This is exactly how to handle the P2P bandwidth problem.
Kudos to them for implementing a sane way to let everyone do everything they want, while still ensuring that the people who actually need to do schoolwork can do it in peace.
Thanks for bringing this up. I might show it to others I work with in the computer department at my college so they can implement the same thing...
Re:Is Intel doing the right thing?
on
Itanium Problems
·
· Score: 1
I didn't know that. Thanks for the tip...
Either way, 130 watts is far too much power to be dissapating from a consumer product that isn't intended to cook something, or light something. I can see myself working inside a machine like this and coming out with burns should the CPU Fan break...:-(
Re:Is Intel doing the right thing?
on
Itanium Problems
·
· Score: 1
Well, it's watts, and the 130 watts is just dissipated power. As in power wasted to heat your heatsink. At this rate it would take a heatsink the size of a car radiator to keep the processor at ambient temperature without a fan...
It will take more than that to run the processor. I don't know how much, though. Any bets?
Did you miss the one application does one thing well paradigm?
>Pine can't hold my calendar and sync with my palm, and itegrate all that with my e-mail.
That's because Pine is an email program. It isn't a virtual operating system like Emacs, nor is it sucking at the teat of an operating system like Outlook.
If I want to backup my palm (which I just got for $39 CDN -- WOW), I'll soon be using coldsync because programs that do just one thing well make sense to me.
And, when I want to use a calendar, I'm certainly not going to use an email client. That'd be like going around the world by making bridges across the continents. I'll be using something like this.
And I thought they took the hardcore Socialists with them.
You aren't having trouble with how a capitalist economy functions and therefore lashing out at me because you feel inept, are you? I can explain in more detail if you'd like -- perhaps that would calm you down.
No disagreements on the faux pas on morals the author has committed, but nevertheless, a good read for when you're sitting at work and just don't have anything to do. Plus your boss might reconsider getting angry at you next time if he sees you reading that...:-)
Exactly. That's why I use Pine. Addressbooks, mail folders, automatic forwarding, connection to usenet, opening applications to view attachments (only when I want it to), ability to choose any editor I like, configurability to the extreme, simplicity to connect to any standard type of mail server, price, footprint, speed, ease of use, overall stability, simplicity to backup your mail and address book, safe defaults, ease of use, awesome help system, use of internet standard mail (ie: No HTML), platform invisibility, being able to use it over telnet/ssh/whatever-you-like, the list goes on and on for the reasons you should switch to Pine immediately.
Best email client ever. Outlook Express only wishes it could do half of what Pine already has covered.
>That $85 mil could've made a real difference in people's lives, a real difference in stem cell research or cancer research.
Yup. That's why the money changed hands. Eventually it will get there. It all takes time. Eventually the money will pass into someone's hands who will decide to pass it on to those charities.
If the buyer were to keep that money instead of spending it then those charities would never see a dime from it.
Money is only good when spent. It's people like Bill Gates, who keep money locked up rather than moving it about that sicken me. The economy, which includes every organization and charity that needs money, can't function with a steady flow of money. Sinking it into a big pit is a waste that does no good.
>So is the brethalyzer test, but go ahead and try to NOT take one.
The drunk Mayor of Kitchener-Waterloo (or it could be Guelph -- hard to find stories on the 'net from the mid 90s sometimes), Ontario told the police flat out he wasn't going to to take one.
They didn't make him. They just reported that fact, plus their observations to the judge. I believe he was virtually convicted on the spot in court for drunken driving, and IIRC, had his license revoked
So yes, you can decide not to take it, but you'll almost certainly lose your license, and probably will end up losing any fight in court about it (since you have no evidence to show you didn't do it, and the police have all the evidence they need).
It had MASSIVE share problems with DOS 4.01 (which was was what included with the 286 it ran on).
Nice GUI in general, though, but certainly not an OS. Had the coolest support for Dot-Matrix printers I've ever seen (it could get a full 244 DPI from one, if you had the time to wait).
Someone with the skills (unlike myself) and looking for something that people will appreciate your work for if you port it, this is the project of the decade. Ok, maybe not the decade, but certainly this year!:-)
>If I'm not the first to comment, perhaps it's time you changed it to something which sounds a little less arrogant.
