Of course, apparently HP has a patent on a way of making toner abrasive so it wears out the drum faster, allowing them to sell more drums to customers. In fact most HP printers combine the toner with the drum, making their printers some of the more expensive ones to replace toner in.
I stopped dealing with HP Laserjets in the mid 1990s. Brother has a nice line up.
I've seen HP mono laser printers go for $150. Newegg's got a Brother mono laser for $70 + $2 shipping right now.
I've had a Brother HL5280DW for 4 years and counting. I did add a 512MB Ram chip to max it out, but the printer is a little beast. The replacement model and it's color brother are now even more powerful and less expensive. At the time I spent around $315 for that model plus $65 for the TN-580 7,000 page toner. I added the memory for around $100 six months later.
and even Color Laser Toner, twice on Sunday. This fad with inkjet is amazingly short-sided by people who would buy this junk and just print off their digital photos, instead of buying digital picture frames to load up their images to have around the house. Keep buying it as my Laser montone and color printers are dirt cheap today.
There are plenty of good husbands and good fathers in this world. There are very few writers of his calibre however. Saying that he was only a great man on the surface because he wasn't a great family man is like saying Alan Turing wasn't all that great because he was rubbish at water polo*.
Not really. I know very few people that measure a man's greatness based on his water polo skills. But if you're not a good husband and father to the people you promised to be a good husband and father to, then you have lost a significant amount of respect from me.
If we said he was a "great writer," that's fine. But calling him a great man because of his writing is not merited, unless as a society, we actually want to ignore "humanity" faults in a person because of his literary work. Personally, I'd much rather have a great guy (great "man") as my neighbor than a great writer.
With all that said, I don't know much about him as a person, so I don't know if the original claim is true or not:)
Go watch re-runs of The Waltons. If you're looking for some absurd notion of Father of the Century you'll only ever find it in story.
It's open in many more ways than that... e.g. Apple wrote a BSD'd compiler for C like languages (clang) which for C and objective-c beats the pants of gcc in almost every way, and is getting *damn close* on the C++ front.
Er, clang/llvm have some grand goals, but so far, they very clearly don't "beat the pants off gcc in almost every way."
gcc optimizes better, has been ported far more widely, supports many more languages (and of course in cases like C++, is a much more complete compiler -- clang C++ support is still pretty basic), and of course is much more mature. One of clang/llvm's widely touted advantages -- faster compilation -- is shrinking as the compiler grows. clang/llvm's optimization will improve with time, but on the other hand, so will gcc's (the gcc devs are not just sitting around twiddling their thumbs).
The main advantages of clang/llvm basically seem to be (1) more modular design, which hopefully makes them easier to work on, and makes them more suitable for non-traditional roles like run-time compilation of graphics shaders etc, and (2) the BSD license, which allows companies to make proprietary extensions to them, and which seems to be the main reason apple is backing them.
Clang/llvm seem to be a nice modern design, and will no doubt provide some good competition for gcc in the future, but they're not quite there yet.
Come back crying in 9 months when CLang has reached it's goals and you get even more angry that libc++ stomps all over libstdc++. Sorry, but even the most ardent C++ compiler engineers recognize the writing on the all---LLVM/Clang are just better and when they reach feature parity the results aren't even close. It is LLVM that is forcing GCC to get off it's ass and improve, not the other way around.
One of the many improvements that Android 2.2 will bring is better performance when running applications. They have made improvements to how applications are compiled that allows apps to run more efficiently, which ultimately allows the applications to run faster and smoother than ever before. Android's web browser Chrome, has also been improved with a 2-3x javascript performance boost using the V8 engine which allows web apps to load a lot faster with Android 2.2. During the live demonstration using Sun's standard Spider javascript test, Chrome on Android 2.2 out performed the same phone running Android 2.1 and even outperformed the Apple iPad running Safari!
I sure hope it outperforms Safari on iPad seeing as it's not remotely near the WebKit nightly that's been in development for nearly a year.
What matters to lawyers and judges are not concepts like "justice", "equity" or "reason". What matters to them is the written rule of the law,
The laws say that's what they are supposed to do. In the US, they are required to follow the law, except in extreme cases, where it is in conflict with the constitution.
