Yeah, a whopping 10 of them, all expensive. Now see count how many 16x9 there are!
You are comparing apples and oranges. If you want the cheap commodity monitors you have to live with what the main market wants: 1080p. You are looking for a specialty monitor when you talk 1200 tall. You get to pay more for that. That's just basic supply and demand economics.
I actually called them. All three Apple stores in Oregon: They do not have the 16GB+WiFi $499 model in stock currently. They did have the 64GB+3G in stock. For "slightly" more.
Good luck finding that model in stock in the local Apple Store. Or in any store, for that matter.
I checked the receipt and you are right about shipping. But on the $729 for the 32GB + 3G I still paid well $114 for a case, taxes and fees. Scaling down to $499 for the taxes would give a final cost of about $588.
Plus taxes, shipping and recycle fees. Which will raise the cost to well over $500. Add a case for another $40 whack and that $499 iPad is fast approaching $600.
Addendum: Checking my logs, the 3000 greylist stopped spam emails were what were left after *other* filters stopped an additional 156,000 spam attempts. Yes - it really has reached the point where *less than* 1% of email is legitimate.
On my servers, at one point, 99% of attempted spam mailings were being rejected via greylisting at the edge MXs (I'm talking order of 200K mail attempts per day - it vastly outnumbered legitimate emails). If you are big enough, it is a very important tool. It is less effective today than it was but is still is an important first layer spambot screen: Yesterday, it stopped around 3000 attempts to spam us and let through about 1000 mails. Stopping 75% of spam with *one* technique is nothing to be sneezed at.
The problem with this is pretty much all of the whois servers rate limit requests. Make than a very small number of requests per day and they simply quit answering. What we need is basic whois info available like domain created dates via DNS queries.
I was reading your web page about the accident involving the dry ice and the loss of the woman's sight. On July 3, 1999 a similar accident happened in my family. My then three year old son was seriously injured, He lost one of his eyes, his right thumb was 75% severed and broken, his left thumb was 50% severed and he had a gash about 4 inches long on his stomach. I had also never heard of this and was mortified. My son is now doing wonderful and we are very vocal about it to let people know what can happen with what I found out after the fact to be called "dry ice bombs". Angela Hinkhouse
Someone else suggested that they may be using the lower expectations of the external USB hard drive market (slower drives) to launch a drive that isn't 'up to snuff' performance wise for traditional internal drive use. Nowhere on their web pages for the drive do they give any performance numbers.
That may be the 'pig in a poke' aspect here. It may be a really big, but really slow drive.
Dammit. I had a nicely linked response all written. And then I clicked on one of my own links in the preview. Sigh.
Ok. I actually did read TFA before I posted (having long since learned not to trust Slashdot headlines;) ).
I have now visited Seagate's own tech pageon the drives. They do not clearly state anywhere that it is a single drive inside the case. But you can infer that from the external case dimensions of 6.22 in x 4.88 in x 1.73 in that there isn't enough room for two 3.5" drives.
Having been in this business for a long time I have learned that if you don't ask the right questions computer manufacturers will happily sell you a 'pig in a poke'.
Exactly. People keep glossing over this part of Tavis's original post:
Protocol handlers are a popular source of vulnerabilities, and hcp:// itself has been the target of attacks multiple times in the past. I've concluded that there's a significant possibility that attackers have studied this component, and releasing this information rapidly is in the best interest of security.
Tavis released it because MS seem uninterested in committing to fix it and because the bad guys probably already had it.
Even if you are using SUSE or RHEL, support for 2.4 is about to vanish completely. The last version of RHEL to use a 2.4 kernel was RHEL3 - which goes EOL October this year. I actually have one very old system to convert because of this. There is no version of SUSE using a 2.4 kernel and still in general or extended support. Even for 'self-support' (it's a bit of an oxymoron - it just means you can use the forums and the knowledge base but nothing is going to get fixed by Novell. How this is different from 'Googling it' isn't obvious to me), the last SUSE support for 2.4 will EOL in November 2012.
