You have no idea what you are talking about. IBM pretty much invented SQL. DB/2 is and SQL database and competes with Oracle in the market. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_DB2
Okay how are you going to get a breach of security behind a NAT firewall? They are going to have to compromise a server "If you have one on your network" and then use that machine for an attack. Or you are going to have to have your router firewall compromised and the villan setup port forwarding rules to allow an attack on the server. Depending on the data of course on the server yes you can be a lot less paranoid on some intranet systems than you can be on the web. I will say if you are dealing with a large complex network then you are 100% correct. You never know when something will be forgotten or someone forwards something that they should not.
Umm. No it isn't Microsoft's fault but then you just don't get it. Some people use computers as tools to get a job done. This guy has a very expensive printer that he uses for his business. So here are his two choices. 1. Keep XP and keep using the very expensive pinter and keep making money. 2. Spend money to upgrade to Windows 7 and pay a lot of money for a new printer to do what he is already doing. So why upgrade? It has a lot of cost and no real benefit. With the cost of the printer it is cheaper for him to keep and XP machine just to print with.
I see the same thing in my market. Some people have very old devices that use 3.5" disks that stored data in a none dos format. Windows XP will not run the software to read those disks so they still keep old DOS machines around just ro read those disks and then copy the data to a Dos formated disk.
I don't care how long they support it from launch. I care about how long they support it from the time the copy is sold!. They had to extend XP past 10 years because they where still selling it. As far as I know they are till selling it today.
For most programs 64 bits is just not needed. What 64 bits gets you is more than 2GB for any one task. There are a huge number of tasks where the dataset is well under one GB. There are very few Office users that are using spreadsheets or documents that are in the GB range. That is the issue with many people Windows XP is getting security updates and it runs everything they need to run. Why pay for a new OS when you get no real world benefit from it.
Except that Linux has a large percentage of the server market so that makes it a high value target.
I will admit that Windows gets blame for things that I just do not think are it's fault. For instance I do not think it is right to blame any OS for trojans. If you run a program as admin that infects your system that isn't the OSs fault. Of course for the longest time Windows pretty much was useless if you where not running as admin and it has taken a while for software to learn to play nice when it is being run by a normal user. AKA it isn't Windows falt if you click on "hot naked chicks.exe" in your email.
Umm. You do know that we have bases in Oman and the UAE don't you? Not to mention that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia probably wouldn't have issues with the US putting F22s their. The F-22s would be land based. In fact from my post "The US fleet would stand off outside of cruise missile range except for forward deployed Submarines. F-18 and land based F-16s, F15s, and F-22s would hunt any recon aircraft that are sent out to locate the fleet. While ATACMS are moved to the coast for counter battery fire on SAM sites and land based cruise missiles." Notice the words LAND BASED when speaking about F-15,F-16s, and F-22s.
And I put in the UAVs last "I left out the UAVs which will be used to watch for and take out any small boats and to map radar sites for strikes." Most of the interesting stuff UAVs do is classified and recon in nature. The Predator and Reapers would be used for hunting small boats and such. Global Hawks would take do most of the TR-1/U2R did which is recon.
And actually the Sea Eagle wasn't scrapped it, was never built. The Sea Eagle was proposed to replace the F-14 which was having a lot of problems at the time with the TF-30 engines and the AWG-9 radar. The Sea Eagle was a none starter because once they put the AWG-9, AIM-54s, and made it carrier ready it would have been more risky and more expensive than the F-14. Of course the F-14 was born when the DOD scrapped the F-111b which was a real mess. The F-14 got it's AWG-9 and AIM-54 weapon system from the F-111b. Of course the TF-30 was not a great engine and really was not suited to a fighter at all. The F-14 didn't really come over come those issues until the F-14D and F-14A+ which replaced the TF-30 with the GE F110. Maybe you need to work on your reading skills a bit.
