Considering the cost of the sets, and considering there's only a handful of sets used, one would think they could afford genlocked CRTs.
However, since TOS didn't really prove they were using CRTs (even in the movies -- they always made sure they were inset, and Kirk couldn't crush a CRT the way he crushed his set with his fist in TOS), hey, Enterprise can get away with what they're using. However, I do hope the electronics are using vacuum tubes, as that's required by the ST timeline.
I'm not sure if they've shown the guts of the ship yet... Which is it? ICs or tubes?
Re:when was the last time you hosed off your ibook
on
Military Grade Laptops
·
· Score: 1
I shall refute this point by point:
>You will notice consistant definitions which are in agreement with the author. Your assertion that most people use the phrase "CD-ROM disc" is anecdotal and unverifiable.
>Additionally, you go on to make some rather rude remearks that the author is wrong about the history of acronym for DVD.
If you think bullshit is rude, I would suggest you dislike Penn and Teller, known scpetics who, I'm willing to bet, despise grammarians (Although I haven't asked them this. Perhaps a reading of some old PC Computing rags might shed some light on this matter.)
In essence, there is no consensus as for what the letters stand. Originally it meant "digital video disc"; some tried to shoe-horn "digital versatile disc", but there was never an agreement reached. However, the author of the site never makes a claim as to the current meaning. He states merely:
[O]riginally "Digital Video Disc"-even though some manufacturers now claim the initials stand for "Digital Versatile Disc."
What he says is true. It did at one point stand for "digital video disc" and some manufacturers currently do claim that it stand for "digital versatile disc." The dictionary offers both as a possibility and, in the end, both may end up as satisfactory answers.
Half-true. All manufacturers call it Digital Versatile Disc. I can find none that, today, would call it otherwise, except when they want to point out how a DVD player plays only Videos. Therefore the author was incorrect. It isn't some. It is all. The fact that there is a new logo that has been used by all manufacturers since, and that the DVD group now call it Digital Versatile Disc is just icing on the cake, as it were.
>If what you meant, however, was that "UFO" is the phrase to be applied to a creature not from Earth, then you are mistaken. Both "extraterrestrial" and "alien" already serve this purpose.
Yes, that is what I meant. The fact that there are already 2 words with this meaning does not preclude another word being used as such.
Princeton university supports my definition, and provides no specific definition that supports the argument of the author:
n : an (apparently) flying object whose nature is unknown; especially those considered to have extraterrestrial origins [syn: unidentified flying object, UFO, flying saucer]
The author is incorrect in his assumption that the term UFO cannot be applied to alien spacecraft. The military would also agree with Princeton University.
>On the matter of usage [of ok], you are correct. However, no one ever disagreed with you.
Bullshit. Read the site with a text browser next time. It clearly states "WRONG: OK". If this is a mistake on the part of the author, so be it. He is an english professor, and not a CS professor.
>He also claims that humanists (believers in the principles of Humanism) are more likely to use the "analogue" spelling.
Being pretentious, are we? I think if I were to lump myself with a group of people I'd know what the definition of Humanism are.
How's about an apology from you, since we apoligize for so much, it would appear.
>The author who wrote the page holds a degree Ph.D in English and is a professor of English at Washington State University. Not only does this qualify him as an expert of the English language, but it also exposes him to more samples of writings than most people. As such, if he claims that one spelling is preferred over another depending
Re:when was the last time you hosed off your ibook
on
Military Grade Laptops
·
· Score: 1
WRONG, According to your link: "CD-ROM" stands for "compact disc, read-only memory," so adding another "disc" or "disk" is redundant. The same goes for "DVD" -originally "Digital Video Disc"-even though some manufacturers now claim the initials stand for "Digital Versatile Disc." Don't say "give me that DVD disk," just "give me that DVD."
That is what the author of that site thinks. But he's wrong not by definition, but by de facto usage of the term. In common usage CD-ROM means "The computer drive that plays CDs". I've met very few in the computer industry who don't use the term CD-ROM to mean the hardware rather than the disc. That's because the term CDD didn't catch on as well as HDD and FDD. I don't know why that is, but it is a fact. In all possibility, it could be a localized thing, but I doubt it. Either way, the author needs to mention this, but fails to.
Yes, it could be regarded as redundant, but that isn't all that unusual in this industry. I do agree with him that saying "CD disc" or "DVD disc" is redundant, but "CD-ROM disc", while by acronym is redundant, by common usage it is not.
He's also wrong about DVD. It is Digital Versatile Disc. The people who designed and named the format figured out after calling it Digital Video Disc that it could be used for data. They hastily thought up a new term that would fit the original acronym, and re-dubbed it Digital Versatile Disc. They also gave it a new logo to show that they meant business on this fact. It certainly isn't just "some manufacturers" making up a term. The author's full of bullshit for this definition and would do well to check his facts before spouting off.
Re:when was the last time you hosed off your ibook
on
Military Grade Laptops
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Even that site has errors.
It decides to apply english to computer terms. That's a big mistake.
