I'm the exact opposite. From my perspective, too many auto manufacturers only hear the word "economy" in the phrase "fuel economy". Thus all of the cars with fair to good mileage seem to be low-end plastic econo-boxes.
Why can't I get a nice mid-to-upper-range car that's well equipped AND gets excellent gas mileage?
When I read the article, what stuck me the most was not that the specific pattern observed WAS the memory, but more like the control sequence needed to create it and then retrieve it.
In computer terms, it seemed like putting a set of addresses out on the memory bus, controlling the storage in and then out of a block of RAM.
'Course, the new Insight gets 60 MPG and only costs $19,000, so it would appear that efficiency is going up and costs are going down. And all your math is predicated on a $3,000 difference, and not, say, a $1,000 difference.
Plus you're not considering the alternatives. If you're going to invest your savings, then so can I.
I could, from day one, easily begin banking the savings gained from one $60 tank of gas a month vs. FOUR tanks of gas per month ($240 in the SUV I'm driving now), whichs saves $180/m or $2,160/y. Put $180 per month in the bank for six years, compounded at 5%, and you get $15,077, whereas you only made $4,020 on your inital "savings" of $3,000. Some savings.
Now, you're going to say that I need to be considering a more comperable "alternative", like, say a Jetta TDI. But a TDI only gets 45/mpg, its fuel costs are roughly 15% higher in the US due to the price of diesel, and the diesel version of the Jetta cost about $1,500 more than the gas version. Plus there's a waiting list and dealer premuim for those as well. All of which means that the Jetta comes out on the bottom when you run the same kind of numbers.
Finally, you're assuming that the guy who saved $3,000 invested it. From my perspective, it's equally likely the idiot put $3,000 down on a $5,000 72" flatscreen TV, and is now paying down his credit card at 18% interest. Compounded daily.
"... it'll be next to impossible to police anything..."
Please. No matter how many round-robins and proxies and how much encryption you use, at the end of the day, any P2P system MUST be engaged in the process of downloading and uploading gigabytes of data. Simply count the bytes flowing into and out of your IP address, and the whole thing sticks out like a sore thumb.
Put bandwidth caps in place, charge on a per-byte basis, or throttle upstream traffic, and P2P falls like a house of cards.
"Insisting that female performer be referred to as "actress" is sexist and minimizes their talent..."
Guess we need to drop all of the Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress categories from the Oscars. Let the men and woman both fight it our for the single Best Actor award...
"I said it had to be a good product. All that means is that it needs to serve a useful purpose."
Which is what? Saying that a single company needs to do it instead of the community simply begs the issue. What are they going to do?
The whole concept was to combine the HP touch screen device (or something like it) with Linux and do something great so that people in turn see just how wonderful Linux is and to spread its adoption. Fine.
What wonderful thing is it going to do? As I pointed out, simply slapping Linux on a computer and writing a touchscreen driver isn't going to do the trick. Existing general-purpose applications aren't designed for touch. And writing a comprehensive set of general-purpose touch applications is prohibitive for a single company with little to no market share. Look how much time and effort Apple has spent on iLife and iWork. Or how long it's taken to do Open Office.
And writing some sort of killer dedicated application, like a home controller or multimedia system, is all about the dedicated system and not the underlying OS. How many people know what OS their cable STB or Tivo is running? As long as it's doing it's job, how many even care?
And that tends to kill the whole idea of doing the whole thing to "promote" Linux, doesn't it?
It doesn't "replace" the Windows desktop. There are a few applets that let you play with music, photos, and a few other things. When done playing, you close the pretty application and return to Windows and the "real" world.
Think of the "Front Row" multi-media application on a Mac... and then what happens when you quit back to desktop.
The iPhone UI was designed from the ground up as a touch interface, maximizing the use of space and screen real estate in a portable device. All of the applications it uses were redesigned to take advantage of that interface. With that in mind, just what, exactly, is a Linux-based touch-screen desktop computer going to do? What is it going to do differently? More importantly, just how is it going to do it BETTER?
