Well, I wouldn't be surprised if it was specified in imperial. But my point wasn't necessarily to denigrate Metric, but to expose the fallacy behind connecting successful missions with using metric over standard (or imperial).
That last comment, just by itself, should have been modded +5, funny. Unfortunately, I believe it was unintentional. And I love the little "American-made" jab. Of course, I'm supposed to be insulted by it while still agreeing with it. The only part I agree with is the last part of the sentence, "to suit American needs". You're absolutely right. It should be to suit American needs. Of course, to suit my American needs, I drive a Toyota.
The lesson is, whatever works best, not whatever the ESA would approve of. And using metric measurements doesn't make space travel easier or safer. It just makes it different.
I don't know that the Moon Landing teams were German. Maybe you are thinking of Rockets? The Saturn V team was lead by Von Braun. But take a look at the Manual for the Lunar Module, available at
In it, you will see many standard measurements listed. 32" here, a 2 3/8" vent opening there. The weights are listed in pounds. The only metric measurements (for distance, as far as I can tell) seem to be part of the thermal shield and blanket, where the largest layer is 1.25 mil (I assume millimeters?), the only measurement larger than a millimeter, and the rest are fractions of a millimeter.
In fact, if you look at original Saturn V docs (not Wikipedia, which is not reliable), located at:
you will see that almost all measurements are standard. They talk yards (yes, yards), inches, pounds, gallons, etc.. Now, did you want to continue with your critique? Regarding tractors, I defy you to find European tractors that have lasted as long as mine with as many original parts, while being used summer and winter for 40 years (plowing, mowing, tilling and grading)
Of course, I have never worked on a farm. I use my tractor to mow, to plow, and perform landscaping tasks. It's a 1967, and the only non-original parts are a couple of belts, 2 of the four tires, the air filter, the battery, the oil and the gas. It starts almost immediately with the push of a button, and runs smoothly, winter or summer.
But go ahead, instead of challenging my assertion of excellent American engineering using standard measurements, as the Lunar Module appears to have used, go on about the superiority of the system the Soviets adopted. Hmm... another mark against the metric system (that is a joke, for those humor impaired).
Of course, we did beat them to the moon, using our inefficient standard measurements, and other than the Russians, who pioneered space exploration amongst those other "agencies".
Somehow I doubt that the first moon landing teams felt that metric was important. Obviously, they made it (and back). Instead of trying to figure out ways to make things less divisible by three, they should focus on the actual logistics of getting there and back safely.
Of course, the most of the Slashdot crowd think that the metric system is some sort of gift from God. All I know is the bar where I order pints serves them at a proper temperature and you get a little more than the rated 20 UK fluid ounces. Should they switch to the metric system? Will that improve the beer? Will it make the Thames Welsh Bitter taste better? How about Coniston's, or Fuller's, or Paulaner Salvator?
All of my tractors parts are standard measurements. Will changing them to metric make the tractor last longer than the 40 years it already has? Of course, this will be unpopular here, but who cares what other space agencies think? Are they as successful as NASA? Have they broken more new ground? Do they care what we think about their use of the metric system, despite it's weaknesses? Don't think so.
I myself started in corporate while saving to start my company. It has it's own problems, but yeah, it's nice when the Sun workstation monitor that is 10 years old dies, but is attached to a machine 3 years old with a gold contract, and you get a brand new monitor within a day.
We certainly have met XP machines that have 256 and aren't worth upgrading (customer might use one app on that machine, and they don't need it quickly. If you have a corporate image, and it's been trimmed to the essentials, I can imagine XP using 120MB. Usually we see just the kernel memory taking 80-90MB. Now throw in your antivirus app (pigs, usually), various system tray stuff that can't be feasibly disabled without compromising a customer-desired feature, and backend stuff that installed applications like to run at all times, after login you have maybe 64 mb to play with. Maybe. Consider this: the machine I am typing on uses an ATI GPU (nothing fancy, just don't like waiting for refreshes with integrated graphics). The modern ATI drivers use.NET. So when this particular workstation finishes logging in, I am looking at 28MB of usage without touching any ATI options (I just checked). Now, some of this may not actually be ATI, and instead is some other.NET app (though I try to run a stripped down environment).
512MB is the spot where on a normal installation, with normal tasks, you don't have to listen to and wait for constant paging operations.
> Based on this comment and your previous ones, it obvious that you should not be supporting Windows machines.
You clearly feel upset that I get more service calls from the Windows users. I suppose that when they buy some accessory, plug it in, and the machine blue screens, that I am clearly responsible. Maybe you don't quite understand small business? You see, if you set things up correctly, most small business don't need your help on a daily basis. If you train the staff properly, they can take care of basic tasks on their own, clear their own paper jams, and even rotate their own tapes.
Unfortunately, organizations fall victim to various software problems (I won't include hardware, though I have a slightly lower failure rate for Apple hardware). Software patches cause issues, drivers cause issues that most end users can't solve (or don't have the time to solve), and for new customers of ours, we have to perform virus and spyware cleanups, train them on safer browsing habits, make sure things are being patched regularly, etc.
Most of the Apple customers click OK to get their patches, both optional and critical. Then they may reboot the computer. And the computer is fine. They don't require extensive security suites, just like properly configured Linux boxes don't require them. Every year or so, Windows customers need antivirus updates involving the core application. Even using various distribution systems, hiccups and software issues usually mean that a small office with less than 50 users will require close to 8 hours of service (checking installations, preparing the rollout, making policies, removing and installing software, testing distributions, and cleaning up the installations on up to 20% of machines that may have taken issue with some part of the process.
> Bullshit. XP is not Win9x. Processes can't just "take it down"... *Cue up the irrelevant anecdote about some > XP machine infected with ten rootkits.*
You apparently have never met CA's eTrust Antivirus. Several revisions and updates have led to ino* or realmon processes pegging the machine at 100% and keeping it there. Plenty of other applications can and do cause the same problem. You also apparently have very little actual experience in varied environments, many of which you as a consultant did not design from the outset. You inherit a lot of problems in this business, and there *are* a lot of incompetents. Most are inexperienced techs who used to work at a corporation with an IT "team" who know nothing but some parts of the Microsoft platform, and think that Dell is God's gift to the PC (don't forget that extended service agreement). Just make sure you remove the MyWay schlock. And don't forget to replace them as soon as they are off-contract.
> The only difference SP2 made to the firewall was enabling it by default.
Umm, I don't remember SP1 asking people if they wanted to unblock an app, but let's pretend it did for the sake of harmony.
