Hemmingway y'know... You have to read up on stuff like that so you can make wierd references and quote Poe in your source comments. (At least IMHO that's half the fun of commenting the code. (Actually it's all the/fun/ but it's really good for when you read someone's code as well, a laugh is always good when you are trying to figure it out.))
When your computers talk to each other they use a LAN. PAN are for keyboards, mice, printers and that sort of things.
The idea is that you should be able to take your palmtop computer and put it close to a mobile phone, keyboard and printer. Select "connect" (With appropriate security.). Then use the keyboard to download somehting and print it. You could do this today with USB, the idea is to have it act seamlessly with wireless tech.
Compared to LAN's you could say that a LAN is for moving a lot of data (1Mbps +) and a PAN is for doing "magical" things with your equipment.
Because whay you get in the package. IT's not only an OS with Notepad. On the DVD you get basically all the software you'll need. That's the point.
If MS delivered XP with Office, Photoshop, and a bunch of other "big apps" then noone would complain. (Besides Adobe.) That's what's on the DVD, check the above mentioned "allpackages" link for more specific info.
Now, Katz tells us that lots of different info from lots of different sources is actually "bad", confusing, and impacts negatively on the "truth".
No, he's pointing out that the same information is only reharshed again and again. So there is little point in watching it. (At least more than once.) And that the information is generally given out before it's checked at all.
Yes, it's the same thing if you only read the headlines. If you read some of the comments as well the truth (or some variant of it) is generally found pretty quickly. That is the real problem with TV and paper media... They never do any critizising of their own work. You never get to see the "other side" it's just the same 30 minute soundbites repeated over and over.
If instead they showed a few documentaries about/why/ things happened then it could be worth watching. Personally I scan papers more or less every day. And the TV news every other day, or so. That's generally the only you need. (IMHO) The rest is generally only bloat anyways.
I've experienced that too. (I didn't try restarting Moz though.) I run Moz 0.95, I just switched from 0.9 and before that I never had any problems.
I was even doing the "right thing" and filling in a bugreport at SourceForge. Naturally it required that I had a SF login to post the bug. And it told me that AFTER I had filled the bug out. An-noy-ing!
Or you make it a server. No use of monitor/keyboard then. (Preferably run a sshd on it as well.)
You won't be playing Quake on it like this though. OTOH I have a tough time understanding why you'd want multiple game/workstations and only one screen.
As long as you don't run intense programs X works well as well.
I'm not going to defend it, rather say what I like about Neuromancer and the later book in the series. (If you want to find out #2 you'll just have to read the other 5 books.)
First I found the style of writing fascinating. You spend the first part of the book confused from different plots that don't seem to be related. (Which most likely is a way of describing the chaotic life of the Sprawl.) As the story progress more order can be found amid the chaos. That is what I like about the series.
And pershaps the ideas are not that new anylonger, they have been copied for almost 2 decades by now, so why should they be?
Secondly a lot of really good Sci-Fi literature is rather poor, in a strictly literary meaning. For instance "A brave new world" is IMHO a very poor book, but the ideas and setting is the important part. The plot is extremely silly and unimaginative, that doesn't matter however. We are basically given a tour of Mr Huxley's vision, and at least I find it a lot more credible than 1984. (Although 1984 is a much better book, from a literary pow.)
Pair programming works just fine, I know that from personal experience. However it does require that you can get along with your partner. And that at some point one say "I'll do this then" instead of discussing what and how to do endlessly. Naturally this is a skill, it's not the same as coding on your own. But it is not impossible.
However if you cram a room full of people. Varying from coders, managers, psychologists to someone who just figuer they'd get some donuts;/then/ you won't be able to produce any code.
The first (pair programming) is a team, not a committe.
Motorola has some models like that. The Accompli 008 for instance. Doesn't seem to appear on the US site though. Here it is on the UK site.
Re:Microsoft turned their backs on...
on
J#
·
· Score: 1
Bollox!
The entire point of Java is to be platform independent. If you start adding hooks for a specific OS then the point is lost. After all, if that was "allowed" why didn't Sun add a lot of good stuff for Solaris/Sparc users?
