I, for one, didn't see anything in there about how it improves over an experienced farmer who can drive a tractor well.
From the article i got the sense these were just modified regular tractors, not some lightwieght version that reduces compaction.
I invite you to go look at any farmer's (try my dad) row crops. The furrows on fields of row crops such as carrot seed and garlic are laser straight, and they travel the same furrows when working the field all season long. Growing up, Dad used to let me try to cultivate a row at the very edge of the field (where it was easy for him to fix) and it was always a disaster. However after years of doing it, my dad and many of the farmers in our area had it down to where you could look all the way down a 1/4 mile field and see only inches of deviation.
Furthermore, even if someone had some wandering furrows, it's just a matter of staying in them when doing work in the field as the crop grows (spraying, etc).
I can see a system that uses lighter machinery or allows few passes over a field in a season, but if we're talking about driving the same tractors by different methods, aside from the convenience, I don't see how it would yield the spectacular result quoted. Unless they were comparing their tractors to one driven by complete novices who wander all over the field (too much Fosters?)
There had been no injuries, McEvoy said, and fewer than 10 complaints had been received.
Still good point on the whole beancounter angle. Recalls are usually less a public safety decision than an accounting one.
[snide] Fair and Balanced [ /snide] on your phone.
on
Real-World Hyperlinks
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'd like to use it at video rental places and CD stores to get product reviews.
I'm sure that the rollout of that would never involve the media companies signing on (or walking across the hall) with the phone companies to control that content.
"This 'Cell-O-Matic' review of this fine MGM movie, brought to you by...MGM"
My problem with this, is that in the interview I heard on Morning Edition, the spokeperson basically layed it out as gospel (that the foam caused it).
Sure it did, Ace. You shot the damn thing enough times at 500 mph. You kept getting small, inconclusive cracks, so you shot it over and over and over until you got what you wanted. How do we know the wing used for that test wasn't defective? Maybe the foam you used was a tiny bit more dense. Rip that same hole 3 times in a row, and I'm on board.
Found what you're looking for? More like looking for what you found.
At work, we call it the "Ticka-tick-tick-bing Syndrom." Account Execs think that when they need something changed, I sit at my Mac, punch a few keys, and it's good-to-go, a la the movies: "Can you zoom in on that? Enhance, please." *ticka-tick-tick-bing*
I was thinking more of the fact that RAM is normally in units of 128 MB. Maybe there could be a simple way to say how many of these 128's you have?
"This machine is 'memory-5', while this one over here comes with 'memory-8'."
I guess I'm thinking of how Ford F-Series trucks are F-150, F-250, F-350. It doesn't really mean much as far as engine size or any real specs. It's just kinda like Small, Medium, Large. While that's a little simple for RAM, I don't think RAM needs a whole lot more complexity.
Marketing is all about taking things and ideas and making them palatable to the general public. In the computer world, you try to give people catchy handles to reference technologies that are fairly obscure in their technical descriptions.
Firewire -- IEEE-1394
Airport Extreme -- IEEE 802.11g
Bluetooth -- Full duplex radio in the 2.4 GHz spectrum
(add your own)
There's little things in most computers and apps that do a fairly good job of masking the tech behind them. It wasn't long ago that you had to type http:// into a browser window. Now most will assume that and go get the page.
Hardware still has a way to go. RAM, VRAM, and hard drives are all fairly basic things that will frequently flunk the "Mom test". Maybe it's time for some 'unit' of memory and storage than help to explain what these do for the computer in a more colloquial terms.
Copyright was made to reward the public, and law provides protection from copyright infringement. What about rewarding innovation? Allowing inventors and creators to profit from their work before it goes to the people?
Why did you bring up a straw man argument? What you said is similar to saying good will is communism.
You hammered in the stake and brought the bale of hay. You insisted that copyright law is more for the public's good than protection of creation. I was trying to point out that software protection is mainly the protection of innovation.
... but the public still deserves to enjoy it if they can. What bothers me most about naysayers to Apple's deal is the assumption that it's somehow our right to have the maximum quality possible. I understand you don't think it's illegal, simply unfair. But the public still can enjoy it. If this were actually good music, I could play it and hear it and enjoy it.
Considering the equipment the bulk of America listens to their music on, they don't care that much about super high fidelity either. They just want to enjoy it.
Adobe is very sensitive about direct competition from Apple. Adobe also fears that Apple might one day start giving away Pro applications for free,...
This is nothing more than some junk that was in the rumor mill, but I recall there was talk of Apple having iPhoto be their consumer app, and then releasing a pro photo editor. I guess Adobe almost shit bricks over it, and the rumor goes that Apple shelved the pro photo app.
I think Apple has always danced on eggshells with Adobe, but with the suites of power apps Apple is creating/scooping up, I don't think it's too long before they can cut the apron strings and give em the big middle finger.
The public has the right to freely enjoy its culture. And likewise, freely make their own art/culture contribution if they don't like what's offered. With all due respect, the way you phrased your initial comment could be twisted to include 'code poetry'. Yay, software piracy is for the 'greater good'.
