You have a point about the number of buyers. At the same time, Apple increased revenue from its stores 50% over last quarter. (I don't think there were any new store openings, so it's sales increase.) They cut their loss from $3 million to $1 million, as I remember, so it sounds like they're trending towards profitability, unlike Gateway.
They announced it today evidently, even lower under the radar than the Apple X11 release:
http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/index.html
I'm downloading it now at a pitifully slow 12KB.sec.
It appears that in the US we basically have two Bluetooth phone choices: the T68i and the 6310i.
I read a bunch of user reviews before buying a new phone a couple of days ago, and the T68i was widely panned for its poor physical design and shoddy workmanship while the 6310i was praised for physical design and quality of workmanship.
So it seems to me that unless you simply can't access the Nokia's address book via Bluetooth, Apple had better get off of their high horse and support the 6310i. If Apple insists on doing it the Pure Way (SyncML only), even if that means the only viable choice of cellphone is less-than-Mac-quality, they're returning to old ways that will throw water on their natural advocates and consumers.
Actually, Mr. Bigot, I've heard that Mac's are over-represented in programming circles, as compared to Apple's overall market share. Makes sense since most PCs are bought to run games. And there's just something about a Titanium Powerbook running UNIX and also running productivity apps and games and also being having innovative combinations of technology such as Rendezvous+Airport+iChat, which geeks love.
Oh yeah, MacOS X also ships with a free CD containing full developer tools including a visual development environment, multiple scripting languages (perl, ruby, Applescript), C, C++, Objective-C, etc. And MacOS X is largely open sourced via Darwin. Sounds like a better programming environment than your average PC.
"Darwin is not free software, because the APSL is not consistent with the free software definition. For more information, check GNU Project. "
Shouldn't this be "not consistent with the GNU Free Software (tm) definition"? Obviously GNU has somehow once and for all defined the One True Free Software (tm) and no doubt has a copyright on the phrase Open Source (tm), etc. Or maybe it's Free (tm) Software (tm)?
In my pocket all the time. Of the 4 Basics, I use:
***** Calendar. I live by it. If it doesn't beep at me, I don't make the meeting.
***** Address Book. If you're not in there, I'm probably not calling you.
*** Memo. Some facts I live by are in there, but I don't access them that often. So it's an average of 1 star and 5 stars.
* To Do List. I really need a 2-dimensional list. Hard to organize.
** Note Pad (Sketch program). Useful, but not critical.
Beyond that, I have an astronomy program, games, the Bible, and Documents to Go. (DtG lets me carry my budget spreadsheets with me for reference, etc.)
The mistakes database site doesn't list it, but the ring keeps jumping on and off its chain in the final scenes. As I remember, it switched about four times in the scenes where Borimor confronts him through where Aragorn refuses to take the ring.
that the theater release was butchered. No, I don't mean it didn't match the book in every detail, I mean it was just plain butchered in totally obvious and annoying ways.
I loved the characters, the look and the feel of the world. But it was choopy in two ways: 1) locally with bad edits, and 2) globally with parts of the story that were obviously filmed then cut out.
I can't remember specific examples of #1 right now, but I remember scenes in which people stood up, there was a cut, and suddenly they were halfway across a room.
The example of #2 that stands out is when Gimli is entering the forest and talking about the witch that lives there and bragging how she'll never enchant him. This is the setup for the punchline where he actually falls in (courtly) love with her and adopts her as his Lady. But the punchline was cut, leaving the setup hanging.
(The setup scene couldn't be cut because it ended with him turning and seeing the arrows of the elves pointing at him and you couldn't cut that out.)
The first time I saw it, I speculated that they'd cut a half hour of stuff out for the theater and it turns out I was prescient. It just felt like they got the the elven woods and realized they were making a movie that was too long and then turned around and started hacking.