A list of his errors:
CD-ROM. A CD-ROM is a DRIVE, not a DISC. A CD is a disc, or, if one wants to use the long form, a CD-ROM disc is a disc that fits in a CD-ROM. This is extremely common usage by those in the know, therefore the author is de-facto wrong.
UFO. While I'm not a Raelian, I'm very sure the common usage of the word UFO by such people is to mean anything that is unidentifiable as human.
OK. Flat out stupid griping by a person who has nothing to gripe about. OK is a valid acronym, spelt without periods. Don't like it? TS. Yeah, that's an acronym too. Look it up and be amazed! Oh, and on the internet we rarely put periods in acronyms. Common usage and all that again...
Drive. Please gripe more! Not! What the hell is this all about? Common usage by Billions and Billions (served) is Hard Disk. Don't like it? TS again!
Lite. Hey asshole, I'm a humanist and I spell it analog. Nice job putting words in people's mouths and ignoring how 300 million people spell things. Also good job ignoring entire dictionaries worth of information telling you you're wrong. I'll say it again: Asshole.
How can I trust a site that doesn't accept the common usage of words in their respective fields? Stop treading on people's toes, lest you be trodden on, pretentious grammarian.
>Sorry, you think that's simple? I got my duaghter to rebuild her own pc the other day, gave her an xp pro disk and watched. took her 30 mins.
I'd be annoyed, but since you picked such a difficult to install OS (in comparison to slackware) it's dead easy to rebut:
It's excellent your daughter is building your computers for you. I'm glad she's decided to get computer experience with such a complicated to install operating system.
Installing windows XP, where do I start?
You have to use a totally undocumented partitioning program, which will then proceed to destroy your bootsector and do other nasty things. After sitting about for a while, you'll then be prompted to enter a computer name, a workgroup name, and you'll be asked if you're on a domain or not. If you are you continue through screens asking what your domain controller is, what the domain is called, and other fun stuff (tm). You then have to set the time and time zone of the machine (IIRC). You then wait a long while (again!) while the machine configures those choices. After this you are then prompted to enter your name, wether the machine should auto-login or not, and you must create some accounts. The next step is registration. For this you will need to either drag a phone over to your computer, or you'll have to hope-to-God your network info was perfect and that you have DHCP. Enter all your personal details (name, address, email, phone number, number of the beast) so that Microsoft can better advertise to you. If the machine can't dial out or use the network, you'll need to phone Microsoft up so they can better serve your "warranty". Dial their phone number. Sit on hold. Finally talk to someone who tells you that you have to send in a non-existant registration card. Bitch and moan and give up on this step (FAILURE to complete the install). Next we must activate windows. Since our network is giving us trouble, we have to phone. So we sit on hold for about 10 minutes. You tell the guy the huge 30 or so character string on your screen. He isn't sure if you said B or D, so you look about for your phonetic alphabet chart and tell him it's "Bravo". He understands and retuns a code to you, which you enter. It turns out the agent forgot to use the phonetic alphabet, so you have to ask him if he meant t or d. He says "Tango". You enter the code, reboot the machine, and it asks for drivers for your network card.
Now you search in the box of crap that came with the computer for your network card drivers and install them. Then it wants video drivers. And sound drivers. So you get online and download them.
You now finally have your computer set up.
Oh, and somewhere in all that mess is entering your 25 character cd-key. Perfectly.
At no point during the install are you asked about what you would like installed, so you absolutely must have a large hard drive.
Which one was easier? I'm sorry, I forgot after all that typing.
>Yeah, right, like a "typical" home user is going to have a clue as to what the hell that means or even why they hould have to do it! Remember that "auto-recognition" stuff???? You can slag of Mircosoft all you like, but the installer is one slick piece of code.
I didn't say "typical home user", did I? I said "serious user". Home users are usually not serious unless they're hobbyists. I think I can expect a serious user to know about modprobe. I also think I can expect them to be able to use a line-based setup program if it is fully documented (and xf86config certainly is!). It isn't rocket science, even though it is outside the realm of a day 1 user.
>How many 1024x768 projectors don't already have inputs for composite, s-video, and probably component?
All of those are 525 lines of interlaced video (625 if you're in europe). Blech.
The problem with projectors is that unless they have CRT tubes in them (not likely unless you paid about $25k [or more] for it) you're not going to have interlaced support. If it does support it, it will be de-interlaced, and anyone who has a video capture card knows that isn't very good.
>Now that were in 2003 I'm still amazed that anyone wants to deal with all of that manual work in order to get everything completely working.
Que?
The installer is simpler than simple. Fdisk, setup, choose formatting & swap, autodetect cdrom, select full from packages (unlike many other distros this will fit on all but the worst sized hard drives, yet will provide you with just about everything you need, including MP3 decoding [wow]), select to probe for your network and voila! All done!
That's hard for a serious user? The requirements to be a serious user serious have slipped over the years... At this rate finding the power button will make one a dedicated user in a few years.