RAM disks have been available for PC for a looooong time as well. Besides the fact that you can compile support into the kernel for Linux there are even RAM disk loaders for DOS. Yes the idea is/that/ old.
And someone thought of the idea of using RAM disks for Q3 when the demo was released, 80Mb was rather easy to make room for in a large system. Which gave you several seconds at the start of the level to collect weapons/powerups before the slower hd people could join.
With 1Gb RAM system becoming possible I recon it's time to use RAM to simulate a CD for the same effect in any game.
And just as an aside. Although the concept of RAM disks is an old one it's not until recently that memory has become so dirt cheap that you can actually use it like this.
If the fact that you sold 100 000 units is central to the presentation then make it a slide. I would bet that if you do make a slide then many more will remember the message afterwards. (A lot of the stuff I have seen on slides have however not been worthy of beeing remembered though.)
A lot of people would need a lesson in how to use slides. (A good general rule that I learned in a course about presentation technique is that the information content of a speech is inversely proportional to the amount of animated gimmicks in the slides.)
They don't need big chips the way they work today. But tomorrow they might need more power.
For instance, we just got a new microwave oven where I live. It has a lot of neat features like frying capabilities, steaming vegetables etc. but it's a pain to use the because you need to look it up in manual and then use the features. (For instence using the automatic thaw and fry function for french fries means you need to know to use the "Crisp 2" mode. Not hard when you know, but it's not something you could figure out without reading the manual.)
If instead this oven had a better controlling chip it could have an menu as well. That would increase the usability of the device by a lot. (It already has a rather good LCD display.)
The same goes for TV's, VCR etc. Just compare the menues on a typical VCR/TV with those on a TiVo. Quite apparently you can make a better product if you have more power to back it.
The people that used to be on BBS's are/not/ the same that today use Napster et al. Instead FTP's and IRC are the main conduits of the "professionals". Naturally these are not as easy to use (and to get into) as all-in-one P2P software so it's not likely that the current P2P crowd are likely to switch to.
OTOH I doubt that people used to turning on a program and searching are going to take the time to search for music on several independent BBS's. It's more work, and it's a lot of work if you want access to the "good stuff".
Agreed, it's just a pity that not more places use it. (I've only used it on their demo file, but it does work. The more people that joined the faster it got.)
Just FYI Swarmcast is developed by the OpenCola guys mentioned above. So it is in fact the same thing.
The basic idea is to make it possible to share the file between the downloading clients. That is, client A begins a download from server S. This is done in a normal fasion. After a while client B joins in. Server S then begins to transmit to B and also tell B about the existance of A and vice versa. Now A sends parts of it's download to B and B sends to A. Both still get data from S. This continues in the same fasion as more clients join the "mesh".
The smart part is that the file is first coded using a FCC (forward correcting code) algorithm. (Also used when communicating with satellites.) Basically you can think of it as RAID for packets. The packets are coded redundanty so you don't need all of the coded ones. (There are more/coded/ packages than original ones, it doesn't comress the file.) This means that none of the involved computers need to do smart things like track what has been sent/received. They just fire away, odds are that the receiver can use the package in some way.
The same algorithm (FCC) can be used as is for multi-casting. (And the site contains links to papers describing this.)
I mean come on. His fanatic opposition to the GPL should be evidence enough. I have never seen anyone use "viral" so many times in one article regarding licensing as the ones Mr Glass write. (OSOpinion has a few.)
And just browsing thru the beginning this one makes me conclude that it is his general anti-GPL troll but with the following rules applied:
s/GPL/OAL/
s/programmer/artist/
s/program/music/
And it's getting seriously old. So Mr Glass, if you are reading this. Why don't you try to counter some of the arguments people have given against your articles instead of clamping your hands firmly over your ears while repeating "four legs good, two legs bad"?
Just FYI the original Quake, and 2 and 3 as well I think, are ANSI C. Not C++. But the general idea is the same though I guess. I personally also think it's easier to code when I have a mental image of how everything is hooked up together. GUI's are generally good for this.
However, I have found that it's often easier to jot diagrams like this down by hand. None of the tools I've used have been good enough to give me the views I wanted and at the same time stayed out of the way when I wanted to get some work done.
