I bought a circa 1995 ThinkPad for $20 at a garage sale. Had Win 3.1 on it. (And a lot of hilarious personal letters that were never deleted.) And Word and Excel. I use it mainly for a DOS program that serves Apple II disk images from the PC to actual disks on my Apple IIe via the SuperSerial card, but my gf has used it very well for word processing when our main computer, my circa 2003 ThinkPad is not at home (all our desktop machines have broken and not been replaced due to our reliance on the ThinkPad). Main issue is just transferring from floppy once you're done -- no machines have floppies any more, but if you can find an old USB floppy drive, you're ok.
No, you didn't. The Apple//c came with 128K of RAM and had a MSRP of $1295, although in practice it usually sold for a $999 street price. (I paid ~$800 at Rainbow Computer in Rochester, MI, but that was part of package deal that included the monitor, monitor stand, and a Scribe printer.)
And yes, I do understand that you were trying to be funny, but common, this is a site for nerds. You have to expect some nerdly correction...
For $799? Where? I foolishly promised to purchase my gf a laptop and so far a shitty dell looks like what she is getting. Although, frankly, since she is a light user, I am tempted to get her an iBook. Do they still have the ability to run classic OS9 things?
I don't shop there. But that doesn't mean I can't bitch and whine about *why* I don't stop there.
My biggest problem w/ Wal-Mart is that they don't pay their employees enough and don't give them health care, making them a burden on the state and the taxpayers and thus me. I don't want to have to subsidize Wal-Mart's low-prices by having my tax dollars pay for a Wal-Mart employee's over-priced trip to the emergency room for something that if they had health care they could have taken care of at a doctor's office or clinic.
They do sell things other companies make, but their price pressure is such that many manufacturers, I have heard from Wal-Mart suppliers, make special "Wal-Mart" versions of certain products, which are cheaper to make and most likely crappier or feature-crippled. According to the person who told me this, this would be for things like barbeques, tools, etc.
I don't typically shop at Wal-Mart because I find their labor practices obscene ("we charge low prices by not giving our employees health-care, and thus making them a burden on taxpayers, who end up subsidizing their trips to the emergency room when they get the flu"), but when I have, most of what they sell does seem cheap, and the stores are filthy (of course, I live in kind of a run-down area, which I'm sure doesn't help).
Bagging aside, when Target was out of stock, I did buy a small TV there for $49 and it has held up for about a year with no signs of going bad.
They don't have great variety on the low end either. The give such price pressure to manufacturers that they end up making new models, or SKUs, just for Wal-Mart. These are typically far cheaper and worse than what you'd find anywhere else in the country, including discounters like Target or K-Mart.
eBags is really nice site to deal with. I bought my JanSport bag there and I like it, although it's kind of big (great for trips, because it can hold an extra change of clothes, kind of overkill for day to day because I keep losing things in all the pockets).
If you're looking for something that doesn't look, feel, and act like every other bag on the market, you should definitely check out groundwear . That link goes to a good laptop bag, but they have some backpacks that would also fit the bill. My friend at work has one of their bags and I am jealous enough of it that I may shelve the JanSport except for over night trips.
The point is, we could level Iraq in about 15 minutes. We don't, and we leave our soldiers open to attack, because we are fighting a culturally sensitive war and trying to minimize civilian casualties. Europe, which shares the same cultural values as the US, would also have to fight such a war -- no decapitating non-combatents, no crashing planes into skyscrapers, no hiding amonst the civilian population. So, it would be a traditional, WWII style, set-piece, conventional war.
Look, just for the record, my whole comment was pretty facetious. But, the reality is, in a war where both sides fought by the same rules -- which would be likely if it ever came to it -- the US would probably defeat a combined EU army. The EU simply hasn't, with the exception of the UK, made much attempt to create a really modern armed forces.
But my real point was that it is unlikely that the EU will ever attempt to go much beyond limited trade embargoes in dealing with the US. The notion of the EU trying to step into a "balancing" super-power role is silly. Most European nations are more worried about France and Germany's creeping, extra-constitutional EU takeover than they are about the US.
I don't know which is funnier, the notion that Europe would ever fund defense at US levels (with the resultant sacrfices required by the welfare stare), the notion that Europe would ever be able to do anything but what it's done since the end of WWII (namely: kow-tow to whoever has the guns, be it the US, USSR, or now, increasingly, Muslim extremists), or the notion that somehow a united, militarized Europe would actually threaten the US, or be seen as threatening by the US.
Given the US's perfect 5 and 0 record against European adversaries (Revolution, War of 1812, Spanish-American War, WWI and WWII), and the fact that European cultures would likely have to fight in the same kind of culturally sensitive way that the US does (and our recent adversaries have not -- eg using human shields, not wearing uniforms, crashing civilian planes into sky-scrapers, etc.), I think a US v. Europe conflict would be over very quickly.