One thing that I imagine isn't fixed is the lame ending. Talk about a confusing letdown! It should've been a cliffhanger: the men run back to the camp and the hobbits and a boat are gone. As they look around and decide what to do, the audience sees the orcs in the distance with two hobbits over their shoulders but we can't tell which two. Then we see the empty boat drifting down the river. THE END.
Obviously, it's not a true cliffhanger in the sense that people either don't know or couldn't find out what happens next, but it'd have left with people saying "AWWWWW" in an excited, "you can't do this to me" tone instead of the "HUH?" that I heard and felt.
That's like saying, "Nikon lenses do not compare to Kodak lenses. (Glass lenses do not count.)" In many ways, Photoshop is artistic manipulation defined.
If you have a Nikon or Canon system, you can get top-shelf digital quality now for about $2,000, and if you wait for the 11 MP systems you'll get better-than-medium-format quality for around $4,000. No need to spend anything like $10,000. (Though maybe your "0" finger just got a little too happy while you were typing.)
You're talking about "consumer" digital cameras, then mention things like multiple frames per second, color reproduction, SLR, and non-fixed lenses. Definitely not features the average consumer looks for. (You know, the ones who judge a camera by how small and convenient it is, develop their film at K-Mart, etc.)
So, the vast majority of consumers would benefit from a digital camera, which is far cheaper and more convenient in the long run, with equivalent quality for the sizes of prints they require.
Pros and avid (rabid?) hobbyists are switching in droves, too. It's like digital musical chairs, and the only people left standing are those who can't afford the $2,000 for a D100/D60 (Nikon/Canon) and especially those who don't already have a Nikon/Canon SLR (hence lenses).
The $2,000 Nikon D100 (6 MP SLR) started shipping a few months ago. Kodak just announced a 11 MP SLR (Nikon lens mount!) for $4,000. Prices will continue to drop and you'll probably be getting $1,000 6 MP SLRs within a year.
A complete BLAS implementation ships with Mac OS X 10.2. The Basic Linear Algebra Subroutines (BLAS) are high quality leaf routines for performing basic vector and matrix operations.
The LAPACK library ships with Mac OS X 10.2. LAPACK provides routines for solving systems of simultaneous linear equations, least-squares solutions of linear systems of equations, eigenvalue problems, and singular value problems.
The libm library is now standard compliant. The new math library in jaguar is now IEEE-754 and C99 compliant in double precision. In addition, the new libm is faster than MathLib found in Mac OS 9 and faster than libm in Mac OS 10.1.x.
The Ruby scripting language is now installed with Mac OS X
Python 2.1.1 is now installed with Mac OS X
The tool "automake" is now installed with Mac OS X
The curses library has been updated to the newer ANSI compliant ncurses library, which supports color and other advanced text attributes as well as offering greatly increased compatibility with applications which rely on having a standards-compliant curses library.
Not bad, eh?
Tanks are too heavy, so...
on
Electric Armor
·
· Score: 1
The point of the new armor is to dramatically decrease the enormous bulk of physical armor. Main battle tanks are very heavy now, and top-down missles will require even more armor. Eventually, you end up with tanks too heavy to transport, too heavy to drive across bridges or in swampy terrain, and too heavy to keep supplied with fuel.
I don't believe that the charge is that the FBI falsified information. Rather that the FBI included information that was false, which can be due to errors as well as malfeasance. Further, the article states that requests have to be renewed 4 times a year, so these "more than 75 cases" could boil down to as few as 10 cases that had original errors two years ago and were routinely resubmitted for reapproval.
The Moussaui case illustrates the "timid bureaucracy" rather well. They didn't search a non-US-citizen's computer because they didn't get permission, which they didn't seek because they weren't sure it was a slam dunk.
The bad cases could have easily been mistakes, incompetence, or even cowboy agents who lied to their own bosses in order to get the wiretaps they felt they needed. Could also be massive conspiracies by the ruling elites in conjunction with the Trilateral commission and the Grays, but just remember that there are other less sinister possibilities too.
Umm, you'd rather that they just wiretapped without having to get authorization?
