However in college if someone wants to learn how to paint still lifes instead of learning math then I'd have trouble passing judgement over them. Even in college I don't see any reason as to why academics should be the most important thing, on a pedestal above everything else.
A very good argument, and very true.
I'm not saying everyone should excel at academics. I know there's more to life, success, and happiness than that. Hell, I knew someone from high school that didn't go to college at all, and is extremely successful (more so than myself or anyone else I know) doing what he loves. He's extremely happy and makes a lot more coin than any of my friends.
I just have a problem with some people that only every focused on sports and have little ambition in life, yet their ability to block a tackle lands them a scholarship (or at least enrollment) at a college that many dare not even apply to (for financial reasons or whatever). It's a specific kind of athlete that fits a stereotype that every American that's attended High School is familiar with, and does not describe any athlete.
I have the utmost respect for athletes, as I am not one. And if college football/track/hockey/etc is a stepping stone into a professional sports career or gets their foot into the door to get something meaningful out of college, then great.
But too many of us have had experiences in High School with some popular "jock" that coasts through his classes on his charm and football ability, and winds up getting accepted to some prestigious college based on his ability to block a tackle. And in many of our experiences, said "jock" winds up taking basket weaving or otherwise gets nothing out of college other than his fraternity experiences.
I think most of the problems people have with athletes getting accepted into college based on their athletic ability stems from their experiences in High School with that stereotypical jock. Some people feel slighted that they could not afford (or get accepted ingo) a more prestigious school or the school of their dreams after working hard in school, yet a jerk they knew on the football team gets offers thrown at them.
In any case, my only argument from the earlier post was that "time spent doing x" does not always necessarily equate to ambition or drive. In some cases, "time spent doing x" simply means "time spent having fun" or "time spent not having to do y."
From your post, you sound a lot more intuitive than the average person who gets in on a college scholarship.
Yes, there are A LOT of college students on sports scholarships that are hard workers and even good students (I knew some back in high school).
But I've knew a lot of jocks that got accepted to ivy-league schools (or at least prestigious schools) that were complete morons. They were the kind of guy that had the cute chicks do their homework or help them cheat on tests.
The important thing is that the number of hours spent working hard on a football field (or track, soccer, etc) does not really translate well into how many hours are spent doing something like studying.
Most "jocks" LIKE spending time with the team, playing the game, etc. So, it makes sense that they'd push themselves hard and spend a lot of their time working on it.
Most "people" DON'T LIKE studying for hours on end. So, if they do it, it shows more.
In college, who will (on average) put more towards studying? A person who has historically worked hard at academics because they chose to (despite it not being fun), or someone who worked hard doing something they loved (which was not academics).
It comes down to the individual. Like I said, I knew a bunch of athletes that also tried to do well in school and made something of themselves. But I knew a lot of "jocks" that were nothing more than football players and their going to college turned out to be a waste and joke.
Oh yeah it must be nice to have a net connection that is faster then a 52x CD-ROM drive. Or maybe you just have a 2x CD-ROM? As I have 256Kb ADSL I think I will just wait for the boxed version;)
But with all of the preloading, when the game is finally "released," you'll only need to download a small portion of the game. So, on release day, instead of driving to the store, waiting in line, waiting for your credit card to go through, driving home. You just drive home, download maybe 100 MB (or less if they preload the binaries) and you're set.
If you don't have broadband, then Steam is completely useless to you.
I'm TEMPTED to use steam via my sh!tty-ass DSL connection (it's slow compared to my friends' cable connection), but I think I'll still go with the CD seeing as I reformat every-so-often.
Part of me would still rather have the physical media, but my CD's tend to get scratched after a while (at least the game CD's, not the install CDs).
Say what you will about the US, but we've opened up a lot of our research. Yeh, some of those high-tech things you're talking about probably aren't readily available, but our older stuff is.
Both the US AND Russia were working against each other, so with the exception of some espionage, both sides were learning from their own mistakes, and learning things on their own.
If any country wants to start a basic manned-space program now, they've got one hell of a head start. First of all, both the US and Russia have figured out most of the physics. Both the US and Russia have leanred the common mishaps and "things not to do" when sending someone up and praying they come down in one piece.
Meanwhile, the technology available today is WAY more advanced than back then. We keep using those old shuttles because we don't have the money to spend on redesigning and rebulding them. Another country, starting from scratch, could have a way more advanced and possibly cheaper manned space-program if they did it right.
Russia and the US layed down the groundwork. Unfortunately, both sides wore themselves out early. Here's to hoping some nation makes it up there eventually.
