Well, their diameter is approx. 4.7 in, pi*r^2 makes their top area approx. 17.34 in, * their height of 1/16 in = approx 1.08 in^3.
And the method of holding them to take up the least amount of volume would be simply to stack them one on top of the other, for approx 1087390.5 in^3, or 627.19 ft^3.
For comparison, if one were to put them in stacks of (random) 1600 and box them in rows and columns of said stacks, each column would be 8 and 1/3 feet tall, and there would be 625 of them. In a grid arrangement, 25x25, this would take up approximately 1380625 in^3, 798.97 ft^3.
I'm sure one could be more efficent and work the grid out hexagonally, right? As it turns out, yes. An equilateral hexagonal pyramid containing and bounding a standard CD is approximately 1.1956 in^3 (you can check my math if you want), times the million = 1195656.1 in^3, or 691.93 ft^3. Not quite as good as one huge stack of them, but damn close, and a lot better than a horizontal/vertical grid.
Well, such a calculation is difficult to make without making some assumptions, but here's a try....let's see here.
They intend to bring 1,000,000 (1x10^6) AOL CDs from El Cerrito, CA, to AOL Corporate HQ in Dulles, Virginia. While the exact location in either city can not be determined, we'll do our best with just the cities. There are 2 El Cerritos in CA, one in Contra Costa County, one in Riverside County. We'll use the one in Contra Costa, just for fun.
That's a distance of 2790.02 miles. Now, each AOL CD has a maximum data capacity of approximately 650 MB. Even if the CD is not "full", the whole CD is still being transferred and thus the whole data capacity counts.
So, 650 MB X 1x10^6 = 6.5x10^8 MB. Let's do this in the standard kilobits/sec that most ISPs measure their bandwidth in, so 6.5x10^8 x 1024 to get KB, then x 8 to get Kb. 5.3248 x 10^12 Kb are being transferred.
Now, I live in Northern California, where freeway speeds usually run about 85 mph, but for the sake of national averages, let's say they make an average of 65 mph. 65 mph over their 2790.02 mile trip is 42.92 hours.
Dividing the total Kb by the hours, we get 1.2406 x 10^11 (rounded) Kb/hr. Divided by 60 minutes per hour, that's 2.0677 x 10^9 Kb/minute, once more for the seconds/minute, and we get 3.4462 x 10^7 Kb/sec.
That's approximately 23,000 times as fast as my 1.5/384 DSL connection.
Ahh, I see. So, instead of releasing Unreal Tournament 2003 for Linux themselves, Epic should just release the entire spec for their rendering and physics engines, and if someone wants to run it on Linux, they can just imp it themselves?
That is not a valid line of reasoning. I'd say the majority of software in the business and consumer world is sold as closed source software, but I don't remember the last time someone called John Carmack evil or domineering because he didn't bundle Quake 3's source with the CD when you paid $50 for it.
Two points.
First, this is a company out for a profit, which means they can't give their dev teams' work away for free.
Second, releasing a security method open-source is the quickest way to get it cracked. Look at HDCP, for example. It hasn't even been deployed yet, but it's already been cracked, because the specification for it was released on the web.
I really don't understand the linux mentality at this point. "Microsoft ignores us." Ok, here's Passport for Linux. "Bah I don't want your version, I want to make my own. Give me your code!"
Microsoft is not GNU/GPL licensed software. They don't operate in that mindset, and expecting them to is setting yourself up for disappointment.
Could anyone explain what they really realistically want from Microsoft?
I know it goes against the flow here to defend Microsoft, but isn't it possible that there are valid reasons for most, if not all, of Microsoft's actions in this case?
For instance, what if the protocols in question include the DRM protocols for Windows Media Player? Said DRM protocols would almost have to be negotiated or licensed from a Content Management company, and that would cost money from Microsoft. In addition, the CM company might have required MS to agree to an NDA for the protection of the encryption/DRM scheme.
In that case, just as a for example, wouldn't it be prudent of MS to require an NDA to view its protocols? While that's not quite the same as an NDA to view the cost of the protocols, it is still a valid point.
Also, as Microsoft would then have had to pay licensing fees (and additional license fees for every copy of the DRM that is bought from them) doesn't it make sense for them to attempt to recoup these losses by passing that cost along to the licensees?