And xf86config is likely the most intuitive setup program I've come across in a long time. Plus it doesn't limit to me to setting up X while I'm in front of the box.
>Suppose I came to your house, found the door to be unlocked and decided to come in and take your stuff.
No, suppose you came to my house and tried the doorknob. Full stop.
Where you get the idea that burglarizing someone's home is the equivalent of Port Scanning, I have no clue. I'd hate to see what you compare cracking to. Genocide, perhaps?
>If you come to my house and try all the doors to see what's open to the general public, you'll probably get shot or at least get to see how well your head is capable of decelerating a baseball bat.
Where I come from, you'd be going to jail for a very long time. Certainly much longer than the "burglar", who, at best, would go to jail for a week or two for a tresspass misdemeanor.
And while that happens to be Canada, the US is no different. That is, assuming you don't have a big "No Tresspassing" sign outside. You need one of those to protect your right to kill unarmed strangers on sight in the VERY few US states that support such action.
And you know how rude it is to put up "No Tresspassing" signs...
>i dont see where the implied DoS attack came from
Just saying that if you're stealing something you must be taking something away from others. Therefore if you're stealing a pay-per-view, someone else must be trying to tune in but are being denied their service by you.
Otherwise it's a breach of contract and possibly copyright violation.
Just doing my part not to give into RIAA/MPAA/cableco/satco propaganda!:-) According to them, having been a legal watcher of American TV in Canada a few years ago, I like to steal ladies purses and cars, now that it's beeen outlawed. Often.
>Seriously, are there people here on Slashdot who believe that stealing pay-per-view movies is better than just paying the cable company the $3.25 or whatever for a movie? I'm actually curious if anyone reading this site has tried one of these things, and if so, what the rationale behind using it was.
Stealing? You mean if I use one of these filters I will cause a DoS attack on every single other user's cable boxes?
COOL! Seems to me like a reason to use it! Just for the anarchistic fun of the matter! (Sure it's childish, but if there was a big red button on your desk that said "turn off all electricity in this building" don't you think you'd be tempted to push it? Just once?)
>And every time a PPV is sent the cable company is missing $$ they have to give to the provider of their service.
Uhh, if the cableco knew the movies were being watched, don't you think they would charge the "pirates" for them? And would they be pirates if they were reporting their purchases to the cableco?
9 percent just happens to be the amount of GWB's votes that came from atheists, so you're right on.:-) [ Thanks CNN for giving me an unintended laugh the other day! ]
>we don't have companies refusing to make cars that go faster than 70mph
You would be surprised.:)
In many countries there are laws that prevent the sale of cars to regular consumers that go over about 300 km/h (can't remember the exact speed, sorry, cars aren't my specialty -- it was mentioned on Driver's Seat once or twice), and many manufacturers voluntarialy limit the speed of their cars (mostly because today's shitboxes are so light they'd fly off the road or blow up their shitty tires if they went over 160 km/h).
Fortunately, I'm told my Corrola doesn't have a governor. Not that it doesn't feel like it'll explode at 150 anyways, so it's a little pointless, but hey. "I dunna think she can withstand any more captin'! She'll tear herself aparrt!"
>I find your posts, though insightful, tend to divert attention from the topic at the top of the thread.
Give this man a cookie!
Finally, someone who put it all together! And it only took 2640 posts for it to be noticed! Woohoo! (I hope you didn't read them all!).
(You'll notice I tend to deviate from topics on other forums as well. It's fun! But I always try to stay somewhat on topic, or at least on topic to the parent post.:-)
I'll try your suggestion some time, we'll see what happens.
For top-notch cheap AV cabling, I reccomend buying a bunch of crimp-on F -> RG-6 connectors, and some F -> RCA adapters, plus a box of bulk RG-6 cable.
RG-6 "satellite" cable will do wonders for your picture (It's good to 2.4 Ghz, so it's practically lossless at 3 Mhz). And it won't cost any more than the cheapie pre-made cables, either.
This stuff is also good for VGA cable, just in case you need a nice long monitor cable at any point.:-)
>Corroded connectors mean crappy contact and NOISE - so ALWAYS go for a Gold or Rhodium surfaced connector.
Connections that aren't moved don't corrode where they make contact (or at least it takes long enough for the oxygen to seep in that the consumer stereo will have exploded by the time it matters). I see few (if any) home stereos that get rewired, ever.
Besides, unless you're soldering your wires into those banana-jack connectors, you've still got exactly the same corrosion problem, and the last thing I would want to think of is Joe-Sixpack wielding a soldering iron.
>Are the inductors air core? If not, start winding again.
The low pass for the midrange is. I had to give in for the woofer -- I bought a prewound iron core inductor for it. I neither had the time to handwind it, nor access to the super-expensive inductance/Q meter for that long.
Plus everywhere about here charges really stupid amounts for enameled wire. Prices of $15 for 50' of 18 AWG were pretty average, IIRC. I couldn't stick to a budget if I handwound 'em.