"The only way an iMac is going to run some particular game as well as a "gaming PC" is if they stick a GF6800 in it and a 2.5GHz G5."
I'll bite.
The video card, yeh, I agree with.
But the G5 is pound-for-pound faster than the PC chips out today. Right now, a 2.5GHz P4 or Athlon will make just about any game fly (except DOOM 3). A P4 2.5GHz is not top of the line, but it's more than enough for gaming, so long as you have a decent video card.
I'd say a 2GHz G5 would perform very well with the right video card, on par with at LEAST an Intel 2.4GHz machine with similar RAM and video card.
The only thing current Macs need to run particular games well are the particular games. DOOM 3 will have an OSX port eventually, but there are a lot of NEW games that haven't been ported yet (if they ever will be).
I'd still like to buy a G5 PowerMac with Dual G5's (not the fastest ones, but medium). That would be nice.
If it wasn't for the Windows development I do for work (when I'm at home), I'd be using my PowerBook as my main machine ALL THE TIME when I'm at home.
"How many times can people fall for the same marketing trick. Infinite."
Yeh, first it was "Half-Life 2 will work x times better on an ATI card than nVidia," but that has proven to be BS. There are some rumors floating around that the 5x00 video cards are having some DX 9 problems with CS:Source, but I haven't read them yet, and it doesn't affect me anyway.
Then, it was "DOOM 3 will work x times better with an nVidia 6800 GT/Deluxe than an ATI card." Once ATI fixed their OpenGL support in their drivers a little, this point was moot.
THEN, you have all of these game saying "Best played with ATI" or "nVidia, the way it was meant to be played." I find these annoying, particularly when the nVidia ad plays every time you start a certain game.
However, I think Valve's "statements" and ATI's Half-Life 2 coupon helped them a LOT more in sales than any of nVidia-based card companies. Not saying they were true, just saying TONS of people bought 9800XT's because HL-2 was supposed to "run great on it," and it came with the free STEAM coupon.
In the end, it SHOULD all come down to 2 things: 1) Price 2) Company experience
Personally, my recent venture into ATI left me feeling a little wanting. My driver experience wasn't the best, and other things bugged me. So, when I built a new machine, I went back to my good old nVidia-based cards.So far, their quality has remained true.
"Supposedly, ATI cards are actually supposed to get higher speeds in HL2 than nVidia cards. And ATI's latest driver set equalized them in Doom 3 also."
That used to be the case back in the "nVidia 5x00 series." Those things sucked on so many levels. The ATI cards "supposedly" gave a big performance increase when compared to nVidia. This is proving to be false with the LATEST generation of cards from the competitors.
I saw some "benchmarks" on the Source engine (using CS:S) amd nVidia was doing about as well as ATI. Likewise, with the exception of the old driver in DOOM 3, the difference between the 2 fluxuates a couple of FPS in either direction.
ATI has always had notorious OpenGL performance (when compared to nVidia) but slightly better Direct-X. This has become less and less of an issue lately since most games are now (unfortunately) coded in Direct-X. ATI's new drivers try to improve on their Open-GL performance since so many people were going ga-ga over DOOM 3.
Personally, I recently switched back to nVidia on my gaming rig. My last card as ATI, and while it was ALRIGHT, the driver experience and what-not was just more annoying than my old GF4 TI 4600.
I'd say their comparable generation cards are comparable in performance now. It comes down to personal preferences now, with ATI having SLIGHTLY better image quaality (I don't even notice it). Personally, I like nVidia now, and will probably also go with their motherboard chipset when I upgrade my gaming rig next year.
Well, SP2 is cumulative; as in it has ALL of the updates thus far as well as SP1.
So, the combined network-install file can easily be over 400 megs.
If you're up-to-date with Windows Updates and already have SP1, then it won't be copying anywhere near 400MB of crap to your hard drive.
I have a copy of SP1 on CD, so when I need to install XP on someone's machine, I can bring it to a certain point update-wise without having to download all of the small updates again.
Now, I'll have SP2 on CD, so I'm covered for all updates up through Jul 04 when I need to install or reinstall XP.
In all seriousness, without reading their reasons, I can sort of agree with what the title says.
I'm going to get modded down, but who cares.
Linux is great, but in the end, it's really al ot like Unix. It tries to offer WHAT unix offers and HOW it offers it (while also improving on the two).
The 2 are very similar. Sure, you can porbably spend weeks listing some of the "technical" differenes, but they really are very much the same in CONCEPT and somewhat in design.
Personally, both should simply be called *nix from now on, as both offer the same thing.