> WTF ? A stripped Windows 2000 install will run happily in *64MB* of RAM and be absolutely flying in 256
Yeah, maybe a stripped Windows 2000 install will. I guess we're not worried about running any applications on this machine, then? Do you use Firefox? Why don't you pop that task manager open and tell us that it is using 5MB. It would fit with what you have claimed so far. Hell, I'm in Mozilla right now with only two slashdot windows open (the thread and this reply) and I just opened it 5 minutes ago. It's using 71,272K of memory. Hold on, I'll launch Firefox. 30,200K. Let me launch it in "Safe Mode".
22,252K. Wow. Good thing we have that 64MB to happily run with. Let's hope that we don't start opening any tabs, use email, or do any actual work.
> 768MB - 1GB
Right. What system are we talking about? What are you running on them? I have customers in an office using 400 mhz iMacs with 512MB and 10.4, and they have no problem running Office 2003 and Filemaker Pro 5.5, Apple Mail and Safari. Another uses an eMac with a 700mhz G4 and runs Quark 6 on top of the other items above. Same amount of memory. They don't complain about the speed. In fact, in the last year, the only problem or complaint they have had is with an apparently buggy postscript implementation on a Ricoh multi-function they leased.
> No they don't... You seem to have this completely arse about face. OS X's VM has historically been awful, > although it's improved in 10.4 at least to the point of acceptable.
Wow. Great anecdote. Too bad that it only has any bearing in the fantasy land you are in.
> Pure, unalduterated FUD.
My point exactly. Your claims of the performance of Windows are far fetched, and your decrying of OS X smacks of inexperience with the product, despite your ibook ownership (slow hard drive, maybe?). I say this typing from Windows XP.
256MB on Windows XP? It never should have been. Unfortunately, cheap manufacturers started *decreasing* the amount of memory standard equipped (they had started shipping everything with 512, but when prices for RAM went up, they dropped down to 256). No XP box should have ever been sold with less than 512MB, as once you add AV software, and you have your modern.NET video driver controls (NVIDIA and ATI), it takes 30 seconds just to finish logging in to the system. Let's not forget a decent firewall pre-SP2. Not exactly lightweight. Now launch Firefox, fire up a few tabs, and watch your screen refresh slow to a crawl and the disk rattling away as it throws things to and from the swap file.
You seem to be grossly overstating the performance of Windows XP. You can strip a Windows 2K installation to make it run in 256 without major issues, but even 2K should be equipped with 512MB unless you like disk activity to be your constant musical accompaniment. Of course, 512MB is where OS X gets real comfortable, too. Apple also shipped 256MB equipped machines far longer than they should have. But again, you don't wait after logging in to 10.4 with 256MB before you can perform basic functions.
Many "slowdowns" in OS X are related to the foundations. When I run Linux, I don't expect applications to launch as quickly. And in general, they don't. But once open, the OS schedules things very nicely. The same holds true for OS X. Having worked with Mac System 6.x to 9.x, they all felt more responsive than OS X when running one or two tasks. But beyond that, active tasks would really tax the system. While tasks may not feel as initially responsive under OS X, the memory handling is much better, and you can leave lots of applications open without much of a performance penalty.
Stability-wise, OS X wins hands down. Errant processes can take XP down in a heartbeat. And once the CPU is pegged, try even launching the Task Manager. Then when you get in there, discover that the errant process is registered as a service, and has to be stopped from services.msc. Then discover that services.msc becomes unresponsive when trying to stop the service(s). Now the question is, wait 10 minutes for the machine to respond enough to regain control, or take the chance on rebooting without shutting down properly, going into safe mode, and taking care of the problem. If that means uninstalling something, better hope the uninstaller will work in safe mode. Otherwise, you'd better launch the best available startup entry editor, and disable things from there or from services.
Yeah, Windows is a dream. That's why 95% of my income comes from supporting Windows shops, and I maybe visit the Mac folks (about 20% of my customers) once per year for support issues.
AMD used to use clamshell packaging on their Athlon processors. It was a nightmare, and I cut myself more than once opening them. I lavished them with praise (through the reseller channel) a couple of years ago when they switched to a mixed packaging of cardboard, cornstarch-based molding, and a little plastic. That new package is easy to open, easy to reuse, and is easy to disassemble for appropriate recycling.
The Core2 Duo processors I have been receiving are coming in plastic inside cardboard. There's more plastic, but it's not hard to open. I still prefer the AMD packaging, and I hope Intel does something similar soon, as the plastic looks resealable, but isn't.
Some very good points. I would disagree about the U.S. not being a sovereign nation in 20 years, though certainly I won't say that it's impossible.
The "You're throwing away your vote!" garbage gets me real steamed. You should always vote for the best person (not necessarily candidate, as some would take that as being someone who can win) according to your beliefs. If that happened, we wouldn't be in the messes we are in now. We have a "Extreme right wing" president who is afraid of or undesirous of standing up for conservative principles. We had a Republican Legislature trying to forward the concept of a Mommy-state while spending all of their time trying to figure out how to "bring home the bacon". Supposed "Conservatives" who supposedly cherish our System but refuse to ensure the enforcement of laws regarding immigration, pass bills restricting our privacy and freedoms, and appear to be just as beholden to various industries and organizations who obviously can't win them elections with financial support.
On the other hand, the Democrats will be no better. They are beholden to the same industries and organizations. They will have the same lobbyists courting them. Sure, they will try to rapid-fire impress some folks with a few quick moves. But even if they take the White House in 2008, we won't see much real change.
Except that when your parents pass away and leave you the house, you will magically owe the government money.
I agree that the only way to fix this, barring a leader who has the will and charisma and popular support of the people who can force change in the party, is to support alternative parties. Unfortunately, many promising people feel it is easier to take a party over from within, and push it to victory. This is sometimes the case, and certainly parties can be moved by strong personality to effect real changes. Ronald Reagan, for example, was able to shove the Republican party and create a short term change in their true tack. But often, once that personality leaves, the river starts to return to its original course. Here's a history tip for the young among you: Republicans weren't always enamored of tax cuts. Nor were they proponents of reducing the size of government. As you can see, some tax cutting attitudes remain. But the government reduction now seems to have been reduced itself to a talking point.
If Republican candidates hadn't drifted so far from the right, the Conservative base would have kept the party in full control. If people ignored the ridiculous campaign ads, educated themselves, and voted their conscience, we probably wouldn't have the Republican and Democrat parties in power, or at least the parties themselves would be vastly different.