"You can have 500 mile striking distance, but you will have to close those miles to find targets that are passively waiting for your crafts." You can close that with aircraft. A passive ship or boat will be nothing but a target for aircraft. Iran will not just attack without first saying that they are closing the water way. If they did that then all bets are off. Iran would face the full unrestrained furry of not just the US but all of the US's allies. I doubt that the Iranian government is that stupid.
They are not anti radar they are anti ship missiles. They are not going to be stealthy and even if they are they will be emitting radar and be very hot in IR so yes they will be spotted by E-3s, E-2s, F-18s, F-15s, and possibly F-22s. All of these aircraft have data links so what they see the helicopters will also see. If it is there is any concern the repeater will be a towed decoy and be suspended far below the helicopter. Anti-ship missiles ignore anything above a certain height so even if they close enough for the crews to see them they can just turn them off.
For the rest of your fantasy let me correct it for you. 1. General? This is the navy so it would be a Captain, squadron commander, or maybe an admiral but that is unlikely.
2. The pilot and crews have already trained for this tactic. It is not a new tactic at all and is pretty well known.
Actually PHP is pretty bad as a language. Like Perl it does nothing to encourage proper design or even readability. What people don't understand is that a good programer can write a good, stable, and scaleable program in just about any language. The best can do it in Assembly language. Bad programers can write crap in any language. The problem is that most programers fall in the middle. A good language will help them write good code.
So what is good about PHP? That is simple, it is popular, everywhere, and has a lot of support. IMHO it is the Microsoft Basic of the web. I have not played with Yii, Cake, or Zend but they all sound very interesting. One may want to go one step higher and possibly look at something like Drupal or Joomla instead of a framework. What the original poster wants to do may already be available in one of those CMSs or could be added to it as a module.
If they close the water way then. 1. Yes the US would shot but not first. Closing the water way would be the first "shot". The UN would establish a no fly zone or the US and it's allies would. So yes it would be unwise to send out any aircraft. 2. US carrier aircraft have a longer range then Iranian cruise missiles. Not to mention land based aircraft in the area, satellites, and UAVs. yes we could find targets and hit them while standing off. The US's striking distance is greater than Iran's by far.
Maybe but F-15s have long endurance and good radar so if they are in the area why not use them. F-16s are cleared to carry the AIM-120 and are more than a match for most aircraft. Might as well keep the F-22s to deal with any SU-30s and or F-14s that Iran can get into the air and use the F-15s and F-18s to deal with any other fighters. The F-16s can take out any patrol aircraft and or helicopters. And frankly using E-3s and E-2s for targeting the F-16 can act as a very fast SAM site so why not use them for extra CAP until they are needed for Air to Ground. The B2 can be forward deployed to Diego Garcia along with the B-1 and B-52s if needed. As for same sites. I think the F-22 may be cleared for the Harm if not you can use JSOWs to stand off and E-6Bs and EF-18s with HARMs.
Remember these are anti ship missiles. Once they missiles are launched and heading towards the decoys the helicopters turn off the repeaters and climb. The missles will just keep going out to see and kill some fish.
"You seem to be assuming that the Iranian's don't have any high tech weapons and ECM, but clearly that isn't true. They managed to steal one of your drones only recently using purely technical means. They have satellites too you know." They claim that they did. Since the GPS signal that the drone uses is encrypted it is unlikely that they "brought it down" It is far more likely that it malfunctioned. I do not think you know what ECM is or how it works. You have two types of ECM. 1. Noise jammers. 2. Deception jammers. Both involve putting out EM. Guess what? The AIM 120 has a home on jammer mode as does the HARM. Jammers without air superiority have a very short life span. You use ECM when you are attacking to cover your own aircraft. It will not be a significant issue for the Western forces. The US fleet can stand off in the Indian Ocean with out any issues until they degrade the Iranian defenses. There SAM systems are based on the SA-5, SA-2, and the old US Hawk systems. All of them are 1960s/70s technology. They have had some upgrades but not state of the art. They claim that they have the SA-300 system but Russia says they didn't sell those to Iran. So that is a bit of a question mark. Sure we my take some losses but their SAM system isn't better than what Iraq had during the first gulf war. As to their subs the only ones that are a real threat are the Kilos. Those are a threat but they have to snorkel to recharge their batteries and are slow. If they try to go in to the Indian Ocean they will be very vulnerable to the Seawolf class subs the US will have forward deployed. If they stay in shallow water they will be vulnerable to P-3s and Seahawks. If they stay in port they will get hit by ATACMS and Tomahawks. A threat but not an insurmontable one.