The disadvantage to the HP is that they've come up with a half-hearted interface with a few applets that lets you manipulate a few things via touch, then drops you back into Windows for everything else. And Windows, for the most part, has no clue the touch screen system exists. Yes, you can still "click" the screen, but all of the teensy-tiny widgets in Windows are designed for skinny, precise mouse pointers and not for fat, dull fingers.
So again, what would Linux do differently? And who's going to rewrite all of those applications to take advantage of the hardware?
Speaking of which, from what I gather the screen uses a "smart" border and not capacitance, so it only recognizes single finger presses and not multi-touch gestures. No pinches, no two finger Jeff Han rotations and zooms. Touch-wise, it's speaking at a kindergarten level. With all of that in mind, and given the limitations of the hardware, I fail to see just how revolutionary the device could be, even if you managed to convince the Linux developer community to to support it.
And without groundbreaking applications to pique a user's imagination, the concept that this computer could "promote" Linux is..., well... totally out of touch with reality.
Noticed just how many McCain ads are attack ads focused on how "bad" the other side's position is, but with little to no explanation as to what he'd do instead?
A contract spells out, in very specific terms, what's expected of both sides in an agreement. Or are you saying that two people or businesses should ignore them, enter into agreements based on vague promises and a handshake, and then let things devolve to a he said/she said battle when one side or the other feels dissatisfied or disgruntled?
If you think the terms of a contract are unfair then negotiate them. And if you can't or won't, then don't sign them.
WiFi is faster than 3G, and using it doesn't burn up your data plan. Further, you can only plug in a USB cable if you also happen to be carrying a computer around as well (which tends to negate the compact size). With WiFi, any publicly available access point will do.
"3 hour talk time"
Just indicates the size and strength of the battery. With 5/10hr talk times on iPhone, there's more power for talking AND music AND games and so on.
And video and MMS is coming, can already do dictation, can already view office (and iWork) documents, and other than mp3s and mpgs, don't really have any pressing interest or need to for "other" media formats (many of which are only popular with torrent freaks anyway).
As to other capabilities, iPhone can access Google, Wikipedia, and most any other web site, and not need a stripped down mobile version to do so. Access and read news and RSS feeds. Get real-time weather information, including weather radar. Get real-time access to traffic cameras. Immediately cross-sync contacts, appointments, and the like to my home/work machines without needing that USB cable, hear and view podcasts and vidcasts, and I'm finding out that it makes a very, very nice little pocket ebook reader.
What else? Even if my phone did video, I'd probably ignore it, and bring my HD cam if/when I thought I'd need it, just like I dig out the G9 (or the 1Ds) depending upon the photographic situation. Turn-by-turn nav doesn't float my boat, and the next car I get will probably have it built in anyway.
The iPhone isn't just a phone, it's the first of a new generation of pocket general-purpose computing platforms. The touch screen may not be the very best text entry system out there, but in my book it's just as good as a Crackberry, and far, far superior to the hit-one-button-three-times system used on your phone. Wouldn't want to type a novel on it, but I wouldn't do so on a 'berry either.
The advantage of the touch screen, however, is that the interface is endlessly mutable. It can be a scientific calculator one second, a dive computer the next, and a home entertainment remote control system right after that.
I know the uses we've discussed, but have you given any thought as to the number of custom devices this thing (and others like it) are going to replace? Installment loan calculators (ANY special purpose calculator), pocket dictionaries, language translators, metronomes, chess clocks, timers, trip computers, portable game systems, PDAs, bar code scanners, video surveillance monitors, remote camera controllers, and more.
The general-purpose pocket computer is going to kill off the majority of these things as surely as the general-purpose desktop computer killed off the Wang Word Processor.
"... universities are very good at patenting the results."
Which gives rise to another question? Why should universities, many of whom receive state and federal funding and research grants, be allowed to patent the results of their research? If it's federally (i.e. publicly) funded, the results should be public domain.
And if a corporation "outsources" research, again, why should it be the sole beneficiary? Those students and professors are not their employees.
So you carry it, and not a phone AND a MP3 player AND a video/DVD player AND a GPS system AND a camera, and so on. Which in turn reinforces my point. Unless you need the advanced capabilities a particular device provides, convergence devices are the wave of the future.
Thank you.
