Moller has never actually had anything for sale.
To be more correct, Moller has never had a flying vehicle for sale. In fact, he has been quite successful at selling his SuperTrapp mufflers for motorcycles. The muffler actually is a good design because it is tunable to the bikes power curve. (Yes, I have one on my bike.)
As for flying anything, I still think he's more a quack than anything else. His designs are very inefficient as flying machines go. And he needs to take a few of his SuperTrapps and attach them because his rotary engines are very loud. Oh, did I also mention how loud his engines are.
BTW, His muffler sales had actually supported his Skycar development efforts, to the tune of ~$200 Million, until he sold the company several years ago!
Actually, that is incorrect. Microsoft is a great example of it. Being a monolopy changes the rules AFTER a company does what ever actions it took to get there. For example, I can bundle products together and it is perfectly legal to do so, except, if you are convicted of being a monolopy, in which case, the rules change and actions you did in the past... like "tying", become illegal retroactivly. (If Microsoft wern't ruled a monolopy, the "tying" would have been just considered a standard competitive business practice.)
Then save the file as HelloWorld.cs and drop out to a command prompt. Switch to the directory where you saved the file and type the following command.
c:\windows\microsoft.net\framework\v2.0.50727\csc HelloWorld.cs You can then run the program by typing in "HelloWorld" and pressing enter.
Works for me and I don't have anything on this computer... it's running Windows Vista right out of the box from HP.
Hey, that makes sense... no wait... no it doesn't. Buying the game from them is what feeds their monopoly - you know... gives them money to continue their practices. Also, you would have also had to buy the system to run it on, etc. Using a freely distributed codec and video doesn't give them anything, but gives you the ability to WATCH the video... for Free (as in beer.)
His comment was generic just like yours is. WE have had absolutly no reason to upgrade our system for the past decade. It's been working flawlessly since it was introduced and have not had the stability issues he is referring to as the reason to upgrade.
My original point is that as long as the system requriements don't change and the system is working, then there is absolutly no reason to upgrade. His comment was that "ANY COMPANY" should switch, period. I'm going to reiterate again that this is not necessary. We have had our computers running Win98 and our custom application for years with no problems, therefore no reason to change. We are just now thinking about upgrading the infrastructure which will require that we do upgrade those machines, but that is only because we forsee our requirements changing.
Given the lack of stability of Win9x, any company serious about getting their work done should have switched to a NT family OS years ago (assuming they wanted to stay with Windows).
Don't you think that if we found a stability problem with our application running on Win98 that we would have addressed it, oh, say a decade ago when we first deployed it? We're running these machines on a 24x7 basis with absolutly no stability problems. Those people who run into stability problems simply don't know how to write software correctly or debug applications completly. Now, hardware is a different matter. For us, when a machine fails, it's a simple matter of buying the cheapest Dell or HP available and using that. By the way, those of you talking about drivers... that's a non issue as well. Have you tried running Win98 on a modern machine? It runs just fine. All the standard I/O stuff is supported in Win98 like Serial, Parallel and even USB. We don't use anything else so drivers for them are irrelavant.
By the way, we are in the process of moving to a more modern system, but that isn't because the machines are "outdated" in any way, we're changing the bases for the reason of the software, so we are going to redevelop it. It's possible that a spin off of our work will remain on the old systems to support some customers on a contract basis.
Anyone running Windows 98 for a business critical system has a HUGE need to modernize. That should be the priority.
Why? Just becuase Microsoft doesn't support it anymore doesn't make it any less usable. That's just like having a computer for years and asking someone if they need to upgrade it because it's old. My answer is always, "have you changed what you are originally using it for? If so, is the software newer and does it require more horsepower than the machine can provide?" If you say no, then there is no reason to upgrade.
I've got several computers running that are still using Windows 98. They're doing their tasks perfectly. There's absolutly no reason to upgrade them or modernize them, they're doing excactly what they've been doing since the first day they went into use. I don't add software to them, I don't change what they are used for, and therefore, they don't need to be upgraded.
Also, if you decide that you do need to change your platform to utilize the new functionality of a deployment package like SMS, then I'd suggest using a new OS running your old Windows 98 based software in VirtualPC (it's free!) It's a great solution that keeps the base OS up to date with all the latest wizbang stuff, but still maintains the ability to run your old legacy applications.
Actually, Chrysler had a record player as an option in their cars back in the Fiftys. It was called the Highway Hi-Fi. It didn't use standard records but instead used a propriatery 16 2/3 RPM 7" format (read ARM anyone - that would be Analog Rights Managment.)
Later on, they realized that the custom format wouldn't work and opened up to the standard 45. The 1960 version could allow you to stack up to 12 records in it.
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
Ok... So I'm no typing these comments from my computer. It MUST have more ram in it than 512meg and it must have a DX10 based 128meg Video card in it, because otherwise it wouldn't be usful.