But it isn't arrogant. It's all in how you decide to view it. If your frame of mind is that of a troll (ie: Always angry at the world) then you would frame that as being arrogant, even though it doesn't have such qualities. Regular people don't frame it as such -- I get very few comments on my sig from user accounts, and those few times it's used as leverage in the heat of an argument. As we already know from the slashdot faq, most Anonymous Cowards are trolls, which, as I will prove, are the people most attracted to this signature.
Now, just to define the term arrogant (thanks dictionary.com):
arrogant adj. 1. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. 2. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others: an arrogant contempt for the weak. See Synonyms at proud.
At no point did I ever equate my amount of posts with self worth in my signature. I simply stated a fact that is easily visible in my user page, and (in fewer words) I asked the question: Why don't you have this many posts?
The fact is you've equated this statement of fact with some kind of lack of your own self-worth, thereby making it appear this is a display of my self-worth (which it isn't -- I don't measure my self-worth by my slashdot account). Therefore, in your troll delusion, you feel I am arrogant.
For this I am sorry. It does bring out the trolls, my signature, doesn't it?
>You are judging a company based on a few scanners.
True. It's all the experience I have to go by, but it is many thousands of dollars of experience, though.
>I have never had any problems getting parts or service for my Nikon cameras.
I can't disagree too much, I have no experience with that branch, and probably never will as I'm not a professional photographer.
BTW: Those scanners aren't 20 years old. They're less than a decade old, and unlike our HP laserjet IIIs, which cost the same amount at about the same time, they don't have parts for those scanners.
Maybe their photographic division is the best thing since sliced bread. I won't ever know since I don't buy professional photographic equipment, and I'm completely soured on the company, which means I won't buy any other equipment from them that they may (in the future) offer that I would be interested in.
>But wait, lack of customer confidence that the chip will actually work in their box, and the cost of developing and more importantly (and costly) producing the new chips will quickly drive the 'chippers out of business.
You might just want to check the classifieds of your local newspaper. You might be surprised as to how many people are still hacking satellite TV for people, even though the hacks usually don't last more than a month, sometimes end up destroying your card semi-permanently, and they're a lot more likely to end up in jail for TV piracy than X-BOX hacking.
The more difficult it becomes to hack the X-Box, the more value there is in acquiring the skills to do it. Because if you have the hack and they don't, there'll be a market, and you can gouge it all you like (without charging taxes, too!).
>I mean, he posted over 1000 comments on Slashdot, that must make him right!
Wow, now that's an Ad-Hominem stab I haven't seen in a while (not). Your jealousy's showing!
>Anyone who knows photography knows that Nikon rocks.
No problem with that (well, a little problem, since I did find pages of photographers unhappy with Nikon, but whatever). Anyone dealing with computers (which would probably everyone but you and that other poster on slashdot) would hate Nikon had they had my experience. Seems to me at least one person agrees with me here -- probably another sysadmin whose had the headache of dealing with a journalism department that doesn't understand the needs of the computer department and gets their asses burned when they have to buy scanners a couple of years earlier than expected.
>I don't care enough to investigate, but it's possible that the scanner was even made by another company and was branded by Nikon.
Probably was. I'd still blame Ford for their cars sucking if they took Ladas and rebranded them, though. It's 100% their fault for not inspecting the quality of their OEM parts properly. And 200% their fault for deciding, of their own will, not to keep their software up to date (or, in the case of the car, not supporting it with replacement parts). And 300% their fault if their crappy rebranded product breaks down and they just decide to leave the consumer flat on their face without parts.
I just don't understand what people are having the problem with here. Perhaps you could explain it to me?
I mean, lets take it to the tech field, which I hope most of slashdot understands:
RCA makes a line of cheap and nasty VCRs that don't last. I have one and it broke down. Guess what? Even though I know their TVs are made by another company, I'm not interested in buying any more RCA equipment because they tend to sell crappy products, even if that list of products doesn't include TVs.
Does that make me a freak? If so, I must live in a country of freaks, because it seems standard that when a consumer is soured on one line of product from a company they aren't interested in anything else from the company.
But hey, I'm not Nikon's target market, you are. And if you're satisfied, then that's fine. But as long as computer professionals exist, Nikon isn't ever entering our market. I guess they're just a niche company after all... sorta like Apple and how they'll never be as big as Microsoft as long as they only focus on Photographers, Artists, and DTP. But hey, each to their own.
