It's the same whitebox kit, actually, except Alienware'll charge you an extra $1k for the novelty alien head on the cover (comparing identically configured systems).
To their credit, Alienware also offers 2 cheaper video cards (the Hypersonic kit only comes with the 7800).
Check out the FX7 from Hypersonic (http://www.hypersonic-pc.com/FX7/), a Clevo whitebox available from several other vendors as well.
Granted, at 12lbs and ~1 hour battery life, it is neither light nor highly mobile. Still, as a portable desktop replacement, it kicks ass compared to the Intel duos used in the article.
Greek? Hebrew? Latin? AFAIK, politics, poor translation skills, lack of a common spelling guide (a.k.a. dictionaries) and fluctuating social values throughout the years have made just about any English translation unreliable, if not downright comical.
... at ~18 hours of battery life, 5Gb of storage, and -$50 in price. The only downside is Rio's dropping support. Given Apple's "just buy a new one" attitude on warrantees, that's barely a negative.
They're cheaper, safer, better, awesomer, and nowhere near as Rube Goldberg-esque as the shuttle.
Did you even read the Wikipedia article? Cheaper - "Development costs might be roughly equivalent, in modern dollars, to the cost of developing the shuttle system" - the technology for this currently doesn't exist, which means additional R&D is required (more $$$) - moving the elevator along the cable would require an enormous power source (so big, in fact, it wouldn't fit on board), so we're talking about additional R&D spent on alternative power sources - lastly, to avoid problems with corrosion, you'd have to plate the cables with gold or platinum
Safer - "early elevators would be restricted to cargo due to radiation shielding issues" - "all satellites with perigees below the top of the elevator will eventually collide" - meteoroids and micrometeorites are unpredictable and could easily sever the cable - "no terrorist act in history has approached the potential destruction caused by the carefully-targeted sabotage of a space elevator"
I personally love the idea, but until we can find more practical (economical) reasons to be in orbit, there just isn't enough long-term justification for an elevator.
This new 'first' series is considered by some to be the 27th series of Doctor Who, and by others to be the first series of a new production (although I'm not sure on the exact reasoning behind either viewpoint)
The original series ran for 23 years, from 1962 to 1985 (IIRC). It was then put on hiatus for a year, only to return for a 2 year run, finally shutting down production in 1987. This was considered the second series. Not including assorted made-for-TV movies in both the US and UK, the Doctor didn't return to TV until this new (third) series, beginning in March 2005. That makes 27 years, with 9 different actors (10 if you include David Tennant tomorrow night) officially playing the role of the Doctor (again, not counting movies or radio programs).
Badwolf will be The Master I reckon. But I'm probably wrong.
Yup, you're wrong. The IMDB entry for this last episode originally had a casting for Davros (it has since been changed). The Master has never appeared on the casting list. Most likely, we're going to see Davros, or the Emperor Dalek, as the big baddy for the final episode.
However, there are other theories out there, some of which are bolstered by the casting Laura Frazer as the Tardis's Voice. Is the Tardis itself the Bad Wolf? Or maybe there's something/someone else inside the Tardis, manipulating it and/or the Doctor? When you consider the US made-for-TV Dr. Who movie from 1996 and how it ended, your original suggestion may not be too far from the mark.
Another theory has it that the Controller (the girl that Transmatted the Doctor onto Space Station 5 in the first place) may have been using time travelling technology to send subliminal S.O.S.es to the Doctor, in the hopes that she would draw his attention without revealing herself to her silent masters.
Who knows? Indeed! We'll see tomorrow (or Sunday even, thanks to my friend B.T.).
With Dashboard, you can either display your widgets, or display your active applications; you cannot do both. With Konfabulator, you can have any number of widgets and active applications on your screen as you want. I concede your point, but humbly suggest that some people like this fact. Then you'll want to place all your Konfabulator widgets on the Konspose panel; this prevents them from appearing until you call up the panel.
A Dashboard widget has to show you a dialog box to get permission to access the network. Running a Konfabulator widget provides no prompts or other warnings. A good software firewall will trap any outgoing connections and prompt you for confirmation first.
Which software do you think has more installed seats, Konfabulator or Tiger? At this point, I'd say it's probably evenly split between existing Konfabulator users on both platforms and Tiger early-adopters. In the long run, Tiger will almost certainly have more users.