I CALL BULL SHIT!!! BECAUSE I AM USING THIS COMPTUER AS WE SPEAK. It runs just fine. I run Office 2007 on it... I run Visual Web Developer Express on it... I run C# Express (with Robotics Studio AND XNA Express) on it.
Let me be loud and clear, IT RUNS JUST FINE WITH 512Meg AND A 64 Meg VIDEO CARD.
Is that clear enough for you??? Stop arguing with me when you haven't checked the facts. Dell says what sells Dell products. The figures I took came right from Microsoft's web site and the performance came from ME using this computer every single day... not Dell or some other foolish source tring to sell their own wares.
Bill
Re:My predictions for Wndows over the next year...
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
1. To my knowledge, the minimum requirements on graphics are 128MB VRAM and Direct X 10 support... Obviously, you have not even looked at the requirements. If you're going to argue with someone, at least know the facts.
Here are the base requirements for Windows Vista:
1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor 512 MB of system memory 20 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space Support for DirectX 9 graphics and 32 MB of graphics memory DVD-ROM drive Audio Output Internet Access
I've been running it on my Toshiba Notebook for quite a while and it runs just fine. I didn't have any Driver Issues, No Memory Complaints, in fact, no issues at all. And my computer is about 4 years old. It has a 1.3mhz Celeron processor with 512 meg Ram and 64meg video card. Not a beast, but it runs at least as well as XP does. In some cases, better.
GSM came to the US in 1999. I am currently holding my first VoiceStream GSM "dual band" phone, which has a manufacture date of 02/01. (VoiceStream is now called T-Mobile, but used to be called Cellular One in some places and Western Wireless in others.)
Oh my God! What have I been doing for the past several years? Is the reception I receive in my plane just a figment of my imaginiation?
My EFIS uses a weather datalink that communicates over cell phones to get updated conditions, TFRs, etc. I also, regularly, fly over 2100 ft (both MSL and AGL) and it continues to work just fine.
One other proof of this is that all of the unfortunate flights on 9/11/2001 had callers calling loved ones, etc. I'm not a tin foil hat kind of person, but if GSM didn't work, do you think the Gov't made it all up???
That source site obviously hasn't really tried it.
The Space Station varies it's orbit depending on a lot of factors. It's in a continously decaying orbit (intented) which will always make it return to Earth at some point. It's orbit is occasionally boosted by the Space Shuttle or by the various Russian cargo ships. For example, right now, NASA is letting the orbit decay to around 205 miles so that the Shuttle can bring up the largest (and heaviest) component without having to push it all the way. With ISS in a lower orbit, less fuel is needed to get the heaviest components there. Later, a service module will boost it back to a higher orbit.
Well... nothing if you go to a Gas Station that has free compressed air. Some, however, are charging $.25 or $.50. Even at that, it's still cheap because it'll cost the station about $3 according to the article.
Question. If you own a TV in the UK but don't use it for viewing television programs (like hooking it up to an Atari 2600 full time,) do you still have to pay the license fee?
Given that the current kill ratio of the F-15 in real combat is 125:zip nada zero, that's a real testament to just how impressive the F-22 really is. That's right... no F-15 has ever been lost in ACM. Not in any country that has flown it.
However, the F-15 was getting long in the tooth and there are several aircraft out there that are more than capable of holding their own with it, it's just that they've never met in combat. (Most notable is Russia's Su-35/Su-37 series.)
The F-22 was designed to easily handle the F-15, so it should still have a significant advantage over anything else out there.
By the way, someone mentioned the EF 2000. Pretty plane, but not good enough. It's current K/R is 10:1. Not bad, but no F-15.
So, what are they going to do come May 1st? Smile and extend the date? Why should Microsoft do anything? So what if Linus et al sign on... what can they possibly do to coerse Microsoft into showing their guns before they're ready to fire?
Please explain what you mean by "different jet engines." There are several different types of jet engines, but both inventors produced similar centrifugal designs - a lay person would not be able to tell the difference between them. The Germans later decided to go with a different design called an Axial Flow engine, the Jumo 004, for their first production jet (Me-262) and the British stayed with the simpler and more robust centrifugal design for their first jet (the Gloster Meteor) which was powered by the de Havilland Halford H.1 (later to become the de Havilland Globlin.)
There are several examples of independent inventions where the product is nearly identical. Sir Frank Whittle (UK) and Hans von Ohain (Germany) both invented jet engines on their own. Neither one knew of the other's efforts, yet, both are very similar in what they do and how they do it.
Slashdot Mirror
To be more correct, Moller has never had a flying vehicle for sale. In fact, he has been quite successful at selling his SuperTrapp mufflers for motorcycles. The muffler actually is a good design because it is tunable to the bikes power curve. (Yes, I have one on my bike.)
