Oh dear, I don't think Nettwerk is able to protect you now. How did SunComm and XCP get there?
I really wanted Bloom, but there's no way I'm willingly going to accept that crap. Nettwerk is going to have to try a little harder than simply saying "oh, suing people is bad."
When CSS2.1 did not exist, text-shadow was the standard and FireFox still did not implement the standard. That is my point. Only recently has this not been the case.
Besides, even with CSS2.1, there are things FireFox doesn't comply with (pointed out above).
My point was that FireFox/Gecko is not the paragon of standards compliance, so dragging IE into the "you don't comply" mud is hypocritical. Indeed there are more important things to make work, but nevertheless, compliance is incomplete.
To that effect, since CSS2 came out in 1998, and CSS2.1 in 2005, I would have expected text-shadow (along with the other things you listed) to get fixed in that time frame. What have the FireFox devs been doing?
Note this bug was opened in 1999. Judging from the target milestone (mozilla1.9) and the FireFox roadmap, we will have full CSS2 support in FireFox 3.0 by 2007. Wow, eight years...
Never heard of it until I went to my employer's house, who has all the channels (sans sports) that DirectTV offers. They had something on fabric roofs vs everything else. I think they kicked all that "weird" but good stuff to that channel.
... if the driver reads the wear count and does the translation on the fly. This sounds like something that should be standardized, though. Because using it on a foreign computer where a generic SBP2 driver is loaded (and not the special one) would render it useless again.
I could foresee a hybrid hard disk/flash disk, where the high read/low write areas are remapped to flash (say, OS files) and everything else is on disk. Hard drives already have something of this capability with their caching mechanism.
Considering your "virtual erase unit" (VEU) to be a multiple of the physical erase unit, you still have to have a significant number of these VEUs so you can remap things, lowering the flash density as you increase the reliability. Make the VEU too large, and the leveling algorithm doesn't give you that much time. Make it too small, the flash chip is now twice the size. Not only that, but in order for the VEU to remember where to map what, it itself has to be flash. What happens when the VEU flash area gets worn out? How would you even detect that the VEU is getting written too much without, oh, keeping track of THOSE times in flash too.
And what happens when the disk is mostly full and there are only a few empty sectors to write to, as most data gets overwritten? Guess you're screwed then!
No, I don't think this is a very good trade. Flash has a physical problem that needs to be solved with materials science, not computer science.
If you take a peek at SIIGs PCIe card (NN-E38012-S1), it has an extra TI chip on it that looks like it's hooked directly to the bus. Probably a PCI-PCIe bridge like this. The FW400 version ( NN-E20012-S1) has no such chip. That's probably what is causing the 1394b cards to be/54.
Extra bridge chip notwithstanding, if it was actually impossible to put it in given the timeframe, I'd like to hear somebody apologize for the downgrade and say they'll put it back in RevB. I use that port and I'm not even a video professional. I can imagine that those guys are already not very happy about the state of Pro Apps and universal binaries.
* There was space for it previously, why not now? * Heat? The Yonah is supposed to be better than the 1.67. How can this be a problem. * As for the internal hard drive... NFW. It's an internal SATA card. Besides, I actually need it to capture DV to an external FW800 drive. There's not enough bandwidth in FW400 to do that.
I am glad to see some sort of FireWire in there, but I expect it. It is a next-generation interface just like that new ExpressCard slot. I shouldn't have to worry about it disappearing. How does everything else but FireWire get the latest? It doesn't make any sense. I actually could have dealt with the 400 port disappearing and the 800 being the only port. That would be fine, stock a low-profile adapter as a $15 accessory. But this is a DOWNGRADE. Completely unacceptable for Apple.
* USB robs CPU cycles (yes, I want all of them) * USB does not chain * You don't connect DV devices over USB * USB on-the-go does not bring it to feature parity with FireWire * USB has nothing on FireWire in terms of bandwidth
I don't buy Macs because they are missing advanced technology. I buy them because they have it by *default*. I get the latest USB and Bluetooth standards. If I am paying $3,000 for a high-end laptop it better damn well have the latest and greatest version of FireWire that cost them $2 to put in.
The licensing fees are $1. Some of that money even goes back to Apple, IIRC. I they broke backwards compatibility because some accounting tool decided that FireWire support wasn't worth the $1 x 14 million iPods, despite the fact that while the iPod didn't have USB2 support people were practically forcing vendors to put FireWire in computers... This is the only explanation that I can come up with that makes any sense. It's also explains the slow decline of the included accessories with the iPod.
