I prefer to think of him as "The voice of 'Crush' the sea turtle."
IMDB also shows writing and directing credits on "A Bug's Life," writing credits on "Toy Story," "Toy Story 2" and writing and producing credits on "Monsters, Inc."
I'd say he's probably one of the most famous, wealthy and powerful people no one's ever heard of.:)
According to http://www.ddwg.org/dvi.html single-link DVI supports up to 1920x1080 @ 60Hz; dual-link DVI supports up to 2048x1536 @ 60Hz. Since WUXGA is 1920x1200, the non-Apple monitors that support it (Sony has a 23" one, same panel as Apple's, for about $100 or so more with more inputs) must be using dual-link DVI, I guess.
Of course if you want to run an IBM T220, you'll need some other connection entirely...;)
I bought a (NEC/)Mitsubishi DiamondPoint NM56LCD panel last July at OfficeMax. 15", D-SUB _and_ DVI inputs. Why that one, instead of some cheaper Planar POS at WalMerde?
Well, I needed the D-SUB, 'cos I knew I'd be hooking it to an iBook, and all consumer-market Apple products come with VGA out, rather than DVI.
But I also planned to use it as the second monitor on a Power Mac G5 months later - and allcurrent professional-market Apple products come with DVI out (at least - the Radeon 9800 in my G5 has an ADC connector for an Apple Cinema display, and a DVI out for whatever else I want.)
Folks who say it's "high-end" are pretty much right. It's something the UXGA (1600x1200) and WUXGA (1920x1200 like my Cinema) folks have a lot more use for than the 1280x1024 folks. Right now, that's largely the pro market still.
When I can walk into WalMerde and see even a single DVI connector, then I'll know it's achieving mass-market penetration.
ya need to know the plot BEFORE you write the movie... and the plot should not suck.
Indeed. Case in point: Highlander 2: The Quickening, with its "everything you know about the origins of the Highlanders is wrong" plot. Scotland? Bah, laddie, they're from another planet, and one named for an optics company, at that!
Second case in point: Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace, with its "everything you know about the origins of the force is wrong" plot. Magic or religion? Ah, young Jedi, it's just some little thingies floating around in your blood.
My definition of "quasirandom" is pretty far beyond "AT" and "DOT.";)
Of course, the sole Slashdotter who wants to de-munge addresses on a site of mine will go to the trouble of figuring out how the quasirandom munging works, for that one site.
Figuring out different quasirandom munging for a large number of sites, though -- which is what address harvesters would have to do -- would be about as big a task as figuring out how to pattern-match spam 100% of the time.
Especially if the munge kept mutating.:)
In the "more than ten lines of Perl" category, for example, you could have a script to display addresses, a script to de-munge addresses, and a script to update/etc/aliases (or its equivalent), all in sync.
So Joe User comes along, clicks on "dan@spam-armor040121.example.com" and gets a redirect to "dan040121@example.com"... which was added to/etc/aliases as an alias for "dan@example.com" (which never gets publicized) at 2004-01-21 00:00, and gets removed from/etc/aliases at, say, 2004-01-23 00:00.
Joe's got a couple days to finish typing his message. If a spam-harvester is even smart enough to click the link and harvest the address (which none are, so far), the address it harvests becomes totally worthless in short order.
I've actually used "expiring" addresses of this nature on Usenet before; some harvesters are in possession of literally hundreds of addresses for me that were used for all of an hour and haven't worked since about a week after they were used. I have dreams of someday filling an entire "million addresses" CD with nothing but broken addresses for me.:)
I've been doing this type of thing since about 1998. Surprised more people don't do it. It's fairly trivial to improve upon it and add quasirandom munging to the addresses, etc...
Playing as a Night Elf, I like to build a bunch of Ancient Protectors (a dozen is a good number), uproot them and walk them to some totally inconvenient location - say a bottleneck between two areas of the map, or a healing/mana place - and then set them up so that anything that wants to go through there has to "run the gauntlet," with multiple things hurling boulders at them.
And Commodore included a Z80 in its 128, for the same reason. Yep, lots of people have tried this routine...I'll take a decent software-based emulator any day.