The US constitution makes it very clear that copyright is only granted, for a limited time, to reward the public for creating and expanding the public domain, and the public's culture. Very clear also, is copyright law that says you can do what you want with your work until the time you aren't protected by that law, and the 'common good' stuff kicks in. As far as I know, the soundtrack was just released and has a ways to go before it's in the class of American Standards.
If I hand over the ten bucks for the album, how good of an encode do I get?
My guess would be about $10 worth. The premise of online music distro is that not everyone is an audiophile, and some people just want to rock out at OK quality for a nice price.
As someone already pointed out, you can have the master tapes of you are that 133t. It just might cost you a few million bucks.
Just because you are used to one way of purchasing/enjoying art, doesn't make other methods 'unfair'.
What if I prefer to buy my music in a more lasting form? So should sidewalk chalk artists not be allowed to make drawings?
What if I prefer my music to be compressed with FLAC? So, should publishers not be allowed to print a book in whatever size they want, then distribute it on tape/cd/ebook/etc if they want?
What if I prefer to compress my music with MY parameters, to meet MY standards of audio fidelity? So should a painter have to check with the buyer before he decides oil versus pastels, canvas versus illustration board, small versus mural, etc.?
Sure you can hang it/display it/listen to it wherever you want once you get it home, but as to where you can buy art, it's not 'unfair' that you have to go to a gallery contracted to sell the piece. Art isn't public domain (despite p2p advocates). It's a product, and if you choose to enjoy it, you are stuck with how the artist/rep choose to let you partake in it.
You know, this is a teriffic illustration of how futile most 'App A vs. App B' arguments are.
You listed things that are important to the way you work. I've used both heavily, yet since I never use vector apps for flash, multi-page, and rarely with gradients, and I ALWAYS use vector combined with Photoshop and never print from the app (thereby not really needing the admittedly neat trapping previews), I'll never need most of the areas where Freehand owns.
Dog slow: You win, hands down
Even though my vote is for AI, I've would love to have the Inspector in Illustrator. Much more compact and useful.
What if at the office a user is running windows and Premier, wants to take the project home and only has his nice new dual 2ghz G5 sitting there. What's he/she to do? sheesh.
Quite a conundrum, yet I'm still gonna have a hard time feeling bad for someone with that at home.:)
I know it's a pretty narrow market, but Illustrator still whoops ass all over Freehand. And as a long-time Quark user, every update of InDesign get's me contemplating how much easier life would be if I bit the bullet and switched.
Adobe's problem isn't that Apple strongarmed them out of the video market. Adobe's problem is that the Apple product just kicked theirs all over the school yard. Good riddance to an inferior product.
Slashdot Mirror
From the article i got the sense these were just modified regular tractors, not some lightwieght version that reduces compaction.
I invite you to go look at any farmer's (try my dad) row crops. The furrows on fields of row crops such as carrot seed and garlic are laser straight, and they travel the same furrows when working the field all season long. Growing up, Dad used to let me try to cultivate a row at the very edge of the field (where it was easy for him to fix) and it was always a disaster. However after years of doing it, my dad and many of the farmers in our area had it down to where you could look all the way down a 1/4 mile field and see only inches of deviation.
Furthermore, even if someone had some wandering furrows, it's just a matter of staying in them when doing work in the field as the crop grows (spraying, etc).
I can see a system that uses lighter machinery or allows few passes over a field in a season, but if we're talking about driving the same tractors by different methods, aside from the convenience, I don't see how it would yield the spectacular result quoted. Unless they were comparing their tractors to one driven by complete novices who wander all over the field (too much Fosters?)
Sure, but does it support the neato macro virii that help make office life so much of an edge-of-your-seat experience?
Yes, but if they took your "Docu-dust®" and put a million bags of it in a room with a million monkeys and a million Uhu glue sticks...
"Lesse....WGN...not harmful.
Telemundo....not harmful.
FoxNews...pretty borderline.
Playboy....not harmful.
Playboy....not harmful.
Playboy...not harmful..."
Yes, I'm sure this is par for the course in the legal profession.
The fact that it took 2 years to expose him shows what a bunch of slackers the average cohort of lawyers is.
Maybe the fact that you even heard about it shows that it's an extraordinary example.
I'll have what he's having!
There had been no injuries, McEvoy said, and fewer than 10 complaints had been received.
Still good point on the whole beancounter angle. Recalls are usually less a public safety decision than an accounting one.
I'm sure that the rollout of that would never involve the media companies signing on (or walking across the hall) with the phone companies to control that content.
"This 'Cell-O-Matic' review of this fine MGM movie, brought to you by...MGM"
So it's true what they say: "A pint's a pound, the world around."
Sure it did, Ace. You shot the damn thing enough times at 500 mph. You kept getting small, inconclusive cracks, so you shot it over and over and over until you got what you wanted. How do we know the wing used for that test wasn't defective? Maybe the foam you used was a tiny bit more dense. Rip that same hole 3 times in a row, and I'm on board.
Found what you're looking for? More like looking for what you found.
There you go! Classify the infrastructure involved (highways) and then no one will be able to find the roads, ergo, less highway fatalities.