Now, Windows and Mac OS (even pre-9) are not that similar anymore. They run differently, have different architectures; the only thing they have in common is the UI. Linux and Unix have a lot more common than MACOS and Windows.
Is that to say that the SCO should benefit from this? NO
Is that saying that Linux is not a great OS? NO
Is that saying Linux should from now on be called Unix lite? NO
Linux is in many way a reflection of Unix, all-be-it sharper than the original. Linux is what Unix would be if developed as open-source.
Or, when old people eventually start driving / flying them.
I can see it now, "Today on CBS news, 30 old men each flew their cars into seperate Farmer's Markets in 20 different states."
There are sooooo many sh!tty drivers out there today on the ROADS, imagine how dangerous the world would be if those same a$$-hats were flying overhead. Nobody would be safe. And, just like it is today, everyone would think their safe and above-average drivers, and recklesly fly around.
Hell, a few weeks / months ago, 2 small airplanes collided in NJ. I think both were hobbyist pilots that lived in the airstrips (where the backyards lead into the runway).
Here's to hoping this idea never gets off the ground (pun intended).
I'm a novice at Java; I was cast into the fire to learn it for a project (when I really didn't want to). Until then, my Java experience had not been a fun experience.
UI is very easy now, a LOT more than MFC (Visual C++). First off, there are GUI editors out there (even a plugin for eclipse), which embed the normal java code into the frame init code. It's the same code you'd type yourself with a text editor (if you wanted to).
Adding a button is simply dragging a button onto the fame and entering the name / text into the property panel. To add the action code, you usually have 3 choices:
1) Double click on the button, brings you to normal action code.
2) Click on the "Event" pane (usually tabbed with the property pane) and select which event you wish to code.
3) Manually code the event, which isn't that bad.
*Pretty much the same as VC++ and VB.
It's really a decent programming experience. I like coding in Java more than C++ now.
My only problem is deployment; deploying a Java application can be a pain in the a$$ when dealing with a mixed environment, while standard a VC++ binary is pretty simple. Even though JBuilder allows you to make an executable, it's pretty much just a wrapper to call the JRE to run the classes correctly.
Give it a shot, and install the JBuilder trial or Eclipse and the Visual Editor plugin.
In Eps 1 and 2, you see there are scores of Jedi. A LOT of them, and more young kids in training.
It is even said that they no longer could use teh force effectively to foresee events and whatnot.
The "lawn had become overgrown," if you will.
And Anakin was the lawn mower. By the time he was done, the number of Jedi was practically non-existant, and foce-sensitive beings were dwindled down to a small few.
Back before the 'Net, I was in middle school. Resources were found using the old "card catalog" system, unless you went to a prestigious library that had their county's card catalogs avaiable on a terminal.
It was 7th grade and the first time we had to write a "report" using multiple sources for a Social Studies class. We never were told about "plagurizing" or copying papers (as we were too young and didn't really have the resources). I wrote a 4 page paper about Alexander the great.
On one page, I wrote a segment about Alexander's horse (there was some sort of myth), and annotated which book / page I got the information from. The thing was very short and written like a 13-year-old would write something; it was OBVIOUSLY in my own words.
My teacher, let's call her Mrs P, returned my paper and claimed I had "plagurized" that segment. I was confused, as I didn't know what the hell that meant, and when she said I "copied it from a book," I got angry. I said "I know enough to know I write like a 13-year-old, how could I copy something from a book that sounds like what I had written? Nobody would print a book that bad."
I had to show her the pages from the book I cited, and even then she did not believe me. Eventually, she caved and gave me a "B-" instead of failing me. But I was pissed.
I never cheated on anything in my entire life, even afterwards through college, and was a pretty good student (honor role). I was the kind of kid people picked on, and was never any trouble. Meanwhile, this bitch was claiming I had cheated on something without any proof.
While it's now easier to plagurize than back then, at least now the teachers have the resources to determine if a student was cheating. Make the student hand in their report on paper AND a floppy disk, and make check it that way using some service. This should get rid of false accusations.
Amtrack sucks, but have you actually tried driving to some major cities during rush hour? The scenario has to be a common torture in Hell. Driving in traffic to get TO the city, and driving through traffic IN the city, every day can drive someone mad.
In some situations, driving is definately better. But other cases: horrible...
Car - Summit NJ to New York NY - 1+ hour to get to parking. Amtrack - Summit NJ to New York NY - 20-30 minutes to Penn station.
A lot of people use the rails to commute, particularly to New York. Driving into NYC during rush hour is insane. When I take a NJ Transit to NYC, the cars are always packed.