Well, as a point of interest, I have never found file cabinets to have locks all that secure. Even from things as simple as paper clips. There have also been some good points in this thread about trust and trustworthiness, and pragmatism. When the head of the company is having an issue, he wants the admin to be able to fix everything, and doesn't want excuses. If the organization treats a well-qualified IT hire with respect, and doesn't bite the hand that feeds them, then they can expect to escape being bitten themselves.
Of course, there are always exceptions to this. But as many have mentioned, most admins don't want to waste the time digging through email boxes without some sort of incentive. On the other hand, I have discovered tampering with food and drinks by janitorial staff in the past (which people find much more horrifying than espionage, because they always leave some more for you to drink after them:)).
Vidar
Re:Twenty years from now...
on
An Ode To Al
·
· Score: 1
Twenty years ago "Weird" Al was pretty mainstream: "Eat It" was played all the time on pop stations, "Like a Surgeon" seemed not quite as popular, but still got a lot of play.
In fact, I didn't hear of Dr. Demento until the 1990's, whereas people were laughing about his songs in my school in 1984 and '85 ("Eat It" was amazingly popular, probably because everyone was listening to Michael Jackson at the time).
Thanks for the heads up on Synnex. We already knew about TechData (useless company, in my mind). We have used Newegg, PageComputers, techonweb, and others to fulfill orders and get lower prices. Two of those companies (Page and Techonweb) use Ingram, and we have mentioned to Ingram the fact that we are ordering from them, and asked them why they would give up margin just so they don't have to sell to us at the same price (they lose the direct sale, and instead basically pay an intermediary to sell it to one of their direct customers). They seem to be too dense to understand how crazy that is, because they are shipping some stuff to us anyways, it's not like it is a separate order or anything. It can't be any easier to fulfill. In fact, it must cost them more, as when we order, some boxes they send us are half empty, when they could have been filled with a few boxed processors, or cables, or something else.
Anyway, I get the feeling that it will only get worse. We actually have never made a profit on hardware sales, and we let customers know up front that we will do our best to get them the best price, and invite them to shop around. Those that try never find a better price, and we have capitalized on that good will to gain loyalty (thus service calls). Margin on hardware is a losing proposition these days.
Being a VAR myself, and having used Ingram Micro for years, I can say that a lot of that isn't AMD's fault. Ingram Micro is a fairweather friend to manufacturers. They were caught with their pants down when demand started to increase, and they never, ever stick their necks out on an order. My theory is that they they would let people backorder till they felt comfortable ordering a batch. Then, other people would order, and by the time the processors got to Ingram, they were already taken. We experienced this about a year ago, and Ingram kept telling us that supplies were constrained. But we were able to source them from other distributors, and even from retailers who ended up getting us a better price than Ingram (who pretty much rips us off).
As a side story, we've had lots of issues where Ingram would not move on a price, and the price they were charging on a $300 item was like $10 less than MSRP. They would claim that the prices one friendly retailer offered to us were lower than their cost. We ordered the items from the retailer, and they would be drop shipped from Ingram. The best part is the scramble for excuses when we called them on it (it happened several times). They would make all sorts of claims, such as "they must have a back end rebate", or that the retailer was selling it at a loss. We have access to all sorts of "partner programs", and those rebates, if they existed, were top secret, only for that special retailer (which of course, didn't exist in the magnitude described). Of course, fast forward a few years, and that same retailer is selling stuff to us "below Ingram's cost" and having it drop shipped from Ingram to us. Any day now, they will have to close their doors, what with all the charity and all:).
It was recommended that we check out Synnex, and we are investigating that option now. It is rumored that they are a much more competitive organization than the behemoth that is Ingram Micro (one of several distributors under one person or group - there's Ingram Books, video, etc.). The only things we buy from Ingram at this point are items that we aren't allowed to buy retail (per reseller agreements).
Lots of people where I live got their wells positioned using a dowser by the name of Marcel Triau (who was kind of a local legend). He used to use a chain, of all things, and swing it to and fro, and where he said dig, you'd better dig (as far as the story goes). When you got the well digger there, some would try to move it (easier access for the truck, or what have you), and those that did would have a hard time of it, and invariably have to go to where Triau pointed out. Many other weird capabilities were attributed to him, which seem in some ways fantastical. I tried googling him, and only found an article on a "french coil" method of pest control for trees - http://mypage.direct.ca/j/jliving/pen06.htm (also one tiny mention in a local newspaper). Seems weird.
Funny thing is, he mentions magnetism as one possibility for why it works, and disavows any scientific knowledge on his part on why things work, but that they just "do". From the article: "Because we cannot scientifically define and analyze these laws many people disbelieve them. However, nature is full of mystery and even the working of our own bodies is not fully understood." Perhaps his "abilities" were actually derived from some form of this magnetic sense, which allowed him to sense differences in magnetic fields, from which he could learn which "feelings" meant water, using the chain as an antenna.
Interesting, I think, though I know that most Slashdotters are not subsribers to "dowsing" and have pointed out a study or two in the past showing dowsers to only have a random shot at finding things. But I personally feel that all sorts of stuff that is claimed, but unexplained and therefore disregarded, has been established as having merit using scientific principles.
This "gallery" is extremely misleading, full of gaps and errors, and doesn't take the effort to point out the actual differences. The System 5.0 screenshot appears to be taken from an Apple IIGS running GS/OS, which while similar in appearance to the MacOS, was a different operating system. The System 7.0 screenshot actually has the "About this Macintosh" window open, showing us that it was actually running System 7.5.3R2 (which is skipped in this presentation, which is funny, as most clones shipped with 7.5). I used System 7.0* (--that's supposed to be a "bullet") for 6 years, and it looks nothing like System 7.5, and according to my memory, it was far less fancy, not featuring submenus on the Apple menu, or a control strip (which I never got used to, and it got in the way!:)). Also, 7.5 introduced a more grayscale appearance in both icons and interface (not platinum yet, but the Trash Can is a good example in the picture - compare 7.1 (which was very similar to 7.0) to 7.5.3 (which is erroneously placed in the System 7.0 screenshot.)
He completely skips Windows NT 4, which while it looked only marginally different from 95, had lots of different control panels (like SCSI, for when you want to add an IDE CD-ROM, how maddening was that!). I'm pretty sure background images were a capability of Windows 95, at the least after ActiveX was installed, and I know that 98 had the capability. But he shows it in Mac OS 8, and skips Windows 2000 altogether (and Windows ME, which had some graphical variances in explorer from 98)
These are just the things I noticed from personal experience. Who knows what else is wrong. It would have been better for him to ask for screenshots from people who actually have the stuff. I'm sure this seems overly critical, but I can't believe the lack of quality in a gallery mentioned on Slashdot.