Which has more brand recognition among the target audience? Which is more likely to gain developer support (hence more widgets) due to the larger installed base? Unless Konfabulator gets some heavy press in the near future, again, Tiger'll win hands-down.
It's dirt-simple to develop a Dashboard widget: it's a web page bundled with a simple instruction file. Konfabulator won't render HTML for you. You have to use their format and their JavaScript objects. Konfabulator's XML is simpler and easier to use than HTML, frankly. If you want to set an object's position, you use object.vOffset() and object.hOffset(), as opposed to setting CSS properties via HTML. As for its inability to render HTML, that's what you have a browser for.
I found myself wondering why the colors on widgets in Konfabulator didn't change as I tweaked the settings.The fact that I saw both the configuration and widget at the same time made me think that updating one should affect the other. Under Konfabulator 2.0, you can create a window to display HSL controls, allowing you to adjust coloring in realtime.
pressing F8 for Konspose took about a second to render Check out Konfabulator 2.0. Performance has been improved.
Agreed. The gallery is a nightmare. Several users have mentioned this on the forums. The developers are in the middle of revamping their site for the new release (v2.0). I can only hope they plan on fixing the gallery as well (e.g., display widgets by # of downloads, popularity, date, etc.).
More functional? Dashboard widgets have the complete OS X toolkit available - you can hook into anything. Konfabulator is javascript only. Try again.
Konfabulator can invoke the Unix shell scripts (on Mac and Win), as well as having a built-in AppleScript interpreter (Mac-only); anything you can access via AppleScript or a shell script can be accessed via Konfabulator.
With Dashboard, you can either display your widgets, or display your active applications; you cannot do both. With Konfabulator, you can have any number of widgets and active applications on your screen as you want.
Konfabulator not only runs under Windows, but 99% of the widgets are platform-neutral and can be run on either Windows or Mac without any modification.
Konfabulator can interact with COM objects.
A Konfabulator 2-seat license costs only $19(US), even less if you don't mind nagware. Dashboard comes bundled in with a software package that'll cost you $140(US) per seat. Even then, it still won't run native on Windows.
Try www.konfabulator.com. It's free to use (nagware, actually) and versions are available for Windows and Mac.
With Konfabulator, you can build cross-platform (no Linux yet) desktop widgets (similar to OSX Dashboard widgets, but more functional), using XML and Javascript. You can define the different components of your widget in XML, and then write the event handlers in Javascript. Optionally, you can have Javascript dynamcially create the components in the onLoad event handler. It uses the Spidermonkey Javascript engine, also found in Mozilla/Firefox.
If you give it a try, Check out my widget, ClipDrop (a clipboard manager), in the Gallery.
The bad news: the manufacturer won't send out a replacement until they've received the broken unit
The really bad news: Sergei threw the crate out after they unpacked it, so they've go nothing to ship it in
The really, really bad news: When they do finally find something to ship it in, they're just going to kick it out of an airlock with a note attached: "If found, please return to We Scrub Air, Inc. P.S., sorry for landing on your grandmother"
From their website, you can get a free academic version of the software as well. At least, that's what the site says (I didn't register to download it, so I can't confirm).
This is basically the same argument against shareware (if I can use your product legally for free, why should I pay you?). And yet, no one argues that shareware isn't profitable.
I mean, the V'grs havae a 28 year headstart. building a Human Resources probe fast enough to catch up with them may be cost-prohibitive. It might be cheaper just to keep 'em both on the books and write them off at tax time.
Open Source software does not mean free software (not always, at least). You can still charge a fee for OS software. However, once you've sold it/given it away, the purchaser can do whatever they damn well please with it, including redistribution and providing support services.
If you want to make money on Open Source software, you can:
- charge for your software, but offer no support
- charge for your software, and offer free support
- charge for your software, and charge for support
- give your software away for free, and charge for support
You can't give your unsupported software away for free and expect any money. Thankfully, you don't have to with Open Source software.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and make sure you use a mixed-case password, with numbers and letters combined. So,
password: GOD
becomes
password: G0d
Much gooder!
FYI - AS/400s are NOT mainframes. They're midrange systems (at best).
It's the same whitebox kit, actually, except Alienware'll charge you an extra $1k for the novelty alien head on the cover (comparing identically configured systems).
To their credit, Alienware also offers 2 cheaper video cards (the Hypersonic kit only comes with the 7800).