Think about the example given in the article: a foreign national is arrested on immigration charges and suspicions of terrorism, but the FBI has to get a court order to search his laptop. That's pretty God-bless-American civil liberties in my book.
we *ARE* talking about wiretaps on U.S. citizens and on U.S. soil.
To avoid ambiguity here, we're talking about wiretaps on US citizens or on US soil, not and. Mussoui is a French citizen, not US and he's specifically named as an example in the article.
I'd be more comfortable with the restrictions -- national-security-wise speaking -- if it were an AND. As it stands, it's incredibly restrictive and I wonder if any other country in the world has such restrictions.
I predict the wormhole concept will be achievable. But there will be one hitch: you will only be able to travel through a wormhole in one direction, and the physical distance you emerge from the wormhole entrance will be equal to or greater than the time it takes to travel at the speed of light to that location.
Thus, you will be able to go back in time, but even if you then raced at the speed of light back home, you wouldn't be able to arrive before you departed.
So you'd travel back in time sure enough, but never able to affect your own past. Another way to phrase it would be: you can go back in time, but only someone else's history.
Of course, you could, say, still go back in time and kill someone in another part of the Galaxy. Maybe terrorist possibilities, etc. Gives a whole new meaning to a leader staying close to his people.
OK, one more speculation. Wormholes will turn out to repel each other, or maybe wormhole exits and entrances that are close to one another create catastrophic feedback loops, making them impossible.
Otherwise, you could take the W-80 (Milky Way --> Andromeda) from near Sol, then catch the W-95 (Andromeda--> Millky Way) near Kl'Kithus, which , it turns out, dumps you right out at Sol again.
And that would make your own past accessible and that's Bad (tm). I guess it could also allow you to go farther and farther into the past by traversing the loop multiple times.
Of course, it's not clear why someone would want to travel to a time before indoor plumbing or computer games.
Slashdot Mirror
s/Lousy Security/Lousy Interface + Lousy Security/
You have a point about the number of buyers. At the same time, Apple increased revenue from its stores 50% over last quarter. (I don't think there were any new store openings, so it's sales increase.) They cut their loss from $3 million to $1 million, as I remember, so it sounds like they're trending towards profitability, unlike Gateway.
They announced it today evidently, even lower under the radar than the Apple X11 release: http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/index.html I'm downloading it now at a pitifully slow 12KB.sec.
It appears that in the US we basically have two Bluetooth phone choices: the T68i and the 6310i.
I read a bunch of user reviews before buying a new phone a couple of days ago, and the T68i was widely panned for its poor physical design and shoddy workmanship while the 6310i was praised for physical design and quality of workmanship.
So it seems to me that unless you simply can't access the Nokia's address book via Bluetooth, Apple had better get off of their high horse and support the 6310i. If Apple insists on doing it the Pure Way (SyncML only), even if that means the only viable choice of cellphone is less-than-Mac-quality, they're returning to old ways that will throw water on their natural advocates and consumers.
Actually, Mr. Bigot, I've heard that Mac's are over-represented in programming circles, as compared to Apple's overall market share. Makes sense since most PCs are bought to run games. And there's just something about a Titanium Powerbook running UNIX and also running productivity apps and games and also being having innovative combinations of technology such as Rendezvous+Airport+iChat, which geeks love.
Oh yeah, MacOS X also ships with a free CD containing full developer tools including a visual development environment, multiple scripting languages (perl, ruby, Applescript), C, C++, Objective-C, etc. And MacOS X is largely open sourced via Darwin. Sounds like a better programming environment than your average PC.
"Darwin is not free software, because the APSL is not consistent with the free software definition. For more information, check GNU Project. "
Shouldn't this be "not consistent with the GNU Free Software (tm) definition"? Obviously GNU has somehow once and for all defined the One True Free Software (tm) and no doubt has a copyright on the phrase Open Source (tm), etc. Or maybe it's Free (tm) Software (tm)?
