Nothing says the system has to look like a military cockpit, thumbscrews and all. Clearly there could be cosmetic coverings that hide the seams, the thumb screws or latches could be located elsewhere than the front (look at many Ford radios, for example, which are freed from their mount by tiny holes in the radio front and a special tool inserted to free the latch. This is just one example, likely it would be done even cleaner). There could certainly be the same type of cosmetic bezzel that now covers many instrument pannels and keeps you from seeing that the speedometer is a seperate device. At the worst this would look more like the front of modern computers, with multiple bays that a user can install different devices into, not a cockpit with thumb screws. With a slight bit of effort it would look much better. Remember, most of all displays could be simple digital pannels, a simple consistant contoured bezzel around the edge to only show the display and they would look great, a nice anti-glare screen in front, even better. And unlike an aircraft, where someone may drill an out of place hole to install a special switch for some new gizmo, the concept of networked devices and multi-function soft controls means that clutter is reduced as things are added, giving a much cleaner overall system.
When you think about it for a little bit, it makes sense. It's kind of like PI... you can try and mark an instant in time, but that instant still represents an interval. The more precise your equipment, the smaller the interval, but the
interval can get infinitely smaller.said aboutZeno's theories are pretty well-established, you know "Man is walking across a road, if you keep on dividing the time intervals, he'll never get there."
But Zeno's "theories" are obviously wrong. The man walking across a road will get there. Even Zeno really knew this. Here we have a theory that tries to explain why he will not get there! There's actually growing evidence that your statement but the interval can get infinitely smaller is wrong and the the interval can not shrink beyond a certain quantum size. The quantum interval is quite small, and makes time seem continuos in our normal macroscopic viewpoint, but it avoids the problems of singuarities and other paradoxes of the quantum world. It makes sense too: consider the smallest units of any theory, strings, super strings, or whatever; could there be any concept of time shorter than it takes one of these to do something?
You know, car thieves will just love your free million dollar idea.
Not if done right. Certainly some modules (like the computer) could be on the network but not in the open with easy access. But all of these devices are going to have to talk together (there might not even be a speedometer as such, just an x pixel by y pixel display that the computer knows how to display the current speed on in an attractive manner). One thing on the network would certainly be a nice secure digital ignition key (actually, the reader for the key). Any module could be made to learn the Car's ID, VIN number, igition key code and more when it is installed and it's installation software run (perhaps by inserting the installation CD in the CD player!) and save that in flash memory on the device. The device could then refuse to work if it's not uninstalled before being removed, and you need the key to uninstall it (and you need the owner key as well, not the valet key, which has a different code, and also locks you out from some things like the car phone or garage door opener). So a well designed system would actually produce much more secure devices and instruments than we have now, and even though they would not work if improperly removed, they could show (in the case of a display, or say through the speakers in the case of a radio without a built in display) that they were stolen and even give the car they came from and the owner's contact information information. Devices made for the new system would actually be much more secure than they are now, where, if you forget to remove the front panel and put it in your pocket where it can be broken, your radio will be stolen (and sometimes even when you do)
And remember: even the computer should be replaceable (or maybe you want multiple computers in your car), so the computers should learn their owner's key ID and refuse to run if moved to a different car too without be uninstalled.
Here are a few other advantages of the system:
Want to install something like fog lights in you car? Just plug them into power and the network. No need to mount an extra ugly switch on the dash, the network can control them through the same set of soft controls on the steering wheel that controls curise control, the radio and cd player, the door locks, the power windows, the GPS, the power mirrors, the car cell phone, and about everything else you add in (as can any other control panel you program to do so). And the computer can even give the lights extra features like automatic turn off when the ignition is turned off.
No need for the maker to install seat belt buzzers, ignition switch buzzers, Headlights left on buzzers, and other similar alerts; all that audio just goes to the existing speakers through the network. Lots of other small savings too, like no need for that turn signal blinker (just another thing that now gets done in software).
Want a rear view camera, or a low light front vision IR system? Just install the camera by the back bumper or behind the grill and plug it into the network, then install the software. One of your existing display panels can be programmed to display this video on demand, when it's not a GPS display, CD player index, trip computer, speedometer, or even displaying the menu for the drive through fast food joint you just pulled into.