The tweeters are piezoelectric, so just a protection/limiting resistor for them, and a low-cut cap on the midrage and that's pretty much it.
>Do you have level controls on the outputs from the crossover?
I wish! I was trying to keep them decent, but reasonbly priced. Rheostats get mighty expensive really fast.
>Even if the woofer, tweeter, and mid all claim to be 90db at one watt at one meter, I'd bet that they are not.
They joys of buying from the surplus store mean you get to make up your own values for these (and everything else). I'm __sure__ that 10" pyramid "sub" goes down to 30 Hz in a 1 cu. ft. sealed enclosure...
That being said, I'm happy with how they turned out, and those friends of mine that I trust to give an honest opinion think they do the job fine. Especially since I kept them below $150 CDN each! Fortunately the woofers (oh, sorry, Pyramid calls 'em subs;-) say Made in USA (yeah, they forgot the the as well) on the cone instead of "Pyramid powered" or something else equally offensive.
They're big & beefy boxes -- I intended to build my system without a subwoofer (too hard to get decent amp power at a reasonable price and too expensive to get pre-built).
>Acoustic suspension, tuned port, transmission line, folded horn, or some other design? I used to build speakers, so I really love that stuff.
Regular, ugly, dual ported, boxy looking particleboard speakers. But they're 100% handmade by me and dad (my woodworking skills would have had me gluing them together, so it's a good thing I asked him to help out). A friend of mine built his own folded horn speakers with 18" drivers and an ungodly amount of tweeters from a professional design of some sort (the source escapes me). They're about 4'x6'x3'. They stay clean at even the most ear-piercing volumes, and that's coming from an el-cheapo amp... really surprising, and I've give a shot at building copies, but there's no way I could get plywood to curve like that.:)
>The banana plugs are also really good when one wants to swap speakers, whether to test bookshelf speakers or to verify that a sonic anomaly (like a buzz) was actually in the recording.
Why, oh why, does all consumer audio have to be unbalanced? I always wondered why studios used all those neato XLR (and now many other types) cables 'till I used them myself (not at home, of course, just from some volunteering to some sound working so my student association could run dance parties). Stupid cable CO + VCR making my audio sound like crap. Blech.
Who knew there's actually a third person out there that likes to build their own speakers. I really suggest anyone who's handy with tools give it a try -- it's hard to make a set of speakers sound worse than the ones you find in your average WalMart if you follow the rules of thumb in a decent speaker building book.
>Yeah, ohms law says that I should not even be losing more than a single decibel but the bottom end is tighter on the 12 gauge cabling and I bet you could hear it too.
I probably could. It's just my crappy math skills and not remembering to account for impedance/reactance/god-knows-what.
However, I still stick with my suggestion that for a normal home audio system, I bet it would be difficult to tell the difference between thickness of speaker cables.
But drag in the expensive stuff and forgo the subwoofer and yeah, you need good cables.
I've found if you want the best of both worlds (a lack of bullshit and lots of good equipment) go to the places your local clubs and studios shop at. Which could be an audiophile's store, but in my limited experience, it isn't.
I guess what I'm alluding to is the whole "Look at my 5 kW Sony amplifier! It sounds so good because I used 000 AWG tram cable to hook it up to my 10 GW speakers" phenomenon.
Perhaps I'll try some thicker wire on my speakers rather than EQing them all to hell (hey, they're homebuilt with handwound inductors in the crossover, cut me some slack!:-)
I'd pay attention to things like impedance, but then I wouldn't have an excuse for failing out of analog electronics. And math. Math with lots of trig. Oh boy, flashbacks of teachers telling me I didn't deserve to pass...
>I got some decent speaker wire and attached some good quality banana plugs.
Good stuff. I've just found that around here, for whatever reason, you can get some really nasty, almost solid, cheapie speaker wire for the best price, next step up in price being bulk lamp cord, and last step up being "Acoustic Research" OFC with arrows showing "which way 'round" to hook up the cable cable (oh man, can they really call themselves that after what I've seen in Future Shop? I can't even make fun of it like BOSE).
I've got nothing against banana plugs per se, just that if they aren't going to be touched more than once, they're a waste, and every extra junction just provides another place for a fault and more wasted energy.
And, oh yeah, if you're ever thinking of pumping 325 watts into a 4 Ohm speaker, you sure do want thick cable. That's a _lot_ of current (in comparison to your joe-sixpack's stereo [mine]), inductive or not! It must be nice to have that sort of headroom on a system...
Slashdot Mirror
>TNG had a "gay rights" plot in disquise, BTW.
Accessing... Accessing... Accessing.
You mean this one, right?
Man, trek trivia is fun.
Considering the cost of the sets, and considering there's only a handful of sets used, one would think they could afford genlocked CRTs.
However, since TOS didn't really prove they were using CRTs (even in the movies -- they always made sure they were inset, and Kirk couldn't crush a CRT the way he crushed his set with his fist in TOS), hey, Enterprise can get away with what they're using. However, I do hope the electronics are using vacuum tubes, as that's required by the ST timeline.
