Indeed, here's a IBM press release [ibm.com] dated June 20, 2000.
Yeah, on the other hand I remember them being really costly when they came out, like about $1000. Now they are about $300, or free with the right camera. Well the right $2200 camera at least:-)
Predictable, but still important.
However I still haven't seen the promised type I 500M clones. Ah well.
They do demand careful treatment, though. A friend of mine dropped his Microdrive from about waist height onto carpet, and it never worked again.
On the other hand Bill Biggart (the only PJ to be killed wile covering the towers collapse) had one in his digital camera. It survived, he didn't, nor did the film in either of his film cameras (the backs burst open). So while his ~30 rolls of film taken earlier were good his last surviving pictures were on the 1G microdrive.
There is a picture of the remains of his camera (on a stark white background) on the cover of the current American Photo magazine. It includes some pretty stunning interviews of a half dozen or so pros that were covering the event.
It is pretty amazing to read how they were "operating on automatic", and "could barely see the viewfinder through the tears", and look at the same time at the amazingly well framed photos (like James Nachtwey's shot for Time with the building coming down in the background framed against the top of a church and it's cross on page 20).
A geek should own it just for the machine beat to death on the cover.
A photo geek should own it for the interviews and pictures.
Everyone who reads news papers should own it to see how the people that get their pictures risk their lives sometimes for them.
I can't find the Am Photo cover online, but doing a google search for "Bill Biggart American Photo" does turn up a whole bunch of relevant articles (including a surprisingly good MSNBC one).
If you do search for the cheapest hardware it is normally cheap for a reason. Being bad, and/or having no support is a reason. I buy cheap hardware too sometimes. I also buy the expensive kind.
I had a Cisco Aeronet (Aironet?) base station go bad recently. It took maybe 3 clicks from cisco.com to find a phone number, and less then five minutes to talk to a live person even though it was a bit after 9PM on the east coast, and a bit after 5 on the west. Not bad. Of corse all they did was agree that it sounded like a hardware problem and offer to fix it for about $700 (nothing about that 802.11 base station makes it significantly better then base stations that cost $150 to $300 new).
It is also easy to get Apple on the phone to support their hardware (or software), but I think with more limited hours.
It was trivial to get PC Power and Cooling on the phone (you use the main 800 number and ask for support), they even cross ship broken hardware.
Easy to get TiVo and DISH on the phone. A bit hard to break out of the script though.
Pretty easy to get the phone company, unless you want to call because your only line is down. It's almost trivial to get out of their script though.
It looks to be really hard to get Quicken on the phone. I'll find out for sure in the morning.
Canon is pretty easy to get on the phone, I have had only hardware questions though (one wasn't in the manual -- the sync voltage is 6V -- the other was -- the focus assist needs CF6 set to on, and focus to be in one shot not AI focus).
I'm sure a lot of other places answer their phones (and have people on the other end and all). I do believe a lot of places don't.
I think eventually, all the companies that can't even support their hardware are just going to become extinct
I hope so, but I'm not so sure. I mean I buy the cheep stuff. I have a cheep CF card, a cheep CD-RW, and cheep media. Stuff that if it breaks I can replace. Stuff that I think isn't that complex to design. I don't have cheep power supplies partly because it is hard to find cheep quiet ones, and partly because if a power supply goes bad in the wrong way it can destroy a lot of more costly stuff. I do have other cheep parts though.
Now that I think about it I'm not sure a cheep CF card was a good idea....
Sure...and I never wait for PhotoShop to finish something anymore. Or...hmmmm....I guess other then disk I/O and net I/O I can't think of anything else that I have to wait for normally, my compiles seem to be disk bound.
Well except for ray tracing, if I were to get back into it again. Computers have not gotten faster enough for that to be instant yet (3 days per frame on a P-III 500Mhz won't be instant fast enough on today's machines either).
There have been a number of fairly spectacular failures in this arena. Consider, for example
You forgot OSF/1 which was more or less "All Unix venders except Sun and AT&T vs. Sun and AT&T". It was a failure in that only DEC really used it, and even there it appears dead now.