And along with this much greater utility the maker saves a small fortune in wire and makes a lighter car.
I doubt that I or anyone else can even predict what all can be done with such a system (although I have a number of additional ideas). Once such a technology becomes open it would evolve at a much greater pace than even the "concept cars" that we see showing things that we will never really be offered.
It does seem crazy, but in reality pretty much every college student is involved with music piracy online.
That's a statement that you have offered no proof for. Just because all of the people you know are music pirates does not make everyone guilty. But much more importantly, in America we (at least in theory) have persumption of innocence until proven guilty. One should not be punished for something they are not guilty of, even if a lot of people are guilty. And having your money taken and given to the RIAA is certainly punishment.
I'm sure the RIAA loves this concept, take money from everyone, if they copy music or not. And they likely can still have people arrested if they find them doing something like selling mix CDs, even though they paid through the school!
Anyone know the price of this thing? (Why even bother to post about it without that basic information? Clearly this and more are available if price is no object.)
And only the US version is hobbled with the cell frequency clock. Anyone know if there is a non-US NTSC version available anywhere?
Paying more and having it go to the RIAA, or to some RAP artist who you would never support or listen to is even worse. Making all students pay for this, directly or indirectly, on the assumption that some will illegally copy music, is crazy.
OK, built to order cars. You can pretty much do that now, although he seems to be intent on giving more choices.
But if he's really going to try to do something new in the industry, as well a greatly increase the ability to build cards to "spec", I would suggest he seriously consider rethinking the way that car electronics mount and interconnect. I think it's insane the way dashboards are built today, and I'm not crazy about how hard it is to change a radio or install something extra like my ham radio. What the industry really needs is someone not trying hard to lock the customer in, but rather making things much more modular so the customer has the greatest number of choices. I would love to see a system where the instrument pannel, radio, gps/map, and any other electronics (including the computer) are all standaridized "rack" units networked and powered together, such that any device can be located anywhere in the system. If I want a bigger spedometer and tack, I should just be able to plug it into a couple of rack unit spaces. If I want my moving map right in the middle of my dash I just move the speedometer over (or maybe replace it with one integrated into the oil pressure / alternator / warning lights/ trip computer display) and put the video module where the speedometer was. If I get a ham radio made for this technology it should fit into an available bay and cleanly integrate with the rest of the car audio, letting me hear it through the speakers and optionally muting the CD player when there is radio traffic.
Eventually I would see this leading to "soft" displays, where you can use a pannel for whatever you want, speedometer, tach, warning lights, trip computer, or any new feature you program into a flexiable computer. True button switch pannels could be used, or touch screens that reconfigure themselves as needed, depending on the user's preference. Users could even elect, if they wished, to replace a digital speedometer with a
white analog needle module (with appropriate electronics in the module) if they prefer that style of instrument over digital displays.
Sure, major players are not doing this now because they want to lock you into their stuff. But a modular system should give a truly flexiable design, lower overall costs, and much great utility. If someone is going to claim to want to make build to order cars, them this approach should be a must.
I have right here a computer that is much more powerful that the million dollar plus CDC computer that provided services to my entire University when I went to school. It's more powerful than the 90 user time sharing system I was in charge of for another university. But the Internet is safe from having all of this potential computing power unleashed against it. Why? Because I hobble that dangerous computing power with Microsoft(R) brand software! Yes friends, that's right. No matter how powerful your computer is, you can rest assured that it can do little harm on the 'Net when it's running Microsoft(R) brand software, the software that not only opens security vulnerabilities but makes your system so slow that it just can't do much harm to the rest of the 'Net. And , as an added bonus, my Microsoft(R) software crashes frequently, so I reboot it often and just maybe that might eliminate or at least confuse some exploits. And when a world full of computers are crashing several times a day, it's just that much harder for exploits to find ones that are up long enough to exploit. And any exploit is likely to be minimally more inconvenient that running the Microsoft(R) software in the first place.
Don't unleash your powerful computer on the Internet. Tame it with Microsoft(R) brand software today.
Actually, I doubt that it is, and certainly not a lot cheaper if any. My reasoning:
The Linix box certainly does not need to pay the Windows tax.
You can avoid multiple monitors by rather inexpensive monitor/keyboard/mice switches.
