a friend of mine is involved in the mobile market, and they are using a different approach to conduct the same thing - people's phone bills.
essentially if you order a 50c song, you get billed 50c on your monthly mobile bill.
an interesting investigation is to the pay as you go market...technically it would be feasible to deduct 50c off your balance as this is maintained on a server infrastructure...
i think the uproar in the industry if he had been nomiated and in fact won "best supporting actor" would be huge. and, in fact, i tend to think would be unfair.
surely a new oscar category - "best digital actor" or something along those lines would be a good move forward and should appease all.
you see, that's sort of the funny thing. windows XP has begun implementing inductive user interface paradigms, which is essentially what you describe as task-driven.
we've adopted it heavily where i work and we are finding the results pretty good in user lab tests.
sorry, but this was basically 68k of text going on and on to finally make the point that the open source movement must try and revolutionise the desktop using some new paradigm of user interface; the desktop is dead.
i would much prefer to hear some suggestions from mr dvorak, or indeed the/. community.
how about sub factions within the open source community that help purely with the UI aspects of various other products?
i understand the 100% scientific approach to weeding out certain stars that have not been around that long:
When it comes to scoring signals, however, not all stars are equal. This is because, according to SETI wisdom, some stars are more likely to host a communicating alien civilization than others. Thus, for example, only main-sequence stars are considered for signal-scoring purposes, excluding red giants and white dwarfs. Short-lived stars, whose lifespan is only a few million years, are also excluded from consideration, since complex life would not have had time to evolve in such an environment. Nearby stars, on the other hand, get "extra credit" in their scoring, since it would be comparatively easier to communicate with civilizations in our galactic neighborhood than with those in distant parts of our galaxy or beyond. Finally, the more similar a star is to our own Sun, the higher its score, since it would be more likely to host a civilization similar to ours.
and maybe this sounds really really stupid and like i should stop watching star trek - but i don't actually watch it! but surely a far advanced alien race could be migratory and move to one of these less advanced planets. like maybe for the sunshine?
sorry but i think you are just so on the wrong track. maybe you should stop clicking arbitary banners!
the point is NOT that they are being sued for being irritating, otherwise i would have filed a class action suit against destiny's child when they brought out BILLS, BILLS, BILLS!. they are filing for MISLEADING people.
you may not be mislead because you are some sort of genius (who clicks on banners?). but the point made a few posts up regarding a/.'s mom is EXACTLY the point of this - and my sentiments are identical to that post. if my mother saw a windows-looking popup message that said her internet connection is slow, click here to make it faster - she would click on it. funnily enough, clicking on that banner doesn't upgrade her 56k analog modem into an ADSL broadband connection - but what the hell does she know?
when i first encountered one of these, my first thought was clever, my second was disgust.
to come back to your stupid restaurant analagy... if they had a special if you order a great big juicy steak and get a free bottle of wine, you did so, and you got some thin shitty steak and a 125ml bottle of wine - then they are being MISLEADING. although that example is also pretty stupid. doh.
I was just about to mention Hyperion when I did a quick search for the text and found your post.
I have to agree, I put his "universe" way up there with Stephenson's Snow Crash.
Note that there are two more in the series, Endymion and the fall of Endymion.
Re:light on the details....
on
Smart Pool Table
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
my sentiments exactly regarding tutoring. what a fantastic application to have on your basement pool-table so that when you go out "sharking" you really kick some ass.
in terms of the dependance on the laser lines. i would think that maybe a good mechansim for this would be a level of competitance meter. basically, if you are a crap pool player - the lines would stay on the table until you've hit the ball. as you become better, the lines last on the table for a shorter period. this way you can use the lines as a guidance and still use some form of intuition to make the shot.
when you have something as sexy as the MZ-N1 would anybody want something this big to lug around.
actually, a better why...
why do americans not like/use minidisc players? i noticed that when i was over there about a month ago - everyone had clunkly cd-size walkmen. in london mini-disc players are continuing to become more ubiqitous and i would assume for two reasons: 1) size 2) re-recordable
does this just not go down well in the US? i mean, discover the sony mz-n1....