Up until an hour or two ago (it is now 5pm in California), the Apple store listed the iPad as having the $30/month unlimited plan available if you bought one - period. About four hours ago AT&T stated on their Facebook account that you could (1) Only get the $30/month plan if you activated it before June 7th, and (2) You had to have the physical device to activate. That would mean *EVERYONE* who bought a 3G iPad via the Apple store during the last week or two and hasn't yet received it would have been sold a device under the false promise of being able to subscribe to the unlimited data plan : The very definition of 'Bait & Switch'.
I lodged a complaint with the FTC via their web site and posted that I had done so to AT&T's Facebook page a couple of hours ago and advised others to do the same.
Magically,just hours later, if you go to Apple's store right now it clearly states that if you buy an iPad by June 6th, you *WILL* be eligible for the $30/month unlimited plan - in contradiction to AT&T's previous clear statements on it only a few hours ago.
Which probably means *someone* at AT&T blinked in the face of facing legal charges of a blatant bait and switch by the company.
It isn't their mass that makes them so unlikely to interact with ordinary matter. It is because they don't interact via the Electromagnetic or Strong Nuclear forces (at least not at the energies we are discussing here). Because we can't use gravity to directly detect them (or any other elementary particle) because of its incredible weakness, that leaves only the Weak Nuclear force, which is *extremely* short range. That short range means that a neutrino must pass *very* close to an electron or a quark to have any chance what-so-ever of interacting: Something like 10 to the minus 16th power meters. For comparison, a hydrogen atom has a diameter of around 10 to the minus 10th meters - or a million times larger.
A single *proton* has a diameter of around 10 to the minus 15th meters - or still 10 times larger than the distance in question.
So hundreds of neutrinos could pass directly through the very nucleus of an atom and *still* not interact with anything. And that is matter with a density more than a trillion times as dense as anything in your ordinary experience.
Frankly, I hate 'clever' headlines which manage to work in some rather stupid pun while declining to actually say what the freaking article is about. It may make headline writing 'fun' for writers, but it just annoys everyone else. *You* want to be clever - *I* just want to decide whether the article is actually about something I'm interested in.
I come to bury IE6, not to praise it. The evil that Microsoft does lives after it; The good is oft interred with their code; So let it be with IE6, The noble Stallman Hath told you IE6 was ambitious: If it were so, it was a grievous fault; And grievously hath IE6 answer'd it. Here, under leave of Ballmer and the rest, - For IE6 is an honorable browser; So are they all, all honorable browsers, - Come I to speak in IE6's funeral. It was my friend, faithful and just to me: But Stallman says he was ambitious; And Stallman is an honorable man.
Almost every time someone asks a question where they obviously have made an implementation decision that depends on "doing it differently than everyone else on the planet" while providing no information about what they are trying to actually accomplish, the problem can usually be solved in a much simpler way. While it is possible you are doing something exotic like trying to turn a hard drive platter into a meta-material by patterning high density magnetic patterns on it and so you really do need to be able to control the bits at the hardware level, odds are low.
You provided no information about what you are trying to do. There are pretty good odds that if you provide information about what you are trying to do instead of trying to get people to come up with a way for you to do it 'the hard way' you, will get an answer that will work for you.
I've had a conversation recently with the CIO of a major business who didn't quite understand why backups were worthwhile. He said something along the lines of "how does this help the business sell more widgets?".
I got the message of why we needed both on and offsite backups through to the CFO of my company by putting it bluntly: If we had a fire in the server room both of us would be looking for new jobs the week after if we didn't have them.
Linux user since 1994. And yes, I have 'smoked' a monitor by using a too fast a vertical sync. To be fair, the monitor had run at that speed before but had aged out of spec.