(BTW, with a 2.2" screen, no keyboard, no WiFi, and a measly 3 hour rated talk time, I'd probably argue "much more capable"...)
"... is that the iPhone is a piss-poor replacement for ANY of them..."
If it were, I wouldn't own one. It's okay as a phone, probably the best music/video/audiobook player out there, has a wonderful web browser for the size of its screen, does email fairly well, SMS is great (though MMS would be nice), and so on. Most of the games I play are logic games like Sudoku, so not having Super Mario Brothers or arcade-style crap doesn't bother me.
It's biggest weakness is the camera, but I tend to throw the G9 into the backpack most days, and, as I said, I still have a camera even when I don't. And, newsflash, you can put MP3s on an iPod/iPhone without going to the "web-store".
Most of the issues the phone has now, other than the camera, are simply in the software, and Apple and third-parties are definitely aware of the flaws and updates and applications are coming.
Any new platform has issues, and a few arrows in the back is the price anyone pays to be an early adopter. That's not being a fanboy, or apologetic, but simply a fact of life. I'm sure Android, if/when it ever gets around to shipping, will have its own flaws, sins, and omissions.
But that isn't going to stop anyone who really wants one from getting in line on day one.
I said keep the laptop, did I not? Reading for comprehension: FAIL
Besides, I ALWAYS have my iPhone with me. And it can, to some extent, and in most cases to the extent necessary, stand in for all of those other things.
You on the other hand, may or may not, depending on whether or not you loaded up your Batman utility belt that morning, be carrying the LG, the Nokia, the Ericcson, the Canon, the Cowan, or the Nintendo. Nor, given the subject of the post, will you be totally certain that any or all of them are charged up and ready to go. (BTW, you forgot to mention the book reader/Kindle, GPS/Magellen,...., ah, never mind.)
From my perspective, having the perfect dedicated device for each and every function does me no good whatsoever when it's sitting on the shelf at home because I didn't feel like being an electronic pack mule that day.
This, my young Padawan, can be solved with a simple three step process...
1) Buy iPhone. 2) Throw away everything but theThinkpad. 3) Charge iPhone on Thinkpad's USB port.
And add a new phrase to your vocabulary: convergence device.
Seriously. I've pretty much stopped wearing a watch, got rid of that stupid keyring LED flashlight, gave away my PDA, sold the RAZR, sold my iPod, sold the portable DVD player, returned the Kindle, only dig out the camera on holidays and special occasions, and see no need for a DS or Gameboy.
Especially when you consider that the interior elements are failing first due to the heat, which in turn directs more of the kinetic energy inward (towards the core) than outward.
Funny you mentioned Voltaire. Didn't he also say that "Common sense is not so common"?
Though Einstein is perhaps closer, with "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." It's a common assumption, masquerading as wisdom (to use your word).
Or to put it another way, when one lacks facts, they fall back on what everyone "knows" to be true... regardless of whether it's true or not.
So whose point are you trying to prove? The arguments portray the building being brought down in a controlled fashion. Which, according to what you just said, meant that teams of people wandered throughout WTC7 weeks beforehand drilling columns, planting explosives, and weakening and/or removing key support structures. All unnoticed and undetected.
A fire, OTOH, is largely an uncontrollable event. I doubt that a demo company would be willing to guarantee that any building brought down by simply lighting a fire would NOT inadvertently damage adjacent structures. Or that said fire and debris would NOT spread elsewhere.
One has only to watch an episode or two of American Chopper to see that simply heating steel lets it bend and deform quite easily. No melting required.
And you know, of course, that engines and parts of the plane were found five, six, and even seven blocks away from the point of impact.
Nope, the only conspiracy is how GW and his cohorts shanghaied the event and twisted the aftermath to their own ends...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm the exact opposite. From my perspective, too many auto manufacturers only hear the word "economy" in the phrase "fuel economy". Thus all of the cars with fair to good mileage seem to be low-end plastic econo-boxes.
Why can't I get a nice mid-to-upper-range car that's well equipped AND gets excellent gas mileage?
Reread please. The new Insight reportedly will get 60 MPG. I didn't mention the Prius.