just wondering how much loot our frinds google have. it's becoming a more common occurance to see their name involved in stupid lawsuits such as this; clearly they either have to pay laywers or give in - giving in would ruin the integrity we've come to love and respect. surely this is hurting google?
i would assume that the best use for the audrey would be a glorified touch screen colour uber remote. i mean, if you've got a usb 802.11 in it - you don't want it wired down into your amp.
i've got a system running at home, like a lot of other posts on here, running a linux server and pushing the video out into my tv. nav'ing this with a multi-remote is a little crap.
i think i'm gonna get myself one of these guys and just use it to access http://mymp3server on my lap when i'm sitting on the loo!
(to mods: i thought i posted this, but it doesn't seem to appear. apologies if repost).
on the point of architecture...
a client-server architecture has all of the wonderful benefits of centralisation (backups, maintenance, etc...) but at the cost of redundancy. if you were to have a truly scalable internet - every service delivered in the traditional client-server approach (HTTP, FTP, you name it) should be on some backbone that has at least two lines on separate circuits as well as <insert normal redundancy stuff here>
on the other hand, we've seen the benefits of disitributed processing (SETI, Proteins, etc...) and i believe that big players like IBM and Intel are using the concept of a P2P architecture for disitributing data around the cheap HDD space they have on their network.
now my understanding of the initial concept of "the internet" was that it would provide a redunandt infrastructure such that a nuke couldn't knock out the military communication mechansims entirely.
it seems to me that the current client-server approach doesn't not address this WITHOUT A SUBSTANTIAL COST (data centres all over the world for an SME would be ludicrous).
what are your feelings on a possible middle-ground, or the future of internet architecture considering both cost and redundancy?
indeed, i've configured this on many a box. the thing is, if an OPEN SOURCE web site can't handle/.'ing and we harp on about PERFORMANCE and SCALABILITY - it doesn't send out a good message.
imagine some uberpower decision making manager thinking "hmmm... i wonder if we should move everything to apache+php" and then he goes and visits OSDN and boom he gets that message. what kind of pretence is he going to have against apache+php?
well done on the Get a clue comment by the way. you should get yourself a jump to conclusion matt you fsckwit.
Warning: Too many connections on/home/osnews/web/connect.php on line 2
Warning: MySQL Connection Failed: Too many connections in/home/osnews/web/connect.php on line 2
Could not connect to the Database
i've been mentioning it to a lot of the developers here as i'm really keen to get a mac notebook. they all look at me funny until i remind them that its just "pretty unix" with full office support etc...
then the price tag comes up...
so maybe somebody could answer a question regarding relative performance. i've got a T23 IBM 1GHZ with 512MB of RAM - sort of like this puppy over here. it goes, fast. after using acers, dells and compaqs - if i'm going x86, there's no going back from these thinkpads!
so my question is, what would give me the same feeling of performance? would an iBook suffice or should i fork out the dough and go the powerbook g4 route?
Or, instead, he'd get rid of the browser altogether and come up with a "digital control panel," something integrated with e-mail and other network applications...
this is indeed the direction that MSN Messenger is heading. although just a pretty AOL client - much of the UI is rendered using embedded ie and using (D)HTML (etc...) as a means of primary navigation; much like MSN Messenger. similarly, the company i work for, is extended its usage of HTML for dialogs and even primary navigation mechanisms.
surely you could run x threads of httpd as each of the users? my httpd runs as user apache, so i don't see why you couldn't fire them up as user joe, fred, gareth etc...
i suppose the downside of this is that you would have to maintain configs for each of the users and you couldn't just killall -9 httpd; but the solution is workable.
i hope this isn't taken in the wrong way - but has apache 2.0 been overengineered? have the guys been wasting their time? i think these are important questions as, i assume, a tendancy of open source software is developers writing code bsaed on what they deem to be "wanted" rather than focusing on the end-user.