Of corse there is also Solaris which was really a joint design Sun and AT&T, but not really the same as the others since AT&T never intended to use it, and never announced that they would. It is a failure in that it sucks:-), on the other hand it is a raging commercial success, or at least the closes Unix has to one.
It's hard to imagine how much farther along they would be if they had stuck to the path they are on with SunOS4, at least technically. Politically they got more business support, so maybe if they hadn't gone the way the did they might not be the dominant Unix player...that still doesn't make me like Solaris though.
I can't think of any commercially successful joint venture OSes...but, wasn't Multics a joint venture? Not commercially successful by a long shot, but very very influential...
In all reality I am completely surprised that there are this many options for broadband coming out that I was wondering if anyone has thought to use the obvious... Internet Pipes (IE T-Lines, OC-Lines, DS-Lines,... so on...).
It costs a huge amount of money to run a new line, thus many soulitions that try to reuse existing lines, or no lines at all.
Now I'm not sure a T1 should cost $1000 a month to keep running, the the huge start up cost is justified. ($1000/month will vary, Frame Relay prices may be much better since they are distance insensitive in most areas). The install involves someone digging from the nearest phone box to your house. It also involves routing a real copper pair to the closest CO and then to the CO closest to the other end point. Sometimes this is existing copper, sometimes not.
How does that differ from DSL which also needs a copper pair to the CO? Well when you buy a T1 you get a pair, if you buy DSL they use an existing pair. If there is no existing pair (or it goes through conversions to fiber) you can't order DSL, but if you order a T1 they will build a new pair. It may take six months, and cost you a lot of money, but they will do it. Also DSL has distance limitations, if you are too far from the CO you can't get DSL (or you get one of the slower kinds), with a T1 they install repeaters...plus I think the signal is stronger anyway...
I also can't remember for sure, but I think a T1 is two pair, and DSL is only one. It has been a while since I really knew anything about T1's though:-)
Re:If it isn't a fake ...
on
Apple PDA?
·
· Score: 2
Or are they?
I know three people that did. The real question is does Apple make more money convincing a few people to buy a Mac so they can use an iPod (or whatever), or from selling lots of iPods (or whatever) to PC users?
Everyone in the US knows that Microsoft's tactics are more than a little anticompetitive.
Except (apparently) the current court system...
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 1
That explains why I couldn't find it with google and link it to...er, nope, still no happy googling. I'm sure it came from somewhere...
It kinda sounds like The Onion, but it could have been some random stand up I saw...
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 1
Maybe Canada has its own laws, but customs?
It has been a long time since I have visited, like since the 80s, or even 70s, and I was like 10, so I don't recall for sure...but...the clearly had their whole own kind of bacon, and to me, a people that have their own kind of bacon, clearly must have their own culture to support the bacon.
Plus there was that who Bob and Doug McKenzie thing in the 80s, eh? So take off, eh?
Re:This discussion is two years to late ;-)
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 2
Wrong. The couldn't after January 1st, 1999.
Sure they could, they just back out of the deal. Now, or really in a few short months, they would have to somehow re-issue the old currency. Very hard.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 2
ireland is more or less a part of britain, and follows their economic policy
Really? Practice this one: "Pesky Canada found to have it's own laws, customs"
Re:This discussion is two years to late ;-)
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 2
This discussion here is two years to late, today only the metal and the paper we hold in our hands has changed.
Sort of. Any time in the past two years that an EU country had really wanted to change it's interest rates and fiddle with it's currency value, it could have done it without somehow convincing everyone in the whole country to trade in the currency.
So yeah, two years ago they all tied their boats to the same dock and started hanging out on the island. Today they started setting fire to the boats.
(That's not to say it's a bad idea, but now good or bad it's real hard to turn back)
The people who chose to not opt out are the people who obviously won't mind having spam sent to them
That's not quite the same as not only having your address/number sold to spammers, but also having a list of who you call and for how long (and who calls you) being sold.
Look, she orders pizza 3 times a week, never makes calls on Friday...
He calls 976 numbers...
They use the Internet a lot...
Look, he calls Land's End...
In other words a somewhat bigger deal, even to people who normally throw away their privacy... (of corse I would have thought that about the supermarket savings cards, but...)
