This could do well in association with a local User Group of some sort, methinks.
Getting a bunch of people together to organize the CD labeling, DVD-cases instead of jewel cases, etc could help spread the cost and work around, as well as creating a perfect "next step" for the people checking out the software - a user group basically waiting for them.
I especially like the quote: Forcing anyone to do something they don't want to do just breeds resentment.
The original article was poor. It shouldn't have made it to publication. There should have been an alarm in the mind of some editor, reviewer... someone.
The basis for a rebuttal is valid and appropriate. A correction by the author would be better, but we tend towards sensational announcements and very, very quiet retractions.
Every work day, I use Mac OS X 10.3, Windows XP Pro, 2k Pro, NT 4, and 98 - sometimes 95, too. I like my Mac. I could go into why, but no one asked me, so I won't. How the original story managed to make some sort of grade for acceptability at PC Magazine makes me less interested in the publication.
I concur will your view - the correct answer, said rudely, still isn't right.
The PC Magazine story was just about that - a story.
It wasn't a report. It wasn't an account. It wasn't an investigation. It wasn't supported by facts. It wasn't supported by logic. It was an opinion piece that, from my view, wasn't well thought or well written.
It's unfortunate that people need to write rebuttals to this sort of journalism, but some naive readers out there will simply take it at face value because it's in print, so it must be true.
The issue there is when does the availability of that information start interfering with your life?
If everyone has access to your medical records, even if they can't change them, we could start getting to a Gattaca style world; where people are discriminated against based upon their genetic profile.
We could make laws that say having access to certain information can't affect your decisions, but that is easily circumvented by finding or creating other "reasons" to select a differen, "better" individual.
Total access to purchasing history could make companies vulnerable to attack. If someone knows you recently purchased a certain router or operating system, they could use known exploits against you immediately. They still can now, but the limitation of that information makes that action more difficult.
Privacy secures certain other freedoms. A total lack of privacy could cause substantial issues.
I see your point, but I want to add some additional definition to muddy the waters...
Privacy isn't a natural right. I do consider it stronger than a generic privilege, so I would like to call it a governed right. That is, privacy may not be inherent to existence, but it should be to our government. Privacy is something I would rather not lose.
I concede on the criminals point. We do take away rights - governed or natural.
I still think that privacy is a method rather than an object. Some information should be free - indeed I can go to SuperPages and look up a phone number or a name from a number. I can go to Google, type in a phone number, and bring up a name and driving directions.
With the phone number as an example, I have the option to request a level of privacy - an unlisted number. Privacy becomes the mechanism by which you cannot find my phone number without having been granted certain privilege. The privilege to find an unlisted number comes with additional responsibility and, most importantly, accountability. This is where the government comes in.
The government knows your phone number. They know your social security number (hopefully), bank account numbers, your credit card numbers - all the pieces of information that you may wish to be private. If, then, we assume that privacy is a right - govered or natural - then the government must take steps to secure our information if we wish it so, and if privacy is a right, the presumption must be that we do wish it.
Privacy isn't a property - it is a privilege. This is evidenced by taking away certain levels of privacy from criminals... You can find out information about the location of a federal prisoner through the Freedom of Information Act; neighbors must be notified when some sex offenders move into an area - thus limiting their privacy...
I think the wording is odd in that statement. It isn't privacy that is a property, it's the information that is a property. Privacy is a means to protect that information, and failing to protect personal "property" that someone is required to provide is my issue here. Just as if the government required a key to your house and then made then available for duplication.
A cradle or dock would be the easiest to deal with that, though it's not really a portable solution. Good for the office or home, though.
A stand could do the trick - I've seen book stand that fold down to a little longer than a cassette. Not the most elegant solution...
Another possibility - not sure about this one - would be a built-in stand - think picture frame - but I don't see this one being either convenient or Apple.
It doesn't need a keyboard plugged in. Apple has Bluetooth keyboards these days. I wrote a JE on why I thought Apple could make a great tablet a while ago. Interesting to see Cringley's entirely different direction.
But these rules were created before many advances were made.
For instance, you aren't likely to find everything you want at an online store in three clicks. If you are looking for jewelry or specialty blank CD media, you may get to your category in three clicks, but there are still a dozen clicks beyond that to see the full contents of the category.
