The new MS mouse should be Linux-happy. All the circutry to handle the translation from optical signals to mouse movement is taken care of within the mouse itself - the only things going down the wire are standard mouse movement signals.
...about any of these new discoveries until I see some information on production costs.
The smallest, fastest, lightest, smartest and overall best (insert thing here) doesn't do jack for the industry and end-consumer if we can't mass produce it low, low costs. Sure, these scientists in their labs can do wonders, but can that process be scaled up and automated?
I was doing similar research a while back, and found the following sites helpful. Unfortunately, I was researching US-only. But other folks here have posted similar links for outside the US, and hey - I'm a helpful kind of guy, so I'll summarize.
Salary Survey (US only) Nice, because they've been doing the survey for nearly 10 years, so there's data not only on the current situation, but also overall trends. (Good when negiotating your annual pay raise in a non-software company that doesn't realize that we geeks really should get more money.:-) )
...for on-line discussion. Yes, we can get some good, solid answers on Slashdot, but a there are too many factors that play into an equation like this to generate a solid, definite answer in this type of forum.
First, let me talk about myself personally. There are simply too many little things that I'm looking for in a girl. Most of these can't be determined in an on-line enviroment.
(My first-date test? I unlock the passenger door for her. If she leans over and unlocks my door, that's a Good Thing. Otherwise, well... it's generally been downhill from there.) I'm looking for little idiosyncracies in personality, little twists in taste, and other little details. Yes, they're little things, but I've been around the block enough to know what is important to me. These little things are what is important. And I've never been able to "see" these things in an on-line enviroment.
However, other people may not have their ideas so well-defined. Being able to come home at night and actually talk to your SO about the problems and issues you encountered at work that day may be a very large issue. Having your SO be a "geek" might be a very important factor for some. I can certainly understand this - I've got a couple (good-looking) friends who are computer fiends. It's certainly a refreshing things when they rebute you in a "discussion" about some issue. I really do enjoy being with these girls, because I can be myself and talk about computer topics without fear of being dubbed a "computer dork". But - they're not for me.
There is no simple yes or no answer to this kind of question. The answer to on-line romance depends upon what you're looking for, and who you are. The unfortunate part is that a lot of us don't know ourselves well enough to be able to clearly see what we want out of a relationship. I consider myself lucky because I do. It took some time, but with that time, things became gradually clearer. The only unfortunate part is the wait for that little woman to appear.
...so the "ease of use" tack that LinuxOne is taking just might the the key that makes them cash.
So, having said that, I'm confused. First off, let me say that I am (gasp) not a Linux user. Sorry. I'm too enmeshed in the Windows world to put up with the trouble of dual booting all the time.
All I've seen here is folks bashing LinuxOne. I've been reading Slashdot for about 2 years now, and have always seen the/. community get pumped about Linux growing and becoming more accepted. It appears that LinuxOne is doing their part to help Linux make it further on the desktop level.
We all know that the vast majority of computer users are somewhat intimidated by Linux. Installation reviews that appear are contradictory - some installs go smoothly and easily, and some seem to go poorly. A person who is considering installing Linux, just to "see what all the hype is about" just might do that, simply because of the spin that LinuxOne is putting on their distro. Granted, it's nothing new, but hell folks - what in this world is new? Look around and see what new and fancy items that appear are just the same old thing with a new little twist.
Tech businesses today have a difficult job - the world is full of niches, and the easiest to fill are those that complement a larger niche. Riding the wave of success of another product is far easier than creating a whole new "next big thing". LinuxOne is attempting to do that. They may have a history of vaporware in the past, but there's a distro now, and it looks to me like it could really help Linux at the desktop level. It might not be anything "new", but success is largely marketing and spin, and LinuxOne seems to have that under control.
This LinuxLite may just be the next big thing - who, at this point, can really tell?
...is good point - and it did cross my mind while making the post. However, while I start to drift a bit in my discussion, I attempted to keep the focus on the delivery of these materials by ballistic missles. Alternate means of delivery should be covered by alternate means of detection/deterrence. I started to discuss that, but wanted to keep the post as on-topic as possible with my thoughts.
The only defense is not peace. Peace is a wonderful, garguantuan step, but world-wide peace will never stop acts of terror and hate. There are simply too many people in this world with differing viewpoints. Most are valid - the problem comes when people fail to see the other side's view, and will break the rules of society (i.e., violence) to attempt to bring about the change. But that's another topic for another story...
