You do not provide a link to your site so i cannot say that for sure,
That was intentional. The last thing I need is Slashdot pouring down on my poor server.;-)
but i guess that your site is not there to make money
Correct. However, I have a commercial site that also gets top billing on Google without tricks. See if you can spot it. The sad part is that I have done very few updates to the site in quite a long time, and yet Google *still* gives it top billing. (It's long overdue for an overhaul.)
If this is the reason you use PPC, you are actually doing seo.
No, the SEO is a side effect of normal business. i.e. Google is going to attempt to latch on to every legitimate advertising method available as a way of identifying useful information. Trying to forcefully throw yourself into the middle of these venues is only going to cause people to get upset and Google to change their methods.
I am sure that 95% of the links to your site come from cooking related sites.
Nope. Guess again. Surprisingly there are very few outright links to my site. It's only the early advertising I did of the site that has caused it to skyrocket. Who'da'thunk? Now if only I could figure out a *good* business model for it.
But if some new fellow wants to enter the competition he can either wait a very long time so enough people would link out of their free will to his site, or, he can try and make the process a little faster.
Nonsense. My very point is that traditional methods do that for you. For example, if I list my site of DMOZ it will get picked up and linked by hundreds (if not thousands!) of sites. If I use a pay-per-click service like AdClick, then I can have my site temporarily higher on search results as well as increase Google's "confidence" in my site. Press releases and public announcements also increase your Google ranking without resorting to evil trickery.
I happen to run a recipe database that I wrote for my wife. It's a small thing designed to meet her needs. Thanks to Google, it is an extremely popular site that keeps growing despite my hands off approach. I never intended it to be much more than a place for my wife to store and share her recipes, but people liked the idea and Google reflects that.
Sometimes search engine optimization isn't about making a hack site rank well. Sometimes it is about getting the traffic that a really nifty site deserves.
Actually, pretty much everything you list falls under the issue of usability. Many of those options have lower usability for the user, and thus the search engine by extension.
These companies don't need an SEO, they need to find a web designer that doesn't use Macromedia "tools".
Yes, patents ARE a violation of google's do no evil policy, as it gives them a monopoly on the good search engine algorithems.
So they have monopoly. What's your point?
When did a monopoly by google become ok?
Sometime around the 1790's when the patent system was created in the US to give inventors an temporary and artificial monopoly on their inventions so as to encourage them to innovate. Google has not violated their policy of "do no evil" by properly utilizing the patent system, and it has had the intended side effect of preventing Microsoft from using their corporate muscle to crush Google.
but why support one companies attempts to cripple their opponents through legislation instead of competition?
Why should a company with more money have a right to crush me with my own invention?
The primary reason why the patent system sucks is that "invention" is far too loosely defined. Many patents get granted in cases where the patent office's own rules state that they should throw them out.
Truthfully, a search for "Tiger" should point to Apple's OS because that's what most people are looking for.
No, that's the tack that Google has taken (i.e. Group think) because it works better than any other method. That doesn't meant that it's the "correct" design. The "correct" design should give you results relavent to what you searched for. i.e. "Tiger" or "Tigers" should give you info about furry creatures (and potentially furry creatures in advertising and sports), because that's what you searched for.
OTOH "OS X Tiger", "Apple Tiger", "Mac Tiger", "Tiger Computers", "Tiger Direct", and "Tiger Software" should all give results for either Apple or Tiger Direct because that is what you asked for.
If search engines can reach that stage, then we can finally start installing Computer Libraries in warp-capable starships.
Here's a thought: How about companies try to offer useful services rather than "optimize" their search engine results? I've gotten several top hits on Google by the complete accident of providing useful services or information in the past. Traditional advertising such as adclicks and dmoz listings also help. Not once have I wasted my time trying to game the system.