I remember the first machine I played MP3's on, back around 1998, or 1999 at the latest, was my wife's NEC Versa 4080H laptop - Pentium 120 (with F00F bug, I think) with about 40 megs of RAM. Running Linux, of course. I had to scrounge around for low-bit-rate stuff since there was no way it could handle decoding and playback at 160kbps or higher. Even 128kbps might have made it get a little bogged down.
I sent my 2-year-old iBook in for service under AppleCare. AppleCare's repair depot lost it (yes really). So they sent me a shiny brand new one.
I've only tried this once, though, so I don't know whether it will work for others...
Oh, and in Apple's quarterly earnings call yesterday, I believe they specifically mentioned setting aside some money to deal with the "white spots" screen problem some new PowerBooks had, and maybe also the iBook video issue. I didn't hear that part of the call myself, though.
But the iPod will be irrelevant, because Longhorn is coming! Soon! I mean, really soon! Really! Honest! Would I lie to you? And it will be so frickin' great it will do... um... all the stuff Apple already does. And maybe some other stuff, too! Until Longhorn gets here, there's just no point in thinking about anything since you might buy the wrong operating system or brand of computer, and then have to buy another one when Longhorn comes out next year. Or maybe in 2006. Or 2007. Or 2008. Or 2009. But probably next year. Really. I mean it... this time.
Once we finish fixing up a room in the basement, my dual G5 and its Cinema 23HD are going to move in there, along with my (and my wife's) other high-tech toys. Then we'll get a futon couch, some artsy lighting, and a decent set of speakers (probably Logitech Z680's so I can go optical Toslink from the G5 to them) and a remote (either ATI or Keyspan) and the neighbors will feel 500 watts of remorse for all the times they annoyed us by cranking up the sound on their movies.
Other than that... mini-DV camera at some point, and a Canon EOS digital SLR.
HP use a PowerPC chip? Nah... after all, they've got *fanfare* the Itanium! Which delivers better bang-for-the-buck than PA-RISC. What? We're not sure about that? Okay, er... um... better-bang-for-the-buck than Alpha! What, I'm wrong again? Well, it's got to deliver better bang-for-the-buck than the PowerPC. After all, hasn't HP built some of the fastest supercomputer in the world built with Itaniums?
What? You mean of the 4 systems HP has in the top 15 (all of which were in the top 10 last list, mind you) only one uses Itanium chips? The others all use Alphas? And most of the others are using either 32-bit x86 chips or PowerPC/IBM Power systems? And we got beat by a cluster made out of Apples?!
Oh...fsck!
Hello? Carly? Um... I think somebody checked the wrong box on which processor family we were supposed to kill...
Ah well, hopefully the iPod deal won't be another instance of "hitch your wagon to a falling star," like the Itanium has been thus far.
Apple was the one that backed AAC in a heavy way? Silly me, I thought it was ISO IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, who hammered out the MPEG-4standard, and the MPEG-4 Industry Forum, whose members include quite a few makers of computers, operating systems and consumer electronics other than Apple.
Apple certainly doesn't seem to have fought the MPEG-4 standard like, for example, fellow MP4IF member Microsoft did. (As an aside, Fraunhofer Institute IIS and Thomson - who hold the MP3 patents - are also in the MP4IF.) But I'd expect that the majority of the lobbying for its inclusion would have come from Dolby.
I agree that it's all about selling more Apple stuff.:)
Let's not forget mummy and daddy trying to keep their little princesses from getting all upset because every other girl at school has an iPod mini in fashion colors...
$250 for one of these beasties, and, say, $10 a month in music allowance, might go a long way toward having a less angstful teen.
I don't even know one person who has one of those little camera VAIOs.
But then, I can say the same of most products. Especially computers, where the Foobar Computing Frobnitz-2000A, Frobnitz-2000I, and Frobnitz-2000T might be outwardly identical, and differ only in the AMD, Intel or Transmeta CPU (respectively) and other innards, so even if I knew someone who had a Frobnitz-2000, I might not know *which* one.
The exception would be the Dual G5 next to my desk. People who havee Dual G5's tend to find each other and keep track of each other. It's not quite like Jeep owners waving to one another, though... I think of it as being more like sitting next to one another in the poorhouse after shelling out the bucks.:)
I hate to be one to defend to microsoft here, but get off your high horse.
