There are traffic lights on dual-carriageways in the UK, so a 70mph limit. Rarely on the motorways, although technically there are traffic lights used on some entry slip roads at rush hour, although you'd be lucky to be doing 70 on them then...
There's one intersection in my city where I enter it on a green, and it turns red before I'm on the other side. People have learned to wait 20 seconds after their light turns green to let traffic in the other direction finish.
I don't know what it's like in your country, but in the UK, the light you pass when you enter is the relevant one. The other is just there to make it easier to see. There's always a white line to denote the real stop line.
You were unlucky. I ran a P2-300 at 450 for years with no bother. It was a sweet spot of Intel producing much better chips than they needed, so you could easily overclock them without any special tricks. I had no trouble with MMX or anything else, stable as a rock.
No, I think it's rather different, but yes, I do think a semi-nomadic people like the bedouins have a rather different view. Given the land rights they had dated back to the Ottoman era, and were widely ignored, they're probably right not to believe in land ownership.
Much like in the US though, my understanding was that the residents didn't really have a concept of land ownership, so I'm not sure it was an entirely valid transaction.
There's no reason they couldn't offer a cosmetic stick as an add-on, with a soundtrack to match. It's not like petrol driven cars are above piping sound in via the speakers to improve the experience.
Quite, so film in front of a live audience. Red Dwarf is a good example where they switched away from a live audience, and you really notice the damage.
If you're talking about simple web graphics, then yes, PNG is often a good choice. Lossy compression simply makes more sense for photos, as the compression ratio is that much better. Always using PNG is idiotic, as is always using JPEG. JPEG2000 is not our saviour.
Oh don't get me wrong, I'm no different. But looking at religious behaviours in contended and violent regions is, in my own opinion, quite difficult to analyse. It might make you think that religious fanatics went to war in WW1 for example.
I thought petrol in a diesel caused excessive wear of some components that expected lubrication from the diesel that they don't get from petrol. If you look into average repair bills for misfuelling, it's considerable.
We go with username@domain and A.N.Other@domain as the main alias, where there are conflicts they get a number added to the end. People want a fancier alias all the time, so it doesn't make sense to generate them ad-hoc as it'd just generate too many support requests.
You must be comically RAM starved to get a frame rate boost from upgrading to an SSD (swapping of some form), or the game has to be shoddily written to be constantly hitting disk and blocking on it.
The installer's crap, I'll give him that. I've just given it a run through to see whether he makes fair points, and I think he actually misses some, but not all his complaints make sense to me.
KDE LiveCD worked just fine for me, logging in automatically. No errors about networks, no warnings about/var being full. No complaints about audio not working. Was he perhaps running with minimal RAM such that the LiveCD couldn't work properly. I couldn't get any similar failings even with dropping RAM down to 512Mbytes, which is a half the 1Gbyte recommended. But given his screenshot and/home being on/tmpfs I don't see how else it could report less than 100Mbytes free. Running with 512Mbytes shows a nominal 220Mbytes available in your home directory. I faintly wonder whether that's actually the source of most of his liveCD issues.
The progress bar showed Installing Software 100% but the bar wasn't all the way across. But that's because the progress bar is showing all install progress, not just installing software. The progress bar seemed sane to me. All in, the installer is less functional than the old installer, and certainly less clear. Having Done and Continue buttons just isn't helpful. After clicking Done, you'll be returned to a page showing out of date information, and you have to wait for it to update. This makes no sense, I'm with him on that. I get what they're trying to present to you, and it's possibly even useful in the way they've done it, but it's definitely less clear.
Some images are oddly low resolution, but I can live with that, it's only aesthetics. It needs fixing, but it's not worth holding up a release.
His complaints with the installed system also seem a little unfair. He installs easylife (not part of fedora), the complains that the repofusion repo hasn't been set up correctly, when that's been done by easylife... His flash/mp3 complaints fit into that same category. That's very much blaming windows for itunes not playing back FLAC files.
So I'd say that the installer sucks and was a mistake to put into F18, but things aren't necessarily quite as portrayed in that review.
Systemd isn't enough of a reason to jump distro, and gnome3 is no reason at all for servers. I'll be sticking with RHEL because they seem to employ bloody good developers who provide ace support to users of their software, and I don't just mean paying users.
Sure, monitors were expensive, and even the 19" was second hand (and still in active use by someone else). Monitors have almost always been the ultimate limiting factor, as they are now more often than not.