Now that I have "proven" (in a way you seem to accept) computer users and professional photographers alike don't think Nikon is perfect, will you please shut up and stop crawling up Nikon's ass?
They have a PATHETIC software development department, and for anyone who has to deal with their software on a regular basis, like computer support staff or a journalism department, they are exactly the WRONG choice.
I guess if all you do is take 35mm photos, well, Nikon is the choice for you.
>That phrase only appeared on three web sites (four now that I've written this).
A hell of a lot more than that. You need to learn to use google properly, and realize that the word sucks doesn't need to be right beside Nikon to still bring up hits of things that suck about Nikon, such as "Nikon's software sucks ass".
>It seems that there are not many people that share your opinion.
It seems you are wrong about a great many things.
>Nor have I had any problems with my Nikon SLRs or lenses.
So they have two good product departments. Big friggin' deal. Especially if they can't compete in the information age (and with today's more and more generic products, software is the ONLY thing that distinguishes between them). Nikon can FOAD for all I care.
>You need to grow up and realize that Nikon is in business to sell products, not to provide you with replacement parts and new drivers for obsolete slide scanners.
Yup. That's good business for you (haha). It people with defeatist attitudes like yours that contribute to the complete waste of this country's resources, and the cash of consumers.
Buddy, I'd better not hear you complaining about your 5 year old car requiring replacement parts that the company doesn't make anymore. You should just suck it up and say "Well, hell, it's a little older anyways, the company is doing the right thing by making me buy a $20k car instead of a $500 replacement part". Show us your balls to support the fact you think yer all "grown up" and do that for me. Of course you won't because when the tables are turned, you'll say how horribly hard Toyota/Ford/Chevy/whoever sucks. And people will tell you they're perfect because them and all their friends have them, just like you're doing now.
Weak, man, so very weak. When you grow up and out of your "my xyz is the best because by photographer friend says so" attitude, come back and play. 'Till then take your ball and go home. The big guys who regularly get +4 and +5 scores have things to say.
>There are thousands of professional photographers that have been made very happy by Nikon over the years.
And there are now hundreds pouring out from the college I work at who think Nikon stinks (even when those CoolScans did work, the software was beyond pathetic).
Funny how that works, isn't it? Out with the old, in with the new.
>They aren't even from the same branches of the company.
Maybe so, but they're definately more related than a piano and a motocross bike.
I'd say they're related like an engine and gasoline. If you have an SLR camera and want to take the film digital, you'll need a slide scanner. Very related products, IMHO.
When a company (or its branches) decide not to support one of these two products, the chain of events breaks down, you see, and you end up screwed.
If being from a different company branch makes it OK, I guess buying an Acer scanner (for example) is fine because Acer computers are what is mostly related to their bad name, not their scanners.
Nikon, in general, deserves a bad name if they can't support the digital end of things properly, and from my experience, I'd rather buy a PCChips or Acer product instead. Much more reliable support, that's for sure!
Nikon doesn't give two shits about their customers. Just ask anyone who owns an older model CoolScan. We trashed a few not so long ago because they worked fine, but Nikon won't devlop new drivers or touch the damn things. We lost a slide insert once. We ended up with a "spare" unit because Nikon doesn't make replacement parts for products that are more than a couple of years old.
Nikon is the shittiest company I've dealt with, barring Iomega.
Slashdot Mirror
This is exactly how to handle the P2P bandwidth problem.
Kudos to them for implementing a sane way to let everyone do everything they want, while still ensuring that the people who actually need to do schoolwork can do it in peace.
Thanks for bringing this up. I might show it to others I work with in the computer department at my college so they can implement the same thing...
I didn't know that. Thanks for the tip...
:-(
Either way, 130 watts is far too much power to be dissapating from a consumer product that isn't intended to cook something, or light something. I can see myself working inside a machine like this and coming out with burns should the CPU Fan break...
Well, it's watts, and the 130 watts is just dissipated power. As in power wasted to heat your heatsink. At this rate it would take a heatsink the size of a car radiator to keep the processor at ambient temperature without a fan...
It will take more than that to run the processor. I don't know how much, though. Any bets?
Hi,
Did you miss the one application does one thing well paradigm?
