Hotkeys for application launching and just about anything else
While I agree with your point, on this one, I have to say Windows was far ahead on this one for a long time.
Because Win 3.0/3.1 was designed from the start to be usable without a mouse, keyboard shortcuts could do anything you could do with a mouse. Win 95/98 inherited all the same keyboard shortcuts.
X always required a mouse as an inherent requirement. Therefore keyboard-only use of X and its apps was very difficult (some things were impossible) for a long time. In the last few years the WMs and desktop environments have improved this, so it's now it's about equal.
It's called "anticompetitive behavior" for a reason. It doesn't mean that it's impossible to compete, it means that they are using illegal tactics to make it more difficult to compete with them.
Yeah, I found a copy of "Inside the IBM PC" in the storage room here at work. With Peter Norton posing on the spine of it. It's right here on the bookshelf behind me, and it actually looks to be a decent read.
Reminds me a lot of "upgrading and repairing PCs", except obviously limited to what was around in 1986.:)
Don't attribute to malic that might might be explained by ignorance.
I know, for instance, that some firewalls, iptables included, just can't handle the huge connection loads of some P2P clients. I've maxed out the default conntrack tables before with a single client running, that can cause your connection to get extremely flaky, basically shut it down.
So it's possible they have some device or software upstream from you that just can't handle the incredibly insane number of connections that P2P can cause.
That's the point though. A patent that is sufficiently novel and specific isn't a big problem. It may be harder to fight, but it's also much easier to code around, and much more legitimate (less likely to generate blanket C+D letters fishing for money).
Compare how much programs in 3.1 did versus what they do now. Word didn't offer spell checking, grammar checking, and hosts of other goodies. Visual Studio didn't even exist (sic?).
What does that have to do with video cards? You can easily run Word 200X/VS on a 4 meg PCI graphics card. You probably wouldn't notice much speed difference either, since 2D performance hasn't improved much.
The RAM which used to be used for windowing can now be freed up
It couldn't have been much, as I said, the whole system ran in 4MB, and had most of the same features as todays WMs. (I even had multiple desktops in 3.1)
Also, compositing reduces the stress on your CPU immensely
How bad could the stress be? It couldn't be using more than a 486-66 worth of speed, since that's what I used to have. That's what? 1-2% of a modern CPU?
For instance, composited windows can be zoomed up or down with almost no work done by your CPU
I saw some crazy zoomers implemented as 4-64K demos in DOS. Very smooth.
Look, my point is, hardware is getting better and better, but software is getting much worse, with very little in the way of new features, especially talking about things like WMs and GUIs. Thousands of times slower. We don't need a 512meg video card, we need less bloated software.
Now, think about how many windows you have open right now. Think about how many windows a power user may have open. Think about how much memory that can burn to give all those windows their own space.
Think about how Windows 3.1 managed to do it with maybe 50 windows at a time on a system with 4 megs of system ram, and barely enough video ram to store a frame buffer.
As far as I am concerned, "windowing technology" hasn't much advanced since Win 3.1.
Accordingly, Adobe gives anyone copyright permission, subject to the conditions stated below, to: Prepare files whose content conforms to the Portable Document Format Write drivers and applications that produce output represented in the Portable
Document Format
Write software that accepts input in the form of the Portable Document Format
and displays, prints, or otherwise interprets the contents
Copy Adobe's copyrighted list of data structures and operators, as well as the
example code and PostScript language function definitions in the written
specification, to the extent necessary to use the Portable Document Format for
the purposes above
If it's still unclear, I don't know what else to say.
It's usually some obscure option you need to set. It is possible to get high quality output from gs, sometimes it requires a little tweaking to get there though.
This is incorrect, it's even used in fire extinguishers. It's used to smother extremely hot fires like burning magnesium.
I'm not sure where the whole "graphite is flammable" myth came from. In fact the only references on google for "burning graphite" are in relation to chernobyl.
I guess anything will burn if you get it hot enough, but calling graphite flammamble or combustible is just plain wrong.
Cadmium and lead are too toxic to see a cooler based on Wood's alloy.
Wood's alloy can be replaced by alloys of indium, gallium, and bismuth, but the first two on that list are pretty expensive, Indium is about twice the cost of Silver for example.
Slashdot Mirror
Hotkeys for application launching and just about anything else
While I agree with your point, on this one, I have to say Windows was far ahead on this one for a long time.
Because Win 3.0/3.1 was designed from the start to be usable without a mouse, keyboard shortcuts could do anything you could do with a mouse. Win 95/98 inherited all the same keyboard shortcuts.
X always required a mouse as an inherent requirement. Therefore keyboard-only use of X and its apps was very difficult (some things were impossible) for a long time. In the last few years the WMs and desktop environments have improved this, so it's now it's about equal.
It's called "anticompetitive behavior" for a reason. It doesn't mean that it's impossible to compete, it means that they are using illegal tactics to make it more difficult to compete with them.