I'm not sure if they've shown the guts of the ship yet... Which is it? ICs or tubes?
I shall refute this point by point:
>You will notice consistant definitions which are in agreement with the author. Your assertion that most people use the phrase "CD-ROM disc" is anecdotal and unverifiable.
You are incorrect. It is verifiable. And it only takes seconds.
In summary -- use the tools available to you.
>Additionally, you go on to make some rather rude remearks that the author is wrong about the history of acronym for DVD.
If you think bullshit is rude, I would suggest you dislike Penn and Teller, known scpetics who, I'm willing to bet, despise grammarians (Although I haven't asked them this. Perhaps a reading of some old PC Computing rags might shed some light on this matter.)
In essence, there is no consensus as for what the letters stand. Originally it meant "digital video disc"; some tried to shoe-horn "digital versatile disc", but there was never an agreement reached. However, the author of the site never makes a claim as to the current meaning. He states merely:
[O]riginally "Digital Video Disc"-even though some manufacturers now claim the initials stand for "Digital Versatile Disc."
What he says is true. It did at one point stand for "digital video disc" and some manufacturers currently do claim that it stand for "digital versatile disc." The dictionary offers both as a possibility and, in the end, both may end up as satisfactory answers.
Half-true. All manufacturers call it Digital Versatile Disc. I can find none that, today, would call it otherwise, except when they want to point out how a DVD player plays only Videos. Therefore the author was incorrect. It isn't some. It is all. The fact that there is a new logo that has been used by all manufacturers since, and that the DVD group now call it Digital Versatile Disc is just icing on the cake, as it were.
>If what you meant, however, was that "UFO" is the phrase to be applied to a creature not from Earth, then you are mistaken. Both "extraterrestrial" and "alien" already serve this purpose.
Yes, that is what I meant. The fact that there are already 2 words with this meaning does not preclude another word being used as such.
Princeton university supports my definition, and provides no specific definition that supports the argument of the author:
ufo
n : an (apparently) flying object whose nature is unknown; especially those considered to have extraterrestrial origins [syn: unidentified flying object, UFO, flying saucer]
The author is incorrect in his assumption that the term UFO cannot be applied to alien spacecraft. The military would also agree with Princeton University.
>On the matter of usage [of ok], you are correct. However, no one ever disagreed with you.
Bullshit. Read the site with a text browser next time. It clearly states "WRONG: OK". If this is a mistake on the part of the author, so be it. He is an english professor, and not a CS professor.
>He also claims that humanists (believers in the principles of Humanism) are more likely to use the "analogue" spelling.
Being pretentious, are we? I think if I were to lump myself with a group of people I'd know what the definition of Humanism are.
How's about an apology from you, since we apoligize for so much, it would appear.
>The author who wrote the page holds a degree Ph.D in English and is a professor of English at Washington State University. Not only does this qualify him as an expert of the English language, but it also exposes him to more samples of writings than most people. As such, if he claims that one spelling is preferred over another depending
WRONG, According to your link:
"CD-ROM" stands for "compact disc, read-only memory," so adding another "disc" or "disk" is redundant. The same goes for "DVD" -originally "Digital Video Disc"-even though some manufacturers now claim the initials stand for "Digital Versatile Disc." Don't say "give me that DVD disk," just "give me that DVD."
That is what the author of that site thinks. But he's wrong not by definition, but by de facto usage of the term. In common usage CD-ROM means "The computer drive that plays CDs". I've met very few in the computer industry who don't use the term CD-ROM to mean the hardware rather than the disc. That's because the term CDD didn't catch on as well as HDD and FDD. I don't know why that is, but it is a fact. In all possibility, it could be a localized thing, but I doubt it. Either way, the author needs to mention this, but fails to.
Yes, it could be regarded as redundant, but that isn't all that unusual in this industry. I do agree with him that saying "CD disc" or "DVD disc" is redundant, but "CD-ROM disc", while by acronym is redundant, by common usage it is not.
He's also wrong about DVD. It is Digital Versatile Disc. The people who designed and named the format figured out after calling it Digital Video Disc that it could be used for data. They hastily thought up a new term that would fit the original acronym, and re-dubbed it Digital Versatile Disc. They also gave it a new logo to show that they meant business on this fact. It certainly isn't just "some manufacturers" making up a term. The author's full of bullshit for this definition and would do well to check his facts before spouting off.
Even that site has errors.
It decides to apply english to computer terms. That's a big mistake.
A list of his errors:
CD-ROM. A CD-ROM is a DRIVE, not a DISC. A CD is a disc, or, if one wants to use the long form, a CD-ROM disc is a disc that fits in a CD-ROM. This is extremely common usage by those in the know, therefore the author is de-facto wrong.
UFO. While I'm not a Raelian, I'm very sure the common usage of the word UFO by such people is to mean anything that is unidentifiable as human.