If using multiple PC's rather than multiple OS's then you can get buy with a little less hard drive on each, but ever large drives are inexpensive nowadays. I would expect you could easily have set the developers up with second PC for Linux around the $400 price.
One downside to this argument that I see is if you keep upgrading hardware it could cost you more long run to upgrade more systems, as long as there are no reoccuring or update costs that you would incur with VMWare. But I don't see VMWare as a really atractive alternative to two real system at a $400 price point. And there are certainly advantages to running the computers in real world non-VMWare environments that justify electing to do with seperate systems.
Lets look at it another way:
Is it legal to have a Whites Only lunch counter, or University?
If not, is it legal to have a lunch counter with only $100 lunches, but a 95% discount for whites? Or a University with $1,000,000 yearly tuition but a 90% discount for whites?
And if none of the above is legal, then I submit that other forms of Price Discrimination should be illegal too, be it gender, income class or anything else.
Yes, that's why I was clear to say " turned down the $199 offer so that, in part, he could (talk about it)". This was his claim in the article that you clearly read. So the questions still stand, who was this suit against? (heck, if it's a true story then it should be a matter of public record, there is no good reason to hide this), and why not file for a refund on the other bundeled software too, since you did pay something for it and certainly can't use it if you didn't get installable media and are forced to delete the pre-installed copy.
That was unacceptable to me; I wanted $199 and court costs...... Also, I wanted to be able to tell people what happened.
So if he wanted to be able to talk about it so bad, and even turned down the $199 offer so that, in part, he could; why in the world is he not saying who he won this judgement against? He seems to be going out of his way to avoid doing exactly what he claimed he wanted to be able to do.
Also, in the article he mentioned that he should have been able to get not just a refund for Windows, but also for the additional software that he bought with the computer. That or get installable copies that he could install under Wine. But he got neither, since the software he had was pre-installed on the Windows system and there was no seperate installation disk. Why didn't he ask for this too when he files the claim? If you're going to go after bad manufacturer policies, centaingly this pre-installed only software with no install disk is an important one to go after too, and if he won the Windows portion of the case it's likely he could have won for "several hundred dollars "worth" of extra software" he got with the computer too. I would certainly like to see that win as it would serve the manufacturer an important message against filling half of a notebook's hard drive with bloat but giving the buyer no way to uninstall some of the software if the ever want to be able to reinstall it again.
Not that I'm against bundeled software, but the way it's being done is a complete disservice to the customer. And the manufacturer who installs ten cents worth of software and then advertises that as "includes $1000 worth of valuable software" should be called to task for it, and since in this case it was lost due to the need to reject the Windows license terms, this would be a perfect case to hold the manufacturer responsiable for providing installable copies of software.
It will be a shame if in the future a wealth of information is locked away because knoweldge of the underlying technology is lost."
Particularly since the expressed intention of copyright is to give protection to creaters for a limited time (and then have the work pass into public ownership), from article 1 of the U.S. Constitution:
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their
respective writings and discoveries;
Clearly shuch works cannot pass into public ownership as intended; which might be a good argument in fighting any copyright infringement charges in the first place!
Not that most people care, since they don't even bother to vote, right?
That's one theory. Mine is that more and more people distrust the government so much that they don't really believe that who we vote for has anything to do with who they tell us won. So voting machine fraud is just a new tool for the new world order (not a term I invented, one Daddy Bush liked to use) to use to do what they have been doing for a while.
I noticed all of mine leaked too. Fortunately, I had stopped using them, since in my case they seemed to have lower capacity than standard alkalines (more like NiCad capacity, not even NIMH capacity) and lost even that capacity after a few recharges. That and the need to keep toping them off rather than cycle them (meaning they were useless for things like my handheld LCD TV) made them completely useless for me. But they all leaked in a drawer a month or two later!
It's not that good of a deal when you realize the charger does not sense the individual cells and will soon kill the batteries. Just buy the batteries without a junk charger and get a charger that will recharge individual cells (does not require you to charge in pairs). WalMart will even sell you a Ray-O-Vac 4 cell AA/AAA recharger for $9.99 that will do this. Don't ruin your expensive rechargeable cells with a junk charger that does not sense the individual cells.
