Meanwhile, Linux keeps on getting faster and faster. I'm running Mandriva 2008, with Compiz Fusion on a Celeron 1.5 GHz, 512 MB RAM, Intel GMA, and it's faster than Vista without Aero. It's also faster than XP. I think that Linux will really take off if MS can't make their next OS consume less resources. When the choice for the average consumer becomes, spend $50 on a Linux computer, or spend $800 on a Windows computer, I think that most people will begin to switch. If things keep going the way they are, this is how the situation will become.
And if people had written their applications with proper database abstraction layers, moving from one database to another wouldn't be all that difficult. The fact is that a lot of programmers did a really bad job when they designed their applications, and now they want MS to fix some ancient technology, just so they never have to upgrade their systems.
The typo was intentional, just to show how stupid and how not-well-thought-out their name was. Also, thank you for that info. I think it's to do with some bug in their site, as I'm pretty sure that they are supposed to not be shown the answers. Maybe they designed it that way to get around Google, but make most people visiting the site think they had to sign up to see the answers.
I live in Canada, and see a lot of the same. In my neighbourhood, there is a lot of kids, and a lot of families. I know this because I see them in the elevator, and on the bus. However we have an 18 month old that we take to the park quite a bit, at least every other day, and are surprised how few kids are at the park. Once in a while we'll see one or two other kids at the park, but many days we go there, and there's absolutely no one. I'm not sure what all these kids are doing, whether they are staying inside all day or what, but I feel sorry for the kids, because they must have really boring lives.
It's the law now in Ontario that kids have to wear helmets on their bikes. Although I'm not sure if any kid or their parents have ever been charged under this law. Once you're 16, you don't have to wear a helmet, they figure you can make up your own mind. Although I grew up in the times of no helmets, and still can't believe that skiers other than olympic racers wear helmets, I think that helmets on bikes isn't that bad of an idea. They aren't uncomfortable, and don't really impede your riding ability or field of vision at all. I knew kids who used to play war with pellet guns. Just because kids used to do stupid things, doesn't mean we should keep on letting kids do stupid things. The real problem wasn't that the kid had to wear a helmet, but that he was too self conscious to ride his bike 3 blocks with the helmet.
I think stuff like this is important for kids. And adults too. In my first week of college, we had initiation. The upper class men made us crawl around in the mud, and poured all type of food all over us. I was kept pretty safe, and completely voluntary. At one point I got up to walk around because my knee started to gimp out, from crawling around for so long, after I explained that they were cool with it. They were also prepared with plenty of water to wash your eyes out in case you got something like mustard in them. They didn't want to hurt anybody, they just wanted to have fun, and make sure that we were doing the same. Despite the fact that this wouldn't sound like fun to most people, once you got into it, and finished the day, you got a bunch of free beer, and had a sense of accomplishment. If you can survive that, then the quickly advancing deadlines of assignments and tests don't seem all that bad. However, I think that with the way things are going, they won't have stuff like this around much longer. Or maybe people will completely turn around, and realize how wussie we are all becoming, and start to let people do as they choose.
Exactly. Buying for a copy of windows doesn't entitle you to any kind of support. Here's the kind of support that microsoft makes available. After that, you're left scrounging newsgroups, websites, or paying through the nose.
No, volts is just the speed of the current, what you're really looking for is amperes. You can have a 10,000 volt current and it won't kill you if there is no amperage.
Yes, it would suck, because we all know that standard hard drives with spinning platters, and magnetic read/write heads, almost never break down.:)
My point is, is that if solid state drives had better known failure times, they could be better than the spinning platter types. Spinning platter drives tend to die whenever, for unknown reasons, and they also die if they just get too old. If using solid state drives could solve the first problem, and only have drives die at a known point in the future, when they get too old, then it would probably work out better for most people. If the drive has a lifetime of 5 years, but you know with 99.99% certainty that it won't start to die before that, you can plan to replace it. However, with the spinning platter hard drives, we know they are probably going to die in 5 years, but also that they could die at any point, for no reason at all.