OK. Flat out stupid griping by a person who has nothing to gripe about. OK is a valid acronym, spelt without periods. Don't like it? TS. Yeah, that's an acronym too. Look it up and be amazed! Oh, and on the internet we rarely put periods in acronyms. Common usage and all that again...
Drive. Please gripe more! Not! What the hell is this all about? Common usage by Billions and Billions (served) is Hard Disk. Don't like it? TS again!
Lite. Hey asshole, I'm a humanist and I spell it analog. Nice job putting words in people's mouths and ignoring how 300 million people spell things. Also good job ignoring entire dictionaries worth of information telling you you're wrong. I'll say it again: Asshole.
How can I trust a site that doesn't accept the common usage of words in their respective fields? Stop treading on people's toes, lest you be trodden on, pretentious grammarian.
>Yea we all know how hard it is to copy text letter for letter
0F C0UR5E! That's 8ecause N0TH1N9 in English 100K5 alike, does it?
Try harder.
>Sorry, you think that's simple? I got my duaghter to rebuild her own pc the other day, gave her an xp pro disk and watched. took her 30 mins.
I'd be annoyed, but since you picked such a difficult to install OS (in comparison to slackware) it's dead easy to rebut:
It's excellent your daughter is building your computers for you. I'm glad she's decided to get computer experience with such a complicated to install operating system.
Installing windows XP, where do I start?
You have to use a totally undocumented partitioning program, which will then proceed to destroy your bootsector and do other nasty things. After sitting about for a while, you'll then be prompted to enter a computer name, a workgroup name, and you'll be asked if you're on a domain or not. If you are you continue through screens asking what your domain controller is, what the domain is called, and other fun stuff (tm). You then have to set the time and time zone of the machine (IIRC). You then wait a long while (again!) while the machine configures those choices. After this you are then prompted to enter your name, wether the machine should auto-login or not, and you must create some accounts. The next step is registration. For this you will need to either drag a phone over to your computer, or you'll have to hope-to-God your network info was perfect and that you have DHCP. Enter all your personal details (name, address, email, phone number, number of the beast) so that Microsoft can better advertise to you. If the machine can't dial out or use the network, you'll need to phone Microsoft up so they can better serve your "warranty". Dial their phone number. Sit on hold. Finally talk to someone who tells you that you have to send in a non-existant registration card. Bitch and moan and give up on this step (FAILURE to complete the install). Next we must activate windows. Since our network is giving us trouble, we have to phone. So we sit on hold for about 10 minutes. You tell the guy the huge 30 or so character string on your screen. He isn't sure if you said B or D, so you look about for your phonetic alphabet chart and tell him it's "Bravo". He understands and retuns a code to you, which you enter. It turns out the agent forgot to use the phonetic alphabet, so you have to ask him if he meant t or d. He says "Tango". You enter the code, reboot the machine, and it asks for drivers for your network card.
Now you search in the box of crap that came with the computer for your network card drivers and install them. Then it wants video drivers. And sound drivers. So you get online and download them.
You now finally have your computer set up.
Oh, and somewhere in all that mess is entering your 25 character cd-key. Perfectly.
At no point during the install are you asked about what you would like installed, so you absolutely must have a large hard drive.
Which one was easier? I'm sorry, I forgot after all that typing.
>Yeah, right, like a "typical" home user is going to have a clue as to what the hell that means or even why they hould have to do it! Remember that "auto-recognition" stuff???? You can slag of Mircosoft all you like, but the installer is one slick piece of code.
I didn't say "typical home user", did I? I said "serious user". Home users are usually not serious unless they're hobbyists. I think I can expect a serious user to know about modprobe. I also think I can expect them to be able to use a line-based setup program if it is fully documented (and xf86config certainly is!). It isn't rocket science, even though it is outside the realm of a day 1 user.
>How many 1024x768 projectors don't already have inputs for composite, s-video, and probably component?
All of those are 525 lines of interlaced video (625 if you're in europe). Blech.
The problem with projectors is that unless they have CRT tubes in them (not likely unless you paid about $25k [or more] for it) you're not going to have interlaced support. If it does support it, it will be de-interlaced, and anyone who has a video capture card knows that isn't very good.
>Now that were in 2003 I'm still amazed that anyone wants to deal with all of that manual work in order to get everything completely working.
/etc/rc.d/rc.modules
Que?
The installer is simpler than simple. Fdisk, setup, choose formatting & swap, autodetect cdrom, select full from packages (unlike many other distros this will fit on all but the worst sized hard drives, yet will provide you with just about everything you need, including MP3 decoding [wow]), select to probe for your network and voila! All done!
That's hard for a serious user? The requirements to be a serious user serious have slipped over the years... At this rate finding the power button will make one a dedicated user in a few years.
Sound isn't hard: echo modprobe soundcard-name.o >>
And xf86config is likely the most intuitive setup program I've come across in a long time. Plus it doesn't limit to me to setting up X while I'm in front of the box.
What more do you want? A computer-chauffeur?
blah, blah, blah, you not using a dictionary, blah, blah, blah, me making you look stupid (sorry, I suppose), blah, blah, blah.
