It allowed you to use macros to zoom right in on certain text elements and rip through a document for automatic changes. That is much harder to do in Word. And after all these years, Word still can't give you multiple headers/footers on the same page.
So don't use Word. FrameMaker can do all of that (and more) without resorting WP's codes system.
But the sysadmin's job IS to make users happy. By providing them with the tools they need for the job.
Limiting the sysadmin's job description to 'to make the computers run' gives him an excuse to (in true BOFH style) totally lose sight of the user, and just build his little empire when in reality, he should be working to make himself redundant.
he/she understands this technology and is thus the best person to make recomendations
No. Someone who understands what the users need and can translate this into technology is the best person to make recommendations. All too often the BOFH is solely technology-driven, which makes him a menace.
Could Columbia have been damaged by a meteor?
NASA has not ruled this out, but it is not a leading theory. A 1997 report by the National Research Council warned NASA of this threat. Small rocks in space do pose a threat to all spacecraft. Meteors have caused minor damage on shuttles in the past, and the phenomenon is well-studied (The Hubble Space Telescope, in space for more than a decade now, is loaded with pits). The shuttles are designed to handle impacts of marble-sized objects. Whatever, there is currently quite a bit of evidence that Columbia's damage was caused by hardened foam insulation falling off the rocket booster during launch. A meteor explanation isn't needed right now.
What they mean is that "the foam impact can account for the damage that led to destruction. It is not necessary to assume a meteor strike."
So it's not a matter of not wanting to know about meteors, it's a matter of the foam being sufficient cause.
Read the article. The amount of quality control that goes into those 420k lines is incredible. They spend about $100 per line per year on the software. Every single one of those 420k lines has cost $25k by now. They took 2500 pages to document 6000 lines of code (about 100 pages).
1. Let's get normal elevators to work correctly 100% of the time first.
Well, we're pretty close to that. On a fatalities per passenger carried scale, elevators are about the safest mode of transport you can find. And even nonfatal breakdowns are pretty rare (in my experience).
And, even if they did get near Progress, how do you get the stuff on board? No MMUs, no long ropes, no arm to grab the module...this would be the most dangerous space walk ever, and they'd have to do it dozens of times to get the stuff on board Columbia.
Desperate times, desperate measures.
Only the first walk would be that dangerous, because they could load the Progress with spacewalk equipment.
And no long ropes? Improvise! Pull the wiring from a few experiments. Still dangerous, but a lot better than no ropes at all.
This has to be one of the dumbest units made up so far. Everyone except drive manufacturers have been using kilo/mega/giga-bit/byte to mean 2^n, not 10^n.
Well, obviously, you'd pass on three-orders-of-magnitude cost savings to satisfy your emotional arguments, but I don't think many others would agree. The cost of moving stuff from the surface to LEO is a major factor in keeping space travel from becoming commonplace.
Yes, space elevators are completely new. But so were space rockets, only 50 years ago. It's nonsense to expect an elevator to replace the Shuttle within 10 years, but now's the time to start taking the idea seriously, at least.
If you had flight control and power for reentry, you wouldn't have to rely on (potentially hazardous) atmospheric braking so much, making the design (and application) of the heat shielding simpler. IDK if those benefits would outweigh the extra cost in bringing up all that weight. Probably not, in view of current designs. Oh well...
Yes, the USAF fields plenty of old aircraft. The problem is, these aircraft are costing more and more to keep running. There comes a point where it's more cost effective to buy new ones.
Once production of an aircraft ceases, most its production tools are destroyed, leaving you with a limited number of spare parts, and making it very hard to produce more of that model of aircraft.
Also, you can't compare the B-52 and KC-135 to fighters. The stresses on a fighter are much higher (especially for 'planes that operate from a carrier) than for these transports, which results in a shorter life.
I doubt it. PC making is a commodity market, driven almost solely by price. Nice design and high quality doesn't sell.
If Apple were to move to x86, they'd have to compete with Joe Clonebaker and the Crappy Componentbuilders. And at the same time, Apple would have to make sure OS X worked with all the bazillion motherboards, PCI cards, etc. available for PCI processors.
They would lose much of the "there is no step three" user experience (hassle-free installation, etc.) they can offer now.
Are you crazy? Doing that would add all of $1 to the cost of the drive. We can't possibly afford that! It's much more important to lower the price some more than to stop and think about adding features.
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing missing are the Blinkenlights.
It allowed you to use macros to zoom right in on certain text elements and rip through a document for automatic changes. That is much harder to do in Word. And after all these years, Word still can't give you multiple headers/footers on the same page.
So don't use Word. FrameMaker can do all of that (and more) without resorting WP's codes system.
400-page documents in Word? Egads. Do you ever get any work done?
But the sysadmin's job IS to make users happy. By providing them with the tools they need for the job.