Sprint didn't back when I had a feature phone. Sprint has been pretty open about things like that. I downloaded Opera for My A900 back in the day with not problem.
1. You have AEW radars looking down and ship based radar looking up just where will the missiles hide? 2. Interesting idea of trying to get a cruise missile to fly in close formation with an airliner. I have never heard of that being done in real life. 3. Modern radar can identify the target based on it's signature. So unless the airliners is pumping out jamming a modern radar system will see the missile and identify it at high altitude and take it out with a SM2 at long range.
That is a pretty iffy tactic at best. And I feel you would be very mistaken if you think that nothing was learned from that. Here is one way that it would probably go down IHMO. The US fleet except would stand off outside of cruise missile range except for forward deployed Submarines. F-18 and land based F-16s, F15s, and F-22s would hunt any recon aircraft that are sent out to locate the fleet. While ATACMS are moved to the coast for counter battery fire on SAM sites and land based cruise missiles. Any ships of the Iranian navy that stay in port will be targeted with ATACMS and Tomahawks. Any ships at see will be hit by Harpoons. B-2s, B-1s, and B-52s will take out command and control, air fields, and radar sites using stand off weapons. While P-3s, Seahawks, and Seawolf class subs hunt the Kilo class subs and 688is and Ohio Class SGNs get into position for Tomahawk strikes. Once Iran's sensors are degraded the US will us helicopters to mimic the fleet. They will fly low and slow and us radar repeaters to look like large ships. When the Iranians fire at those targets their radars will be taken out by HARMS and the missile sites by JDAMS, JSOWS or ATACMs depending on the location. At that point the fleet can move closer and any remaining anti ship missiles should be taken care of by the CGs and DDGs escorting the carriers. The Iranian fleet will be gone, The Iranian air force will be gone. The on threat left will be from their mobile ballistic missiles so we will see how well SM-3s and PAC-3s really work but if they do work as well as expected and if the launchers are within range of ATACMS for counter battery fire then the Iranian air and navy forces will no longer be a threat and any land forces they use to attack with will be vulnerable to air strikes. I left out the UAVs which will be used to watch for and take out any small boats and to map radar sites for strikes. And that is just using publicly available data.
So? Voyager is not the fastest space craft we could build even then. It is not the fastest space craft we could build today. Today with an unlimited budget we could build a nuclear powered ion drive and maybe reach Proxima in a century or two. In the future we may go even faster with a laser pumped solar sail. So no not impossible but very difficult and possibly impractical today for us. A century or so of progress and it may become practical if not before then.
True but how much will that come too. $5 per machine? $10? the touch screens add a lot to the cost of the device. That is why the cheap tablets cheap out on the touch screen.
Wow what a jerk... Really he has no idea how to act at all. The line that gets me is this. "Ultimately, if I was able to control the customer, it never would have happened. I've dealt with thousands and thousands of customers with similar complaints, they were all asking the same question. " I want a list of his clients! I want to make sure that I never do any business where I might run into this jerk.
"Yet while admitting he handled things badly, Christoforo said he also felt the situation could have been different if Krahulik approached the situation differently. "He called me a bully, but he was being a bully... especially when he emailed me out of the blue, saying 'That's f***ing s***ty, you're banned from PAX,' I was like 'Who the f*** are you? That's how you introduce yourself?... I dont want to call him out, but he could have gone about that a totally different way, he could have said, 'Hey, I run the show, that email was a little unprofessional, if you don't do something to apologize I don't want you at my show.' But he just came at me and said, indirectly, 'Hey, f*** you, you're banned from PAX.' Is that what you'd call professional? I wouldn't."