I understand this is going to quickly get modded -1000 Anti European, but common. Realisticly, Europe does not have the political will to ever stand up to the US in any significant way.
You may set a precedent, but the opportunity for others to wreck our satellites wouldn't change if we started wrecking others'. In fact, if others were relying on some kind of futuristic hunter-killer satellite, it might actually lessen the opportunity. Reading the article reveals that the Air Force also favors option E over actual destruction.
In the non-Japanese milleau(sp?), Gladius was great for turn-based combat and leveling madness. Along with many long side quests (you must get a Minataur to join your party). The story is fairly thin, but I don't dig on Japanese melodram anyway.
No, if it gets better then it will be useless. The idea is that it's so harmful, it's worse than just not existing. You've probably worked with some poeple like that.
The irony -- well it isn't that ironic -- is that based on what we know happened to Columbia during its destruction; the computers on-board did a better job keeping Columbia alive that was ever expected, and longer than ever expected. If the hole was slightly smaller, Columbia may have survived (or at least survived long enough for a bail out, were that possible).
Their business model was better -- for me! -- when it was $10 a month for all the tracks you could download. I came to digital music late, found out about emusic first, and can honestly say I don't have any pirated.mp3s among the ~4GB of music on my machine...
Pong remains as fun a two-player game as it ever has been. It's a little less remarkable graphically, but still roughly as challenging and good for two people as real ping pong. If you don't believe me, buy this and see for yourself.
I remember just a couple years ago being at a beach house for a week with no other video games and we found an old Pong TV game. We seriously played it for hours when it rained, setting up tournaments, etc.
This is why you don't forge documents, Genius. Because if you forge a doc to nail home your (true) point, 99% of the people say "oh, they forged that document, all thoise charges are bullshit."
A better question is whether or not Bush did anything anyone didn't do in the 1970s. In 1989 I was considering ROTC and the recruiter said to me... "And if you go in the Guard, and miss a few sessions, no one really gives a crap." Literally.
Why would a guy -- who both his wife and kid say couldn't type (a very common situation back then) use a difficult to use Composer to write a letter to his personal file? Why would he have a Times-style font on his Selectric when they shipped with Courier? Why would the leading be so tight on the doc when the Selectric default is much larger? (Yes, I have used Selectrics -- calling them typesetting machines is stretching it; it's a typewriter with a removable ball, but it can't do any formatting seriously).
My point isn't that that document *couldn't* have been produced with 1970s technology, just that it's vastly unlikely that someone writing a memo to file would have gone through the trouble to do it. Therefore the documents are suspect to me. Without seeing the originals, which CBS hasn't either, though, it's impossible to render a final judgement.
But you can ask his wife and kid if they seem characteristic of him. And here's what they had to say.
But hey, how about this novel idea. We give Bush and Kerry a pass on Viet Nam and any post Viet Nam shenanigans, and we base the campaign on, say, everything they've done since 1980? Or even 1990? Or 2000? I'd even settle on since 9/11? Anything?
I'm starting to think that basing our election on some war that happened 30 years ago is just yet another manifestation of fucking baby boomers making everything about them.
It's extemely unlikely that the word breaks and MUCH more importantly the line spacing would be identical on a typewriter and MS WORD. Typical typewriters of the day, including the Selectric, had much more line spacing (spacing between the lines) than do modern word processors.
Not quite. If I'm a landlord, I can say "if you want the place, sign this lease that agrees you won't have cats." Don't want to be regulated by the lease, which takes away your God-given right to live with a feline? Don't sign it and don't move in.
Universities routinely ban the use of certain devices, like hot-plates, for obvious reasons. And their leases are pretty draconian: they usually can search the place at any time, change the lease, ban whatever they want, etc.
Want to own a hot-plate or a WAP device? Go right ahead. Want to plug it in? Move out. The end.
Slashdot Mirror
I bought a circa 1995 ThinkPad for $20 at a garage sale. Had Win 3.1 on it. (And a lot of hilarious personal letters that were never deleted.) And Word and Excel. I use it mainly for a DOS program that serves Apple II disk images from the PC to actual disks on my Apple IIe via the SuperSerial card, but my gf has used it very well for word processing when our main computer, my circa 2003 ThinkPad is not at home (all our desktop machines have broken and not been replaced due to our reliance on the ThinkPad). Main issue is just transferring from floppy once you're done -- no machines have floppies any more, but if you can find an old USB floppy drive, you're ok.
Merci, Alas my entourage hasn't included students in several years...
And yes, I do understand that you were trying to be funny, but common, this is a site for nerds. You have to expect some nerdly correction...
For $799? Where? I foolishly promised to purchase my gf a laptop and so far a shitty dell looks like what she is getting. Although, frankly, since she is a light user, I am tempted to get her an iBook. Do they still have the ability to run classic OS9 things?
But if you make a new product, it will be a new SKU. So you might have a bunch of unique SKUs for Wal-Mart versus other stores.
