Discs aren't quite that bad any more. $1.80/disc for the 2.4x DVD+R DL over at www.supermediastore.com. Not that that's cheap compared to the single layer ones, but not 5 bucks anymore at least.
You should also be aware that there are a number of different techniques out there. Wavefront guided is one of the options (that's what I had done) and is supposed to give better improvement than the standard operation. I got 20/20 vision out of it and I started being very nearsighted.
There are also some options as to how they go about it. One method is to cut a flap in the cornea with a keratome (kindof a little suction device that they stick on your eyeball that has a blade in it.) Another way they do it is to polish off the surface of your cornea insted of cutting it. The second way takes longer to heal but has not cut the cornea and is supposed to be stronger in the long run (as well as removing less material for those of you with thin corneas.)
Best thing to do is to research several places and not necessarily pick the one with the best price. The places also use different equipment. You can find out what machines they are using and get some statistics on surgeries with that type of machine. For example, the machine they used on me had a larger treatment spot area (though I don't remember what the size was) and is supposed to help people with large pupils in the dark since you have the potential to see through part of your untreated cornea when your pupils are big.
Ok, so Cypress is pushing this thing pretty hard. The FAE was here the other day handing out data sheets for this part when he was in for a different reason. But the deal is that the first version is really only 10 meter out of the box, or 100 meter if you add in an amplifier. Data rates on the first series are up to 250 kbit. And so far, this is not actually part of the USB standard, though they are trying to get it included in a future version of the standard. So do we really need another wireless protocol? I don't know. But the main drawback I see here is that the FAE was also talking about putting batteries in these devices. Personally, I'll just stick with the cord until that is not the case. I mean, how many of you want to have to stop using your computer to go find batteries for your keyboard or mouse? Granted some vendors could come up with a decent solution with rechargeables, like some mat you just have to leave things on that I remember seeing an article about a while back here. What would be really nice of course is things like the Wacom mouse that comes with their tablet. No cord and no batteries (but the tablet still has a cord.)
Hey, so the best one I've run across so far was in something like gcc 2.95 when the optimizer was turned on...
short x = 0x1122;
short y = 0x2222;
if ( ((BYTE)x) == ((BYTE)y) )
{
return true;
}
else
{
return false;
}
And yes... this returned false with -O and true without optimization.
It has long since been fixed (and included in the test suite) but it must have taken me a week to find why my code was breaking with optimization.
Slashdot Mirror
Discs aren't quite that bad any more. $1.80/disc for the 2.4x DVD+R DL over at www.supermediastore.com. Not that that's cheap compared to the single layer ones, but not 5 bucks anymore at least.
You should also be aware that there are a number of different techniques out there. Wavefront guided is one of the options (that's what I had done) and is supposed to give better improvement than the standard operation. I got 20/20 vision out of it and I started being very nearsighted. There are also some options as to how they go about it. One method is to cut a flap in the cornea with a keratome (kindof a little suction device that they stick on your eyeball that has a blade in it.) Another way they do it is to polish off the surface of your cornea insted of cutting it. The second way takes longer to heal but has not cut the cornea and is supposed to be stronger in the long run (as well as removing less material for those of you with thin corneas.) Best thing to do is to research several places and not necessarily pick the one with the best price. The places also use different equipment. You can find out what machines they are using and get some statistics on surgeries with that type of machine. For example, the machine they used on me had a larger treatment spot area (though I don't remember what the size was) and is supposed to help people with large pupils in the dark since you have the potential to see through part of your untreated cornea when your pupils are big.
Ok, so Cypress is pushing this thing pretty hard. The FAE was here the other day handing out data sheets for this part when he was in for a different reason. But the deal is that the first version is really only 10 meter out of the box, or 100 meter if you add in an amplifier. Data rates on the first series are up to 250 kbit. And so far, this is not actually part of the USB standard, though they are trying to get it included in a future version of the standard. So do we really need another wireless protocol? I don't know. But the main drawback I see here is that the FAE was also talking about putting batteries in these devices. Personally, I'll just stick with the cord until that is not the case. I mean, how many of you want to have to stop using your computer to go find batteries for your keyboard or mouse? Granted some vendors could come up with a decent solution with rechargeables, like some mat you just have to leave things on that I remember seeing an article about a while back here. What would be really nice of course is things like the Wacom mouse that comes with their tablet. No cord and no batteries (but the tablet still has a cord.)
Hey, so the best one I've run across so far was in something like gcc 2.95 when the optimizer was turned on... short x = 0x1122; short y = 0x2222; if ( ((BYTE)x) == ((BYTE)y) ) { return true; } else { return false; } And yes... this returned false with -O and true without optimization. It has long since been fixed (and included in the test suite) but it must have taken me a week to find why my code was breaking with optimization.