Companies need to start realizing that making money is about providing what customers want. Advertising is a great way of getting your name out, but only a good product or service will actually carry through. So in that frame of thinking, I highly recommend that companies:
Stop looking at "cost cutting" by reduction, and start looking at "using existing resources to provide relavent products"
Start hiring employees who know what they're doing and listen to them
Stop wasting your money on search engine optimizations.
Be good to the customer, and the cutomer will be good to you. If you don't know why people are upset or unhappy, grab a couple off the street and ask.
Actually, I'm generally happier with Borders. Borders has all the same features as B&N, but their selection is usually better, and they give you a good price without pressing the membership thing.
Of course, it shouldn't be *too* suprising, as Borders is just the large version of Walden Books (one of the few awesome bookstores).:-)
You mean after I buy a computer to put in my living room? No thanks.
Sorry, I often forget that most people don't use their computer as their TV. (The TV Card allows us to save a lot of space in our apartment.) My guess is that Apple is probably thinking of souping up this baby with an SVideo out port...
Use the SVideo out port on your video card. Most 3D cards have this as a standard options these days. Barring that, try a VGA -> TV or USB -> TV converter.
And for on the go, something tells me that iPod Photo is about to get a firmware upgrade...
Actually, Borders made a deal with Amazon whereby Amazon would handle their online business. Which (in English) means that Amazon was allowed to license the Border's name on a royalty basis.
Here is a link to a news story on the subject. (Mods: This is an example of an informative post.) No, there are no associates links embedded in that link. (Mods: This is a joke. It may optionally be modded as "Funny" *if you laughed*.)
(Mods: Don't bother to mod up this post. The "VOID" across it means that it is an example intended for demonstration purposes only. Yes, that's another joke. Ha ha. Funny. Rolling on the floor. Yeash, I really need to get over this cold.)
Will someone please reverse the Troll mod on the parent? His point is his own and he should *not* be punished for it. My original post is far more deserving of a Troll mod than DogDude's.
(And don't bother modding up my original post. I gave fair warning of the associates link, but I mostly just being a smartass. Feel free to mod it down if you like.)
from an independent local bookstore that actually contributes to my community
Okay, I'll bite. How does B&N contribute to your community? Are you referring to this link? If you agree with their charity work and think they should be rewarded for it, then by all means follow the Barnes and Noble link. Personally, I'm none to happy with stores that require "memberships" to get special deals, but to each their own.
If you go through the Barnes & Noble link for the book, you'll find that the book costs $31.99 for the unwashed masses, and $28.79 for the "B&N members". What Barnes and Noble isn't telling their members is that they are still paying more than if they went to Amazon! Even with an associate laden link, you can still get the book off of Amazon for a mere $26.39! And no membership hassles to mess with!
From an Amazon review: Note that this 325-page book is really a 201-page book. Appendix A is the entire API of the Commons lang project - word for word.
Am I the only one who gets annoyed at how computer books have devolved into hardcopies of auto-generated online documentation? Am I the only one who remembers books that cover the intangables of coding (e.g. theory of operation, correct methodology for usage, cool coding and hardware tricks, etc.) rather than the "instruction manual for dummies" books? Bah, I say! I don't know which is scarier: the current trend in books, or the fact that the review I'm citing gave the book 4 out of 5 stars.
Of course, I'll probably get in trouble with my fellow authors for saying this. (Sorry guys, but I just don't like 90% of the books being printed.)
darr, because it would be impossible to store the card in a foil sleeve (maybe even issue it in one, gasp!)
I've got a better idea. They should just switch to microchipping people. It would save hassles, and no one would ever lose their identification. They could even ensure that the transmissions of the ID is valid by transmitting the 0x0294 prefix code in the clear!
Yeah, that was right around the time when Sun was getting in big trouble for cutting corners. They pretty much lost EBay because of it. Sun lost a lot of consumer trust during that period.
These days I wouldn't buy from them, just because their financial situation is so bleak that there's no reason to believe that they'll still be in business in 1-2 years.