And to supplement the post a bit:
After making the post, several others have replied that know far more in the way of details regarding the specifics of the treaties than I. The general consensus to Rolan's question is that yes, treaties exist that ban ABM weapons, but the Clinton Administration is currently negiotiating to change/withdraw from those. So in effect, they didn't care when the system was developed, but now that it exists, they're making a token effort.
The treaties signed with the USSR are still in effect with Russia. If the dissolving of the Soviet Union also dissolved all the treaties things would've gone to hell in a handbasket very quickly.
I assume that Congress/DoD is developing the weapons under the guise of an anti-ballistic missle program, and are just promising not to expand the use of the weapons to an anti-satellite type mission. In the old days of the USSR, this would have caused an uproar. But today, it's essential for the United States to have an ABM program. Russia understands this, and allows the technology to be developed without causing too much difficulty.
The problem is the downfall of the Soviet Union. Tracking the proliferation of nuclear arms in Eastern Europe & elsewhere is one of the larger problems that our country's intelligence agencies have today. Over the past several years, the nuclear arsenal of the former Soviet Union has diminished frightenly. Corrupt soviet officers, the Russian mafia, even gov't officials have been conviently losing track of nuclear arms to their own financial gain.
There are far too many terrorists in this world. During the height of the Cold War, the checks of the USSR were sufficient enough to deter the loss of nuclear materials. However, the collapse of Russia's infrastructure has sent that system of checks into ruin. The nuclear materials that helped make the USSR the superpower it was has fallen into the hands of hundreds, in not thousands, of individuals and countries worldwide. A lot of these people resent the US's self-appointed role as the world's police force. When you're sitting up as high as the United States is, everyone wants to knock you down.
Now, most of these individuals/countries that have the nuclear weapons do not have the means of delivery. As far as my non-existant security clearance knows, North Korea is the only country hostile to the United States that has a ballistic missile capable of deilvering a nuclear warhead to within US borders. What scares the United States is what they don't know. After the Gulf War, the weapons inspectors were shocked to see how far along Iraq's nuclear capabilities had come. Iraq had progressed beyond the best of estimates by an order of magnitude, and all right underneath the noses of the collective world. Who's to say that they same isn't happening elsewhere? And that when the technology is finalized, it's not coming torwards the United States, packing enough power to level Los Angeles?
There's simply too much uncertainity these days. In some respects, the Cold War was a Good Thing, because our intelligence assests were focused, and the threats come from a single source. Nowadays, the threat can come from anywhere, and the price of eternal vigilance is high. This is why these ABM systems are being developed. Today, North Korea poses a real nuclear threat. Tomorrow, who knows where that threat will originate. The United States is a high profile target - Congress understands this, and Russia understands this.
Going out on a limb here with a related topic - why not have the moderators of the day do a little to help the Slashdot boys out, and moderate the submission queue? That way, the "hot" stories that need to be posted immediately can be bumped up, while the ones that aren't time-dependent or as interesting can sit until the guys have the time to sort things through.
... not too sure if that would work efficiently enough or not, but it's something to think about.
Other people have touched on the edges of this point, but I'll do my best here to make things clear. Apologies to those who are far more clever than I and have already realized this from the other posts...
This whole fading toolbars issue cannot be implemented efficiently without the use of the touch mouse. The method that is being discussed here is a simple timeout - if the mouse doesn't move within x seconds, then fade the toolbars. Simple enough, and it works. But take a second and imagine yourself *using* a setup like that. (Not Word with millions of widgets, mind you, but something actually useful - say the sidebars in MSDEV. More screen space for your source code, and the sidebars fade in when you move the mouse.) Once you're done with the toolbar and click back to your document, how long is it until the toolbars fade? What does your user do? Sit and wait? Begin editing, only to have things jump around after a few seconds time? Niether possibilities are feasible.
To be a useful feature, the fading effect has to be immediate. The pauses associated with the timeout implementation would break up the fluidity of the UI so much that it would be frustrating.
The touch mouse has merit, and there are definately some useful applications for it. (More so than making the the useless (to 90% of the users) widgets in Word disappear on the fly.)
The real value of these expandable Palms is fulfilling numerous niche markets with nearly the same hardware and, most importantly, the same software. Since the TRGpro (and the Visor) use the PalmOS, you utilize the software already written.
