That's not entirely true. The reason PS1s needed a mod chip to play burned games is because of a software hack.
As I understand it, the PS1 disks were stamped with an invalid checksum for the first data block on the disk (0, if I recall correctly). CD burning software helpfully computed the correct checksum and wrote that instead if you burned an ISO to disk. The PS1 looked for that zero checksum, and if it did not find it, assumed that the disk was pirated, and refused to load the disk.
I believe this is why the "disk-swap" trick worked.
For example in baseball, while batting you also have to control the baserunners---how far they lead off, when to steal, etc. In football, you have audibles, hotroutes, motion, etc. Will Wii just remove these from the games, or will they somehow find a way to incorporate them in? And if so, how[?]
From what I understand of Wii Sports Tennis, you do not actually control how your character moves across the court. Realistically, there's no need -- of course you are going to run towards the ball, and it's no fun to play if you can't make it there because you forget how the controller works. With the Wiimote, the controller works as you would expect, namely you swing it to hit the ball. If you hit it with the correct spin, you hit the ball to a place where your opponent cannot reach it, thus you win the point. You can likely pick characters based on ability; a strong hitter may not be a fast runner, and vice versa. In basebal and football games, the elements you ask after are all likely there, just not under your direct control.
Think about playing a real game of baseball. When you're at the plate swinging, you expect that your teammate (or the third-base coach) knows how far to lead-off. With a video game, you can spend some time before the game starts picking your lineup and batting order, planning out how this should work in the course of a game. That way, when you're swinging at air while batting, you don't have to be fumbling with the controls trying to tell "Big Jim" to get back to the bag.
By simplifying the controller, the Wiimote forces players/developers to change the way games are played. Instead of taking advantage of all thirty-seven buttons on the controller, you have to think about the lineup and batting-order before you actually step up to the plate for the core of the baseball experience -- swinging for the bleachers.
This may, actually lead to a deeper, more entertaining game of baseball, because you focus on the 'fun' part. It also leaves intact, however, the management aspect, without the micro-management that a button-loaded controller allows a lazy developer.
There are two reasons my mother hated the front-load washer she had.
You can't add clothes after you hit start. If you see a sock on the ground that fell out of the pile as you were loading, well, that'll just have to wait.
It is impossible to soak clothes overnight. Since the tub is not full of water you just can't do it, and my Mom swears by soaking for tough stain removal.
There was a time for a while in the US that everyone and their brother was afraid we'd run out of water, tomorrow (EVERYBODY PANIC). Manufacturers (temporarily) switched production, almost exclusively, to front-load machines to capitalize on that fear. It turns out that the only people afraid enough to actually use the damn things were the people who live in deserts (I'm looking at you southern California). They're the ones that keep foisting abominations like low-flow showerheads on those of us smart enough to live close enough to stable water supplies.
n.b., Just so you know I'm at least half-joking about SoCal, I live in New Orleans, where we occasionally have a little too much water.
You can define computer literacy without context. In fact, I have taught literacy as such. My definition of literate would be:
Don't be afraid. If you don't know how to do something, poke around. You probably won't break anything.
Learn the rules. Save and Open are almost always under the File menu. If you want to change the font style, look under Format. Most common software sticks to an ad hoc Interface Guideline, and if you see the patterns, you can get almost anything done.
Know your history. In the beginning, there was the commandline. It worked differently than the windowing system you use now. Try typing 'help' or '?'. If you got there by accident, try typing 'exit' or 'quit'. Older windowing systems had the close button and/or menu in a different place. Look around the window and screen, then see Rule 1.
Figure out how to save. Data are no good if you can't look at them again. This should be the first progam specific thing you learn how to do.
Don't hesitate to ask for help. Find the help menu, read a manual, or ask someone for a pointer (not a held hand for the rest of your life).
Certainly, there are quirky programs and systems that require more investigation than the others (blender, I'm looking at you), but if you really and truly grok these points, you are computer-literate.
Your car analogy works against you here. When I climb into the van we have at work, I drive more slowly and cautiously because it doesn't work quite like I'm used to. The fact that I know how to look for the controls to start, steer, and stop means I am 'driving-literate' even if I have to hunt for the seat-adjustment lever every time I drive that monster. Just because I know nothing about lisp, and am thus unable to use emacs to it's full potential, does not mean I am computer illiterate; it means I am unfamiliar with this particular windshield-wiper control. I'll figure out how to use emacs eventually though, because I am literate enough to do so.
When I first saw the price of the GB micro, and found out it did not play GB/GBC games, I balked a little. I've still got a massive collection of those older games (all the way back to the Tetris that came with the original GB), and I want the ability to play those games. When I thought about it, though, I really don't play them very often. So I bought the micro.