I've got an 11 year old 3840x2400 monitor at work that can manage a stellar 41Hz if you wire in all 4 dvi leads... I guess that monitor probably exceeds the limits of a graphics card, unless you count an X2 or eyefinity 6.
All I can say is lucky you. When I said 95, I was being entirely fair, that was still what I had in 97. I think I must have been slumming it lower down the pecking order than you, as even later on when I'd upgraded, I didn't have monitors of the calibre you're talking about. Think more like this, but 15").
In 2000 I upgraded to a 19" monitor driven by a matrox G200 (from a machine I bought in late 98). But that card only had a maximum resolution of 1920x1200@70Hz, so I still couldn't have hit your figure. I splashed out and bought a replacement graphics card in 2001 (GeForce 2 MX), that *still couldn't hit the higher than 2048 x 1536 / 75.0 Hz (but to be honest, the 19" monitor I was using wasn't sensible to use about 1600x1200). Right, so that's up to 2005 and I've still not owned anything that can hit what you're listing.
Right, then what did I own... ATI Radeon 9600 XT. Still maxes out at 2048 x 1536 / 60.0 Hz. Next... not sure. I had a ATI X1300. That could do 2048x1536@75Hz. 2007 I upgraded that to an nVidia 7950 GT. Done it, I've finally hit something I've owned that could drive a monitor at 2048x1536@85Hz, but by then I'd got rid of my CRT, so I'm back down to 60Hz again...
I'm not saying you *couldn't* do these things, but I'm definitely saying that *I* couldn't, and I don't think I was anywhere near slumming it at the bottom, I just wasn't cutting edge.
Yes I was talking 90s. I'd guess the median refresh in the late 90s was either 72 of 75Hz. I seem to recall the RAMDAC on my ATI Mach 64 1MB graphics card could only hit 85 at 800x600, and that was 1995 I had that.
Slashdot Mirror
There are traffic lights on dual-carriageways in the UK, so a 70mph limit. Rarely on the motorways, although technically there are traffic lights used on some entry slip roads at rush hour, although you'd be lucky to be doing 70 on them then...
There's one intersection in my city where I enter it on a green, and it turns red before I'm on the other side. People have learned to wait 20 seconds after their light turns green to let traffic in the other direction finish.
I don't know what it's like in your country, but in the UK, the light you pass when you enter is the relevant one. The other is just there to make it easier to see. There's always a white line to denote the real stop line.
Only you normally don't need to be online, as Steam has an offline mode?
You were unlucky. I ran a P2-300 at 450 for years with no bother. It was a sweet spot of Intel producing much better chips than they needed, so you could easily overclock them without any special tricks. I had no trouble with MMX or anything else, stable as a rock.
No, I think it's rather different, but yes, I do think a semi-nomadic people like the bedouins have a rather different view. Given the land rights they had dated back to the Ottoman era, and were widely ignored, they're probably right not to believe in land ownership.
Peaceful coexistence on Israel's terms. That's an interesting interpretation of peaceful coexistence.
Much like in the US though, my understanding was that the residents didn't really have a concept of land ownership, so I'm not sure it was an entirely valid transaction.
There's no reason they couldn't offer a cosmetic stick as an add-on, with a soundtrack to match. It's not like petrol driven cars are above piping sound in via the speakers to improve the experience.
Quite, so film in front of a live audience. Red Dwarf is a good example where they switched away from a live audience, and you really notice the damage.
If you're talking about simple web graphics, then yes, PNG is often a good choice. Lossy compression simply makes more sense for photos, as the compression ratio is that much better. Always using PNG is idiotic, as is always using JPEG. JPEG2000 is not our saviour.
Oh don't get me wrong, I'm no different. But looking at religious behaviours in contended and violent regions is, in my own opinion, quite difficult to analyse. It might make you think that religious fanatics went to war in WW1 for example.
Also note that if you're blind, you may be applying for DLA via a website that, yes you guessed it, isn't accessible...
There are no atheists in the trenches.
I thought petrol in a diesel caused excessive wear of some components that expected lubrication from the diesel that they don't get from petrol. If you look into average repair bills for misfuelling, it's considerable.
http://www.mis-fuelling.co.uk/misfuelling-faqs.php
Am I wrong in thinking the UK has a plutonium stockpile it really doesn't know what to do with? Simply not juicy enough?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21505271
That's not true, they're not entirely generous to Chinese or Romanian ones either.
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/HowTo:Tell_the_Difference_between_an_American_and_a_European_car
You've seen Cooking Mama right? ;)
They can have weather radar along with a radar altimeter, but I think you're right that they don't have radar for detecting nearby aircraft.