The harddisk could use ext2 or 3 and all this sdmi copyprotection crap could be disabled, too.
Um, what SDMI crap? The iPod doesn't pay attention to the SDMI stuff, it never lets you copy files via iTunes, and treats the iTune loaded sound files as hidden through the filesystem (which means standard file tools can see them if you click "show hidden", or use, you know, "ls").
I think that is just as much to keep the drooling idiot users (and Apple has more then it's fair share) from deleting and moving the files around as to let them claim the iPod can't promote piracy since it won't let the files back out. I'm sure they knew it would take about no time for people to figure out how to take the files out. If they had really wanted to keep people from them they would have stored them in one big file, and XORed it with 0xdeadbeef.
It would be cool for it to play ogg files though. If iTunes and the iPod did I would start re-ripping my CDs...
What it didn't say, however, is if other DVD drives, such as the famous slot-loading Pioneer (which I am blessed to have), also exhibit this behavior.
What stops you from buying the CD, and returning it after you find out? I mean they are apparently accepting returns on the copy protected CDs unlike normal ones...
Just say "it didn't work in my computer (or car, or...)", you don't have to say "didn't work" means the copy protection (er, fair-use-crusher) didn't work....
2.4Ghz Seimens wireless phone and whenever I use that it cancels out my computer's wireless access
I have the same phone (three of them), and working 802.11 (with a Cisco 340, until it died, and then an Airport 'cause my office is close to the apple store...and it looks cool so my wife will let me put it in more "public" parts of hte house).
Try changing the channel you broadcast on, and try the "reduce interference" setting on your iBook. Also if you don't have really good signal before using the phones try moving things around a bit.
Does anyone know if this hack will affect this behavior (worse or better)?
Since it boosts the base station, and not your laptop's output, it may not help (you might be able to see it, but it may not see you), also the boost looks kinda small.
I would try it myself, but I use my iBook's Airport card for wireless access and can't run the program they use from my Mac, which would mean getting a PC wireless card to perform the hack.
I don't think you need to try the hack from a wireless machine, just something with IP access to your WAP base station. Plus while the instructions for the hack are for using a PC tool, it is all done using SNMP, so you can grab some of the SNMP tools for Mac OSX and translate the instructions yourself. It might not buy you much range, but it would be a learning experience...
Holography is cool, but it takes patience, a lot of trial/error, and when you want to move a step further, it takes as much money than doing high-end photography (with all the optics and chemicals).
While I don't completely doubt you, I do want to make sure we have the same idea of "high-end photography".
Canon has a 600mm f/4 lens and a 1200mm f/5.6 lens. Neither have list prices (well the 1200mm doesn't, I think the 600mm doesn't either). They are not stocked items either. Not just not stocked at camera (even CPS) stores, Canon also does not stock them.
You call Canon, they quote you a price and build time, and then they make it. Not sure if you pay first, or after.
One can also spend quite a bit on lights, $400 is on the very low end for a studio light, and some studios use 10+ of them ($200 is a good price for an amature's light, and it might be usable as a hair light to a pro if it is reliable enough).
Some triggers (sound/laser) are in the $600 range, and fiddling with them trying to find the right delay and distance and sensitivity settings to catch a bullet in flight, or a balloon collapsing, or the like can consume many 36 exposure rolls of film (many pros don't like digital for that sort of work -- I expect they will in a few years though).
35mm pro film cameras cost $1000 to $2000, digital $2000 (D30 - bad AF for a pro camera, bad flash exposure for a pro camera, bad weather seal for a pro camera, great everything else) to $5000 to $8000.
Medimum format and large format cameras cost more, depending (actually the Holga 120 costs about $15, but it sucks pretty bad). MF digital scanning backs can cost $50,000 and up (as in $120,000 or more).
Drum scanners make a Nikon 8000ED seem cheap.
Cibachromes can approach $100 *per print* from a master printer.
Is Holography going to run that much? (hmmm, may be time for a second job...)
The problem was the only room that we had to create the holograms in was on the 2nd floor of the house. So all kinds of vibrations from below caused some problems.