Sure, not too many people go cross-country in trains anymore (at least, in the US). But a lot of people use the commuter rails.
Personally, I won't let the potential fear of something happening stop me from doing the day-to-day. But the rails would be easy-pickings for some real jerks.
I sort of agree. I doubt they'd ever use airplane as "missles" again, as people would fight back to prevent another 9/11.
But, it would still be pretty devastating to simply blow up an airplane, as it would take out the passengers and possibly the citizens below.
Personally, I'm shocked more isn't done with the Railroads. I've ridden the Acela Express from New Jersey to Manhatten about 6 times in the last year, and there hasn't been ANY security. What's to stop some psycho from derailing a train or cashing it into a busy train station? Nothing.
I like taking the train a lot more than flying for dozens of reasons; security causing delays is the main one.
By the time it get through the airport checkpoints, get on the plain, wait for the delays, taken off, landed, gotten a cab, etc. I could have strolled onto a train, had a quiet and comfortable ride, and end up a few subway stops from our Cambridge office, for about half the price.
I think your battery probably lasts longer. They probably put something in there that will last a little longer so the owners of the 1.3 wouldn't complain too much about the deminished battry life.
As for my battery, the whole unit runs fine for now. It gets mildly warm when browsing the internet, but barely. I don't use it for gaming, so I can't comment on how it runs while playing UT 2004.
A1045 is like saying "The Chevy Malibu." The serial numbers are like saying "if your VIN number starts with..." or more broadly "models made between 1995 and 1997."
My battery is model number A1045, but it's serial number is not in the supplied list. Therefore, mine doesn't have a problem.
I have the PB 15" (1.25 GHz). And while I've never had it on my lap while playing, say, Unreal 2004, it's never been that hot. It's actually run cooler than most of my other noitebooks.
The PB 12, on the other hand, feels like it just came out of the oven. That thing heats up like a hot plate on a summer day. It's ony of the main reasons I decided to get the 15" instead (that, and I wanted to use it as my main computer and the screen was just annoying).
But truthfully, m Powerbook has been the best computer purchase I've ever made. And this is coming from a person that's long-since hated Macs for various reasons. While I'm no zealot, I think the Powerbook is a work of art.
In the LARGE scale, yeh, outsourcing hasn't become a plague yet. But it's still prevalent, and I know a bunch of people from different states that have been let go because of it.
But the whole "by the time this stream makes it through, three/four years from now, the economy will likely be in full boom yet again" really sucks.
I got into Computer Science because I LOVE it. I started programming back in Middle School and continued from there.
Unfortunately, by the time I graduated from university, the tech market had already bottomed out. I saw it coming, but I had dedicated so many years to persuing programming (5 years before college), I couldn't see myself doing anything else.
I like math and love science (chemistry and astronomy), but am not that great at eiter.
Here's to hoping you're right. Hopefully it will swing back (partially) in a few years.
We use them at work. And while I use them to lock my laptop to my cubicle (of if I have to travel), I really don't trust them.
At most, they're like "The Club (tm)". Sure, they MIGHT deter a thief from wanting to risk stealing the laptop or tempt them to steal someone else's laptop (that ISN'T secured).
But unlike cars, you rarely see a number of laptops in a row to choose from, unless it's after-hours in an office or school lab. So, if a thief sees it sitting on a desk in a library, there's a good chance they'll take it since it's just so damn tempting.
Personally, I never let my laptop leave my sight. If I'm staying at a hotel, I either take it with me when I go out, or (if it's a nice hotel) I place it in my backpack and hide it somewhere.
"King of the Hill" (a cartoon on FOX) did a similar thing, though I think they've since sold the site.
The title was "Transnational Amusements Presents: Peggy's Magic Sex Feet"
It was an episode about Peggy's feet; she felt ashamed of having a mans-size-14 or something like that.
So, someone cons her into having her huge friggin feet videotaped on a fetish site (stomping on rotten fruit, getting hit with a pingpong ball paddle, etc). They mention the url in the episode, it was like "peggysfeet.com" or something.
Going to it showed the same stuff the episode showed, in the same animation. I thought it was a hoot they did that.
Because "King of the Hill" is usually more tame than FOX's other cartoons (Simpsons, Futurama, etc), it was just full of a bunch of stupid stuff.
In any case, at least they weren't liable for anything. Nice to see that even a moron like FOX can think ahead.
Slashdot Mirror
A very good argument, and very true.