A lot of churches I've seen give you a really hard time if you don't put something in the donation basket. Remember on the Simpsons when Reverend Lovejoy was reminding them that "it's 10% off the top, that's gross, not net". That's the way a lot of churches are getting. From what I hear from my Hindu friends, the people aren't allowed to pray and speak to the gods. You can get a priest to pray for you, but that costs money. Also, most of the museums are funded through tax dollars, which is where the majority of their money comes from. Donation boxes are just to make people feel good.
And the difference between you quitting your job, and someone deciding not to pay for an album, is that your boss now loses your services, whereas people will still download the music for free, and won't lose anything.
I that that whar Radiohead did was a good idea, but I'm just playing devil's advocate. There are some downsides to this model. If people only pay what they have to, then a lot of people will pay nothing. This model only works because the people who pay nothing, impose no cost on the artist. If they were just taking physical products for free, then the artist would lose a lot of money.
But couldn't you theoretically make more money by offering a product to people (a virtual one at that, esp. in the case of downloaded files) to pay whatever we want. If you contrast this with iTunes, I will only buy the albums that I think are worth $10, or the songs that I think are worth $1. If I was presented with the Radiohead model, I could buy more music, because I could choose to pay what I felt was appropriate for what I'm getting. If I feel your album is only worth $3, and I'm allowed to pay $3, then you get $3. If I feel that your album is only worth $3, and my only choices are buy it for $10, or not buy it, then you get $0.
I think the Radiohead thing is just an interesting experiment to find out what people really do want to pay. People have never had a choice before. The album is released, and the people who buy it only have 2 choices. Buy at the price they are selling it at, or don't buy it. This is like taking a poll and asking people what a downloaded album is really worth. Then there's the Saul Williams album, where he said, pay $5 or $0, it's your choice. $5 is a much more reasonable price to ask for a downloaded album, where there is no physical product, and no distribution chain.
I was going to just go the torrent direction so as not to waste my bandwidth, but because of my slow and highly one way connection (14 KB/s Up, 120 KB/s down) i usually don't get good download rates on torrents, and in this case, it was slow to download, and the only one I could find was the 320 kbps mp3 version. Anyway, I think they changed things, because, at least on the free version I got to download it right away. I was also sent a link where presumably I could download it again, although I haven't tried the link. They probably got too many people not getting the email, and just decided to have it download right away.
Another album with a similar selling model is the new Saul Williams album. You can download it for free, or choose to pay $5. I downloaded it for free because there was no sample. I'm trying to figure out if I'm going to buy it. I'm not a big fan of hip hop, but I do like the music, and will probably end up sending the $5. Anyway, the album was produced by Trent Reznor. So not only is he doing great things with changing the business model for his own music, he's helping other artists do the same.
If you are really interested in encoding video, I would think that you would have a specialized chip. My TV Tuner has a specialized chip for encoding mpeg 2, which means it can encode 12 mbit/s mpeg2 without putting any noticeable load on my processor. I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to build a chip specifically to encode video into MPEG 4.
Since MS does a complete redesign every time they release a product, isn't every MS product a 1.0 product? Not until they start releasing service packs could the product be considered not 1.0.
I recently got an iPod Nano Video. All the shows I've taped with SageTV get converted using a special conversion profile I've set up which basically amounts to 320x240 MPEG4 with 128 kBit/s AAC sound. You can get an hour of TV in 140 Megs. This means I can keep a lot of shows on my tiny 4 GB Nano. The screen doesn't support higher resolutions anyway, so no point taking up space for it.
How would a computer run games that aren't available for the PC? Would you have to buy a PS3, Wii, XBox360, DS, PSP and a computer just to make sure you can play all the games? Or maybe you could just be satisfied playing a subset of all the games in existence.
Slashdot Mirror
Meanwhile, Linux keeps on getting faster and faster. I'm running Mandriva 2008, with Compiz Fusion on a Celeron 1.5 GHz, 512 MB RAM, Intel GMA, and it's faster than Vista without Aero. It's also faster than XP. I think that Linux will really take off if MS can't make their next OS consume less resources. When the choice for the average consumer becomes, spend $50 on a Linux computer, or spend $800 on a Windows computer, I think that most people will begin to switch. If things keep going the way they are, this is how the situation will become.