In my pocket all the time. Of the 4 Basics, I use:
***** Calendar. I live by it. If it doesn't beep at me, I don't make the meeting.
***** Address Book. If you're not in there, I'm probably not calling you.
*** Memo. Some facts I live by are in there, but I don't access them that often. So it's an average of 1 star and 5 stars.
* To Do List. I really need a 2-dimensional list. Hard to organize.
** Note Pad (Sketch program). Useful, but not critical.
Beyond that, I have an astronomy program, games, the Bible, and Documents to Go. (DtG lets me carry my budget spreadsheets with me for reference, etc.)
The mistakes database site doesn't list it, but the ring keeps jumping on and off its chain in the final scenes. As I remember, it switched about four times in the scenes where Borimor confronts him through where Aragorn refuses to take the ring.
that the theater release was butchered. No, I don't mean it didn't match the book in every detail, I mean it was just plain butchered in totally obvious and annoying ways.
I loved the characters, the look and the feel of the world. But it was choopy in two ways: 1) locally with bad edits, and 2) globally with parts of the story that were obviously filmed then cut out.
I can't remember specific examples of #1 right now, but I remember scenes in which people stood up, there was a cut, and suddenly they were halfway across a room.
The example of #2 that stands out is when Gimli is entering the forest and talking about the witch that lives there and bragging how she'll never enchant him. This is the setup for the punchline where he actually falls in (courtly) love with her and adopts her as his Lady. But the punchline was cut, leaving the setup hanging.
(The setup scene couldn't be cut because it ended with him turning and seeing the arrows of the elves pointing at him and you couldn't cut that out.)
The first time I saw it, I speculated that they'd cut a half hour of stuff out for the theater and it turns out I was prescient. It just felt like they got the the elven woods and realized they were making a movie that was too long and then turned around and started hacking.
One thing that I imagine isn't fixed is the lame ending. Talk about a confusing letdown! It should've been a cliffhanger: the men run back to the camp and the hobbits and a boat are gone. As they look around and decide what to do, the audience sees the orcs in the distance with two hobbits over their shoulders but we can't tell which two. Then we see the empty boat drifting down the river. THE END.
Obviously, it's not a true cliffhanger in the sense that people either don't know or couldn't find out what happens next, but it'd have left with people saying "AWWWWW" in an excited, "you can't do this to me" tone instead of the "HUH?" that I heard and felt.
No benefit. We're billed for airtime, which includes incoming and outgoing calls.
I'm satisfied with Nikon's Large, Fine JPEGs, so fit 318 on my IBM microdrive CF, which costs about $300.
The 1.5x factor for your film lenses is because the CCD is smaller than film, so you are cropping the image. This has three advantages for sports:
1. Instant 1.5x tele-extender.
2. The 1.5x maintains the same aperature, as opposed to the usual 1 stop loss.
3. The crop lets you use a lens a little wider than you normally would, because image-quality falloff at the very edges is cropped out.
Photoshop does not count
That's like saying, "Nikon lenses do not compare to Kodak lenses. (Glass lenses do not count.)" In many ways, Photoshop is artistic manipulation defined.
If you have a Nikon or Canon system, you can get top-shelf digital quality now for about $2,000, and if you wait for the 11 MP systems you'll get better-than-medium-format quality for around $4,000. No need to spend anything like $10,000. (Though maybe your "0" finger just got a little too happy while you were typing.)
You're talking about "consumer" digital cameras, then mention things like multiple frames per second, color reproduction, SLR, and non-fixed lenses. Definitely not features the average consumer looks for. (You know, the ones who judge a camera by how small and convenient it is, develop their film at K-Mart, etc.)
So, the vast majority of consumers would benefit from a digital camera, which is far cheaper and more convenient in the long run, with equivalent quality for the sizes of prints they require.
