That's actually the SAFER backpack for emergency use during ISS/STS spacewalks in case a tether ever breaks. It is not regularly used for untethered walks but is designed to allow an astronaut to get back from a mishap during a regular tethered walk. It was tested from the payload bay of the orbiter before being put into regular use.
I'm not sure how serious you are... but just in case you're semi-serious, I should point out that that sort of thing wouldn't work -- the tiles are made of glass and aren't magnetic, and suction cups wouldn't work in space, and the hold-down shoes used on Skylab depended on a specially-designed 'floor' to have something to grab on to.
Actually, it would have been covered in titanium had Congress not killed the budget for that part of the orbiter! Then the tiles wouldn't be directly exposed to the environment and thus would be far less likely to be damaged...
It is an emergency task because it was not planned ahead of time. It was not on the manifest and is being done in order to correct a fault that will either cause loss of mission or loss of vehicle.
The astronaut will be outside the orbiter standing in a foot restraint mounted to the end of the space station's robotic arm.
Actually, no. The news is that the decision is to do it. The plans have existed for a few days, but the go-ahead just came this afternoon. Emergency plans are worked out before a mission but implementation is ordered on-the-fly.
It's noteworthy because a TPS repair (no, not those infamous reports) has never been attempted in space before, and also because no spacewalker has ever ventured underneath (as would be underneath if it were flying level in the atmosphere) the orbiter before. The RMS by itself cannot reach these areas and the Manned Maneuvering Unit has not been used since the 1980s, so there is no tetherless spacewalk capability anymore.
Why is it hypocritical to have a problem with invasiveness but not with needing to use certain hardware with a given piece of software? Has it not occurred to you that I like Apple's hardware and like the fact that they don't feel the need to be intrusive and feel it's a fair trade along with how much I like their software? It's as simple as that. That's not hypocritical. That's just the fact that I have different opinions than you do.
So don't buy your stuff from a company whose primary business is in hardware with software on the side. And if you think it's juvenile to have a set of morals, which can and do vary from person to person, fine, go ahead. But you'll find that suddenly everyone in the world is a wailing baby who won't shut up... other than yourself, I'm sure.
We all have our reasons why we will do one thing over another, and I have objections to my own computer sending information about what I have on it and what I made it out of to some third party, so I don't use Microsoft's stuff. That's my right.
Morality can be, among other things, one of these two:
"Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior" (it is not good or correct to nose into someone's business uninvited, nor is it polite, good, or correct to assume that someone is an evil asshole without proof), or
"Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior" (the aforementioned actions are not considered right or just by society as a whole).
But if you buy Apple software, part of the bargain is that you must run it on Apple's hardware, and consequently it's designed to ensure that. You are free to not enter into the bargain by making the purchase, but don't complain when companies act to protect their investments. Where's the harm to you?
Exactly. You don't release data without confirming what you have discovered and disclosing exactly what you did to gather that data in the first place, so that others can replicate your experiments.
Seriously, why would it have been so bad to wait til October? As has been said elsewhere, withholding this research until thoroughly checked does not put people at risk. It is perfectly safe, and in fact preferred, to make sure that all is OK before publishing.
And this kind of thing is supposed to be published in a journal, not in a news release.
Whoever wrote that article needs to go spend some time with some scientists and learn about what they're writing about. This is just another example of the all-too-frequent tendency to jump on any science/space issue and start screaming bloody murder that those responsible aren't doing their jobs, blah blah.
They are doing their jobs, but most people don't like the fact that science and engineering are by nature slow and methodical. Theorize, experiment/build, observe/test, check results, modify theory/experiment, test again, etc. until you get results.
You shouldn't be surprised that the foam issue with the shuttle isn't fixed yet, as the fixes have to be tested to see whether they work or not, and can't be tested on the ground. So something still needs work. It'll be fixed, and then tested again, and so on. What's the problem? Same with these guys. They made some observations that need to be confirmed, so they were working on that before, yet again, someone who was uninformed started loudly criticizing, with no justification to do so.
While a fair enough argument, there are many people who like having a more powerful OS that doesn't get in the way that allows Unix/Linux applications to run with a minimal headache while at the same time running stuff like Photoshop. I honestly haven't felt that the hardware is causing me any problems, either -- it's not as non-upgradeable as many think and I haven't had many problems finding repair parts to fix things -- for either Macs OR PCs.