Actually, I don't see how trying to pin down the age of the universe, which is impossible to do with the data we have, can advance us in other areas. I am all for the space program (in fact I would like to see it expanded greatly). I am all for research. What I am constantly disappointed by is what I see as opportunism at the expense of true knowledge. I don't know what kind of funding these people are getting to arrive at this "knowledge", but that funding could be used more efficiently by someone researching in an area where real results can be obtained. Instead, we have another "temporary" fact.
I realize my opinion on that is not popular (which is why my post moderated down as flamebait and overrated after being modded up). But that is a good proof of my point as well. Not only do some want to be able to spew out facts and figures (which may be incorrect), but they will try to drown out the voice of reason in order to maintain that status quo.
This, while a "funny" post, is also quite insightful. The problem with any of these figures is that we are really pulling them out of our nether regions. Given the supposed size and complexity of our universe (which doesn't seem to be getting any smaller or more simple), we will likely never know the actual age or size of the universe. If you were able to travel at insanely fast speeds, or use some form of long-distance teleportation, and you reached the "edge" of the universe, what would lie beyond? Empty space? How do we know the universe is not of infinite dimensional characteristics? We don't have nearly enough data to even justify a measurement.
Of course, by declaring the figures to be new and improved, some hooligan gets a microdot of attention for a while, so I guess that's what we are really looking for. We need to feel important, and like we're accomplishing something. Meanwhile, TV technology could be moving forward to something beyond digital, into the realm of beautiful analog freedom. I jest somewhat, but there is something to be said for the results of focused energy (in the form of thought). We improve our digital processes so that they become more effective than the current analog standards. However, we often do so at the expense of advances in other areas (analog, rottedlog, and ants-on-a-log technologies).
The age of the universe is all fine and dandy to want to know about, but really, would it break anybody's heart if it were 6,000 years and 3 days old? What about if it were only 10 million years old? 5 billion? Just as I think many Christians waste their time worrying about what someone else thinks about the age of the earth, many scientists do the same. Considering that most of us will likely be dead within 130 years, anything 6,000 years and older is a long time. And all of the above measurements are probably incorrect. Trying to pin it down with such limited amounts of data is pointless.
Having used the HL-5170DN for many customers, with no problems, I started getting the replacement, the 5250DN. Had the same problems with envelope creasing. One thing that I like about Brother is their technical support, which is available by 800 number and has a decent amount of knowledge about their product.
For heavy paper and envelope problems, if you flip a panel down in the back, there are two adjustment levers. I would speak with tech support or find documentation before fiddling with them, because I believe that you only need to adjust one at a time (there are levers on both sides) and I can't remember which side you start on (or if it matters at all). What I do know is that it completely fixed the creasing problem, and it has been a wonderful printer since, with no issues.
Another customer had a noisy 5250DN, which Brother replaced immediately, providing a shipping label, pickup, and return of a Brand New Model (not refurb'd). I agree that the construction doesn't feel as nice as the 5170, but the product is so superior in it's price range it's not even funny. 30ppm, fake PS3, PCL, Web Management, an admin utility with pretty cool features, updateable firmware, 10/100 ethernet, optional trays, adjustable paper path, good tech support, 32MB exp to 512 I think. It costs me a whopping $230 shipped. And Brother still provides a Mac OS 9 driver!
If you need multifunction, their unit based on the 5250 is also nice (though I wouldn't bother with scanning, which IME is slow).
BTW, make sure you are not buying toner/drums from Staples. I can get, and you can probably, too, Brother's 7000 page extended life toner (5% coverage) for $60, and the Drums for $102 (about 25,000 pages at 5% coverage). I think there is no better option for inexpensive B&W printing. Only when you get up to color products do the Xerox/Tektronix products get my dollar. (Have had nightmares with modern HP printers [since 1999]). Good Luck!
Lebanon as a nation is not capable of much control. Most of the Lebanese people are peace-loving, and want nothing to do with the terrorists. Parts of the country have at times been occupied by the PLO, and after the recent Hariri assassination, we saw that Hezbollah was very capable of creating unrest for the Lebanese people, who have been trying to shake off Syrian influence. Sometimes people don't realize that Lebanon has a large Christian population (and that their president, by law, must be Maronite Christian), and that they do not wish the destruction of Israel. There are also large Islamic communities, however, and many favor the practices of the terrorist groups in the area.
You are correct that if Lebanon is unable to do anything about it that Israel has some right to fix it themselves. I hope they do. In short, I agree with every part of your post excepting the first sentence, as I do not feel the Lebanese govt. could stop Hezbollah. They just don't have the resources. Notice the lack of official retaliation of Lebanon towards Israel. They are trying to let Israel take care of it.
Actually it is. If you read your history, you will see that considered to be a compassionate practice. It allows civilians to leave the area, but troops who have munitions either have to abandon some of them, or stay to protect them. Besides letting the enemy continue their bombardment from a "safe" civilian locale, there is no other way I can think of to defeat them. Any ideas?
Hamas is not the only terrorist group to utilize suicide bombers, either (and in fact you are now talking about Palestine?). Getting back by any means possible is exactly what the Israelis don't do. They don't purposefully target women and children, or civilians at all. And perhaps the reason why certain parties are in "camps" at all is because they refuse to peacefully coexist. Even Human Rights Watch, which is considered very anti-Israel by many, has condemned Hamas for it's crimes against humanity. A preface to it's charter (source:Wikipedia) - "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."
Great people, Hamas. I for one am glad that you are here to dictate the rules of engagement. I'm sure you take a similar stand on gun rights, and self-defense rights. I guess I can shoot the guy who shot me, but only as many times as he shot me. After all, if 3 people enter my home intending violence, and one shoots me, I can't hold it against the other two.
"But then again, it's all just a bunch of statistics. Who cares about the children, unless they are American brats, right?"
True colors, shining through. Did Hezbollah leaflet the Israeli target areas? The only ones who truly care about the civilians are the Israelis. The BBC snippet posted by someone above is particularly telling of the goal of most news orgs.
Slashdot Mirror
You can think of another, more successful, space agency?
Well, I wouldn't be surprised if it was specified in imperial. But my point wasn't necessarily to denigrate Metric, but to expose the fallacy behind connecting successful missions with using metric over standard (or imperial).
