On my computer, I can controll voltage, FSB, multiplier, fan speed, and so on from Windows, and don't even have to reboot to change those settings. I think this is a result of the open competition between manufacturers, and as longa s Mac's are the toy of a single company, they will always lack this aspect of providing what the customers REALLY want or need, but only what the company is willing to provide.
No, thats because you can buy a variety of different processors to put in that motherboard, so you need to be able to adjust these settings. The MacMini ships as a while unit so these settings aren't needed.
While I won't judge Apple for refusing to ship a 3-button mouse, I will say it's the one thing that keeps me from buying one of their laptops. When I'm using X applications, the PRIMARY buffer is my best friend. Copying text via simple selection and pasting just by clicking the middle mouse button does actually help me work faster.
Seriously, the one-button mouse has got to be one of the stupidest 'features' I've ever seen. Frankly, if people get 'confused' by a two or three button mice, then they shouldn't be using a computer in the first place.
Welcome to the real world. Some otherwise productive (particularly older) people have trouble with two button mice. Deal with it.
It's all fine and dandy if you buy a tower Apple, but what if you bought a Powerbook? A lot of the time you won't have a mouse handy, and you're stuck with that stupid one button trackpad.
Got one. I love it, and I'm generally of the school that wants as many buttons as possible. If I want more buttons I just hold down control/Option/Command or Shift. All the modifiers I could want. Try leaving your bedroom sometime and meeting people in the real world. Oh yeah, and try using a mac for more than five minutes at a time.
The silly nonsense arguments people make saying there are benefits to using a one-button mouse instead of a two-button. It's obviously a style/coolness thing ($80 for a damn mouse!) and please don't say otherwise.
For someone who's technically skilled? I don't see any major benefit. If you've got to support a library/school/secretarial pool full of middle aged women who are convinced the computer is some sort of demon of randomness that hates them? Then I'm seeing some advantages. Control-Click seems to stick better than Right-Click for some reason.
namely when the mouse abbuts the mouse chord and deosn't let the user click the button.
This is annoying as all hell. Generally happens to me about once a day. Could easily be fixed by making the mouse drop straight down for the last little bit in front instead of curving under.
Certain people also get confused by quantum physics. Are we to abandon that now? Let's stop catering to infant minds.
I've got Control/Option/Command/Shift click. Chording these for even more options. You've just got two to four buttons to click. Obviously my penis is far larger than yours.
Besides, we all know the people with the _really_ large penises use the Command Line. What kinda small-dicked panzy are you using a GUI anyway?
In short, I use a multi-button mouse with a Mac all the time. It works just fine. The only thing I've found that is significantly inhibited by the single button mouse is gaming where I'm already using my left hand on the keyboard. For everything else, the single button is fine and for those of us who have to live in the real world and support otherwise productive people who aren't particularly computer literate, more blessing.
(I've never been modded Flamebait before...wonder what its like?)
If we'd waited for standardization for 56k modems, we'd have waited an extra three years. Instead we had x2 and k56 flex for a little while. Was that a bad thing? No, not really. It took the pressure off the final v.90 standard, so they could take the time and get it right.
The impact of that was mitigated by the fact that one end of the connection you had an ISP. Someone who could afford to support both standards. Things are a bit different on a consumer and smaller-organization basis. I can only imagine the PITA I would have to endure if I had to deal with a significant number of students walking up with 802.11a cards because they just knew it was a wireless card.
If you want to play games, you don't want a Mac anyway. If you want to do real video editing or 3D modeling, you don't want a Mac mini. The Radeon 9200 does exactly what 99% of Mini users need it to do. A faster card would pump up the cost and produce more heat and, consequently, noise.
Battlefield 1942 plays beautifully on my 9200 toting powerbook G4.
The people in the spaceship are watching the broadcast from Earth, and the people on Earth are watching the broadcast from the spaceship.
As the Spaceship's speed approaches that of light, the people on earth will see that time has almost frozen on the spaceship.
However, for the people on the spaceship it will look like 100s or 1000s of years are going by in a matter of seconds on earth.
This is why pseudo-time travel (one way into the future) is possible with near-light speed travel.
Nope.:) If that were the case, things wouldn't be relative. The Earth would be definitely stationary and the ship would be definitely moving. The two frames of reference would not be equal.
In your example, the people on the SpaceShip and the people on Earth would both see each other moving slowly. The situation is totally symmetric - Both sides see the other moving slowly, there is no preferred frame of reference allowing you to say "This person is moving" and "This person is stationary". It's only when the spaceship accelerates back in the direction of Earth (and only during that acceleration) that the symmetry is broken and time on Earth seems to "Speed up" from the POV of the space ship crew.