When I read the article, what stuck me the most was not that the specific pattern observed WAS the memory, but more like the control sequence needed to create it and then retrieve it.
In computer terms, it seemed like putting a set of addresses out on the memory bus, controlling the storage in and then out of a block of RAM.
'Course, the new Insight gets 60 MPG and only costs $19,000, so it would appear that efficiency is going up and costs are going down. And all your math is predicated on a $3,000 difference, and not, say, a $1,000 difference.
Plus you're not considering the alternatives. If you're going to invest your savings, then so can I.
I could, from day one, easily begin banking the savings gained from one $60 tank of gas a month vs. FOUR tanks of gas per month ($240 in the SUV I'm driving now), whichs saves $180/m or $2,160/y. Put $180 per month in the bank for six years, compounded at 5%, and you get $15,077, whereas you only made $4,020 on your inital "savings" of $3,000. Some savings.
Now, you're going to say that I need to be considering a more comperable "alternative", like, say a Jetta TDI. But a TDI only gets 45/mpg, its fuel costs are roughly 15% higher in the US due to the price of diesel, and the diesel version of the Jetta cost about $1,500 more than the gas version. Plus there's a waiting list and dealer premuim for those as well. All of which means that the Jetta comes out on the bottom when you run the same kind of numbers.
Finally, you're assuming that the guy who saved $3,000 invested it. From my perspective, it's equally likely the idiot put $3,000 down on a $5,000 72" flatscreen TV, and is now paying down his credit card at 18% interest. Compounded daily.
"... it'll be next to impossible to police anything..."
Please. No matter how many round-robins and proxies and how much encryption you use, at the end of the day, any P2P system MUST be engaged in the process of downloading and uploading gigabytes of data. Simply count the bytes flowing into and out of your IP address, and the whole thing sticks out like a sore thumb.
Put bandwidth caps in place, charge on a per-byte basis, or throttle upstream traffic, and P2P falls like a house of cards.
"Insisting that female performer be referred to as "actress" is sexist and minimizes their talent..."
Guess we need to drop all of the Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress categories from the Oscars. Let the men and woman both fight it our for the single Best Actor award...
It also places the tab, a very commonly used element of the interface, further away from the content of the page (also a very commonly used element).
It also places the bookmark bar with all your bookmarks for all of the other sites in the same context as the web page.
"I said it had to be a good product. All that means is that it needs to serve a useful purpose."
Which is what? Saying that a single company needs to do it instead of the community simply begs the issue. What are they going to do?
The whole concept was to combine the HP touch screen device (or something like it) with Linux and do something great so that people in turn see just how wonderful Linux is and to spread its adoption. Fine.
What wonderful thing is it going to do? As I pointed out, simply slapping Linux on a computer and writing a touchscreen driver isn't going to do the trick. Existing general-purpose applications aren't designed for touch. And writing a comprehensive set of general-purpose touch applications is prohibitive for a single company with little to no market share. Look how much time and effort Apple has spent on iLife and iWork. Or how long it's taken to do Open Office.
And writing some sort of killer dedicated application, like a home controller or multimedia system, is all about the dedicated system and not the underlying OS. How many people know what OS their cable STB or Tivo is running? As long as it's doing it's job, how many even care?
And that tends to kill the whole idea of doing the whole thing to "promote" Linux, doesn't it?
It doesn't "replace" the Windows desktop. There are a few applets that let you play with music, photos, and a few other things. When done playing, you close the pretty application and return to Windows and the "real" world.
Think of the "Front Row" multi-media application on a Mac... and then what happens when you quit back to desktop.
The iPhone UI was designed from the ground up as a touch interface, maximizing the use of space and screen real estate in a portable device. All of the applications it uses were redesigned to take advantage of that interface. With that in mind, just what, exactly, is a Linux-based touch-screen desktop computer going to do? What is it going to do differently? More importantly, just how is it going to do it BETTER?
The disadvantage to the HP is that they've come up with a half-hearted interface with a few applets that lets you manipulate a few things via touch, then drops you back into Windows for everything else. And Windows, for the most part, has no clue the touch screen system exists. Yes, you can still "click" the screen, but all of the teensy-tiny widgets in Windows are designed for skinny, precise mouse pointers and not for fat, dull fingers.