What's wrong or right depends on individual users -- and a good many people don't like being treated like criminals by the software they bought. I can't say I blame them. Choosing to not deal with the Wintel mess is a very valid choice for people to make should they wish to, just as running free OSes on commodity hardware is a valid choice too.
Apple sued people who copied the design for use in Windows. However, you can get theme changers quite easily. Like [unsanity] ShapeShifter. There's no problem with modifying the theme as long as you don't port it elsewhere. I can and have used themes that are quite different from Aqua, and there's no legal worry about doing so.
I think an explanation is in order, since popular opinion, here and many other places, seems to be quite the opposite. In fact, this very topic has been beaten to death elsewhere in this article's comments.
Mr. Clarke is taking a fresh approach, stating that his goal is to protect political opponents of repressive regimes." Wasn't freenet originally about dissent?
Isn't that exactly what protecting dissent is? A very common definition of the word is someone who disagrees with the reigning government in their country. So I don't see this sudden change of motive that is being implied here.
So why not use vlc and mplayer? If you want to use the feature, pay the licensing fee. If you respect the GPL, as most Slashdotters do, and companies' right to publish their source code as open source and expect others' modifications to also be published, then you also need to respect payware. No one is forcing you to pay the fee; no one's stopping alternate players from working.
This MacUpdate: Search for full-screen players also reveals a variety of full-screen players, some free and some not.
VLC's pretty good. I use it. If you're aware of VLC, then I assume you have too? I don't see a problem...
And it's not just a movie player. It's a movie editor as well. We have a license for it (we're an imaging-based research lab) and we use it quite a bit for movie editing. It may not be as powerful as some other editors out there, but indeed $30 is a good deal for what you get.
Yeah, damn them all to hell for providing minor version upgrades for FREE and then actually charging for major upgrades just like most other software companies out there! $30 isn't that bad for a major update! Who's makin' you upgrade, anyway? You don't have to upgrade beyond the major version of QT that comes with your OS if you're offended by actually having to pay for X.0 updates!
And so they shouldn't considering Apple exists primarily to sell hardware, although they are branching out more into software (and non-OS stuff usually does require serial numbers, which isn't intrusive and ridiculous like Microsoft's crap).
Yes, it's an artificial constraint, but if you read up elsewhere in this comment thread, I've explained repeatedly to people who seem to not understand why this is done.
But it's a universal constraint, not a stupid region-based one that restricts trade and price discriminates. I can take my Mac to Australia and it'll still work fine and not care where it's located. And so it should.
Erm, since when does iTunes have anything to do with the OS other than the fact that iTunes runs on the MacOS? It's a self-contained application.
The stupid lawsuit you refer to is thankfully being appealed, though I'm still not sure what it has to do with the fact that they've publicly stated that their OS is going to be restricted to Apple hardware! And then it's a surprise when they actually describe how they're doing it?
I don't know about their "what processors to use" debate, but AMD and Intel processors can both run the same stuff. You'd have to ask them why they didn't go with AMD, but that's not the issue this story is about.
If you don't like how iTunes works, then don't use it. Nobody's making you use it. It does however also play MP3s and OGG files (with plugin) or whatever else you want (with plugin). So what's stopping you from using the file format you want?
I've heard of cases like this in which tech support decides to be idiotic. Find their "Customer Service" number -- they have authority that tech support doesn't and can override the mistakes that tech support makes. Alas, I don't have the number on hand, but I recall reading this on macintouch.com.
Why don't you try actually reading some of those news items about their financial reports, which they PUBLICLY DISCLOSE? You don't have to be at a board meeting of a public company to know stuff like this. You just need to open your eyes and read.
Slashdot Mirror
That's actually the SAFER backpack for emergency use during ISS/STS spacewalks in case a tether ever breaks. It is not regularly used for untethered walks but is designed to allow an astronaut to get back from a mishap during a regular tethered walk. It was tested from the payload bay of the orbiter before being put into regular use.
Spacewalkers Suited Up with Advanced Jet Packs
I'm not sure how serious you are ... but just in case you're semi-serious, I should point out that that sort of thing wouldn't work -- the tiles are made of glass and aren't magnetic, and suction cups wouldn't work in space, and the hold-down shoes used on Skylab depended on a specially-designed 'floor' to have something to grab on to.
