Those deals are always the same, they get you to sign up for an extra service by offering an introductory rate that's cheaper than what you'd pay without that service. But once they got you suckered in they jack rates right up. It's always better in the long run to only sign up for what you actually want*. And don't believe what the salesweasel tells you about how the bundle will be cheaper - they are lying.
Though I'd just drop Comcast if you can. I'm glad I can get decent naked DSL through the phone company here - that's all I need.
* Or call them up every once and a while and threaten to cancel, they'll usually offer you a deal to stay
I can't speak for the Alps, but around here in the American Midwest I don't need photographs because the climate has noticeably changed within my own lifetime. And I'm only in my 30's, which makes it a bit concerning to say the least.
That doesn't make any sense. All other things equal, if a star can accelerate a probe with a solar sail to a certain speed away from the star, the same star should be able to deaccelerate the same probe back to the speed it started at when it approaches the star.
Of course, a few things that might make it unequal is that we could bounce the probe around our solar system and sling it around some planets to give it a boost (and the probe would get a boost simply because we would launch it from Earth which itself is moving). We could reverse that in the target solar system but pulling that off might require knowing more about the characteristics of the target solar system than the data we'd have at launch.
Another factor would be how luminous the target star is - a star less bright than the Sun obviously won't be as effective at slowing the probe down than our Sun would be at accelerating it. But that could be used to our advantage in the case sending probes to stars that are more luminous than the sun.
Somehow I doubt that. Take the Raspberry Pi Zero. It has a MicroSD slot and 2 micro USB ports on it, which by your numbers would be about $2 or so. Since they sell for $5.00 retail, that leaves $3 for the rest of it, which includes a micro HDMI port. Don't forget other bits like packaging, distribution, etc.
I'm not so sure of that. I've sat there for literally several minutes of clicking through ever-so-goddamn-slow-loading pictures of buses or stop signs or whatever before giving up. Maybe it would eventually let me in, or maybe it's really an endless loop. But most people aren't going to have the patience to sit through several minutes of captcha bullshit, with no indication that it's ever going actually going to let you through.
This has been studied multiple times and the energy savings, at best, are minor. It's not 1945 anymore, and we no longer use a significant fraction of our electricity just for lighting. In hot climates, it can even be counter-productive, as it's better if everyone is at the office later in the afternoon and you only have to keep one, large building cool than it is for everyone to go home during the heat of the day and crank up their home AC.
Plenty of them. It's common with high end laptops to support at least a M.2 drive and a 2.5" SATA drive. Many can hold even more than that. The Lenovo P50-series support two up to M.2 drives and a SATA drive, so you can easily cram more than 4TB into one if you're willing to spend the money. Granted, I don't know if Lenovo sells them that way, but it's a standard slot so just buy the drive you want and pop it in there.
So yes, you can get 4TB in a laptop, just not one with a fruit on the lid.
That's like saying Nintendo is 130 years old. Which it actually is. Except the Nintendo that everyone knows (the video game company) really only goes back to the 80's. The Apple of today really only goes back to 2007 when they decided to be a mobile phone company. You'll note that they also changed their name in 2007 from Apple Computers, Inc. to Apple, Inc.
The vehicles were required to crushed/shredded after a certain amount of time. While they could strip them for parts beforehand, the large sudden influx of vehicles meant they had to get started with crushing them right away, and the fact the most valuable part (the engine) was ruined meant a lot of dismantlers didn't even want to deal with them and the paperwork. So while some did get parted out, many of them did not.
Given that one of the requirements that the vehicle was driveable when it was turned in, it was sad to see intact vehicles, most of which were still in good condition cosmetically, get fed to shredder one after the other.