I'm not saying that is what happened, but automatically assuming it's MS's evil doings is jumping to conclusions, isn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, their diameter is approx. 4.7 in, pi*r^2 makes their top area approx. 17.34 in, * their height of 1/16 in = approx 1.08 in^3.
And the method of holding them to take up the least amount of volume would be simply to stack them one on top of the other, for approx 1087390.5 in^3, or 627.19 ft^3.
For comparison, if one were to put them in stacks of (random) 1600 and box them in rows and columns of said stacks, each column would be 8 and 1/3 feet tall, and there would be 625 of them. In a grid arrangement, 25x25, this would take up approximately 1380625 in^3, 798.97 ft^3.
I'm sure one could be more efficent and work the grid out hexagonally, right? As it turns out, yes. An equilateral hexagonal pyramid containing and bounding a standard CD is approximately 1.1956 in^3 (you can check my math if you want), times the million = 1195656.1 in^3, or 691.93 ft^3. Not quite as good as one huge stack of them, but damn close, and a lot better than a horizontal/vertical grid.
And yes, I seem to be happy to do math.
Well, such a calculation is difficult to make without making some assumptions, but here's a try....let's see here.
They intend to bring 1,000,000 (1x10^6) AOL CDs from El Cerrito, CA, to AOL Corporate HQ in Dulles, Virginia. While the exact location in either city can not be determined, we'll do our best with just the cities. There are 2 El Cerritos in CA, one in Contra Costa County, one in Riverside County. We'll use the one in Contra Costa, just for fun.
That's a distance of 2790.02 miles. Now, each AOL CD has a maximum data capacity of approximately 650 MB. Even if the CD is not "full", the whole CD is still being transferred and thus the whole data capacity counts.
So, 650 MB X 1x10^6 = 6.5x10^8 MB. Let's do this in the standard kilobits/sec that most ISPs measure their bandwidth in, so 6.5x10^8 x 1024 to get KB, then x 8 to get Kb. 5.3248 x 10^12 Kb are being transferred.
Now, I live in Northern California, where freeway speeds usually run about 85 mph, but for the sake of national averages, let's say they make an average of 65 mph. 65 mph over their 2790.02 mile trip is 42.92 hours.
Dividing the total Kb by the hours, we get 1.2406 x 10^11 (rounded) Kb/hr. Divided by 60 minutes per hour, that's 2.0677 x 10^9 Kb/minute, once more for the seconds/minute, and we get 3.4462 x 10^7 Kb/sec.
That's approximately 23,000 times as fast as my 1.5/384 DSL connection.
Ahh, I see. So, instead of releasing Unreal Tournament 2003 for Linux themselves, Epic should just release the entire spec for their rendering and physics engines, and if someone wants to run it on Linux, they can just imp it themselves?
That is not a valid line of reasoning. I'd say the majority of software in the business and consumer world is sold as closed source software, but I don't remember the last time someone called John Carmack evil or domineering because he didn't bundle Quake 3's source with the CD when you paid $50 for it.
Two points.
First, this is a company out for a profit, which means they can't give their dev teams' work away for free.
Second, releasing a security method open-source is the quickest way to get it cracked. Look at HDCP, for example. It hasn't even been deployed yet, but it's already been cracked, because the specification for it was released on the web.
I really don't understand the linux mentality at this point. "Microsoft ignores us." Ok, here's Passport for Linux. "Bah I don't want your version, I want to make my own. Give me your code!"
Microsoft is not GNU/GPL licensed software. They don't operate in that mindset, and expecting them to is setting yourself up for disappointment.
Could anyone explain what they really realistically want from Microsoft?
I know it goes against the flow here to defend Microsoft, but isn't it possible that there are valid reasons for most, if not all, of Microsoft's actions in this case?
For instance, what if the protocols in question include the DRM protocols for Windows Media Player? Said DRM protocols would almost have to be negotiated or licensed from a Content Management company, and that would cost money from Microsoft. In addition, the CM company might have required MS to agree to an NDA for the protection of the encryption/DRM scheme.
In that case, just as a for example, wouldn't it be prudent of MS to require an NDA to view its protocols? While that's not quite the same as an NDA to view the cost of the protocols, it is still a valid point.
Also, as Microsoft would then have had to pay licensing fees (and additional license fees for every copy of the DRM that is bought from them) doesn't it make sense for them to attempt to recoup these losses by passing that cost along to the licensees? I'm not saying that is what happened, but automatically assuming it's MS's evil doings is jumping to conclusions, isn't it?