As a college student, I've bounced around to several different work enviroments in the past four summers. In just a brief scan of the CompactFlash components avaliable now, I'm drooling with the possibilities of what I could have done. My mind is still racing with the number of ways we could have done things better with these Palms and their hardware. In too many places, I have had to use an entire desktop system to accomplish a small repetitive task that these new Palms can now do. Too bad I'm not still around those big coporate budgets to roll these things out. But I did send off a few quick e-mails to the guys I worked with.:-)
You're romanticizing the military's hiring of computer-geeks too much. The services don't go out courting geeks and hackers. Engineers don't get a bad deal, but that's still mainly mediocre pay and free graduate school.
I assure you - no one can tell the difference between the guys working in personnel who shuffle papers all day, the guys working in Aircraft maintenance who constantly bitch about funds because they've got 4+ F-16s that just sit in a hanger all day and get scavenged for parts, and the hackers, who sit in front of the computer all day. The hackers hired by the military are normal personnel, from the outside perspective. Do you really think that the military will get so desperate for hackers that they will allow someone to not go to boot camp, not get their hair chopped, and not wear a standard uniform to work every day?
Military hackers are just people, doing their job. The vast majority of these folks are just kids - doing their stint in the service, and just waiting to get out, because - you said it, and so did I - the pay sucks. There are enlisted personnel on base with wives and kids who are forced to live off food stamps, because the military cannot pay them enough to support their families. It's ridiculous, when you stop to think about it. Military service used to be an badge of honor, worn proudly. Nowadays, it seems as if it's a last resort. Kids without too many other options resort to it. Can't get a job that pays well out of high school? Go into the military! They'll take care of you. That's where these military hackers come from. They're kids who don't have any other options.
Do you rememeber that article in Rolling Stone by Katz? Those two kids, Jesse and Eric were geeks, but they were stuck in dead-end jobs in a dead-end town. Those are your military hackers. And do you know the worst thing? The military's not a career, not for those types - the private sector is too inviting. The best talent goes to the private sector, leaving our country's information in the hands of the next set of kids that are just using the service as a means to an end.
The answer is not to homeschool your child. Homeschool deprives your child of social interaction, positive or negative. Kids are harsh, but the real world is also harsh. Do you really think that keeping your child at home is adequate preparation for the real world? Homeschool only serves to shelter his social growth. A strong family life can combat an adversity encountered outside the home.
I'm 21 and about to graduate college. In high school I was rather unique - I was not a part of any group, but was accepted by all. I hung out with the "non-conformists", I ate lunch with the "white-hatters", I got invited to the parties. (But I never went. working 40 hours a week on top of high school doesn't allow for much free time.) I didn't fit in anywhere.
The white-hatters thought I was wierd, because I hung out with the non-conformists. But I've always been laid back and accepting of everyone, so I was close enough.
The non-conformists thought I was wierd, because I talked to the white-hatters. But I've always been laid back and accepting of everyone, so I was close enough.
No, I didn't hate anyone. No, I wasn't ostracized. I was lucky, in that respect. Problem was, I still didn't have any friends. At least those kids who fit definitively into one group or another had friends to work with. I didn't have any.
It was tough. I didn't have anything to put my time into. I was a computer dork since middle school, and became active in the local BBS scene and met people there. But even at it's max, that was only a few hours out of my day. I never found an outlet for my time.
The one thing that kept me sane? My parents. I was lucky. I have a wonderful set of parents, that still to this day provide me with a wonderful place that I can call home. I didn't really realize it until I came to college and finally made some close friends. Long nights up talking provided me with the insight into other peoples lives to understond just how lucky I really am.
A strong family can defeat any problem. If you parents who are worried now care enough, do not homeschool your children, but simply care for them. Be a good parent, and the rest of life will take care of itself. Your children will have problems, but guess what? They'll deal with them. Katz's article in Rolling Stone a few weeks ago had a quote in it that made a very strong impression on me. "Character is a trophy you take away from conquering a trouble" By homeschooling your child, you shelter him from these troubles, and deprive him of the an essential area of growth.
Too bad this will get lost in the other 700 comments....
Calling what happened in China bombing is a little misleading.
US Forces fought on Chinese land for about 8 months - intensely for about 2 weeks in Oct, then sporadically until the end of May. This was all a part of the US involvement in the Chinese Civil War.
