It's not "just" two pins, definitely not the same size conductor. I think the drives need as much as one amp on 12V and 5V, and it looks like at least four conductors are used to do that.
It would be a problem because the boundaries between craft have to be a *lot* bigger than people accept for cars. And you're going to get the jerks that can't hold a prescribed altitude or direction. And you're going to get drunken flying. Personal flying machines has no place for most of the general public in the short term. Maybe it would be OK if it was all automated such that the user is not allowed to pilot it. But that would still not resolve the energy problem, if you're complaining about the cost of fuel, maintenance, cars and insurance now, don't try flying, it's worse in aircraft.
If it's not really a leak, then I don't have a problem with it taking memory, as long as it's being useful.
It still doesn't resolve the stability problem. Seriously, I can use Firefox for maybe three days before it must be restarted because it starts acting like there's no server on the other end. Kill it and restart the session and it's fine. I've even gone to FF 1.5 and I'm running almost no extensions except the two that I must have.
I think Mozilla would be much better off finding someone to plug the memory leaks and other stability problems. The latest version stops working after a few days and I have to kill it and restart. The only reason I stick with FF right now is the plugins.
The problem of the "flying car" is not technological, it's economic and societal. We already have Piper Cubs, Cessnas and so on.
Given the cost of energy, do you really want to pay for the cost to fly a flying car? I don't think energy is going to get any cheaper over the next century. Just the gas to fly a single prop aircraft is $45/hr, not counting all the other maintenance costs, and the craft can only go about twice as fast as legal highway speed. Do you really want to deal with sky rage?
It's not so simple. The calendar looks like it might be trading on Ford's trademarks. Put it this way, if the Mustang wasn't in a particular image, would anyone want to pay the same for the image?
Costs do go down too though. Last summer I bought a 1080p projector for 1/12th the cost of the cheapest model two or three years ago. I think they're a little cheaper still now, but really, once the display elements ramp up in production, the costs can go way down to something that's getting to be affordable.
And the picture quality jump is more than just noticeable. I think 480p to 720p is quite noticeable even on crap equipment.
But I see an odd dichotomy, a crowd like Slashdot's readers as a whole doesn't see the value in 2MP video image, but as a whole, they also seem to gripe about not having a 5MP still camera in a phone. If you can't see a 1/3MP to 2MP jump in video, then what's the jump to 5MP really going to get you, even if it's a still shot?
It's not for home use. I think there are some in use. One system was demonstrated at NAB 2007 and IBC 2006. I think some museums are using it. It's actually quite nice. It's almost possible to recognize the t-shirt designs audience members are wearing from across a football stadium.
The wealthy have been hoarding money for decades. Stick it in the mattress, in the vault, anywhere but in a savings account or in the market where the money would stay in the economies, keeping them at least operating. Now, credit is tight, because those who have it don't want to risk letting the middle class earn it to invest it in their own wealth-growth schemes.
That's the silliest thing I've seen in a while. Uninvested money just shrivels through inflation. Even in the "buy in down times", almost no one makes money that way, it's a way to lose money.
I don't think our society remembers being in a time of shortage - and I think that's a problem. It's easy to consume and throw away things if you don't think there will be a problem in getting more, and that attitude is pretty wasteful.
VC-1 is based on WMV9, but they aren't necessarily the same thing.
Windows XP/Vista is the only platform supported, because that's what Netflix wanted to support. They could very, very easily have supported Windows 2000, 9x, etc. I imagine they could also have supported most Macs, via the rather old Mac WMP release. They could also have supported web browsers like Firefox, rather than being IE-only quite easily.
WMV DRM is just simply not available to Windows older than XP, by Microsoft's choice. Netflix has nothing to do with that. None of the Plays For Sure devices will work with my W2k computer either, for the same reason, MS won't release the files to be installed, though maybe I can do some shoehorning, it's not a trivial action.
Also, Microsoft won't license it to be used on non-MS platforms, period.
Apple cares a lot more about the iTunes revenue than the computer hardware revenue.
iTunes isn't that profitable. Apple makes much better money on the hardware, in margins and revenue. To make a comparison, the gross income from iTunes works out to something like $10 (or so) per iPod sold.