Interesting. Maybe the best thing to do is do it outside on a dark night, or in side a light tight bag (like the kind they sell for changing film on medium or large format cameras...or even for 35mm HIE work).
Make sure ur far away from streets and all forms of noise (and therefore vibrations) as this REALLY causes problems.
Outside after a long hike into no man's land it is then...at least if holographic plates/film hold a latent image well. If you put one in a light tight bag after you expose it (or leave it in the bag and take the laser out), does the image remain stable until you develop it, or do you need to do that as soon as possible?
However, 90% of the apps from 1986 to ~1995 uses undocumented APIs, weren't 32-bit clean, didn't like multifinder, used finder-hooks or other UI tricks, or resorted to other tricks for speed or whatever, and will not run on newer versions of the OS.
Bummer. The On MacOS product I had anything to do with (helped with docs, and did pre-release QA -- plus it was my first professions job) was released right around when the MacII came out, 1986? 1987? Worked quite well on the new OS. In fact if I ever find the box I packed it in I'll have to check it under OSX...
Relative to the Wintel world, back-compatibility on Macs is actually pretty bad.
I'm not so sure. Prior to windows any graphical app touched the hardware directly (and many non-graphical ones). Even post windows many games did that as well. It is hard to get CivI running on a WinXP machine, esp. one that has "built-in audio" that isn't really SoundBlaster compatable.
I think you underestimate the complexity of what you are suggesting.
Naw, not really. I have been assuming the recent (possably incomplete) render extention had enough transparency support, I may be wrong it may only have anti-alias support. X has supported outline fonts for a very long time, but only in a very superfical manner (turning them into bitmaps at a normal orientation, not as paths you can rotate). I beleve that has changed recently (either as part of the render extention, or something parallel to it).
Also last time DisplayPostScript was rammed into X it was as the XDPS extention, Sun and DEC implmented, and maybe SGI.
Anyway I was assuming there would be required extentions, or there would be some ugly slow parts.
Why might this make sense for (say) Linux in a way it never made sense for OSX? Well OSX's target audiance doesn't care about X11 apps, while Linux's has a ton of X11 apps they do care about. Diffrent audiance, diffrent design goals, thus a different design is not only possiable, but likely.
Why might it also be a bad idea? Well if you force the old apps to at least try to convert to the new world they will resemble the new world more, and work better with it. In other words if xtank will work unchanged, then the lazy ass xtank authors will never change it, thus no pretty antialiased tanks, and no use of modern load/save dialogs. Oh, and it keeps those nasty Escher menu borders.
On the gripping hand, the xtank authors are lazy ass programmers that may well not port it even if it is manditory just to get it to keep running.
Well, all you need then is a programme loader and you don't need to port the apps at all.
Yeah you do, different CPUs in many cases, and a different implmentation may have diffrent bugs (or fix some that a few things rely on). It should be an easy port though...unless the orignal was written in assembly.
Didn't realize it was going behind my back and sudo root-ing on me. That's just plain scary. Nothing like the iTunes rm -rf fiasco to point out how much of a Bad Idea this is...
What do you think it wanted the root password for?:-) Or how it can install in/Applications when you can't write files there....
Yeah, the iTunes thing was kinda sucky, and other Unix venders may have made similar mistakes, but they didn't promote use of spaces in file names all over the place...nor do most of them hide the install process (not that I have used many comercial Unix installers).
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, on the other hand I remember them being really costly when they came out, like about $1000. Now they are about $300, or free with the right camera. Well the right $2200 camera at least :-)
Predictable, but still important.
However I still haven't seen the promised type I 500M clones. Ah well.
On the other hand Bill Biggart (the only PJ to be killed wile covering the towers collapse) had one in his digital camera. It survived, he didn't, nor did the film in either of his film cameras (the backs burst open). So while his ~30 rolls of film taken earlier were good his last surviving pictures were on the 1G microdrive.
There is a picture of the remains of his camera (on a stark white background) on the cover of the current American Photo magazine. It includes some pretty stunning interviews of a half dozen or so pros that were covering the event.
It is pretty amazing to read how they were "operating on automatic", and "could barely see the viewfinder through the tears", and look at the same time at the amazingly well framed photos (like James Nachtwey's shot for Time with the building coming down in the background framed against the top of a church and it's cross on page 20).