I'm not saying everyone should excel at academics. I know there's more to life, success, and happiness than that. Hell, I knew someone from high school that didn't go to college at all, and is extremely successful (more so than myself or anyone else I know) doing what he loves. He's extremely happy and makes a lot more coin than any of my friends.
I just have a problem with some people that only every focused on sports and have little ambition in life, yet their ability to block a tackle lands them a scholarship (or at least enrollment) at a college that many dare not even apply to (for financial reasons or whatever). It's a specific kind of athlete that fits a stereotype that every American that's attended High School is familiar with, and does not describe any athlete.
I have the utmost respect for athletes, as I am not one. And if college football/track/hockey/etc is a stepping stone into a professional sports career or gets their foot into the door to get something meaningful out of college, then great.
But too many of us have had experiences in High School with some popular "jock" that coasts through his classes on his charm and football ability, and winds up getting accepted to some prestigious college based on his ability to block a tackle. And in many of our experiences, said "jock" winds up taking basket weaving or otherwise gets nothing out of college other than his fraternity experiences.
I think most of the problems people have with athletes getting accepted into college based on their athletic ability stems from their experiences in High School with that stereotypical jock. Some people feel slighted that they could not afford (or get accepted ingo) a more prestigious school or the school of their dreams after working hard in school, yet a jerk they knew on the football team gets offers thrown at them.
In any case, my only argument from the earlier post was that "time spent doing x" does not always necessarily equate to ambition or drive. In some cases, "time spent doing x" simply means "time spent having fun" or "time spent not having to do y."
From your post, you sound a lot more intuitive than the average person who gets in on a college scholarship.
Yes, there are A LOT of college students on sports scholarships that are hard workers and even good students (I knew some back in high school).
But I've knew a lot of jocks that got accepted to ivy-league schools (or at least prestigious schools) that were complete morons. They were the kind of guy that had the cute chicks do their homework or help them cheat on tests.
The important thing is that the number of hours spent working hard on a football field (or track, soccer, etc) does not really translate well into how many hours are spent doing something like studying.
Most "jocks" LIKE spending time with the team, playing the game, etc. So, it makes sense that they'd push themselves hard and spend a lot of their time working on it.
Most "people" DON'T LIKE studying for hours on end. So, if they do it, it shows more.
In college, who will (on average) put more towards studying? A person who has historically worked hard at academics because they chose to (despite it not being fun), or someone who worked hard doing something they loved (which was not academics).
It comes down to the individual. Like I said, I knew a bunch of athletes that also tried to do well in school and made something of themselves. But I knew a lot of "jocks" that were nothing more than football players and their going to college turned out to be a waste and joke.
But with all of the preloading, when the game is finally "released," you'll only need to download a small portion of the game. So, on release day, instead of driving to the store, waiting in line, waiting for your credit card to go through, driving home. You just drive home, download maybe 100 MB (or less if they preload the binaries) and you're set.
If you don't have broadband, then Steam is completely useless to you.
I'm TEMPTED to use steam via my sh!tty-ass DSL connection (it's slow compared to my friends' cable connection), but I think I'll still go with the CD seeing as I reformat every-so-often.
Part of me would still rather have the physical media, but my CD's tend to get scratched after a while (at least the game CD's, not the install CDs).
Say what you will about the US, but we've opened up a lot of our research. Yeh, some of those high-tech things you're talking about probably aren't readily available, but our older stuff is.
Both the US AND Russia were working against each other, so with the exception of some espionage, both sides were learning from their own mistakes, and learning things on their own.
If any country wants to start a basic manned-space program now, they've got one hell of a head start. First of all, both the US and Russia have figured out most of the physics. Both the US and Russia have leanred the common mishaps and "things not to do" when sending someone up and praying they come down in one piece.
Meanwhile, the technology available today is WAY more advanced than back then. We keep using those old shuttles because we don't have the money to spend on redesigning and rebulding them. Another country, starting from scratch, could have a way more advanced and possibly cheaper manned space-program if they did it right.
Russia and the US layed down the groundwork. Unfortunately, both sides wore themselves out early. Here's to hoping some nation makes it up there eventually.
"The only way an iMac is going to run some particular game as well as a "gaming PC" is if they stick a GF6800 in it and a 2.5GHz G5."
I'll bite.
The video card, yeh, I agree with.
But the G5 is pound-for-pound faster than the PC chips out today. Right now, a 2.5GHz P4 or Athlon will make just about any game fly (except DOOM 3). A P4 2.5GHz is not top of the line, but it's more than enough for gaming, so long as you have a decent video card.
I'd say a 2GHz G5 would perform very well with the right video card, on par with at LEAST an Intel 2.4GHz machine with similar RAM and video card.
