Pay attention. Follow the link. Trillian Pro is patched, and works with yahoo, and no longer needs the "disable autoconnect" workaround from yesterday. (Which was just a stopgap to keep you from crashing while they banged out this new patch.)
Trillian's yahoo AND MSN fixes are already out. And there is a free version as well as a paid version. It's just like the old shareware-- if you feel like helping out the authors of a product you like, you pay them.
And what monthly costs are you referring to? Even Trillian Pro is a one-time fee.
He's a monster, but sometimes he helps us fight off other monsters. We can cheer as long as he's saving Tokyo. Once that's done, we just have to make sure he goes back into the ocean.
But please be aware that you can get unlimited data plans (for very little more) so that all that picture sending and whatnot is cheaper than actually talking. Data minutes on modern cell networks (GSM/GPRS or 1xRTT) do not require the phone to occupy a voice circuit.
I might also recommend the Nokia 3565 and 3390 as phones that appear to be relatively simple. T-Mobile has both for $50 with no contract, which is outside your range-- but I don't recall *ever* being able to buy a $40 cell phone without signing something.
Your point is well taken, though-- there are customers enough for both types of phones. I hope you find one that suits your tastes and your wallet, and i'll continue looking for one that will let me quit carrying 4 devices around with me.
Every time there's a converged device, we get comments like this. Likewise, every time we hear about a new gadget of some sort, we get comments suggesting it would be better if we tried cross-breeding it with a laptop.
Just stop for a second and realize that not everybody has the same tastes as you. Variety is good! People who want all that and a bag of chips can go buy a PDA/Phone/Camera/MP3/GPS, and people who just want a phone can get one of the simple no-nonsense Nokia models. People who like to have their pants stuffed with electronics can buy it all separately so they can practice juggling it all while simultaneously talking to clients on the phone.
In the end, we all benefit when there's choices. Quit complaining when a product isn't the same as the products you like-- and just go buy those instead.
I've only played with development a tiny bit with mine-- some basic test apps. I didn't want to invest any time until the ability to deploy apps to other hiptops was available.
Now... this sync you speak of-- is this in realtime, or is this just the same old "export all your shit from outlook into a textfile and import it into the t-mobile website GUI" one-way deal we've had since launch last year?
If I had known there were goodies like this in the Dev OS, I'd have gone ahead and written something useful to get upgraded.
Just curious-- which non-hybrid do you have? Is it automatic? Just to add another stat, my non-hybrid 2001 civic HX CVT automatic averages about 37 mpg in my everyday driving, with air conditioning about 75% of the time. It does a hair better (39 or so) on freeway-only trips. That's based on actual gas used vs. mileage, not an in-dash meter or epa estimate.
You got it. Think of it like this: instead of one large gas motor, you have a small gas motor and a small electric motor that equal the same total horsepower.
When you need to accelerate, they're both there, so you get full power.
When you reach cruising speed, one or the other shuts off, reducing your fuel consumption.
When you stop, both motors stop, using no gas at idle.
When you're slowing down, the electric motors run as small generators, putting energy back into the system while slowing the car down.
When you start up from a stop, the electric motor acts as the World's Biggest Starter Motor, and (in the case of the Toyota Prius, anyway) can actually have the engine started in *less than one revolution*.
Also, the battery pack is tiny compared to those in pure electrics-- it's not there to run the car full-time.
There are different types of hybrids, but this description is basically true for the Prius and Hybrid Civic.
That's more or less what we're headed for-- some sort of temporal equivalent to FFAA. Instead of rendering higher resolution and downsampling, we'll be talking about rendering a higher framerate and downsampling into a motion-blurred image. In the meantime, most games run at less than a monitor's full resolution, and are able to take advantage of the much higher refresh rate of the lower resolution. I don't remember where mine is exactly, but it's something like 120Hz at 1024x768.
No kidding. I *like* small midwestern communities. Ones with computer engineering jobs are pretty stinking rare, though. Do tell us where this magical place is located!
Despite all its other problems, not the least of which are the incredibly steep system requirements-- BF1942 has FANTASTIC vehicle integration. And because of it, I love that game. Normal FPSes are so boring now.
I strongly suspect that BF1942's success has spurred the "vehicles in games" fad. Tribes tried, but it was lame. In BF, the games are integral. I think it helps that they're all semi-realistic vehicles that people used to driving cars can intuitively drive and use. None of this "8-passenger hoverplatform with cannon" stuff that don't behave like reality.
Integration is key, intuitive and predictable control is key, and a range of vehicles to hide the learning curve (from jeep to fighter plane) is key.
Don't forget the lack of motion blur, and the fact that for a PC game, the framerate is an average, not a constant. You need your minimum to stay at a playable level, too.