It is, hands down, the system I play the most. The size (combined with the sleep/quicksave mode in most GBA games) really makes it the perfect "play anywhere" device.
I almost mentioned this as an alternative, but the sentence appropriate for the insertion was already too long.
The fact of the matter is, that with a drag and drop transfer system, you still need ripping software, a playlist editor, and an audio player for the desktop. While I appreciate the "UNIX Way" of small tools doing one task well, audio file management lends itself well to a larger combined tool, and iTunes fits this bill to a 'T'.
In the interest of completeness, at the time of my iPod purchase (it's a 3G iPod, so I've had it for a while) there was at least one other piece of software commonly used for MP3 player management (discounting Sony's SonicStage). That was MusicMatch, which was a pile of garbage according to the reviews I read. For a time it was used as the Windows iPod interface (it even came on the software CD that came with my iPod), but the Windows version of iTunes quickly supplanted it.
You know what's funny? That's how I think of iTunes.
I tried using WMP to listen to music. It was too much of a resource hog and I always heard stuttering and pops in the music; I thought I had downloaded crappy rips. I switched to WinAmp, which cleaned up all the audio problems, but it hung all the time.
So then I downloaded iTunes. I turned off the music store options, and used it strictly as an MP3 player on my desktop. It worked great. I initially had no intention of buying any MP3 player, let alone an iPod, but when I decided to take the plunge, all of the iPod competitors used WMP as the transfer interface (with the exception of Sony players, but I've been avoiding Sony products for a looong time now). I figured out that buying an iPod (and using the software I wanted to use) was about a $50 premium over the other options. To me, it was worth $50 to be able to use the simple MP3 player I wanted to use.
iTunes, with the music store turned off, makes for a fantastic, simple MP3 player that just happens to look pretty. With the music store turned on, you have cheap, easy access to a lot of songs that may not be in your collection, if you choose to buy them. That's how I choose to use it, supplementing my current collection with those one or two songs that I want from a CD without having to pay $10 for a used copy. For the times when I want an entire album, I still go buy it on CD.
Not really, notice that I said "reduces the number." If it were all free/readily accessible (i.e., family PC and a free beta) there would be more of them on there.
This is something we call "barrier to entry." Even if the barrier is very low, the cost still keeps out the riff-raff, and, since the individual invested something, they are more inclined to treat it seriously. Suppose you charge as little as $1/year; the hassle involved with actually paying that dollar make it unattractive to those who just want to screw around with other people.
As an example, when the GameCube was announced, I read online that there were free demo DVDs available at game stores. When I went to get one, they had a price of $0.01 on them. I pulled out a penny to pay, and they guy behind the counter said, "don't worry about it, we put that on there so that people won't just take them all." Even a barrier as low as one cent will reduce hassle and discourage trouble-makers.
The reason you have no fun in free betas is that any 12 year old with a chip on his shoulder and no real desire to see if the game is any good can log in and try to break shit. Hey, he's twelve, that's what you do when you're that age. Requiring a console and a game purchase, however, reduces the number of idiots who will actually end up playing you online, especially if you eschew the types of games that attract the 12 year old 'hardcore' gamers.
I think (I'm not the OP, so I can't say for certain) that this 'customer' is an aquaintance/friend who calls up every now and then to ask for help. We've all been there, heck, sometimes we even offer to help the first few times. The goods ones offer you a beer or two and snacks. The bad ones don't even try to make small-talk when they call you up ("Jim? It's Bob. I need you to come over and...").
To get back to the original question, however, here's how I've done it in the past. First, I defer once or twice (i.e., "I can't come over tonight. Maybe next week?"). Next, I give them a list of sites/programs that might help, if they take the initiative, this list generally helps them. Thirdly, I tell them that I'm just not going to be able to do it anymore, and try to suggest some one who can (generally for money).
I can appreciate how you may not want to hurt the customer's feelings (especially if you want to remain on good terms), so the trick is in how gently you let them down. I've had some people figure it out on their own after defering, for others, I'm perennially in the "try this, this, this, and this, and call back if it doesn't work" phase. I've only had to tell one person that I couldn't do it anymore (computers aren't my primary business, and they weren't paying me anywhere near enough for my time and travel).
If you look at how I've described it, it's almost like breaking-up. The real trick is giving them good reasons as to why you're dumping them in a non-judgemental way. Myriad family problems seem a good enough reason to me, but if they overreact, well, do you really want to hang around them anymore?
Nice to see someone mention the Harry Potter change. It had it's correct name up here in Canada. Never could figure out why they changed it.
That's easy. In the US, philosopher has (almost exclusively) the connotation of an individual like Socrates; a thinker and academe (see the US English definition). In the UK, the connotation includes 'magician'. Sorcerer is much more clear to the US audience, and much more in line with the original intent of the author.