1. They have 7 billion in the bank, and they're more or less breaking even. That's not *that* bleak.
2. You have the hardware. It's a standard box with PC hardware. Who cares about whether Sun will be there or not?
Yes. The reason why Sun upgrades are so expensive is that the equipment is supposedly all stuff that's been burnt-in, thoroughly tested, and certified for quality. Sadly, that doesn't seem to stop stuff from failing these days, but it's almost certainly better than the Dell POS I've seen. If you're just looking for a desktop though, you can save yourself some money by adding memory and disk from off-the-shelf components.
P.S. That Offtopic mod was a little rude, mods. I posted at +1 instead of +2, and it was in response to someone else's point. Remember, mod UP or don't mod at all. (Unless it's an obvious troll, that is.)
That's because they have an exclusive contract with Intel. If they were to offer AMD CPUs, they'd lose out on the competitive advantage that contract gives them. If you want an AMD64 system, go check out Sun. Their systems are a smidge more expensive, but still quite affordable for an individual. (Especially if you do some of the more expensive upgrades yourself.)
I have to wonder though, how does Dell feel about ceding the AMD64 market to Sun? Must be rather annoying for them.
Further proof that I am 5 to 10 years ahead of my time.
You mind filling in those of us outside your fan club who have no idea what you're talking about?
And to delve into poor form (by answering a stupid sig):
General Relativity is only a theory.
It is. Just a theory, that is. We know for a fact that it can't be 100% correct because otherwise Quantum Physics couldn't operate (which is also "just a theory"). The catch 22 on these theories is that they have been probabilistically proven to be "correct" to within a very small margin for error. This means that the theories are "mostly correct" to the best of our current knowledge.
Your obvious point of making the "Evolution is just a theory" statement sound silly doesn't work. Evolution is just as much "just a theory" as Relativity, with the exception that it has yet to produce any mathematical probablities for its correctness. Indeed, the very physics required seem to argue against the concept! Barring any undiscovered advances in the theory, the probability of an evolutionary occurance is lower than (if you'll excuse the overused analogy) a 747 being accidentally put together by a tornado storming through a junk yard.
So, instead of having such an amazingly lame signature, how about having an amazingly lame signature that links to something that argues your point? Or you could just link to an Amazon deal like myself. Or perhaps an Amazon deal that makes your point?;-)
You sir, need to lighten up and have a little fun.:-)
Yes, Microsoft Xenix was a good OS. But it never really did go mainstream. And Microsoft was feeling far more pressure to work on graphical interfaces than they were feeling to produce a multiuser system. Believe it or not, the majority of users were happy with DOS. So happy, that practically every computer maker of the time was falling over themselves to use that or CP/M. (Anyone remember the FM-Towns?)
It was less of a matter of Bill Gates becoming infatuated with the Mac, and more of a matter of VisiOn, Xerox, and finally Apple all making Microsoft irrelivant. Microsoft had started their Windows effort in direct response to VisiOn, but wasn't seeing much enthusiam for it. They then went and checked out Xerox and STILL couldn't find their problem. Then Apple started whispering about the Mac and Bill Gates managed to court Jobs into letting him have a peek. All under the guise of being the number one applications vendor for the Mac.
As a result, Bill Gates said whatever it took to steal the technology he needed to make Windows work. Steve Jobs wasn't stupid and managed to figure out what was going on, but he figured that Gates didn't know his head from his rear and wouldn't pose much of a threat. In exchange, the Mac would gain Microsoft Basic and Microsoft's early Office applications.
Well, Jobs was right. Microsoft's Windows shell didn't do so well, taking until version 3.x to finally manage any sort of market sway. Unfortunately, the board gave Jobs the boot and Microsoft went on to use the next logical step in Apple's technology while Apple sat around and lost all of its brainpower.
You mean SCO Xenix? That's right, Microsoft sold Xenix to SCO, thus creating the company now known as Tarantella, who sold the rights to a company called Caldera, who then changed their name to SCO and sued lots of people.
And there you have it. Incontrovertible proof that Microsoft is Evil(TM).