You hit the nail on the head. There's no motion blur-- the frames are drawn "crisp". So, in order to look as good as naturally motion-blurred film or TV, you need *at least* two frames for each TV frame to give your eyes and brain two things to blur between.
And I'd guess you'd need more than 2. So, if TV looks nice at 30fps, you probably need something like 60-120fps to look as smooth.
Not to mention that unlike TV with its never-changing 30fps framerate, the numbers you see for games are an average. At 60fps, you might see framerate drops to 15 or 20fps. And it's always at the worst moment-- it's when 15 guys have all their particle-effect weapons pointed right at you. The more crap that's in your view, the slower it goes. You want a nice, high average so your framerate floor is still playable.
If you read the article, you would have noticed the bit where they said they had to spend FIVE TIMES as long optimizing for the Nvidia cards.
And it still sucks.
Five times the effort, a drop to a hybrid low-precision mode, and Nvidia's still in the hole on DX9.
It's early, so I'm feeding the trolls. Don't get me wrong-- I loved my last three nvidia cards. But my most recent upgrade was ATI. I have no love for either side. Whoever gets the performance for a decent price wins. I'll buy a K-Mart brand video card if it wins the tests for the games I want to play.
What you say seems logical, but history does not bear you out. All 17 Apollo capsules landed with 3 miles of their pre-planned landing point. And the recovery ship was never more than 13 miles away-- and that one was a fluke.
See this guy's post. I didn't know they were that precise, either, but apparently the ocean pickups were no big deal.
The "Most Stolen" statistics you see in the paper are almost always in terms of total number stolen rather than percentage stolen. Which means, of course, that the most common cars will almost always top the list of most stolen cars. Unless they REALLY suck, or are REALLY secure.
I looked and looked and looked, and couldn't find anything on the web using numbers that weren't from the same yearly NICB study that deals with total numbers.
If you're bored, you could take the NICB study and dig up the sales statistics from somewhere else, and do the math yourself, but I'm far to lazy today. It would be interesting, though, to know if there are any "popular but never stolen" cars, or any "rare but frequently stolen" ones.
Yes, yes, Dear GOD yes. Old shit is not intrinsically better, although some of it is. The part that is better is all that's left today, because the part that was shit is all broken and gone.
I keep trying to make this point, but it doesn't seem to get through.
****************** What about conservation of angular momentum?
When an elevator ascends the ribbon, it must be accelerated eastward because the Earth's rotation represents a larger eastward velocity the higher you go. The required eastward force on the ascending elevator would have to be provided by a corresponding westward force on the ribbon.
If you go through the math quantitatively, the angular momentum for the climbers requires a pound or so of force over the one-week travel time, and we do that easily with our many tons of material in the anchor and the counterweight.
The quantities really are tiny, but just to be complete, a climber going up pushes the entire elevator slightly to the east, causing it to lean. However, the ribbon recovers for the same reason that it stays up in the first place. Centripetal acceleration is acting on the upper two-thirds pulling it outward, and the lost angular momentum is replaced very quickly (essentially as fast as it is lost). The ribbon will never lose enough angular momentum to even deflect a single degree, let alone fall. The extra angular momentum is stolen from the Earth's rotation.
***********
I don't have time or a good recollection of my college dynamics class to verify this, but it seems they have it worked out. I'd be more concerned with the part about "dodging a satellite every 14 hours."
that whole metro/brute thing is a bad example at best. I could just as easily say something like "But when my brand new abrams tank crashes into your 30-year-old Dodge, which car do you want to be in?"
or...
This whole "built better back then" thing drives me insane. It's just not true in general. Consider that back in the early sixties, you were lucky to get a car to last to 100K. <joke> Of course, if you're driving a Dodge, that may still be true.</joke>
I seem to remember that we've found the "stuff"
on
The Return of Apollo?
·
· Score: 1
Yep.. a quick search pulled it up. Carbon nanotubes have twice the tensile strength needed to pull off a space elevator.
So it's invented, anyway... now the stumbling block is "how do you make a contiguous carbon nanotube long enough to hang down from GEO?"
Especially since they *currently* have to make TWO fishing trips with a boat to haul out the solid rocket boosters for reuse. If you were only after the capsule, it would be less work than the current shuttle, although your astronauts would get some quality time in the ocean.
You can find those headphone cables for $0.99. I bought mine from a reseller like success-hk.com or lik-sang.com-- i have forgotten which one now. Get all your GBA SP pals together and do one big order to save on shipping.
Not having the headphone jack built-in is pretty silly, though. But PLEASE don't go justifying Nintendo's stupidity by paying them $15 for their intentional feature-pruning.
Slashdot Mirror
Pay attention. Follow the link. Trillian Pro is patched, and works with yahoo, and no longer needs the "disable autoconnect" workaround from yesterday. (Which was just a stopgap to keep you from crashing while they banged out this new patch.)