This is also the point at which we become able to differentiate between frames of reference. While there is no way the differentiate between "Stationary" and "In motion" differeniating between "Accelerated" and "Non-Accelerated" is a simple matter of which object is having a force exerted on it.
As a reference, see the Wikipedia Entry on the Twins Paradox
Given this, I wonder how far light speed travel is off. To travel back in time you must accelerate to the speed of light, but what happens if you accelerate to 99.9% of the speed of light?
Light speed travel is no closer than it was before. Relativity allows for travel at speeds arbitrarily close to that of light, but not at. If you accelerate to 99.9999% of the speed of light you just get all of the normal relativistic effects, just to a more extreme degree. Time slows down (you see it as time slowing in the rest of the universe, they see it as time slowing for you.) Distances get shorter. Your mass (or from your POV, the mass of the rest of the universe) gets higher. Nothing to see here.
Does this apply to kiddie porn as well? Dogs and horses?
Kiddie porn by definition involves people who are not consenting adults. The suppressing recordings of such acts is protecting the privacy of an already violated child from further injury.
The Dog and Horse arguments generally stem from something along the lines of "Animal Cruelty" although I can't imagine most of the animals mind that much.
Very little of what you encounter in math textbooks rises to the level of mathematical law. Furthermore, a conjecture is just that. Someone's conjecture. Please. Split hairs with someone else.
Not sure what textbooks you're using - I've got a Bachelor's in Mathematics and pretty much every book I used featured rigorous proofs of the theorems presented which in turn were the basis of what was taught. This is the fundamental difference between math and science - In science, you follow the scientific method until your results match your theory. In Math things are rigorously proven from a small set of axioms, and so long as the axioms are true then the derived conclusions are as well. Because Math is pure logic sort of endevour you can prove things absolutely and completely. Mistakes are occasionally made, but a correct proof is correct, period. This is a long way from hair splitting.
Funny. I don't ever recall seeing any such stickers on any of my mathematics text books when I majored in it back in college (I had/have a lot of them) and they are almost nothing but theories.
Actually, Math text books would tend to be the books with by far the fewest theories (where they tend to be called conjectures). Mathematics distinguishes itself from science by being a formal system of logic derived from a few basic premises. Where as in science you merely accumlate enough evidence to get most of the people in the field to go along with you, in Math you actually prove things..
Yeah, I have one! It's a Logitech cordless keyboard. Maybe you've heard of them...
Wireless keyboards are a special case. They make up a minority of USB Keyboards, and to put it in the context of the grandparent, Apple's wireless keyboards (bluetooth) don't have USB ports either.
Yeah...at $499+ each, I was thinking this would be a perfect vehicle to cluster a few of these things together. Is there anyway of doing this withing OSX, or would you need to reformat them all to Linux?
Cough..Virginia Tech...Cough...
Seriously though, OSX has some great clustering features. http://www.apple.com/acg/xgrid/
Or spend the money for an Apple Keyboard. Why an Apple Keyboard? Chances are your current USB keyboard doesn't have USB pass-thru, and you'll have both USB ports tied up with keyboard and mouse. Oops!!
You have a USB keyboard that doesn't support pass-through? Wow. Where do you get your crap components? I've got a couple users with microsoft-style ergonomic keyboards they paid all of about $15.00 for and they've got two more USB ports on the board.
I've noticed adaware often does this. It says there are 300 infections, but only 3 of them are program executables and only 1 is running. Many of them are cookies, so I suppose those could count individually, but seperate dlls for the 3 programs it found should not be counted as seperate infections.
Usually they do show what each file belongs to as well, so you can see roughly how many products they're removing. The number of files removed _is_ relavent however - many spyware programs tend to make multiple copies of themselves that'll happily restore each other when one is removed.
...but one can only hope that as we gradually update our (america's) power infrastructure, things like this will be added. However, one wonders how many regional power outages we will need before we do this... but until we do begin a massive overhaul of the grid, something like this will only be an added benefit of such an overhaul.
Why bother? If you're upgrading the cable anyway, why not just run some fiber along side? You'll get better performance without radio-crushing interference.
Weird -- I do support for ~400 or so Macs on a college campus, and I've never seen that problem. I wonder what's going on.