And if people had written their applications with proper database abstraction layers, moving from one database to another wouldn't be all that difficult. The fact is that a lot of programmers did a really bad job when they designed their applications, and now they want MS to fix some ancient technology, just so they never have to upgrade their systems.
I want to see pictures of the captured rainbow.
The typo was intentional, just to show how stupid and how not-well-thought-out their name was. Also, thank you for that info. I think it's to do with some bug in their site, as I'm pretty sure that they are supposed to not be shown the answers. Maybe they designed it that way to get around Google, but make most people visiting the site think they had to sign up to see the answers.
For expert sexchange, use the cached google page. I haven't found a case yet where the answers weren't shown in the cache.
I live in Canada, and see a lot of the same. In my neighbourhood, there is a lot of kids, and a lot of families. I know this because I see them in the elevator, and on the bus. However we have an 18 month old that we take to the park quite a bit, at least every other day, and are surprised how few kids are at the park. Once in a while we'll see one or two other kids at the park, but many days we go there, and there's absolutely no one. I'm not sure what all these kids are doing, whether they are staying inside all day or what, but I feel sorry for the kids, because they must have really boring lives.
It's the law now in Ontario that kids have to wear helmets on their bikes. Although I'm not sure if any kid or their parents have ever been charged under this law. Once you're 16, you don't have to wear a helmet, they figure you can make up your own mind. Although I grew up in the times of no helmets, and still can't believe that skiers other than olympic racers wear helmets, I think that helmets on bikes isn't that bad of an idea. They aren't uncomfortable, and don't really impede your riding ability or field of vision at all. I knew kids who used to play war with pellet guns. Just because kids used to do stupid things, doesn't mean we should keep on letting kids do stupid things. The real problem wasn't that the kid had to wear a helmet, but that he was too self conscious to ride his bike 3 blocks with the helmet.
I think stuff like this is important for kids. And adults too. In my first week of college, we had initiation. The upper class men made us crawl around in the mud, and poured all type of food all over us. I was kept pretty safe, and completely voluntary. At one point I got up to walk around because my knee started to gimp out, from crawling around for so long, after I explained that they were cool with it. They were also prepared with plenty of water to wash your eyes out in case you got something like mustard in them. They didn't want to hurt anybody, they just wanted to have fun, and make sure that we were doing the same. Despite the fact that this wouldn't sound like fun to most people, once you got into it, and finished the day, you got a bunch of free beer, and had a sense of accomplishment. If you can survive that, then the quickly advancing deadlines of assignments and tests don't seem all that bad. However, I think that with the way things are going, they won't have stuff like this around much longer. Or maybe people will completely turn around, and realize how wussie we are all becoming, and start to let people do as they choose.
Exactly. Buying for a copy of windows doesn't entitle you to any kind of support. Here's the kind of support that microsoft makes available. After that, you're left scrounging newsgroups, websites, or paying through the nose.
No, volts is just the speed of the current, what you're really looking for is amperes. You can have a 10,000 volt current and it won't kill you if there is no amperage.
Yes, it would suck, because we all know that standard hard drives with spinning platters, and magnetic read/write heads, almost never break down. :)
My point is, is that if solid state drives had better known failure times, they could be better than the spinning platter types. Spinning platter drives tend to die whenever, for unknown reasons, and they also die if they just get too old. If using solid state drives could solve the first problem, and only have drives die at a known point in the future, when they get too old, then it would probably work out better for most people. If the drive has a lifetime of 5 years, but you know with 99.99% certainty that it won't start to die before that, you can plan to replace it. However, with the spinning platter hard drives, we know they are probably going to die in 5 years, but also that they could die at any point, for no reason at all.