The only thing current Macs need to run particular games well are the particular games. DOOM 3 will have an OSX port eventually, but there are a lot of NEW games that haven't been ported yet (if they ever will be).
I'd still like to buy a G5 PowerMac with Dual G5's (not the fastest ones, but medium). That would be nice.
If it wasn't for the Windows development I do for work (when I'm at home), I'd be using my PowerBook as my main machine ALL THE TIME when I'm at home.
"How many times can people fall for the same marketing trick. Infinite."
Yeh, first it was "Half-Life 2 will work x times better on an ATI card than nVidia," but that has proven to be BS. There are some rumors floating around that the 5x00 video cards are having some DX 9 problems with CS:Source, but I haven't read them yet, and it doesn't affect me anyway.
Then, it was "DOOM 3 will work x times better with an nVidia 6800 GT/Deluxe than an ATI card." Once ATI fixed their OpenGL support in their drivers a little, this point was moot.
THEN, you have all of these game saying "Best played with ATI" or "nVidia, the way it was meant to be played." I find these annoying, particularly when the nVidia ad plays every time you start a certain game.
However, I think Valve's "statements" and ATI's Half-Life 2 coupon helped them a LOT more in sales than any of nVidia-based card companies. Not saying they were true, just saying TONS of people bought 9800XT's because HL-2 was supposed to "run great on it," and it came with the free STEAM coupon.
In the end, it SHOULD all come down to 2 things:
1) Price
2) Company experience
Personally, my recent venture into ATI left me feeling a little wanting. My driver experience wasn't the best, and other things bugged me. So, when I built a new machine, I went back to my good old nVidia-based cards.So far, their quality has remained true.
"Supposedly, ATI cards are actually supposed to get higher speeds in HL2 than nVidia cards. And ATI's latest driver set equalized them in Doom 3 also."
That used to be the case back in the "nVidia 5x00 series." Those things sucked on so many levels. The ATI cards "supposedly" gave a big performance increase when compared to nVidia. This is proving to be false with the LATEST generation of cards from the competitors.
I saw some "benchmarks" on the Source engine (using CS:S) amd nVidia was doing about as well as ATI. Likewise, with the exception of the old driver in DOOM 3, the difference between the 2 fluxuates a couple of FPS in either direction.
ATI has always had notorious OpenGL performance (when compared to nVidia) but slightly better Direct-X. This has become less and less of an issue lately since most games are now (unfortunately) coded in Direct-X. ATI's new drivers try to improve on their Open-GL performance since so many people were going ga-ga over DOOM 3.
Personally, I recently switched back to nVidia on my gaming rig. My last card as ATI, and while it was ALRIGHT, the driver experience and what-not was just more annoying than my old GF4 TI 4600.
I'd say their comparable generation cards are comparable in performance now. It comes down to personal preferences now, with ATI having SLIGHTLY better image quaality (I don't even notice it). Personally, I like nVidia now, and will probably also go with their motherboard chipset when I upgrade my gaming rig next year.
You're just downloading the data files; textures, maps, sounds, etc.
.dll, etc) aren't dont yet so you don't download those.
The binaries (.exe,
Downloading the data now simply means on opening-day, you don't have as much to download before you can start playing.
Well, SP2 is cumulative; as in it has ALL of the updates thus far as well as SP1.
So, the combined network-install file can easily be over 400 megs.
If you're up-to-date with Windows Updates and already have SP1, then it won't be copying anywhere near 400MB of crap to your hard drive.
I have a copy of SP1 on CD, so when I need to install XP on someone's machine, I can bring it to a certain point update-wise without having to download all of the small updates again.
Now, I'll have SP2 on CD, so I'm covered for all updates up through Jul 04 when I need to install or reinstall XP.
In all seriousness, without reading their reasons, I can sort of agree with what the title says. I'm going to get modded down, but who cares. Linux is great, but in the end, it's really al ot like Unix. It tries to offer WHAT unix offers and HOW it offers it (while also improving on the two). The 2 are very similar. Sure, you can porbably spend weeks listing some of the "technical" differenes, but they really are very much the same in CONCEPT and somewhat in design. Personally, both should simply be called *nix from now on, as both offer the same thing. Now, Windows and Mac OS (even pre-9) are not that similar anymore. They run differently, have different architectures; the only thing they have in common is the UI. Linux and Unix have a lot more common than MACOS and Windows. Is that to say that the SCO should benefit from this? NO Is that saying that Linux is not a great OS? NO Is that saying Linux should from now on be called Unix lite? NO Linux is in many way a reflection of Unix, all-be-it sharper than the original. Linux is what Unix would be if developed as open-source.