A geek should own it just for the machine beat to death on the cover.
A photo geek should own it for the interviews and pictures.
Everyone who reads news papers should own it to see how the people that get their pictures risk their lives sometimes for them.
I can't find the Am Photo cover online, but doing a google search for "Bill Biggart American Photo" does turn up a whole bunch of relevant articles (including a surprisingly good MSNBC one).
If you do search for the cheapest hardware it is normally cheap for a reason. Being bad, and/or having no support is a reason. I buy cheap hardware too sometimes. I also buy the expensive kind.
I had a Cisco Aeronet (Aironet?) base station go bad recently. It took maybe 3 clicks from cisco.com to find a phone number, and less then five minutes to talk to a live person even though it was a bit after 9PM on the east coast, and a bit after 5 on the west. Not bad. Of corse all they did was agree that it sounded like a hardware problem and offer to fix it for about $700 (nothing about that 802.11 base station makes it significantly better then base stations that cost $150 to $300 new).
It is also easy to get Apple on the phone to support their hardware (or software), but I think with more limited hours.
It was trivial to get PC Power and Cooling on the phone (you use the main 800 number and ask for support), they even cross ship broken hardware.
Easy to get TiVo and DISH on the phone. A bit hard to break out of the script though.
Pretty easy to get the phone company, unless you want to call because your only line is down. It's almost trivial to get out of their script though.
It looks to be really hard to get Quicken on the phone. I'll find out for sure in the morning.
Canon is pretty easy to get on the phone, I have had only hardware questions though (one wasn't in the manual -- the sync voltage is 6V -- the other was -- the focus assist needs CF6 set to on, and focus to be in one shot not AI focus).
I'm sure a lot of other places answer their phones (and have people on the other end and all). I do believe a lot of places don't.
I hope so, but I'm not so sure. I mean I buy the cheep stuff. I have a cheep CF card, a cheep CD-RW, and cheep media. Stuff that if it breaks I can replace. Stuff that I think isn't that complex to design. I don't have cheep power supplies partly because it is hard to find cheep quiet ones, and partly because if a power supply goes bad in the wrong way it can destroy a lot of more costly stuff. I do have other cheep parts though.
Now that I think about it I'm not sure a cheep CF card was a good idea....
Sure...and I never wait for PhotoShop to finish something anymore. Or...hmmmm....I guess other then disk I/O and net I/O I can't think of anything else that I have to wait for normally, my compiles seem to be disk bound.
Well except for ray tracing, if I were to get back into it again. Computers have not gotten faster enough for that to be instant yet (3 days per frame on a P-III 500Mhz won't be instant fast enough on today's machines either).
You forgot OSF/1 which was more or less "All Unix venders except Sun and AT&T vs. Sun and AT&T". It was a failure in that only DEC really used it, and even there it appears dead now.
Of corse there is also Solaris which was really a joint design Sun and AT&T, but not really the same as the others since AT&T never intended to use it, and never announced that they would. It is a failure in that it sucks :-), on the other hand it is a raging commercial success, or at least the closes Unix has to one.
It's hard to imagine how much farther along they would be if they had stuck to the path they are on with SunOS4, at least technically. Politically they got more business support, so maybe if they hadn't gone the way the did they might not be the dominant Unix player...that still doesn't make me like Solaris though.
I can't think of any commercially successful joint venture OSes...but, wasn't Multics a joint venture? Not commercially successful by a long shot, but very very influential...
You can get townhomes in CA for $100K and single family homes for under $200K? Close to the tech jobs?
Sign me up, goodbye crappy VA weather :-)
It costs a huge amount of money to run a new line, thus many soulitions that try to reuse existing lines, or no lines at all.
Now I'm not sure a T1 should cost $1000 a month to keep running, the the huge start up cost is justified. ($1000/month will vary, Frame Relay prices may be much better since they are distance insensitive in most areas). The install involves someone digging from the nearest phone box to your house. It also involves routing a real copper pair to the closest CO and then to the CO closest to the other end point. Sometimes this is existing copper, sometimes not.
