My initial plan was to use an LCD, but I couldn't find one the right size and shape. Most of the LCDs being made in the 9-10" range are "widescreen" format, and/or overpriced touch screens. I finally went with a same-size monochrome CRT, to keep the original look of the system, and to draw out the "wait, how did you..." reaction a little longer from those who realize instinctively that there's no way OS X could ever run on a stock SE. ("Well, I had to piggyback a G4 upgrade card on top of a PowerPC replacment CPU, but the hard part was converting the memory addressing bus from kilobytes to megabytes...")
The CRT I found (eBay) does 800x600 and was originally designed for use on point-of-sale computers. I would've prefered 1024x768, but that'd be pretty tiny on a 9" screen, so it wasn't a great loss settling for mere SVGA. And since I'll be using it mainly as a file/web server, a relative low-res display isn't really a problem.
By the way, I used an original G4 Mini instead of the new Intel units to maintain compatibility with Classic apps that really would run on an original SE. I'm hoping to fool at least one person into thinking that it's an SE hacked to do greyscale, before I close Photoshop 3.0 and show him it's running on OS X.
The Macquarium SE on my desk (I do tech support at an art school) is easily the most-commented-about aspect of my office decor... which also includes several paintings, photographs, and other works of art I've created. {shrug}
My other recycling project is upgrading a Mac SE to run OS X. Nothing terribly challenging, just an SVGA 9" CRT and a Mac Mini mounted inside. The best part of that is the "Mac SE X" nameplate on the front. {grin}
Of course Macquaria are really tangential to the question of Mac recycling, since the components most in need of special disposal (CRT, circuit boards) are discarded in the process of making one, regardless.
Most commercials are recycled for months or years, not minutes...
Which is one of the main reasons I skip through the damn things. Nothing sends my finger flying for the FF button faster than the realization that the same idiotic clip they've been shoving in my face every night for the last month, just started.
It's not a prequel, but a guy I know is working on a rewrite of the Bible, set in the early 21st century. The main character of the Gospels (which he's doing first, so he can do the Old Testament as a 20th-century prequel) is a Mexican-American Jew named Jesús, born in Bethlehem PA. His ma Donna - who is, like, a virgin - marries her wood-shop teacher to give the kid a father.
No, what would be really neat is to do a series focusong on Adama and Tigh, when they were in the Academy together. Roslin could be a hot Education major at the civilian college next door, and Zarek would be the wise-cracking troublemaker who's always this close to being expelled. It'd be great!
These are standard "identity redesign" constraints. When Pepsi or Burger King or AT&T or DC Comics redesigns their corporate identity package, they ask for something that has some continuity with the old one. Same here.
Slashdot really should retire the "Digital" category. I have fond memories of Digital Equipment Corporation... hell, DEC has been with me through most of my academic and professional career*, to say nothing of their impact on the tech industry. But they don't exist in any meaningful sense today, and this category only serves to confuse the slashkiddiez who are too young to know "Digital" as a name, not an adjective.
*I learned BASIC logging into a PDP-11 using a DECwriter line printing terminal in high school. I learned Fortran, Pascal, COBOL, etc. on a VAX 11-750 in college. I was backup admin for several VAXen in one of my first real jobs (at some college CmdrTaco went to). I was one also of the throngs at DECUS Atlanta in the early 90s who received a free swag "fanny pack", the first of a long line of waist-mounted man-purses that I still use for carrying my PDA (yes, I had one then), wallet, keys, etc. to this day. And I still use a dozen or so unkillable Digital-brand Pentium II boxes as lab word-processor/web-browser machines and as Linux-running DNS boxes in my current job.
...it's a family who never contributed one ounce of effort who are trying to make a buck off of a dead relative.
That is the nature of capitalism.
Don't blame capitalism for this. (Capitalism has enough on its head.) This absurdity is based on ye olde principle of hereditary property and privilege, which easily pre-dates the whole mercantile economic system that capitalism is based on. And capitalism would work just fine (arguably much better) without it.