Remember the intended audience of the book. While most adults will pick up the nuance of 'alchemical investigator' attached to philosopher, a young teen who picks up a dictionary to check the meaning of the unknown word will likely find the definition listed above.
Requiring laptops is not necessary to allow them to be paid for with financial aid money.
I should have been more clear here. Requiring the laptop adds to the "total cost" (T) of attendance. After scholarships (S), there is an "expected contribution" (E) that your parents (if you're a minor) or you are expected to pay. If T - S - E > 0, then you are eligible for Federal loans (with some other eligibility caveats) if less than zero, then you cannot get Federally-backed loans (there are other kinds that you can get, however they have much higher interest rates). This actually makes it possible for those of us who make too much to get financial aid, but not enough to pay for school and a computer to actually get one.
I know all this because I got burned by it. In my first year of graduate school, I applied for Federal loans so I could buy a computer. I made too much (stipend, etc.) and was ineligible, thus I had to buy the thing on Gateway's extended-payment plan, instead of being able to take advantage of the much lower interest rate on the Federal loans.
Interestingly enough my department had recently terminated their required laptop purchase program because it was an unmitigated disaster.
The thing is, it's not 'stupider,' and I'll tell you why.
As mentioned by the OP, requiring that students have a laptop allows financial aid to pay for it. Once every student has a laptop, the school no longer needs to invest the space and money on computer labs, just omnipresent wireless connectivity. In essence, the school is shifting the expense of computing from an indirect cost (i.e., tutition increase) to a direct cost (purchase). Frankly, most students would give their eye-teeth for a computer they don't have to share; the requirement of said machines makes the purchase affordable (via student loans).
Additionally, many software companies will deal in bulk with universities to provide lower-cost licenses to students/faculty. These programs encourage graduated students to purchase the software when they are out in the real world because they are familiar with it. MS is good at this, offering Office and Windows licenses for $75 each (yes, the newest versions, think XP Pro and Office 2003 full whiz-bang version). As far as high-end packages (solid-modeling in this case), one software company gives the school an unlimited number of licenses for a $5000 fee, but the school can earn that fee back by using the software in class demonstrations, required projects, etc. Again, the full-bore version, not a limited thing (this is software that costs $5000 per seat in the real world). Required software is also an eligible purchase using aid monies, thus making it easier on the student (in the short-term, at least).
The thing you're getting hung up on here is the difference between required purchase and mandated purchase. The latter (as I define it) is a computer bought, maintained, and controlled for you by the school. Medical schools (at least one I know of) are shifting to this setup, with exams being taken on the laptop (and answers being submitted via wireless; don't get me started). All other software is disabled while the test software is being run, and woe be unto you if you bring in a laptop for service that has anything other than school-sanctioned software on it.
All that being said, there are two problems I have with required computer plans. The first is that they tend to isolate students. Some of the more productive, enlightening, and entertaining times I had at school occured while working in the close proximity of other in a computer lab at four in the morning. The second is that, in order to justify the program, professors are encouraged to shoehorn computer-use into classes that don't need computers. Some professors do great things with the new technology, others, well, let's just say it doesn't work out so well sometimes.
While I know you're being flippant, this comment got me thinking...
We don't necessarily know what all they've added to Hunters in the WiFi-upgrade bonus round. What if they added co-op multi-play? Two (or more) stealth bounty hunters preparing for a mission would necessitate communication before-hand, especially if conditions (read: processing power, which I'm certain is the real reason there's no in-game chat) dictate radio-silence whilst fighting. Chat after would allow you to hash over what went right/wrong in that round, prehaps while deciding whether or not to take a do-over.
Of course, I'm just pulling all of this out of my ass. I have no real idea what MP:Hunters gameplay will be like.
But I actually find extensions to often be very bad substitutes for properly integrated features. Not everyone wants to deal with extensions.
And, of course, not everyone wants to wait while all of the "properly integrated features" add an additional 3 minutes to the program's load-time. I imagine that if you "properly integrated" all of the extensions available for firefox, you'd very quickly obtain an unusable beast of a program (e.g., MS Office, where 90% of the users use 10% of the features). Not everyone wants to deal with "properly integrated features" when a very workable extensions system means you don't have to.
You know what's kind of funny, I don't get junk snail mail anymore.
Of course, there was some... unpleasantness that caused some levee breaches, some flooding of the mail-sorting equipment, and some Post Masters halting delivery of such things. But, hey, no more junk mail!
Of course, my wife doesn't get her magazines anymore either, which is a pain.
Yeahhh, I accidentally hit 'Submit' when I meant to hit 'Preview' (I wasn't quite finished with that thought yet).