Those things aren't completely mutually exclusive. It's possible make a car that's safe in a collision but still resilient against damage in minor collisions like in a parking lot. Today's cars are very fragile, and it's not just the tech. They've basically eliminated the protruding bumpers in favor of internal bumpers, which means that if you hit anything now you'll smash a light or a grill, and the lights on today's cars are very expensive and easy to damage (compare to the sealed beams from 30 years ago - cheap, standardized, and easy to replace if damaged). A lot of cars have also eliminated the rub strips along the side which makes them more susceptible to dings and scratches.
A lot of the problem with the tech in the examples isn't that the sensors and cameras themselves are getting damaged, it's just that they are built into parts that are easily damaged in a minor accident and end up further complicating the repair.
Personally, I have to wonder if this isn't done on purpose a bit. Building a car that falls apart or has a major mechanical failure after a few years is no longer acceptable. So instead build a car that is overly fragile and expensive to fix, and therefore tip the fix vs. scrap and replace scale in your favor. And since insurance is paying for, people aren't going to mind as much.
The King Ranch version is not the version that people who buy a truck to do work purchase. The King Ranch version is basically the 2010's version of the "personal luxury vehicles" of the 60's-70's like the Cadillac Eldorado. Big, garish, over the top, not particularly fuel efficient, and all about image. A person buying a truck like that isn't going to look at vans.
Also, the problem with the E-Series is that Ford discontinued them (well, they still make the cabs for things like box trucks, but no more vans). You can get a Transit van though, or try to buy used. Problem with used ones is that these vans live hard lives, and people who have them tend to hold onto them until they have pretty much used them up. Though the thing nowadays is to buy a used conversion van for cheap since they tend to live easier lives and have horrible resale value, and then rip out the interior.
If you're running a VM for all current versions of Windows, at the same time, along with 10 Linux VM's just because, you might be a power user. Or maybe nuts.
If you're not trying to run all those all at once, you could easily get away with a pretty normal PC. Maybe the only slightly pricy bit could be a large enough SSD to hold all those VM's. Or just buy a hard drive for $75.
Probably because there really isn't much to be recycled. Cheap inkjet printers are probably 90% plastic, and I've never seen them made out of recyclable plastics so that's basically landfill fodder. There's also a few metal bits and a couple of motors which could be recycled as scrap metal, but it's not a lot and it's not worth separating them from the plastic bits. There's also a small logic board buried in somewhere which probably shouldn't be landfilled, but it's small and since RoHS there probably isn't actually much harmful there anymore. So basically because they are mostly non-recyclable and inert means they just get landfilled.
Well, there are different philosophies towards software. I don't need a gigantic, bloated piece of software like iTunes to manage my multimedia "experience". I prefer simple applications that only try to do one thing, and do it well. That's Winamp. I have no problems finding the music I want to play on my file system, and streaming audio through internet radio stations.
Though in reality, Winamp is actually kind of bloated, though it's positively lean by 2018 standards. But not as lean as something like Foobar2000, though with Winamp you can still slim it down a bit by removing some of the canned plugins that I don't use.
Really the biggest flaw that Winamp has is that it only runs on Windows. But each to their own.
Winamp includes some of its own decoders, but as a fallback anything it doesn't know what do with, it hands off to Windows to try to play it. That's one of the challenges I've found with trying to keep using it is that there's stuff it can't handle or can't handle well, but it tries anyway, so I end up needing to figure how to get Winamp to just hand it off unmolested to Windows because LAVFilters will do a better job anyway.
Back then ram was relatively expensive. Computers could support a lot more RAM than they usually shipped with. You could have a computer with 512 MB of ram in 1998 but be prepared to pay for it. A typical configuration would probably be 32-64 MB. This did come in handy a few years later when upgrading those PCs from Windows 98 (perfectly happy with 64 MB) to Windows XP (256 MB needed to run halfway decently).
Nowadays, RAM is comparatively cheap - though more expensive than it was just a few years ago, so it's not uncommon to buy a new computer already maxed out on RAM.
