Look at what you just said. They're losing a quarter million a year. They have four billion.
At this rate it takes four years to lose a million. Four thousand to lose a billion. Sixteen thousand to lose four billion.
Frankly, if Apple is only losing a quarter of a million dollars while the economy is in the crapper, while sitting on four billion dollars, then I think it is pretty safe to say they don't have that much to worry about.
Well, to play the devil's advocate to that point, think of Jurassic Park and genetic engineering. Does the general public think mad scientists are about to unleash prehistoric creatures on the populace at large? No. However, there is a strong(and, arguably, unfounded) distrust and fear of genetic engineering in general.
Jurassic Park certainly isn't the origin of the 'genetic engineering is evil' train of thought, but it did bring the subject to the spotlight. It did show genetic engineering in a negative light. It did nothing but reinforce the publics 'Frankenstein syndrome' so to speak...
While people may not believe that exactly what Crichton writes will occur, he brings up 'cutting edge' technology and fairly consistently makes it to blame for various evils... A writer that's as popular as Crichton repeatedly beating the 'man shouldn't mess in God's domain' drum can't have a good effect on the public's opinion of science and technology.
I'm not entirely certain whether I agree or disagree...
There are a number of different styles of science fiction. We've got the kind you describe, where amazing technology exists solely because the author wants it to be there. The author wants something to happen, so he waves his hands and says 'it's all because of science.' There's no deeper meaning, and there's no attempt at any sort of realistic theory behind things. These stories are nothing but suspending disbelief and enjoying the ride.
Then there are the books that, while quite possibly written for entertainment as well, also go about playing the 'what-if' game... These are the sort of stories that, even if it isn't the main premise, wind up bringing up issues and trying to answer the question "If we had technology to do X, then what sort of things might happen to us..." These aren't trying to explain how the technology itself works, but rather how the having that technology affects people.
Finally, there are the science fiction books that actually try to propose valid explanations for what is going on...
There can be mixes amongst the categories(frequently something explains a theory and tries to analyze how it might affect people), but it's pretty easy to find examples of all these different types of books in SF... And it doesn't mean any one type is inferior to the others.
That said, while I haven't read this particular book, one of Crichton's recent books, Timeline, annoyed me with one particular trait. If it had been written as an 'enjoy the ride' style story, it would have been fine(though a little predictable, but that's a separate issue). The problem arose in that he spent large portions of the book quoting and referencing scientific papers and books on science trying desperately to justify and explain something, while he really didn't have any sort of grasp on the subject matter. Trying to pass yourself off as explaining the technology in SF, when you don't have a clue as to how the subjects your discussing work is something I find rather grating. If he'd just waved his hands and said 'and the scientists discovered time travel,' then I would have found the book significantly better...
Actually, any image with a resolution higher than 640x480 would be wasted on most TV's... I forgot the exact resolution that a standard TV signal is, but it is approximately 640x480(in addition to being only 30hz interlaced...) Now, the more recent HDTV's and such are a different story, one I'm not very familiar with... but your standard TV wouldn't need any improvement to the image provided to it.
Well, along your lines of the 'different genres on different platforms' remark, I'd say RPG's are the best example of that difference. Yes, they exist on both console and computer gaming, but the genre has evolved into almost entirely different entities.
On the console side, we have the(SquareSoft led) move towards interactive movies... Highly linear plot, a focus on gorgeous graphics... The leveling up/combat determined by menu driven stat based system being the only connection to the original pen and paper RPG's that, in theory, inspired the genre.
On the computer side of things, you have things like Morrowind. Open ended, focusing a lot on the role playing aspect of role playing games...
You will see games that venture in the other direction on each platform(a console styled RPG on the PC, or a more open ended less console style game on consoles), but the trend does hold true for the most part... The best selling console and PC RPGs tend to 'match their platforms archetype'...
Well, while finding biological or pre-biological material on comet would certainly be an important discovery, it really wouldn't prove the 'life seeded by comets' claims.
If we find organic matter on a comet, then that doesn't mean the only source of organic matter is comets. The only way to truly prove those theories would be to disprove all other possible sources of 'original organic matter.' Finding organic material on a comet would simply prove that comets are a possible source, not that they are the definitive source.
And, arguing in the other direction, even if organic matter isn't found on this particular comet, there are still many others that haven't been checked. Just because one comet doesn't contain organic matter, doesn't mean all comets don't.
Hmmm... Last I'd heard, most major render farms used linux for the final renders(because of the price/performance issue), but tended to avoid it on the workstation front beause of various shortcomings... Mostly some comercial flavor of Unix(or a rare Mac) on the desktop to do the design, but a fleet of x86 Linux boxes for the final render...
I agree with the marketing label point, but then again 'cartoon' (especially with the implication that it targets young children) is just as much a marketing label... Frankly, animation is as close to a marketing neutral term as you can get. It is rather ironic that Disney, perhaps the greatest perpetrator of the 'if it is animated, then it is for kids' viewpoint, finds themselves trying to distinguish their features as 'animated films.'