Apple, leader in pushing advanced technology that costs "a bit more" (successfully too), is too cheap to include their own. I'm not impressed.
Old Yeller was the highest on our list (500 or 50...whatever makes more sense. I can't remember). Being ridiculously thick, I ran through the book, skimming over most of the dialog and outlined it over the course of two evenings when I didn't have any homework. I then reread the outline a couple times, actually read critical sections of dialog in the book (took a couple more days, but was during down time in school), and then took the test.
9 out of 10. I couldn't figure out what the lesson was at the time, but I enjoyed meeting my "quota" because I could then read whatever I wanted to.
Considering the time you have to put into filling them out, I'm paid more per-hour than the rebate is worth.
1. Buy envelopes and stamps for your rebates 2. Find rebate on internet 3. Print out rebate 4. Find receipt 5. Print out receipt 6. Fill out rebate 7. Get envelope 8. Get stamp (use two because cardboard can't bend and be sorted like normal mail) 9. Walk to mailbox
Estimating $30 an hour, that rebate better be over $15 for me to waste my time with it.
People are cheap. When given the choice between a smart bus that unloads cycles from the CPU, guarantees bandwidth, has more bandwidth, and basically does what a next-generation bus should do, people chose an updated version of the serial port because the latter cost a dollar more to manufacture. I'm talking about FireWire vs USB. The iPod, which practically drove people out to stores to buy FireWire cards and clamor for it on their new computers, now in its fifth generation has dropped FireWire support because... that dollar was just too much.
Not the source, a copy. Sometimes reporters muck this differentiation up, but even if it were a ownership of a copy of the source, it would still not be the same as ownership of the source.
First, it had to prove that it was the owner of a copy of a computer program. There was no dispute as to whether Titleserv possessed copies of the computer program, however, the concept of ownership is more complex. Krause contended that Titleserv was merely a licensee who possessed a copy of the computer program pursuant to an oral license agreement
Slashdot Mirror
Copyright © 1994
Hewlett-Packard Company
?
Apple Support. They're pretty detailed.
http://docs.projectxenocide.com/index.php/General: FAQ#What_Licence_is_Xenocide_under.3F
I like the Werkshop, tho. I dropped a line to them to see what version they sell there.
Hmm, what's this....?
Afterglow Live
Bloom
Oh dear, I don't think Nettwerk is able to protect you now. How did SunComm and XCP get there?
I really wanted Bloom, but there's no way I'm willingly going to accept that crap. Nettwerk is going to have to try a little harder than simply saying "oh, suing people is bad."
When CSS2.1 did not exist, text-shadow was the standard and FireFox still did not implement the standard. That is my point. Only recently has this not been the case.
Besides, even with CSS2.1, there are things FireFox doesn't comply with (pointed out above).
Reference4 0730/#text-shadow
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-WCAG20-CSS-TECHS-200
My point was that FireFox/Gecko is not the paragon of standards compliance, so dragging IE into the "you don't comply" mud is hypocritical. Indeed there are more important things to make work, but nevertheless, compliance is incomplete.
To that effect, since CSS2 came out in 1998, and CSS2.1 in 2005, I would have expected text-shadow (along with the other things you listed) to get fixed in that time frame. What have the FireFox devs been doing?
FireFox doesn't even fully support CSS2. (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/text.html#text-shad ow-props) When will FireFox join the inevitable?
3
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1071
Note this bug was opened in 1999. Judging from the target milestone (mozilla1.9) and the FireFox roadmap, we will have full CSS2 support in FireFox 3.0 by 2007. Wow, eight years...
Never heard of it until I went to my employer's house, who has all the channels (sans sports) that DirectTV offers. They had something on fabric roofs vs everything else. I think they kicked all that "weird" but good stuff to that channel.
When the subscribers email you about corrections, like spelling, before the story hits the main site, could you fix it? Or does this already happen.
... if the driver reads the wear count and does the translation on the fly. This sounds like something that should be standardized, though. Because using it on a foreign computer where a generic SBP2 driver is loaded (and not the special one) would render it useless again.
I could foresee a hybrid hard disk/flash disk, where the high read/low write areas are remapped to flash (say, OS files) and everything else is on disk. Hard drives already have something of this capability with their caching mechanism.
...how "wear leveling" solves any problems. I get the concept: http://www.dataio.com/pdf/NAND/MSystems/TrueFFS_We ar_Leveling_Mechanism.pdf but maybe I'm reading this wrong.