So again, what would Linux do differently? And who's going to rewrite all of those applications to take advantage of the hardware?
Speaking of which, from what I gather the screen uses a "smart" border and not capacitance, so it only recognizes single finger presses and not multi-touch gestures. No pinches, no two finger Jeff Han rotations and zooms. Touch-wise, it's speaking at a kindergarten level. With all of that in mind, and given the limitations of the hardware, I fail to see just how revolutionary the device could be, even if you managed to convince the Linux developer community to to support it.
And without groundbreaking applications to pique a user's imagination, the concept that this computer could "promote" Linux is..., well... totally out of touch with reality.
Noticed just how many McCain ads are attack ads focused on how "bad" the other side's position is, but with little to no explanation as to what he'd do instead?
A contract spells out, in very specific terms, what's expected of both sides in an agreement. Or are you saying that two people or businesses should ignore them, enter into agreements based on vague promises and a handshake, and then let things devolve to a he said/she said battle when one side or the other feels dissatisfied or disgruntled?
If you think the terms of a contract are unfair then negotiate them. And if you can't or won't, then don't sign them.
"WIFI is hardly an issue"
WiFi is faster than 3G, and using it doesn't burn up your data plan. Further, you can only plug in a USB cable if you also happen to be carrying a computer around as well (which tends to negate the compact size). With WiFi, any publicly available access point will do.
"3 hour talk time"
Just indicates the size and strength of the battery. With 5/10hr talk times on iPhone, there's more power for talking AND music AND games and so on.
And video and MMS is coming, can already do dictation, can already view office (and iWork) documents, and other than mp3s and mpgs, don't really have any pressing interest or need to for "other" media formats (many of which are only popular with torrent freaks anyway).
As to other capabilities, iPhone can access Google, Wikipedia, and most any other web site, and not need a stripped down mobile version to do so. Access and read news and RSS feeds. Get real-time weather information, including weather radar. Get real-time access to traffic cameras. Immediately cross-sync contacts, appointments, and the like to my home/work machines without needing that USB cable, hear and view podcasts and vidcasts, and I'm finding out that it makes a very, very nice little pocket ebook reader.
What else? Even if my phone did video, I'd probably ignore it, and bring my HD cam if/when I thought I'd need it, just like I dig out the G9 (or the 1Ds) depending upon the photographic situation. Turn-by-turn nav doesn't float my boat, and the next car I get will probably have it built in anyway.
The iPhone isn't just a phone, it's the first of a new generation of pocket general-purpose computing platforms. The touch screen may not be the very best text entry system out there, but in my book it's just as good as a Crackberry, and far, far superior to the hit-one-button-three-times system used on your phone. Wouldn't want to type a novel on it, but I wouldn't do so on a 'berry either.
The advantage of the touch screen, however, is that the interface is endlessly mutable. It can be a scientific calculator one second, a dive computer the next, and a home entertainment remote control system right after that.
I know the uses we've discussed, but have you given any thought as to the number of custom devices this thing (and others like it) are going to replace? Installment loan calculators (ANY special purpose calculator), pocket dictionaries, language translators, metronomes, chess clocks, timers, trip computers, portable game systems, PDAs, bar code scanners, video surveillance monitors, remote camera controllers, and more.
The general-purpose pocket computer is going to kill off the majority of these things as surely as the general-purpose desktop computer killed off the Wang Word Processor.
"... universities are very good at patenting the results."
Which gives rise to another question? Why should universities, many of whom receive state and federal funding and research grants, be allowed to patent the results of their research? If it's federally (i.e. publicly) funded, the results should be public domain.
And if a corporation "outsources" research, again, why should it be the sole beneficiary? Those students and professors are not their employees.
So you carry it, and not a phone AND a MP3 player AND a video/DVD player AND a GPS system AND a camera, and so on. Which in turn reinforces my point. Unless you need the advanced capabilities a particular device provides, convergence devices are the wave of the future.
Thank you.
(BTW, with a 2.2" screen, no keyboard, no WiFi, and a measly 3 hour rated talk time, I'd probably argue "much more capable"...)