That last comment, just by itself, should have been modded +5, funny. Unfortunately, I believe it was unintentional. And I love the little "American-made" jab. Of course, I'm supposed to be insulted by it while still agreeing with it. The only part I agree with is the last part of the sentence, "to suit American needs". You're absolutely right. It should be to suit American needs. Of course, to suit my American needs, I drive a Toyota.
The lesson is, whatever works best, not whatever the ESA would approve of. And using metric measurements doesn't make space travel easier or safer. It just makes it different.
I don't know that the Moon Landing teams were German. Maybe you are thinking of Rockets? The Saturn V team was lead by Von Braun. But take a look at the Manual for the Lunar Module, available at
. pdf
g ov/19710065502_1971065502.pdf
http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11LM5structures
In it, you will see many standard measurements listed. 32" here, a 2 3/8" vent opening there. The weights are listed in pounds. The only metric measurements (for distance, as far as I can tell) seem to be part of the thermal shield and blanket, where the largest layer is 1.25 mil (I assume millimeters?), the only measurement larger than a millimeter, and the rest are fractions of a millimeter.
In fact, if you look at original Saturn V docs (not Wikipedia, which is not reliable), located at:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.
you will see that almost all measurements are standard. They talk yards (yes, yards), inches, pounds, gallons, etc.. Now, did you want to continue with your critique? Regarding tractors, I defy you to find European tractors that have lasted as long as mine with as many original parts, while being used summer and winter for 40 years (plowing, mowing, tilling and grading)
"The irony of that statement is overwhelming."
Enter: the person who scoffs at farmers...
Of course, I have never worked on a farm. I use my tractor to mow, to plow, and perform landscaping tasks. It's a 1967, and the only non-original parts are a couple of belts, 2 of the four tires, the air filter, the battery, the oil and the gas. It starts almost immediately with the push of a button, and runs smoothly, winter or summer.
But go ahead, instead of challenging my assertion of excellent American engineering using standard measurements, as the Lunar Module appears to have used, go on about the superiority of the system the Soviets adopted. Hmm... another mark against the metric system (that is a joke, for those humor impaired).
Of course, we did beat them to the moon, using our inefficient standard measurements, and other than the Russians, who pioneered space exploration amongst those other "agencies".
Somehow I doubt that the first moon landing teams felt that metric was important. Obviously, they made it (and back). Instead of trying to figure out ways to make things less divisible by three, they should focus on the actual logistics of getting there and back safely.
Of course, the most of the Slashdot crowd think that the metric system is some sort of gift from God. All I know is the bar where I order pints serves them at a proper temperature and you get a little more than the rated 20 UK fluid ounces. Should they switch to the metric system? Will that improve the beer? Will it make the Thames Welsh Bitter taste better? How about Coniston's, or Fuller's, or Paulaner Salvator?
All of my tractors parts are standard measurements. Will changing them to metric make the tractor last longer than the 40 years it already has? Of course, this will be unpopular here, but who cares what other space agencies think? Are they as successful as NASA? Have they broken more new ground? Do they care what we think about their use of the metric system, despite it's weaknesses? Don't think so.
I myself started in corporate while saving to start my company. It has it's own problems, but yeah, it's nice when the Sun workstation monitor that is 10 years old dies, but is attached to a machine 3 years old with a gold contract, and you get a brand new monitor within a day.
.NET. So when this particular workstation finishes logging in, I am looking at 28MB of usage without touching any ATI options (I just checked). Now, some of this may not actually be ATI, and instead is some other .NET app (though I try to run a stripped down environment).
We certainly have met XP machines that have 256 and aren't worth upgrading (customer might use one app on that machine, and they don't need it quickly. If you have a corporate image, and it's been trimmed to the essentials, I can imagine XP using 120MB. Usually we see just the kernel memory taking 80-90MB. Now throw in your antivirus app (pigs, usually), various system tray stuff that can't be feasibly disabled without compromising a customer-desired feature, and backend stuff that installed applications like to run at all times, after login you have maybe 64 mb to play with. Maybe. Consider this: the machine I am typing on uses an ATI GPU (nothing fancy, just don't like waiting for refreshes with integrated graphics). The modern ATI drivers use
512MB is the spot where on a normal installation, with normal tasks, you don't have to listen to and wait for constant paging operations.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Vidar
> Based on this comment and your previous ones, it obvious that you should not be supporting Windows machines.
... *Cue up the irrelevant anecdote about some
You clearly feel upset that I get more service calls from the Windows users. I suppose that when they buy some accessory, plug it in, and the machine blue screens, that I am clearly responsible. Maybe you don't quite understand small business? You see, if you set things up correctly, most small business don't need your help on a daily basis. If you train the staff properly, they can take care of basic tasks on their own, clear their own paper jams, and even rotate their own tapes.
Unfortunately, organizations fall victim to various software problems (I won't include hardware, though I have a slightly lower failure rate for Apple hardware). Software patches cause issues, drivers cause issues that most end users can't solve (or don't have the time to solve), and for new customers of ours, we have to perform virus and spyware cleanups, train them on safer browsing habits, make sure things are being patched regularly, etc.
Most of the Apple customers click OK to get their patches, both optional and critical. Then they may reboot the computer. And the computer is fine. They don't require extensive security suites, just like properly configured Linux boxes don't require them. Every year or so, Windows customers need antivirus updates involving the core application. Even using various distribution systems, hiccups and software issues usually mean that a small office with less than 50 users will require close to 8 hours of service (checking installations, preparing the rollout, making policies, removing and installing software, testing distributions, and cleaning up the installations on up to 20% of machines that may have taken issue with some part of the process.
> Bullshit. XP is not Win9x. Processes can't just "take it down"
> XP machine infected with ten rootkits.*
You apparently have never met CA's eTrust Antivirus. Several revisions and updates have led to ino* or realmon processes pegging the machine at 100% and keeping it there. Plenty of other applications can and do cause the same problem. You also apparently have very little actual experience in varied environments, many of which you as a consultant did not design from the outset. You inherit a lot of problems in this business, and there *are* a lot of incompetents. Most are inexperienced techs who used to work at a corporation with an IT "team" who know nothing but some parts of the Microsoft platform, and think that Dell is God's gift to the PC (don't forget that extended service agreement). Just make sure you remove the MyWay schlock. And don't forget to replace them as soon as they are off-contract.
> The only difference SP2 made to the firewall was enabling it by default.
... You seem to have this completely arse about face. OS X's VM has historically been awful,
Umm, I don't remember SP1 asking people if they wanted to unblock an app, but let's pretend it did for the sake of harmony.