Actually, it would have been covered in titanium had Congress not killed the budget for that part of the orbiter! Then the tiles wouldn't be directly exposed to the environment and thus would be far less likely to be damaged ...
It is an emergency task because it was not planned ahead of time. It was not on the manifest and is being done in order to correct a fault that will either cause loss of mission or loss of vehicle.
The astronaut will be outside the orbiter standing in a foot restraint mounted to the end of the space station's robotic arm.
Actually, no. The news is that the decision is to do it. The plans have existed for a few days, but the go-ahead just came this afternoon. Emergency plans are worked out before a mission but implementation is ordered on-the-fly.
It's the former of the two. While I can understand it, currently it's a bit much -- but it's the "better safe than sorry" mentality.
It's noteworthy because a TPS repair (no, not those infamous reports) has never been attempted in space before, and also because no spacewalker has ever ventured underneath (as would be underneath if it were flying level in the atmosphere) the orbiter before. The RMS by itself cannot reach these areas and the Manned Maneuvering Unit has not been used since the 1980s, so there is no tetherless spacewalk capability anymore.
Spaceflight Now | STS-114 Shuttle Report | Shuttle mission extended to give bonus day at station
Spaceflight Now | STS-114 Shuttle Report | NASA gives go-ahead to spacewalk repair work
(and the headline says "Emegency" -- someone fix that, please)
Why is it hypocritical to have a problem with invasiveness but not with needing to use certain hardware with a given piece of software? Has it not occurred to you that I like Apple's hardware and like the fact that they don't feel the need to be intrusive and feel it's a fair trade along with how much I like their software? It's as simple as that. That's not hypocritical. That's just the fact that I have different opinions than you do.
So don't buy your stuff from a company whose primary business is in hardware with software on the side. And if you think it's juvenile to have a set of morals, which can and do vary from person to person, fine, go ahead. But you'll find that suddenly everyone in the world is a wailing baby who won't shut up... other than yourself, I'm sure.
We all have our reasons why we will do one thing over another, and I have objections to my own computer sending information about what I have on it and what I made it out of to some third party, so I don't use Microsoft's stuff. That's my right.
Morality can be, among other things, one of these two:
"Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior" (it is not good or correct to nose into someone's business uninvited, nor is it polite, good, or correct to assume that someone is an evil asshole without proof), or
"Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior" (the aforementioned actions are not considered right or just by society as a whole).
But if you buy Apple software, part of the bargain is that you must run it on Apple's hardware, and consequently it's designed to ensure that. You are free to not enter into the bargain by making the purchase, but don't complain when companies act to protect their investments. Where's the harm to you?
Exactly. You don't release data without confirming what you have discovered and disclosing exactly what you did to gather that data in the first place, so that others can replicate your experiments.
Seriously, why would it have been so bad to wait til October? As has been said elsewhere, withholding this research until thoroughly checked does not put people at risk. It is perfectly safe, and in fact preferred, to make sure that all is OK before publishing.
And this kind of thing is supposed to be published in a journal, not in a news release.
Whoever wrote that article needs to go spend some time with some scientists and learn about what they're writing about. This is just another example of the all-too-frequent tendency to jump on any science/space issue and start screaming bloody murder that those responsible aren't doing their jobs, blah blah.
They are doing their jobs, but most people don't like the fact that science and engineering are by nature slow and methodical. Theorize, experiment/build, observe/test, check results, modify theory/experiment, test again, etc. until you get results.
You shouldn't be surprised that the foam issue with the shuttle isn't fixed yet, as the fixes have to be tested to see whether they work or not, and can't be tested on the ground. So something still needs work. It'll be fixed, and then tested again, and so on. What's the problem? Same with these guys. They made some observations that need to be confirmed, so they were working on that before, yet again, someone who was uninformed started loudly criticizing, with no justification to do so.
Uhm ... yes, it has. This was big news when the Intel switch was announced.
MacNN | Apple VP: Mac OS X will not boot on regular PCs
They'll sell the OS separately, as they do now, but it won't be usable on PCs.