No serious bombing campaigns was undertaken, but there was the presence of aircraft for close-air support of the troops on the front line.
Slashdot Mirror
The new MS mouse should be Linux-happy. All the circutry to handle the translation from optical signals to mouse movement is taken care of within the mouse itself - the only things going down the wire are standard mouse movement signals.
...about any of these new discoveries until I see some information on production costs.
The smallest, fastest, lightest, smartest and overall best (insert thing here) doesn't do jack for the industry and end-consumer if we can't mass produce it low, low costs. Sure, these scientists in their labs can do wonders, but can that process be scaled up and automated?
J.J.
...for on-line discussion. Yes, we can get some good, solid answers on Slashdot, but a there are too many factors that play into an equation like this to generate a solid, definite answer in this type of forum.
First, let me talk about myself personally. There are simply too many little things that I'm looking for in a girl. Most of these can't be determined in an on-line enviroment.
(My first-date test? I unlock the passenger door for her. If she leans over and unlocks my door, that's a Good Thing. Otherwise, well... it's generally been downhill from there.) I'm looking for little idiosyncracies in personality, little twists in taste, and other little details. Yes, they're little things, but I've been around the block enough to know what is important to me. These little things are what is important. And I've never been able to "see" these things in an on-line enviroment.
However, other people may not have their ideas so well-defined. Being able to come home at night and actually talk to your SO about the problems and issues you encountered at work that day may be a very large issue. Having your SO be a "geek" might be a very important factor for some. I can certainly understand this - I've got a couple (good-looking) friends who are computer fiends. It's certainly a refreshing things when they rebute you in a "discussion" about some issue. I really do enjoy being with these girls, because I can be myself and talk about computer topics without fear of being dubbed a "computer dork". But - they're not for me.
There is no simple yes or no answer to this kind of question. The answer to on-line romance depends upon what you're looking for, and who you are. The unfortunate part is that a lot of us don't know ourselves well enough to be able to clearly see what we want out of a relationship. I consider myself lucky because I do. It took some time, but with that time, things became gradually clearer. The only unfortunate part is the wait for that little woman to appear.
J.J.
...so the "ease of use" tack that LinuxOne is taking just might the the key that makes them cash.
/. community get pumped about Linux growing and becoming more accepted. It appears that LinuxOne is doing their part to help Linux make it further on the desktop level.
So, having said that, I'm confused. First off, let me say that I am (gasp) not a Linux user. Sorry. I'm too enmeshed in the Windows world to put up with the trouble of dual booting all the time.
All I've seen here is folks bashing LinuxOne. I've been reading Slashdot for about 2 years now, and have always seen the
We all know that the vast majority of computer users are somewhat intimidated by Linux. Installation reviews that appear are contradictory - some installs go smoothly and easily, and some seem to go poorly. A person who is considering installing Linux, just to "see what all the hype is about" just might do that, simply because of the spin that LinuxOne is putting on their distro. Granted, it's nothing new, but hell folks - what in this world is new? Look around and see what new and fancy items that appear are just the same old thing with a new little twist.
Tech businesses today have a difficult job - the world is full of niches, and the easiest to fill are those that complement a larger niche. Riding the wave of success of another product is far easier than creating a whole new "next big thing". LinuxOne is attempting to do that. They may have a history of vaporware in the past, but there's a distro now, and it looks to me like it could really help Linux at the desktop level. It might not be anything "new", but success is largely marketing and spin, and LinuxOne seems to have that under control.
This LinuxLite may just be the next big thing - who, at this point, can really tell?
...is good point - and it did cross my mind while making the post. However, while I start to drift a bit in my discussion, I attempted to keep the focus on the delivery of these materials by ballistic missles. Alternate means of delivery should be covered by alternate means of detection/deterrence. I started to discuss that, but wanted to keep the post as on-topic as possible with my thoughts.
The only defense is not peace. Peace is a wonderful, garguantuan step, but world-wide peace will never stop acts of terror and hate. There are simply too many people in this world with differing viewpoints. Most are valid - the problem comes when people fail to see the other side's view, and will break the rules of society (i.e., violence) to attempt to bring about the change. But that's another topic for another story...
