Wouldn't MS be pissed if some big-name manufacturers start installing Star Office instead of the MS Office Suite? I'm not sure that any would do that, because it would piss off MS, but smaller companies and white box manufacturers could install it at no cost and make their customers happy also.
(sarcasm on) Well, I nominate you for the gas chamber, just like the 6 million Jews and 6 million other people who were gassed by the Aryian Nation. (sarcasm off)
You are despicable. Who are you to judge who is better or worse than you? To my mind you are the one who deserves to be eliminated, although I would never advocate eliminating anybody (other than people convicted of crimes and sentenced to death by a legitimate court).
Why is it immoral for a company to want to get a return on it's investment?
A company spends money developing a new idea, and then patents it. The patent lasts for 17 years, after which it becomes public domain.
A company would not be in business if they did not earn more money than they spend. The fact that YOU would like the company to give away it's intellectual ideas does not make it immoral for the company to simply say NO. The open source movement is wonderful, but there is not law or moral imperative which says that all companies need to release their property.
While Unisys may not have directly developed the gif format (I think that compuserve did), they now own it due to their purchasing (with real dollars) another company which did develop it. The patent was part of the purchase, and therefore Unisys now owns the patent.
While you (and others) may feel that the $5000 fee is too high, there is nothing either legally wrong or immoral with what they are doing.
I have read a lot of responses here, and feel that the demigogs just want free stuff without any feeling of responsibility to the originators of the stuff. Open source is an idea, which many companies do not believe in. That is their right. It may be a wrong belief, but YOU have no law on your side. The market will prove who is right, the wrong ones will either switch sides or diseapper.
The answer? Follow the law, even if you disagree. Use another format, there are many others to choose from. Stop feeling that you are totally rightous, you have no basis for that belief.
As far as I am concerned, there is only one thing a GIF can do which other format can't, that is the transparent gif (no flames, please, I am not an expert here). If you want to use transparent gifs, use a licensed program. If you want to do anything else, use a different format.
Actually, while the original Harrier was of British design and manufacture, the current Harrier is built in the US.
The AV-8B Harrier II is a second generation V/STOL aircraft based on the original British Harrier design in the late 1960's. The USMC AV-8B Harrier II completed Operational Evaluation in March 1985 and was granted Approval for Full Production (AFP) in September 1985. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) for this day attack version of the aircraft was achieved in August 1985. A two-seat training version was introduced in July 1987. A night attack version of the aircraft was introduced in September 1989.
Sorry about the tone of the subject, but I am just a bit annoyed at the garbage being spouted on this list. YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH, OTHERWISE KEEP IT SHUT!
Now that I have offended a lot of you, let me explain:
There have been a number of comments on this list which are devoid of any basis in scientific fact:
1. One set of comments were concerned with a metal-skinned airplane flying through the microwaves. This writer obviously didn't remember his high school science classes, otherwise he would have known that a metal-skinned airplane is a Faraday Cage, which prevents radio waves from penetrating the interior
2. Another comment was about the satellite being in geosyncronous orbit. First, it depends on the season as to whether or not the satellite will be in shadow. Second. even if it is in shadow it would not be there for long. Third, multiple satellites could be positioned so that only a small percentage of them would be in shadow at any one time.
3. Global warming. If we could beam the energy from space and use it here then we could discontinue the use of fossil fuels, which would reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which would reduce the global warming problem
4. Transmission of the energy. This is a problem, but there has already been demonstrated a greater than 50% recovery of energy transmitted. Also, the receivers would be spread out over a large area, such as a desert.
5. The "safe" levels of microwave energy would be less than the energy from a radar gun, it would be gathered by the receivers being spread out over a large area.
Lest I be taken not agreeing with anybody, I do admit that there are major problems needed to be solved, including but not limited to the total cost of building this. Also, the transmission and recovery of the energy are still major problems which still need to be either refined or solved.
There is a book written by Lee Correy called Space Doctor, which although being fiction does go into the science of this a bit.
At a speed of 5MPH, which is what the Power Wheels vehicles do, it will take about 12 minutes to go a mile. Not a lot of time. Think about it. The police get a call, and it will take them a few minutes to get there. My son has one of these, and has no problem in plugging in the car to the battery. I remove the batteries when it is not in use for safety, so I don't have to worry about my son driving off into the sunset. Besides, he knows that if he goes driving without me he will lose the car.