Remember that Rayovac sells rechargable akaline batteries as well,
I tried this. Have one of the $29.99 Ray-O-Vac Alkaline rechargers too; would sell it for a buck. This was a complete rip-off. The batteries are said to last for only 25 recharges, but they also caution you to never discharge the batteries, just use them a little and recharge them. If you can do that you might get 25 recharges out of them, but that might be like getting 4 or 5 real recharges out of them. And once you have recharged the batteries a few times you'll find their capacity drops off faster (assuming you have a battery guage in your device, if you don't and ever discharge them you find the capacity is even lower). And to make things worse, these rechargeable Alkaline batteries, which cost a lot up front don't have the basic capacity that regular alkaline batteries do, their capacity is more like NICads. You might as well use good rechargeables than use these (and NiMH batteries age betting capacities that approach or exceed normal alkalines, alythough the y still don't have the shelf life for charge storage).
First of all, use NiMH batterise, avoid NiCads. NiCads have much lower capacity, and use very toxic materials. NiCads might still be of some use in very high current situations, but overal are obsolete (but people are still willing to sell them to you).
Also, when buying NiMH batteries, pay attention to the mAh rating, which is how much power they hold. AA NIMH batteries might range from 1200mAh or lower to 1950 mAh (the best capacity I've bought so far). This gives you a good indication of how long the batteries will last between charge; clearly there is a big difference out there. And the more expensive batteries do not always have the greatest capacity.
On chargers, there are a lot of different and bad chargers out there. The worst never shut off, just tell you to be sure you only charge batteries for x hours. If you forget and overcharge you can destroy the batteries! Also, if the batteries were not completely discharged then you can overcharge and destroy the battery even if you charge for only the time stated.
The next worst chargers have a simple timer in them and do shut off after x hours. But they still can overcharge a battery if it wasn't fully discharged, or if you try to charge a lower capacity battery. And if you get a higher capacity battery and try to charge it, it will not fully charge.
My rule of thumb is that I never use a charger that insists on charging batteries in pairs. Such chargers cannot sense individual cells, which would allow them to stop charging each cell when it is fully charged. There are a few chargers out there that do sense individual cells and shut off properly though. I think Best Buys sells one for about $30. However, the $9.99 Ray-O-Vac NiMH charger sold at WalMart does this fine. I'm not a Ray-O-Vac fan at all, but I do use and recommend this charger.
And take batteries out of any charger when charged, never trust chargers that promise to keep batteries ready by trickel charging them. I've had them cook batteries.
Again, I want to stress that one should never use chargers that do not sense individual cells and that have to charge in pairs. I have several (I just got one with the 1950 mAh batteries I bought recently) but never use them (I bought the batteries and recharger just to get the batteries, the price was right). Don't risk your expensive batteries to a cheap charger, it will seem to work fine for a while, then you will find that all of you batteries have started leaking and failing.
Remember to look for and pay attention to that mAh rateing when buying batteries.
In applications where the battery might last for years (TV remote control for example, or garage door opener) do not use rechargable batteries. Use Alkaline batteries in these applications; rechargeables will loose their charge too fast, and alkalines are the best choice (I have a garage door opener with the same alkaline battery in it for 19 yeras now).
And thanks for asking here rather than doing a simple Google search on the topic.
Yup, the same statement struck me as rather absurd too. No only would the stuff you track be meaningless, but say, for example you were the little robot that could exploring Mars and you calculated that Earth was about to eclipse the sun (not that it could be much of an eclipse from Mars' view, but you must be tracking these things for some reason). What the heck can the rover do? It's not like it's going to move to avoid the eclipse!
And yes, I read the link, it says nothing about this. Perhaps submissions by anonymous deserve a little more editing.
Should it not be a law that all diskless workstations be required to have front USB ports?
What's worse is that I did visit a library this summer that did have USB ports on the front of the computers. But it was only because they happened to buy systems that came that way.... I had a USB device with me and plugged it in. The device was recognized OK, but the stupid "security software" on the computer would not let you download anything to the USB drive! You could download to a floppy, but I needed to get something a few megs in size (larger than 1.44 meg) for a different system I was trying to set up and they simply were not going to let me do it.