How does that differ from DSL which also needs a copper pair to the CO? Well when you buy a T1 you get a pair, if you buy DSL they use an existing pair. If there is no existing pair (or it goes through conversions to fiber) you can't order DSL, but if you order a T1 they will build a new pair. It may take six months, and cost you a lot of money, but they will do it. Also DSL has distance limitations, if you are too far from the CO you can't get DSL (or you get one of the slower kinds), with a T1 they install repeaters...plus I think the signal is stronger anyway...
I also can't remember for sure, but I think a T1 is two pair, and DSL is only one. It has been a while since I really knew anything about T1's though :-)
I know three people that did. The real question is does Apple make more money convincing a few people to buy a Mac so they can use an iPod (or whatever), or from selling lots of iPods (or whatever) to PC users?
Except (apparently) the current court system...
That explains why I couldn't find it with google and link it to...er, nope, still no happy googling. I'm sure it came from somewhere...
It kinda sounds like The Onion, but it could have been some random stand up I saw...
It has been a long time since I have visited, like since the 80s, or even 70s, and I was like 10, so I don't recall for sure...but...the clearly had their whole own kind of bacon, and to me, a people that have their own kind of bacon, clearly must have their own culture to support the bacon.
Plus there was that who Bob and Doug McKenzie thing in the 80s, eh? So take off, eh?
Sure they could, they just back out of the deal. Now, or really in a few short months, they would have to somehow re-issue the old currency. Very hard.
Really? Practice this one: "Pesky Canada found to have it's own laws, customs"
Sort of. Any time in the past two years that an EU country had really wanted to change it's interest rates and fiddle with it's currency value, it could have done it without somehow convincing everyone in the whole country to trade in the currency.
So yeah, two years ago they all tied their boats to the same dock and started hanging out on the island. Today they started setting fire to the boats.
(That's not to say it's a bad idea, but now good or bad it's real hard to turn back)
That's not quite the same as not only having your address/number sold to spammers, but also having a list of who you call and for how long (and who calls you) being sold.
Look, she orders pizza 3 times a week, never makes calls on Friday...
He calls 976 numbers...
They use the Internet a lot...
Look, he calls Land's End...
In other words a somewhat bigger deal, even to people who normally throw away their privacy... (of corse I would have thought that about the supermarket savings cards, but...)
Um, what SDMI crap? The iPod doesn't pay attention to the SDMI stuff, it never lets you copy files via iTunes, and treats the iTune loaded sound files as hidden through the filesystem (which means standard file tools can see them if you click "show hidden", or use, you know, "ls").
I think that is just as much to keep the drooling idiot users (and Apple has more then it's fair share) from deleting and moving the files around as to let them claim the iPod can't promote piracy since it won't let the files back out. I'm sure they knew it would take about no time for people to figure out how to take the files out. If they had really wanted to keep people from them they would have stored them in one big file, and XORed it with 0xdeadbeef.
It would be cool for it to play ogg files though. If iTunes and the iPod did I would start re-ripping my CDs...
What stops you from buying the CD, and returning it after you find out? I mean they are apparently accepting returns on the copy protected CDs unlike normal ones...
Just say "it didn't work in my computer (or car, or...)", you don't have to say "didn't work" means the copy protection (er, fair-use-crusher) didn't work....
I have the same phone (three of them), and working 802.11 (with a Cisco 340, until it died, and then an Airport 'cause my office is close to the apple store...and it looks cool so my wife will let me put it in more "public" parts of hte house).
Try changing the channel you broadcast on, and try the "reduce interference" setting on your iBook. Also if you don't have really good signal before using the phones try moving things around a bit.
Since it boosts the base station, and not your laptop's output, it may not help (you might be able to see it, but it may not see you), also the boost looks kinda small.
I don't think you need to try the hack from a wireless machine, just something with IP access to your WAP base station. Plus while the instructions for the hack are for using a PC tool, it is all done using SNMP, so you can grab some of the SNMP tools for Mac OSX and translate the instructions yourself. It might not buy you much range, but it would be a learning experience...
While I don't completely doubt you, I do want to make sure we have the same idea of "high-end photography".