It's a three tier system now. Colleges do all the research, the government funds it, and corporations patent the results.
"... is that the iPhone is a piss-poor replacement for ANY of them..."
If it were, I wouldn't own one. It's okay as a phone, probably the best music/video/audiobook player out there, has a wonderful web browser for the size of its screen, does email fairly well, SMS is great (though MMS would be nice), and so on. Most of the games I play are logic games like Sudoku, so not having Super Mario Brothers or arcade-style crap doesn't bother me.
It's biggest weakness is the camera, but I tend to throw the G9 into the backpack most days, and, as I said, I still have a camera even when I don't. And, newsflash, you can put MP3s on an iPod/iPhone without going to the "web-store".
Most of the issues the phone has now, other than the camera, are simply in the software, and Apple and third-parties are definitely aware of the flaws and updates and applications are coming.
Any new platform has issues, and a few arrows in the back is the price anyone pays to be an early adopter. That's not being a fanboy, or apologetic, but simply a fact of life. I'm sure Android, if/when it ever gets around to shipping, will have its own flaws, sins, and omissions.
But that isn't going to stop anyone who really wants one from getting in line on day one.
I said keep the laptop, did I not? Reading for comprehension: FAIL
Besides, I ALWAYS have my iPhone with me. And it can, to some extent, and in most cases to the extent necessary, stand in for all of those other things.
You on the other hand, may or may not, depending on whether or not you loaded up your Batman utility belt that morning, be carrying the LG, the Nokia, the Ericcson, the Canon, the Cowan, or the Nintendo. Nor, given the subject of the post, will you be totally certain that any or all of them are charged up and ready to go. (BTW, you forgot to mention the book reader/Kindle, GPS/Magellen, ...., ah, never mind.)
From my perspective, having the perfect dedicated device for each and every function does me no good whatsoever when it's sitting on the shelf at home because I didn't feel like being an electronic pack mule that day.
This, my young Padawan, can be solved with a simple three step process...
1) Buy iPhone.
2) Throw away everything but theThinkpad.
3) Charge iPhone on Thinkpad's USB port.
And add a new phrase to your vocabulary: convergence device.
Seriously. I've pretty much stopped wearing a watch, got rid of that stupid keyring LED flashlight, gave away my PDA, sold the RAZR, sold my iPod, sold the portable DVD player, returned the Kindle, only dig out the camera on holidays and special occasions, and see no need for a DS or Gameboy.
"Just saying, if people don't have "common sense," then it's completely ficticious and we should redefine the term to reflect reality."
Since when did anyone let anything as mundane as reality interfere with a perfectly good preconception?
Especially when you consider that the interior elements are failing first due to the heat, which in turn directs more of the kinetic energy inward (towards the core) than outward.
"... failed to mention that neither was impacted by anything with the amount of force that the airliner that hit the WTC did."
Yeah, steel and concrete and other debris falling from the collapse of a 110 story building has almost no force whatsoever...
Funny you mentioned Voltaire. Didn't he also say that "Common sense is not so common"?
Though Einstein is perhaps closer, with "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." It's a common assumption, masquerading as wisdom (to use your word).
Or to put it another way, when one lacks facts, they fall back on what everyone "knows" to be true... regardless of whether it's true or not.
So whose point are you trying to prove? The arguments portray the building being brought down in a controlled fashion. Which, according to what you just said, meant that teams of people wandered throughout WTC7 weeks beforehand drilling columns, planting explosives, and weakening and/or removing key support structures. All unnoticed and undetected.
A fire, OTOH, is largely an uncontrollable event. I doubt that a demo company would be willing to guarantee that any building brought down by simply lighting a fire would NOT inadvertently damage adjacent structures. Or that said fire and debris would NOT spread elsewhere.
One has only to watch an episode or two of American Chopper to see that simply heating steel lets it bend and deform quite easily. No melting required.
And you know, of course, that engines and parts of the plane were found five, six, and even seven blocks away from the point of impact.
Nope, the only conspiracy is how GW and his cohorts shanghaied the event and twisted the aftermath to their own ends...