Actually, this is probably all that "Microsoft Research" crapola that Microsoft ignores. I mean, why have a team of crack researchers working on the Next Big Thing(TM) when you're just going to ignore what they're doing?
Here's my take on it: Microsoft Research was founded not as a way of performing valuable research for Microsoft, but as a way of preventing smart people from doing valuable research. By locking up the industry brainiacs, Microsoft can virtually guarantee that no one will come up with the technology to challenge them.
1) Bush has declared the Space Shuttle a dead duck and wants a new spaceship that's based on existing technologies instead of some pie-in-the-sky concepts.
2) The CEV is that vehicle, and will be flying by 2014. No excuses this time, they want a design that can come off the assembly line.
3) Lockheed just released their proposal to the public yesterday. Their design appears to be very similar to the Big Gemini but with some of the proven tech from the Space Shuttle and SR-71.
4) The CEV Spiral 1 is the first step to returning to the moon and eventually Mars. Spiral 2 and Spiral 3 will handle vehicles for those requirements. Nuclear engines are again being considered for Spirals 2 and 3. In response to this, Pratt and Whitney has built a Tri-Mode nuclear engine called the "TRITON".
5) The private sector has been gearing up on non-shuttle launches for the past 8 years or so. This has made the Delta II one of the most popular launch vehicles while the Shuttle finds less and less work.
6) SpaceX is poised to tremendously reduce costs through small but sensible rocket designs. They have been working on these rockets for quite a few years now. The Falcon I launches in August, and the Falcon V launches in the second quarter of 2006.
7) Bigelow took over NASA's research into inflatable space stations, and has managed to produce designs that have NASA very interested. He plans to license the technology back to NASA as well as launch his own stations on the Falcon V.
There's a lot more going on, but I don't have space to fill you in on all of it. Let's just say that your info is probably about a decade old, and that it has never been a more interesting time to be in aerospace. I highly recommend that you use Google and Wikipedia to start poking around.
Slashdot Mirror
You do not provide a link to your site so i cannot say that for sure,
;-)
That was intentional. The last thing I need is Slashdot pouring down on my poor server.
but i guess that your site is not there to make money
Correct. However, I have a commercial site that also gets top billing on Google without tricks. See if you can spot it. The sad part is that I have done very few updates to the site in quite a long time, and yet Google *still* gives it top billing. (It's long overdue for an overhaul.)
If this is the reason you use PPC, you are actually doing seo.
No, the SEO is a side effect of normal business. i.e. Google is going to attempt to latch on to every legitimate advertising method available as a way of identifying useful information. Trying to forcefully throw yourself into the middle of these venues is only going to cause people to get upset and Google to change their methods.
I am sure that 95% of the links to your site come from cooking related sites.
Nope. Guess again. Surprisingly there are very few outright links to my site. It's only the early advertising I did of the site that has caused it to skyrocket. Who'da'thunk? Now if only I could figure out a *good* business model for it.
But if some new fellow wants to enter the competition he can either wait a very long time so enough people would link out of their free will to his site, or, he can try and make the process a little faster.
Nonsense. My very point is that traditional methods do that for you. For example, if I list my site of DMOZ it will get picked up and linked by hundreds (if not thousands!) of sites. If I use a pay-per-click service like AdClick, then I can have my site temporarily higher on search results as well as increase Google's "confidence" in my site. Press releases and public announcements also increase your Google ranking without resorting to evil trickery.
I happen to run a recipe database that I wrote for my wife. It's a small thing designed to meet her needs. Thanks to Google, it is an extremely popular site that keeps growing despite my hands off approach. I never intended it to be much more than a place for my wife to store and share her recipes, but people liked the idea and Google reflects that.
Sometimes search engine optimization isn't about making a hack site rank well. Sometimes it is about getting the traffic that a really nifty site deserves.
Actually, pretty much everything you list falls under the issue of usability. Many of those options have lower usability for the user, and thus the search engine by extension.