Slashdot Mirror
You are comparing apples and oranges. If you want the cheap commodity monitors you have to live with what the main market wants: 1080p. You are looking for a specialty monitor when you talk 1200 tall. You get to pay more for that. That's just basic supply and demand economics.
If you don't like it, that is your problem.
And no availability.
I actually called them. All three Apple stores in Oregon: They do not have the 16GB+WiFi $499 model in stock currently. They did have the 64GB+3G in stock. For "slightly" more.
Good luck finding that model in stock in the local Apple Store. Or in any store, for that matter.
So get one by legally paying less than $500.
Go ahead.
Oh, wait. You can't.
I checked the receipt and you are right about shipping. But on the $729 for the 32GB + 3G I still paid well $114 for a case, taxes and fees. Scaling down to $499 for the taxes would give a final cost of about $588.
Plus taxes, shipping and recycle fees. Which will raise the cost to well over $500. Add a case for another $40 whack and that $499 iPad is fast approaching $600.
Addendum: Checking my logs, the 3000 greylist stopped spam emails were what were left after *other* filters stopped an additional 156,000 spam attempts. Yes - it really has reached the point where *less than* 1% of email is legitimate.
On my servers, at one point, 99% of attempted spam mailings were being rejected via greylisting at the edge MXs (I'm talking order of 200K mail attempts per day - it vastly outnumbered legitimate emails). If you are big enough, it is a very important tool. It is less effective today than it was but is still is an important first layer spambot screen: Yesterday, it stopped around 3000 attempts to spam us and let through about 1000 mails. Stopping 75% of spam with *one* technique is nothing to be sneezed at.
An ugly hack that is required in practice to keep the net from collapsing?
The problem with this is pretty much all of the whois servers rate limit requests. Make than a very small number of requests per day and they simply quit answering. What we need is basic whois info available like domain created dates via DNS queries.
There is this mass group-think happening here were 99% of the posters say something about how it is just harmless fun.
Well, it isn't. People get badly hurt by them. Esophageal injury from a plastic bottle containing dry ice. One of the children in this case nearly died. If you do a Google search for 'dry ice injury' or 'dry ice accident' you can find plenty. Such as this one from Dry Ice Experiments Feedback:
Lots of accidents on video at YouTube.
Yeah. All good harmless fun.
Not.
Someone else suggested that they may be using the lower expectations of the external USB hard drive market (slower drives) to launch a drive that isn't 'up to snuff' performance wise for traditional internal drive use. Nowhere on their web pages for the drive do they give any performance numbers.
That may be the 'pig in a poke' aspect here. It may be a really big, but really slow drive.
Dammit. I had a nicely linked response all written. And then I clicked on one of my own links in the preview. Sigh.
Ok. I actually did read TFA before I posted (having long since learned not to trust Slashdot headlines ;) ).
I have now visited Seagate's own tech pageon the drives. They do not clearly state anywhere that it is a single drive inside the case. But you can infer that from the external case dimensions of 6.22 in x 4.88 in x 1.73 in that there isn't enough room for two 3.5" drives.
Having been in this business for a long time I have learned that if you don't ask the right questions computer manufacturers will happily sell you a 'pig in a poke'.
That isn't clear. They seem to be using 3.5" as a measurement of the external case size.
External RAID arrays have been around for a while. Is this just a conventional RAID0 or really a 3 TB single drive?
Water isn't a pollutant. That doesn't mean you can't drown in it.
Exactly. People keep glossing over this part of Tavis's original post:
Tavis released it because MS seem uninterested in committing to fix it and because the bad guys probably already had it.
Even if you are using SUSE or RHEL, support for 2.4 is about to vanish completely. The last version of RHEL to use a 2.4 kernel was RHEL3 - which goes EOL October this year. I actually have one very old system to convert because of this. There is no version of SUSE using a 2.4 kernel and still in general or extended support. Even for 'self-support' (it's a bit of an oxymoron - it just means you can use the forums and the knowledge base but nothing is going to get fixed by Novell. How this is different from 'Googling it' isn't obvious to me), the last SUSE support for 2.4 will EOL in November 2012.