As for flying anything, I still think he's more a quack than anything else. His designs are very inefficient as flying machines go. And he needs to take a few of his SuperTrapps and attach them because his rotary engines are very loud. Oh, did I also mention how loud his engines are.
BTW, His muffler sales had actually supported his Skycar development efforts, to the tune of ~$200 Million, until he sold the company several years ago!
Bill
Billions and Billions = 1 Sagan!
Voyager is 1 Sagan away - and always will be! Coincendently, so is Voyager 2... and even the Pioneers.
Wow... that's was easy.
Bill
Actually, that is incorrect. Microsoft is a great example of it. Being a monolopy changes the rules AFTER a company does what ever actions it took to get there. For example, I can bundle products together and it is perfectly legal to do so, except, if you are convicted of being a monolopy, in which case, the rules change and actions you did in the past... like "tying", become illegal retroactivly. (If Microsoft wern't ruled a monolopy, the "tying" would have been just considered a standard competitive business practice.)
Bill
Then save the file as HelloWorld.cs and drop out to a command prompt. Switch to the directory where you saved the file and type the following command. c:\windows\microsoft.net\framework\v2.0.50727\csc HelloWorld.cs You can then run the program by typing in "HelloWorld" and pressing enter.
Works for me and I don't have anything on this computer... it's running Windows Vista right out of the box from HP.
Bill
I agree. Quick, someone take a snapshot of both screens and post them to /.
Oh, wait... nevermind.
Bill
The capitalization of the company name should be "aQuantive" not "Aquantive."
Bill
Hey, that makes sense... no wait... no it doesn't. Buying the game from them is what feeds their monopoly - you know... gives them money to continue their practices. Also, you would have also had to buy the system to run it on, etc. Using a freely distributed codec and video doesn't give them anything, but gives you the ability to WATCH the video... for Free (as in beer.)
I think your priorities are backwords.
Bill
That would be Sir Richard Branson: See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Branson/. I can't wait to see how he handles this same scenerio on Virgin Galatic flights!
Bill
His comment was generic just like yours is. WE have had absolutly no reason to upgrade our system for the past decade. It's been working flawlessly since it was introduced and have not had the stability issues he is referring to as the reason to upgrade.
My original point is that as long as the system requriements don't change and the system is working, then there is absolutly no reason to upgrade. His comment was that "ANY COMPANY" should switch, period. I'm going to reiterate again that this is not necessary. We have had our computers running Win98 and our custom application for years with no problems, therefore no reason to change. We are just now thinking about upgrading the infrastructure which will require that we do upgrade those machines, but that is only because we forsee our requirements changing.
Bill
Don't you think that if we found a stability problem with our application running on Win98 that we would have addressed it, oh, say a decade ago when we first deployed it? We're running these machines on a 24x7 basis with absolutly no stability problems. Those people who run into stability problems simply don't know how to write software correctly or debug applications completly. Now, hardware is a different matter. For us, when a machine fails, it's a simple matter of buying the cheapest Dell or HP available and using that. By the way, those of you talking about drivers... that's a non issue as well. Have you tried running Win98 on a modern machine? It runs just fine. All the standard I/O stuff is supported in Win98 like Serial, Parallel and even USB. We don't use anything else so drivers for them are irrelavant.
By the way, we are in the process of moving to a more modern system, but that isn't because the machines are "outdated" in any way, we're changing the bases for the reason of the software, so we are going to redevelop it. It's possible that a spin off of our work will remain on the old systems to support some customers on a contract basis.
Bill
Why? Just becuase Microsoft doesn't support it anymore doesn't make it any less usable. That's just like having a computer for years and asking someone if they need to upgrade it because it's old. My answer is always, "have you changed what you are originally using it for? If so, is the software newer and does it require more horsepower than the machine can provide?" If you say no, then there is no reason to upgrade.
I've got several computers running that are still using Windows 98. They're doing their tasks perfectly. There's absolutly no reason to upgrade them or modernize them, they're doing excactly what they've been doing since the first day they went into use. I don't add software to them, I don't change what they are used for, and therefore, they don't need to be upgraded.
Also, if you decide that you do need to change your platform to utilize the new functionality of a deployment package like SMS, then I'd suggest using a new OS running your old Windows 98 based software in VirtualPC (it's free!) It's a great solution that keeps the base OS up to date with all the latest wizbang stuff, but still maintains the ability to run your old legacy applications.
Bill
Actually, Chrysler had a record player as an option in their cars back in the Fiftys. It was called the Highway Hi-Fi. It didn't use standard records but instead used a propriatery 16 2/3 RPM 7" format (read ARM anyone - that would be Analog Rights Managment.)
/ phono.htm
Later on, they realized that the custom format wouldn't work and opened up to the standard 45. The 1960 version could allow you to stack up to 12 records in it.