These companies don't need an SEO, they need to find a web designer that doesn't use Macromedia "tools".
Yes, patents ARE a violation of google's do no evil policy, as it gives them a monopoly on the good search engine algorithems.
So they have monopoly. What's your point?
When did a monopoly by google become ok?
Sometime around the 1790's when the patent system was created in the US to give inventors an temporary and artificial monopoly on their inventions so as to encourage them to innovate. Google has not violated their policy of "do no evil" by properly utilizing the patent system, and it has had the intended side effect of preventing Microsoft from using their corporate muscle to crush Google.
but why support one companies attempts to cripple their opponents through legislation instead of competition?
Why should a company with more money have a right to crush me with my own invention?
The primary reason why the patent system sucks is that "invention" is far too loosely defined. Many patents get granted in cases where the patent office's own rules state that they should throw them out.
Truthfully, a search for "Tiger" should point to Apple's OS because that's what most people are looking for.
No, that's the tack that Google has taken (i.e. Group think) because it works better than any other method. That doesn't meant that it's the "correct" design. The "correct" design should give you results relavent to what you searched for. i.e. "Tiger" or "Tigers" should give you info about furry creatures (and potentially furry creatures in advertising and sports), because that's what you searched for.
OTOH "OS X Tiger", "Apple Tiger", "Mac Tiger", "Tiger Computers", "Tiger Direct", and "Tiger Software" should all give results for either Apple or Tiger Direct because that is what you asked for.
If search engines can reach that stage, then we can finally start installing Computer Libraries in warp-capable starships.
Truthfully? The top results should be for "Tiger" should be furry creatures that eat meat and perform in Las Vegas.
Companies need to start realizing that making money is about providing what customers want. Advertising is a great way of getting your name out, but only a good product or service will actually carry through. So in that frame of thinking, I highly recommend that companies:
Dude Empire Strikes Back was the best of the original Trilogy. Now who directed that again?
Irvin Kershner What's your point?
Actually, I'm generally happier with Borders. Borders has all the same features as B&N, but their selection is usually better, and they give you a good price without pressing the membership thing.
:-)
Of course, it shouldn't be *too* suprising, as Borders is just the large version of Walden Books (one of the few awesome bookstores).
You mean after I buy a computer to put in my living room? No thanks.
Sorry, I often forget that most people don't use their computer as their TV. (The TV Card allows us to save a lot of space in our apartment.) My guess is that Apple is probably thinking of souping up this baby with an SVideo out port...
Use the SVideo out port on your video card. Most 3D cards have this as a standard options these days. Barring that, try a VGA -> TV or USB -> TV converter.
And for on the go, something tells me that iPod Photo is about to get a firmware upgrade...
Isn't Borders part of Amazon.com?
Actually, Borders made a deal with Amazon whereby Amazon would handle their online business. Which (in English) means that Amazon was allowed to license the Border's name on a royalty basis.
Here is a link to a news story on the subject. (Mods: This is an example of an informative post.) No, there are no associates links embedded in that link. (Mods: This is a joke. It may optionally be modded as "Funny" *if you laughed*.)
(Mods: Don't bother to mod up this post. The "VOID" across it means that it is an example intended for demonstration purposes only. Yes, that's another joke. Ha ha. Funny. Rolling on the floor. Yeash, I really need to get over this cold.)
Will someone please reverse the Troll mod on the parent? His point is his own and he should *not* be punished for it. My original post is far more deserving of a Troll mod than DogDude's.
Man alive, who do we have modding these days?
There you go. Mod parent up.
(And don't bother modding up my original post. I gave fair warning of the associates link, but I mostly just being a smartass. Feel free to mod it down if you like.)
from an independent local bookstore that actually contributes to my community
Okay, I'll bite. How does B&N contribute to your community? Are you referring to this link? If you agree with their charity work and think they should be rewarded for it, then by all means follow the Barnes and Noble link. Personally, I'm none to happy with stores that require "memberships" to get special deals, but to each their own.