> WTF ? A stripped Windows 2000 install will run happily in *64MB* of RAM and be absolutely flying in 256
Yeah, maybe a stripped Windows 2000 install will. I guess we're not worried about running any applications on this machine, then? Do you use Firefox? Why don't you pop that task manager open and tell us that it is using 5MB. It would fit with what you have claimed so far. Hell, I'm in Mozilla right now with only two slashdot windows open (the thread and this reply) and I just opened it 5 minutes ago. It's using 71,272K of memory. Hold on, I'll launch Firefox. 30,200K. Let me launch it in "Safe Mode".
22,252K. Wow. Good thing we have that 64MB to happily run with. Let's hope that we don't start opening any tabs, use email, or do any actual work.
> 768MB - 1GB
Right. What system are we talking about? What are you running on them? I have customers in an office using 400 mhz iMacs with 512MB and 10.4, and they have no problem running Office 2003 and Filemaker Pro 5.5, Apple Mail and Safari. Another uses an eMac with a 700mhz G4 and runs Quark 6 on top of the other items above. Same amount of memory. They don't complain about the speed. In fact, in the last year, the only problem or complaint they have had is with an apparently buggy postscript implementation on a Ricoh multi-function they leased.
> No they don't
> although it's improved in 10.4 at least to the point of acceptable.
Wow. Great anecdote. Too bad that it only has any bearing in the fantasy land you are in.
> Pure, unalduterated FUD.
My point exactly. Your claims of the performance of Windows are far fetched, and your decrying of OS X smacks of inexperience with the product, despite your ibook ownership (slow hard drive, maybe?). I say this typing from Windows XP.
Vidar
256MB on Windows XP? It never should have been. Unfortunately, cheap manufacturers started *decreasing* the amount of memory standard equipped (they had started shipping everything with 512, but when prices for RAM went up, they dropped down to 256). No XP box should have ever been sold with less than 512MB, as once you add AV software, and you have your modern .NET video driver controls (NVIDIA and ATI), it takes 30 seconds just to finish logging in to the system. Let's not forget a decent firewall pre-SP2. Not exactly lightweight. Now launch Firefox, fire up a few tabs, and watch your screen refresh slow to a crawl and the disk rattling away as it throws things to and from the swap file.
You seem to be grossly overstating the performance of Windows XP. You can strip a Windows 2K installation to make it run in 256 without major issues, but even 2K should be equipped with 512MB unless you like disk activity to be your constant musical accompaniment. Of course, 512MB is where OS X gets real comfortable, too. Apple also shipped 256MB equipped machines far longer than they should have. But again, you don't wait after logging in to 10.4 with 256MB before you can perform basic functions.
Many "slowdowns" in OS X are related to the foundations. When I run Linux, I don't expect applications to launch as quickly. And in general, they don't. But once open, the OS schedules things very nicely. The same holds true for OS X. Having worked with Mac System 6.x to 9.x, they all felt more responsive than OS X when running one or two tasks. But beyond that, active tasks would really tax the system. While tasks may not feel as initially responsive under OS X, the memory handling is much better, and you can leave lots of applications open without much of a performance penalty.
Stability-wise, OS X wins hands down. Errant processes can take XP down in a heartbeat. And once the CPU is pegged, try even launching the Task Manager. Then when you get in there, discover that the errant process is registered as a service, and has to be stopped from services.msc. Then discover that services.msc becomes unresponsive when trying to stop the service(s). Now the question is, wait 10 minutes for the machine to respond enough to regain control, or take the chance on rebooting without shutting down properly, going into safe mode, and taking care of the problem. If that means uninstalling something, better hope the uninstaller will work in safe mode. Otherwise, you'd better launch the best available startup entry editor, and disable things from there or from services.
Yeah, Windows is a dream. That's why 95% of my income comes from supporting Windows shops, and I maybe visit the Mac folks (about 20% of my customers) once per year for support issues.
Vidar
AMD used to use clamshell packaging on their Athlon processors. It was a nightmare, and I cut myself more than once opening them. I lavished them with praise (through the reseller channel) a couple of years ago when they switched to a mixed packaging of cardboard, cornstarch-based molding, and a little plastic. That new package is easy to open, easy to reuse, and is easy to disassemble for appropriate recycling.
The Core2 Duo processors I have been receiving are coming in plastic inside cardboard. There's more plastic, but it's not hard to open. I still prefer the AMD packaging, and I hope Intel does something similar soon, as the plastic looks resealable, but isn't.
Vidar
I don't even think I will spoil it, as Google will give you the answer
Some very good points. I would disagree about the U.S. not being a sovereign nation in 20 years, though certainly I won't say that it's impossible.
The "You're throwing away your vote!" garbage gets me real steamed. You should always vote for the best person (not necessarily candidate, as some would take that as being someone who can win) according to your beliefs. If that happened, we wouldn't be in the messes we are in now. We have a "Extreme right wing" president who is afraid of or undesirous of standing up for conservative principles. We had a Republican Legislature trying to forward the concept of a Mommy-state while spending all of their time trying to figure out how to "bring home the bacon". Supposed "Conservatives" who supposedly cherish our System but refuse to ensure the enforcement of laws regarding immigration, pass bills restricting our privacy and freedoms, and appear to be just as beholden to various industries and organizations who obviously can't win them elections with financial support.
On the other hand, the Democrats will be no better. They are beholden to the same industries and organizations. They will have the same lobbyists courting them. Sure, they will try to rapid-fire impress some folks with a few quick moves. But even if they take the White House in 2008, we won't see much real change.
Except that when your parents pass away and leave you the house, you will magically owe the government money.
I agree that the only way to fix this, barring a leader who has the will and charisma and popular support of the people who can force change in the party, is to support alternative parties. Unfortunately, many promising people feel it is easier to take a party over from within, and push it to victory. This is sometimes the case, and certainly parties can be moved by strong personality to effect real changes. Ronald Reagan, for example, was able to shove the Republican party and create a short term change in their true tack. But often, once that personality leaves, the river starts to return to its original course. Here's a history tip for the young among you: Republicans weren't always enamored of tax cuts. Nor were they proponents of reducing the size of government. As you can see, some tax cutting attitudes remain. But the government reduction now seems to have been reduced itself to a talking point.
If Republican candidates hadn't drifted so far from the right, the Conservative base would have kept the party in full control. If people ignored the ridiculous campaign ads, educated themselves, and voted their conscience, we probably wouldn't have the Republican and Democrat parties in power, or at least the parties themselves would be vastly different.