Right. We can only have around 20 AM radio stations on the planet because we are 'out of spectrum'.
Oh. Wait. That isn't how it works.
Up until an hour or two ago (it is now 5pm in California), the Apple store listed the iPad as having the $30/month unlimited plan available if you bought one - period. About four hours ago AT&T stated on their Facebook account that you could (1) Only get the $30/month plan if you activated it before June 7th, and (2) You had to have the physical device to activate. That would mean *EVERYONE* who bought a 3G iPad via the Apple store during the last week or two and hasn't yet received it would have been sold a device under the false promise of being able to subscribe to the unlimited data plan : The very definition of 'Bait & Switch'.
I lodged a complaint with the FTC via their web site and posted that I had done so to AT&T's Facebook page a couple of hours ago and advised others to do the same.
Magically,just hours later, if you go to Apple's store right now it clearly states that if you buy an iPad by June 6th, you *WILL* be eligible for the $30/month unlimited plan - in contradiction to AT&T's previous clear statements on it only a few hours ago.
Which probably means *someone* at AT&T blinked in the face of facing legal charges of a blatant bait and switch by the company.
It isn't their mass that makes them so unlikely to interact with ordinary matter. It is because they don't interact via the Electromagnetic or Strong Nuclear forces (at least not at the energies we are discussing here). Because we can't use gravity to directly detect them (or any other elementary particle) because of its incredible weakness, that leaves only the Weak Nuclear force, which is *extremely* short range. That short range means that a neutrino must pass *very* close to an electron or a quark to have any chance what-so-ever of interacting: Something like 10 to the minus 16th power meters. For comparison, a hydrogen atom has a diameter of around 10 to the minus 10th meters - or a million times larger.
A single *proton* has a diameter of around 10 to the minus 15th meters - or still 10 times larger than the distance in question.
So hundreds of neutrinos could pass directly through the very nucleus of an atom and *still* not interact with anything. And that is matter with a density more than a trillion times as dense as anything in your ordinary experience.
To neutrinos, other matter barely exists at all.
Frankly, I hate 'clever' headlines which manage to work in some rather stupid pun while declining to actually say what the freaking article is about. It may make headline writing 'fun' for writers, but it just annoys everyone else. *You* want to be clever - *I* just want to decide whether the article is actually about something I'm interested in.
your ears;
I come to bury IE6, not to praise it.
The evil that Microsoft does lives after it;
The good is oft interred with their code;
So let it be with IE6, The noble Stallman
Hath told you IE6 was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault;
And grievously hath IE6 answer'd it.
Here, under leave of Ballmer and the rest, -
For IE6 is an honorable browser;
So are they all, all honorable browsers, -
Come I to speak in IE6's funeral.
It was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Stallman says he was ambitious;
And Stallman is an honorable man.
Almost every time someone asks a question where they obviously have made an implementation decision that depends on "doing it differently than everyone else on the planet" while providing no information about what they are trying to actually accomplish, the problem can usually be solved in a much simpler way. While it is possible you are doing something exotic like trying to turn a hard drive platter into a meta-material by patterning high density magnetic patterns on it and so you really do need to be able to control the bits at the hardware level, odds are low.
You provided no information about what you are trying to do. There are pretty good odds that if you provide information about what you are trying to do instead of trying to get people to come up with a way for you to do it 'the hard way' you, will get an answer that will work for you.
I got the message of why we needed both on and offsite backups through to the CFO of my company by putting it bluntly: If we had a fire in the server room both of us would be looking for new jobs the week after if we didn't have them.
She signed off on them.
Linux user since 1994. And yes, I have 'smoked' a monitor by using a too fast a vertical sync. To be fair, the monitor had run at that speed before but had aged out of spec.