And to supplement the post a bit:
After making the post, several others have replied that know far more in the way of details regarding the specifics of the treaties than I. The general consensus to Rolan's question is that yes, treaties exist that ban ABM weapons, but the Clinton Administration is currently negiotiating to change/withdraw from those. So in effect, they didn't care when the system was developed, but now that it exists, they're making a token effort.
The treaties signed with the USSR are still in effect with Russia. If the dissolving of the Soviet Union also dissolved all the treaties things would've gone to hell in a handbasket very quickly.
I assume that Congress/DoD is developing the weapons under the guise of an anti-ballistic missle program, and are just promising not to expand the use of the weapons to an anti-satellite type mission. In the old days of the USSR, this would have caused an uproar. But today, it's essential for the United States to have an ABM program. Russia understands this, and allows the technology to be developed without causing too much difficulty.
The problem is the downfall of the Soviet Union. Tracking the proliferation of nuclear arms in Eastern Europe & elsewhere is one of the larger problems that our country's intelligence agencies have today. Over the past several years, the nuclear arsenal of the former Soviet Union has diminished frightenly. Corrupt soviet officers, the Russian mafia, even gov't officials have been conviently losing track of nuclear arms to their own financial gain.
There are far too many terrorists in this world. During the height of the Cold War, the checks of the USSR were sufficient enough to deter the loss of nuclear materials. However, the collapse of Russia's infrastructure has sent that system of checks into ruin. The nuclear materials that helped make the USSR the superpower it was has fallen into the hands of hundreds, in not thousands, of individuals and countries worldwide. A lot of these people resent the US's self-appointed role as the world's police force. When you're sitting up as high as the United States is, everyone wants to knock you down.
Now, most of these individuals/countries that have the nuclear weapons do not have the means of delivery. As far as my non-existant security clearance knows, North Korea is the only country hostile to the United States that has a ballistic missile capable of deilvering a nuclear warhead to within US borders. What scares the United States is what they don't know. After the Gulf War, the weapons inspectors were shocked to see how far along Iraq's nuclear capabilities had come. Iraq had progressed beyond the best of estimates by an order of magnitude, and all right underneath the noses of the collective world. Who's to say that they same isn't happening elsewhere? And that when the technology is finalized, it's not coming torwards the United States, packing enough power to level Los Angeles?
There's simply too much uncertainity these days. In some respects, the Cold War was a Good Thing, because our intelligence assests were focused, and the threats come from a single source. Nowadays, the threat can come from anywhere, and the price of eternal vigilance is high. This is why these ABM systems are being developed. Today, North Korea poses a real nuclear threat. Tomorrow, who knows where that threat will originate. The United States is a high profile target - Congress understands this, and Russia understands this.
That is why the US gov't doesn't care.
(sorry for rambling a bit - it's getting late.)
Going out on a limb here with a related topic - why not have the moderators of the day do a little to help the Slashdot boys out, and moderate the submission queue? That way, the "hot" stories that need to be posted immediately can be bumped up, while the ones that aren't time-dependent or as interesting can sit until the guys have the time to sort things through.
... not too sure if that would work efficiently enough or not, but it's something to think about.
Other people have touched on the edges of this point, but I'll do my best here to make things clear. Apologies to those who are far more clever than I and have already realized this from the other posts...
This whole fading toolbars issue cannot be implemented efficiently without the use of the touch mouse. The method that is being discussed here is a simple timeout - if the mouse doesn't move within x seconds, then fade the toolbars. Simple enough, and it works. But take a second and imagine yourself *using* a setup like that. (Not Word with millions of widgets, mind you, but something actually useful - say the sidebars in MSDEV. More screen space for your source code, and the sidebars fade in when you move the mouse.) Once you're done with the toolbar and click back to your document, how long is it until the toolbars fade? What does your user do? Sit and wait? Begin editing, only to have things jump around after a few seconds time? Niether possibilities are feasible.
To be a useful feature, the fading effect has to be immediate. The pauses associated with the timeout implementation would break up the fluidity of the UI so much that it would be frustrating.
The touch mouse has merit, and there are definately some useful applications for it. (More so than making the the useless (to 90% of the users) widgets in Word disappear on the fly.)
The real value of these expandable Palms is fulfilling numerous niche markets with nearly the same hardware and, most importantly, the same software. Since the TRGpro (and the Visor) use the PalmOS, you utilize the software already written.