America
1. The United States.
america
1: blah blah blah [syn: United States, United States of America, America, US, U.S., USA, U.S.A.]
HTH!
>Suppose I came to your house, found the door to be unlocked and decided to come in and take your stuff.
No, suppose you came to my house and tried the doorknob. Full stop.
Where you get the idea that burglarizing someone's home is the equivalent of Port Scanning, I have no clue. I'd hate to see what you compare cracking to. Genocide, perhaps?
>If you come to my house and try all the doors to see what's open to the general public, you'll probably get shot or at least get to see how well your head is capable of decelerating a baseball bat.
Where I come from, you'd be going to jail for a very long time. Certainly much longer than the "burglar", who, at best, would go to jail for a week or two for a tresspass misdemeanor.
And while that happens to be Canada, the US is no different. That is, assuming you don't have a big "No Tresspassing" sign outside. You need one of those to protect your right to kill unarmed strangers on sight in the VERY few US states that support such action.
And you know how rude it is to put up "No Tresspassing" signs...
>i dont see where the implied DoS attack came from
:-) According to them, having been a legal watcher of American TV in Canada a few years ago, I like to steal ladies purses and cars, now that it's beeen outlawed. Often.
Just saying that if you're stealing something you must be taking something away from others. Therefore if you're stealing a pay-per-view, someone else must be trying to tune in but are being denied their service by you.
Otherwise it's a breach of contract and possibly copyright violation.
Just doing my part not to give into RIAA/MPAA/cableco/satco propaganda!
>I am however puzzled over one simple fact; can it really be legal in the USofA (where I presume this is happening) to sell such a device?
:-) It'd be like outlawing oxygen.
I don't know. Do you like having anything electronic more complicated than a crystal radio?
You can't outlaw capacitors, man.
>Seriously, are there people here on Slashdot who believe that stealing pay-per-view movies is better than just paying the cable company the $3.25 or whatever for a movie? I'm actually curious if anyone reading this site has tried one of these things, and if so, what the rationale behind using it was.
Stealing? You mean if I use one of these filters I will cause a DoS attack on every single other user's cable boxes?
COOL! Seems to me like a reason to use it! Just for the anarchistic fun of the matter! (Sure it's childish, but if there was a big red button on your desk that said "turn off all electricity in this building" don't you think you'd be tempted to push it? Just once?)
>And every time a PPV is sent the cable company is missing $$ they have to give to the provider of their service.
Uhh, if the cableco knew the movies were being watched, don't you think they would charge the "pirates" for them? And would they be pirates if they were reporting their purchases to the cableco?
9 percent just happens to be the amount of GWB's votes that came from atheists, so you're right on. :-) [ Thanks CNN for giving me an unintended laugh the other day! ]
>we don't have companies refusing to make cars that go faster than 70mph
:)
You would be surprised.
In many countries there are laws that prevent the sale of cars to regular consumers that go over about 300 km/h (can't remember the exact speed, sorry, cars aren't my specialty -- it was mentioned on Driver's Seat once or twice), and many manufacturers voluntarialy limit the speed of their cars (mostly because today's shitboxes are so light they'd fly off the road or blow up their shitty tires if they went over 160 km/h).
Fortunately, I'm told my Corrola doesn't have a governor. Not that it doesn't feel like it'll explode at 150 anyways, so it's a little pointless, but hey. "I dunna think she can withstand any more captin'! She'll tear herself aparrt!"
>I find your posts, though insightful, tend to divert attention from the topic at the top of the thread.
:-)
Give this man a cookie!
Finally, someone who put it all together! And it only took 2640 posts for it to be noticed! Woohoo! (I hope you didn't read them all!).
(You'll notice I tend to deviate from topics on other forums as well. It's fun! But I always try to stay somewhat on topic, or at least on topic to the parent post.
I'll try your suggestion some time, we'll see what happens.
Yes, they should be called Freedomgnomes. Stupid latins editing our language for PH sounds.
And where's freedomdot? It's all wrong, I tells ya, it's all freedomin' wrong!
Freedom. The new Marklar.
For top-notch cheap AV cabling, I reccomend buying a bunch of crimp-on F -> RG-6 connectors, and some F -> RCA adapters, plus a box of bulk RG-6 cable.
:-)
RG-6 "satellite" cable will do wonders for your picture (It's good to 2.4 Ghz, so it's practically lossless at 3 Mhz). And it won't cost any more than the cheapie pre-made cables, either.
This stuff is also good for VGA cable, just in case you need a nice long monitor cable at any point.
>Corroded connectors mean crappy contact and NOISE - so ALWAYS go for a Gold or Rhodium surfaced connector.
Connections that aren't moved don't corrode where they make contact (or at least it takes long enough for the oxygen to seep in that the consumer stereo will have exploded by the time it matters). I see few (if any) home stereos that get rewired, ever.
Besides, unless you're soldering your wires into those banana-jack connectors, you've still got exactly the same corrosion problem, and the last thing I would want to think of is Joe-Sixpack wielding a soldering iron.