Let's see... I just said, "I've spent my fair share of time dealing with Mac issues this year." A quick look at what messages I've posted might reveal that those issues have included Apple losing a machine I sent them for service, and my rather new, top-end dual G5 being rendered paperweightish for a week by a kernel extension glitch in one of their OS updates. Perhaps you should think twice before deciding I'm just some sort of Mac bigot.
In actuality, there are as many PC's in the house as there are Macs. None of them run Windows, of course. I don't run Windows unless someone is paying me to do so - and they pay me quite well for that particular torment. I've used more than enough OSes, be they Mac, Windows, UNIX, or things you've probably never heard of (lucky you) to be able to bash Windows from a thoroughly objective viewpoint.:)
So, your points (such as they are):
The main reason that Macs seem so relatively bug-free is because the platform is so obscure and tightly controlled. "Tightly controlled" on the other hand... is that a BAD thing? I'm not sure. Windows, like Topsy, "just growed," and it's now got a decade plus of stuff piled atop other stuff, and so on. Which of course makes fixing it very hard. OS X has the advantage of having been able to ditch legacy stuff to a large extent.
Obscurity, as has been pointed out before, has nothing to do wiith it. Before Mac OS X, perhaps it might have - but BSD? Obscure? C'mon, we're talking about an OS that's in wide use on the Internet.
You don't have the variety of hardware that you have on a PC, you don't have the variables PCs have.
Well, "variables," whatever they are, would be different on a Mac than a PC, I suppose. Other than that... what do you think Macs are using? We've got ATA (and Serial ATA) drives, DDR RAM, USB devices, FireWire devices, PCI slots - a lot of terminology that should sound pretty familiar to a PC user.
Now, there may be things that work on the Windows because there are drivers, and don't work on the Mac because there aren't. Dunno. I do know that a fair percentage of the external peripherals I buy come with driver disks for Windows, yet are "plug and play" with the Mac. (And actually, I've observed this trend for several years with Linux, as well.)
And before you try to get off acting like a mac is immune to viruses, think again. It's entirely possible to write a virus for a mac, even OS X that can be quite destructive. Probably wouldn't take more than a few hours by a bored enough person. I'd do it myself, but I have better things to do with my time, like sex, than to write viruses.
Are you sure you're not confusing "virus" and "trojan?" This obviously-biased piece has some interesting numbers.
Also, last time I checked, the near-month service packs that Apple puts out for their OS take longer than 5 minutes to download and install.
Odd... not on my machine. But then, I've got DSL, and my system reboots in under 90 seconds... I suppose it'd be worse on an older machine with a dialup connection.
In conclusion, please share whatever pills you are taking to get to that reality, because they seem like they're pretty fun.
Well... relative to the experience of the average Windows user (in terms of security risks, viruses, stability, etc) I can't really disagree with that.
Reminds me of a place I worked a few jobs ago. The uber-PHB had declared that laptops had to have Win9x because NT took too long to start up at airport security checkpoints.
98SE lasted about a week before I blew it away and dropped on NT 4 Workstation. That made it a month or two before devouring its own bootloader in a fit of nihilism, and from then on ('til today) it's run Linux. (For a while it had VMWare with NT 4 under that... to run a Java app that had somehow managed to get Windows-ONLY widgetry... bastards.)
He's got a network of WIndows PC's and uses Internet Explorer? How did this man end up with "Brain" for a name? I mean, c'mon, at least get a browser that organisms capable of rational thought consider "modern."
At least he recognizes that Microsoft is the cause of much of his suffering.:)
I've spent my fair share of time dealing with Mac issues this year (but there've been four Macs in the house this year, with 2-3 present at any given time), but... motherboard-specific drivers? antivirus software? forced upgrades? pop-up windows? security patches that take more than 5 minutes to install, counting a restart? $DEITY, what did poor Marshall do in a past life to deserve this? Those sorts of problems are nonexistent in my reality.
Slashdot Mirror
IMDB also shows writing and directing credits on "A Bug's Life," writing credits on "Toy Story," "Toy Story 2" and writing and producing credits on "Monsters, Inc."