Pros and avid (rabid?) hobbyists are switching in droves, too. It's like digital musical chairs, and the only people left standing are those who can't afford the $2,000 for a D100/D60 (Nikon/Canon) and especially those who don't already have a Nikon/Canon SLR (hence lenses).
The $2,000 Nikon D100 (6 MP SLR) started shipping a few months ago. Kodak just announced a 11 MP SLR (Nikon lens mount!) for $4,000. Prices will continue to drop and you'll probably be getting $1,000 6 MP SLRs within a year.
"roughly the same way", "roughly comparable sets of applications".
A Ford Explorer operates roughly in the same way a Porsche dual turbo does, and it has a roughly comparable set of features. Emphasis on "roughly".
- The Ruby scripting language is now installed with Mac OS X
- Python 2.1.1 is now installed with Mac OS X
- The tool "automake" is now installed with Mac OS X
- The curses library has been updated to the newer ANSI compliant ncurses library, which supports color and other advanced text attributes as well as offering greatly increased compatibility with applications which rely on having a standards-compliant curses library.
Not bad, eh?The point of the new armor is to dramatically decrease the enormous bulk of physical armor. Main battle tanks are very heavy now, and top-down missles will require even more armor. Eventually, you end up with tanks too heavy to transport, too heavy to drive across bridges or in swampy terrain, and too heavy to keep supplied with fuel.
I don't believe that the charge is that the FBI falsified information. Rather that the FBI included information that was false, which can be due to errors as well as malfeasance. Further, the article states that requests have to be renewed 4 times a year, so these "more than 75 cases" could boil down to as few as 10 cases that had original errors two years ago and were routinely resubmitted for reapproval.
The Moussaui case illustrates the "timid bureaucracy" rather well. They didn't search a non-US-citizen's computer because they didn't get permission, which they didn't seek because they weren't sure it was a slam dunk.
The bad cases could have easily been mistakes, incompetence, or even cowboy agents who lied to their own bosses in order to get the wiretaps they felt they needed. Could also be massive conspiracies by the ruling elites in conjunction with the Trilateral commission and the Grays, but just remember that there are other less sinister possibilities too.
Umm, you'd rather that they just wiretapped without having to get authorization?
Think about the example given in the article: a foreign national is arrested on immigration charges and suspicions of terrorism, but the FBI has to get a court order to search his laptop. That's pretty God-bless-American civil liberties in my book.
we *ARE* talking about wiretaps on U.S. citizens and on U.S. soil.
To avoid ambiguity here, we're talking about wiretaps on US citizens or on US soil, not and. Mussoui is a French citizen, not US and he's specifically named as an example in the article.
I'd be more comfortable with the restrictions -- national-security-wise speaking -- if it were an AND. As it stands, it's incredibly restrictive and I wonder if any other country in the world has such restrictions.
I predict the wormhole concept will be achievable. But there will be one hitch: you will only be able to travel through a wormhole in one direction, and the physical distance you emerge from the wormhole entrance will be equal to or greater than the time it takes to travel at the speed of light to that location.
Thus, you will be able to go back in time, but even if you then raced at the speed of light back home, you wouldn't be able to arrive before you departed.
So you'd travel back in time sure enough, but never able to affect your own past. Another way to phrase it would be: you can go back in time, but only someone else's history.
Of course, you could, say, still go back in time and kill someone in another part of the Galaxy. Maybe terrorist possibilities, etc. Gives a whole new meaning to a leader staying close to his people.
OK, one more speculation. Wormholes will turn out to repel each other, or maybe wormhole exits and entrances that are close to one another create catastrophic feedback loops, making them impossible.
Otherwise, you could take the W-80 (Milky Way --> Andromeda) from near Sol, then catch the W-95 (Andromeda--> Millky Way) near Kl'Kithus, which , it turns out, dumps you right out at Sol again.
And that would make your own past accessible and that's Bad (tm). I guess it could also allow you to go farther and farther into the past by traversing the loop multiple times.
Of course, it's not clear why someone would want to travel to a time before indoor plumbing or computer games.