A lot of churches I've seen give you a really hard time if you don't put something in the donation basket. Remember on the Simpsons when Reverend Lovejoy was reminding them that "it's 10% off the top, that's gross, not net". That's the way a lot of churches are getting. From what I hear from my Hindu friends, the people aren't allowed to pray and speak to the gods. You can get a priest to pray for you, but that costs money. Also, most of the museums are funded through tax dollars, which is where the majority of their money comes from. Donation boxes are just to make people feel good.
And the difference between you quitting your job, and someone deciding not to pay for an album, is that your boss now loses your services, whereas people will still download the music for free, and won't lose anything.
I that that whar Radiohead did was a good idea, but I'm just playing devil's advocate. There are some downsides to this model. If people only pay what they have to, then a lot of people will pay nothing. This model only works because the people who pay nothing, impose no cost on the artist. If they were just taking physical products for free, then the artist would lose a lot of money.
But couldn't you theoretically make more money by offering a product to people (a virtual one at that, esp. in the case of downloaded files) to pay whatever we want. If you contrast this with iTunes, I will only buy the albums that I think are worth $10, or the songs that I think are worth $1. If I was presented with the Radiohead model, I could buy more music, because I could choose to pay what I felt was appropriate for what I'm getting. If I feel your album is only worth $3, and I'm allowed to pay $3, then you get $3. If I feel that your album is only worth $3, and my only choices are buy it for $10, or not buy it, then you get $0.
I think the Radiohead thing is just an interesting experiment to find out what people really do want to pay. People have never had a choice before. The album is released, and the people who buy it only have 2 choices. Buy at the price they are selling it at, or don't buy it. This is like taking a poll and asking people what a downloaded album is really worth. Then there's the Saul Williams album, where he said, pay $5 or $0, it's your choice. $5 is a much more reasonable price to ask for a downloaded album, where there is no physical product, and no distribution chain.
How you do combine social liberalism, such as universal health care, a good welfare program, and other socialist ideas with low taxes?
No, these dinosaurs are more evolved, so I think we should say ancestors.
Correction: I was going to get the torrent so as not to waste *THEIR* bandwidth.
I was going to just go the torrent direction so as not to waste my bandwidth, but because of my slow and highly one way connection (14 KB/s Up, 120 KB/s down) i usually don't get good download rates on torrents, and in this case, it was slow to download, and the only one I could find was the 320 kbps mp3 version. Anyway, I think they changed things, because, at least on the free version I got to download it right away. I was also sent a link where presumably I could download it again, although I haven't tried the link. They probably got too many people not getting the email, and just decided to have it download right away.
Another album with a similar selling model is the new Saul Williams album. You can download it for free, or choose to pay $5. I downloaded it for free because there was no sample. I'm trying to figure out if I'm going to buy it. I'm not a big fan of hip hop, but I do like the music, and will probably end up sending the $5. Anyway, the album was produced by Trent Reznor. So not only is he doing great things with changing the business model for his own music, he's helping other artists do the same.
If you are really interested in encoding video, I would think that you would have a specialized chip. My TV Tuner has a specialized chip for encoding mpeg 2, which means it can encode 12 mbit/s mpeg2 without putting any noticeable load on my processor. I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to build a chip specifically to encode video into MPEG 4.
The following link defines how to make an encrypted swap on Mandriva
Since MS does a complete redesign every time they release a product, isn't every MS product a 1.0 product? Not until they start releasing service packs could the product be considered not 1.0.
I recently got an iPod Nano Video. All the shows I've taped with SageTV get converted using a special conversion profile I've set up which basically amounts to 320x240 MPEG4 with 128 kBit/s AAC sound. You can get an hour of TV in 140 Megs. This means I can keep a lot of shows on my tiny 4 GB Nano. The screen doesn't support higher resolutions anyway, so no point taking up space for it.
How would a computer run games that aren't available for the PC? Would you have to buy a PS3, Wii, XBox360, DS, PSP and a computer just to make sure you can play all the games? Or maybe you could just be satisfied playing a subset of all the games in existence.
That's how I do it too. My second computer is a Wii. Quite cheap.