Limiting the sysadmin's job description to 'to make the computers run' gives him an excuse to (in true BOFH style) totally lose sight of the user, and just build his little empire when in reality, he should be working to make himself redundant.
he/she understands this technology and is thus the best person to make recomendations
No. Someone who understands what the users need and can translate this into technology is the best person to make recommendations. All too often the BOFH is solely technology-driven, which makes him a menace.
Here, or here
Sure. If you have the room to accomodate a CNC machine and its infrastructure. Oh wait, now the Shuttle's payload is zero.
To quote the entire paragraph:
Could Columbia have been damaged by a meteor? NASA has not ruled this out, but it is not a leading theory. A 1997 report by the National Research Council warned NASA of this threat. Small rocks in space do pose a threat to all spacecraft. Meteors have caused minor damage on shuttles in the past, and the phenomenon is well-studied (The Hubble Space Telescope, in space for more than a decade now, is loaded with pits). The shuttles are designed to handle impacts of marble-sized objects. Whatever, there is currently quite a bit of evidence that Columbia's damage was caused by hardened foam insulation falling off the rocket booster during launch. A meteor explanation isn't needed right now.
What they mean is that "the foam impact can account for the damage that led to destruction. It is not necessary to assume a meteor strike."
So it's not a matter of not wanting to know about meteors, it's a matter of the foam being sufficient cause.
Read the article. The amount of quality control that goes into those 420k lines is incredible. They spend about $100 per line per year on the software. Every single one of those 420k lines has cost $25k by now. They took 2500 pages to document 6000 lines of code (about 100 pages).
1. Let's get normal elevators to work correctly 100% of the time first.
Well, we're pretty close to that. On a fatalities per passenger carried scale, elevators are about the safest mode of transport you can find. And even nonfatal breakdowns are pretty rare (in my experience).
And, even if they did get near Progress, how do you get the stuff on board? No MMUs, no long ropes, no arm to grab the module...this would be the most dangerous space walk ever, and they'd have to do it dozens of times to get the stuff on board Columbia.
Desperate times, desperate measures.
Only the first walk would be that dangerous, because they could load the Progress with spacewalk equipment.
And no long ropes? Improvise! Pull the wiring from a few experiments. Still dangerous, but a lot better than no ropes at all.
You're correct.
This has to be one of the dumbest units made up so far. Everyone except drive manufacturers have been using kilo/mega/giga-bit/byte to mean 2^n, not 10^n.
sony beats them to it.
The form factor may have something to do with that. The Sony looks much bigger than the iPod.
Well, obviously, you'd pass on three-orders-of-magnitude cost savings to satisfy your emotional arguments, but I don't think many others would agree. The cost of moving stuff from the surface to LEO is a major factor in keeping space travel from becoming commonplace.
Yes, space elevators are completely new. But so were space rockets, only 50 years ago. It's nonsense to expect an elevator to replace the Shuttle within 10 years, but now's the time to start taking the idea seriously, at least.
Everything you mention can be done with expendable rockets. Including getting a rocket pack (for maintaining ISS' orbit) up.
Buran may be an interesting design, but by the time the program collapsed it cost even more than the Shuttle.
Energia may originally have been planned as a reusable launcher, but by the time the design was finished, reuse was no longer a feature.
If you had flight control and power for reentry, you wouldn't have to rely on (potentially hazardous) atmospheric braking so much, making the design (and application) of the heat shielding simpler. IDK if those benefits would outweigh the extra cost in bringing up all that weight. Probably not, in view of current designs. Oh well...
Yes, the USAF fields plenty of old aircraft. The problem is, these aircraft are costing more and more to keep running. There comes a point where it's more cost effective to buy new ones.
Once production of an aircraft ceases, most its production tools are destroyed, leaving you with a limited number of spare parts, and making it very hard to produce more of that model of aircraft.
Also, you can't compare the B-52 and KC-135 to fighters. The stresses on a fighter are much higher (especially for 'planes that operate from a carrier) than for these transports, which results in a shorter life.
But you can't separate internal from external communications. It would suck to have to use two mail clients (Notes and an SMTP/POP client).
Computers should be silent. Any noise at all is too much, and 55 dB is way too much.
I doubt it. PC making is a commodity market, driven almost solely by price. Nice design and high quality doesn't sell.
If Apple were to move to x86, they'd have to compete with Joe Clonebaker and the Crappy Componentbuilders. And at the same time, Apple would have to make sure OS X worked with all the bazillion motherboards, PCI cards, etc. available for PCI processors.
They would lose much of the "there is no step three" user experience (hassle-free installation, etc.) they can offer now.
MS Office 11 will use an XML-based file format, which could mean that it becomes a lot easier for office suites to interoperate with MSO.
Are you crazy? Doing that would add all of $1 to the cost of the drive. We can't possibly afford that! It's much more important to lower the price some more than to stop and think about adding features.
The virus does exist.