Trillian's yahoo AND MSN fixes are already out. And there is a free version as well as a paid version. It's just like the old shareware-- if you feel like helping out the authors of a product you like, you pay them.
And what monthly costs are you referring to? Even Trillian Pro is a one-time fee.
My vote's for the Smog Monster. Mostly hot air, attracted to crap, and if memory serves me, he spends most of his fight with Godzilla pissing himself.
He's a monster, but sometimes he helps us fight off other monsters. We can cheer as long as he's saving Tokyo. Once that's done, we just have to make sure he goes back into the ocean.
But please be aware that you can get unlimited data plans (for very little more) so that all that picture sending and whatnot is cheaper than actually talking. Data minutes on modern cell networks (GSM/GPRS or 1xRTT) do not require the phone to occupy a voice circuit.
I might also recommend the Nokia 3565 and 3390 as phones that appear to be relatively simple. T-Mobile has both for $50 with no contract, which is outside your range-- but I don't recall *ever* being able to buy a $40 cell phone without signing something.
Your point is well taken, though-- there are customers enough for both types of phones. I hope you find one that suits your tastes and your wallet, and i'll continue looking for one that will let me quit carrying 4 devices around with me.
Every time there's a converged device, we get comments like this. Likewise, every time we hear about a new gadget of some sort, we get comments suggesting it would be better if we tried cross-breeding it with a laptop.
Just stop for a second and realize that not everybody has the same tastes as you. Variety is good! People who want all that and a bag of chips can go buy a PDA/Phone/Camera/MP3/GPS, and people who just want a phone can get one of the simple no-nonsense Nokia models. People who like to have their pants stuffed with electronics can buy it all separately so they can practice juggling it all while simultaneously talking to clients on the phone.
In the end, we all benefit when there's choices. Quit complaining when a product isn't the same as the products you like-- and just go buy those instead.
And yes, I should probably heed my own advice.
Sounds like a misprint to me-- if the english language had approximately one bit of information per word, we'd have approximately two words.
"1" and "0"
I've only played with development a tiny bit with mine-- some basic test apps. I didn't want to invest any time until the ability to deploy apps to other hiptops was available.
Now... this sync you speak of-- is this in realtime, or is this just the same old "export all your shit from outlook into a textfile and import it into the t-mobile website GUI" one-way deal we've had since launch last year?
If I had known there were goodies like this in the Dev OS, I'd have gone ahead and written something useful to get upgraded.
Just curious-- which non-hybrid do you have? Is it automatic? Just to add another stat, my non-hybrid 2001 civic HX CVT automatic averages about 37 mpg in my everyday driving, with air conditioning about 75% of the time. It does a hair better (39 or so) on freeway-only trips. That's based on actual gas used vs. mileage, not an in-dash meter or epa estimate.
You got it. Think of it like this: instead of one large gas motor, you have a small gas motor and a small electric motor that equal the same total horsepower.
When you need to accelerate, they're both there, so you get full power.
When you reach cruising speed, one or the other shuts off, reducing your fuel consumption.
When you stop, both motors stop, using no gas at idle.
When you're slowing down, the electric motors run as small generators, putting energy back into the system while slowing the car down.
When you start up from a stop, the electric motor acts as the World's Biggest Starter Motor, and (in the case of the Toyota Prius, anyway) can actually have the engine started in *less than one revolution*.
Also, the battery pack is tiny compared to those in pure electrics-- it's not there to run the car full-time.
There are different types of hybrids, but this description is basically true for the Prius and Hybrid Civic.
That's more or less what we're headed for-- some sort of temporal equivalent to FFAA. Instead of rendering higher resolution and downsampling, we'll be talking about rendering a higher framerate and downsampling into a motion-blurred image. In the meantime, most games run at less than a monitor's full resolution, and are able to take advantage of the much higher refresh rate of the lower resolution. I don't remember where mine is exactly, but it's something like 120Hz at 1024x768.
No kidding. I *like* small midwestern communities. Ones with computer engineering jobs are pretty stinking rare, though. Do tell us where this magical place is located!
Pretty please?
Despite all its other problems, not the least of which are the incredibly steep system requirements-- BF1942 has FANTASTIC vehicle integration. And because of it, I love that game. Normal FPSes are so boring now.
I strongly suspect that BF1942's success has spurred the "vehicles in games" fad. Tribes tried, but it was lame. In BF, the games are integral. I think it helps that they're all semi-realistic vehicles that people used to driving cars can intuitively drive and use. None of this "8-passenger hoverplatform with cannon" stuff that don't behave like reality.
Integration is key, intuitive and predictable control is key, and a range of vehicles to hide the learning curve (from jeep to fighter plane) is key.
I've been eating styrofoam for years! How else would i fill the long, hungry hours between lunch and dinner?