Check out the FX7 from Hypersonic (http://www.hypersonic-pc.com/FX7/), a Clevo whitebox available from several other vendors as well.
Granted, at 12lbs and ~1 hour battery life, it is neither light nor highly mobile. Still, as a portable desktop replacement, it kicks ass compared to the Intel duos used in the article.
Krugle is a sound-alike/llok-alike startup business with no apparent relationship with google.
Greek? Hebrew? Latin?
AFAIK, politics, poor translation skills, lack of a common spelling guide (a.k.a. dictionaries) and fluctuating social values throughout the years have made just about any English translation unreliable, if not downright comical.
... at ~18 hours of battery life, 5Gb of storage, and -$50 in price. The only downside is Rio's dropping support. Given Apple's "just buy a new one" attitude on warrantees, that's barely a negative.
_underline_
My God... it's full of stars...
They're cheaper, safer, better, awesomer, and nowhere near as Rube Goldberg-esque as the shuttle.
Did you even read the Wikipedia article?
Cheaper
- "Development costs might be roughly equivalent, in modern dollars, to the cost of developing the shuttle system"
- the technology for this currently doesn't exist, which means additional R&D is required (more $$$)
- moving the elevator along the cable would require an enormous power source (so big, in fact, it wouldn't fit on board), so we're talking about additional R&D spent on alternative power sources
- lastly, to avoid problems with corrosion, you'd have to plate the cables with gold or platinum
Safer
- "early elevators would be restricted to cargo due to radiation shielding issues"
- "all satellites with perigees below the top of the elevator will eventually collide"
- meteoroids and micrometeorites are unpredictable and could easily sever the cable
- "no terrorist act in history has approached the potential destruction caused by the carefully-targeted sabotage of a space elevator"
I personally love the idea, but until we can find more practical (economical) reasons to be in orbit, there just isn't enough long-term justification for an elevator.
So corporations get a 'czar' to protect their civil interests. Great! When do we get a Civil Liberties/Privacy czar to protect ours?
Bueller?.....Bueller?....Bueller?....
This new 'first' series is considered by some to be the 27th series of Doctor Who, and by others to be the first series of a new production (although I'm not sure on the exact reasoning behind either viewpoint)
The original series ran for 23 years, from 1962 to 1985 (IIRC). It was then put on hiatus for a year, only to return for a 2 year run, finally shutting down production in 1987. This was considered the second series. Not including assorted made-for-TV movies in both the US and UK, the Doctor didn't return to TV until this new (third) series, beginning in March 2005. That makes 27 years, with 9 different actors (10 if you include David Tennant tomorrow night) officially playing the role of the Doctor (again, not counting movies or radio programs).
Badwolf will be The Master I reckon. But I'm probably wrong.
Yup, you're wrong. The IMDB entry for this last episode originally had a casting for Davros (it has since been changed). The Master has never appeared on the casting list. Most likely, we're going to see Davros, or the Emperor Dalek, as the big baddy for the final episode.
However, there are other theories out there, some of which are bolstered by the casting Laura Frazer as the Tardis's Voice. Is the Tardis itself the Bad Wolf? Or maybe there's something/someone else inside the Tardis, manipulating it and/or the Doctor? When you consider the US made-for-TV Dr. Who movie from 1996 and how it ended, your original suggestion may not be too far from the mark.
Another theory has it that the Controller (the girl that Transmatted the Doctor onto Space Station 5 in the first place) may have been using time travelling technology to send subliminal S.O.S.es to the Doctor, in the hopes that she would draw his attention without revealing herself to her silent masters.
Who knows? Indeed! We'll see tomorrow (or Sunday even, thanks to my friend B.T.).
With Dashboard, you can either display your widgets, or display your active applications; you cannot do both. With Konfabulator, you can have any number of widgets and active applications on your screen as you want.
I concede your point, but humbly suggest that some people like this fact.
Then you'll want to place all your Konfabulator widgets on the Konspose panel; this prevents them from appearing until you call up the panel.
A Dashboard widget has to show you a dialog box to get permission to access the network. Running a Konfabulator widget provides no prompts or other warnings.
A good software firewall will trap any outgoing connections and prompt you for confirmation first.
Which software do you think has more installed seats, Konfabulator or Tiger?