What you're spewing isn't an insult of judges, you're condemning the role they fill, which we the people said was necessary.
Frankly, if it were up to judges to decide on justice and equality, you'd be making them emperors rather than judges, with the ability to ignore any laws they don't like, and punish those who have broken no written law.
As to the assertion that they twist the laws "into ways that benefit both the priesthood and its patrons--the wealthy and powerful," you're going to need to cite several cases to make such a claim. It runs DIRECTLY CONTRARY to your previous statement that judges care only about the letter of the law, and lawyers' arguments.
This is Slashdot. The first rule of Slashdot is to be ignorant of the subject matter at hand.
Well, if streaming media has proved *anything* over the years, it's that the general public doesn't care if the compression ruins the work as long as they can play it for free.
Reference the following:
* RealMedia
* Most Youtube videos, "fan reposts" aka re-encodes, and re-re-encodes
* Low bitrate MP3
* JPEG (ok, it's not streaming, but still - "needs more JPEG artifacts")
* Screeners, cams, and foreign translations from the DIVX Discount Theatre
* Webcams
* Most QuickTime videos
* Most AVIs
* Most streaming video on Flash today
* Cable and satellite delivered HD content
Really, the only thing you need to say is "free" and people will at least give it a try.
The problem with your analysis is that currently 90%+ of current homes don't even have an HD capable TV, let alone DVR, so when the Telcos go full force into streaming TV thanks to Comcast buying the controlling stake in NBC as a threat to their network business this low bit rate crap will be part of the separation between crap and quality. If you don't think a $50 Million ad blitz about how superior this experience over that experience is won't change perception, then keep living in 1999.
1 million iPads isn't even 1/10th of one percent of the computer market.
Now that they're surpassing 2 million iPads sold you just aren't grasping the fact their > 40% margins means they will be raking in billions just in their iPad line.
Apple's UI accomplishments over the years are obvious, but I guess I'll have to list a few since you are so used to a post-Apple world that you don't realise what they've done.
good luck.
They were (one of) the pioneers of graphical interfaces in the 80s, and it took until Windows 95 for Windows to come anywhere near Mac OS (but it was still awful).
Apple still forces you to resize windows from the lower-right corner. When I tried to install the hack to get around this, it didn't work, and lots of people have complained about the hack tool making your system unstable anyway. Forcing the user to do things Steve's way is not a benefit to the user. In terms of learning curve, their interfaces are slightly ahead. In terms of productivity, their interfaces are years behind. They took NeXTStep's dock and ruined its defaults for prettiness instead of muscle memory, for example. And you have to move the mouse farther (and on a large display, actually refocus your eyes) to use the single menu bar. And until OSX, Apple didn't even have minimize/maximize, instead using the same multifinder approach they've been using (annoyingly) for years.
Apple have really driven UI design in several ways over the years. It's not being argumentative to say that, it's argumentative to try and deny it.
I'm still waiting for you to "list a few". So far you've listed zero. How did you get 5, Insightful? Oh yeah, Apple fanboys with modpoints. All you did in your comment was praise Apple with no examples.
Apple owns NeXT. Having worked for both, there was a massive debate about modernizing NeXTStep/Openstep versus merging pieces of it into Mac OS. The big fear was the millions of installed users having to learn [regardless of how much more productive NeXTstep is to this day] a new paradigm and we weren't in a position to make this leap. I was one who wanted a compromise being an option to change via a System Preference to switch to a modernized NeXT look n' feel. Clearly, that has never materialized.
"They're all criminals, they should all pay."
Including Steve Jobs, the guy who created his own 'police force' and raided a guy's house because the guy pissed him off?
Welcome to the new double-plus-good future, where everything is owned by Apple.
Better hide your bondage kit and gimp outfit. Steve's checkin' his list. You have a warped sense of reality.
The problem isn't the opt-in. The problem is the arbitrary changing of the TOS with little fanfare. I will grant you that I am a giant hypocrite since I doubt I'll be abandoning Facebook any time soon. I think I was able to deal with TV and radio because it was just broad advertising. Being targeted just seems a little creepier.
Then you better not go to chain grocers as they all track your buying patterns.