Actually, no. Yes, the disk is moving faster, but the physical size of the bits are increased. Think of an old record player spinning at 33 1/3 RPM. The same length of sound was on the outer groove as on the inner groove. That implies that a 1 second sound bite takes up the same proportional amount of the groove. It works out to 10.8 degrees per second, whether you are on the inner groove or the outer groove. The same applies to a hard disk (not CD-roms, most of them do have a variable spin). A hard disk spins at a fixed rate of speed. There are the same number of sectors on each track, therefore it will take the same amount of time to read a sector on the inner track as on the outer track.
This being said, there could still be some performance improvements on locating the swap file/partition at different areas of the disk. For example, placing it as close as possible to the most-often accessed data would certainly reduce the time it takes the head to seek to the appropriate track.
A good rule of thumb is to place a swap file on the most used partition of the least used hard disk (assuming a file and not a partition). For a swap partition, place it as close as possible to the most used partition on the least used hard disk.
I don't know how the ext2 filesystem allocates space, so I can't state whether the swap partition should be close to the outer edge of the ext2 filesystem or the inner edge. Perhaps someone who knows could respond.
Anyone feel up to sending this a--hole a bunch of mail? He feels justified by the fact that the game will be at Fenway Park. Sounds like a very immature 25-year-old who has nothing better to do.
The Apple III was a damn fine machine. They had a manufacturing problem for a while which caused the chips to not be fully seated after transportation (I think they sockets were too tight and they weren't fully seated). I sold a bunch of them with my software for several years, and we never had a failure. I don't like dropping machines so we opened up each one and manually pushed down on each chip. Yes, they machine ran a little warm, but they never overheated. The main problem with the machine was an image problem; once people thought there it was a bad machine they didn't sell at all. But that machine could have 256K of memory, and when running Apple Pascal was a dream to work with. We sold Corvus (any remember them) hard disks, and they worked like a champ. Our largest customer had 8 Apple IIIs on a Corvus network all hooked up to a Corvus 80 meg drive (really big in those days). The networking was a bit primitive, but this customer was running a payroll/billing system for several hundred employees.
Its not worth it. Most if not all cases come with power supplies. Also, replacement power supplies are relatively inexpensive. Finally, the old power supplies were/are very inefficient; they work by using transformers to step down the voltage. The newer power supplies, including the ATX supply, are switching power supplies. This means that more of the power actually gets to the motherboard and less is wasted in the conversion.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't MS be pissed if some big-name manufacturers start installing Star Office instead of the MS Office Suite? I'm not sure that any would do that, because it would piss off MS, but smaller companies and white box manufacturers could install it at no cost and make their customers happy also.
(sarcasm on) Well, I nominate you for the gas chamber, just like the 6 million Jews and 6 million other people who were gassed by the Aryian Nation. (sarcasm off)
You are despicable. Who are you to judge who is better or worse than you? To my mind you are the one who deserves to be eliminated, although I would never advocate eliminating anybody (other than people convicted of crimes and sentenced to death by a legitimate court).
Thank you for the correction
Why is it immoral for a company to want to get a return on it's investment?
A company spends money developing a new idea, and then patents it. The patent lasts for 17 years, after which it becomes public domain.
A company would not be in business if they did not earn more money than they spend. The fact that YOU would like the company to give away it's intellectual ideas does not make it immoral for the company to simply say NO. The open source movement is wonderful, but there is not law or moral imperative which says that all companies need to release their property.
While Unisys may not have directly developed the gif format (I think that compuserve did), they now own it due to their purchasing (with real dollars) another company which did develop it. The patent was part of the purchase, and therefore Unisys now owns the patent.
While you (and others) may feel that the $5000 fee is too high, there is nothing either legally wrong or immoral with what they are doing.
I have read a lot of responses here, and feel that the demigogs just want free stuff without any feeling of responsibility to the originators of the stuff. Open source is an idea, which many companies do not believe in. That is their right. It may be a wrong belief, but YOU have no law on your side. The market will prove who is right, the wrong ones will either switch sides or diseapper.
The answer? Follow the law, even if you disagree. Use another format, there are many others to choose from. Stop feeling that you are totally rightous, you have no basis for that belief.
As far as I am concerned, there is only one thing a GIF can do which other format can't, that is the transparent gif (no flames, please, I am not an expert here). If you want to use transparent gifs, use a licensed program. If you want to do anything else, use a different format.
Actually, while the original Harrier was of British design and manufacture, the current Harrier is built in the US.
The AV-8B Harrier II is a second generation V/STOL aircraft based on the original British Harrier design in the late 1960's. The USMC AV-8B Harrier II completed Operational Evaluation in March 1985 and was granted Approval for Full Production (AFP) in September 1985. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) for this day attack version of the aircraft was achieved in August 1985. A two-seat training version was introduced in July 1987. A night attack version of the aircraft was introduced in September 1989.