Vidar
Parent is not a Troll. Just a Conservative. Which I suppose some Slashdotters feel is a troll.
Well, as a point of interest, I have never found file cabinets to have locks all that secure. Even from things as simple as paper clips. There have also been some good points in this thread about trust and trustworthiness, and pragmatism. When the head of the company is having an issue, he wants the admin to be able to fix everything, and doesn't want excuses. If the organization treats a well-qualified IT hire with respect, and doesn't bite the hand that feeds them, then they can expect to escape being bitten themselves.
:)).
Of course, there are always exceptions to this. But as many have mentioned, most admins don't want to waste the time digging through email boxes without some sort of incentive. On the other hand, I have discovered tampering with food and drinks by janitorial staff in the past (which people find much more horrifying than espionage, because they always leave some more for you to drink after them
Vidar
Twenty years ago "Weird" Al was pretty mainstream: "Eat It" was played all the time on pop stations, "Like a Surgeon" seemed not quite as popular, but still got a lot of play.
In fact, I didn't hear of Dr. Demento until the 1990's, whereas people were laughing about his songs in my school in 1984 and '85 ("Eat It" was amazingly popular, probably because everyone was listening to Michael Jackson at the time).
Vidar
Thanks for the heads up on Synnex. We already knew about TechData (useless company, in my mind). We have used Newegg, PageComputers, techonweb, and others to fulfill orders and get lower prices. Two of those companies (Page and Techonweb) use Ingram, and we have mentioned to Ingram the fact that we are ordering from them, and asked them why they would give up margin just so they don't have to sell to us at the same price (they lose the direct sale, and instead basically pay an intermediary to sell it to one of their direct customers). They seem to be too dense to understand how crazy that is, because they are shipping some stuff to us anyways, it's not like it is a separate order or anything. It can't be any easier to fulfill. In fact, it must cost them more, as when we order, some boxes they send us are half empty, when they could have been filled with a few boxed processors, or cables, or something else.
Anyway, I get the feeling that it will only get worse. We actually have never made a profit on hardware sales, and we let customers know up front that we will do our best to get them the best price, and invite them to shop around. Those that try never find a better price, and we have capitalized on that good will to gain loyalty (thus service calls). Margin on hardware is a losing proposition these days.
Vidar
Being a VAR myself, and having used Ingram Micro for years, I can say that a lot of that isn't AMD's fault. Ingram Micro is a fairweather friend to manufacturers. They were caught with their pants down when demand started to increase, and they never, ever stick their necks out on an order. My theory is that they they would let people backorder till they felt comfortable ordering a batch. Then, other people would order, and by the time the processors got to Ingram, they were already taken. We experienced this about a year ago, and Ingram kept telling us that supplies were constrained. But we were able to source them from other distributors, and even from retailers who ended up getting us a better price than Ingram (who pretty much rips us off).
:).
As a side story, we've had lots of issues where Ingram would not move on a price, and the price they were charging on a $300 item was like $10 less than MSRP. They would claim that the prices one friendly retailer offered to us were lower than their cost. We ordered the items from the retailer, and they would be drop shipped from Ingram. The best part is the scramble for excuses when we called them on it (it happened several times). They would make all sorts of claims, such as "they must have a back end rebate", or that the retailer was selling it at a loss. We have access to all sorts of "partner programs", and those rebates, if they existed, were top secret, only for that special retailer (which of course, didn't exist in the magnitude described). Of course, fast forward a few years, and that same retailer is selling stuff to us "below Ingram's cost" and having it drop shipped from Ingram to us. Any day now, they will have to close their doors, what with all the charity and all
It was recommended that we check out Synnex, and we are investigating that option now. It is rumored that they are a much more competitive organization than the behemoth that is Ingram Micro (one of several distributors under one person or group - there's Ingram Books, video, etc.). The only things we buy from Ingram at this point are items that we aren't allowed to buy retail (per reseller agreements).
Vidar
Lots of people where I live got their wells positioned using a dowser by the name of Marcel Triau (who was kind of a local legend). He used to use a chain, of all things, and swing it to and fro, and where he said dig, you'd better dig (as far as the story goes). When you got the well digger there, some would try to move it (easier access for the truck, or what have you), and those that did would have a hard time of it, and invariably have to go to where Triau pointed out. Many other weird capabilities were attributed to him, which seem in some ways fantastical. I tried googling him, and only found an article on a "french coil" method of pest control for trees - http://mypage.direct.ca/j/jliving/pen06.htm (also one tiny mention in a local newspaper). Seems weird.
Funny thing is, he mentions magnetism as one possibility for why it works, and disavows any scientific knowledge on his part on why things work, but that they just "do". From the article: "Because we cannot scientifically define and analyze these laws many people disbelieve them. However, nature is full of mystery and even the working of our own bodies is not fully understood." Perhaps his "abilities" were actually derived from some form of this magnetic sense, which allowed him to sense differences in magnetic fields, from which he could learn which "feelings" meant water, using the chain as an antenna.
Interesting, I think, though I know that most Slashdotters are not subsribers to "dowsing" and have pointed out a study or two in the past showing dowsers to only have a random shot at finding things. But I personally feel that all sorts of stuff that is claimed, but unexplained and therefore disregarded, has been established as having merit using scientific principles.
Or maybe he was just lucky.
Vidar
This "gallery" is extremely misleading, full of gaps and errors, and doesn't take the effort to point out the actual differences. The System 5.0 screenshot appears to be taken from an Apple IIGS running GS/OS, which while similar in appearance to the MacOS, was a different operating system. The System 7.0 screenshot actually has the "About this Macintosh" window open, showing us that it was actually running System 7.5.3R2 (which is skipped in this presentation, which is funny, as most clones shipped with 7.5). I used System 7.0* (--that's supposed to be a "bullet") for 6 years, and it looks nothing like System 7.5, and according to my memory, it was far less fancy, not featuring submenus on the Apple menu, or a control strip (which I never got used to, and it got in the way! :)). Also, 7.5 introduced a more grayscale appearance in both icons and interface (not platinum yet, but the Trash Can is a good example in the picture - compare 7.1 (which was very similar to 7.0) to 7.5.3 (which is erroneously placed in the System 7.0 screenshot.)
