where they have the media, case, and liner notes all for 12 bucks.
Liner notes: I throw them away.
Jewel case: I throw it away.
Media: I encode the songs and then stuff it into a CD binder. A very, very dusty CD binder.
Bandwidth: Not a problem...
I guess I'll be using their service, if they can give me 160kbps VBR (High) files, or better.
And you know, if they would hook into mp3.com or AudioGalaxy... this would really, really take off. Commercialized formula music over here, indie trash to sort through for the gems over here. Take yer pick: $0.99 per.
On that laptop there's a power inverter board right near the back of the unit, near the built-in speakers. If that unit is not performing correctly then the power change needed to actually change the million pixels on the LCD will cause a fluctuation in the EMF it emits. Being so close to the BUILT-IN speakers, you'll likely hear the buzz there even if the sound is turned off as the EMF itself is driving the speakers.
Does the sound change when the brightness is turned down? If the above is right, then the sound will not be as loud when the brightness is turned to one notch above off.
You're being awfully pedantic about what I said, but I suppose I can be equally pedantic in return...
My layers are not "messed up" in any way. HTTP and FTP have everything to do with firewalls because the protocols have recommended ports they run on, and HTTP sticks to one port and, thus, can be easily allowed in firewalls. FTP's use of ports depends heavily on the protocol since it specifies the use of both incoming and outgoing connections on various ports for the whole schebang unless you use passive, which is a setting, and by far not the default. Even with passive, the protocol embeds ports and is generally firewall unfriendly to firewalls, hence me saysing FTP is not firewall friendly.
Also, directory listings, as talked about elsewhere in this article, have a lot to do with HTTP as it does not have a specification for them whereas FTP does. It's a protocol thing.
Oh, and you would turn on passive if you had firewall problems, but I'm assuming that to be a typo. Long day for me, too.
HTTP does not have firewall issues, does not need authentication, does not (by default) allow directory listings, and is the same speed as FTP. It's a good deal for general file distrubution.
FTP is quickly becoming a special-needs protocol. If you need authentication, uploads, directory listings, accessability with interactive tools, etc. then this is for you. Mainly useful for web designers these days, IMO, since the site software packages can use the extra file metadata for synchronization. Other than that, it's a lot of connection overhead for a simple file.
FTP does have one nice advantage that HTTP lacks: it can limit concurrent connections based on access privleges (500 anonymous and 100 real, etc.). Doesn't sound like you need that.
Go with HTTP. Simple, quick, anonymous, generally foolproof.
Ok, quote me a solution that has remote Java administration, redundant and hot-swap everything, live rebuild of 0, 1, 3 and 5, one IDE controller chip PER drive with twin controllers (hot-swap) going to two fibre-channel connections to the computer and battery-backed drive caches on those controllers. All this in a rack-mount case with 14 bays using 3U.
All those features. Every single one. Oh, and SMART monitoring, but that's trivial (really).
It's obvious that it's only 72 hours of battery backed up cache.
Yeah, I never said the thing would run full-throttle on those things; it's quite obvious when you look at them they look like little twin-pack DVDs. When you look at the pictures of the RAID Admin you can see the checkbox for using the cache "only if batteries are installed" and so on. But the fact is, even without a 3000Ah UPS for the Xserve and friends this will not lose the data. That, with journaling and RAID 5.. mmmm.
The drives, power supplies, controllers, fans, and batteries are all zero-downtime hot-swap. RAID 0, 1, 3, and 5, of course. No hardware two-level RAID, but Mac OS X offers 0 and 1 in software, so you could mix them to get 10 or 5+1, etc.
I about crapped myself when I saw this. No, your little FreeBSD box can't do this, sorry.;)
There's two dozen preference catagories, there's menus out the wazoo, there's dialogs for this and that and the window is cluttered (every edge has a button on it, somewhere).
It's bloated not in size but in features. Every feature takes up a menu item, preference, or window widget. "If you don't want to use this part, don't" isn't a good answer when I have to stare at the infernal button all day.
So, rather than complain, I switched to Chimera, which does not have the problem.
Mozilla is bloated. It's slower than Chimera and includes a whole lot of things that are just not needed in a web browser.
Safari can't render well. For the time being, it's not a good solution for people who need standards-compliance or good CSS support. Chimera is.