What makes you think that Apple is completely at fault here? You're going on assumptions that aren't necessarily true.
A Telestream rep said that Microsoft will not license WM DRM to be operable on any non-Microsoft platform. That's all there is to it. Whether Apple would license it if they had the opportunity, I don't know. But there are two sides to this situation.
Asking them now would have the benefit of time and experience in the answer. Did you ask them if they supported the idea in 2002? It often takes years for a cultural awakening to take hold.
I've used Adobe products for a decade and have not needed to contact Adobe or any kind of document for installation or operational failures. GIMP on the other hand, did require that I follow arcane steps to install that aren't necessary with Adobe products.
- When someone wants to do some photo editing, but can't afford to shell out the cash for Photoshop, I suggest they try the Gimp. Nobody seems to like it, but they get their work done.
That's the wrong comparison anyway. GIMP is closer to Photoshop Elements in many ways. A current version of PSE is about $50 to $100 depending on where you buy it, and older versions are usually fine for most people too. There's one that is one version old included with the $100 Wacom tablet.
I was just going by what I think I heard on the HT Guys podcast because I have little experience with CableCard. Sometimes they get stuff wrong, but usually they're pretty accurate.
It costs money. But what the Wal*Mart generation doesn't understand is that sometimes it's worth paying more. Lucky for you though, there are more options now to getting more naturally derived ingredients through specialty stores or even the local supermarket, so you should be able to find something somewhere.
I really don't consider P2P to be "private communication". If the trading was by email between friends, then I'd grant you your case, but if just anyone can access the networks where no two people know each other, then that's completely different.
I still think having a truly exclusive right to copy is necessary. I realize that you're trying to fight "the man" (whoever that really is), I think it's really immature in many ways to let people take other people's work so broadly, and so publicly.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not "just" two pins, definitely not the same size conductor. I think the drives need as much as one amp on 12V and 5V, and it looks like at least four conductors are used to do that.
Firewire is more expensive and a non-native interface. FW800 is the closest to eSATA in performance, and even then, it's more expensive and slower.
It would be a problem because the boundaries between craft have to be a *lot* bigger than people accept for cars. And you're going to get the jerks that can't hold a prescribed altitude or direction. And you're going to get drunken flying. Personal flying machines has no place for most of the general public in the short term. Maybe it would be OK if it was all automated such that the user is not allowed to pilot it. But that would still not resolve the energy problem, if you're complaining about the cost of fuel, maintenance, cars and insurance now, don't try flying, it's worse in aircraft.
I *was* using FF2.0 and downgraded to 1.5. Over the 2.0.0.x updates, it seems like FF2.0 was getting worse than 1.5 ever was.
If it's not really a leak, then I don't have a problem with it taking memory, as long as it's being useful.
It still doesn't resolve the stability problem. Seriously, I can use Firefox for maybe three days before it must be restarted because it starts acting like there's no server on the other end. Kill it and restart the session and it's fine. I've even gone to FF 1.5 and I'm running almost no extensions except the two that I must have.
I think Mozilla would be much better off finding someone to plug the memory leaks and other stability problems. The latest version stops working after a few days and I have to kill it and restart. The only reason I stick with FF right now is the plugins.
The problem of the "flying car" is not technological, it's economic and societal. We already have Piper Cubs, Cessnas and so on.
Given the cost of energy, do you really want to pay for the cost to fly a flying car? I don't think energy is going to get any cheaper over the next century. Just the gas to fly a single prop aircraft is $45/hr, not counting all the other maintenance costs, and the craft can only go about twice as fast as legal highway speed. Do you really want to deal with sky rage?
prices that relate to your ability and willingness to pay, rather than to the cost of manufacturing the equipment.
There's more to making an electronic device than just the cost of parts and assembly, you've left out the cost of design and development too.
It's not so simple. The calendar looks like it might be trading on Ford's trademarks. Put it this way, if the Mustang wasn't in a particular image, would anyone want to pay the same for the image?
Costs do go down too though. Last summer I bought a 1080p projector for 1/12th the cost of the cheapest model two or three years ago. I think they're a little cheaper still now, but really, once the display elements ramp up in production, the costs can go way down to something that's getting to be affordable.
And the picture quality jump is more than just noticeable. I think 480p to 720p is quite noticeable even on crap equipment.