If you go through the Barnes & Noble link for the book, you'll find that the book costs $31.99 for the unwashed masses, and $28.79 for the "B&N members". What Barnes and Noble isn't telling their members is that they are still paying more than if they went to Amazon! Even with an associate laden link, you can still get the book off of Amazon for a mere $26.39! And no membership hassles to mess with!
From an Amazon review:
Note that this 325-page book is really a 201-page book. Appendix A is the entire API of the Commons lang project - word for word.
Am I the only one who gets annoyed at how computer books have devolved into hardcopies of auto-generated online documentation? Am I the only one who remembers books that cover the intangables of coding (e.g. theory of operation, correct methodology for usage, cool coding and hardware tricks, etc.) rather than the "instruction manual for dummies" books? Bah, I say! I don't know which is scarier: the current trend in books, or the fact that the review I'm citing gave the book 4 out of 5 stars.
Of course, I'll probably get in trouble with my fellow authors for saying this. (Sorry guys, but I just don't like 90% of the books being printed.)
darr, because it would be impossible to store the card in a foil sleeve (maybe even issue it in one, gasp!)
I've got a better idea. They should just switch to microchipping people. It would save hassles, and no one would ever lose their identification. They could even ensure that the transmissions of the ID is valid by transmitting the 0x0294 prefix code in the clear!
Yeah, that was right around the time when Sun was getting in big trouble for cutting corners. They pretty much lost EBay because of it. Sun lost a lot of consumer trust during that period.
These days I wouldn't buy from them, just because their financial situation is so bleak that there's no reason to believe that they'll still be in business in 1-2 years.
1. They have 7 billion in the bank, and they're more or less breaking even. That's not *that* bleak.
2. You have the hardware. It's a standard box with PC hardware. Who cares about whether Sun will be there or not?
Yes. The reason why Sun upgrades are so expensive is that the equipment is supposedly all stuff that's been burnt-in, thoroughly tested, and certified for quality. Sadly, that doesn't seem to stop stuff from failing these days, but it's almost certainly better than the Dell POS I've seen. If you're just looking for a desktop though, you can save yourself some money by adding memory and disk from off-the-shelf components.
P.S. That Offtopic mod was a little rude, mods. I posted at +1 instead of +2, and it was in response to someone else's point. Remember, mod UP or don't mod at all. (Unless it's an obvious troll, that is.)
That's because they have an exclusive contract with Intel. If they were to offer AMD CPUs, they'd lose out on the competitive advantage that contract gives them. If you want an AMD64 system, go check out Sun. Their systems are a smidge more expensive, but still quite affordable for an individual. (Especially if you do some of the more expensive upgrades yourself.)
I have to wonder though, how does Dell feel about ceding the AMD64 market to Sun? Must be rather annoying for them.
Further proof that I am 5 to 10 years ahead of my time.
;-)
You mind filling in those of us outside your fan club who have no idea what you're talking about?
And to delve into poor form (by answering a stupid sig):
General Relativity is only a theory.
It is. Just a theory, that is. We know for a fact that it can't be 100% correct because otherwise Quantum Physics couldn't operate (which is also "just a theory"). The catch 22 on these theories is that they have been probabilistically proven to be "correct" to within a very small margin for error. This means that the theories are "mostly correct" to the best of our current knowledge.
Your obvious point of making the "Evolution is just a theory" statement sound silly doesn't work. Evolution is just as much "just a theory" as Relativity, with the exception that it has yet to produce any mathematical probablities for its correctness. Indeed, the very physics required seem to argue against the concept! Barring any undiscovered advances in the theory, the probability of an evolutionary occurance is lower than (if you'll excuse the overused analogy) a 747 being accidentally put together by a tornado storming through a junk yard.
So, instead of having such an amazingly lame signature, how about having an amazingly lame signature that links to something that argues your point? Or you could just link to an Amazon deal like myself. Or perhaps an Amazon deal that makes your point?