Tabs, and Aqua-ness aside, it's really the best solution. Even after Safari came out I'm still clinging to Chimera. It still has it's uses and is still the best solution for the Mac right now. It's WAY too early to claim obsolescence.
Well now this just makes it Real easy!
on
Real DRM
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Think about it: one DRM for a ton of formats (indeed, this sounds like any file). Tons of people putting this on MP3, Real, WMA, AC3, etc.
This is a GOOD THING.
Break one scheme and get tons of formats for free!;)
This is proof that Apple still has a ways to go. If their changes were that radical, nobody would wait for "...next time I buy a computer.." and would actually do it NOW.
Radical or not, I, like most people, have to wait until I have the money to actually buy it in order to, well, buy it. I'm going to shoot for the entry iBook the next time I buy a computer because that's when I'll have the money to do it.
Besides, what moron goes out and gets a new computer when their current one works just fine? I have a PowerMac G4/450 that's over three years old and it runs 10.2 at a more than acceptable speed ("damn fast") and is no where near needing an upgrade. I'm only getting the iBook because I need an iBook. There are those people that buy things for the sake of having them and then there are those that buy when there is a need. Obviously the previous poster does not need a new computer now. The fact that he is waiting is not a statement on Apple's ability to market or make a product but a statement on the efficiency of the poster with regard to his possessions and money.
Hmm, a mature attitude towards something on Slashdot. Anyone else feel that cold draft come out of the cracks of Hell?
Slashdot Mirror
- Liner notes: I throw them away.
- Jewel case: I throw it away.
- Media: I encode the songs and then stuff it into a CD binder. A very, very dusty CD binder.
- Bandwidth: Not a problem...
I guess I'll be using their service, if they can give me 160kbps VBR (High) files, or better.And you know, if they would hook into mp3.com or AudioGalaxy ... this would really, really take off. Commercialized formula music over here, indie trash to sort through for the gems over here. Take yer pick: $0.99 per.
On that laptop there's a power inverter board right near the back of the unit, near the built-in speakers. If that unit is not performing correctly then the power change needed to actually change the million pixels on the LCD will cause a fluctuation in the EMF it emits. Being so close to the BUILT-IN speakers, you'll likely hear the buzz there even if the sound is turned off as the EMF itself is driving the speakers.
Does the sound change when the brightness is turned down? If the above is right, then the sound will not be as loud when the brightness is turned to one notch above off.
Dude, READ what I'm WRITING. The SERVER update came out yesterday. Not the DESKTOP update, which has been out for two weeks. Look here:
KB 70172
dude, the SERVER update just came out... get with it...
You're being awfully pedantic about what I said, but I suppose I can be equally pedantic in return...
My layers are not "messed up" in any way. HTTP and FTP have everything to do with firewalls because the protocols have recommended ports they run on, and HTTP sticks to one port and, thus, can be easily allowed in firewalls. FTP's use of ports depends heavily on the protocol since it specifies the use of both incoming and outgoing connections on various ports for the whole schebang unless you use passive, which is a setting, and by far not the default. Even with passive, the protocol embeds ports and is generally firewall unfriendly to firewalls, hence me saysing FTP is not firewall friendly.
Also, directory listings, as talked about elsewhere in this article, have a lot to do with HTTP as it does not have a specification for them whereas FTP does. It's a protocol thing.
Oh, and you would turn on passive if you had firewall problems, but I'm assuming that to be a typo. Long day for me, too.
Which is why I said "by default."
HTTP is restricted by browsers, many of which will not support files larger than a certain size.
What you say?! I've downloaded ISO images in IE and Chimera with no issues. Never heard of this.
HTTP does not have firewall issues, does not need authentication, does not (by default) allow directory listings, and is the same speed as FTP. It's a good deal for general file distrubution.
FTP is quickly becoming a special-needs protocol. If you need authentication, uploads, directory listings, accessability with interactive tools, etc. then this is for you. Mainly useful for web designers these days, IMO, since the site software packages can use the extra file metadata for synchronization. Other than that, it's a lot of connection overhead for a simple file.
FTP does have one nice advantage that HTTP lacks: it can limit concurrent connections based on access privleges (500 anonymous and 100 real, etc.). Doesn't sound like you need that.
Go with HTTP. Simple, quick, anonymous, generally foolproof.
... will wait for the CPAN module and then have a whole hell of a time. =)
XML::Keynote::PresentationFile
Mmmmm...