Really? You idiot. Being professional means NEVER losing your cool with any customer or in any business communications ever! Anything you say in writing can come back so never write anything stupid. Christoforo is just clueless. However to the Super Jerks of the Internet. DO NOT THREATEN PEOPLE, AND FOR GOODNESS SAKES NEVER THREATEN ANYONES SPOUSE OR CHILD ! That is far higher on the evil jerk scale than what Cistoforo did.
Simple. "- Capacity touchscreen instead of keyboard" A capitative touchscreen costs more than a keyboard. "- simple case instead of clamshell" In volumen the case is about $5 for one and $3 for the other. The molds are expensive and frankly making a good tablet case is harder than a clamshell netbook because it is expected to be a lot thinner and just as strong.
"- Cheaper ARM CPU instead of Atom" Probably. I have no idea what OEM pricing on Atom is but I bet it is pretty dang cheap. "- smaller battery" But for a tablet you will use LiPoly while a netbook may use cheaper Li-ION batteries. The cost may actually be lower for the Netbook. "- No OS license" Well yes but that my actually add to the cost. Installing craplets like those trial virus checkers actually bring the price of windows down to 0 or lower for a lot of OEMs. Why do you think they put those one?
Actually if you read the FSF website you will see that "Free as in speech" is not the same as "Free as in beer". The FSF has no problem with an author charging for the software. You are just supposed to get the code with it and you are allowed to modify it and or redistribute it. That is one of the problems with the GNU model. It works great if a bug company wants to pay for say a custom CMS or Accounting system. What it doesn't allow is for a way to distribute the cost of development over many users in an easy way.
Actually solar and wind combined with natural gas turbine peaking plants can provide baseload. Combine that with the excess night time baseload and you should be good to go. AKA run the trains mostly at night when power is the cheapest.
Slashdot Mirror
You have no idea what you are talking about.
IBM pretty much invented SQL. DB/2 is and SQL database and competes with Oracle in the market.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_DB2
Okay how are you going to get a breach of security behind a NAT firewall?
They are going to have to compromise a server "If you have one on your network" and then use that machine for an attack.
Or you are going to have to have your router firewall compromised and the villan setup port forwarding rules to allow an attack on the server.
Depending on the data of course on the server yes you can be a lot less paranoid on some intranet systems than you can be on the web.
I will say if you are dealing with a large complex network then you are 100% correct. You never know when something will be forgotten or someone forwards something that they should not.
Umm. No it isn't Microsoft's fault but then you just don't get it.
Some people use computers as tools to get a job done. This guy has a very expensive printer that he uses for his business. So here are his two choices.
1. Keep XP and keep using the very expensive pinter and keep making money.
2. Spend money to upgrade to Windows 7 and pay a lot of money for a new printer to do what he is already doing.
So why upgrade? It has a lot of cost and no real benefit.
With the cost of the printer it is cheaper for him to keep and XP machine just to print with.
I see the same thing in my market. Some people have very old devices that use 3.5" disks that stored data in a none dos format. Windows XP will not run the software to read those disks so they still keep old DOS machines around just ro read those disks and then copy the data to a Dos formated disk.
I don't care how long they support it from launch. I care about how long they support it from the time the copy is sold!.
They had to extend XP past 10 years because they where still selling it. As far as I know they are till selling it today.
For most programs 64 bits is just not needed.
What 64 bits gets you is more than 2GB for any one task.
There are a huge number of tasks where the dataset is well under one GB.
There are very few Office users that are using spreadsheets or documents that are in the GB range.
That is the issue with many people Windows XP is getting security updates and it runs everything they need to run. Why pay for a new OS when you get no real world benefit from it.
Except that Linux has a large percentage of the server market so that makes it a high value target.
I will admit that Windows gets blame for things that I just do not think are it's fault.
For instance I do not think it is right to blame any OS for trojans. If you run a program as admin that infects your system that isn't the OSs fault. Of course for the longest time Windows pretty much was useless if you where not running as admin and it has taken a while for software to learn to play nice when it is being run by a normal user.