At this point, I'd say it's probably evenly split between existing Konfabulator users on both platforms and Tiger early-adopters. In the long run, Tiger will almost certainly have more users.
Which has more brand recognition among the target audience? Which is more likely to gain developer support (hence more widgets) due to the larger installed base?
Unless Konfabulator gets some heavy press in the near future, again, Tiger'll win hands-down.
It's dirt-simple to develop a Dashboard widget: it's a web page bundled with a simple instruction file. Konfabulator won't render HTML for you. You have to use their format and their JavaScript objects.
Konfabulator's XML is simpler and easier to use than HTML, frankly. If you want to set an object's position, you use object.vOffset() and object.hOffset(), as opposed to setting CSS properties via HTML. As for its inability to render HTML, that's what you have a browser for.
I found myself wondering why the colors on widgets in Konfabulator didn't change as I tweaked the settings.The fact that I saw both the configuration and widget at the same time made me think that updating one should affect the other.
Under Konfabulator 2.0, you can create a window to display HSL controls, allowing you to adjust coloring in realtime.
pressing F8 for Konspose took about a second to render
Check out Konfabulator 2.0. Performance has been improved.
Agreed. The gallery is a nightmare. Several users have mentioned this on the forums. The developers are in the middle of revamping their site for the new release (v2.0). I can only hope they plan on fixing the gallery as well (e.g., display widgets by # of downloads, popularity, date, etc.).
More functional? Dashboard widgets have the complete OS X toolkit available - you can hook into anything. Konfabulator is javascript only. Try again.
Konfabulator can invoke the Unix shell scripts (on Mac and Win), as well as having a built-in AppleScript interpreter (Mac-only); anything you can access via AppleScript or a shell script can be accessed via Konfabulator.
With Dashboard, you can either display your widgets, or display your active applications; you cannot do both. With Konfabulator, you can have any number of widgets and active applications on your screen as you want.
You can't force a malicious widget upon a user under Konfabulator.
Dashboard doesn't run under Windows.
Konfabulator not only runs under Windows, but 99% of the widgets are platform-neutral and can be run on either Windows or Mac without any modification.
Konfabulator can interact with COM objects.
A Konfabulator 2-seat license costs only $19(US), even less if you don't mind nagware. Dashboard comes bundled in with a software package that'll cost you $140(US) per seat. Even then, it still won't run native on Windows.
Try www.konfabulator.com. It's free to use (nagware, actually) and versions are available for Windows and Mac.
With Konfabulator, you can build cross-platform (no Linux yet) desktop widgets (similar to OSX Dashboard widgets, but more functional), using XML and Javascript. You can define the different components of your widget in XML, and then write the event handlers in Javascript. Optionally, you can have Javascript dynamcially create the components in the onLoad event handler. It uses the Spidermonkey Javascript engine, also found in Mozilla/Firefox.
If you give it a try, Check out my widget, ClipDrop (a clipboard manager), in the Gallery.
... why can we not send up a replacement machine?
The good news: it's still under warranty
The bad news: the manufacturer won't send out a replacement until they've received the broken unit
The really bad news: Sergei threw the crate out after they unpacked it, so they've go nothing to ship it in
The really, really bad news: When they do finally find something to ship it in, they're just going to kick it out of an airlock with a note attached: "If found, please return to We Scrub Air, Inc. P.S., sorry for landing on your grandmother"
nt
From their website, you can get a free academic version of the software as well. At least, that's what the site says (I didn't register to download it, so I can't confirm).
I call it 'the Slashdot Effect'.
We're gonna need their red staplers, tho'....
This is basically the same argument against shareware (if I can use your product legally for free, why should I pay you?). And yet, no one argues that shareware isn't profitable.
I mean, the V'grs havae a 28 year headstart. building a Human Resources probe fast enough to catch up with them may be cost-prohibitive. It might be cheaper just to keep 'em both on the books and write them off at tax time.
So how do I make any money?
You don't.
Open Source software does not mean free software (not always, at least). You can still charge a fee for OS software. However, once you've sold it/given it away, the purchaser can do whatever they damn well please with it, including redistribution and providing support services.
If you want to make money on Open Source software, you can:
- charge for your software, but offer no support
- charge for your software, and offer free support
- charge for your software, and charge for support
- give your software away for free, and charge for support
You can't give your unsupported software away for free and expect any money. Thankfully, you don't have to with Open Source software.