Considering your "virtual erase unit" (VEU) to be a multiple of the physical erase unit, you still have to have a significant number of these VEUs so you can remap things, lowering the flash density as you increase the reliability. Make the VEU too large, and the leveling algorithm doesn't give you that much time. Make it too small, the flash chip is now twice the size. Not only that, but in order for the VEU to remember where to map what, it itself has to be flash. What happens when the VEU flash area gets worn out? How would you even detect that the VEU is getting written too much without, oh, keeping track of THOSE times in flash too.
And what happens when the disk is mostly full and there are only a few empty sectors to write to, as most data gets overwritten? Guess you're screwed then!
No, I don't think this is a very good trade. Flash has a physical problem that needs to be solved with materials science, not computer science.
I guess you mean this card and this non-existant SIIG card.
/54.
If you take a peek at SIIGs PCIe card (NN-E38012-S1), it has an extra TI chip on it that looks like it's hooked directly to the bus. Probably a PCI-PCIe bridge like this. The FW400 version ( NN-E20012-S1) has no such chip. That's probably what is causing the 1394b cards to be
Extra bridge chip notwithstanding, if it was actually impossible to put it in given the timeframe, I'd like to hear somebody apologize for the downgrade and say they'll put it back in RevB. I use that port and I'm not even a video professional. I can imagine that those guys are already not very happy about the state of Pro Apps and universal binaries.
None of those things make sense.
* There was space for it previously, why not now?
* Heat? The Yonah is supposed to be better than the 1.67. How can this be a problem.
* As for the internal hard drive... NFW. It's an internal SATA card. Besides, I actually need it to capture DV to an external FW800 drive. There's not enough bandwidth in FW400 to do that.
I am glad to see some sort of FireWire in there, but I expect it. It is a next-generation interface just like that new ExpressCard slot. I shouldn't have to worry about it disappearing. How does everything else but FireWire get the latest? It doesn't make any sense. I actually could have dealt with the 400 port disappearing and the 800 being the only port. That would be fine, stock a low-profile adapter as a $15 accessory. But this is a DOWNGRADE. Completely unacceptable for Apple.
.. this nickel and dime crap.
* USB robs CPU cycles (yes, I want all of them)
* USB does not chain
* You don't connect DV devices over USB
* USB on-the-go does not bring it to feature parity with FireWire
* USB has nothing on FireWire in terms of bandwidth
I don't buy Macs because they are missing advanced technology. I buy them because they have it by *default*. I get the latest USB and Bluetooth standards. If I am paying $3,000 for a high-end laptop it better damn well have the latest and greatest version of FireWire that cost them $2 to put in.
The licensing fees are $1. Some of that money even goes back to Apple, IIRC. I they broke backwards compatibility because some accounting tool decided that FireWire support wasn't worth the $1 x 14 million iPods, despite the fact that while the iPod didn't have USB2 support people were practically forcing vendors to put FireWire in computers... This is the only explanation that I can come up with that makes any sense. It's also explains the slow decline of the included accessories with the iPod.
Apple, leader in pushing advanced technology that costs "a bit more" (successfully too), is too cheap to include their own. I'm not impressed.
Old Yeller was the highest on our list (500 or 50...whatever makes more sense. I can't remember). Being ridiculously thick, I ran through the book, skimming over most of the dialog and outlined it over the course of two evenings when I didn't have any homework. I then reread the outline a couple times, actually read critical sections of dialog in the book (took a couple more days, but was during down time in school), and then took the test.
9 out of 10. I couldn't figure out what the lesson was at the time, but I enjoyed meeting my "quota" because I could then read whatever I wanted to.
your proof of warranty was the serial number on the PowerBook
Considering the time you have to put into filling them out, I'm paid more per-hour than the rebate is worth.
1. Buy envelopes and stamps for your rebates
2. Find rebate on internet
3. Print out rebate
4. Find receipt
5. Print out receipt
6. Fill out rebate
7. Get envelope
8. Get stamp (use two because cardboard can't bend and be sorted like normal mail)
9. Walk to mailbox
Estimating $30 an hour, that rebate better be over $15 for me to waste my time with it.
That's just a bridge, not a language.
Does that count as a replacement?
People are cheap. When given the choice between a smart bus that unloads cycles from the CPU, guarantees bandwidth, has more bandwidth, and basically does what a next-generation bus should do, people chose an updated version of the serial port because the latter cost a dollar more to manufacture. I'm talking about FireWire vs USB. The iPod, which practically drove people out to stores to buy FireWire cards and clamor for it on their new computers, now in its fifth generation has dropped FireWire support because... that dollar was just too much.
Cheapskates...
Additionally, Coda, but I'm not sure if it's as stable.
RTLinux doesn't count? Chorus runs on the PPC too.