6 times background isn't much of anything. Flying in an airplane is at least 6 times the normal sea level radiation exposure.
Also, I believe Radon decays into a solid. So you get tiny solids precipitating out of the inhaled radon gas.
Small amounts of tritium aren't regulated. You can get tritium "always on" night lights, etc.
No, it's called betavoltaics for a reason.
You might already know this, but only the fairly rare "adobe ebook" format even requires the Elecomsoft un-rot13 thing.
If it's a normal "protected" PDF, you can output it in ghostscript, and in most versions of xpdf that ignore the "protection flags".
I wasn't joking, in fact, that was what I was implying.
No copyright violation happened when Skylarov reverse engineered the ROT 13 "encryption" on the adobe format.
OpenMOSIX seems to use load average for this sort of thing.
If they didn't have diversity, they wouldn't be able to attract mamby-pamby whiny crybaby rich-kid liberals to work for them.
Liberals that might have important skills that they need.
So yeah, basically diversity is necessary for business success.
Oh no! How terrible that it doesn't break the internet!
Yeah, I found a copy of "Inside the IBM PC" in the storage room here at work. With Peter Norton posing on the spine of it. It's right here on the bookshelf behind me, and it actually looks to be a decent read.
:)
Reminds me a lot of "upgrading and repairing PCs", except obviously limited to what was around in 1986.
Don't attribute to malic that might might be explained by ignorance.
I know, for instance, that some firewalls, iptables included, just can't handle the huge connection loads of some P2P clients. I've maxed out the default conntrack tables before with a single client running, that can cause your connection to get extremely flaky, basically shut it down.
So it's possible they have some device or software upstream from you that just can't handle the incredibly insane number of connections that P2P can cause.
That's the point though. A patent that is sufficiently novel and specific isn't a big problem. It may be harder to fight, but it's also much easier to code around, and much more legitimate (less likely to generate blanket C+D letters fishing for money).
Award shows have always been nothing other than marketing wank. I seriously don't know why anyone watches any award show.
It wouldn't be such a bad thing if Dell rode their exclusive agreement all the way to the bottom of the ocean.
Seems to me the only people that like Dell are those that don't know better.
Compare how much programs in 3.1 did versus what they do now. Word didn't offer spell checking, grammar checking, and hosts of other goodies. Visual Studio didn't even exist (sic?).
What does that have to do with video cards? You can easily run Word 200X/VS on a 4 meg PCI graphics card. You probably wouldn't notice much speed difference either, since 2D performance hasn't improved much.
The RAM which used to be used for windowing can now be freed up
It couldn't have been much, as I said, the whole system ran in 4MB, and had most of the same features as todays WMs. (I even had multiple desktops in 3.1)
Also, compositing reduces the stress on your CPU immensely
How bad could the stress be? It couldn't be using more than a 486-66 worth of speed, since that's what I used to have. That's what? 1-2% of a modern CPU?
For instance, composited windows can be zoomed up or down with almost no work done by your CPU
I saw some crazy zoomers implemented as 4-64K demos in DOS. Very smooth.
Look, my point is, hardware is getting better and better, but software is getting much worse, with very little in the way of new features, especially talking about things like WMs and GUIs. Thousands of times slower. We don't need a 512meg video card, we need less bloated software.
Now, think about how many windows you have open right now. Think about how many windows a power user may have open. Think about how much memory that can burn to give all those windows their own space.
Think about how Windows 3.1 managed to do it with maybe 50 windows at a time on a system with 4 megs of system ram, and barely enough video ram to store a frame buffer.
As far as I am concerned, "windowing technology" hasn't much advanced since Win 3.1.
They can demand you open-source any application that contains GPL'd code.
No, they can't. Stop spreading this myth.
Accordingly, Adobe gives anyone copyright permission, subject to
the conditions stated below, to:
Prepare files whose content conforms to the Portable Document Format
Write drivers and applications that produce output represented in the Portable
Document Format
Write software that accepts input in the form of the Portable Document Format
and displays, prints, or otherwise interprets the contents
Copy Adobe's copyrighted list of data structures and operators, as well as the
example code and PostScript language function definitions in the written
specification, to the extent necessary to use the Portable Document Format for
the purposes above
If it's still unclear, I don't know what else to say.
It's usually some obscure option you need to set. It is possible to get high quality output from gs, sometimes it requires a little tweaking to get there though.
Graphite is very combustible.
This is incorrect, it's even used in fire extinguishers. It's used to smother extremely hot fires like burning magnesium.
I'm not sure where the whole "graphite is flammable" myth came from. In fact the only references on google for "burning graphite" are in relation to chernobyl.
I guess anything will burn if you get it hot enough, but calling graphite flammamble or combustible is just plain wrong.
Is that Eutectic? If not, is 58C fully liquid?
Cadmium and lead are too toxic to see a cooler based on Wood's alloy.
Wood's alloy can be replaced by alloys of indium, gallium, and bismuth, but the first two on that list are pretty expensive, Indium is about twice the cost of Silver for example.