>Are the inductors air core? If not, start winding again.
;-) say Made in USA (yeah, they forgot the the as well) on the cone instead of "Pyramid powered" or something else equally offensive.
:)
The low pass for the midrange is. I had to give in for the woofer -- I bought a prewound iron core inductor for it. I neither had the time to handwind it, nor access to the super-expensive inductance/Q meter for that long.
Plus everywhere about here charges really stupid amounts for enameled wire. Prices of $15 for 50' of 18 AWG were pretty average, IIRC. I couldn't stick to a budget if I handwound 'em.
The tweeters are piezoelectric, so just a protection/limiting resistor for them, and a low-cut cap on the midrage and that's pretty much it.
>Do you have level controls on the outputs from the crossover?
I wish! I was trying to keep them decent, but reasonbly priced. Rheostats get mighty expensive really fast.
>Even if the woofer, tweeter, and mid all claim to be 90db at one watt at one meter, I'd bet that they are not.
They joys of buying from the surplus store mean you get to make up your own values for these (and everything else). I'm __sure__ that 10" pyramid "sub" goes down to 30 Hz in a 1 cu. ft. sealed enclosure...
That being said, I'm happy with how they turned out, and those friends of mine that I trust to give an honest opinion think they do the job fine. Especially since I kept them below $150 CDN each! Fortunately the woofers (oh, sorry, Pyramid calls 'em subs
They're big & beefy boxes -- I intended to build my system without a subwoofer (too hard to get decent amp power at a reasonable price and too expensive to get pre-built).
>Acoustic suspension, tuned port, transmission line, folded horn, or some other design? I used to build speakers, so I really love that stuff.
Regular, ugly, dual ported, boxy looking particleboard speakers. But they're 100% handmade by me and dad (my woodworking skills would have had me gluing them together, so it's a good thing I asked him to help out). A friend of mine built his own folded horn speakers with 18" drivers and an ungodly amount of tweeters from a professional design of some sort (the source escapes me). They're about 4'x6'x3'. They stay clean at even the most ear-piercing volumes, and that's coming from an el-cheapo amp... really surprising, and I've give a shot at building copies, but there's no way I could get plywood to curve like that.
>The banana plugs are also really good when one wants to swap speakers, whether to test bookshelf speakers or to verify that a sonic anomaly (like a buzz) was actually in the recording.
Why, oh why, does all consumer audio have to be unbalanced? I always wondered why studios used all those neato XLR (and now many other types) cables 'till I used them myself (not at home, of course, just from some volunteering to some sound working so my student association could run dance parties). Stupid cable CO + VCR making my audio sound like crap. Blech.
Who knew there's actually a third person out there that likes to build their own speakers. I really suggest anyone who's handy with tools give it a try -- it's hard to make a set of speakers sound worse than the ones you find in your average WalMart if you follow the rules of thumb in a decent speaker building book.
>Yeah, ohms law says that I should not even be losing more than a single decibel but the bottom end is tighter on the 12 gauge cabling and I bet you could hear it too.
I probably could. It's just my crappy math skills and not remembering to account for impedance/reactance/god-knows-what.
However, I still stick with my suggestion that for a normal home audio system, I bet it would be difficult to tell the difference between thickness of speaker cables.
But drag in the expensive stuff and forgo the subwoofer and yeah, you need good cables.
I've found if you want the best of both worlds (a lack of bullshit and lots of good equipment) go to the places your local clubs and studios shop at. Which could be an audiophile's store, but in my limited experience, it isn't.
I guess what I'm alluding to is the whole "Look at my 5 kW Sony amplifier! It sounds so good because I used 000 AWG tram cable to hook it up to my 10 GW speakers" phenomenon.
:-)
Perhaps I'll try some thicker wire on my speakers rather than EQing them all to hell (hey, they're homebuilt with handwound inductors in the crossover, cut me some slack!
I'd pay attention to things like impedance, but then I wouldn't have an excuse for failing out of analog electronics. And math. Math with lots of trig. Oh boy, flashbacks of teachers telling me I didn't deserve to pass...
>I got some decent speaker wire and attached some good quality banana plugs.
Good stuff. I've just found that around here, for whatever reason, you can get some really nasty, almost solid, cheapie speaker wire for the best price, next step up in price being bulk lamp cord, and last step up being "Acoustic Research" OFC with arrows showing "which way 'round" to hook up the cable cable (oh man, can they really call themselves that after what I've seen in Future Shop? I can't even make fun of it like BOSE).
I've got nothing against banana plugs per se, just that if they aren't going to be touched more than once, they're a waste, and every extra junction just provides another place for a fault and more wasted energy.
And, oh yeah, if you're ever thinking of pumping 325 watts into a 4 Ohm speaker, you sure do want thick cable. That's a _lot_ of current (in comparison to your joe-sixpack's stereo [mine]), inductive or not! It must be nice to have that sort of headroom on a system...