Or, when old people eventually start driving / flying them.
I can see it now, "Today on CBS news, 30 old men each flew their cars into seperate Farmer's Markets in 20 different states."
There are sooooo many sh!tty drivers out there today on the ROADS, imagine how dangerous the world would be if those same a$$-hats were flying overhead. Nobody would be safe. And, just like it is today, everyone would think their safe and above-average drivers, and recklesly fly around.
Hell, a few weeks / months ago, 2 small airplanes collided in NJ. I think both were hobbyist pilots that lived in the airstrips (where the backyards lead into the runway).
Here's to hoping this idea never gets off the ground (pun intended).
So it's all the fun of spending money on women with none of that annoying sex.
:)
And to think I got married...
Oh, so you're already there
I'm a novice at Java; I was cast into the fire to learn it for a project (when I really didn't want to). Until then, my Java experience had not been a fun experience.
UI is very easy now, a LOT more than MFC (Visual C++). First off, there are GUI editors out there (even a plugin for eclipse), which embed the normal java code into the frame init code. It's the same code you'd type yourself with a text editor (if you wanted to).
Adding a button is simply dragging a button onto the fame and entering the name / text into the property panel. To add the action code, you usually have 3 choices:
1) Double click on the button, brings you to normal action code.
2) Click on the "Event" pane (usually tabbed with the property pane) and select which event you wish to code.
3) Manually code the event, which isn't that bad.
*Pretty much the same as VC++ and VB.
It's really a decent programming experience. I like coding in Java more than C++ now.
My only problem is deployment; deploying a Java application can be a pain in the a$$ when dealing with a mixed environment, while standard a VC++ binary is pretty simple. Even though JBuilder allows you to make an executable, it's pretty much just a wrapper to call the JRE to run the classes correctly.
Give it a shot, and install the JBuilder trial or Eclipse and the Visual Editor plugin.
My theory is...
In Eps 1 and 2, you see there are scores of Jedi. A LOT of them, and more young kids in training.
It is even said that they no longer could use teh force effectively to foresee events and whatnot.
The "lawn had become overgrown," if you will.
And Anakin was the lawn mower. By the time he was done, the number of Jedi was practically non-existant, and foce-sensitive beings were dwindled down to a small few.
Back before the 'Net, I was in middle school. Resources were found using the old "card catalog" system, unless you went to a prestigious library that had their county's card catalogs avaiable on a terminal.
It was 7th grade and the first time we had to write a "report" using multiple sources for a Social Studies class. We never were told about "plagurizing" or copying papers (as we were too young and didn't really have the resources). I wrote a 4 page paper about Alexander the great.
On one page, I wrote a segment about Alexander's horse (there was some sort of myth), and annotated which book / page I got the information from. The thing was very short and written like a 13-year-old would write something; it was OBVIOUSLY in my own words.
My teacher, let's call her Mrs P, returned my paper and claimed I had "plagurized" that segment. I was confused, as I didn't know what the hell that meant, and when she said I "copied it from a book," I got angry. I said "I know enough to know I write like a 13-year-old, how could I copy something from a book that sounds like what I had written? Nobody would print a book that bad."
I had to show her the pages from the book I cited, and even then she did not believe me. Eventually, she caved and gave me a "B-" instead of failing me. But I was pissed.
I never cheated on anything in my entire life, even afterwards through college, and was a pretty good student (honor role). I was the kind of kid people picked on, and was never any trouble. Meanwhile, this bitch was claiming I had cheated on something without any proof.
While it's now easier to plagurize than back then, at least now the teachers have the resources to determine if a student was cheating. Make the student hand in their report on paper AND a floppy disk, and make check it that way using some service. This should get rid of false accusations.
Amtrack sucks, but have you actually tried driving to some major cities during rush hour? The scenario has to be a common torture in Hell. Driving in traffic to get TO the city, and driving through traffic IN the city, every day can drive someone mad.
In some situations, driving is definately better. But other cases: horrible...
Car - Summit NJ to New York NY - 1+ hour to get to parking.
Amtrack - Summit NJ to New York NY - 20-30 minutes to Penn station.
A lot of people use the rails to commute, particularly to New York. Driving into NYC during rush hour is insane. When I take a NJ Transit to NYC, the cars are always packed.
Sure, not too many people go cross-country in trains anymore (at least, in the US). But a lot of people use the commuter rails.
Personally, I won't let the potential fear of something happening stop me from doing the day-to-day. But the rails would be easy-pickings for some real jerks.