AKA it isn't Windows falt if you click on "hot naked chicks.exe" in your email.
Will if I must.
Scoping is a mess in PHP
http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.scope.php
Umm. You do know that we have bases in Oman and the UAE don't you? Not to mention that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia probably wouldn't have issues with the US putting F22s their.
The F-22s would be land based.
In fact from my post "The US fleet would stand off outside of cruise missile range except for forward deployed Submarines.
F-18 and land based F-16s, F15s, and F-22s would hunt any recon aircraft that are sent out to locate the fleet. While ATACMS are moved to the coast for counter battery fire on SAM sites and land based cruise missiles."
Notice the words LAND BASED when speaking about F-15,F-16s, and F-22s.
And I put in the UAVs last
"I left out the UAVs which will be used to watch for and take out any small boats and to map radar sites for strikes."
Most of the interesting stuff UAVs do is classified and recon in nature. The Predator and Reapers would be used for hunting small boats and such. Global Hawks would take do most of the TR-1/U2R did which is recon.
And actually the Sea Eagle wasn't scrapped it, was never built. The Sea Eagle was proposed to replace the F-14 which was having a lot of problems at the time with the TF-30 engines and the AWG-9 radar. The Sea Eagle was a none starter because once they put the AWG-9, AIM-54s, and made it carrier ready it would have been more risky and more expensive than the F-14. Of course the F-14 was born when the DOD scrapped the F-111b which was a real mess. The F-14 got it's AWG-9 and AIM-54 weapon system from the F-111b. Of course the TF-30 was not a great engine and really was not suited to a fighter at all. The F-14 didn't really come over come those issues until the F-14D and F-14A+ which replaced the TF-30 with the GE F110.
Maybe you need to work on your reading skills a bit.
"You can have 500 mile striking distance, but you will have to close those miles to find targets that are passively waiting for your crafts."
You can close that with aircraft. A passive ship or boat will be nothing but a target for aircraft.
Iran will not just attack without first saying that they are closing the water way. If they did that then all bets are off. Iran would face the full unrestrained furry of not just the US but all of the US's allies. I doubt that the Iranian government is that stupid.
They are not anti radar they are anti ship missiles.
They are not going to be stealthy and even if they are they will be emitting radar and be very hot in IR so yes they will be spotted by E-3s, E-2s, F-18s, F-15s, and possibly F-22s. All of these aircraft have data links so what they see the helicopters will also see. If it is there is any concern the repeater will be a towed decoy and be suspended far below the helicopter. Anti-ship missiles ignore anything above a certain height so even if they close enough for the crews to see them they can just turn them off.
For the rest of your fantasy let me correct it for you.
1. General? This is the navy so it would be a Captain, squadron commander, or maybe an admiral but that is unlikely.
2. The pilot and crews have already trained for this tactic. It is not a new tactic at all and is pretty well known.
Actually PHP is pretty bad as a language. Like Perl it does nothing to encourage proper design or even readability.
What people don't understand is that a good programer can write a good, stable, and scaleable program in just about any language. The best can do it in Assembly language.
Bad programers can write crap in any language.
The problem is that most programers fall in the middle. A good language will help them write good code.
So what is good about PHP? That is simple, it is popular, everywhere, and has a lot of support. IMHO it is the Microsoft Basic of the web. I have not played with Yii, Cake, or Zend but they all sound very interesting.
One may want to go one step higher and possibly look at something like Drupal or Joomla instead of a framework. What the original poster wants to do may already be available in one of those CMSs or could be added to it as a module.
If they close the water way then.
1. Yes the US would shot but not first. Closing the water way would be the first "shot". The UN would establish a no fly zone or the US and it's allies would. So yes it would be unwise to send out any aircraft.
2. US carrier aircraft have a longer range then Iranian cruise missiles. Not to mention land based aircraft in the area, satellites, and UAVs. yes we could find targets and hit them while standing off. The US's striking distance is greater than Iran's by far.