Here is an article from Chrysler about it. http://www.uaw-daimlerchryslerntc.org/images/news
Bill
Ok... So I'm no typing these comments from my computer. It MUST have more ram in it than 512meg and it must have a DX10 based 128meg Video card in it, because otherwise it wouldn't be usful.
I CALL BULL SHIT!!! BECAUSE I AM USING THIS COMPTUER AS WE SPEAK. It runs just fine. I run Office 2007 on it... I run Visual Web Developer Express on it... I run C# Express (with Robotics Studio AND XNA Express) on it.
Let me be loud and clear, IT RUNS JUST FINE WITH 512Meg AND A 64 Meg VIDEO CARD.
Is that clear enough for you??? Stop arguing with me when you haven't checked the facts. Dell says what sells Dell products. The figures I took came right from Microsoft's web site and the performance came from ME using this computer every single day... not Dell or some other foolish source tring to sell their own wares.
Bill
Here are the base requirements for Windows Vista:
1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
512 MB of system memory
20 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
Support for DirectX 9 graphics and 32 MB of graphics memory
DVD-ROM drive
Audio Output
Internet Access
I've been running it on my Toshiba Notebook for quite a while and it runs just fine. I didn't have any Driver Issues, No Memory Complaints, in fact, no issues at all. And my computer is about 4 years old. It has a 1.3mhz Celeron processor with 512 meg Ram and 64meg video card. Not a beast, but it runs at least as well as XP does. In some cases, better.
Bill
GSM came to the US in 1999. I am currently holding my first VoiceStream GSM "dual band" phone, which has a manufacture date of 02/01. (VoiceStream is now called T-Mobile, but used to be called Cellular One in some places and Western Wireless in others.)
Bill
Oh my God! What have I been doing for the past several years? Is the reception I receive in my plane just a figment of my imaginiation?
My EFIS uses a weather datalink that communicates over cell phones to get updated conditions, TFRs, etc. I also, regularly, fly over 2100 ft (both MSL and AGL) and it continues to work just fine.
One other proof of this is that all of the unfortunate flights on 9/11/2001 had callers calling loved ones, etc. I'm not a tin foil hat kind of person, but if GSM didn't work, do you think the Gov't made it all up???
That source site obviously hasn't really tried it.
Bill
The Space Station varies it's orbit depending on a lot of factors. It's in a continously decaying orbit (intented) which will always make it return to Earth at some point. It's orbit is occasionally boosted by the Space Shuttle or by the various Russian cargo ships. For example, right now, NASA is letting the orbit decay to around 205 miles so that the Shuttle can bring up the largest (and heaviest) component without having to push it all the way. With ISS in a lower orbit, less fuel is needed to get the heaviest components there. Later, a service module will boost it back to a higher orbit.
Bill
Well... nothing if you go to a Gas Station that has free compressed air. Some, however, are charging $.25 or $.50. Even at that, it's still cheap because it'll cost the station about $3 according to the article.
Bill
Question. If you own a TV in the UK but don't use it for viewing television programs (like hooking it up to an Atari 2600 full time,) do you still have to pay the license fee?
Bill
Redundant? :-) I was trying to make a joke about the article being nonsense!
Bill
Nope... that was the article... it is all nonsense!
Bill
Given that the current kill ratio of the F-15 in real combat is 125:zip nada zero, that's a real testament to just how impressive the F-22 really is. That's right... no F-15 has ever been lost in ACM. Not in any country that has flown it.
However, the F-15 was getting long in the tooth and there are several aircraft out there that are more than capable of holding their own with it, it's just that they've never met in combat. (Most notable is Russia's Su-35/Su-37 series.)
The F-22 was designed to easily handle the F-15, so it should still have a significant advantage over anything else out there.
By the way, someone mentioned the EF 2000. Pretty plane, but not good enough. It's current K/R is 10:1. Not bad, but no F-15.
Bill
So, what are they going to do come May 1st? Smile and extend the date? Why should Microsoft do anything? So what if Linus et al sign on... what can they possibly do to coerse Microsoft into showing their guns before they're ready to fire?
Bill
Please explain what you mean by "different jet engines." There are several different types of jet engines, but both inventors produced similar centrifugal designs - a lay person would not be able to tell the difference between them. The Germans later decided to go with a different design called an Axial Flow engine, the Jumo 004, for their first production jet (Me-262) and the British stayed with the simpler and more robust centrifugal design for their first jet (the Gloster Meteor) which was powered by the de Havilland Halford H.1 (later to become the de Havilland Globlin.)
Bill
There are several examples of independent inventions where the product is nearly identical. Sir Frank Whittle (UK) and Hans von Ohain (Germany) both invented jet engines on their own. Neither one knew of the other's efforts, yet, both are very similar in what they do and how they do it.
Bill