He completely skips Windows NT 4, which while it looked only marginally different from 95, had lots of different control panels (like SCSI, for when you want to add an IDE CD-ROM, how maddening was that!). I'm pretty sure background images were a capability of Windows 95, at the least after ActiveX was installed, and I know that 98 had the capability. But he shows it in Mac OS 8, and skips Windows 2000 altogether (and Windows ME, which had some graphical variances in explorer from 98)
These are just the things I noticed from personal experience. Who knows what else is wrong. It would have been better for him to ask for screenshots from people who actually have the stuff. I'm sure this seems overly critical, but I can't believe the lack of quality in a gallery mentioned on Slashdot.
Vidar
Actually, I don't see how trying to pin down the age of the universe, which is impossible to do with the data we have, can advance us in other areas. I am all for the space program (in fact I would like to see it expanded greatly). I am all for research. What I am constantly disappointed by is what I see as opportunism at the expense of true knowledge. I don't know what kind of funding these people are getting to arrive at this "knowledge", but that funding could be used more efficiently by someone researching in an area where real results can be obtained. Instead, we have another "temporary" fact.
I realize my opinion on that is not popular (which is why my post moderated down as flamebait and overrated after being modded up). But that is a good proof of my point as well. Not only do some want to be able to spew out facts and figures (which may be incorrect), but they will try to drown out the voice of reason in order to maintain that status quo.
This, while a "funny" post, is also quite insightful. The problem with any of these figures is that we are really pulling them out of our nether regions. Given the supposed size and complexity of our universe (which doesn't seem to be getting any smaller or more simple), we will likely never know the actual age or size of the universe. If you were able to travel at insanely fast speeds, or use some form of long-distance teleportation, and you reached the "edge" of the universe, what would lie beyond? Empty space? How do we know the universe is not of infinite dimensional characteristics? We don't have nearly enough data to even justify a measurement.
Of course, by declaring the figures to be new and improved, some hooligan gets a microdot of attention for a while, so I guess that's what we are really looking for. We need to feel important, and like we're accomplishing something. Meanwhile, TV technology could be moving forward to something beyond digital, into the realm of beautiful analog freedom. I jest somewhat, but there is something to be said for the results of focused energy (in the form of thought). We improve our digital processes so that they become more effective than the current analog standards. However, we often do so at the expense of advances in other areas (analog, rottedlog, and ants-on-a-log technologies).
The age of the universe is all fine and dandy to want to know about, but really, would it break anybody's heart if it were 6,000 years and 3 days old? What about if it were only 10 million years old? 5 billion? Just as I think many Christians waste their time worrying about what someone else thinks about the age of the earth, many scientists do the same. Considering that most of us will likely be dead within 130 years, anything 6,000 years and older is a long time. And all of the above measurements are probably incorrect. Trying to pin it down with such limited amounts of data is pointless.
Having used the HL-5170DN for many customers, with no problems, I started getting the replacement, the 5250DN. Had the same problems with envelope creasing. One thing that I like about Brother is their technical support, which is available by 800 number and has a decent amount of knowledge about their product.
For heavy paper and envelope problems, if you flip a panel down in the back, there are two adjustment levers. I would speak with tech support or find documentation before fiddling with them, because I believe that you only need to adjust one at a time (there are levers on both sides) and I can't remember which side you start on (or if it matters at all). What I do know is that it completely fixed the creasing problem, and it has been a wonderful printer since, with no issues.
Another customer had a noisy 5250DN, which Brother replaced immediately, providing a shipping label, pickup, and return of a Brand New Model (not refurb'd). I agree that the construction doesn't feel as nice as the 5170, but the product is so superior in it's price range it's not even funny. 30ppm, fake PS3, PCL, Web Management, an admin utility with pretty cool features, updateable firmware, 10/100 ethernet, optional trays, adjustable paper path, good tech support, 32MB exp to 512 I think. It costs me a whopping $230 shipped. And Brother still provides a Mac OS 9 driver!
If you need multifunction, their unit based on the 5250 is also nice (though I wouldn't bother with scanning, which IME is slow).
BTW, make sure you are not buying toner/drums from Staples. I can get, and you can probably, too, Brother's 7000 page extended life toner (5% coverage) for $60, and the Drums for $102 (about 25,000 pages at 5% coverage). I think there is no better option for inexpensive B&W printing. Only when you get up to color products do the Xerox/Tektronix products get my dollar. (Have had nightmares with modern HP printers [since 1999]). Good Luck!
Vidar
Lebanon as a nation is not capable of much control. Most of the Lebanese people are peace-loving, and want nothing to do with the terrorists. Parts of the country have at times been occupied by the PLO, and after the recent Hariri assassination, we saw that Hezbollah was very capable of creating unrest for the Lebanese people, who have been trying to shake off Syrian influence. Sometimes people don't realize that Lebanon has a large Christian population (and that their president, by law, must be Maronite Christian), and that they do not wish the destruction of Israel. There are also large Islamic communities, however, and many favor the practices of the terrorist groups in the area.
You are correct that if Lebanon is unable to do anything about it that Israel has some right to fix it themselves. I hope they do. In short, I agree with every part of your post excepting the first sentence, as I do not feel the Lebanese govt. could stop Hezbollah. They just don't have the resources. Notice the lack of official retaliation of Lebanon towards Israel. They are trying to let Israel take care of it.
Vidar
Actually it is. If you read your history, you will see that considered to be a compassionate practice. It allows civilians to leave the area, but troops who have munitions either have to abandon some of them, or stay to protect them. Besides letting the enemy continue their bombardment from a "safe" civilian locale, there is no other way I can think of to defeat them. Any ideas?
Hamas is not the only terrorist group to utilize suicide bombers, either (and in fact you are now talking about Palestine?). Getting back by any means possible is exactly what the Israelis don't do. They don't purposefully target women and children, or civilians at all. And perhaps the reason why certain parties are in "camps" at all is because they refuse to peacefully coexist. Even Human Rights Watch, which is considered very anti-Israel by many, has condemned Hamas for it's crimes against humanity. A preface to it's charter (source:Wikipedia) - "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."
Great people, Hamas. I for one am glad that you are here to dictate the rules of engagement. I'm sure you take a similar stand on gun rights, and self-defense rights. I guess I can shoot the guy who shot me, but only as many times as he shot me. After all, if 3 people enter my home intending violence, and one shoots me, I can't hold it against the other two.
"But then again, it's all just a bunch of statistics. Who cares about the children, unless they are American brats, right?"
True colors, shining through. Did Hezbollah leaflet the Israeli target areas? The only ones who truly care about the civilians are the Israelis. The BBC snippet posted by someone above is particularly telling of the goal of most news orgs.
Vidar