Nobody has run Cats 3, 2 or 1 to my house, nor have I got a barbed wire connection to my ISP. The last mile problem is not one of technology--there are millions of technologies that can solve the technical issues.
The problem is money. Nobody wants to spend the dollars necessary to hook us all up with data cable. That's why all the hullabalo about cable ISPs and DSL--they both utilize an existing physical connection.
In other words, the answer will not come from Cisco, it will come from somebody with deep pockets. And the only pockets deep enough in this case belong to the federal government.
I run a perfectly legitimate domain (a book review site) from my house. Due to Verizon's brain-dead policies, though, I have to run it on a non-80 port. Is there a way to point Netcraft at this server so I can register it with my choice of server software?
You may be inclined to answer "If you aren't on 80, you aren't a Big Player" but that's bullcrap. They count all those "build your own site" pieces of crap, plus everybody who forgot to turn off Personal Web Services. Why not me, too?
I never exchange *unwanted* gifts, that's not what returns are for, IMHO.
A gift says as much about the giver as the recip and should be kept as a memento at least (for a while anyway). The only reason for returns is if it the wrong size or something.
Having recently set up my own domain, I have some stats. The site is non-technical (book reviews) so should represent a relatively random sampling of users.
Total sample: 10000 hits
Windows 98 is way in the lead with 46.5%.
ME comes in at 15.9%
95, 2000, MacOS and NT are all roughly equal at 9.1, 8.8, 7.4 and 6.1 respectively.
XP has 3.6%.
Linux has 1%.
(there are a few others, including "Unknown" so those won't add up to 100)
Considering the differences between some of those Windows OS's, that's fairly diverse. What's more disturbing to me is the following:
IE has 81.3% of the browser stats, Netscape has 16.8%. "Unknown" and Opera together have less than 2%. WebTV brings up the rear with a measly 8 hits (0%) and that's it. No other browsers.
Considering that desktop OS is largely irrelevant to the Internet whereas browser is VERY relevant, this points out a disturbing trend: Microsoft Owns The Client-Side of the Internet.
Otherwise what are we to make of this statement: "...Microsoft has rigorous processes in place during the development of Windows to ensure the security and integrity of source code."
How anybody could fall for such a transparent and obvious hoax as this is beyond me.
"...OpenMail is the *only* e-mail platform out there, besides Exchange that will support a whole slew of Microsoft Outlook features..."
Please let me plug two products for a moment. The first is MailOne (descended from DEC's MailWORKS). Except for the Calendar/Groupware functions, it also supports Exchange/Outlook clients (including address book) as well as POP and IMAP (plus a command line and Motif client). Runs on Linux, AIX and Tru64.
The second is Direct21, an email migration tool. If you are trying to get off of OpenMail (or on, I think) this tool will do that quickly and easily.
I've looking for a new job. My current job is Linux-related and I'd like something similar. So I search for "Linux".
Let me tell you, about 80% of the Linux jobs out there are asking for embedded experience as well. If Linux is hot anywhere, it's in the embedded market.
Now, it may just be that embedded is hot and, because I'm not searching for it, I never see the non-Linux ads. That doesn't change the fact that nearly the only Linux ads I see are for embedded stuff.
"They may have emerged from the roiling of the vacuum of space, much as supply-and-demand and other "laws" of economics emerge from the bustle of the marketplace. If so, then solid-state
physics, which specializes in how emergent phenomena occur, may be the most fundamental science of them all.
If they are right and (some) higher-level laws are irreducible to particle physics, then solid-state physics probably won't be "the most fundamental" either. Any discipline that contains irreducible laws (economics? cognitive science? evolution?) will be in some sense "fundamental".
MailOne is a descendent of MailWORKS from DEC. Not only does it do what you want, it also has POP and IMAP servers and will talk Exchange/Outlook via MAPI. The only thing missing (which you don't mention you are looking for) is calendaring.
The amount of practical power you extract has little if anything to do with theoretical efficiency. The efficiency is based on an arbitrary equation, the power is actual energy per unit time.
For instance, what about a Stirling engine? It has a low "efficiency" according to your definition--but it uses literally any heat source at extremely low temperature differentials. Which engine is more efficient in a practical sense, the one that uses barrel after barrel of precious oil or the one that produces household current from sunshine and snow?
In other news, I just had lunch. It was eggs with cheese, sausage and banana bread. Now I'm working on modifying the docs for the app I fixed. If you promise to keep me posted on what licenses OSI is rejecting, I'll promise to let you know when I get my hair cut.
If we are going to genetically engineer, the only theoretical limitation I can see on the 100 meter dash is (100 meters / 3e8 meters/second) = 3e-7 seconds =.3 microseconds.
Seriously, what *theoretical* reason is there why we can't engineer a jet-powered human? Beetles do it. High gees? Exoskeleton.
Week after week of homoerotic "sports" were beginning to make me think Futurama wasn't coming back. Unfortunately it won't be THIS Sunday. *sigh*--another Junkyard War rerun it is, I guess. I wish they'd kill off that idiot Tyler and bring back Robert.
The point here is how to make a commercial website easy to use for customers. When you go to Target (the brick and mortar store), do they have a big animation in front of the door that requires you to watch 30 seconds of commercials and "punch the monkey" to get inside? No? Then why do websites do the same thing? Do they not want customers?
Slashdot is not the pinnacle of anything, especially not commercial site design. Arguing that "/. isn't 'back-button-compatible'" means nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
I live just down the road from Dean Kamen--why wasn't I informed about this competition?? I would love to have seen it live!
