They were obviously so inspired by the movie The Martian, they thought they could go back in time and get the program launched a few years ago. Give them some more time and they might just pull it off.:)
Biggest waste of money in a long time. Besides what everyone else has already said, this is a useless plane for Canada, yet our goverment has been pursuing it for over 10 years. (Conservatives now, Liberals previously) In the arctic it helps to have a reliable aircraft. The old CF-18s have two engines so they can survive an engine failure, the new, wonderful F-35s have a single engine and don't work particularly well in cold temperatures. If the engine fails, you crash. So they suck for Canada, but I guess they are intended for use overseas, when we are helping the US to bomb miscellaneous countries. But apparently they suck for that too. Oh, and the software sucks, and we depend on the US to fix it.
I say cancel the bloody project and give money to Canadian companies to produce our own plane. We have companies and people with the experience and skills to do this, and it might just create a few more jobs. We should have done this 20 years ago, but it's not too late. And when we finally get a good product, we owe no-one, and maybe, if they ask nice, we might sell them to the US. But we'll probably have too many orders from Europe, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East, so the US will have to wait. They do have a shady credit history after all.
This plane is an ef'ing joke, at least from my perspective as Canadian ex-military. Does not operate well in cold weather, and has only one engine. If you lose an engine while patrolling the arctic, you go down. This is an overpriced, overcomplicated piece of shit. Our government has produced at least two reports that have stated that this is an inappropriate and overpriced solution for what we need, yet regardless the federal government (across two parties) seems to keep trying to back it, and even now, another report is surfacing suggesting this might change.
Small, stupid suggestion: Screw this boondoggle, and pay Canadian companies to produce a world-class, well-designed and actually useful aircraft to replace the well-performing, but old, CF-18s. And if the US doesn't like it, too bad.
Add to that special helmets? By a country engaged in war-crimes and atrocities? Yeah, that will sell it.
Figuring out the taxes on a phone line is rather complimakated
And yet they manage to send out hundreds of thousands of bills every month that calculate it down to the penny. Sure, they might make mistakes and have to offer refunds or disclaimers, but there's no excuse for them to not be able to tell you exactly what a $79.99 plan in a given ZIP code would have been billed after all taxes/fees were added last month.
This is basic customer service, not some advanced alien technology beyond the reach of AT&T.
Yes, and besides, it's not like they don't have some type of electronic device in front of them that would do all those calculations for them automatically.
Interesting, I just sent them an email that referenced the same film. What you're saying is technically correct. In fact the same thing happened to Ford I believe (or some other CEO, correct me if I'm wrong) who had a policy of "We only need to make so much, we should invest the rest in our employees". He was, of course, sued for the reason you suggest and the courts stated shareholders had the ultimate interest, bar none.
However, whether their hands are now tied, as you suggest, is not guaranteed. Other avenues are open. Of course, there's the typical: "PR is good for the company. It makes us look better, which therefore results in better sales." Other responses are also possible. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't speculate as to all the approaches that could be taken, but it's not impossible the system could be worked from within.
I really don't understand why there needs to be any argument or disagreement here. If some people really like Apache 1.x a lot and don't like 2.x (whether it is justified or not), there's a easy solution: Fork 1.x and maintain it yourself. Then the Apache people can focus on 2.x and not worry about 1.x and the PHP people can choose either competing package based on which they like best.
This is similar to the whole FreeBSD 4.x vs 5.x arguments and the spawning of Dragonfly. Open Source is about choice, and different projects can live or die based on their usefulness and/or popularity.
"...limiting the player accessibility to the provided player
software..."
That seems like a *big* showstopper to me. So, they're saying it works on
Windows and Mac, but you can't use iTunes on *either*? I don't see how
that would be possible if it's following the standard, as they claim, but
if it does, I can't imagine many people going for it.
There are things more important that "the ecomony". Like general happiness, health, and a good environment. People who are happy and healthy and live in a good environment also tend to be more intellectually "productive" (if you *must* think of things in those terms.)
I agree with some of the other replies to this, but isn't there something else to consider? Why do we need so many people? If the world had only a few million people (like it did not so long ago) we'd be in much better shape:
the environment wouldn't be threatened as we wouldn't be using nearly as much energy, burning as much fuel, using as much chemicals, etc.
There would be much more room for everyone, which should reduce tension and wars.
There would be so many more resources to go around, we'd have much less poverty and suffering
Also, much less disease
To get back on topic, none of the above negates the need for off-world colonization, obviously. We still need to protect against natural disasters. But I wish people wouldn't see this as a solution to over-population. Why can't we just grow up and realize that limiting the population is the rational, humane thing to do anyway.
Unfortunately no G5 support yet. I figured it would support that before Linux. Oh well. Now it's a race between OpenBSD and NetBSD to see who gets it first.:)
Slashdot Mirror
They were obviously so inspired by the movie The Martian, they thought they could go back in time and get the program launched a few years ago. Give them some more time and they might just pull it off. :)
Biggest waste of money in a long time. Besides what everyone else has already said, this is a useless plane for Canada, yet our goverment has been pursuing it for over 10 years. (Conservatives now, Liberals previously) In the arctic it helps to have a reliable aircraft. The old CF-18s have two engines so they can survive an engine failure, the new, wonderful F-35s have a single engine and don't work particularly well in cold temperatures. If the engine fails, you crash. So they suck for Canada, but I guess they are intended for use overseas, when we are helping the US to bomb miscellaneous countries. But apparently they suck for that too. Oh, and the software sucks, and we depend on the US to fix it.