The Americas first telegram, transmitted via a repeater: "What hath God wrought" sent by Samuel F.B. Morse in 1844.
And the first reply was:
I'm sorry, God is not available at the moment. To leave a message for God please transmit your message after the beep. When you are finished transmit '1' for more options.
Or transmit '2' for Toys and Santa Claus will receive your request soon.
The higher the frequency the worse the propagation.
Already 5 GHz is a step down from 2.4 GHz when it comes to penetrating walls.
There's a reason long range wireless technologies use lower frequencies (and that's not only reflection off the ionosphere).
Just consider how weak satellite TV-signals are, and those usually only travel a few 100 kilometers off of 100-Watt-class emitters. Here the high frequencies are probably chosen to prevent reflection off the ionosphere...
Beyond 300 Ghz, even the athmosphere becomes opaque...
There most certainly is a reason: The laws of Physics state that Frequency and Wavelength are inversely proportional.
Patent legislation in the USA is very unclear on questions about whether it should apply to software. That's why it's always ignored in the debate, with everyone focussing on the rulings from the CAFC and the Supreme Court. There is good grounds for saying the legislation excludes software ideas, since the Constitution only allows patents where they romote the progress of useful arts - and all the studies say software patents impede such progress.
A flat exclusion of software from patentability is one solution, and its the best one. Other possibilities include an exclusion of liability when using ideas for the purpose of compatibility. That wouldn't fix all problems, but it would fix the h.264 and other file format problems.
Twenty years ago Harvard released dozens of studies showing the dangers of Caffeine and now Science is back with a new spin. Spare me the ``all the studies'' crap.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, apparently HP has a patent on a way of making toner abrasive so it wears out the drum faster, allowing them to sell more drums to customers. In fact most HP printers combine the toner with the drum, making their printers some of the more expensive ones to replace toner in.
I stopped dealing with HP Laserjets in the mid 1990s. Brother has a nice line up.
I've seen HP mono laser printers go for $150. Newegg's got a Brother mono laser for $70 + $2 shipping right now.
I've had a Brother HL5280DW for 4 years and counting. I did add a 512MB Ram chip to max it out, but the printer is a little beast. The replacement model and it's color brother are now even more powerful and less expensive. At the time I spent around $315 for that model plus $65 for the TN-580 7,000 page toner. I added the memory for around $100 six months later.
It looks like they removed the LED display [I like that feature] for the newer model and dropped the price nearly $100. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16828113428&cm_re=HL-5370DW-_-28-113-428-_-Product
and even Color Laser Toner, twice on Sunday. This fad with inkjet is amazingly short-sided by people who would buy this junk and just print off their digital photos, instead of buying digital picture frames to load up their images to have around the house. Keep buying it as my Laser montone and color printers are dirt cheap today.
It's going to end up being a locked-down piece of proprietary shit anyway.
Yes, but it will be a shiny locked-down piece of proprietary shit, so people will still buy it :p
Can we please keep our personal sex lives to ourselves?
There are plenty of good husbands and good fathers in this world. There are very few writers of his calibre however. Saying that he was only a great man on the surface because he wasn't a great family man is like saying Alan Turing wasn't all that great because he was rubbish at water polo*.
Not really. I know very few people that measure a man's greatness based on his water polo skills. But if you're not a good husband and father to the people you promised to be a good husband and father to, then you have lost a significant amount of respect from me.
If we said he was a "great writer," that's fine. But calling him a great man because of his writing is not merited, unless as a society, we actually want to ignore "humanity" faults in a person because of his literary work. Personally, I'd much rather have a great guy (great "man") as my neighbor than a great writer.
With all that said, I don't know much about him as a person, so I don't know if the original claim is true or not :)
Go watch re-runs of The Waltons. If you're looking for some absurd notion of Father of the Century you'll only ever find it in story.
It's open in many more ways than that... e.g. Apple wrote a BSD'd compiler for C like languages (clang) which for C and objective-c beats the pants of gcc in almost every way, and is getting *damn close* on the C++ front.