My biggest problem w/ Wal-Mart is that they don't pay their employees enough and don't give them health care, making them a burden on the state and the taxpayers and thus me. I don't want to have to subsidize Wal-Mart's low-prices by having my tax dollars pay for a Wal-Mart employee's over-priced trip to the emergency room for something that if they had health care they could have taken care of at a doctor's office or clinic.
I don't typically shop at Wal-Mart because I find their labor practices obscene ("we charge low prices by not giving our employees health-care, and thus making them a burden on taxpayers, who end up subsidizing their trips to the emergency room when they get the flu"), but when I have, most of what they sell does seem cheap, and the stores are filthy (of course, I live in kind of a run-down area, which I'm sure doesn't help).
Bagging aside, when Target was out of stock, I did buy a small TV there for $49 and it has held up for about a year with no signs of going bad.
No way. This is a joke right? Do these things really exist?
If you're looking for something that doesn't look, feel, and act like every other bag on the market, you should definitely check out groundwear . That link goes to a good laptop bag, but they have some backpacks that would also fit the bill. My friend at work has one of their bags and I am jealous enough of it that I may shelve the JanSport except for over night trips.
i for one welcome our new anti matter overlords.
The point is, we could level Iraq in about 15 minutes. We don't, and we leave our soldiers open to attack, because we are fighting a culturally sensitive war and trying to minimize civilian casualties. Europe, which shares the same cultural values as the US, would also have to fight such a war -- no decapitating non-combatents, no crashing planes into skyscrapers, no hiding amonst the civilian population. So, it would be a traditional, WWII style, set-piece, conventional war.
But my real point was that it is unlikely that the EU will ever attempt to go much beyond limited trade embargoes in dealing with the US. The notion of the EU trying to step into a "balancing" super-power role is silly. Most European nations are more worried about France and Germany's creeping, extra-constitutional EU takeover than they are about the US.
I don't know which is funnier, the notion that Europe would ever fund defense at US levels (with the resultant sacrfices required by the welfare stare), the notion that Europe would ever be able to do anything but what it's done since the end of WWII (namely: kow-tow to whoever has the guns, be it the US, USSR, or now, increasingly, Muslim extremists), or the notion that somehow a united, militarized Europe would actually threaten the US, or be seen as threatening by the US.
Given the US's perfect 5 and 0 record against European adversaries (Revolution, War of 1812, Spanish-American War, WWI and WWII), and the fact that European cultures would likely have to fight in the same kind of culturally sensitive way that the US does (and our recent adversaries have not -- eg using human shields, not wearing uniforms, crashing civilian planes into sky-scrapers, etc.), I think a US v. Europe conflict would be over very quickly.
I understand this is going to quickly get modded -1000 Anti European, but common. Realisticly, Europe does not have the political will to ever stand up to the US in any significant way.
You may set a precedent, but the opportunity for others to wreck our satellites wouldn't change if we started wrecking others'. In fact, if others were relying on some kind of futuristic hunter-killer satellite, it might actually lessen the opportunity. Reading the article reveals that the Air Force also favors option E over actual destruction.
The irony -- well it isn't that ironic -- is that based on what we know happened to Columbia during its destruction; the computers on-board did a better job keeping Columbia alive that was ever expected, and longer than ever expected. If the hole was slightly smaller, Columbia may have survived (or at least survived long enough for a bail out, were that possible).
Their business model was better -- for me! -- when it was $10 a month for all the tracks you could download. I came to digital music late, found out about emusic first, and can honestly say I don't have any pirated .mp3s among the ~4GB of music on my machine...
I remember just a couple years ago being at a beach house for a week with no other video games and we found an old Pong TV game. We seriously played it for hours when it rained, setting up tournaments, etc.
A better question is whether or not Bush did anything anyone didn't do in the 1970s. In 1989 I was considering ROTC and the recruiter said to me... "And if you go in the Guard, and miss a few sessions, no one really gives a crap." Literally.
My point isn't that that document *couldn't* have been produced with 1970s technology, just that it's vastly unlikely that someone writing a memo to file would have gone through the trouble to do it. Therefore the documents are suspect to me. Without seeing the originals, which CBS hasn't either, though, it's impossible to render a final judgement.
But hey, how about this novel idea. We give Bush and Kerry a pass on Viet Nam and any post Viet Nam shenanigans, and we base the campaign on, say, everything they've done since 1980? Or even 1990? Or 2000? I'd even settle on since 9/11? Anything?
I'm starting to think that basing our election on some war that happened 30 years ago is just yet another manifestation of fucking baby boomers making everything about them.
Universities routinely ban the use of certain devices, like hot-plates, for obvious reasons. And their leases are pretty draconian: they usually can search the place at any time, change the lease, ban whatever they want, etc.
Want to own a hot-plate or a WAP device? Go right ahead. Want to plug it in? Move out. The end.