We go with username@domain and A.N.Other@domain as the main alias, where there are conflicts they get a number added to the end. People want a fancier alias all the time, so it doesn't make sense to generate them ad-hoc as it'd just generate too many support requests.
You must be comically RAM starved to get a frame rate boost from upgrading to an SSD (swapping of some form), or the game has to be shoddily written to be constantly hitting disk and blocking on it.
The installer's crap, I'll give him that. I've just given it a run through to see whether he makes fair points, and I think he actually misses some, but not all his complaints make sense to me.
KDE LiveCD worked just fine for me, logging in automatically. No errors about networks, no warnings about /var being full. No complaints about audio not working. Was he perhaps running with minimal RAM such that the LiveCD couldn't work properly. I couldn't get any similar failings even with dropping RAM down to 512Mbytes, which is a half the 1Gbyte recommended. But given his screenshot and /home being on /tmpfs I don't see how else it could report less than 100Mbytes free. Running with 512Mbytes shows a nominal 220Mbytes available in your home directory. I faintly wonder whether that's actually the source of most of his liveCD issues.
The progress bar showed Installing Software 100% but the bar wasn't all the way across. But that's because the progress bar is showing all install progress, not just installing software. The progress bar seemed sane to me. All in, the installer is less functional than the old installer, and certainly less clear. Having Done and Continue buttons just isn't helpful. After clicking Done, you'll be returned to a page showing out of date information, and you have to wait for it to update. This makes no sense, I'm with him on that. I get what they're trying to present to you, and it's possibly even useful in the way they've done it, but it's definitely less clear.
Some images are oddly low resolution, but I can live with that, it's only aesthetics. It needs fixing, but it's not worth holding up a release.
His complaints with the installed system also seem a little unfair. He installs easylife (not part of fedora), the complains that the repofusion repo hasn't been set up correctly, when that's been done by easylife... His flash/mp3 complaints fit into that same category. That's very much blaming windows for itunes not playing back FLAC files.
So I'd say that the installer sucks and was a mistake to put into F18, but things aren't necessarily quite as portrayed in that review.
Systemd isn't enough of a reason to jump distro, and gnome3 is no reason at all for servers. I'll be sticking with RHEL because they seem to employ bloody good developers who provide ace support to users of their software, and I don't just mean paying users.
Sure, monitors were expensive, and even the 19" was second hand (and still in active use by someone else). Monitors have almost always been the ultimate limiting factor, as they are now more often than not.
I've got an 11 year old 3840x2400 monitor at work that can manage a stellar 41Hz if you wire in all 4 dvi leads... I guess that monitor probably exceeds the limits of a graphics card, unless you count an X2 or eyefinity 6.
All I can say is lucky you. When I said 95, I was being entirely fair, that was still what I had in 97. I think I must have been slumming it lower down the pecking order than you, as even later on when I'd upgraded, I didn't have monitors of the calibre you're talking about. Think more like this, but 15").
http://www.computerdisplays.co.uk/17%20inch%20monitors/iiyama_1402.htm
In 2000 I upgraded to a 19" monitor driven by a matrox G200 (from a machine I bought in late 98). But that card only had a maximum resolution of 1920x1200@70Hz, so I still couldn't have hit your figure. I splashed out and bought a replacement graphics card in 2001 (GeForce 2 MX), that *still couldn't hit the higher than 2048 x 1536 / 75.0 Hz (but to be honest, the 19" monitor I was using wasn't sensible to use about 1600x1200). Right, so that's up to 2005 and I've still not owned anything that can hit what you're listing.
Right, then what did I own... ATI Radeon 9600 XT. Still maxes out at 2048 x 1536 / 60.0 Hz. Next... not sure. I had a ATI X1300. That could do 2048x1536@75Hz. 2007 I upgraded that to an nVidia 7950 GT. Done it, I've finally hit something I've owned that could drive a monitor at 2048x1536@85Hz, but by then I'd got rid of my CRT, so I'm back down to 60Hz again...
I'm not saying you *couldn't* do these things, but I'm definitely saying that *I* couldn't, and I don't think I was anywhere near slumming it at the bottom, I just wasn't cutting edge.
Yes I was talking 90s. I'd guess the median refresh in the late 90s was either 72 of 75Hz. I seem to recall the RAMDAC on my ATI Mach 64 1MB graphics card could only hit 85 at 800x600, and that was 1995 I had that.