You sir, need to lighten up and have a little fun. :-)
Yes, Microsoft Xenix was a good OS. But it never really did go mainstream. And Microsoft was feeling far more pressure to work on graphical interfaces than they were feeling to produce a multiuser system. Believe it or not, the majority of users were happy with DOS. So happy, that practically every computer maker of the time was falling over themselves to use that or CP/M. (Anyone remember the FM-Towns?)
It was less of a matter of Bill Gates becoming infatuated with the Mac, and more of a matter of VisiOn, Xerox, and finally Apple all making Microsoft irrelivant. Microsoft had started their Windows effort in direct response to VisiOn, but wasn't seeing much enthusiam for it. They then went and checked out Xerox and STILL couldn't find their problem. Then Apple started whispering about the Mac and Bill Gates managed to court Jobs into letting him have a peek. All under the guise of being the number one applications vendor for the Mac.
As a result, Bill Gates said whatever it took to steal the technology he needed to make Windows work. Steve Jobs wasn't stupid and managed to figure out what was going on, but he figured that Gates didn't know his head from his rear and wouldn't pose much of a threat. In exchange, the Mac would gain Microsoft Basic and Microsoft's early Office applications.
Well, Jobs was right. Microsoft's Windows shell didn't do so well, taking until version 3.x to finally manage any sort of market sway. Unfortunately, the board gave Jobs the boot and Microsoft went on to use the next logical step in Apple's technology while Apple sat around and lost all of its brainpower.
You mean SCO Xenix? That's right, Microsoft sold Xenix to SCO, thus creating the company now known as Tarantella, who sold the rights to a company called Caldera, who then changed their name to SCO and sued lots of people.
And there you have it. Incontrovertible proof that Microsoft is Evil(TM).
Actually, this is probably all that "Microsoft Research" crapola that Microsoft ignores. I mean, why have a team of crack researchers working on the Next Big Thing(TM) when you're just going to ignore what they're doing?
;-)
Here's my take on it: Microsoft Research was founded not as a way of performing valuable research for Microsoft, but as a way of preventing smart people from doing valuable research. By locking up the industry brainiacs, Microsoft can virtually guarantee that no one will come up with the technology to challenge them.
That's my take on it, anyway. Too bad they missed a few.
Holy cow are you ever out of it! Let me edumacate you:
Bigelow Aerospace
Lockheed CEV
The Crew Exploration Vehicle contest
Falcon V info
The long and short of it is this:
1) Bush has declared the Space Shuttle a dead duck and wants a new spaceship that's based on existing technologies instead of some pie-in-the-sky concepts.
2) The CEV is that vehicle, and will be flying by 2014. No excuses this time, they want a design that can come off the assembly line.
3) Lockheed just released their proposal to the public yesterday. Their design appears to be very similar to the Big Gemini but with some of the proven tech from the Space Shuttle and SR-71.
4) The CEV Spiral 1 is the first step to returning to the moon and eventually Mars. Spiral 2 and Spiral 3 will handle vehicles for those requirements. Nuclear engines are again being considered for Spirals 2 and 3. In response to this, Pratt and Whitney has built a Tri-Mode nuclear engine called the "TRITON".
5) The private sector has been gearing up on non-shuttle launches for the past 8 years or so. This has made the Delta II one of the most popular launch vehicles while the Shuttle finds less and less work.
6) SpaceX is poised to tremendously reduce costs through small but sensible rocket designs. They have been working on these rockets for quite a few years now. The Falcon I launches in August, and the Falcon V launches in the second quarter of 2006.
7) Bigelow took over NASA's research into inflatable space stations, and has managed to produce designs that have NASA very interested. He plans to license the technology back to NASA as well as launch his own stations on the Falcon V.
There's a lot more going on, but I don't have space to fill you in on all of it. Let's just say that your info is probably about a decade old, and that it has never been a more interesting time to be in aerospace. I highly recommend that you use Google and Wikipedia to start poking around.