The problem is money. Nobody wants to spend the dollars necessary to hook us all up with data cable. That's why all the hullabalo about cable ISPs and DSL--they both utilize an existing physical connection.
In other words, the answer will not come from Cisco, it will come from somebody with deep pockets. And the only pockets deep enough in this case belong to the federal government.
You may be inclined to answer "If you aren't on 80, you aren't a Big Player" but that's bullcrap. They count all those "build your own site" pieces of crap, plus everybody who forgot to turn off Personal Web Services. Why not me, too?
Draw them by hand using a compass and plexiglass.
A gift says as much about the giver as the recip and should be kept as a memento at least (for a while anyway). The only reason for returns is if it the wrong size or something.
Wow! Linux, Hurd *and* GNU systems? Does it work on Tru64 with the GNU tools? How about AIX with GNU tools? Solaris with GNU?
Contrast that with Microsoft. MS Office, for example, only runs on two platforms: Windows 95/98/XP/ME/NT/2k and MacOS.
Rock on, dotDudes!
Mozilla now supports shortcut icons (a.k.a favicons) and custom page icons in bookmarks and in the personal toolbar.
...is working even as I type into 0.9.6.
What's with that spacing?
Total sample: 10000 hits
Windows 98 is way in the lead with 46.5%.
ME comes in at 15.9%
95, 2000, MacOS and NT are all roughly equal at 9.1, 8.8, 7.4 and 6.1 respectively.
XP has 3.6%.
Linux has 1%.
(there are a few others, including "Unknown" so those won't add up to 100)
Considering the differences between some of those Windows OS's, that's fairly diverse. What's more disturbing to me is the following:
IE has 81.3% of the browser stats, Netscape has 16.8%. "Unknown" and Opera together have less than 2%. WebTV brings up the rear with a measly 8 hits (0%) and that's it. No other browsers.
Considering that desktop OS is largely irrelevant to the Internet whereas browser is VERY relevant, this points out a disturbing trend: Microsoft Owns The Client-Side of the Internet.
How anybody could fall for such a transparent and obvious hoax as this is beyond me.
Please let me plug two products for a moment. The first is MailOne (descended from DEC's MailWORKS). Except for the Calendar/Groupware functions, it also supports Exchange/Outlook clients (including address book) as well as POP and IMAP (plus a command line and Motif client). Runs on Linux, AIX and Tru64.
The second is Direct21, an email migration tool. If you are trying to get off of OpenMail (or on, I think) this tool will do that quickly and easily.
Both can be found through the website.
It sounds like I'm working in the wrong end of the software business. Time to launch "willacceptsexforproductreviews.com"...
I've looking for a new job. My current job is Linux-related and I'd like something similar. So I search for "Linux".
Let me tell you, about 80% of the Linux jobs out there are asking for embedded experience as well. If Linux is hot anywhere, it's in the embedded market.
Now, it may just be that embedded is hot and, because I'm not searching for it, I never see the non-Linux ads. That doesn't change the fact that nearly the only Linux ads I see are for embedded stuff.
Why? Why not wireless networking? That would make setup even simpler.
"They may have emerged from the roiling of the vacuum of space, much as supply-and-demand and other "laws" of economics emerge from the bustle of the marketplace. If so, then solid-state
physics, which specializes in how emergent phenomena occur, may be the most fundamental science of them all.
If they are right and (some) higher-level laws are irreducible to particle physics, then solid-state physics probably won't be "the most fundamental" either. Any discipline that contains irreducible laws (economics? cognitive science? evolution?) will be in some sense "fundamental".
MailOne is a descendent of MailWORKS from DEC. Not only does it do what you want, it also has POP and IMAP servers and will talk Exchange/Outlook via MAPI. The only thing missing (which you don't mention you are looking for) is calendaring.
www.openone.com
The amount of practical power you extract has little if anything to do with theoretical efficiency. The efficiency is based on an arbitrary equation, the power is actual energy per unit time.
For instance, what about a Stirling engine? It has a low "efficiency" according to your definition--but it uses literally any heat source at extremely low temperature differentials. Which engine is more efficient in a practical sense, the one that uses barrel after barrel of precious oil or the one that produces household current from sunshine and snow?
"I think it'd be really slick to make still suits..."
That's right! Forget about flying cars, I wish for the day when I can drink tepid water harvested from my own sweat and urine!
In other news, I just had lunch. It was eggs with cheese, sausage and banana bread. Now I'm working on modifying the docs for the app I fixed. If you promise to keep me posted on what licenses OSI is rejecting, I'll promise to let you know when I get my hair cut.
Are you kidding? You think the artists, let alone the software and hardware manufacturers are going to just stand aside when it starts raining money?
If we are going to genetically engineer, the only theoretical limitation I can see on the 100 meter dash is (100 meters / 3e8 meters/second) = 3e-7 seconds = .3 microseconds.
Seriously, what *theoretical* reason is there why we can't engineer a jet-powered human? Beetles do it. High gees? Exoskeleton.
Week after week of homoerotic "sports" were beginning to make me think Futurama wasn't coming back. Unfortunately it won't be THIS Sunday. *sigh*--another Junkyard War rerun it is, I guess. I wish they'd kill off that idiot Tyler and bring back Robert.
Slashdot is not the pinnacle of anything, especially not commercial site design. Arguing that "/. isn't 'back-button-compatible'" means nothing.
"Reuters is reporting that scientists have found a massive black hole..."
Sounds like somebody should learn to hover over Slashdot links before clicking them...
IANAL, but I bet this means we can all stop saying "IANAL".