I would be interested in seeing what kind of tasks users were asked to perform and rate their "three-clickability" (terrible term). Almost anything involving a store, inventory, or selection process voids that "rule" for the end result, but not for the category.
Perhaps it should be rephrased that the user should be able to get to any content-space in three clicks instead of a page.
Pricewatch gets you to content in two clicks. Outpost has three clicks to content on the sections I checked - one click, really - two for refining. ice.com has one click to content, and then two for refining. Barnes & Noble has three clicks to content. Even eBay has three clicks to content.
An easy system would be for a server to provide each document it houses with a unique meta-data identifier. Then, when a document, story or paper moves from the "main page" into an archive section, you can still refer to the FileID. This ID should be searchable, so that an article could be linked via something like:
http://www.cnn.com/?2001EXCJA2
The IDs could be system generated and handled by a file system that supports meta-data or they could be designed to mean something and handled by a content management system.
Implementation is the difficult part. Getting everyone - or at least news sites, magazines, and colleges/universities - to set up FileID searching and then document the linking process on their site is no small task.
Running on Windows means commodity hardware - cheaper up front, cheaper to replace, and easier to find people to service. Same with programming it in Windows. Sure, Windows costs more than Linux, but you can throw VB or something up quick and dirty. The underlying design can be total shit because your commodity hardware has power to burn.
Many of these things could probably benefit from more carefully designed systems that don't suffer from Desktop OS issues, but unless everyone starts doing it all at once, it's more expensive and they simply aren't critical systems. Yet.
Over an entire weekend once the Local Access TV station programming was stopped by Norton AntiVirus' Update Definitions message.
Re:Looks like something Judge Dredd might ride
on
Bombardier's Hot Wheel
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I would imagine that it tilts the riders backwards early in stopping so that they are pressed against the vehicle as they slow, then tilting upright when the speed is low enough. It would take a fair amount of testing and design to allow you to come to a screeching halt, but it could probably be done.
I imagine, though, that it would be a terribly frightening feeling to be thrown backwards as you stop suddenly.
Convenience is really the key for online music stores. Browsing from your home at all hours of day and night, previewing a track - something you may not be able to do where you buy music - the ability to "impulse buy" a song you just heard or remembered, and the instant gratification of having it available only a few moments after you make your decision (unless you are on a slow connection) are big factors. The "what other people purchased" up-sell can be a way to broaden your music library as well.
As the BBC article mentions, it's not a truly fair comparison because it's all tracks sold online vs. only singles. I purchased a number of my tracks as part of an album, and I don't often buy CD singles, either (never, actually). So, it would be nice if we could compare full album sales instead of the unbalance "tracks vs. singles".
Still, it is nice to see online music doing well - IMHO, anyway. DRM, as always, will remain a key issue here.
But iTunes doesn't rip Ogg Vorbis, even on Mac, or did I miss something? Sure, you can rip it with another program, but that takes away from the integrated iTunes experience. You also can't play Ogg Vorbis on the iPod. It doesn't seem like it should be too difficult an option to add...
With the exception of the ability to rip into Ogg Vorbis, iTunes is probably the best choice for this in Windows. It's abilities as a jukebox are well-established and it's interface was not cluttered or damaged by the addition of a music store (like MusicMatch). You can rip to AAC, which isn't free (as in libre) like Vorbis, but at least sounds better than MP3.
The G5 has 8GBps bandwidth per processor (4GBps each way, I assume) and 6.4GBps memory access. The Infiniband stops at 1.25GBps, and the best PCI slot on the G5 is 1.075GBps (133MHz 64-bit PCI-X), so it would seem that the slot is the limitation, at a glance, with all the theoretical numbers. What am I missing?
Of course, it's also possible that, quite by accident, they aren't using the one 133MHz slot, and put the Infiniband card in one of the two 100MHz slots, dragging it down to ~.8GBps maximum.
My (completely untrained) guess is they are dealing with network saturation. The computers themselves don't get slower because there are more of them, so...
Could they add NICs to each computer, bond them (probably need to write something for this), and set up parallel networks with each set of cards to improve bandwidth?
Don't enough about the cluster's setup to say much at this point.
Slashdot Mirror
Price.
Also, how many parent think, "Little Jimmy should have a programmable set of Lego!"
TC Logo and Dacta were also great toys (one of my teachers wrote some of the documentation), but there just wasn't a big market.