While a fair enough argument, there are many people who like having a more powerful OS that doesn't get in the way that allows Unix/Linux applications to run with a minimal headache while at the same time running stuff like Photoshop. I honestly haven't felt that the hardware is causing me any problems, either -- it's not as non-upgradeable as many think and I haven't had many problems finding repair parts to fix things -- for either Macs OR PCs.
What's wrong or right depends on individual users -- and a good many people don't like being treated like criminals by the software they bought. I can't say I blame them. Choosing to not deal with the Wintel mess is a very valid choice for people to make should they wish to, just as running free OSes on commodity hardware is a valid choice too.
Apple sued people who copied the design for use in Windows. However, you can get theme changers quite easily. Like [unsanity] ShapeShifter. There's no problem with modifying the theme as long as you don't port it elsewhere. I can and have used themes that are quite different from Aqua, and there's no legal worry about doing so.
I think an explanation is in order, since popular opinion, here and many other places, seems to be quite the opposite. In fact, this very topic has been beaten to death elsewhere in this article's comments.
I'm not sure whether you refer to the iPod updater files, but let's see...
Is this what you need?
Apple - iPod - Download
I think the restriction to 2K/XP/OSX has to do with what kernels the OSes run on. 2K and XP have an entirely different kernel than 98/ME do.
Mr. Clarke is taking a fresh approach, stating that his goal is to protect political opponents of repressive regimes." Wasn't freenet originally about dissent?
Isn't that exactly what protecting dissent is? A very common definition of the word is someone who disagrees with the reigning government in their country. So I don't see this sudden change of motive that is being implied here.
So why not use vlc and mplayer? If you want to use the feature, pay the licensing fee. If you respect the GPL, as most Slashdotters do, and companies' right to publish their source code as open source and expect others' modifications to also be published, then you also need to respect payware. No one is forcing you to pay the fee; no one's stopping alternate players from working.
...
This MacUpdate: Search for full-screen players also reveals a variety of full-screen players, some free and some not.
VLC's pretty good. I use it. If you're aware of VLC, then I assume you have too? I don't see a problem
And it's not just a movie player. It's a movie editor as well. We have a license for it (we're an imaging-based research lab) and we use it quite a bit for movie editing. It may not be as powerful as some other editors out there, but indeed $30 is a good deal for what you get.
Yeah, I'm just waiting for the day when someone installs Windows and it says "Microsoft's Computer".
Yeah, damn them all to hell for providing minor version upgrades for FREE and then actually charging for major upgrades just like most other software companies out there! $30 isn't that bad for a major update! Who's makin' you upgrade, anyway? You don't have to upgrade beyond the major version of QT that comes with your OS if you're offended by actually having to pay for X.0 updates!
And so they shouldn't considering Apple exists primarily to sell hardware, although they are branching out more into software (and non-OS stuff usually does require serial numbers, which isn't intrusive and ridiculous like Microsoft's crap).
Yes, it's an artificial constraint, but if you read up elsewhere in this comment thread, I've explained repeatedly to people who seem to not understand why this is done.
But it's a universal constraint, not a stupid region-based one that restricts trade and price discriminates. I can take my Mac to Australia and it'll still work fine and not care where it's located. And so it should.
Erm, since when does iTunes have anything to do with the OS other than the fact that iTunes runs on the MacOS? It's a self-contained application.
The stupid lawsuit you refer to is thankfully being appealed, though I'm still not sure what it has to do with the fact that they've publicly stated that their OS is going to be restricted to Apple hardware! And then it's a surprise when they actually describe how they're doing it?
I don't know about their "what processors to use" debate, but AMD and Intel processors can both run the same stuff. You'd have to ask them why they didn't go with AMD, but that's not the issue this story is about.
If you don't like how iTunes works, then don't use it. Nobody's making you use it. It does however also play MP3s and OGG files (with plugin) or whatever else you want (with plugin). So what's stopping you from using the file format you want?
I've heard of cases like this in which tech support decides to be idiotic. Find their "Customer Service" number -- they have authority that tech support doesn't and can override the mistakes that tech support makes. Alas, I don't have the number on hand, but I recall reading this on macintouch.com.
Good luck!
Why don't you try actually reading some of those news items about their financial reports, which they PUBLICLY DISCLOSE? You don't have to be at a board meeting of a public company to know stuff like this. You just need to open your eyes and read.