Maybe but F-15s have long endurance and good radar so if they are in the area why not use them. F-16s are cleared to carry the AIM-120 and are more than a match for most aircraft. Might as well keep the F-22s to deal with any SU-30s and or F-14s that Iran can get into the air and use the F-15s and F-18s to deal with any other fighters. The F-16s can take out any patrol aircraft and or helicopters. And frankly using E-3s and E-2s for targeting the F-16 can act as a very fast SAM site so why not use them for extra CAP until they are needed for Air to Ground.
The B2 can be forward deployed to Diego Garcia along with the B-1 and B-52s if needed.
As for same sites. I think the F-22 may be cleared for the Harm if not you can use JSOWs to stand off and E-6Bs and EF-18s with HARMs.
Remember these are anti ship missiles. Once they missiles are launched and heading towards the decoys the helicopters turn off the repeaters and climb. The missles will just keep going out to see and kill some fish.
"You seem to be assuming that the Iranian's don't have any high tech weapons and ECM, but clearly that isn't true. They managed to steal one of your drones only recently using purely technical means. They have satellites too you know."
They claim that they did. Since the GPS signal that the drone uses is encrypted it is unlikely that they "brought it down" It is far more likely that it malfunctioned.
I do not think you know what ECM is or how it works. You have two types of ECM.
1. Noise jammers.
2. Deception jammers.
Both involve putting out EM. Guess what? The AIM 120 has a home on jammer mode as does the HARM. Jammers without air superiority have a very short life span. You use ECM when you are attacking to cover your own aircraft. It will not be a significant issue for the Western forces.
The US fleet can stand off in the Indian Ocean with out any issues until they degrade the Iranian defenses.
There SAM systems are based on the SA-5, SA-2, and the old US Hawk systems. All of them are 1960s/70s technology. They have had some upgrades but not state of the art. They claim that they have the SA-300 system but Russia says they didn't sell those to Iran. So that is a bit of a question mark. Sure we my take some losses but their SAM system isn't better than what Iraq had during the first gulf war.
As to their subs the only ones that are a real threat are the Kilos. Those are a threat but they have to snorkel to recharge their batteries and are slow. If they try to go in to the Indian Ocean they will be very vulnerable to the Seawolf class subs the US will have forward deployed. If they stay in shallow water they will be vulnerable to P-3s and Seahawks. If they stay in port they will get hit by ATACMS and Tomahawks.
A threat but not an insurmontable one.
Sprint didn't back when I had a feature phone. Sprint has been pretty open about things like that. I downloaded Opera for My A900 back in the day with not problem.
1. You have AEW radars looking down and ship based radar looking up just where will the missiles hide?
2. Interesting idea of trying to get a cruise missile to fly in close formation with an airliner. I have never heard of that being done in real life.
3. Modern radar can identify the target based on it's signature. So unless the airliners is pumping out jamming a modern radar system will see the missile and identify it at high altitude and take it out with a SM2 at long range.
Really?
That is a pretty iffy tactic at best.
And I feel you would be very mistaken if you think that nothing was learned from that.
Here is one way that it would probably go down IHMO.
The US fleet except would stand off outside of cruise missile range except for forward deployed Submarines.
F-18 and land based F-16s, F15s, and F-22s would hunt any recon aircraft that are sent out to locate the fleet. While ATACMS are moved to the coast for counter battery fire on SAM sites and land based cruise missiles.
Any ships of the Iranian navy that stay in port will be targeted with ATACMS and Tomahawks. Any ships at see will be hit by Harpoons. B-2s, B-1s, and B-52s will take out command and control, air fields, and radar sites using stand off weapons. While P-3s, Seahawks, and Seawolf class subs hunt the Kilo class subs and 688is and Ohio Class SGNs get into position for Tomahawk strikes.
Once Iran's sensors are degraded the US will us helicopters to mimic the fleet. They will fly low and slow and us radar repeaters to look like large ships. When the Iranians fire at those targets their radars will be taken out by HARMS and the missile sites by JDAMS, JSOWS or ATACMs depending on the location.