*shrug*. I've encountered the problem fairly frequently. Usually it's just a problem if a slow down in Office (Communicated as "My computer is slow...") but in the cases where I've had to remove plists it's been crashing when attempting to use certain functions. Also, it managed to corrupt its lookup table for fonts once in such a manner that you would get a font two up the list from the one it actually chose..that was kinda fun to figure out..
I have been quite impressed with Word on OSX, and indeed the rest of the available Office suite. I would prefer to use OpenOffice, but I feel it has a little longer to mature on OSX
Office on Mac is Ok. For the most part it behaves decently (for office anyway. I tend to thing that lots of its UI features are fairly braindamaged) except that every so often it seems to have some sort of fit of suck where it decides that it's either going to run very slowly, or it's going to do weird shit like not allow certain tool bars, or just crash constantly. In these instances you generally have to track down all of the office plists and the microsoft user data and delete them. After which it'll run fine again. I currently herd around 150 macs, and this sort of failure is probably my most frequent Mac problem.
Slashdot Mirror
On my computer, I can controll voltage, FSB, multiplier, fan speed, and so on from Windows, and don't even have to reboot to change those settings. I think this is a result of the open competition between manufacturers, and as longa s Mac's are the toy of a single company, they will always lack this aspect of providing what the customers REALLY want or need, but only what the company is willing to provide.
No, thats because you can buy a variety of different processors to put in that motherboard, so you need to be able to adjust these settings. The MacMini ships as a while unit so these settings aren't needed.
Option Click.
Welcome to the real world. Some otherwise productive (particularly older) people have trouble with two button mice. Deal with it.
It's all fine and dandy if you buy a tower Apple, but what if you bought a Powerbook? A lot of the time you won't have a mouse handy, and you're stuck with that stupid one button trackpad.
Got one. I love it, and I'm generally of the school that wants as many buttons as possible. If I want more buttons I just hold down control/Option/Command or Shift. All the modifiers I could want. Try leaving your bedroom sometime and meeting people in the real world. Oh yeah, and try using a mac for more than five minutes at a time.
The silly nonsense arguments people make saying there are benefits to using a one-button mouse instead of a two-button. It's obviously a style/coolness thing ($80 for a damn mouse!) and please don't say otherwise.
For someone who's technically skilled? I don't see any major benefit. If you've got to support a library/school/secretarial pool full of middle aged women who are convinced the computer is some sort of demon of randomness that hates them? Then I'm seeing some advantages. Control-Click seems to stick better than Right-Click for some reason.
This is annoying as all hell. Generally happens to me about once a day. Could easily be fixed by making the mouse drop straight down for the last little bit in front instead of curving under.
Certain people also get confused by quantum physics. Are we to abandon that now? Let's stop catering to infant minds.
I've got Control/Option/Command/Shift click. Chording these for even more options. You've just got two to four buttons to click. Obviously my penis is far larger than yours.
Besides, we all know the people with the _really_ large penises use the Command Line. What kinda small-dicked panzy are you using a GUI anyway?
In short, I use a multi-button mouse with a Mac all the time. It works just fine. The only thing I've found that is significantly inhibited by the single button mouse is gaming where I'm already using my left hand on the keyboard. For everything else, the single button is fine and for those of us who have to live in the real world and support otherwise productive people who aren't particularly computer literate, more blessing.
(I've never been modded Flamebait before...wonder what its like?)
And costs a lot less. My point is, if you're like me and shop for your games off the bargain rack, the MacMini will do just fine.
It just suggests that since it doesn't seem to be hurting anyone, maybe is should be.
The power book isn't exactly shiny and new either.
If we'd waited for standardization for 56k modems, we'd have waited an extra three years. Instead we had x2 and k56 flex for a little while. Was that a bad thing? No, not really. It took the pressure off the final v.90 standard, so they could take the time and get it right.
The impact of that was mitigated by the fact that one end of the connection you had an ISP. Someone who could afford to support both standards. Things are a bit different on a consumer and smaller-organization basis. I can only imagine the PITA I would have to endure if I had to deal with a significant number of students walking up with 802.11a cards because they just knew it was a wireless card.
Battlefield 1942 plays beautifully on my 9200 toting powerbook G4.
IIRC MS patented boolean values a few months ago
The Onion is not a real news source.
As the Spaceship's speed approaches that of light, the people on earth will see that time has almost frozen on the spaceship.
However, for the people on the spaceship it will look like 100s or 1000s of years are going by in a matter of seconds on earth.
This is why pseudo-time travel (one way into the future) is possible with near-light speed travel.
Nope. :) If that were the case, things wouldn't be relative. The Earth would be definitely stationary and the ship would be definitely moving. The two frames of reference would not be equal.