Canon has a 600mm f/4 lens and a 1200mm f/5.6 lens. Neither have list prices (well the 1200mm doesn't, I think the 600mm doesn't either). They are not stocked items either. Not just not stocked at camera (even CPS) stores, Canon also does not stock them.
You call Canon, they quote you a price and build time, and then they make it. Not sure if you pay first, or after.
One can also spend quite a bit on lights, $400 is on the very low end for a studio light, and some studios use 10+ of them ($200 is a good price for an amature's light, and it might be usable as a hair light to a pro if it is reliable enough).
Some triggers (sound/laser) are in the $600 range, and fiddling with them trying to find the right delay and distance and sensitivity settings to catch a bullet in flight, or a balloon collapsing, or the like can consume many 36 exposure rolls of film (many pros don't like digital for that sort of work -- I expect they will in a few years though).
35mm pro film cameras cost $1000 to $2000, digital $2000 (D30 - bad AF for a pro camera, bad flash exposure for a pro camera, bad weather seal for a pro camera, great everything else) to $5000 to $8000.
Medimum format and large format cameras cost more, depending (actually the Holga 120 costs about $15, but it sucks pretty bad). MF digital scanning backs can cost $50,000 and up (as in $120,000 or more).
Drum scanners make a Nikon 8000ED seem cheap.
Cibachromes can approach $100 *per print* from a master printer.
Is Holography going to run that much? (hmmm, may be time for a second job...)
Works well for lion as well as house cats.
Not so well for ants.
Interesting. Maybe the best thing to do is do it outside on a dark night, or in side a light tight bag (like the kind they sell for changing film on medium or large format cameras...or even for 35mm HIE work).
Outside after a long hike into no man's land it is then...at least if holographic plates/film hold a latent image well. If you put one in a light tight bag after you expose it (or leave it in the bag and take the laser out), does the image remain stable until you develop it, or do you need to do that as soon as possible?
Bummer. The On MacOS product I had anything to do with (helped with docs, and did pre-release QA -- plus it was my first professions job) was released right around when the MacII came out, 1986? 1987? Worked quite well on the new OS. In fact if I ever find the box I packed it in I'll have to check it under OSX...
I'm not so sure. Prior to windows any graphical app touched the hardware directly (and many non-graphical ones). Even post windows many games did that as well. It is hard to get CivI running on a WinXP machine, esp. one that has "built-in audio" that isn't really SoundBlaster compatable.
That's not to say they didn't both suck though.
Naw, not really. I have been assuming the recent (possably incomplete) render extention had enough transparency support, I may be wrong it may only have anti-alias support. X has supported outline fonts for a very long time, but only in a very superfical manner (turning them into bitmaps at a normal orientation, not as paths you can rotate). I beleve that has changed recently (either as part of the render extention, or something parallel to it).
Also last time DisplayPostScript was rammed into X it was as the XDPS extention, Sun and DEC implmented, and maybe SGI.
Anyway I was assuming there would be required extentions, or there would be some ugly slow parts.
Why might this make sense for (say) Linux in a way it never made sense for OSX? Well OSX's target audiance doesn't care about X11 apps, while Linux's has a ton of X11 apps they do care about. Diffrent audiance, diffrent design goals, thus a different design is not only possiable, but likely.
Why might it also be a bad idea? Well if you force the old apps to at least try to convert to the new world they will resemble the new world more, and work better with it. In other words if xtank will work unchanged, then the lazy ass xtank authors will never change it, thus no pretty antialiased tanks, and no use of modern load/save dialogs. Oh, and it keeps those nasty Escher menu borders.
On the gripping hand, the xtank authors are lazy ass programmers that may well not port it even if it is manditory just to get it to keep running.
Yeah you do, different CPUs in many cases, and a different implmentation may have diffrent bugs (or fix some that a few things rely on). It should be an easy port though...unless the orignal was written in assembly.
What do you think it wanted the root password for? :-) Or how it can install in /Applications when you can't write files there....
Yeah, the iTunes thing was kinda sucky, and other Unix venders may have made similar mistakes, but they didn't promote use of spaces in file names all over the place...nor do most of them hide the install process (not that I have used many comercial Unix installers).