Update your Operating System Automatically
on
Lindows Webstation
·
· Score: 1
From the Tiger website:
Update your Operating System And Applications Automatically
On a CD-ROM based system? I think Tiger is being a bit agressive on their claims for this thing (as well as clearly showing a hard drive in the box when they are selling it without a hard drive).
Re:This would be PERFECT...if...
on
Lindows Webstation
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Lindows gave you the CD to create the LindowsCD OS for the computer. Think about how incredibly useful that would be!
Actually, the Lindows part of this seems pretty lame, since you have no hard drive (which most windows software, even most games, needs to be installed to befoe it will run!) and can't pop out the Lindows CD to read a windows application CD. For surfing the web and a lot of other stuff Knoppix will do just fine.
I do agree with the basic premis, more needs to be done to make thinks like this and Knoppix user configurable. There are a number of people out there starting to do custom Knoppix based versions, everything from Knoppix STP to Knoppix Mame. But the average user really needs a good way to customize some of these (particularly since Knoppix Mame has no games on the CD for copyright reasons). Even some simple little things, like find the the persistant Knoppix home directory without having to type in a magic command at boot time would be nice, but we really need a Knoppix uild utility where we can pick and choose what programs and configuration information end up in our system. At least Knoppix is giving me a way to get my feet wet in Linux, maybe I'll eventually master enough I can start building my own version for my own use, but tools like you describe would be most helpful.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing says the system has to look like a military cockpit, thumbscrews and all. Clearly there could be cosmetic coverings that hide the seams, the thumb screws or latches could be located elsewhere than the front (look at many Ford radios, for example, which are freed from their mount by tiny holes in the radio front and a special tool inserted to free the latch. This is just one example, likely it would be done even cleaner). There could certainly be the same type of cosmetic bezzel that now covers many instrument pannels and keeps you from seeing that the speedometer is a seperate device. At the worst this would look more like the front of modern computers, with multiple bays that a user can install different devices into, not a cockpit with thumb screws. With a slight bit of effort it would look much better. Remember, most of all displays could be simple digital pannels, a simple consistant contoured bezzel around the edge to only show the display and they would look great, a nice anti-glare screen in front, even better. And unlike an aircraft, where someone may drill an out of place hole to install a special switch for some new gizmo, the concept of networked devices and multi-function soft controls means that clutter is reduced as things are added, giving a much cleaner overall system.
But Zeno's "theories" are obviously wrong. The man walking across a road will get there. Even Zeno really knew this. Here we have a theory that tries to explain why he will not get there! There's actually growing evidence that your statement but the interval can get infinitely smaller is wrong and the the interval can not shrink beyond a certain quantum size. The quantum interval is quite small, and makes time seem continuos in our normal macroscopic viewpoint, but it avoids the problems of singuarities and other paradoxes of the quantum world. It makes sense too: consider the smallest units of any theory, strings, super strings, or whatever; could there be any concept of time shorter than it takes one of these to do something?
Not if done right. Certainly some modules (like the computer) could be on the network but not in the open with easy access. But all of these devices are going to have to talk together (there might not even be a speedometer as such, just an x pixel by y pixel display that the computer knows how to display the current speed on in an attractive manner). One thing on the network would certainly be a nice secure digital ignition key (actually, the reader for the key). Any module could be made to learn the Car's ID, VIN number, igition key code and more when it is installed and it's installation software run (perhaps by inserting the installation CD in the CD player!) and save that in flash memory on the device. The device could then refuse to work if it's not uninstalled before being removed, and you need the key to uninstall it (and you need the owner key as well, not the valet key, which has a different code, and also locks you out from some things like the car phone or garage door opener). So a well designed system would actually produce much more secure devices and instruments than we have now, and even though they would not work if improperly removed, they could show (in the case of a display, or say through the speakers in the case of a radio without a built in display) that they were stolen and even give the car they came from and the owner's contact information information. Devices made for the new system would actually be much more secure than they are now, where, if you forget to remove the front panel and put it in your pocket where it can be broken, your radio will be stolen (and sometimes even when you do)
And remember: even the computer should be replaceable (or maybe you want multiple computers in your car), so the computers should learn their owner's key ID and refuse to run if moved to a different car too without be uninstalled.