Oh lord, there's TONS more here:
BBS Taglines
I use them for the top and bottom of my site. Reads fine raw. =)
while ($deadHorse) {
}
Hmph.
News for Turds. Stuff that splatters.
Sadly I saw it flying down I35 in Austin. Guess that ruins the dreams of a few thousand geeks around here.
Ok, quote me a solution that has remote Java administration, redundant and hot-swap everything, live rebuild of 0, 1, 3 and 5, one IDE controller chip PER drive with twin controllers (hot-swap) going to two fibre-channel connections to the computer and battery-backed drive caches on those controllers. All this in a rack-mount case with 14 bays using 3U.
All those features. Every single one. Oh, and SMART monitoring, but that's trivial (really).
It's obvious that it's only 72 hours of battery backed up cache.
.. mmmm.
Yeah, I never said the thing would run full-throttle on those things; it's quite obvious when you look at them they look like little twin-pack DVDs. When you look at the pictures of the RAID Admin you can see the checkbox for using the cache "only if batteries are installed" and so on. But the fact is, even without a 3000Ah UPS for the Xserve and friends this will not lose the data. That, with journaling and RAID 5
Does it seem more ironic that they're making more money by doing so? [g]
Where are your redundant power supplies? Read the site, fool! This mamma has:
;)
Redundant controllers
Redundant power supplies
Redundant fans
Redundant BUILT-IN UPS batteries (est. 72 hrs)
The drives, power supplies, controllers, fans, and batteries are all zero-downtime hot-swap. RAID 0, 1, 3, and 5, of course. No hardware two-level RAID, but Mac OS X offers 0 and 1 in software, so you could mix them to get 10 or 5+1, etc.
I about crapped myself when I saw this. No, your little FreeBSD box can't do this, sorry.
To keep them from moving set the size ratio of start and finish to 1.0. Since it's already at its destination size and location it just sits there.
Oh, sure, leave the Mac users in the dark again. Thanks bunches.
Damn PC usin' fools <grumble>
Bloat is not just size, it's feel.
There's two dozen preference catagories, there's menus out the wazoo, there's dialogs for this and that and the window is cluttered (every edge has a button on it, somewhere).
It's bloated not in size but in features. Every feature takes up a menu item, preference, or window widget. "If you don't want to use this part, don't" isn't a good answer when I have to stare at the infernal button all day.
So, rather than complain, I switched to Chimera, which does not have the problem.
Please, please don't take my Chimera! Here's why:
Mozilla is bloated. It's slower than Chimera and includes a whole lot of things that are just not needed in a web browser.
Safari can't render well. For the time being, it's not a good solution for people who need standards-compliance or good CSS support. Chimera is.
Tabs, and Aqua-ness aside, it's really the best solution. Even after Safari came out I'm still clinging to Chimera. It still has it's uses and is still the best solution for the Mac right now. It's WAY too early to claim obsolescence.
Think about it: one DRM for a ton of formats (indeed, this sounds like any file). Tons of people putting this on MP3, Real, WMA, AC3, etc.
;)
This is a GOOD THING.
Break one scheme and get tons of formats for free!
Ahh. Dead horses. Sig is finally appropriate! Wheee!!!
PowerBooks are make in Taiwan ... as are the new iMacs and the iBooks.
I'm not even sure they're doing anything in Cork except answering phones and getting drunk.
This is proof that Apple still has a ways to go. If their changes were that radical, nobody would wait for "...next time I buy a computer.." and would actually do it NOW.
Radical or not, I, like most people, have to wait until I have the money to actually buy it in order to, well, buy it. I'm going to shoot for the entry iBook the next time I buy a computer because that's when I'll have the money to do it.
Besides, what moron goes out and gets a new computer when their current one works just fine? I have a PowerMac G4/450 that's over three years old and it runs 10.2 at a more than acceptable speed ("damn fast") and is no where near needing an upgrade. I'm only getting the iBook because I need an iBook. There are those people that buy things for the sake of having them and then there are those that buy when there is a need. Obviously the previous poster does not need a new computer now. The fact that he is waiting is not a statement on Apple's ability to market or make a product but a statement on the efficiency of the poster with regard to his possessions and money.
Hmm, a mature attitude towards something on Slashdot. Anyone else feel that cold draft come out of the cracks of Hell?