But I see an odd dichotomy, a crowd like Slashdot's readers as a whole doesn't see the value in 2MP video image, but as a whole, they also seem to gripe about not having a 5MP still camera in a phone. If you can't see a 1/3MP to 2MP jump in video, then what's the jump to 5MP really going to get you, even if it's a still shot?
I don't want to design your commission. New clothes on boring farts still nets a room of boring farts.
If that's your attitude, why watch TV? Why not just read a book?
It's not for home use. I think there are some in use. One system was demonstrated at NAB 2007 and IBC 2006. I think some museums are using it. It's actually quite nice. It's almost possible to recognize the t-shirt designs audience members are wearing from across a football stadium.
The wealthy have been hoarding money for decades. Stick it in the mattress, in the vault, anywhere but in a savings account or in the market where the money would stay in the economies, keeping them at least operating. Now, credit is tight, because those who have it don't want to risk letting the middle class earn it to invest it in their own wealth-growth schemes.
That's the silliest thing I've seen in a while. Uninvested money just shrivels through inflation. Even in the "buy in down times", almost no one makes money that way, it's a way to lose money.
I don't think our society remembers being in a time of shortage - and I think that's a problem. It's easy to consume and throw away things if you don't think there will be a problem in getting more, and that attitude is pretty wasteful.
VC-1/WMV9/WMV3 is an open, SMPTE standard.
VC-1 is based on WMV9, but they aren't necessarily the same thing.
Windows XP/Vista is the only platform supported, because that's what Netflix wanted to support. They could very, very easily have supported Windows 2000, 9x, etc. I imagine they could also have supported most Macs, via the rather old Mac WMP release. They could also have supported web browsers like Firefox, rather than being IE-only quite easily.
WMV DRM is just simply not available to Windows older than XP, by Microsoft's choice. Netflix has nothing to do with that. None of the Plays For Sure devices will work with my W2k computer either, for the same reason, MS won't release the files to be installed, though maybe I can do some shoehorning, it's not a trivial action.
Also, Microsoft won't license it to be used on non-MS platforms, period.
Apple cares a lot more about the iTunes revenue than the computer hardware revenue.
iTunes isn't that profitable. Apple makes much better money on the hardware, in margins and revenue. To make a comparison, the gross income from iTunes works out to something like $10 (or so) per iPod sold.
RIAA-approved
Get your organizations right.
What makes you think that Apple is completely at fault here? You're going on assumptions that aren't necessarily true.
A Telestream rep said that Microsoft will not license WM DRM to be operable on any non-Microsoft platform. That's all there is to it. Whether Apple would license it if they had the opportunity, I don't know. But there are two sides to this situation.
Asking them now would have the benefit of time and experience in the answer. Did you ask them if they supported the idea in 2002? It often takes years for a cultural awakening to take hold.
I've used Adobe products for a decade and have not needed to contact Adobe or any kind of document for installation or operational failures. GIMP on the other hand, did require that I follow arcane steps to install that aren't necessary with Adobe products.
- When someone wants to do some photo editing, but can't afford to shell out the cash for Photoshop, I suggest they try the Gimp. Nobody seems to like it, but they get their work done.
That's the wrong comparison anyway. GIMP is closer to Photoshop Elements in many ways. A current version of PSE is about $50 to $100 depending on where you buy it, and older versions are usually fine for most people too. There's one that is one version old included with the $100 Wacom tablet.
I was just going by what I think I heard on the HT Guys podcast because I have little experience with CableCard. Sometimes they get stuff wrong, but usually they're pretty accurate.
It costs money. But what the Wal*Mart generation doesn't understand is that sometimes it's worth paying more. Lucky for you though, there are more options now to getting more naturally derived ingredients through specialty stores or even the local supermarket, so you should be able to find something somewhere.
This interview is apropos to your comment:
http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200801043
I really don't consider P2P to be "private communication". If the trading was by email between friends, then I'd grant you your case, but if just anyone can access the networks where no two people know each other, then that's completely different.
I still think having a truly exclusive right to copy is necessary. I realize that you're trying to fight "the man" (whoever that really is), I think it's really immature in many ways to let people take other people's work so broadly, and so publicly.