Here are a few other advantages of the system:
Want to install something like fog lights in you car? Just plug them into power and the network. No need to mount an extra ugly switch on the dash, the network can control them through the same set of soft controls on the steering wheel that controls curise control, the radio and cd player, the door locks, the power windows, the GPS, the power mirrors, the car cell phone, and about everything else you add in (as can any other control panel you program to do so). And the computer can even give the lights extra features like automatic turn off when the ignition is turned off.
No need for the maker to install seat belt buzzers, ignition switch buzzers, Headlights left on buzzers, and other similar alerts; all that audio just goes to the existing speakers through the network. Lots of other small savings too, like no need for that turn signal blinker (just another thing that now gets done in software).
Want a rear view camera, or a low light front vision IR system? Just install the camera by the back bumper or behind the grill and plug it into the network, then install the software. One of your existing display panels can be programmed to display this video on demand, when it's not a GPS display, CD player index, trip computer, speedometer, or even displaying the menu for the drive through fast food joint you just pulled into.
And along with this much greater utility the maker saves a small fortune in wire and makes a lighter car.
I doubt that I or anyone else can even predict what all can be done with such a system (although I have a number of additional ideas). Once such a technology becomes open it would evolve at a much greater pace than even the "concept cars" that we see showing things that we will never really be offered.
That's a statement that you have offered no proof for. Just because all of the people you know are music pirates does not make everyone guilty. But much more importantly, in America we (at least in theory) have persumption of innocence until proven guilty. One should not be punished for something they are not guilty of, even if a lot of people are guilty. And having your money taken and given to the RIAA is certainly punishment.
I'm sure the RIAA loves this concept, take money from everyone, if they copy music or not. And they likely can still have people arrested if they find them doing something like selling mix CDs, even though they paid through the school!
And only the US version is hobbled with the cell frequency clock. Anyone know if there is a non-US NTSC version available anywhere?
Paying more and having it go to the RIAA, or to some RAP artist who you would never support or listen to is even worse. Making all students pay for this, directly or indirectly, on the assumption that some will illegally copy music, is crazy.
But if he's really going to try to do something new in the industry, as well a greatly increase the ability to build cards to "spec", I would suggest he seriously consider rethinking the way that car electronics mount and interconnect. I think it's insane the way dashboards are built today, and I'm not crazy about how hard it is to change a radio or install something extra like my ham radio. What the industry really needs is someone not trying hard to lock the customer in, but rather making things much more modular so the customer has the greatest number of choices. I would love to see a system where the instrument pannel, radio, gps/map, and any other electronics (including the computer) are all standaridized "rack" units networked and powered together, such that any device can be located anywhere in the system. If I want a bigger spedometer and tack, I should just be able to plug it into a couple of rack unit spaces. If I want my moving map right in the middle of my dash I just move the speedometer over (or maybe replace it with one integrated into the oil pressure / alternator / warning lights/ trip computer display) and put the video module where the speedometer was. If I get a ham radio made for this technology it should fit into an available bay and cleanly integrate with the rest of the car audio, letting me hear it through the speakers and optionally muting the CD player when there is radio traffic.
Eventually I would see this leading to "soft" displays, where you can use a pannel for whatever you want, speedometer, tach, warning lights, trip computer, or any new feature you program into a flexiable computer. True button switch pannels could be used, or touch screens that reconfigure themselves as needed, depending on the user's preference. Users could even elect, if they wished, to replace a digital speedometer with a white analog needle module (with appropriate electronics in the module) if they prefer that style of instrument over digital displays.
Sure, major players are not doing this now because they want to lock you into their stuff. But a modular system should give a truly flexiable design, lower overall costs, and much great utility. If someone is going to claim to want to make build to order cars, them this approach should be a must.
Don't unleash your powerful computer on the Internet. Tame it with Microsoft(R) brand software today.
Oh, now that I think about it I guess it would be dangerous to give SCO more money to try to destroy Linux with.
Actually, I doubt that it is, and certainly not a lot cheaper if any. My reasoning:
The Linix box certainly does not need to pay the Windows tax.
You can avoid multiple monitors by rather inexpensive monitor/keyboard/mice switches.
If using multiple PC's rather than multiple OS's then you can get buy with a little less hard drive on each, but ever large drives are inexpensive nowadays. I would expect you could easily have set the developers up with second PC for Linux around the $400 price.