I was going to add almost exactly this. The only exception being that it could be the OP's manager is not aware of her shortcomings and need for training (the "It doesn't look as though training will be forthcoming..." comment in the article leads me to this conclusion).
The problem could just be that the manager thinks everything is peachy, and the OP has not stated her need clearly enough. A good manager isn't going to be poking his or her nose into your office everyday asking if you know what you're doing. The only time that happens is when the domain server goes FUBAR.
The important thing here is documentation. Documenting everything that you ask of your employer, and why you are asking for it, shields you from fallout in the event of a catastrophy, and it establishes to your boss (and thus, your boss's boss if an expenditure needs approval) that a need is not being addressed. A decent company will make attempts to address this need, but managers are not omniscient; they need to be told that there is a (potential) problem.
Most engineers and techie-types (in my experience; stereotypes form for a reason) aren't that great at interpersonal communications. They believe they've said one thing, but the other party hears something totally different. This could be what is confounding your requests. Writing a memo gives you time to think over exactly what it is you're saying, and you can bounce the ideas off a few people (like your husband, OP) to gauge how effectively you've asked for what you need. Just make sure that the first memo you send IS IN NO WAY accusatory. That just triggers every defensive measure your manager has, and you'll never get anywhere.
If, however, your manager flatly refuses training, make sure to get the refusal in writing ("Not my fault!"), and start looking for another position (perhaps even in the same company, if it's large enough); you're going to be taken advantage of. You could also start talking to the HR department (I know, I know, but they're there for a reason). They may have resources available for training that neither you nor your boss know about (e.g., books, or discounts on training), and they may also be able to suggest better ways of communicating with your manager such that you can work more effectively with each other. Worst case scenario, HR will have a list of openings within the company.
One thing I would suggest, keeping in line with this, would be to 'spin' it such that it is to the company's great benefit to ensure that you are properly trained. For example, you don't want to spend hours trying to solve a problem that a properly trained domain admin might spend 5 minutes fixing (think of the downtime!). This is the polite way of batting the camel on the nose (as it were) to make it back out of the tent.
If necessary, keep records of the time you spend on figuring out problems, and present this (in accumulated form) to your manager, insisting that training will reduce this. Present this in paper memo form, making sure to cc: to file (yours, paper, of course), and make certain that your manager's secretary stamps each memo you deliver to him or her with one of those "Received On" stamps (they still use those, right?). If your manager still refuses training, your ass is covered when the shit hits the fan (and it will).
I've never been in an IT position like this. It doesn't matter, though, because just about every manager with a lean training budget will act the same. Once you prove to your manager that this training is worth the investment, you'll generally get the support you need. On the other hand, you might see (currently) intangible benefits by training yourself. You're a go-getter with initiative. A straight-shooter with upper management written all over you.
As an engineer, I love being able to see my data, and the changes that are made to them when I apply some transformation to them.
I often perform the initial analysis in Excel (so that I can see what is actually happening) before I write code to do the same thing, albeit faster and to a great many more data-sets. It saves a lot of head-scratching time when the output from my shiny new program is totally wonky.
You've hit the nail on the head, here (at least in my experience).
I used to teach the mechanical engineering freshman computer class at my undergraduate institution. I would frequently respond to questions with, "I don't know, let's look here to see if we can find it..." The fact that I, the great and powerful Oz, did not immediately know how to do everything really opened their eyes. In fact, the whole time I tried to teach them to look for patterns in the UI that they could recognize, and thus use to their benefit.
Of course, the first thing I told them on day one was, "don't worry about trying something. There's nothing you can do to these computers that I can't fix." While a little egotistic, it removed one of the largest barriers to learning I saw; the fear that you'll f*ck things up. Once that fear is gone, people really begin to try and do things on their own, which is truly the only way to learn. Of course, I'd never put that bit of advice in a book (oh, think of the calls).
I believe the problem you are having is a result of listening to the music through the headphone port (no, really!)
I believe you said that this is a first-gen iPod, in which case, your only option is to get a newer one. BUUUT, for those of you with a dock-connector iPod, the secret lies in using that fancy little socket.
The amp used for the headphone port (I've read) can cause nasty distortions, especially if you have a second amp inline (i.e., home or car stereo). The line-out from the dock-connector does not have any amplification, so you don't get the unaltered sound going into whatever other amp you may happen to use.
The moral of the story is to use the dock-connector line-out for the best quality audio.
As to the specific songs you're talking about, (I'm sure you've tried this, but I'll say it anyway) instead of turning the EQ off or leaving it flat, leave it on and try one of the bass-reduction settings to see if that makes the distortion go away.