>Pine can't hold my calendar and sync with my palm, and itegrate all that with my e-mail.
That's because Pine is an email program. It isn't a virtual operating system like Emacs, nor is it sucking at the teat of an operating system like Outlook.
If I want to backup my palm (which I just got for $39 CDN -- WOW), I'll soon be using coldsync because programs that do just one thing well make sense to me.
And, when I want to use a calendar, I'm certainly not going to use an email client. That'd be like going around the world by making bridges across the continents. I'll be using something like this.
When I need to syncronize my mail, I'll use this.
If I really want everyone scrunched into one application, I'll use this.
I haven't even scratched the surface of available applications yet...
You windows people amuse me.
In the future, you might want to search freshmeat before you assume windows does it best.
>Jesus. I thought Reaganomics died in the 80s. :(
And I thought they took the hardcore Socialists with them.
You aren't having trouble with how a capitalist economy functions and therefore lashing out at me because you feel inept, are you? I can explain in more detail if you'd like -- perhaps that would calm you down.
No disagreements on the faux pas on morals the author has committed, but nevertheless, a good read for when you're sitting at work and just don't have anything to do. Plus your boss might reconsider getting angry at you next time if he sees you reading that... :-)
>I'll take a modern PIM/E-mail client, thanks.
Exactly. That's why I use Pine. Addressbooks, mail folders, automatic forwarding, connection to usenet, opening applications to view attachments (only when I want it to), ability to choose any editor I like, configurability to the extreme, simplicity to connect to any standard type of mail server, price, footprint, speed, ease of use, overall stability, simplicity to backup your mail and address book, safe defaults, ease of use, awesome help system, use of internet standard mail (ie: No HTML), platform invisibility, being able to use it over telnet/ssh/whatever-you-like, the list goes on and on for the reasons you should switch to Pine immediately.
Best email client ever. Outlook Express only wishes it could do half of what Pine already has covered.
>That $85 mil could've made a real difference in people's lives, a real difference in stem cell research or cancer research.
Yup. That's why the money changed hands. Eventually it will get there. It all takes time. Eventually the money will pass into someone's hands who will decide to pass it on to those charities.
If the buyer were to keep that money instead of spending it then those charities would never see a dime from it.
Money is only good when spent. It's people like Bill Gates, who keep money locked up rather than moving it about that sicken me. The economy, which includes every organization and charity that needs money, can't function with a steady flow of money. Sinking it into a big pit is a waste that does no good.
>I'd really like to know (in the U.S.) where this notion of universal provacy came from
Here.
It's a good read.
>considering RMS himself is a communist
He is?
I don't remeber him saying that...
>So is the brethalyzer test, but go ahead and try to NOT take one.
The drunk Mayor of Kitchener-Waterloo (or it could be Guelph -- hard to find stories on the 'net from the mid 90s sometimes), Ontario told the police flat out he wasn't going to to take one.
They didn't make him. They just reported that fact, plus their observations to the judge. I believe he was virtually convicted on the spot in court for drunken driving, and IIRC, had his license revoked
So yes, you can decide not to take it, but you'll almost certainly lose your license, and probably will end up losing any fight in court about it (since you have no evidence to show you didn't do it, and the police have all the evidence they need).
I have that rotting on some disks somewhere...
It was renamed GeoWorks in '92.
It had MASSIVE share problems with DOS 4.01 (which was was what included with the 286 it ran on).
Nice GUI in general, though, but certainly not an OS. Had the coolest support for Dot-Matrix printers I've ever seen (it could get a full 244 DPI from one, if you had the time to wait).
Memories... precious memories.
Someone with the skills (unlike myself) and looking for something that people will appreciate your work for if you port it, this is the project of the decade. Ok, maybe not the decade, but certainly this year! :-)
>If I'm not the first to comment, perhaps it's time you changed it to something which sounds a little less arrogant.
But it isn't arrogant. It's all in how you decide to view it. If your frame of mind is that of a troll (ie: Always angry at the world) then you would frame that as being arrogant, even though it doesn't have such qualities. Regular people don't frame it as such -- I get very few comments on my sig from user accounts, and those few times it's used as leverage in the heat of an argument. As we already know from the slashdot faq, most Anonymous Cowards are trolls, which, as I will prove, are the people most attracted to this signature.
