"NT 3.51 was a very unrewarding release," Thompson said, contrasting it with Daytona. "After Daytona was completed, we basically sat around for 9 months fixing bugs while we waited for IBM to finish the Power PC hardware. But because of this, NT 3.51 was a solid release, and our customers loved it."
Does that mean they only solve bugs when there's nothing else to do?
Re:Why so many different standards?
on
Cashless Society
·
· Score: 1
I received mine years ago, and I have *never* used it for anything (I haven't even put any money on it).
I had one (the Belgian variant, that is) some years ago, and I did put some money on it (mainly to use in public payphones - didn't have a mobile phone back then). It was a major pain in the ass when it came switch to another bank and try to cancel the accounts at my old bank: there was some money left on the card, and the bank couldn't get it off and hand it over to me.
Because of that experience and because I just don't have any use for the card, I never put any money on my new card. And I'm not planning to do it anywhere in the future.
In France the keyboars are azerty, where the 'm' is closer to the 'o'. The 'o' occupies the same position as on qwerty, the 'm' is to the right of the 'l' (where ':' and ';' are on qwerty).
Allthough he's not normally annoyed by fan noise, the noise of the NV30 bothered even him, he said. Somewhere at the end of the article I think, but I'm too lazy to look it up.
Yes, but the Non Commercial Edition for Windows is still at 2.3 while other versions are at 3.0, and Trolltech doesn't seem to have animo to upgrade the Non Commercial Edition.
Nupedia is also o free collaborative encyclopedia, but uses rigourous peer review. Comparing Wikipedia and Nupedia, one can see that Wikipedia has articles on much more topics, while the quality is certainly comparable.
AZERTY is used in France and Belgium; in France and the soutern part of Belgium it's used with French, in the northern part of Belgium it's used with Dutch.
The stupid thing is, there is even a difference between French azerty and Belgian azerty. All the letters are in the same place, but there are difference with regards to other characters like the backslash.
BTW, not everyone uses azerty around here. Some folks, especially programmer types, use qwerty.
All of my education took place in Europe, Belgium. This (a) explains why my English isn't as good as yours and (b) makes it difficult to compare education levels
My diploma says I'm a bio-engineer in environmental technology (first cycle,
second cycle), which is something that doesn't exist in the USA, I think. It is a 5-year study, comparable to M.Sc. level. Basics of physics (and chemistry, mathematics and other sciences) are studied, but of course not on the same level as a M.Sc. in Physics.
We did study the differences between real vs. fictitious forces, IIRC in the very beginning of our physics course.
Full name of the faculty is Faculty of Agricultural and Applied Biological Sciences. In accordance with the name, most attention is given to the applied aspect of physics and other sciences. I guess that's why we studied the differences between inertial and non-inertial systems, and we studied how to deal with both, but not that we should limit ourselves to classical mechanics and inertial coordinate systems when non-intertial are more appropriate for the task at hand: "use the right tool for the job"
Perhaps a shortcoming of our education is that little attention is given to demarcation of different scientific theories. At one time, while studying, I bought an introduction to quantum mechanics, because I found it was a severe hiatus in our study. As it turned out, the only hiatus was that the name 'quantum mechanics' was never mentioned; most of the concepts were covered in our study.
Seems to be a case of different definitions. If we're restricting ourself to non-accelerating coordinate systems, you're right of course that centrifugal force is not real. My textbooks never made the distinction between real and fictitious forces as explicit and dependent upon the kind of coordinate system as your citation; they were much more pragmatic: choose the coordinate system that's best suited to the problem at hand.
Still, your claim (as I read it) that the word 'centrifugal' in the text of the law should be simply substituted with 'centripetal' is not correct. The blade doesn't open because of the centripetal force; it opens because it would need a centripetal force to stay closed, and there is no centripetal force, or it is not big enough.
Also, you say "We're talking classical mechanics here *not* relativistic mechanics." Does the law specify that?
I have no access to these books, but rest assured that I have a good understanding of these concepts. And remember that all of this very much dependent on the choice of reference frame, and that -- according to principles of relativity -- it is impossible for an observer in any reference frame to detect whether a particular force is a "real" or a "pseudo" force.
I think "pseudo"-force is not the right word to describe centrifugal force. (it just depends on your reference system: for a reference system fixed to the handle of the knife, the centrifugal force is a very real force).
Pseudo or not, it is still a force. I don't think the law should be changed, and I don't think your interpretation is correct.
You are right of course that centrifugal and centripetal are opposites, but I disagree that the law had really meant centripetal. A knife can not open due to centripetal force, only due to a lack of centripetal force; which is equivalent to a centrifugal force without a reacting force to stop the blade from opening.
They are not open source. They have a small kernel modules that comes as a source tarball, which you have to compile against your kernel. The driver itself is binary only and communicates to the kernel using that module.
Close buttons for windows should be on the upper left side of the window.. I'm not sure why Microsoft changed this (and hence creating a whirlpool effect); Windows 3.1 had a upper-left close button, MacOS has it, MWM (and clones/spinoffs), etc. It much faster, easier, and more natural to have it on the upper left. I believe Microsoft's intention was that it should be difficult and slow to close windows.. something that may help novices from making mistakes (which is why MWM and clones, including Windows 3.1 require it to be double-clicked); however, I find that a lot of people new to computers cannot find the close button due to it's location... advanced users are just annoyed or learn to use keyboard shortcuts.