Here's what you are looking for. However, it is not available on their store.
Hmm...
This could do well in association with a local User Group of some sort, methinks.
Getting a bunch of people together to organize the CD labeling, DVD-cases instead of jewel cases, etc could help spread the cost and work around, as well as creating a perfect "next step" for the people checking out the software - a user group basically waiting for them.
I especially like the quote: Forcing anyone to do something they don't want to do just breeds resentment.
The original article was poor. It shouldn't have made it to publication. There should have been an alarm in the mind of some editor, reviewer... someone.
The basis for a rebuttal is valid and appropriate. A correction by the author would be better, but we tend towards sensational announcements and very, very quiet retractions.
Every work day, I use Mac OS X 10.3, Windows XP Pro, 2k Pro, NT 4, and 98 - sometimes 95, too. I like my Mac. I could go into why, but no one asked me, so I won't. How the original story managed to make some sort of grade for acceptability at PC Magazine makes me less interested in the publication.
I concur will your view - the correct answer, said rudely, still isn't right.
The PC Magazine story was just about that - a story.
It wasn't a report. It wasn't an account. It wasn't an investigation. It wasn't supported by facts. It wasn't supported by logic. It was an opinion piece that, from my view, wasn't well thought or well written.
It's unfortunate that people need to write rebuttals to this sort of journalism, but some naive readers out there will simply take it at face value because it's in print, so it must be true.
I'm with Taco on the iPod. A digital camera with 5x or better optical zoom is a nice thing, too.
Also, you might look at bitChen. They look like much more fun than they should be, though very practical.
The issue there is when does the availability of that information start interfering with your life?
If everyone has access to your medical records, even if they can't change them, we could start getting to a Gattaca style world; where people are discriminated against based upon their genetic profile.
We could make laws that say having access to certain information can't affect your decisions, but that is easily circumvented by finding or creating other "reasons" to select a differen, "better" individual.
Total access to purchasing history could make companies vulnerable to attack. If someone knows you recently purchased a certain router or operating system, they could use known exploits against you immediately. They still can now, but the limitation of that information makes that action more difficult.
Privacy secures certain other freedoms. A total lack of privacy could cause substantial issues.
Copyright doesn't guarantee you privacy, just another avenue of recourse should your information be taken.
Hrm...
I see your point, but I want to add some additional definition to muddy the waters...
Privacy isn't a natural right. I do consider it stronger than a generic privilege, so I would like to call it a governed right. That is, privacy may not be inherent to existence, but it should be to our government. Privacy is something I would rather not lose.
I concede on the criminals point. We do take away rights - governed or natural.
I still think that privacy is a method rather than an object. Some information should be free - indeed I can go to SuperPages and look up a phone number or a name from a number. I can go to Google, type in a phone number, and bring up a name and driving directions.
With the phone number as an example, I have the option to request a level of privacy - an unlisted number. Privacy becomes the mechanism by which you cannot find my phone number without having been granted certain privilege. The privilege to find an unlisted number comes with additional responsibility and, most importantly, accountability. This is where the government comes in.
The government knows your phone number. They know your social security number (hopefully), bank account numbers, your credit card numbers - all the pieces of information that you may wish to be private. If, then, we assume that privacy is a right - govered or natural - then the government must take steps to secure our information if we wish it so, and if privacy is a right, the presumption must be that we do wish it.
Privacy isn't a property - it is a privilege. This is evidenced by taking away certain levels of privacy from criminals... You can find out information about the location of a federal prisoner through the Freedom of Information Act; neighbors must be notified when some sex offenders move into an area - thus limiting their privacy...
I think the wording is odd in that statement. It isn't privacy that is a property, it's the information that is a property. Privacy is a means to protect that information, and failing to protect personal "property" that someone is required to provide is my issue here. Just as if the government required a key to your house and then made then available for duplication.
A cradle or dock would be the easiest to deal with that, though it's not really a portable solution. Good for the office or home, though.
A stand could do the trick - I've seen book stand that fold down to a little longer than a cassette. Not the most elegant solution...
Another possibility - not sure about this one - would be a built-in stand - think picture frame - but I don't see this one being either convenient or Apple.
Spell Check? Yes.
Proofread?
the only way to make Multiband OFDM be truly FCC complaint is by reducing the power...