personally i didn't get the whole hoopla about it - i mean, its an http daemon, it accepts port 80 requests and passes them over for processing. did it really require all the work that was put into it? could that work have been better spent building an IIS-like management console which, imho, would be far more useful for administration...
so i write this and you will note the very dismissive response by Frymaster.
i think it makes a lot of sense because it will allow apple to make money (like microsoft do) off selling software rather than boxes. everyone knows that the margins in pc manufacturing a miniscule and that heavy competition has driven the prices down immensely - which doesn't quite happen with apple.
i appreciate the fact that hardware compatability could become an issue - but then you take the BeOS approach by having a limited list of supported video cards and network devices. that way, people who want to run OSX on an i386 can put one together using supported hardware.
quite frankly, i'm very excited about this prospect.
we sell document-centric software into the legal sector - and i will agree with you that there is some proliferation of WP, but it is NOT used "far more".
secondly:
personally i'm not shocked that they didn't go for the Open Office approach...
despite the thread yesterday about managers making stupid decisions (yes out of context i know!), i doubt they got a whole bunch of suits in the room together and said:
"oh, which software should we give them".
"hey, my gran uses this word perfect thing and she can print with it".
"great, lets go with that. drinks anyone?".
i'm quite sure they have gone down that route because of good support clauses and so on in their negotiations.
when i saw windows users switching, i though "oh great, os x on the i386". but i see that by switch it is meant "great, lets go out and spend thousands of pounds on new hardware."
i believe that the core of os x (darwin?) is available on the i386 platform - but is the whole thing?
personally i'm not prepared to throw out all my old boxes and bring in a ton(ne) of new kit. hello, i have rent to pay!!
personally, i feel, that until apple is able to accomodate open hardware architecture they are going to continue to be a bunch of underachievers.
Slashdot Mirror
a friend of mine is involved in the mobile market, and they are using a different approach to conduct the same thing - people's phone bills.
essentially if you order a 50c song, you get billed 50c on your monthly mobile bill.
an interesting investigation is to the pay as you go market...technically it would be feasible to deduct 50c off your balance as this is maintained on a server infrastructure...
i think the uproar in the industry if he had been nomiated and in fact won "best supporting actor" would be huge. and, in fact, i tend to think would be unfair.
surely a new oscar category - "best digital actor" or something along those lines would be a good move forward and should appease all.
you see, that's sort of the funny thing. windows XP has begun implementing inductive user interface paradigms, which is essentially what you describe as task-driven.
we've adopted it heavily where i work and we are finding the results pretty good in user lab tests.
sorry, but this was basically 68k of text going on and on to finally make the point that the open source movement must try and revolutionise the desktop using some new paradigm of user interface; the desktop is dead.
/. community.
i would much prefer to hear some suggestions from mr dvorak, or indeed the
how about sub factions within the open source community that help purely with the UI aspects of various other products?
i understand the 100% scientific approach to weeding out certain stars that have not been around that long:
When it comes to scoring signals, however, not all stars are equal. This is because, according to SETI wisdom, some stars are more likely to host a communicating alien civilization than others. Thus, for example, only main-sequence stars are considered for signal-scoring purposes, excluding red giants and white dwarfs. Short-lived stars, whose lifespan is only a few million years, are also excluded from consideration, since complex life would not have had time to evolve in such an environment. Nearby stars, on the other hand, get "extra credit" in their scoring, since it would be comparatively easier to communicate with civilizations in our galactic neighborhood than with those in distant parts of our galaxy or beyond. Finally, the more similar a star is to our own Sun, the higher its score, since it would be more likely to host a civilization similar to ours.
and maybe this sounds really really stupid and like i should stop watching star trek - but i don't actually watch it! but surely a far advanced alien race could be migratory and move to one of these less advanced planets. like maybe for the sunshine?
sorry but i think you are just so on the wrong track. maybe you should stop clicking arbitary banners!