One downside to this argument that I see is if you keep upgrading hardware it could cost you more long run to upgrade more systems, as long as there are no reoccuring or update costs that you would incur with VMWare. But I don't see VMWare as a really atractive alternative to two real system at a $400 price point. And there are certainly advantages to running the computers in real world non-VMWare environments that justify electing to do with seperate systems.
If not, is it legal to have a lunch counter with only $100 lunches, but a 95% discount for whites? Or a University with $1,000,000 yearly tuition but a 90% discount for whites?
And if none of the above is legal, then I submit that other forms of Price Discrimination should be illegal too, be it gender, income class or anything else.
Yes, that's why I was clear to say " turned down the $199 offer so that, in part, he could (talk about it)". This was his claim in the article that you clearly read. So the questions still stand, who was this suit against? (heck, if it's a true story then it should be a matter of public record, there is no good reason to hide this), and why not file for a refund on the other bundeled software too, since you did pay something for it and certainly can't use it if you didn't get installable media and are forced to delete the pre-installed copy.
So if he wanted to be able to talk about it so bad, and even turned down the $199 offer so that, in part, he could; why in the world is he not saying who he won this judgement against? He seems to be going out of his way to avoid doing exactly what he claimed he wanted to be able to do.
Also, in the article he mentioned that he should have been able to get not just a refund for Windows, but also for the additional software that he bought with the computer. That or get installable copies that he could install under Wine. But he got neither, since the software he had was pre-installed on the Windows system and there was no seperate installation disk. Why didn't he ask for this too when he files the claim? If you're going to go after bad manufacturer policies, centaingly this pre-installed only software with no install disk is an important one to go after too, and if he won the Windows portion of the case it's likely he could have won for "several hundred dollars "worth" of extra software" he got with the computer too. I would certainly like to see that win as it would serve the manufacturer an important message against filling half of a notebook's hard drive with bloat but giving the buyer no way to uninstall some of the software if the ever want to be able to reinstall it again.
Not that I'm against bundeled software, but the way it's being done is a complete disservice to the customer. And the manufacturer who installs ten cents worth of software and then advertises that as "includes $1000 worth of valuable software" should be called to task for it, and since in this case it was lost due to the need to reject the Windows license terms, this would be a perfect case to hold the manufacturer responsiable for providing installable copies of software.
Ever try to buy the notebook you want without Windows already installed on it?
Particularly since the expressed intention of copyright is to give protection to creaters for a limited time (and then have the work pass into public ownership), from article 1 of the U.S. Constitution:
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
Clearly shuch works cannot pass into public ownership as intended; which might be a good argument in fighting any copyright infringement charges in the first place!
So if NCR sued Yahoo and Yahoo was the one infringing, why is it that " Yahoo is now licensing the technology" instead of NCD doing the licensing?
That's one theory. Mine is that more and more people distrust the government so much that they don't really believe that who we vote for has anything to do with who they tell us won. So voting machine fraud is just a new tool for the new world order (not a term I invented, one Daddy Bush liked to use) to use to do what they have been doing for a while.
I noticed all of mine leaked too. Fortunately, I had stopped using them, since in my case they seemed to have lower capacity than standard alkalines (more like NiCad capacity, not even NIMH capacity) and lost even that capacity after a few recharges. That and the need to keep toping them off rather than cycle them (meaning they were useless for things like my handheld LCD TV) made them completely useless for me. But they all leaked in a drawer a month or two later!
It's not that good of a deal when you realize the charger does not sense the individual cells and will soon kill the batteries. Just buy the batteries without a junk charger and get a charger that will recharge individual cells (does not require you to charge in pairs). WalMart will even sell you a Ray-O-Vac 4 cell AA/AAA recharger for $9.99 that will do this. Don't ruin your expensive rechargeable cells with a junk charger that does not sense the individual cells.
