Background tasks, especially networking ones (which frankly, are the most useful type), would flatten the battery really quickly. Even more so with several of them waking up at different times and connecting the network.
On the other hand, making the rule hard and fast is a bit tough. And Apple could provide some means of minimizing drain (waking every task up every few hours for example), but don't damn Apple totally on this one.
Some programming techniques can be programmed much more elegantly without compile time typing. All type systems have problems, especially with things like covariance and contravariance.
Now, I would tend to agree that it is worth sacrificing a little elegance for all the benefits of compile time typing, but you can't say it is an axiom of truth that compile time typing is best way. From a strictly purest perspective, runtime typing is best.
Actually, I've legally downloaded non-open source programs with the blessing of the copyright owner, because I bought the software key from them and they like to distribute the binary via bittorrent.
I don't think you want a laptop on a trip like that, I think you want an iPhone. Sure the keyboard isn't really up to the great american novel, (but someone may release an external one after February, when the platform is opened up), but would you really write a novel, or would notes for a novel be good enough? And you could keep your notes backed up over the internet or such.
There are barriers to crossing particular market shares. For example, it's a different proposition to convince businesses than to convince individuals to change. However, when many of the individuals in a business, including the executives and IT staff are using OS-X (assuming that scenario comes to pass), then the business becomes likely to change too. You can't assume any particular limitation of 15%.
Uh, no. Both sides of the debate agree that natural selection takes place. The argument is over the creative power of random mutations. Bacteria being immune doesn't prove anything unless you can prove that not a single one of those billions of bacteria was _already_ immune. Similarly with living things changing over time, could be a sign of natural selection but you need to be a bit more specific about what kinds of changes over time before claiming proof of the creative power of random mutation.
True. But if they are moving at the same speed there seems a good chance they would be lined up the other way. However not on the same line. It would be a line at the reverse angle to the hypothetical centre of the big bang.
Machines that count paper votes can be tested by manually counting a sample. If the sample differs significantly from the mechanical count, you have a problem. You could cheat this way, but not by much.
Flouros etc are fine in a lounge room, but for a toilet where you turn it on for 60 seconds and then turn it off, the good old fashion light bulb is the only real solution. I don't think they should be getting rid of them.
I used Tiger for a year and probably had it crash maybe 4 times in that time. I've been using Leopard since it came out and no crashes.
I admit that some of the new stuff in leopard is a bit lame, but some of it simply rocks. The built-in VNC screen sharing for example, blows away 3rd party VNC in both speed and ease of use. Also Time Machine, while I'd prefer if it had more options, also rocks in terms of design and ease of use.
So I don't think the comparison fits at all. I've used Vista and I think the problems with it are deep seated. Leopard could do with a bit of maturing before it is perfect, but I don't see any great problem with it here and now.
I could generally get a fix for a small problem out in 48 hours. But then again my software may not be the complexity that your software is. If the software I was working on was say, the kernel of Oracle or UNIX, then I'd imagine 4 weeks would be good.
>How much more advanced would computers be now if it were still common to drop $700 on the CPU alone?
30 years ago it was common to drop $10,000 on a CPU alone. That didn't mean they hopped directly to Core 2 Duo in the 70s and bypassed intervening developments, it doesn't work like that.
Slashdot Mirror
Background tasks, especially networking ones (which frankly, are the most useful type), would flatten the battery really quickly. Even more so with several of them waking up at different times and connecting the network.
On the other hand, making the rule hard and fast is a bit tough. And Apple could provide some means of minimizing drain (waking every task up every few hours for example), but don't damn Apple totally on this one.
Some programming techniques can be programmed much more elegantly without compile time typing. All type systems have problems, especially with things like covariance and contravariance.
Now, I would tend to agree that it is worth sacrificing a little elegance for all the benefits of compile time typing, but you can't say it is an axiom of truth that compile time typing is best way. From a strictly purest perspective, runtime typing is best.
It just means you can only travel through time in exact year increments so the earth is back where it was. Not too big a restriction!
Actually, I've legally downloaded non-open source programs with the blessing of the copyright owner, because I bought the software key from them and they like to distribute the binary via bittorrent.
IANAL, but the court can order anybody they like to supply evidence so that it can reach a conclusion.
Are you surprised they are using satellites, or surprised they are admitting to it?
I don't think you want a laptop on a trip like that, I think you want an iPhone. Sure the keyboard isn't really up to the great american novel, (but someone may release an external one after February, when the platform is opened up), but would you really write a novel, or would notes for a novel be good enough? And you could keep your notes backed up over the internet or such.
Duh, do you understand what a MARGINAL cost is?
There are barriers to crossing particular market shares. For example, it's a different proposition to convince businesses than to convince individuals to change. However, when many of the individuals in a business, including the executives and IT staff are using OS-X (assuming that scenario comes to pass), then the business becomes likely to change too. You can't assume any particular limitation of 15%.
Uh, no. Both sides of the debate agree that natural selection takes place. The argument is over the creative power of random mutations. Bacteria being immune doesn't prove anything unless you can prove that not a single one of those billions of bacteria was _already_ immune. Similarly with living things changing over time, could be a sign of natural selection but you need to be a bit more specific about what kinds of changes over time before claiming proof of the creative power of random mutation.
True. But if they are moving at the same speed there seems a good chance they would be lined up the other way. However not on the same line. It would be a line at the reverse angle to the hypothetical centre of the big bang.
Machines that count paper votes can be tested by manually counting a sample. If the sample differs significantly from the mechanical count, you have a problem. You could cheat this way, but not by much.
Flouros etc are fine in a lounge room, but for a toilet where you turn it on for 60 seconds and then turn it off, the good old fashion light bulb is the only real solution. I don't think they should be getting rid of them.
Windows has a philosophy for security??
Do they actually change to become resistent, or is it merely that the already resistent minority multiplies to become predominant?
I used Tiger for a year and probably had it crash maybe 4 times in that time. I've been using Leopard since it came out and no crashes.
I admit that some of the new stuff in leopard is a bit lame, but some of it simply rocks. The built-in VNC screen sharing for example, blows away 3rd party VNC in both speed and ease of use. Also Time Machine, while I'd prefer if it had more options, also rocks in terms of design and ease of use.
So I don't think the comparison fits at all. I've used Vista and I think the problems with it are deep seated. Leopard could do with a bit of maturing before it is perfect, but I don't see any great problem with it here and now.
I could generally get a fix for a small problem out in 48 hours. But then again my software may not be the complexity that your software is. If the software I was working on was say, the kernel of Oracle or UNIX, then I'd imagine 4 weeks would be good.
Employees of software development companies can hardly be considered typical.
Myself, I did install windows on my Mac but very rarely have cause to boot it up. Yet it did influence my decision to go to Mac initially.
Mussel cars will make girls think you are a cold fish. Now Muscle cars, they might turn the girls on.
So you get put in jail even though you never saw, heard about or touched any pot? What makes me think you're talking nonsense?
>How much more advanced would computers be now if it were still common to drop $700 on the CPU alone?
30 years ago it was common to drop $10,000 on a CPU alone. That didn't mean they hopped directly to Core 2 Duo in the 70s and bypassed intervening developments, it doesn't work like that.
Ok, copyrights apply to derivative works. But how do you prove it is a derivative work if they won't tell you?
Kinetic? Give me a break. The first watch to harvest human power was developed by Breguet in 1780.
The equivalent of a nun is a monk and they have the same significance.
But can Cowboy Neal blend a Beowulf cluster of them?
That is the question.