I'm just glad it's safe.
Don't forget the lack of motion blur, and the fact that for a PC game, the framerate is an average, not a constant. You need your minimum to stay at a playable level, too.
You hit the nail on the head. There's no motion blur-- the frames are drawn "crisp". So, in order to look as good as naturally motion-blurred film or TV, you need *at least* two frames for each TV frame to give your eyes and brain two things to blur between.
And I'd guess you'd need more than 2. So, if TV looks nice at 30fps, you probably need something like 60-120fps to look as smooth.
Not to mention that unlike TV with its never-changing 30fps framerate, the numbers you see for games are an average. At 60fps, you might see framerate drops to 15 or 20fps. And it's always at the worst moment-- it's when 15 guys have all their particle-effect weapons pointed right at you. The more crap that's in your view, the slower it goes. You want a nice, high average so your framerate floor is still playable.
If you read the article, you would have noticed the bit where they said they had to spend FIVE TIMES as long optimizing for the Nvidia cards.
And it still sucks.
Five times the effort, a drop to a hybrid low-precision mode, and Nvidia's still in the hole on DX9.
It's early, so I'm feeding the trolls. Don't get me wrong-- I loved my last three nvidia cards. But my most recent upgrade was ATI. I have no love for either side. Whoever gets the performance for a decent price wins. I'll buy a K-Mart brand video card if it wins the tests for the games I want to play.
What you say seems logical, but history does not bear you out. All 17 Apollo capsules landed with 3 miles of their pre-planned landing point. And the recovery ship was never more than 13 miles away-- and that one was a fluke.
See this guy's post. I didn't know they were that precise, either, but apparently the ocean pickups were no big deal.
The "Most Stolen" statistics you see in the paper are almost always in terms of total number stolen rather than percentage stolen. Which means, of course, that the most common cars will almost always top the list of most stolen cars. Unless they REALLY suck, or are REALLY secure.
I looked and looked and looked, and couldn't find anything on the web using numbers that weren't from the same yearly NICB study that deals with total numbers.
If you're bored, you could take the NICB study and dig up the sales statistics from somewhere else, and do the math yourself, but I'm far to lazy today. It would be interesting, though, to know if there are any "popular but never stolen" cars, or any "rare but frequently stolen" ones.
Yes, yes, Dear GOD yes. Old shit is not intrinsically better, although some of it is. The part that is better is all that's left today, because the part that was shit is all broken and gone.
I keep trying to make this point, but it doesn't seem to get through.
From the ISR space elevator FAQ.
******************
What about conservation of angular momentum?
When an elevator ascends the ribbon, it must be accelerated eastward because the Earth's rotation represents a larger eastward velocity the higher you go. The required eastward force on the ascending elevator would have to be provided by a corresponding westward force on the ribbon.
If you go through the math quantitatively, the angular momentum for the climbers requires a pound or so of force over the one-week travel time, and we do that easily with our many tons of material in the anchor and the counterweight.
The quantities really are tiny, but just to be complete, a climber going up pushes the entire elevator slightly to the east, causing it to lean. However, the ribbon recovers for the same reason that it stays up in the first place. Centripetal acceleration is acting on the upper two-thirds pulling it outward, and the lost angular momentum is replaced very quickly (essentially as fast as it is lost). The ribbon will never lose enough angular momentum to even deflect a single degree, let alone fall. The extra angular momentum is stolen from the Earth's rotation.
***********
I don't have time or a good recollection of my college dynamics class to verify this, but it seems they have it worked out. I'd be more concerned with the part about "dodging a satellite every 14 hours."
that whole metro/brute thing is a bad example at best. I could just as easily say something like "But when my brand new abrams tank crashes into your 30-year-old Dodge, which car do you want to be in?"
or...
This whole "built better back then" thing drives me insane. It's just not true in general. Consider that back in the early sixties, you were lucky to get a car to last to 100K. <joke> Of course, if you're driving a Dodge, that may still be true.</joke>
Yep.. a quick search pulled it up. Carbon nanotubes have twice the tensile strength needed to pull off a space elevator.
So it's invented, anyway... now the stumbling block is "how do you make a contiguous carbon nanotube long enough to hang down from GEO?"
Especially since they *currently* have to make TWO fishing trips with a boat to haul out the solid rocket boosters for reuse. If you were only after the capsule, it would be less work than the current shuttle, although your astronauts would get some quality time in the ocean.
You can find those headphone cables for $0.99. I bought mine from a reseller like success-hk.com or lik-sang.com-- i have forgotten which one now. Get all your GBA SP pals together and do one big order to save on shipping.
Not having the headphone jack built-in is pretty silly, though. But PLEASE don't go justifying Nintendo's stupidity by paying them $15 for their intentional feature-pruning.