Now, just to define the term arrogant (thanks dictionary.com):
arrogant
adj.
1. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance.
2. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others: an arrogant contempt for the weak. See Synonyms at proud.
At no point did I ever equate my amount of posts with self worth in my signature. I simply stated a fact that is easily visible in my user page, and (in fewer words) I asked the question: Why don't you have this many posts?
The fact is you've equated this statement of fact with some kind of lack of your own self-worth, thereby making it appear this is a display of my self-worth (which it isn't -- I don't measure my self-worth by my slashdot account). Therefore, in your troll delusion, you feel I am arrogant.
For this I am sorry. It does bring out the trolls, my signature, doesn't it?
If you get an account you can turn off sigs, or just put me on your foes list if those few words cause you such mental anguish.
As long as you're an AC, nobody cares. Except your shrink.
BTW: You're not the first person (this week, even) to have said that...
>Sure it will always be a small part of the market but that doesn't mean Apple can't make money doing it.
Right, until there's economic slowdown (like the past year in the tech sector). That's when the expensive luxuries get hit the worst.
>You are judging a company based on a few scanners.
True. It's all the experience I have to go by, but it is many thousands of dollars of experience, though.
>I have never had any problems getting parts or service for my Nikon cameras.
I can't disagree too much, I have no experience with that branch, and probably never will as I'm not a professional photographer.
BTW: Those scanners aren't 20 years old. They're less than a decade old, and unlike our HP laserjet IIIs, which cost the same amount at about the same time, they don't have parts for those scanners.
Maybe their photographic division is the best thing since sliced bread. I won't ever know since I don't buy professional photographic equipment, and I'm completely soured on the company, which means I won't buy any other equipment from them that they may (in the future) offer that I would be interested in.
>But wait, lack of customer confidence that the chip will actually work in their box, and the cost of developing and more importantly (and costly) producing the new chips will quickly drive the 'chippers out of business.
You might just want to check the classifieds of your local newspaper. You might be surprised as to how many people are still hacking satellite TV for people, even though the hacks usually don't last more than a month, sometimes end up destroying your card semi-permanently, and they're a lot more likely to end up in jail for TV piracy than X-BOX hacking.
The more difficult it becomes to hack the X-Box, the more value there is in acquiring the skills to do it. Because if you have the hack and they don't, there'll be a market, and you can gouge it all you like (without charging taxes, too!).
>I mean, he posted over 1000 comments on Slashdot, that must make him right!
Wow, now that's an Ad-Hominem stab I haven't seen in a while (not). Your jealousy's showing!
>Anyone who knows photography knows that Nikon rocks.
No problem with that (well, a little problem, since I did find pages of photographers unhappy with Nikon, but whatever). Anyone dealing with computers (which would probably everyone but you and that other poster on slashdot) would hate Nikon had they had my experience. Seems to me at least one person agrees with me here -- probably another sysadmin whose had the headache of dealing with a journalism department that doesn't understand the needs of the computer department and gets their asses burned when they have to buy scanners a couple of years earlier than expected.
>I don't care enough to investigate, but it's possible that the scanner was even made by another company and was branded by Nikon.
Probably was. I'd still blame Ford for their cars sucking if they took Ladas and rebranded them, though. It's 100% their fault for not inspecting the quality of their OEM parts properly. And 200% their fault for deciding, of their own will, not to keep their software up to date (or, in the case of the car, not supporting it with replacement parts). And 300% their fault if their crappy rebranded product breaks down and they just decide to leave the consumer flat on their face without parts.
I just don't understand what people are having the problem with here. Perhaps you could explain it to me?
I mean, lets take it to the tech field, which I hope most of slashdot understands:
RCA makes a line of cheap and nasty VCRs that don't last. I have one and it broke down. Guess what? Even though I know their TVs are made by another company, I'm not interested in buying any more RCA equipment because they tend to sell crappy products, even if that list of products doesn't include TVs.
Does that make me a freak? If so, I must live in a country of freaks, because it seems standard that when a consumer is soured on one line of product from a company they aren't interested in anything else from the company.
But hey, I'm not Nikon's target market, you are. And if you're satisfied, then that's fine. But as long as computer professionals exist, Nikon isn't ever entering our market. I guess they're just a niche company after all... sorta like Apple and how they'll never be as big as Microsoft as long as they only focus on Photographers, Artists, and DTP. But hey, each to their own.