This is an example of why (IMHO) copyrights should immediately expire along with the creator (unless they have a dependent child or spouse, in which case they'd last a fixed term, as the law was originally written). This whole doctrine that works of art should provide financial support to the grown children of the creator is wrong-headed, and the notion that these property heirs and their children and grandchildren should have creative control over these works is absurd.
Copyright-enforced royalties should be a kind of pension for creators, offering some financial security to people who've spent their lives creating works of art (visual, literary, musical, etc). Retirement pensions don't keep paying out after someone dies (except to a surviving spouse), because the person who earned them no longer needs them. Likewise, when I die, why should my sisters or my nieces and nephew start getting money from the things I've created? And more importantly, why should they have the right to authorize what's done with copies of them?
I'm a staunch supporter of copyright in principle - people who indiscriminately "share" tunez, warez, and videoz with strangers on the net can go suck on a shotgun as far as I'm concerned - but I think copyright has been hammered and stretched and twisted over the course of the past century into some kind of hereditary entitlement and corporate welfare scheme. Maybe if modern copyright law weren't so obviously aimed at giving money to people who didn't earn it, it'd be easier to persuade people to respect it.
Fortunately the innocent traveler whom TSA employees gunned down on suspicion of being a terrorist had no immediate family, so the chances of a wrongful death lawsuit are slim.
I'd take a car to go a mile if I had to do it more than once or twice in a short period of time.
I'd rethink what I'm doing if I had to make that trip more than once or twice in a short period of time. Rather than spending an hour making a couple 2-mile round trips, I'd... um... use the phone? Fire up VNC or ARD? Delegate one of the tasks? Bring a bike? Plan ahead next time so I'm not going back to my office on Infinite Loop between two meetings over on Disk Drive? Bottom line: Why would you have to do this?
I've worked on campuses that were the better part of a mile across, and I rarely had a problem with having to hike back and forth across them a lot because I figured out ways to not have to. The only times I found myself going all the way cross-campus more than once in a day was in a crisis, and in that kind of situation I wouldn't take a car; I'd run.
When you fire up the restored Windows XP on a computer with different hardware then last used, it will go through its hardware detection and driver installation phase, just point it to the i386 folder you have included in the image, and all should work.
You had some misspellings in that last section. The correct spelling is "...quite likely BSOD, go into a reboot loop, or lock up instead of loading Windows, and you'll have to do a reinstall on top of the existing install once or twice and then reload all the service packs and updates, and even this may not..." Hope this helps.:)
Have any of you had to take a ______ test to get a job? Should I do it, or just keep looking?
What about a drug test? A skills test? A standardized aptitude test? A bar exam, or medical boards? A background check?
If you want the job, you submit to the test. If the requirement of taking that kind of test means you don't want the job, then you don't want the job. And they probably don't want you, either.
...it's probably far easier than answering that damned question, 'What do you regard as your greatest weakness?'
That one's easy: Point to a moderate excess of some otherwise positive trait. e.g. "I tend to be a bit of a perfectionist." "I try too hard to fix problems before taking them to management." "I sometimes get too caught up in my work." The fact that you recognize this excess as a "weakness" means you've probably got it under control, which means it's really an asset.
Anyway, what makes it even worse with regard to Palm syncing is that Palm is the only real choice for Mac users, because the only other PDAs around run Windows!
Not mine. My Psion Revo runs EPOC (i.e. Symbian before the OS was sold to Nokia et al.) and you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead fingers. Granted, it doesn't sync with modern Macs (or modern Windows PCs) either, but it's the only PDA to hit the market in the past two decades that I've found usable: good software, good form factor.
Unfortunately, optical zoom seems to be going away even in standalone digital cameras.
That's probably true of the point-and-shoot variety, but I'm not too worried about it vanishing from the camera market altogether. The smaller surface area of CCDs vs. film makes building zoom lenses easier and more affordable. (e.g. My new 6MP digital has a 10X zoom, which would be prohibitively large and expensive for a 35mm film camera.) As long as there are pros and enthusiasts of the sort who've been buying 35mm SLRs for the past few decades, there will be sufficient demand for digital cameras with real optics on them.