I'd say he's probably one of the most famous, wealthy and powerful people no one's ever heard of. :)
According to http://www.ddwg.org/dvi.html single-link DVI supports up to 1920x1080 @ 60Hz; dual-link DVI supports up to 2048x1536 @ 60Hz. Since WUXGA is 1920x1200, the non-Apple monitors that support it (Sony has a 23" one, same panel as Apple's, for about $100 or so more with more inputs) must be using dual-link DVI, I guess. Of course if you want to run an IBM T220, you'll need some other connection entirely... ;)
Well, I needed the D-SUB, 'cos I knew I'd be hooking it to an iBook, and all consumer-market Apple products come with VGA out, rather than DVI.
But I also planned to use it as the second monitor on a Power Mac G5 months later - and allcurrent professional-market Apple products come with DVI out (at least - the Radeon 9800 in my G5 has an ADC connector for an Apple Cinema display, and a DVI out for whatever else I want.)
Folks who say it's "high-end" are pretty much right. It's something the UXGA (1600x1200) and WUXGA (1920x1200 like my Cinema) folks have a lot more use for than the 1280x1024 folks. Right now, that's largely the pro market still.
When I can walk into WalMerde and see even a single DVI connector, then I'll know it's achieving mass-market penetration.
Second case in point: Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace, with its "everything you know about the origins of the force is wrong" plot. Magic or religion? Ah, young Jedi, it's just some little thingies floating around in your blood.
Revisionism sucks, even in the movies.
A stud bull services a cow.
This is precisely how Bill has serviced global enterprise.
Hope this clears things up.
This is something that Microsoft has asserted a commitment to on at least a yearly basis, for at least the last two years.
Unfortunately, it is also something that Microsoft appears unlikely to deliver any time soon - even two years from now.
Of course, the sole Slashdotter who wants to de-munge addresses on a site of mine will go to the trouble of figuring out how the quasirandom munging works, for that one site.
Figuring out different quasirandom munging for a large number of sites, though -- which is what address harvesters would have to do -- would be about as big a task as figuring out how to pattern-match spam 100% of the time.
Especially if the munge kept mutating. :)
In the "more than ten lines of Perl" category, for example, you could have a script to display addresses, a script to de-munge addresses, and a script to update /etc/aliases (or its equivalent), all in sync.
So Joe User comes along, clicks on "dan@spam-armor040121.example.com" and gets a redirect to "dan040121@example.com" ... which was added to /etc/aliases as an alias for "dan@example.com" (which never gets publicized) at 2004-01-21 00:00, and gets removed from /etc/aliases at, say, 2004-01-23 00:00.
Joe's got a couple days to finish typing his message. If a spam-harvester is even smart enough to click the link and harvest the address (which none are, so far), the address it harvests becomes totally worthless in short order.
I've actually used "expiring" addresses of this nature on Usenet before; some harvesters are in possession of literally hundreds of addresses for me that were used for all of an hour and haven't worked since about a week after they were used. I have dreams of someday filling an entire "million addresses" CD with nothing but broken addresses for me. :)
#!/usr/bin/perl
print "Location: mailto:dan@sales.example.com\n\n";
exit(0);
And then it's just a simple matter of replacing:
a href="mailto:dan@sales.example.com"
with:
a href="/bin.cgi?href=mailto:abuse"
I've been doing this type of thing since about 1998. Surprised more people don't do it. It's fairly trivial to improve upon it and add quasirandom munging to the addresses, etc...
And Commodore included a Z80 in its 128, for the same reason. Yep, lots of people have tried this routine...I'll take a decent software-based emulator any day.
I remember the first machine I played MP3's on, back around 1998, or 1999 at the latest, was my wife's NEC Versa 4080H laptop - Pentium 120 (with F00F bug, I think) with about 40 megs of RAM. Running Linux, of course. I had to scrounge around for low-bit-rate stuff since there was no way it could handle decoding and playback at 160kbps or higher. Even 128kbps might have made it get a little bogged down.
I've only tried this once, though, so I don't know whether it will work for others...
Oh, and in Apple's quarterly earnings call yesterday, I believe they specifically mentioned setting aside some money to deal with the "white spots" screen problem some new PowerBooks had, and maybe also the iBook video issue. I didn't hear that part of the call myself, though.
That sounds like a great idea... but... how will the watch know when Longhorn is really going to be released?
Maybe that manned Mars mission can include the "Can you hear me now? Good." guy from the Verizon ads.
Okay, now I'll stop channeling Mr. Thurrott. :)
Other than that... mini-DV camera at some point, and a Canon EOS digital SLR.