>Just out of curiosity, I did a Google search for the phrase Nikon sucks and the word CoolScan
Just out of curiosity, I decided to check if you are lying.
You are.
Here's just a couple of hits I came up with, liar:
Software / connection to Mac sucks
Yet another expensive flop from Nikon, further confirming my belief that Nikon hasn't made anything worth owning since 1980
BONUS: the NikonScan 2.5 software sucks big time. I nominate it as the worst user interface I've ever seen
Now that I have "proven" (in a way you seem to accept) computer users and professional photographers alike don't think Nikon is perfect, will you please shut up and stop crawling up Nikon's ass?
They have a PATHETIC software development department, and for anyone who has to deal with their software on a regular basis, like computer support staff or a journalism department, they are exactly the WRONG choice.
I guess if all you do is take 35mm photos, well, Nikon is the choice for you.
>That phrase only appeared on three web sites (four now that I've written this).
A hell of a lot more than that. You need to learn to use google properly, and realize that the word sucks doesn't need to be right beside Nikon to still bring up hits of things that suck about Nikon, such as "Nikon's software sucks ass".
>It seems that there are not many people that share your opinion.
It seems you are wrong about a great many things.
>Nor have I had any problems with my Nikon SLRs or lenses.
So they have two good product departments. Big friggin' deal. Especially if they can't compete in the information age (and with today's more and more generic products, software is the ONLY thing that distinguishes between them). Nikon can FOAD for all I care.
>You need to grow up and realize that Nikon is in business to sell products, not to provide you with replacement parts and new drivers for obsolete slide scanners.
Yup. That's good business for you (haha). It people with defeatist attitudes like yours that contribute to the complete waste of this country's resources, and the cash of consumers.
Buddy, I'd better not hear you complaining about your 5 year old car requiring replacement parts that the company doesn't make anymore. You should just suck it up and say "Well, hell, it's a little older anyways, the company is doing the right thing by making me buy a $20k car instead of a $500 replacement part". Show us your balls to support the fact you think yer all "grown up" and do that for me. Of course you won't because when the tables are turned, you'll say how horribly hard Toyota/Ford/Chevy/whoever sucks. And people will tell you they're perfect because them and all their friends have them, just like you're doing now.
Weak, man, so very weak. When you grow up and out of your "my xyz is the best because by photographer friend says so" attitude, come back and play. 'Till then take your ball and go home. The big guys who regularly get +4 and +5 scores have things to say.
>There are thousands of professional photographers that have been made very happy by Nikon over the years.
And there are now hundreds pouring out from the college I work at who think Nikon stinks (even when those CoolScans did work, the software was beyond pathetic).
Funny how that works, isn't it? Out with the old, in with the new.
>They aren't even from the same branches of the company.
Maybe so, but they're definately more related than a piano and a motocross bike.
I'd say they're related like an engine and gasoline. If you have an SLR camera and want to take the film digital, you'll need a slide scanner. Very related products, IMHO.
When a company (or its branches) decide not to support one of these two products, the chain of events breaks down, you see, and you end up screwed.
If being from a different company branch makes it OK, I guess buying an Acer scanner (for example) is fine because Acer computers are what is mostly related to their bad name, not their scanners.
Nikon, in general, deserves a bad name if they can't support the digital end of things properly, and from my experience, I'd rather buy a PCChips or Acer product instead. Much more reliable support, that's for sure!
>Nikon understands the concept of an investment
Ahhh HAHAHAHAHA! ROTFLMAO! Now that's funny.
Nikon doesn't give two shits about their customers. Just ask anyone who owns an older model CoolScan. We trashed a few not so long ago because they worked fine, but Nikon won't devlop new drivers or touch the damn things. We lost a slide insert once. We ended up with a "spare" unit because Nikon doesn't make replacement parts for products that are more than a couple of years old.
Nikon is the shittiest company I've dealt with, barring Iomega.
Strange, I thought that one was the best of the entire line of Simpsons games (starting with the Arcade version, of course).
:)
I guess that's the way life goes... can't please them all!
>Now if only they will release that game!
:)
Too late!
Download and 'enjoy'.