Personally I don't like programs like Visual neither. That is, when you are more or less dependent on the GUI to get any work done. That annoys me immensely.
OTOH most of the "authorized by GW" computer versions of their table top versions have pretty much sucked.
Granted however that there was a squad FPS version of 40k which was supposed to be pretty good.
The Bloodbowl game sucked, the Epic game was really-really tragic. The Warhammer Fantasy was so-so, but I only think that hardcore fans bothered with completing it.
It's tragic really, because at least I would love to see a/good/ computer version of Epic and Bloodbowl. (Perhaps Necromunda and 40k as well.)
Even if Blizzard was inspired by Warhammer in [war|star]craft they did manage to do one thing right. They did good computer versions of them. (I know that GW didn't do the computer versions of the above mentioned games.)
Oh please, DOS is hardly an OS by todays standards. No multitasking, no memory protection. Technically it's an OS, just like a T Ford technically is a car.
And yes, there are a lot of free (beer) RTOS's, they are hardly easy to develop though. If OS's were easy to develop would it have taken the Open Source community so long to make GNU/Linux and the surrounding software (GNOME,KDE, window manageers etc.) this long to be developed.
Now the big benefit of programming is that it's rather cheap and easy for a layman to do it on their freetime. It's not like you're likely to do some molecular biology research in the basement.
If more areas had developed in the same way as Open Source then the world would be a much better place for a lot of people.
Bluetooth and 802.11 may be too close to coexist peacefully. I know nothing about the technologies here, but what's to stop the 802.11 people from making a low-power version
Do you want all of your periferals to have IP adresses? 802.11 is not designed for the same area as BT. IEEE does have another standard however, 802.15, which IS in direct "conflict" with BT.
The biggest differences between BT and 802.11b is that BT supports roaming. You don't have much use of that in a more or less permament network at home though.
Slashdot Mirror
Hemmingway y'know... You have to read up on stuff like that so you can make wierd references and quote Poe in your source comments. (At least IMHO that's half the fun of commenting the code. (Actually it's all the /fun/ but it's really good for when you read someone's code as well, a laugh is always good when you are trying to figure it out.))
No a LAN is not the same thing as a PAN.
When your computers talk to each other they use a LAN. PAN are for keyboards, mice, printers and that sort of things.
The idea is that you should be able to take your palmtop computer and put it close to a mobile phone, keyboard and printer. Select "connect" (With appropriate security.). Then use the keyboard to download somehting and print it. You could do this today with USB, the idea is to have it act seamlessly with wireless tech.
Compared to LAN's you could say that a LAN is for moving a lot of data (1Mbps +) and a PAN is for doing "magical" things with your equipment.
Because whay you get in the package. IT's not only an OS with Notepad. On the DVD you get basically all the software you'll need. That's the point.
If MS delivered XP with Office, Photoshop, and a bunch of other "big apps" then noone would complain. (Besides Adobe.) That's what's on the DVD, check the above mentioned "allpackages" link for more specific info.
No, he's pointing out that the same information is only reharshed again and again. So there is little point in watching it. (At least more than once.) And that the information is generally given out before it's checked at all.
Yes, it's the same thing if you only read the headlines. If you read some of the comments as well the truth (or some variant of it) is generally found pretty quickly. That is the real problem with TV and paper media... They never do any critizising of their own work. You never get to see the "other side" it's just the same 30 minute soundbites repeated over and over.
/why/ things happened then it could be worth watching. Personally I scan papers more or less every day. And the TV news every other day, or so. That's generally the only you need. (IMHO) The rest is generally only bloat anyways.
If instead they showed a few documentaries about
I've experienced that too. (I didn't try restarting Moz though.) I run Moz 0.95, I just switched from 0.9 and before that I never had any problems.
I was even doing the "right thing" and filling in a bugreport at SourceForge. Naturally it required that I had a SF login to post the bug. And it told me that AFTER I had filled the bug out. An-noy-ing!
Or you make it a server. No use of monitor/keyboard then. (Preferably run a sshd on it as well.)