Er, clang/llvm have some grand goals, but so far, they very clearly don't "beat the pants off gcc in almost every way."
gcc optimizes better, has been ported far more widely, supports many more languages (and of course in cases like C++, is a much more complete compiler -- clang C++ support is still pretty basic), and of course is much more mature. One of clang/llvm's widely touted advantages -- faster compilation -- is shrinking as the compiler grows. clang/llvm's optimization will improve with time, but on the other hand, so will gcc's (the gcc devs are not just sitting around twiddling their thumbs).
Here's a recent comparison of gcc 4.5 and llvm 2.7: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-04/msg00948.html
The main advantages of clang/llvm basically seem to be (1) more modular design, which hopefully makes them easier to work on, and makes them more suitable for non-traditional roles like run-time compilation of graphics shaders etc, and (2) the BSD license, which allows companies to make proprietary extensions to them, and which seems to be the main reason apple is backing them.
Clang/llvm seem to be a nice modern design, and will no doubt provide some good competition for gcc in the future, but they're not quite there yet.
Come back crying in 9 months when CLang has reached it's goals and you get even more angry that libc++ stomps all over libstdc++. Sorry, but even the most ardent C++ compiler engineers recognize the writing on the all---LLVM/Clang are just better and when they reach feature parity the results aren't even close. It is LLVM that is forcing GCC to get off it's ass and improve, not the other way around.
try this
Or he could get off his own rear, launch Terminal and type: man natd
I sure hope it outperforms Safari on iPad seeing as it's not remotely near the WebKit nightly that's been in development for nearly a year.
The laws say that's what they are supposed to do. In the US, they are required to follow the law, except in extreme cases, where it is in conflict with the constitution.
What you're spewing isn't an insult of judges, you're condemning the role they fill, which we the people said was necessary.
Frankly, if it were up to judges to decide on justice and equality, you'd be making them emperors rather than judges, with the ability to ignore any laws they don't like, and punish those who have broken no written law.
As to the assertion that they twist the laws "into ways that benefit both the priesthood and its patrons--the wealthy and powerful," you're going to need to cite several cases to make such a claim. It runs DIRECTLY CONTRARY to your previous statement that judges care only about the letter of the law, and lawyers' arguments.
This is Slashdot. The first rule of Slashdot is to be ignorant of the subject matter at hand.
Well, if streaming media has proved *anything* over the years, it's that the general public doesn't care if the compression ruins the work as long as they can play it for free.
Reference the following: * RealMedia * Most Youtube videos, "fan reposts" aka re-encodes, and re-re-encodes * Low bitrate MP3 * JPEG (ok, it's not streaming, but still - "needs more JPEG artifacts") * Screeners, cams, and foreign translations from the DIVX Discount Theatre * Webcams * Most QuickTime videos * Most AVIs * Most streaming video on Flash today * Cable and satellite delivered HD content
Really, the only thing you need to say is "free" and people will at least give it a try.
The problem with your analysis is that currently 90%+ of current homes don't even have an HD capable TV, let alone DVR, so when the Telcos go full force into streaming TV thanks to Comcast buying the controlling stake in NBC as a threat to their network business this low bit rate crap will be part of the separation between crap and quality. If you don't think a $50 Million ad blitz about how superior this experience over that experience is won't change perception, then keep living in 1999.
you actually mean 'merging' with them. galaxies do not consume stellar material to burn. stellar material just merges.
The story submitter has watched too many movies.
List all the development environments for Windows 7 Mobile, other than Microsoft's platform. Same for PS3/Wii/XBox.
Get this down to 2020 and I'd be impressed.
How are you going to get the thing to print?
People still print things?
Ever had a job that has an Accounting, HR, Sales, etc., department in it? They all print massive reams of paper.
I wish I could sticky this post at the top, permanently. Spot on!
You may be forgetting the whole "windowing system" thing.
Which was invented by Xerox's PARC. As is the mouse and most other aspects of the GUI. Way to be drinking the kool-aid.
Wrong. See way above for an in-depth history of computing. You'll be amazed how facts improve one's perception.
1 million iPads isn't even 1/10th of one percent of the computer market.
Now that they're surpassing 2 million iPads sold you just aren't grasping the fact their > 40% margins means they will be raking in billions just in their iPad line.