These equations are used all the time in the design and development of almost everything you use (drive, type on, fly, drink, what have you) on a daily basis. One of the biggest "ah-ha" moments I've ever had was, when taking Fluid Mechanics II, we started into the Navier-Stokes equations, and I realized that the equations describing stress-concentrations looked reeel familair. My Intermediate Mechanics of Materials professor confirmed my insight, and that was when it all clicked.
That, and when viewed together using the Einstein summation convention, they're just plain pretty. What's funny is, I used to hate them.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not entirely true. The reason PS1s needed a mod chip to play burned games is because of a software hack.
As I understand it, the PS1 disks were stamped with an invalid checksum for the first data block on the disk (0, if I recall correctly). CD burning software helpfully computed the correct checksum and wrote that instead if you burned an ISO to disk. The PS1 looked for that zero checksum, and if it did not find it, assumed that the disk was pirated, and refused to load the disk.
I believe this is why the "disk-swap" trick worked.
You just wait until your bedroom magically turns pink one day.
When you complain, that 'bitch' will certainly let you know who's boss.
(hint: It ain't you)
From what I understand of Wii Sports Tennis, you do not actually control how your character moves across the court. Realistically, there's no need -- of course you are going to run towards the ball, and it's no fun to play if you can't make it there because you forget how the controller works. With the Wiimote, the controller works as you would expect, namely you swing it to hit the ball. If you hit it with the correct spin, you hit the ball to a place where your opponent cannot reach it, thus you win the point. You can likely pick characters based on ability; a strong hitter may not be a fast runner, and vice versa. In basebal and football games, the elements you ask after are all likely there, just not under your direct control.
Think about playing a real game of baseball. When you're at the plate swinging, you expect that your teammate (or the third-base coach) knows how far to lead-off. With a video game, you can spend some time before the game starts picking your lineup and batting order, planning out how this should work in the course of a game. That way, when you're swinging at air while batting, you don't have to be fumbling with the controls trying to tell "Big Jim" to get back to the bag.
By simplifying the controller, the Wiimote forces players/developers to change the way games are played. Instead of taking advantage of all thirty-seven buttons on the controller, you have to think about the lineup and batting-order before you actually step up to the plate for the core of the baseball experience -- swinging for the bleachers.
This may, actually lead to a deeper, more entertaining game of baseball, because you focus on the 'fun' part. It also leaves intact, however, the management aspect, without the micro-management that a button-loaded controller allows a lazy developer.
There was a time for a while in the US that everyone and their brother was afraid we'd run out of water, tomorrow (EVERYBODY PANIC). Manufacturers (temporarily) switched production, almost exclusively, to front-load machines to capitalize on that fear. It turns out that the only people afraid enough to actually use the damn things were the people who live in deserts (I'm looking at you southern California). They're the ones that keep foisting abominations like low-flow showerheads on those of us smart enough to live close enough to stable water supplies.
n.b., Just so you know I'm at least half-joking about SoCal, I live in New Orleans, where we occasionally have a little too much water.
Certainly, there are quirky programs and systems that require more investigation than the others (blender, I'm looking at you), but if you really and truly grok these points, you are computer-literate.
Your car analogy works against you here. When I climb into the van we have at work, I drive more slowly and cautiously because it doesn't work quite like I'm used to. The fact that I know how to look for the controls to start, steer, and stop means I am 'driving-literate' even if I have to hunt for the seat-adjustment lever every time I drive that monster. Just because I know nothing about lisp, and am thus unable to use emacs to it's full potential, does not mean I am computer illiterate; it means I am unfamiliar with this particular windshield-wiper control. I'll figure out how to use emacs eventually though, because I am literate enough to do so.
When I first saw the price of the GB micro, and found out it did not play GB/GBC games, I balked a little. I've still got a massive collection of those older games (all the way back to the Tetris that came with the original GB), and I want the ability to play those games. When I thought about it, though, I really don't play them very often. So I bought the micro.
It is, hands down, the system I play the most. The size (combined with the sleep/quicksave mode in most GBA games) really makes it the perfect "play anywhere" device.
I almost mentioned this as an alternative, but the sentence appropriate for the insertion was already too long.
The fact of the matter is, that with a drag and drop transfer system, you still need ripping software, a playlist editor, and an audio player for the desktop. While I appreciate the "UNIX Way" of small tools doing one task well, audio file management lends itself well to a larger combined tool, and iTunes fits this bill to a 'T'.
In the interest of completeness, at the time of my iPod purchase (it's a 3G iPod, so I've had it for a while) there was at least one other piece of software commonly used for MP3 player management (discounting Sony's SonicStage). That was MusicMatch, which was a pile of garbage according to the reviews I read. For a time it was used as the Windows iPod interface (it even came on the software CD that came with my iPod), but the Windows version of iTunes quickly supplanted it.
