It seems like this is a partial response to the backlash of people getting stranded on planes on the ground during bad weather. Now the airlines have the option of putting the planes in the air, and flying the long way around to avoid the weather.
The end result is that people will still be spending more time in airliners.
I agree. As a pilot, I would love to be able to record flight data for my own use and evaluation, not necessarily data as the result of a less than optimal landing. I would think recording the data would be the easy part. The interface to the instruments to collect the data will be an exercise in frustration, given the age and veriety of instruments in most planes.
What will be really interesting will be to see how accurate their atmospheric analysis will be a year from now. In the article they mentioned finding tiny particles of "silicates in the atmosphere". Sounds a like a lot of speculation as to what the actual data could represent.
Every time I see one of those ads I can't help but think that it isn't my job to try and convicen my doctor to prescribe some drug, it is the doctor's job to know what drugs are available and prescribe them to me.
If the drug companies want me to sell my doctor on their particlar product, I should get a commission every time they write me the prescription.
Not trying to start a flame war, just sort of thinking out loud.
Because a manufactirer sets the MSRP at a certain level, does that really set an intrinsic value of that object? It has been a while since economics classes, but I am thinking that if the market is only willing to pay $3 for something doesn't that make it worth $3 rather than $10,000 or any other arbitrary value set by the manufacturer?
The whole question of piracy aside, software is only "worth" whatever someone is willing to pay for it, and that worth is specific to that someone. Something worth $100 to one may not be worth anything to another.
AT&T is certainly acting like a monopoly. As an AT&T customer I've seen my rates slowly creeping up since the original merger, their customer service in the form of that automated attendant is an insult to anyone that ever tried to use it (say 'operator' and watch it hang up on you right after telling you it will connect you to someone that can help...) and their rates are irrelevant as they seem to be able to charge whatever other "additional service fees" they feel like. Heck, they even get to charge you when you want to drop them as a service provider (and I quote from my last call to customer service: Me - "I want to drop AT&T..." them - "That will be a $9.15 charge". Craziness.
I guess what goes around, comes around. Hopefully they will go sooner rather than later.
While I enjoyed the games in question quite a lot, and would probabaly enjoy a re-vamping of these games, I see a disturbing similarity to the movie industry of late. It seems that there have been less and less really innovative, creative, and original movies being released. There seem to be more and more remakes of older films now that movie technology has gotten better. A few examples of what I am talking about such as 'Mr. & Mrs. Smith', 'War of the Worlds' or 'Cheaper by the Dozen' come to mind. I don't want to start a whole flame war on "how can you say you didn't like movie..." but to me, most of these remade-for-a-new audience movies have left a lot to be desired. Mostly because they were just remakes of an older movie. The story was the same, the special effects were changed try to make a buck.
I can only hope that the remake of an old favorite game doesn't fall into the same trap. And they need get the same voice actor for the Dungeon Keeper! Thinking about slapping around those imps to get them to work faster still brings a smile to my face...
I'm not sure I agree with the comment that Norton A.V. was "essential software". I have always seemed to find a better, or at least far less intrusive, alternative to the Norton products. When the things that are intended to help you get in the way, they cease to be essential.
I have been in the industry over 20 years and this is one of the more difficult questions to answer. For me, having worked in both development and management capacities, the most accurate answer that can be provided is "it depends".
Primarily, it depends on what you know. There are a number of techniques beyond the W.A.G. of developer's experience with the software at hand (a google search for "estimation techniques" turns up over 900,000 matches), and depending upon the circumstances one technique may be better suited than another. IMHO they all boil down to one simple fact: the more you know the more accurate an estimate can be. As a manager, you develop a feel for which of your developers pad their estimates and by how much. When the numbers seem high, it is usually because they don't have enough information to make a more reasonable "guess". As a developer you don't want to get caught short when your "rough estimate" turns into a schedule deadline, so you take into account all the things that are likely to come up.
For me, the best way to stay out of trouble is to offer a range in your estimates. The less you know the wider the range and vice versa. You can always qualify the range estimate based upon what you know. Other posts have suggested taking time to "get back to you with that estimate" and that is a very valid technique to "know more", thus reducing the range of your estimate. If you have reasonable management and business users, they will understand that an estimate is a "best guess given the information available" rather than a due date to be slapped on a schedule.
How to come up with accurate estimates, isn't an easy question to answer. If it were, there would be one or two simple ways to do it accurately, and everyone would be following those procedures to come up with estimates.
I would think that once patent lawyers stop making more money than the patent holders, both on creating and defending/enforcing unreasonable patents, these types of scenarios would be greatly diminished.
I doubt anyone really gets excited by US animation. Di$ney seems to set the tone and that is just too predictable. Some of the Warner Brothers animation is picking up the slack, but the quality of US animation just doesn't compare.
Slashdot Mirror
The days on the moon are about 14 earth days long. That would mean a lot of batteries to store enough juice to last 14 "earth days" of a lunar night.