And on the subject of "live action anime," I'd have to argue that live action movies based on previously existing anime(for example, the live action City Hunter starring Jackie Chan) would fit the description "live action anime" quite well. Though I agree, labelling a movie like The Matrix as "live action anime" because it bears a passing resemblance to a genre that happens to be somewhat common in anime is a misnomer...
Slashdot Mirror
Look at what you just said. They're losing a quarter million a year. They have four billion.
At this rate it takes four years to lose a million. Four thousand to lose a billion. Sixteen thousand to lose four billion.
Frankly, if Apple is only losing a quarter of a million dollars while the economy is in the crapper, while sitting on four billion dollars, then I think it is pretty safe to say they don't have that much to worry about.
Well, to play the devil's advocate to that point, think of Jurassic Park and genetic engineering. Does the general public think mad scientists are about to unleash prehistoric creatures on the populace at large? No. However, there is a strong(and, arguably, unfounded) distrust and fear of genetic engineering in general.
Jurassic Park certainly isn't the origin of the 'genetic engineering is evil' train of thought, but it did bring the subject to the spotlight. It did show genetic engineering in a negative light. It did nothing but reinforce the publics 'Frankenstein syndrome' so to speak...
While people may not believe that exactly what Crichton writes will occur, he brings up 'cutting edge' technology and fairly consistently makes it to blame for various evils... A writer that's as popular as Crichton repeatedly beating the 'man shouldn't mess in God's domain' drum can't have a good effect on the public's opinion of science and technology.
I'm not entirely certain whether I agree or disagree...
There are a number of different styles of science fiction. We've got the kind you describe, where amazing technology exists solely because the author wants it to be there. The author wants something to happen, so he waves his hands and says 'it's all because of science.' There's no deeper meaning, and there's no attempt at any sort of realistic theory behind things. These stories are nothing but suspending disbelief and enjoying the ride.
Then there are the books that, while quite possibly written for entertainment as well, also go about playing the 'what-if' game... These are the sort of stories that, even if it isn't the main premise, wind up bringing up issues and trying to answer the question "If we had technology to do X, then what sort of things might happen to us..." These aren't trying to explain how the technology itself works, but rather how the having that technology affects people.
Finally, there are the science fiction books that actually try to propose valid explanations for what is going on...
There can be mixes amongst the categories(frequently something explains a theory and tries to analyze how it might affect people), but it's pretty easy to find examples of all these different types of books in SF... And it doesn't mean any one type is inferior to the others.
That said, while I haven't read this particular book, one of Crichton's recent books, Timeline, annoyed me with one particular trait. If it had been written as an 'enjoy the ride' style story, it would have been fine(though a little predictable, but that's a separate issue). The problem arose in that he spent large portions of the book quoting and referencing scientific papers and books on science trying desperately to justify and explain something, while he really didn't have any sort of grasp on the subject matter. Trying to pass yourself off as explaining the technology in SF, when you don't have a clue as to how the subjects your discussing work is something I find rather grating. If he'd just waved his hands and said 'and the scientists discovered time travel,' then I would have found the book significantly better...
Then again, this is just my opinion.
Actually, any image with a resolution higher than 640x480 would be wasted on most TV's... I forgot the exact resolution that a standard TV signal is, but it is approximately 640x480(in addition to being only 30hz interlaced...) Now, the more recent HDTV's and such are a different story, one I'm not very familiar with... but your standard TV wouldn't need any improvement to the image provided to it.
Well, along your lines of the 'different genres on different platforms' remark, I'd say RPG's are the best example of that difference. Yes, they exist on both console and computer gaming, but the genre has evolved into almost entirely different entities. On the console side, we have the(SquareSoft led) move towards interactive movies... Highly linear plot, a focus on gorgeous graphics... The leveling up/combat determined by menu driven stat based system being the only connection to the original pen and paper RPG's that, in theory, inspired the genre. On the computer side of things, you have things like Morrowind. Open ended, focusing a lot on the role playing aspect of role playing games... You will see games that venture in the other direction on each platform(a console styled RPG on the PC, or a more open ended less console style game on consoles), but the trend does hold true for the most part... The best selling console and PC RPGs tend to 'match their platforms archetype'...
If we find organic matter on a comet, then that doesn't mean the only source of organic matter is comets. The only way to truly prove those theories would be to disprove all other possible sources of 'original organic matter.' Finding organic material on a comet would simply prove that comets are a possible source, not that they are the definitive source.
And, arguing in the other direction, even if organic matter isn't found on this particular comet, there are still many others that haven't been checked. Just because one comet doesn't contain organic matter, doesn't mean all comets don't.
Hmmm... Last I'd heard, most major render farms used linux for the final renders(because of the price/performance issue), but tended to avoid it on the workstation front beause of various shortcomings... Mostly some comercial flavor of Unix(or a rare Mac) on the desktop to do the design, but a fleet of x86 Linux boxes for the final render...
And on the subject of "live action anime," I'd have to argue that live action movies based on previously existing anime(for example, the live action City Hunter starring Jackie Chan) would fit the description "live action anime" quite well. Though I agree, labelling a movie like The Matrix as "live action anime" because it bears a passing resemblance to a genre that happens to be somewhat common in anime is a misnomer...