/.'s mom is EXACTLY the point of this - and my sentiments are identical to that post. if my mother saw a windows-looking popup message that said her internet connection is slow, click here to make it faster - she would click on it. funnily enough, clicking on that banner doesn't upgrade her 56k analog modem into an ADSL broadband connection - but what the hell does she know?
the point is NOT that they are being sued for being irritating, otherwise i would have filed a class action suit against destiny's child when they brought out BILLS, BILLS, BILLS!. they are filing for MISLEADING people.
you may not be mislead because you are some sort of genius (who clicks on banners?). but the point made a few posts up regarding a
when i first encountered one of these, my first thought was clever, my second was disgust.
to come back to your stupid restaurant analagy... if they had a special if you order a great big juicy steak and get a free bottle of wine, you did so, and you got some thin shitty steak and a 125ml bottle of wine - then they are being MISLEADING. although that example is also pretty stupid. doh.
I was just about to mention Hyperion when I did a quick search for the text and found your post.
I have to agree, I put his "universe" way up there with Stephenson's Snow Crash.
Note that there are two more in the series, Endymion and the fall of Endymion.
my sentiments exactly regarding tutoring. what a fantastic application to have on your basement pool-table so that when you go out "sharking" you really kick some ass.
in terms of the dependance on the laser lines. i would think that maybe a good mechansim for this would be a level of competitance meter. basically, if you are a crap pool player - the lines would stay on the table until you've hit the ball. as you become better, the lines last on the table for a shorter period. this way you can use the lines as a guidance and still use some form of intuition to make the shot.
yeah, i was thinking the same thing. possibly a subscription service...
heh. i kind of like the cool factor of fumbling around with MDs - kinda makes me believe i'm keanu reeves... *sigh*
when you have something as sexy as the MZ-N1 would anybody want something this big to lug around.
actually, a better why...
why do americans not like/use minidisc players? i noticed that when i was over there about a month ago - everyone had clunkly cd-size walkmen. in london mini-disc players are continuing to become more ubiqitous and i would assume for two reasons:
1) size
2) re-recordable
does this just not go down well in the US?
i mean, discover the sony mz-n1....
just wondering how much loot our frinds google have. it's becoming a more common occurance to see their name involved in stupid lawsuits such as this; clearly they either have to pay laywers or give in - giving in would ruin the integrity we've come to love and respect. surely this is hurting google?
i would assume that the best use for the audrey would be a glorified touch screen colour uber remote. i mean, if you've got a usb 802.11 in it - you don't want it wired down into your amp.
i've got a system running at home, like a lot of other posts on here, running a linux server and pushing the video out into my tv. nav'ing this with a multi-remote is a little crap.
i think i'm gonna get myself one of these guys and just use it to access http://mymp3server on my lap when i'm sitting on the loo!
(to mods: i thought i posted this, but it doesn't seem to appear. apologies if repost).
on the point of architecture...
a client-server architecture has all of the wonderful benefits of centralisation (backups, maintenance, etc...) but at the cost of redundancy. if you were to have a truly scalable internet - every service delivered in the traditional client-server approach (HTTP, FTP, you name it) should be on some backbone that has at least two lines on separate circuits as well as <insert normal redundancy stuff here>
on the other hand, we've seen the benefits of disitributed processing (SETI, Proteins, etc...) and i believe that big players like IBM and Intel are using the concept of a P2P architecture for disitributing data around the cheap HDD space they have on their network.
now my understanding of the initial concept of "the internet" was that it would provide a redunandt infrastructure such that a nuke couldn't knock out the military communication mechansims entirely.
it seems to me that the current client-server approach doesn't not address this WITHOUT A SUBSTANTIAL COST (data centres all over the world for an SME would be ludicrous).
what are your feelings on a possible middle-ground, or the future of internet architecture considering both cost and redundancy?
indeed, i've configured this on many a box. the thing is, if an OPEN SOURCE web site can't handle /.'ing and we harp on about PERFORMANCE and SCALABILITY - it doesn't send out a good message.
imagine some uberpower decision making manager thinking "hmmm... i wonder if we should move everything to apache+php" and then he goes and visits OSDN and boom he gets that message. what kind of pretence is he going to have against apache+php?
well done on the Get a clue comment by the way. you should get yourself a jump to conclusion matt you fsckwit.