You know what's funny? That's how I think of iTunes.
I tried using WMP to listen to music. It was too much of a resource hog and I always heard stuttering and pops in the music; I thought I had downloaded crappy rips. I switched to WinAmp, which cleaned up all the audio problems, but it hung all the time.
So then I downloaded iTunes. I turned off the music store options, and used it strictly as an MP3 player on my desktop. It worked great. I initially had no intention of buying any MP3 player, let alone an iPod, but when I decided to take the plunge, all of the iPod competitors used WMP as the transfer interface (with the exception of Sony players, but I've been avoiding Sony products for a looong time now). I figured out that buying an iPod (and using the software I wanted to use) was about a $50 premium over the other options. To me, it was worth $50 to be able to use the simple MP3 player I wanted to use.
iTunes, with the music store turned off, makes for a fantastic, simple MP3 player that just happens to look pretty. With the music store turned on, you have cheap, easy access to a lot of songs that may not be in your collection, if you choose to buy them. That's how I choose to use it, supplementing my current collection with those one or two songs that I want from a CD without having to pay $10 for a used copy. For the times when I want an entire album, I still go buy it on CD.
Not really, notice that I said "reduces the number." If it were all free/readily accessible (i.e., family PC and a free beta) there would be more of them on there.
I'll just let that scary thought sink in.
This is something we call "barrier to entry." Even if the barrier is very low, the cost still keeps out the riff-raff, and, since the individual invested something, they are more inclined to treat it seriously. Suppose you charge as little as $1/year; the hassle involved with actually paying that dollar make it unattractive to those who just want to screw around with other people.
As an example, when the GameCube was announced, I read online that there were free demo DVDs available at game stores. When I went to get one, they had a price of $0.01 on them. I pulled out a penny to pay, and they guy behind the counter said, "don't worry about it, we put that on there so that people won't just take them all." Even a barrier as low as one cent will reduce hassle and discourage trouble-makers.
The reason you have no fun in free betas is that any 12 year old with a chip on his shoulder and no real desire to see if the game is any good can log in and try to break shit. Hey, he's twelve, that's what you do when you're that age. Requiring a console and a game purchase, however, reduces the number of idiots who will actually end up playing you online, especially if you eschew the types of games that attract the 12 year old 'hardcore' gamers.
I think (I'm not the OP, so I can't say for certain) that this 'customer' is an aquaintance/friend who calls up every now and then to ask for help. We've all been there, heck, sometimes we even offer to help the first few times. The goods ones offer you a beer or two and snacks. The bad ones don't even try to make small-talk when they call you up ("Jim? It's Bob. I need you to come over and...").
To get back to the original question, however, here's how I've done it in the past. First, I defer once or twice (i.e., "I can't come over tonight. Maybe next week?"). Next, I give them a list of sites/programs that might help, if they take the initiative, this list generally helps them. Thirdly, I tell them that I'm just not going to be able to do it anymore, and try to suggest some one who can (generally for money).
I can appreciate how you may not want to hurt the customer's feelings (especially if you want to remain on good terms), so the trick is in how gently you let them down. I've had some people figure it out on their own after defering, for others, I'm perennially in the "try this, this, this, and this, and call back if it doesn't work" phase. I've only had to tell one person that I couldn't do it anymore (computers aren't my primary business, and they weren't paying me anywhere near enough for my time and travel).
If you look at how I've described it, it's almost like breaking-up. The real trick is giving them good reasons as to why you're dumping them in a non-judgemental way. Myriad family problems seem a good enough reason to me, but if they overreact, well, do you really want to hang around them anymore?
Nice to see someone mention the Harry Potter change. It had it's correct name up here in Canada. Never could figure out why they changed it.
That's easy. In the US, philosopher has (almost exclusively) the connotation of an individual like Socrates; a thinker and academe (see the US English definition). In the UK, the connotation includes 'magician'. Sorcerer is much more clear to the US audience, and much more in line with the original intent of the author.
Remember the intended audience of the book. While most adults will pick up the nuance of 'alchemical investigator' attached to philosopher, a young teen who picks up a dictionary to check the meaning of the unknown word will likely find the definition listed above.
Along the lines of getting your significant other into gaming, might I suggest Animal Crossing?
The GC is nice because you can watch while the other person plays, but I'm sure the DS version would be cool too.
The only problem I ran into is that I got a lot more chores to do when I was playing and my wife wanted her turn.
...they are all so lacking when held up next to that little gem.
The only one I ever liked better than the Series 5 was the Revo (for the pocketability of it).
Requiring laptops is not necessary to allow them to be paid for with financial aid money.