I sort of agree. I doubt they'd ever use airplane as "missles" again, as people would fight back to prevent another 9/11.
But, it would still be pretty devastating to simply blow up an airplane, as it would take out the passengers and possibly the citizens below.
Personally, I'm shocked more isn't done with the Railroads. I've ridden the Acela Express from New Jersey to Manhatten about 6 times in the last year, and there hasn't been ANY security. What's to stop some psycho from derailing a train or cashing it into a busy train station? Nothing.
I like taking the train a lot more than flying for dozens of reasons; security causing delays is the main one.
By the time it get through the airport checkpoints, get on the plain, wait for the delays, taken off, landed, gotten a cab, etc. I could have strolled onto a train, had a quiet and comfortable ride, and end up a few subway stops from our Cambridge office, for about half the price.
But, you have to wonder, how safe are our trains.
I think your battery probably lasts longer. They probably put something in there that will last a little longer so the owners of the 1.3 wouldn't complain too much about the deminished battry life. As for my battery, the whole unit runs fine for now. It gets mildly warm when browsing the internet, but barely. I don't use it for gaming, so I can't comment on how it runs while playing UT 2004.
No...
..." or more broadly "models made between 1995 and 1997."
A1045 is the model number, not the serial number.
A1045 is like saying "The Chevy Malibu." The serial numbers are like saying "if your VIN number starts with
My battery is model number A1045, but it's serial number is not in the supplied list. Therefore, mine doesn't have a problem.
I have the PB 15" (1.25 GHz). And while I've never had it on my lap while playing, say, Unreal 2004, it's never been that hot. It's actually run cooler than most of my other noitebooks.
The PB 12, on the other hand, feels like it just came out of the oven. That thing heats up like a hot plate on a summer day. It's ony of the main reasons I decided to get the 15" instead (that, and I wanted to use it as my main computer and the screen was just annoying).
But truthfully, m Powerbook has been the best computer purchase I've ever made. And this is coming from a person that's long-since hated Macs for various reasons. While I'm no zealot, I think the Powerbook is a work of art.
I'm big into Oracle, and use MySQL on my desktop for test databases. But the lack of views and such is driving me crazy.
What do you recommend for Windows software to handle PostgreSql?
I'm looking along the lines of something like SQL Navigator or Toad, but free.
Something to perform queries (with syntax coloring) and return results in nice tables, as well as other more administrative tasks.
In the LARGE scale, yeh, outsourcing hasn't become a plague yet. But it's still prevalent, and I know a bunch of people from different states that have been let go because of it.
But the whole "by the time this stream makes it through, three/four years from now, the economy will likely be in full boom yet again" really sucks.
I got into Computer Science because I LOVE it. I started programming back in Middle School and continued from there.
Unfortunately, by the time I graduated from university, the tech market had already bottomed out. I saw it coming, but I had dedicated so many years to persuing programming (5 years before college), I couldn't see myself doing anything else.
I like math and love science (chemistry and astronomy), but am not that great at eiter.
Here's to hoping you're right. Hopefully it will swing back (partially) in a few years.
We use them at work. And while I use them to lock my laptop to my cubicle (of if I have to travel), I really don't trust them.
At most, they're like "The Club (tm)". Sure, they MIGHT deter a thief from wanting to risk stealing the laptop or tempt them to steal someone else's laptop (that ISN'T secured).
But unlike cars, you rarely see a number of laptops in a row to choose from, unless it's after-hours in an office or school lab. So, if a thief sees it sitting on a desk in a library, there's a good chance they'll take it since it's just so damn tempting.
Personally, I never let my laptop leave my sight. If I'm staying at a hotel, I either take it with me when I go out, or (if it's a nice hotel) I place it in my backpack and hide it somewhere.
"King of the Hill" (a cartoon on FOX) did a similar thing, though I think they've since sold the site.
The title was "Transnational Amusements Presents: Peggy's Magic Sex Feet"
It was an episode about Peggy's feet; she felt ashamed of having a mans-size-14 or something like that.
So, someone cons her into having her huge friggin feet videotaped on a fetish site (stomping on rotten fruit, getting hit with a pingpong ball paddle, etc). They mention the url in the episode, it was like "peggysfeet.com" or something.
Going to it showed the same stuff the episode showed, in the same animation. I thought it was a hoot they did that.
Because "King of the Hill" is usually more tame than FOX's other cartoons (Simpsons, Futurama, etc), it was just full of a bunch of stupid stuff.
In any case, at least they weren't liable for anything. Nice to see that even a moron like FOX can think ahead.