My prediction is that the camera market will refactor itself into: A) fixed-focal-length lenses on cheap point-and-shoot cameras, and B) optical-zoom lenses on expensive "pro" cameras. The days of the fixed-focal-length SLR lens (except for extreme wide or tele) and the optical-zoom auto-everything camera are in the past.
High-megapixel CCDs are going to become commonplace in phones for the simple reason that they cost so little to include. And the optics will never be better than snapshot-grade, because that would add significantly to the cost (and size). My brother-in-law does patent work in Motorola's phone division, and he says that it'll soon be nearly impossible to buy a phone without an integrated camera. It's already gone from being a gee-whiz selling point to differentiate a product from its competitors, to a checklist "requirement" to keep up with them.
In the meantime, I'll keep "no worthless features" on my phone-shopping checklist, and "good optical zoom" on my camera-shopping checklist.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean these guys?
There was a time when Billy Gates was surrounded by hairy guys.
(There was also this one time, at a party, when I was surrounded by hairy guys... a memorable night, indeed! {wicked grin})
The catch is that they want it to have the same color scheme, font, icons, and certain design elements from the Slashdot home page.
The CRT I found (eBay) does 800x600 and was originally designed for use on point-of-sale computers. I would've prefered 1024x768, but that'd be pretty tiny on a 9" screen, so it wasn't a great loss settling for mere SVGA. And since I'll be using it mainly as a file/web server, a relative low-res display isn't really a problem.
By the way, I used an original G4 Mini instead of the new Intel units to maintain compatibility with Classic apps that really would run on an original SE. I'm hoping to fool at least one person into thinking that it's an SE hacked to do greyscale, before I close Photoshop 3.0 and show him it's running on OS X.
Great, so there goes another ecologically important wildlife habitat and economically important tourism attraction! :)
My other recycling project is upgrading a Mac SE to run OS X. Nothing terribly challenging, just an SVGA 9" CRT and a Mac Mini mounted inside. The best part of that is the "Mac SE X" nameplate on the front. {grin}
Of course Macquaria are really tangential to the question of Mac recycling, since the components most in need of special disposal (CRT, circuit boards) are discarded in the process of making one, regardless.
Which is one of the main reasons I skip through the damn things. Nothing sends my finger flying for the FF button faster than the realization that the same idiotic clip they've been shoving in my face every night for the last month, just started.
It's not a prequel, but a guy I know is working on a rewrite of the Bible, set in the early 21st century. The main character of the Gospels (which he's doing first, so he can do the Old Testament as a 20th-century prequel) is a Mexican-American Jew named Jesús, born in Bethlehem PA. His ma Donna - who is, like, a virgin - marries her wood-shop teacher to give the kid a father.
No, what would be really neat is to do a series focusong on Adama and Tigh, when they were in the Academy together. Roslin could be a hot Education major at the civilian college next door, and Zarek would be the wise-cracking troublemaker who's always this close to being expelled. It'd be great!
These are standard "identity redesign" constraints. When Pepsi or Burger King or AT&T or DC Comics redesigns their corporate identity package, they ask for something that has some continuity with the old one. Same here.
Given the current state of funding for schools in the U.S., I wouldn't be so sure about that.
*I learned BASIC logging into a PDP-11 using a DECwriter line printing terminal in high school. I learned Fortran, Pascal, COBOL, etc. on a VAX 11-750 in college. I was backup admin for several VAXen in one of my first real jobs (at some college CmdrTaco went to). I was one also of the throngs at DECUS Atlanta in the early 90s who received a free swag "fanny pack", the first of a long line of waist-mounted man-purses that I still use for carrying my PDA (yes, I had one then), wallet, keys, etc. to this day. And I still use a dozen or so unkillable Digital-brand Pentium II boxes as lab word-processor/web-browser machines and as Linux-running DNS boxes in my current job.
Don't blame capitalism for this. (Capitalism has enough on its head.) This absurdity is based on ye olde principle of hereditary property and privilege, which easily pre-dates the whole mercantile economic system that capitalism is based on. And capitalism would work just fine (arguably much better) without it.