In your example, the people on the SpaceShip and the people on Earth would both see each other moving slowly. The situation is totally symmetric - Both sides see the other moving slowly, there is no preferred frame of reference allowing you to say "This person is moving" and "This person is stationary". It's only when the spaceship accelerates back in the direction of Earth (and only during that acceleration) that the symmetry is broken and time on Earth seems to "Speed up" from the POV of the space ship crew.
This is also the point at which we become able to differentiate between frames of reference. While there is no way the differentiate between "Stationary" and "In motion" differeniating between "Accelerated" and "Non-Accelerated" is a simple matter of which object is having a force exerted on it.
As a reference, see the Wikipedia Entry on the Twins Paradox
Given this, I wonder how far light speed travel is off. To travel back in time you must accelerate to the speed of light, but what happens if you accelerate to 99.9% of the speed of light?
Light speed travel is no closer than it was before. Relativity allows for travel at speeds arbitrarily close to that of light, but not at. If you accelerate to 99.9999% of the speed of light you just get all of the normal relativistic effects, just to a more extreme degree. Time slows down (you see it as time slowing in the rest of the universe, they see it as time slowing for you.) Distances get shorter. Your mass (or from your POV, the mass of the rest of the universe) gets higher. Nothing to see here.
Kiddie porn by definition involves people who are not consenting adults. The suppressing recordings of such acts is protecting the privacy of an already violated child from further injury.
The Dog and Horse arguments generally stem from something along the lines of "Animal Cruelty" although I can't imagine most of the animals mind that much.
Not sure what textbooks you're using - I've got a Bachelor's in Mathematics and pretty much every book I used featured rigorous proofs of the theorems presented which in turn were the basis of what was taught. This is the fundamental difference between math and science - In science, you follow the scientific method until your results match your theory. In Math things are rigorously proven from a small set of axioms, and so long as the axioms are true then the derived conclusions are as well. Because Math is pure logic sort of endevour you can prove things absolutely and completely. Mistakes are occasionally made, but a correct proof is correct, period. This is a long way from hair splitting.
Actually, Math text books would tend to be the books with by far the fewest theories (where they tend to be called conjectures). Mathematics distinguishes itself from science by being a formal system of logic derived from a few basic premises. Where as in science you merely accumlate enough evidence to get most of the people in the field to go along with you, in Math you actually prove things..
Wireless keyboards are a special case. They make up a minority of USB Keyboards, and to put it in the context of the grandparent, Apple's wireless keyboards (bluetooth) don't have USB ports either.
Cough..Virginia Tech...Cough...
Seriously though, OSX has some great clustering features. http://www.apple.com/acg/xgrid/
You have a USB keyboard that doesn't support pass-through? Wow. Where do you get your crap components? I've got a couple users with microsoft-style ergonomic keyboards they paid all of about $15.00 for and they've got two more USB ports on the board.
I've noticed adaware often does this. It says there are 300 infections, but only 3 of them are program executables and only 1 is running. Many of them are cookies, so I suppose those could count individually, but seperate dlls for the 3 programs it found should not be counted as seperate infections.
Usually they do show what each file belongs to as well, so you can see roughly how many products they're removing. The number of files removed _is_ relavent however - many spyware programs tend to make multiple copies of themselves that'll happily restore each other when one is removed.
Welcome to 2005. Go look at a G5 Macintosh, then get back to us on how behind the times Apple is.
Why bother? If you're upgrading the cable anyway, why not just run some fiber along side? You'll get better performance without radio-crushing interference.
Weird -- I do support for ~400 or so Macs on a college campus, and I've never seen that problem. I wonder what's going on.
*shrug*. I've encountered the problem fairly frequently. Usually it's just a problem if a slow down in Office (Communicated as "My computer is slow...") but in the cases where I've had to remove plists it's been crashing when attempting to use certain functions. Also, it managed to corrupt its lookup table for fonts once in such a manner that you would get a font two up the list from the one it actually chose..that was kinda fun to figure out..
Office on Mac is Ok. For the most part it behaves decently (for office anyway. I tend to thing that lots of its UI features are fairly braindamaged) except that every so often it seems to have some sort of fit of suck where it decides that it's either going to run very slowly, or it's going to do weird shit like not allow certain tool bars, or just crash constantly. In these instances you generally have to track down all of the office plists and the microsoft user data and delete them. After which it'll run fine again. I currently herd around 150 macs, and this sort of failure is probably my most frequent Mac problem.