You won't be playing Quake on it like this though. OTOH I have a tough time understanding why you'd want multiple game/workstations and only one screen.
As long as you don't run intense programs X works well as well.
I'm not going to defend it, rather say what I like about Neuromancer and the later book in the series. (If you want to find out #2 you'll just have to read the other 5 books.)
First I found the style of writing fascinating. You spend the first part of the book confused from different plots that don't seem to be related. (Which most likely is a way of describing the chaotic life of the Sprawl.) As the story progress more order can be found amid the chaos. That is what I like about the series.
And pershaps the ideas are not that new anylonger, they have been copied for almost 2 decades by now, so why should they be?
Secondly a lot of really good Sci-Fi literature is rather poor, in a strictly literary meaning. For instance "A brave new world" is IMHO a very poor book, but the ideas and setting is the important part. The plot is extremely silly and unimaginative, that doesn't matter however. We are basically given a tour of Mr Huxley's vision, and at least I find it a lot more credible than 1984. (Although 1984 is a much better book, from a literary pow.)
Pair programming works just fine, I know that from personal experience. However it does require that you can get along with your partner. And that at some point one say "I'll do this then" instead of discussing what and how to do endlessly. Naturally this is a skill, it's not the same as coding on your own. But it is not impossible.
/then/ you won't be able to produce any code.
However if you cram a room full of people. Varying from coders, managers, psychologists to someone who just figuer they'd get some donuts;
The first (pair programming) is a team, not a committe.
Motorola has some models like that. The Accompli 008 for instance. Doesn't seem to appear on the US site though. Here it is on the UK site.
Bollox!
The entire point of Java is to be platform independent. If you start adding hooks for a specific OS then the point is lost. After all, if that was "allowed" why didn't Sun add a lot of good stuff for Solaris/Sparc users?
RAM disks have been available for PC for a looooong time as well. Besides the fact that you can compile support into the kernel for Linux there are even RAM disk loaders for DOS. Yes the idea is /that/ old.
And someone thought of the idea of using RAM disks for Q3 when the demo was released, 80Mb was rather easy to make room for in a large system. Which gave you several seconds at the start of the level to collect weapons/powerups before the slower hd people could join.
With 1Gb RAM system becoming possible I recon it's time to use RAM to simulate a CD for the same effect in any game.
And just as an aside. Although the concept of RAM disks is an old one it's not until recently that memory has become so dirt cheap that you can actually use it like this.
Not sure if I agree with that.
If the fact that you sold 100 000 units is central to the presentation then make it a slide. I would bet that if you do make a slide then many more will remember the message afterwards. (A lot of the stuff I have seen on slides have however not been worthy of beeing remembered though.)
A lot of people would need a lesson in how to use slides. (A good general rule that I learned in a course about presentation technique is that the information content of a speech is inversely proportional to the amount of animated gimmicks in the slides.)
They don't need big chips the way they work today. But tomorrow they might need more power.
For instance, we just got a new microwave oven where I live. It has a lot of neat features like frying capabilities, steaming vegetables etc. but it's a pain to use the because you need to look it up in manual and then use the features. (For instence using the automatic thaw and fry function for french fries means you need to know to use the "Crisp 2" mode. Not hard when you know, but it's not something you could figure out without reading the manual.)
If instead this oven had a better controlling chip it could have an menu as well. That would increase the usability of the device by a lot. (It already has a rather good LCD display.)
The same goes for TV's, VCR etc. Just compare the menues on a typical VCR/TV with those on a TiVo. Quite apparently you can make a better product if you have more power to back it.
Insightful? Eh?
/not/ the same that today use Napster et al. Instead FTP's and IRC are the main conduits of the "professionals". Naturally these are not as easy to use (and to get into) as all-in-one P2P software so it's not likely that the current P2P crowd are likely to switch to.
The people that used to be on BBS's are
OTOH I doubt that people used to turning on a program and searching are going to take the time to search for music on several independent BBS's. It's more work, and it's a lot of work if you want access to the "good stuff".
It would be if the attachment just happened to be on your computer one day. But if a friend gives you a bottle wouldn't you drink from it?
;-)
A "what the hell is this?" might be appropriate first though, particularly if (s)he doesn't drink from it first.