What? You mean of the 4 systems HP has in the top 15 (all of which were in the top 10 last list, mind you) only one uses Itanium chips? The others all use Alphas? And most of the others are using either 32-bit x86 chips or PowerPC/IBM Power systems? And we got beat by a cluster made out of Apples?!
Oh...fsck!
Hello? Carly? Um... I think somebody checked the wrong box on which processor family we were supposed to kill...
Ah well, hopefully the iPod deal won't be another instance of "hitch your wagon to a falling star," like the Itanium has been thus far.
Apple certainly doesn't seem to have fought the MPEG-4 standard like, for example, fellow MP4IF member Microsoft did. (As an aside, Fraunhofer Institute IIS and Thomson - who hold the MP3 patents - are also in the MP4IF.) But I'd expect that the majority of the lobbying for its inclusion would have come from Dolby.
I agree that it's all about selling more Apple stuff. :)
$250 for one of these beasties, and, say, $10 a month in music allowance, might go a long way toward having a less angstful teen.
At least it wasn't "garageBand" instead. Then anyone who's ever touched Java(Script) would start to twitch and drool uncontrollably.
But then, I can say the same of most products. Especially computers, where the Foobar Computing Frobnitz-2000A, Frobnitz-2000I, and Frobnitz-2000T might be outwardly identical, and differ only in the AMD, Intel or Transmeta CPU (respectively) and other innards, so even if I knew someone who had a Frobnitz-2000, I might not know *which* one.
The exception would be the Dual G5 next to my desk. People who havee Dual G5's tend to find each other and keep track of each other. It's not quite like Jeep owners waving to one another, though... I think of it as being more like sitting next to one another in the poorhouse after shelling out the bucks. :)
I think the little Sony VAIO with the camera built in used Transmeta chips, but I don't know what volume Sony sold.
In actuality, there are as many PC's in the house as there are Macs. None of them run Windows, of course. I don't run Windows unless someone is paying me to do so - and they pay me quite well for that particular torment. I've used more than enough OSes, be they Mac, Windows, UNIX, or things you've probably never heard of (lucky you) to be able to bash Windows from a thoroughly objective viewpoint. :)
So, your points (such as they are):
Obscurity, as has been pointed out before, has nothing to do wiith it. Before Mac OS X, perhaps it might have - but BSD? Obscure? C'mon, we're talking about an OS that's in wide use on the Internet. Well, "variables," whatever they are, would be different on a Mac than a PC, I suppose. Other than that... what do you think Macs are using? We've got ATA (and Serial ATA) drives, DDR RAM, USB devices, FireWire devices, PCI slots - a lot of terminology that should sound pretty familiar to a PC user.Now, there may be things that work on the Windows because there are drivers, and don't work on the Mac because there aren't. Dunno. I do know that a fair percentage of the external peripherals I buy come with driver disks for Windows, yet are "plug and play" with the Mac. (And actually, I've observed this trend for several years with Linux, as well.)
Are you sure you're not confusing "virus" and "trojan?" This obviously-biased piece has some interesting numbers. Odd... not on my machine. But then, I've got DSL, and my system reboots in under 90 seconds... I suppose it'd be worse on an older machine with a dialup connection. Well... relative to the experience of the average Windows user (in terms of security risks, viruses, stability, etc) I can't really disagree with that.Reminds me of a place I worked a few jobs ago. The uber-PHB had declared that laptops had to have Win9x because NT took too long to start up at airport security checkpoints.
98SE lasted about a week before I blew it away and dropped on NT 4 Workstation. That made it a month or two before devouring its own bootloader in a fit of nihilism, and from then on ('til today) it's run Linux. (For a while it had VMWare with NT 4 under that... to run a Java app that had somehow managed to get Windows-ONLY widgetry... bastards.)
At least he recognizes that Microsoft is the cause of much of his suffering. :)
I've spent my fair share of time dealing with Mac issues this year (but there've been four Macs in the house this year, with 2-3 present at any given time), but... motherboard-specific drivers? antivirus software? forced upgrades? pop-up windows? security patches that take more than 5 minutes to install, counting a restart? $DEITY, what did poor Marshall do in a past life to deserve this? Those sorts of problems are nonexistent in my reality.