At that point the fleet can move closer and any remaining anti ship missiles should be taken care of by the CGs and DDGs escorting the carriers.
The Iranian fleet will be gone, The Iranian air force will be gone. The on threat left will be from their mobile ballistic missiles so we will see how well SM-3s and PAC-3s really work but if they do work as well as expected and if the launchers are within range of ATACMS for counter battery fire then the Iranian air and navy forces will no longer be a threat and any land forces they use to attack with will be vulnerable to air strikes.
I left out the UAVs which will be used to watch for and take out any small boats and to map radar sites for strikes.
And that is just using publicly available data.
So? Voyager is not the fastest space craft we could build even then. It is not the fastest space craft we could build today. Today with an unlimited budget we could build a nuclear powered ion drive and maybe reach Proxima in a century or two. In the future we may go even faster with a laser pumped solar sail.
So no not impossible but very difficult and possibly impractical today for us. A century or so of progress and it may become practical if not before then.
True but how much will that come too. $5 per machine? $10? the touch screens add a lot to the cost of the device. That is why the cheap tablets cheap out on the touch screen.
Wow what a jerk... Really he has no idea how to act at all.
The line that gets me is this.
"Ultimately, if I was able to control the customer, it never would have happened. I've dealt with thousands and thousands of customers with similar complaints, they were all asking the same question. "
I want a list of his clients! I want to make sure that I never do any business where I might run into this jerk.
"Yet while admitting he handled things badly, Christoforo said he also felt the situation could have been different if Krahulik approached the situation differently. ... especially when he emailed me out of the blue, saying 'That's f***ing s***ty, you're banned from PAX,' I was like 'Who the f*** are you? That's how you introduce yourself? ... I dont want to call him out, but he could have gone about that a totally different way, he could have said, 'Hey, I run the show, that email was a little unprofessional, if you don't do something to apologize I don't want you at my show.' But he just came at me and said, indirectly, 'Hey, f*** you, you're banned from PAX.' Is that what you'd call professional? I wouldn't."
"He called me a bully, but he was being a bully
Really? You idiot. Being professional means NEVER losing your cool with any customer or in any business communications ever! Anything you say in writing can come back so never write anything stupid. Christoforo is just clueless.
However to the Super Jerks of the Internet. DO NOT THREATEN PEOPLE, AND FOR GOODNESS SAKES NEVER THREATEN ANYONES SPOUSE OR CHILD !
That is far higher on the evil jerk scale than what Cistoforo did.
Simple.
"- Capacity touchscreen instead of keyboard"
A capitative touchscreen costs more than a keyboard.
"- simple case instead of clamshell"
In volumen the case is about $5 for one and $3 for the other. The molds are expensive and frankly making a good tablet case is harder than a clamshell netbook because it is expected to be a lot thinner and just as strong.
"- Cheaper ARM CPU instead of Atom"
Probably. I have no idea what OEM pricing on Atom is but I bet it is pretty dang cheap.
"- smaller battery"
But for a tablet you will use LiPoly while a netbook may use cheaper Li-ION batteries. The cost may actually be lower for the Netbook.
"- No OS license"
Well yes but that my actually add to the cost. Installing craplets like those trial virus checkers actually bring the price of windows down to 0 or lower for a lot of OEMs. Why do you think they put those one?
Actually if you read the FSF website you will see that "Free as in speech" is not the same as "Free as in beer". The FSF has no problem with an author charging for the software. You are just supposed to get the code with it and you are allowed to modify it and or redistribute it.
That is one of the problems with the GNU model. It works great if a bug company wants to pay for say a custom CMS or Accounting system. What it doesn't allow is for a way to distribute the cost of development over many users in an easy way.
No manned interstellar flight is currently impossible. No real reason that robotic missions are impossible.
Actually solar and wind combined with natural gas turbine peaking plants can provide baseload. Combine that with the excess night time baseload and you should be good to go. AKA run the trains mostly at night when power is the cheapest.