Warning: Too many connections on /home/osnews/web/connect.php on line 2
/home/osnews/web/connect.php on line 2
Could not connect to the Database
Warning: MySQL Connection Failed: Too many connections in
fantastic advert for open source's scalability...
i've been mentioning it to a lot of the developers here as i'm really keen to get a mac notebook. they all look at me funny until i remind them that its just "pretty unix" with full office support etc...
then the price tag comes up...
so maybe somebody could answer a question regarding relative performance. i've got a T23 IBM 1GHZ with 512MB of RAM - sort of like this puppy over here. it goes, fast. after using acers, dells and compaqs - if i'm going x86, there's no going back from these thinkpads!
so my question is, what would give me the same feeling of performance? would an iBook suffice or should i fork out the dough and go the powerbook g4 route?
Or, instead, he'd get rid of the browser altogether and come up with a "digital control panel," something integrated with e-mail and other network applications...
this is indeed the direction that MSN Messenger is heading. although just a pretty AOL client - much of the UI is rendered using embedded ie and using (D)HTML (etc...) as a means of primary navigation; much like MSN Messenger. similarly, the company i work for, is extended its usage of HTML for dialogs and even primary navigation mechanisms.
surely you could run x threads of httpd as each of the users? my httpd runs as user apache, so i don't see why you couldn't fire them up as user joe, fred, gareth etc...
i suppose the downside of this is that you would have to maintain configs for each of the users and you couldn't just killall -9 httpd; but the solution is workable.
i hope this isn't taken in the wrong way - but has apache 2.0 been overengineered? have the guys been wasting their time? i think these are important questions as, i assume, a tendancy of open source software is developers writing code bsaed on what they deem to be "wanted" rather than focusing on the end-user.
personally i didn't get the whole hoopla about it - i mean, its an http daemon, it accepts port 80 requests and passes them over for processing. did it really require all the work that was put into it? could that work have been better spent building an IIS-like management console which, imho, would be far more useful for administration...
if you think there is any good reason for apple to port to intel then you really aren't thinking at all.
:P
maybe they aren't thinking either?
so i write this and you will note the very dismissive response by Frymaster.
i think it makes a lot of sense because it will allow apple to make money (like microsoft do) off selling software rather than boxes. everyone knows that the margins in pc manufacturing a miniscule and that heavy competition has driven the prices down immensely - which doesn't quite happen with apple.
i appreciate the fact that hardware compatability could become an issue - but then you take the BeOS approach by having a limited list of supported video cards and network devices. that way, people who want to run OSX on an i386 can put one together using supported hardware.
quite frankly, i'm very excited about this prospect.
different aprroach
are you happy with your bandwidth?
are you happy with the price you pay for it?
that's it.
firstly: when you worked...
we sell document-centric software into the legal sector - and i will agree with you that there is some proliferation of WP, but it is NOT used "far more".
secondly: personally i'm not shocked that they didn't go for the Open Office approach...
despite the thread yesterday about managers making stupid decisions (yes out of context i know!), i doubt they got a whole bunch of suits in the room together and said:
"oh, which software should we give them".
"hey, my gran uses this word perfect thing and she can print with it".
"great, lets go with that. drinks anyone?".
i'm quite sure they have gone down that route because of good support clauses and so on in their negotiations.
personally i feel that i'm repeating my self today...
:)
hey, its my birthday, its allowed!
when i saw windows users switching, i though "oh great, os x on the i386". but i see that by switch it is meant "great, lets go out and spend thousands of pounds on new hardware."
i believe that the core of os x (darwin?) is available on the i386 platform - but is the whole thing?
personally i'm not prepared to throw out all my old boxes and bring in a ton(ne) of new kit. hello, i have rent to pay!!
personally, i feel, that until apple is able to accomodate open hardware architecture they are going to continue to be a bunch of underachievers.