:-)
As a college student, I've bounced around to several different work enviroments in the past four summers. In just a brief scan of the CompactFlash components avaliable now, I'm drooling with the possibilities of what I could have done. My mind is still racing with the number of ways we could have done things better with these Palms and their hardware. In too many places, I have had to use an entire desktop system to accomplish a small repetitive task that these new Palms can now do. Too bad I'm not still around those big coporate budgets to roll these things out. But I did send off a few quick e-mails to the guys I worked with.
J.J.
You're romanticizing the military's hiring of computer-geeks too much. The services don't go out courting geeks and hackers. Engineers don't get a bad deal, but that's still mainly mediocre pay and free graduate school.
I assure you - no one can tell the difference between the guys working in personnel who shuffle papers all day, the guys working in Aircraft maintenance who constantly bitch about funds because they've got 4+ F-16s that just sit in a hanger all day and get scavenged for parts, and the hackers, who sit in front of the computer all day. The hackers hired by the military are normal personnel, from the outside perspective. Do you really think that the military will get so desperate for hackers that they will allow someone to not go to boot camp, not get their hair chopped, and not wear a standard uniform to work every day?
Military hackers are just people, doing their job. The vast majority of these folks are just kids - doing their stint in the service, and just waiting to get out, because - you said it, and so did I - the pay sucks. There are enlisted personnel on base with wives and kids who are forced to live off food stamps, because the military cannot pay them enough to support their families. It's ridiculous, when you stop to think about it. Military service used to be an badge of honor, worn proudly. Nowadays, it seems as if it's a last resort. Kids without too many other options resort to it. Can't get a job that pays well out of high school? Go into the military! They'll take care of you. That's where these military hackers come from. They're kids who don't have any other options.
Do you rememeber that article in Rolling Stone by Katz? Those two kids, Jesse and Eric were geeks, but they were stuck in dead-end jobs in a dead-end town. Those are your military hackers. And do you know the worst thing? The military's not a career, not for those types - the private sector is too inviting. The best talent goes to the private sector, leaving our country's information in the hands of the next set of kids that are just using the service as a means to an end.
The answer is not to homeschool your child. Homeschool deprives your child of social interaction, positive or negative. Kids are harsh, but the real world is also harsh. Do you really think that keeping your child at home is adequate preparation for the real world? Homeschool only serves to shelter his social growth. A strong family life can combat an adversity encountered outside the home.
I'm 21 and about to graduate college. In high school I was rather unique - I was not a part of any group, but was accepted by all. I hung out with the "non-conformists", I ate lunch with the "white-hatters", I got invited to the parties. (But I never went. working 40 hours a week on top of high school doesn't allow for much free time.) I didn't fit in anywhere.
The white-hatters thought I was wierd, because I hung out with the non-conformists. But I've always been laid back and accepting of everyone, so I was close enough.
The non-conformists thought I was wierd, because I talked to the white-hatters. But I've always been laid back and accepting of everyone, so I was close enough.
No, I didn't hate anyone. No, I wasn't ostracized. I was lucky, in that respect. Problem was, I still didn't have any friends. At least those kids who fit definitively into one group or another had friends to work with. I didn't have any.
It was tough. I didn't have anything to put my time into. I was a computer dork since middle school, and became active in the local BBS scene and met people there. But even at it's max, that was only a few hours out of my day. I never found an outlet for my time.
The one thing that kept me sane? My parents. I was lucky. I have a wonderful set of parents, that still to this day provide me with a wonderful place that I can call home. I didn't really realize it until I came to college and finally made some close friends. Long nights up talking provided me with the insight into other peoples lives to understond just how lucky I really am.
A strong family can defeat any problem. If you parents who are worried now care enough, do not homeschool your children, but simply care for them. Be a good parent, and the rest of life will take care of itself. Your children will have problems, but guess what? They'll deal with them. Katz's article in Rolling Stone a few weeks ago had a quote in it that made a very strong impression on me. "Character is a trophy you take away from conquering a trouble" By homeschooling your child, you shelter him from these troubles, and deprive him of the an essential area of growth.
Too bad this will get lost in the other 700 comments....
Calling what happened in China bombing is a little misleading.
US Forces fought on Chinese land for about 8 months - intensely for about 2 weeks in Oct, then sporadically until the end of May. This was all a part of the US involvement in the Chinese Civil War.
No serious bombing campaigns was undertaken, but there was the presence of aircraft for close-air support of the troops on the front line.