Copyright-enforced royalties should be a kind of pension for creators, offering some financial security to people who've spent their lives creating works of art (visual, literary, musical, etc). Retirement pensions don't keep paying out after someone dies (except to a surviving spouse), because the person who earned them no longer needs them. Likewise, when I die, why should my sisters or my nieces and nephew start getting money from the things I've created? And more importantly, why should they have the right to authorize what's done with copies of them?
I'm a staunch supporter of copyright in principle - people who indiscriminately "share" tunez, warez, and videoz with strangers on the net can go suck on a shotgun as far as I'm concerned - but I think copyright has been hammered and stretched and twisted over the course of the past century into some kind of hereditary entitlement and corporate welfare scheme. Maybe if modern copyright law weren't so obviously aimed at giving money to people who didn't earn it, it'd be easier to persuade people to respect it.
Fortunately the innocent traveler whom TSA employees gunned down on suspicion of being a terrorist had no immediate family, so the chances of a wrongful death lawsuit are slim.
Funny: We feel the same way about incompetent drivers.
And we were here first.
I'd rethink what I'm doing if I had to make that trip more than once or twice in a short period of time. Rather than spending an hour making a couple 2-mile round trips, I'd... um... use the phone? Fire up VNC or ARD? Delegate one of the tasks? Bring a bike? Plan ahead next time so I'm not going back to my office on Infinite Loop between two meetings over on Disk Drive? Bottom line: Why would you have to do this?
I've worked on campuses that were the better part of a mile across, and I rarely had a problem with having to hike back and forth across them a lot because I figured out ways to not have to. The only times I found myself going all the way cross-campus more than once in a day was in a crisis, and in that kind of situation I wouldn't take a car; I'd run.
You had some misspellings in that last section. The correct spelling is "...quite likely BSOD, go into a reboot loop, or lock up instead of loading Windows, and you'll have to do a reinstall on top of the existing install once or twice and then reload all the service packs and updates, and even this may not..." Hope this helps. :)
What about a drug test? A skills test? A standardized aptitude test? A bar exam, or medical boards? A background check?
If you want the job, you submit to the test. If the requirement of taking that kind of test means you don't want the job, then you don't want the job. And they probably don't want you, either.
That one's easy: Point to a moderate excess of some otherwise positive trait. e.g. "I tend to be a bit of a perfectionist." "I try too hard to fix problems before taking them to management." "I sometimes get too caught up in my work." The fact that you recognize this excess as a "weakness" means you've probably got it under control, which means it's really an asset.
Most people I know have upgraded to Windows 1.04. That's the version that supports the new IBM PS/2s, after all.
Is it just me, or does this smell even more of munitions R&D for the military-industrial complex than DARPA's challenge?
No, no one uses it anymore. Not since the close of the Third Age, when it was destroyed by a Halfling in the fires of Mount Doom.
This is, of course, utter nonsense.
Not mine. My Psion Revo runs EPOC (i.e. Symbian before the OS was sold to Nokia et al.) and you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead fingers. Granted, it doesn't sync with modern Macs (or modern Windows PCs) either, but it's the only PDA to hit the market in the past two decades that I've found usable: good software, good form factor.
That's probably true of the point-and-shoot variety, but I'm not too worried about it vanishing from the camera market altogether. The smaller surface area of CCDs vs. film makes building zoom lenses easier and more affordable. (e.g. My new 6MP digital has a 10X zoom, which would be prohibitively large and expensive for a 35mm film camera.) As long as there are pros and enthusiasts of the sort who've been buying 35mm SLRs for the past few decades, there will be sufficient demand for digital cameras with real optics on them.
My prediction is that the camera market will refactor itself into: A) fixed-focal-length lenses on cheap point-and-shoot cameras, and B) optical-zoom lenses on expensive "pro" cameras. The days of the fixed-focal-length SLR lens (except for extreme wide or tele) and the optical-zoom auto-everything camera are in the past.
In the meantime, I'll keep "no worthless features" on my phone-shopping checklist, and "good optical zoom" on my camera-shopping checklist.