I should have been more clear here. Requiring the laptop adds to the "total cost" (T) of attendance. After scholarships (S), there is an "expected contribution" (E) that your parents (if you're a minor) or you are expected to pay. If T - S - E > 0, then you are eligible for Federal loans (with some other eligibility caveats) if less than zero, then you cannot get Federally-backed loans (there are other kinds that you can get, however they have much higher interest rates). This actually makes it possible for those of us who make too much to get financial aid, but not enough to pay for school and a computer to actually get one.
I know all this because I got burned by it. In my first year of graduate school, I applied for Federal loans so I could buy a computer. I made too much (stipend, etc.) and was ineligible, thus I had to buy the thing on Gateway's extended-payment plan, instead of being able to take advantage of the much lower interest rate on the Federal loans.
Interestingly enough my department had recently terminated their required laptop purchase program because it was an unmitigated disaster.
The thing is, it's not 'stupider,' and I'll tell you why.
As mentioned by the OP, requiring that students have a laptop allows financial aid to pay for it. Once every student has a laptop, the school no longer needs to invest the space and money on computer labs, just omnipresent wireless connectivity. In essence, the school is shifting the expense of computing from an indirect cost (i.e., tutition increase) to a direct cost (purchase). Frankly, most students would give their eye-teeth for a computer they don't have to share; the requirement of said machines makes the purchase affordable (via student loans).
Additionally, many software companies will deal in bulk with universities to provide lower-cost licenses to students/faculty. These programs encourage graduated students to purchase the software when they are out in the real world because they are familiar with it. MS is good at this, offering Office and Windows licenses for $75 each (yes, the newest versions, think XP Pro and Office 2003 full whiz-bang version). As far as high-end packages (solid-modeling in this case), one software company gives the school an unlimited number of licenses for a $5000 fee, but the school can earn that fee back by using the software in class demonstrations, required projects, etc. Again, the full-bore version, not a limited thing (this is software that costs $5000 per seat in the real world). Required software is also an eligible purchase using aid monies, thus making it easier on the student (in the short-term, at least).
The thing you're getting hung up on here is the difference between required purchase and mandated purchase. The latter (as I define it) is a computer bought, maintained, and controlled for you by the school. Medical schools (at least one I know of) are shifting to this setup, with exams being taken on the laptop (and answers being submitted via wireless; don't get me started). All other software is disabled while the test software is being run, and woe be unto you if you bring in a laptop for service that has anything other than school-sanctioned software on it.
All that being said, there are two problems I have with required computer plans. The first is that they tend to isolate students. Some of the more productive, enlightening, and entertaining times I had at school occured while working in the close proximity of other in a computer lab at four in the morning. The second is that, in order to justify the program, professors are encouraged to shoehorn computer-use into classes that don't need computers. Some professors do great things with the new technology, others, well, let's just say it doesn't work out so well sometimes.
While I know you're being flippant, this comment got me thinking...
We don't necessarily know what all they've added to Hunters in the WiFi-upgrade bonus round. What if they added co-op multi-play? Two (or more) stealth bounty hunters preparing for a mission would necessitate communication before-hand, especially if conditions (read: processing power, which I'm certain is the real reason there's no in-game chat) dictate radio-silence whilst fighting. Chat after would allow you to hash over what went right/wrong in that round, prehaps while deciding whether or not to take a do-over.
Of course, I'm just pulling all of this out of my ass. I have no real idea what MP:Hunters gameplay will be like.
But I actually find extensions to often be very bad substitutes for properly integrated features. Not everyone wants to deal with extensions.
And, of course, not everyone wants to wait while all of the "properly integrated features" add an additional 3 minutes to the program's load-time. I imagine that if you "properly integrated" all of the extensions available for firefox, you'd very quickly obtain an unusable beast of a program (e.g., MS Office, where 90% of the users use 10% of the features). Not everyone wants to deal with "properly integrated features" when a very workable extensions system means you don't have to.
You know what's kind of funny, I don't get junk snail mail anymore.
Of course, there was some... unpleasantness that caused some levee breaches, some flooding of the mail-sorting equipment, and some Post Masters halting delivery of such things. But, hey, no more junk mail!
Of course, my wife doesn't get her magazines anymore either, which is a pain.
Yeahhh, I accidentally hit 'Submit' when I meant to hit 'Preview' (I wasn't quite finished with that thought yet).
I was going to add almost exactly this. The only exception being that it could be the OP's manager is not aware of her shortcomings and need for training (the "It doesn't look as though training will be forthcoming..." comment in the article leads me to this conclusion).
The problem could just be that the manager thinks everything is peachy, and the OP has not stated her need clearly enough. A good manager isn't going to be poking his or her nose into your office everyday asking if you know what you're doing. The only time that happens is when the domain server goes FUBAR.