I say cancel the bloody project and give money to Canadian companies to produce our own plane. We have companies and people with the experience and skills to do this, and it might just create a few more jobs. We should have done this 20 years ago, but it's not too late. And when we finally get a good product, we owe no-one, and maybe, if they ask nice, we might sell them to the US. But we'll probably have too many orders from Europe, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East, so the US will have to wait. They do have a shady credit history after all.
Don't visit the US! I've had a great experience visiting Cuba. Hell, some people probably had a better experience visiting East Germany.
Come to the US, we'll strip search you, steal you money, and and we won't even say please. And that's if you're white!
This plane is an ef'ing joke, at least from my perspective as Canadian ex-military. Does not operate well in cold weather, and has only one engine. If you lose an engine while patrolling the arctic, you go down. This is an overpriced, overcomplicated piece of shit. Our government has produced at least two reports that have stated that this is an inappropriate and overpriced solution for what we need, yet regardless the federal government (across two parties) seems to keep trying to back it, and even now, another report is surfacing suggesting this might change.
Small, stupid suggestion: Screw this boondoggle, and pay Canadian companies to produce a world-class, well-designed and actually useful aircraft to replace the well-performing, but old, CF-18s. And if the US doesn't like it, too bad.
Add to that special helmets? By a country engaged in war-crimes and atrocities? Yeah, that will sell it.
Actually, it was the second Quicksilver model that added support for +128 ATA drives, not the MDD model.
Fuck these guys. They should be thrown in jail or shot not making fucking video games.
So grab their user database and send out the email notifications yourself!
They should really upgrade, Jaguar is ancient!
Seriously. Quit.
And yet they manage to send out hundreds of thousands of bills every month that calculate it down to the penny. Sure, they might make mistakes and have to offer refunds or disclaimers, but there's no excuse for them to not be able to tell you exactly what a $79.99 plan in a given ZIP code would have been billed after all taxes/fees were added last month.
This is basic customer service, not some advanced alien technology beyond the reach of AT&T.
Yes, and besides, it's not like they don't have some type of electronic device in front of them that would do all those calculations for them automatically.
Interesting, I just sent them an email that referenced the same film. What you're saying is technically correct. In fact the same thing happened to Ford I believe (or some other CEO, correct me if I'm wrong) who had a policy of "We only need to make so much, we should invest the rest in our employees". He was, of course, sued for the reason you suggest and the courts stated shareholders had the ultimate interest, bar none.
However, whether their hands are now tied, as you suggest, is not guaranteed. Other avenues are open. Of course, there's the typical: "PR is good for the company. It makes us look better, which therefore results in better sales." Other responses are also possible. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't speculate as to all the approaches that could be taken, but it's not impossible the system could be worked from within.
People keep forgetting that Linux is not x86-only. It runs on lots of other platforms (probably ppc/ppc64 is the second most popular.)
So this isn't going to help me (nor will it help Linus!)
Try Azureus, it works very well on Mac OS X.
I really don't understand why there needs to be any argument or disagreement here. If some people really like Apache 1.x a lot and don't like 2.x (whether it is justified or not), there's a easy solution: Fork 1.x and maintain it yourself. Then the Apache people can focus on 2.x and not worry about 1.x and the PHP people can choose either competing package based on which they like best.
This is similar to the whole FreeBSD 4.x vs 5.x arguments and the spawning of Dragonfly. Open Source is about choice, and different projects can live or die based on their usefulness and/or popularity.
That seems like a *big* showstopper to me. So, they're saying it works on Windows and Mac, but you can't use iTunes on *either*? I don't see how that would be possible if it's following the standard, as they claim, but if it does, I can't imagine many people going for it.
Read the article, it mentions the $3 billion. It's still dead though.
I think it's pretty clear the Intanium is dead. I predict that within
3 years HP will officially abandon it and Intel will stop making it.
How exactly is this building eco-friendly? Seems like a big waste of energy to me.
There are things more important that "the ecomony". Like general happiness, health, and a good environment. People who are happy and healthy and live in a good environment also tend to be more intellectually "productive" (if you *must* think of things in those terms.)
I note that you didn't reply to my point about the environment.
I agree with some of the other replies to this, but isn't there something else to consider? Why do we need so many people? If the world had only a few million people (like it did not so long ago) we'd be in much better shape:
To get back on topic, none of the above negates the need for off-world colonization, obviously. We still need to protect against natural disasters. But I wish people wouldn't see this as a solution to over-population. Why can't we just grow up and realize that limiting the population is the rational, humane thing to do anyway.
Argh, I've almost given up on the human species.
The scary thing is, lots of "hello world" code examples, actually do have bugs. A common example is returning (void) instead of (int) in main().
This is not the right way to speak to customers. Generally they don't like to be fed loads of BS.
Unfortunately no G5 support yet. I figured it would support that before Linux. Oh well. Now it's a race between OpenBSD and NetBSD to see who gets it first.
I thought it was a part of an office suite called abisuite.