It is manufacured by McDonnell Douglas.
Sorry about the tone of the subject, but I am just a bit annoyed at the garbage being spouted on this list. YOU SHOULD KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTH, OTHERWISE KEEP IT SHUT!
Now that I have offended a lot of you, let me explain:
There have been a number of comments on this list which are devoid of any basis in scientific fact:
1. One set of comments were concerned with a metal-skinned airplane flying through the microwaves. This writer obviously didn't remember his high school science classes, otherwise he would have known that a metal-skinned airplane is a Faraday Cage, which prevents radio waves from penetrating the interior
2. Another comment was about the satellite being in geosyncronous orbit. First, it depends on the season as to whether or not the satellite will be in shadow. Second. even if it is in shadow it would not be there for long. Third, multiple satellites could be positioned so that only a small percentage of them would be in shadow at any one time.
3. Global warming. If we could beam the energy from space and use it here then we could discontinue the use of fossil fuels, which would reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which would reduce the global warming problem
4. Transmission of the energy. This is a problem, but there has already been demonstrated a greater than 50% recovery of energy transmitted. Also, the receivers would be spread out over a large area, such as a desert.
5. The "safe" levels of microwave energy would be less than the energy from a radar gun, it would be gathered by the receivers being spread out over a large area.
Lest I be taken not agreeing with anybody, I do admit that there are major problems needed to be solved, including but not limited to the total cost of building this. Also, the transmission and recovery of the energy are still major problems which still need to be either refined or solved.
There is a book written by Lee Correy called Space Doctor, which although being fiction does go into the science of this a bit.
JBB
At a speed of 5MPH, which is what the Power Wheels vehicles do, it will take about 12 minutes to go a mile. Not a lot of time. Think about it. The police get a call, and it will take them a few minutes to get there.
My son has one of these, and has no problem in plugging in the car to the battery. I remove the batteries when it is not in use for safety, so I don't have to worry about my son driving off into the sunset. Besides, he knows that if he goes driving without me he will lose the car.
Actually, no. Yes, the disk is moving faster, but the physical size of the bits are increased. Think of an old record player spinning at 33 1/3 RPM. The same length of sound was on the outer groove as on the inner groove. That implies that a 1 second sound bite takes up the same proportional amount of the groove. It works out to 10.8 degrees per second, whether you are on the inner groove or the outer groove.
The same applies to a hard disk (not CD-roms, most of them do have a variable spin). A hard disk spins at a fixed rate of speed. There are the same number of sectors on each track, therefore it will take the same amount of time to read a sector on the inner track as on the outer track.
This being said, there could still be some performance improvements on locating the swap file/partition at different areas of the disk. For example, placing it as close as possible to the most-often accessed data would certainly reduce the time it takes the head to seek to the appropriate track.
A good rule of thumb is to place a swap file on the most used partition of the least used hard disk (assuming a file and not a partition). For a swap partition, place it as close as possible to the most used partition on the least used hard disk.
I don't know how the ext2 filesystem allocates space, so I can't state whether the swap partition should be close to the outer edge of the ext2 filesystem or the inner edge. Perhaps someone who knows could respond.
Jonathan Bayer
Anyone feel up to sending this a--hole a bunch of mail? He feels justified by the fact that the game will be at Fenway Park. Sounds like a very immature 25-year-old who has nothing better to do.
Blah!
The Apple III was a damn fine machine. They had a manufacturing problem for a while which caused the chips to not be fully seated after transportation (I think they sockets were too tight and they weren't fully seated). I sold a bunch of them with my software for several years, and we never had a failure. I don't like dropping machines so we opened up each one and manually pushed down on each chip. Yes, they machine ran a little warm, but they never overheated. The main problem with the machine was an image problem; once people thought there it was a bad machine they didn't sell at all. But that machine could have 256K of memory, and when running Apple Pascal was a dream to work with. We sold Corvus (any remember them) hard disks, and they worked like a champ. Our largest customer had 8 Apple IIIs on a Corvus network all hooked up to a Corvus 80 meg drive (really big in those days). The networking was a bit primitive, but this customer was running a payroll/billing system for several hundred employees.
Its not worth it. Most if not all cases come with power supplies. Also, replacement power supplies are relatively inexpensive.
Finally, the old power supplies were/are very inefficient; they work by using transformers to step down the voltage. The newer power supplies, including the ATX supply, are switching power supplies. This means that more of the power actually gets to the motherboard and less is wasted in the conversion.