Apple's UI accomplishments over the years are obvious, but I guess I'll have to list a few since you are so used to a post-Apple world that you don't realise what they've done.
good luck.
They were (one of) the pioneers of graphical interfaces in the 80s, and it took until Windows 95 for Windows to come anywhere near Mac OS (but it was still awful).
Apple still forces you to resize windows from the lower-right corner. When I tried to install the hack to get around this, it didn't work, and lots of people have complained about the hack tool making your system unstable anyway. Forcing the user to do things Steve's way is not a benefit to the user. In terms of learning curve, their interfaces are slightly ahead. In terms of productivity, their interfaces are years behind. They took NeXTStep's dock and ruined its defaults for prettiness instead of muscle memory, for example. And you have to move the mouse farther (and on a large display, actually refocus your eyes) to use the single menu bar. And until OSX, Apple didn't even have minimize/maximize, instead using the same multifinder approach they've been using (annoyingly) for years.
Apple have really driven UI design in several ways over the years. It's not being argumentative to say that, it's argumentative to try and deny it.
I'm still waiting for you to "list a few". So far you've listed zero. How did you get 5, Insightful? Oh yeah, Apple fanboys with modpoints. All you did in your comment was praise Apple with no examples.
Apple owns NeXT. Having worked for both, there was a massive debate about modernizing NeXTStep/Openstep versus merging pieces of it into Mac OS. The big fear was the millions of installed users having to learn [regardless of how much more productive NeXTstep is to this day] a new paradigm and we weren't in a position to make this leap. I was one who wanted a compromise being an option to change via a System Preference to switch to a modernized NeXT look n' feel. Clearly, that has never materialized.
"They're all criminals, they should all pay." Including Steve Jobs, the guy who created his own 'police force' and raided a guy's house because the guy pissed him off? Welcome to the new double-plus-good future, where everything is owned by Apple.
Better hide your bondage kit and gimp outfit. Steve's checkin' his list. You have a warped sense of reality.
The problem isn't the opt-in. The problem is the arbitrary changing of the TOS with little fanfare. I will grant you that I am a giant hypocrite since I doubt I'll be abandoning Facebook any time soon. I think I was able to deal with TV and radio because it was just broad advertising. Being targeted just seems a little creepier.
Then you better not go to chain grocers as they all track your buying patterns.
The Americas first telegram, transmitted via a repeater: "What hath God wrought" sent by Samuel F.B. Morse in 1844.
And the first reply was: I'm sorry, God is not available at the moment. To leave a message for God please transmit your message after the beep. When you are finished transmit '1' for more options.
Or transmit '2' for Toys and Santa Claus will receive your request soon.
I'm pretty sure sausage and beer would work for the vast majority of stereotype Germans, and those are the ones we want to kill right?
And somehow sauerbraten isn't sausage and weizenbock isn't beer?
The higher the frequency the worse the propagation. Already 5 GHz is a step down from 2.4 GHz when it comes to penetrating walls. There's a reason long range wireless technologies use lower frequencies (and that's not only reflection off the ionosphere).
Just consider how weak satellite TV-signals are, and those usually only travel a few 100 kilometers off of 100-Watt-class emitters. Here the high frequencies are probably chosen to prevent reflection off the ionosphere... Beyond 300 Ghz, even the athmosphere becomes opaque...
There most certainly is a reason: The laws of Physics state that Frequency and Wavelength are inversely proportional.
Where the hell do you get Trillions of years? You're 100 times off and more.
Patent legislation in the USA is very unclear on questions about whether it should apply to software. That's why it's always ignored in the debate, with everyone focussing on the rulings from the CAFC and the Supreme Court. There is good grounds for saying the legislation excludes software ideas, since the Constitution only allows patents where they romote the progress of useful arts - and all the studies say software patents impede such progress.
A flat exclusion of software from patentability is one solution, and its the best one. Other possibilities include an exclusion of liability when using ideas for the purpose of compatibility. That wouldn't fix all problems, but it would fix the h.264 and other file format problems.
Related info on en.swpat.org:
Twenty years ago Harvard released dozens of studies showing the dangers of Caffeine and now Science is back with a new spin. Spare me the ``all the studies'' crap.