The important thing here is documentation. Documenting everything that you ask of your employer, and why you are asking for it, shields you from fallout in the event of a catastrophy, and it establishes to your boss (and thus, your boss's boss if an expenditure needs approval) that a need is not being addressed. A decent company will make attempts to address this need, but managers are not omniscient; they need to be told that there is a (potential) problem.
Most engineers and techie-types (in my experience; stereotypes form for a reason) aren't that great at interpersonal communications. They believe they've said one thing, but the other party hears something totally different. This could be what is confounding your requests. Writing a memo gives you time to think over exactly what it is you're saying, and you can bounce the ideas off a few people (like your husband, OP) to gauge how effectively you've asked for what you need. Just make sure that the first memo you send IS IN NO WAY accusatory. That just triggers every defensive measure your manager has, and you'll never get anywhere.
If, however, your manager flatly refuses training, make sure to get the refusal in writing ("Not my fault!"), and start looking for another position (perhaps even in the same company, if it's large enough); you're going to be taken advantage of. You could also start talking to the HR department (I know, I know, but they're there for a reason). They may have resources available for training that neither you nor your boss know about (e.g., books, or discounts on training), and they may also be able to suggest better ways of communicating with your manager such that you can work more effectively with each other. Worst case scenario, HR will have a list of openings within the company.
One thing I would suggest, keeping in line with this, would be to 'spin' it such that it is to the company's great benefit to ensure that you are properly trained. For example, you don't want to spend hours trying to solve a problem that a properly trained domain admin might spend 5 minutes fixing (think of the downtime!). This is the polite way of batting the camel on the nose (as it were) to make it back out of the tent.
If necessary, keep records of the time you spend on figuring out problems, and present this (in accumulated form) to your manager, insisting that training will reduce this. Present this in paper memo form, making sure to cc: to file (yours, paper, of course), and make certain that your manager's secretary stamps each memo you deliver to him or her with one of those "Received On" stamps (they still use those, right?). If your manager still refuses training, your ass is covered when the shit hits the fan (and it will).
I've never been in an IT position like this. It doesn't matter, though, because just about every manager with a lean training budget will act the same. Once you prove to your manager that this training is worth the investment, you'll generally get the support you need. On the other hand, you might see (currently) intangible benefits by training yourself. You're a go-getter with initiative. A straight-shooter with upper management written all over you.
As an engineer, I love being able to see my data, and the changes that are made to them when I apply some transformation to them.
I often perform the initial analysis in Excel (so that I can see what is actually happening) before I write code to do the same thing, albeit faster and to a great many more data-sets. It saves a lot of head-scratching time when the output from my shiny new program is totally wonky.
You've hit the nail on the head, here (at least in my experience).
I used to teach the mechanical engineering freshman computer class at my undergraduate institution. I would frequently respond to questions with, "I don't know, let's look here to see if we can find it..." The fact that I, the great and powerful Oz, did not immediately know how to do everything really opened their eyes. In fact, the whole time I tried to teach them to look for patterns in the UI that they could recognize, and thus use to their benefit.
Of course, the first thing I told them on day one was, "don't worry about trying something. There's nothing you can do to these computers that I can't fix." While a little egotistic, it removed one of the largest barriers to learning I saw; the fear that you'll f*ck things up. Once that fear is gone, people really begin to try and do things on their own, which is truly the only way to learn. Of course, I'd never put that bit of advice in a book (oh, think of the calls).
I believe the problem you are having is a result of listening to the music through the headphone port (no, really!)
I believe you said that this is a first-gen iPod, in which case, your only option is to get a newer one. BUUUT, for those of you with a dock-connector iPod, the secret lies in using that fancy little socket.
The amp used for the headphone port (I've read) can cause nasty distortions, especially if you have a second amp inline (i.e., home or car stereo). The line-out from the dock-connector does not have any amplification, so you don't get the unaltered sound going into whatever other amp you may happen to use.
The moral of the story is to use the dock-connector line-out for the best quality audio.
As to the specific songs you're talking about, (I'm sure you've tried this, but I'll say it anyway) instead of turning the EQ off or leaving it flat, leave it on and try one of the bass-reduction settings to see if that makes the distortion go away.
These equations are used all the time in the design and development of almost everything you use (drive, type on, fly, drink, what have you) on a daily basis. One of the biggest "ah-ha" moments I've ever had was, when taking Fluid Mechanics II, we started into the Navier-Stokes equations, and I realized that the equations describing stress-concentrations looked reeel familair. My Intermediate Mechanics of Materials professor confirmed my insight, and that was when it all clicked.
That, and when viewed together using the Einstein summation convention, they're just plain pretty. What's funny is, I used to hate them.
n.b. Yes, I am a Mechanical Engineering geek.