At work, we call it the "Ticka-tick-tick-bing Syndrom."
Account Execs think that when they need something changed, I sit at my Mac, punch a few keys, and it's good-to-go, a la the movies: "Can you zoom in on that? Enhance, please." *ticka-tick-tick-bing*
"This machine is 'memory-5', while this one over here comes with 'memory-8'."
I guess I'm thinking of how Ford F-Series trucks are F-150, F-250, F-350. It doesn't really mean much as far as engine size or any real specs. It's just kinda like Small, Medium, Large. While that's a little simple for RAM, I don't think RAM needs a whole lot more complexity.
If we're doing cats, I'm betting on "Flat Eric".
Firewire -- IEEE-1394
Airport Extreme -- IEEE 802.11g
Bluetooth -- Full duplex radio in the 2.4 GHz spectrum
(add your own)
There's little things in most computers and apps that do a fairly good job of masking the tech behind them. It wasn't long ago that you had to type http:// into a browser window. Now most will assume that and go get the page.
Hardware still has a way to go. RAM, VRAM, and hard drives are all fairly basic things that will frequently flunk the "Mom test". Maybe it's time for some 'unit' of memory and storage than help to explain what these do for the computer in a more colloquial terms.
What about rewarding innovation? Allowing inventors and creators to profit from their work before it goes to the people?
Why did you bring up a straw man argument? What you said is similar to saying good will is communism.
You hammered in the stake and brought the bale of hay. You insisted that copyright law is more for the public's good than protection of creation. I was trying to point out that software protection is mainly the protection of innovation.
What bothers me most about naysayers to Apple's deal is the assumption that it's somehow our right to have the maximum quality possible. I understand you don't think it's illegal, simply unfair. But the public still can enjoy it. If this were actually good music, I could play it and hear it and enjoy it. Considering the equipment the bulk of America listens to their music on, they don't care that much about super high fidelity either. They just want to enjoy it.
This is nothing more than some junk that was in the rumor mill, but I recall there was talk of Apple having iPhoto be their consumer app, and then releasing a pro photo editor. I guess Adobe almost shit bricks over it, and the rumor goes that Apple shelved the pro photo app.
I think Apple has always danced on eggshells with Adobe, but with the suites of power apps Apple is creating/scooping up, I don't think it's too long before they can cut the apron strings and give em the big middle finger.
And likewise, freely make their own art/culture contribution if they don't like what's offered. With all due respect, the way you phrased your initial comment could be twisted to include 'code poetry'. Yay, software piracy is for the 'greater good'.
The US constitution makes it very clear that copyright is only granted, for a limited time, to reward the public for creating and expanding the public domain, and the public's culture.
Very clear also, is copyright law that says you can do what you want with your work until the time you aren't protected by that law, and the 'common good' stuff kicks in. As far as I know, the soundtrack was just released and has a ways to go before it's in the class of American Standards.
My guess would be about $10 worth. The premise of online music distro is that not everyone is an audiophile, and some people just want to rock out at OK quality for a nice price.
As someone already pointed out, you can have the master tapes of you are that 133t. It just might cost you a few million bucks.
Just because you are used to one way of purchasing/enjoying art, doesn't make other methods 'unfair'.
What if I prefer to buy my music in a more lasting form?
So should sidewalk chalk artists not be allowed to make drawings?
What if I prefer my music to be compressed with FLAC?
So, should publishers not be allowed to print a book in whatever size they want, then distribute it on tape/cd/ebook/etc if they want?
What if I prefer to compress my music with MY parameters, to meet MY standards of audio fidelity?
So should a painter have to check with the buyer before he decides oil versus pastels, canvas versus illustration board, small versus mural, etc.?
Sure you can hang it/display it/listen to it wherever you want once you get it home, but as to where you can buy art, it's not 'unfair' that you have to go to a gallery contracted to sell the piece. Art isn't public domain (despite p2p advocates). It's a product, and if you choose to enjoy it, you are stuck with how the artist/rep choose to let you partake in it.
You listed things that are important to the way you work. I've used both heavily, yet since I never use vector apps for flash, multi-page, and rarely with gradients, and I ALWAYS use vector combined with Photoshop and never print from the app (thereby not really needing the admittedly neat trapping previews), I'll never need most of the areas where Freehand owns.
Dog slow: You win, hands down
Even though my vote is for AI, I've would love to have the Inspector in Illustrator. Much more compact and useful.
And for me! I am soooo gonna kick some ass in 'Data Units Completed'.
Quite a conundrum, yet I'm still gonna have a hard time feeling bad for someone with that at home. :)
To your question, EDL's should get the job done.
Wow, everytime I've ever used it, I couldn't even find the humor... *gently caressing my FCP machine*
I know it's a pretty narrow market, but Illustrator still whoops ass all over Freehand. And as a long-time Quark user, every update of InDesign get's me contemplating how much easier life would be if I bit the bullet and switched.
Adobe's problem isn't that Apple strongarmed them out of the video market. Adobe's problem is that the Apple product just kicked theirs all over the school yard. Good riddance to an inferior product.