I don't really see how a close button in the upper-right corner is any slower in use than one in the upper-left corner, but apart from that your information is not 100% correct: the close buttons from Windows 3.1 still exist in Windows 9x/NT/2000/XP. You can still double-click the application icon in the upper left corner, which is exactly the same as what you did in Windows 3.1.
So the old way still works for people used to it or for people who prefer it that way, and MS added a faster alternative (at least in my opinion) for the others.
Hey, I read the article too, and I don't think you're right. It's not that it's wrong, but it's a bit misleading at least?
Just one example: the section on the limited resources in Windows 95, 98 and ME. True, this is the reason for lots of the crashes I experienced when I still used 98, but it's not like it's hidden: 'OUT OF RESOURCES' or something to that effect in big ugly letters is hard to miss. And, by the way, it's not a plan to make it crash more often than it would have otherwise, it's just bad design.
And about the virtual memory system: though I doubt it, it might be as bad as the article says it is. But I'm not going to believe it is as bad as the article makes it out to be without supporting evidence. And for the record, the 2.4 kernel series are not known for their superb virtual memory implementation.
All in all, there might be truth in the article, but it's written in such an overblown way that I don't even want to read it all and check all the facts.
Slashdot Mirror
- The betas and releases of NSD are distributed under freeware BSD license
- however we require the alpha testers to:
...
(emphasis mine)Cool down, I was just trying to be funny. Bad attempt perhaps, but we'll have to live with that.
I had one (the Belgian variant, that is) some years ago, and I did put some money on it (mainly to use in public payphones - didn't have a mobile phone back then). It was a major pain in the ass when it came switch to another bank and try to cancel the accounts at my old bank: there was some money left on the card, and the bank couldn't get it off and hand it over to me.
Because of that experience and because I just don't have any use for the card, I never put any money on my new card. And I'm not planning to do it anywhere in the future.
Why would you do a thing like that?
Nope, the whole cartoon is based around the fact that Asterix and Obelix, and the whole village, never surrenders to the Romans.
In France the keyboars are azerty, where the 'm' is closer to the 'o'. The 'o' occupies the same position as on qwerty, the 'm' is to the right of the 'l' (where ':' and ';' are on qwerty).
Allthough he's not normally annoyed by fan noise, the noise of the NV30 bothered even him, he said. Somewhere at the end of the article I think, but I'm too lazy to look it up.
OTOH, if you do GetBit() before SetBit(), the result is undefined, and could indeed be any byte.
Yes, but the Non Commercial Edition for Windows is still at 2.3 while other versions are at 3.0, and Trolltech doesn't seem to have animo to upgrade the Non Commercial Edition.
Nupedia is also o free collaborative encyclopedia, but uses rigourous peer review. Comparing Wikipedia and Nupedia, one can see that Wikipedia has articles on much more topics, while the quality is certainly comparable.
Actually it kinda reminds me of the way the A-Team used to rebuild their van in every episode.
The stupid thing is, there is even a difference between French azerty and Belgian azerty. All the letters are in the same place, but there are difference with regards to other characters like the backslash.
BTW, not everyone uses azerty around here. Some folks, especially programmer types, use qwerty.
... where the Z is located, well, I guess you can figure it out.
Still, your claim (as I read it) that the word 'centrifugal' in the text of the law should be simply substituted with 'centripetal' is not correct. The blade doesn't open because of the centripetal force; it opens because it would need a centripetal force to stay closed, and there is no centripetal force, or it is not big enough.
Also, you say "We're talking classical mechanics here *not* relativistic mechanics." Does the law specify that?
I have no access to these books, but rest assured that I have a good understanding of these concepts. And remember that all of this very much dependent on the choice of reference frame, and that -- according to principles of relativity -- it is impossible for an observer in any reference frame to detect whether a particular force is a "real" or a "pseudo" force.
Pseudo or not, it is still a force. I don't think the law should be changed, and I don't think your interpretation is correct.
You are right of course that centrifugal and centripetal are opposites, but I disagree that the law had really meant centripetal. A knife can not open due to centripetal force, only due to a lack of centripetal force; which is equivalent to a centrifugal force without a reacting force to stop the blade from opening.
They are not open source. They have a small kernel modules that comes as a source tarball, which you have to compile against your kernel. The driver itself is binary only and communicates to the kernel using that module.
So the old way still works for people used to it or for people who prefer it that way, and MS added a faster alternative (at least in my opinion) for the others.
I think she means her eyes were red because of her allergies, not because of the Benadryl.
Transmeta is being led by Chandler Bing?!?
Just one example: the section on the limited resources in Windows 95, 98 and ME. True, this is the reason for lots of the crashes I experienced when I still used 98, but it's not like it's hidden: 'OUT OF RESOURCES' or something to that effect in big ugly letters is hard to miss. And, by the way, it's not a plan to make it crash more often than it would have otherwise, it's just bad design.
And about the virtual memory system: though I doubt it, it might be as bad as the article says it is. But I'm not going to believe it is as bad as the article makes it out to be without supporting evidence. And for the record, the 2.4 kernel series are not known for their superb virtual memory implementation.
All in all, there might be truth in the article, but it's written in such an overblown way that I don't even want to read it all and check all the facts.
Your URL doesn't seem to exist though, try this one instead: http://rawdataserver.com/dude/browser/index.html?n akedurl=http://www.teenmaster.hpg.ig.com.br/page1/ images/Teen79_jpg.jpg