I tried this. Have one of the $29.99 Ray-O-Vac Alkaline rechargers too; would sell it for a buck. This was a complete rip-off. The batteries are said to last for only 25 recharges, but they also caution you to never discharge the batteries, just use them a little and recharge them. If you can do that you might get 25 recharges out of them, but that might be like getting 4 or 5 real recharges out of them. And once you have recharged the batteries a few times you'll find their capacity drops off faster (assuming you have a battery guage in your device, if you don't and ever discharge them you find the capacity is even lower). And to make things worse, these rechargeable Alkaline batteries, which cost a lot up front don't have the basic capacity that regular alkaline batteries do, their capacity is more like NICads. You might as well use good rechargeables than use these (and NiMH batteries age betting capacities that approach or exceed normal alkalines, alythough the y still don't have the shelf life for charge storage).
Also, when buying NiMH batteries, pay attention to the mAh rating, which is how much power they hold. AA NIMH batteries might range from 1200mAh or lower to 1950 mAh (the best capacity I've bought so far). This gives you a good indication of how long the batteries will last between charge; clearly there is a big difference out there. And the more expensive batteries do not always have the greatest capacity.
On chargers, there are a lot of different and bad chargers out there. The worst never shut off, just tell you to be sure you only charge batteries for x hours. If you forget and overcharge you can destroy the batteries! Also, if the batteries were not completely discharged then you can overcharge and destroy the battery even if you charge for only the time stated.
The next worst chargers have a simple timer in them and do shut off after x hours. But they still can overcharge a battery if it wasn't fully discharged, or if you try to charge a lower capacity battery. And if you get a higher capacity battery and try to charge it, it will not fully charge.
My rule of thumb is that I never use a charger that insists on charging batteries in pairs. Such chargers cannot sense individual cells, which would allow them to stop charging each cell when it is fully charged. There are a few chargers out there that do sense individual cells and shut off properly though. I think Best Buys sells one for about $30. However, the $9.99 Ray-O-Vac NiMH charger sold at WalMart does this fine. I'm not a Ray-O-Vac fan at all, but I do use and recommend this charger.
And take batteries out of any charger when charged, never trust chargers that promise to keep batteries ready by trickel charging them. I've had them cook batteries.
Again, I want to stress that one should never use chargers that do not sense individual cells and that have to charge in pairs. I have several (I just got one with the 1950 mAh batteries I bought recently) but never use them (I bought the batteries and recharger just to get the batteries, the price was right). Don't risk your expensive batteries to a cheap charger, it will seem to work fine for a while, then you will find that all of you batteries have started leaking and failing.
Remember to look for and pay attention to that mAh rateing when buying batteries.
In applications where the battery might last for years (TV remote control for example, or garage door opener) do not use rechargable batteries. Use Alkaline batteries in these applications; rechargeables will loose their charge too fast, and alkalines are the best choice (I have a garage door opener with the same alkaline battery in it for 19 yeras now).
And thanks for asking here rather than doing a simple Google search on the topic.
And yes, I read the link, it says nothing about this. Perhaps submissions by anonymous deserve a little more editing.
What's worse is that I did visit a library this summer that did have USB ports on the front of the computers. But it was only because they happened to buy systems that came that way.... I had a USB device with me and plugged it in. The device was recognized OK, but the stupid "security software" on the computer would not let you download anything to the USB drive! You could download to a floppy, but I needed to get something a few megs in size (larger than 1.44 meg) for a different system I was trying to set up and they simply were not going to let me do it.
On a CD-ROM based system? I think Tiger is being a bit agressive on their claims for this thing (as well as clearly showing a hard drive in the box when they are selling it without a hard drive).
Actually, the Lindows part of this seems pretty lame, since you have no hard drive (which most windows software, even most games, needs to be installed to befoe it will run!) and can't pop out the Lindows CD to read a windows application CD. For surfing the web and a lot of other stuff Knoppix will do just fine.
I do agree with the basic premis, more needs to be done to make thinks like this and Knoppix user configurable. There are a number of people out there starting to do custom Knoppix based versions, everything from Knoppix STP to Knoppix Mame. But the average user really needs a good way to customize some of these (particularly since Knoppix Mame has no games on the CD for copyright reasons). Even some simple little things, like find the the persistant Knoppix home directory without having to type in a magic command at boot time would be nice, but we really need a Knoppix uild utility where we can pick and choose what programs and configuration information end up in our system. At least Knoppix is giving me a way to get my feet wet in Linux, maybe I'll eventually master enough I can start building my own version for my own use, but tools like you describe would be most helpful.