No.
It doesn't need a keyboard plugged in. Apple has Bluetooth keyboards these days. I wrote a JE on why I thought Apple could make a great tablet a while ago. Interesting to see Cringley's entirely different direction.
But these rules were created before many advances were made.
For instance, you aren't likely to find everything you want at an online store in three clicks. If you are looking for jewelry or specialty blank CD media, you may get to your category in three clicks, but there are still a dozen clicks beyond that to see the full contents of the category.
I would be interested in seeing what kind of tasks users were asked to perform and rate their "three-clickability" (terrible term). Almost anything involving a store, inventory, or selection process voids that "rule" for the end result, but not for the category.
Perhaps it should be rephrased that the user should be able to get to any content-space in three clicks instead of a page.
Pricewatch gets you to content in two clicks.
Outpost has three clicks to content on the sections I checked - one click, really - two for refining.
ice.com has one click to content, and then two for refining.
Barnes & Noble has three clicks to content.
Even eBay has three clicks to content.
An easy system would be for a server to provide each document it houses with a unique meta-data identifier. Then, when a document, story or paper moves from the "main page" into an archive section, you can still refer to the FileID. This ID should be searchable, so that an article could be linked via something like:
http://www.cnn.com/?2001EXCJA2
The IDs could be system generated and handled by a file system that supports meta-data or they could be designed to mean something and handled by a content management system.
Implementation is the difficult part. Getting everyone - or at least news sites, magazines, and colleges/universities - to set up FileID searching and then document the linking process on their site is no small task.
Running on Windows means commodity hardware - cheaper up front, cheaper to replace, and easier to find people to service. Same with programming it in Windows. Sure, Windows costs more than Linux, but you can throw VB or something up quick and dirty. The underlying design can be total shit because your commodity hardware has power to burn.
Many of these things could probably benefit from more carefully designed systems that don't suffer from Desktop OS issues, but unless everyone starts doing it all at once, it's more expensive and they simply aren't critical systems. Yet.
Over an entire weekend once the Local Access TV station programming was stopped by Norton AntiVirus' Update Definitions message.
I would imagine that it tilts the riders backwards early in stopping so that they are pressed against the vehicle as they slow, then tilting upright when the speed is low enough. It would take a fair amount of testing and design to allow you to come to a screeching halt, but it could probably be done.
I imagine, though, that it would be a terribly frightening feeling to be thrown backwards as you stop suddenly.
Convenience is really the key for online music stores. Browsing from your home at all hours of day and night, previewing a track - something you may not be able to do where you buy music - the ability to "impulse buy" a song you just heard or remembered, and the instant gratification of having it available only a few moments after you make your decision (unless you are on a slow connection) are big factors. The "what other people purchased" up-sell can be a way to broaden your music library as well.
As the BBC article mentions, it's not a truly fair comparison because it's all tracks sold online vs. only singles. I purchased a number of my tracks as part of an album, and I don't often buy CD singles, either (never, actually). So, it would be nice if we could compare full album sales instead of the unbalance "tracks vs. singles".
Still, it is nice to see online music doing well - IMHO, anyway. DRM, as always, will remain a key issue here.
Then I think it would take a very long time to drive to the site.
But iTunes doesn't rip Ogg Vorbis, even on Mac, or did I miss something? Sure, you can rip it with another program, but that takes away from the integrated iTunes experience. You also can't play Ogg Vorbis on the iPod. It doesn't seem like it should be too difficult an option to add...
However, I'm sure plenty of people will disagree.
The G5 has 8GBps bandwidth per processor (4GBps each way, I assume) and 6.4GBps memory access. The Infiniband stops at 1.25GBps, and the best PCI slot on the G5 is 1.075GBps (133MHz 64-bit PCI-X), so it would seem that the slot is the limitation, at a glance, with all the theoretical numbers. What am I missing?
Of course, it's also possible that, quite by accident, they aren't using the one 133MHz slot, and put the Infiniband card in one of the two 100MHz slots, dragging it down to ~.8GBps maximum.
My (completely untrained) guess is they are dealing with network saturation. The computers themselves don't get slower because there are more of them, so...
Could they add NICs to each computer, bond them (probably need to write something for this), and set up parallel networks with each set of cards to improve bandwidth?
Don't enough about the cluster's setup to say much at this point.