It seems like this is a partial response to the backlash of people getting stranded on planes on the ground during bad weather. Now the airlines have the option of putting the planes in the air, and flying the long way around to avoid the weather.
The end result is that people will still be spending more time in airliners.
I agree. As a pilot, I would love to be able to record flight data for my own use and evaluation, not necessarily data as the result of a less than optimal landing. I would think recording the data would be the easy part. The interface to the instruments to collect the data will be an exercise in frustration, given the age and veriety of instruments in most planes.
What will be really interesting will be to see how accurate their atmospheric analysis will be a year from now. In the article they mentioned finding tiny particles of "silicates in the atmosphere". Sounds a like a lot of speculation as to what the actual data could represent.
Every time I see one of those ads I can't help but think that it isn't my job to try and convicen my doctor to prescribe some drug, it is the doctor's job to know what drugs are available and prescribe them to me.
If the drug companies want me to sell my doctor on their particlar product, I should get a commission every time they write me the prescription.
Not trying to start a flame war, just sort of thinking out loud.
Because a manufactirer sets the MSRP at a certain level, does that really set an intrinsic value of that object? It has been a while since economics classes, but I am thinking that if the market is only willing to pay $3 for something doesn't that make it worth $3 rather than $10,000 or any other arbitrary value set by the manufacturer?
The whole question of piracy aside, software is only "worth" whatever someone is willing to pay for it, and that worth is specific to that someone. Something worth $100 to one may not be worth anything to another.
AT&T is certainly acting like a monopoly. As an AT&T customer I've seen my rates slowly creeping up since the original merger, their customer service in the form of that automated attendant is an insult to anyone that ever tried to use it (say 'operator' and watch it hang up on you right after telling you it will connect you to someone that can help...) and their rates are irrelevant as they seem to be able to charge whatever other "additional service fees" they feel like. Heck, they even get to charge you when you want to drop them as a service provider (and I quote from my last call to customer service: Me - "I want to drop AT&T..." them - "That will be a $9.15 charge". Craziness.
I guess what goes around, comes around. Hopefully they will go sooner rather than later.
While I enjoyed the games in question quite a lot, and would probabaly enjoy a re-vamping of these games, I see a disturbing similarity to the movie industry of late. It seems that there have been less and less really innovative, creative, and original movies being released. There seem to be more and more remakes of older films now that movie technology has gotten better. A few examples of what I am talking about such as 'Mr. & Mrs. Smith', 'War of the Worlds' or 'Cheaper by the Dozen' come to mind. I don't want to start a whole flame war on "how can you say you didn't like movie ..." but to me, most of these remade-for-a-new audience movies have left a lot to be desired. Mostly because they were just remakes of an older movie. The story was the same, the special effects were changed try to make a buck.
I can only hope that the remake of an old favorite game doesn't fall into the same trap. And they need get the same voice actor for the Dungeon Keeper! Thinking about slapping around those imps to get them to work faster still brings a smile to my face...
FWIW...
I'm not sure I agree with the comment that Norton A.V. was "essential software". I have always seemed to find a better, or at least far less intrusive, alternative to the Norton products. When the things that are intended to help you get in the way, they cease to be essential.
I have been in the industry over 20 years and this is one of the more difficult questions to answer. For me, having worked in both development and management capacities, the most accurate answer that can be provided is "it depends".
Primarily, it depends on what you know. There are a number of techniques beyond the W.A.G. of developer's experience with the software at hand (a google search for "estimation techniques" turns up over 900,000 matches), and depending upon the circumstances one technique may be better suited than another. IMHO they all boil down to one simple fact: the more you know the more accurate an estimate can be. As a manager, you develop a feel for which of your developers pad their estimates and by how much. When the numbers seem high, it is usually because they don't have enough information to make a more reasonable "guess". As a developer you don't want to get caught short when your "rough estimate" turns into a schedule deadline, so you take into account all the things that are likely to come up.
For me, the best way to stay out of trouble is to offer a range in your estimates. The less you know the wider the range and vice versa. You can always qualify the range estimate based upon what you know. Other posts have suggested taking time to "get back to you with that estimate" and that is a very valid technique to "know more", thus reducing the range of your estimate. If you have reasonable management and business users, they will understand that an estimate is a "best guess given the information available" rather than a due date to be slapped on a schedule.
How to come up with accurate estimates, isn't an easy question to answer. If it were, there would be one or two simple ways to do it accurately, and everyone would be following those procedures to come up with estimates.
FWIW...
I would think that once patent lawyers stop making more money than the patent holders, both on creating and defending/enforcing unreasonable patents, these types of scenarios would be greatly diminished.
I doubt anyone really gets excited by US animation. Di$ney seems to set the tone and that is just too predictable. Some of the Warner Brothers animation is picking up the slack, but the quality of US animation just doesn't compare.