Agreed, it's just a pity that not more places use it. (I've only used it on their demo file, but it does work. The more people that joined the faster it got.)
/coded/ packages than original ones, it doesn't comress the file.) This means that none of the involved computers need to do smart things like track what has been sent/received. They just fire away, odds are that the receiver can use the package in some way.
Just FYI Swarmcast is developed by the OpenCola guys mentioned above. So it is in fact the same thing.
The basic idea is to make it possible to share the file between the downloading clients. That is, client A begins a download from server S. This is done in a normal fasion. After a while client B joins in. Server S then begins to transmit to B and also tell B about the existance of A and vice versa. Now A sends parts of it's download to B and B sends to A. Both still get data from S. This continues in the same fasion as more clients join the "mesh".
The smart part is that the file is first coded using a FCC (forward correcting code) algorithm. (Also used when communicating with satellites.) Basically you can think of it as RAID for packets. The packets are coded redundanty so you don't need all of the coded ones. (There are more
The same algorithm (FCC) can be used as is for multi-casting. (And the site contains links to papers describing this.)
I mean come on. His fanatic opposition to the GPL should be evidence enough. I have never seen anyone use "viral" so many times in one article regarding licensing as the ones Mr Glass write. (OSOpinion has a few.)
And just browsing thru the beginning this one makes me conclude that it is his general anti-GPL troll but with the following rules applied:
s/GPL/OAL/
s/programmer/artist/
s/program/music/
And it's getting seriously old. So Mr Glass, if you are reading this. Why don't you try to counter some of the arguments people have given against your articles instead of clamping your hands firmly over your ears while repeating "four legs good, two legs bad"?
Just FYI the original Quake, and 2 and 3 as well I think, are ANSI C. Not C++. But the general idea is the same though I guess. I personally also think it's easier to code when I have a mental image of how everything is hooked up together. GUI's are generally good for this.
However, I have found that it's often easier to jot diagrams like this down by hand. None of the tools I've used have been good enough to give me the views I wanted and at the same time stayed out of the way when I wanted to get some work done.
Personally I don't like programs like Visual neither. That is, when you are more or less dependent on the GUI to get any work done. That annoys me immensely.
Seems to me that:
Protoss == Eldar
Zerg == Genestealers (What ever that army type is called, it was a long time since I played Epic/40k.)
And Humans are naturally Imperial Guards / Space Marienes.
OTOH most of the "authorized by GW" computer versions of their table top versions have pretty much sucked.
/good/ computer version of Epic and Bloodbowl. (Perhaps Necromunda and 40k as well.)
Granted however that there was a squad FPS version of 40k which was supposed to be pretty good.
The Bloodbowl game sucked, the Epic game was really-really tragic. The Warhammer Fantasy was so-so, but I only think that hardcore fans bothered with completing it.
It's tragic really, because at least I would love to see a
Even if Blizzard was inspired by Warhammer in [war|star]craft they did manage to do one thing right. They did good computer versions of them. (I know that GW didn't do the computer versions of the above mentioned games.)
Getting to be too sue happy? As in, has not been too sue happy before? ;-)
I always figured sueing was a national sport in the US. Just after baseball and basketball in popularity.
Oh please, DOS is hardly an OS by todays standards. No multitasking, no memory protection. Technically it's an OS, just like a T Ford technically is a car.
And yes, there are a lot of free (beer) RTOS's, they are hardly easy to develop though. If OS's were easy to develop would it have taken the Open Source community so long to make GNU/Linux and the surrounding software (GNOME,KDE, window manageers etc.) this long to be developed.
Now the big benefit of programming is that it's rather cheap and easy for a layman to do it on their freetime. It's not like you're likely to do some molecular biology research in the basement.
If more areas had developed in the same way as Open Source then the world would be a much better place for a lot of people.
Do you want all of your periferals to have IP adresses? 802.11 is not designed for the same area as BT. IEEE does have another standard however, 802.15, which IS in direct "conflict" with BT.
The biggest differences between BT and 802.11b is that BT supports roaming. You don't have much use of that in a more or less permament network at home though.