Against any modern adversary, or even one armed with cold war technology, the A10 would be a a big flying target. And they're are irreplaceable - in a conflict where A10's are getting shot down, we'd either have to ground the fleet or soon not have any A10's. That's part of the reason why the Air Force doesn't like them (at least officially), because the brass are worried about what would happen if we going up against someone like Russia or China, and not a bunch of camel-jockeys cruising around in Toyotas armed with AK47's. However, since we are fighting against a bunch of camel-jockeys with no air force and virtually no anti-air capability, the A10 absolutely excels at raining death from above with impunity and at a fraction of the cost of other aircraft. Since those seem to be the kind of wars we're going to be fighting, it makes no sense to get rid of the A10's or to replace them with other aircraft that could do the job, but at a much higher cost.
That's because AIO PCs are a niche product (I would argue that the AIO Macs are also a niche). If you start expanding your search to a regular desktop/tower and a separate 4K monitor you'll quickly find you can get much better hardware at a fraction of the price. And if you're so inclined, you can even make a DIY AIO PC by buying a small form-factor PC that has a kit to mount to a VESA mount on the monitor, and that will also be a fraction of the price, though it won't look quite as nice.
I don't know about "lots". Low-end laptops still ship with 5400RPM hard drives. As you move up eventually you start seeing the models with 256 GB SSDs. The big exception for this seems to be Apple (lol), where most of their models start with a meager 128 GB, and yes you pay dearly for this. The other exception are some of the tablets-with-keyboards, probably because they don't want to cram a hard drive in there but still want to keep the cost down.
Interestingly, major updates to Ubuntu also drop at the same time. Though with Ubuntu, they aren't forced and even if you do upgrade it will likely be without drama.
Functionality wise, I can't think of anything they've added to Windows 10 that I miss when I go back to Windows 7. Well, there's that handy right-click menu on the Start button - I guess they could port that back.
What they need to do is drop the Windows 7 GUI on top of the Windows 8 kernel with the driver support in Windows 10. And then stop messing with Windows because they would have reached perfection at that point.
Well, your 2004-era Mac is a different beast. I seriously doubt any of these new Macs will still be operable in 2032. At some point Apple will kill support for these models, and since they can only be repaired by Apple that means any of those machines still running are on borrowed time. Eventually something will go wrong, and even if you manage to find a second machine to salvage parts from, you still won't be able to get it running again.
Besides, your 2004 "Mac Book Pro" (actually a PowerBook) was obsoleted by Apple some time ago. A 2004-era PC could be upgraded to Windows 7* and still be supported today. Or just install Linux.
* But not Windows 10 because the processor most likely would lack the NX-bit
The TIE bombers from ESB are basically TIE fighters with a big gun that fires downwards instead of a gun that fires forward. Actually makes a lot of sense in the context of the Star Wars universe - it would be much easier to just fly over a capital ship while firing downwards than it is to fly towards it and strafe it with front firing weapons.
SVN absolutely tracks when a branch was made. It also tracks merges and history. Granted, the way it does it is very simplistic which leads to some additional steps and overhead and having to do things like recording a merge (when no actual merge took place) in order to fool its system. The only upside is that the way it does things is simple which makes it easy to understand what's going on under the hood, and once you have that understanding then it's obvious why you have to do some things even if it seems a bit silly.
The biggest problem I had when using SVN with others is they wouldn't use the built in tools, and instead would do things like checkout the code then check in a copy in order to "branch", and do their merges using some outside tool. Which lead to having to do things like recording the branch number because SVN had no idea what they were up to.
In comparison, git almost seems like magic sometimes since it just seems to "know" what you're trying to and is built to make branching and merging easy. Until of course it gets it wrong or does something non-obvious and you have no idea why it just did that. And while it gives you the tools to fix it (in theory), in practice using those tools often feels like playing with a loaded gun.
Slashdot Mirror
Those deals are always the same, they get you to sign up for an extra service by offering an introductory rate that's cheaper than what you'd pay without that service. But once they got you suckered in they jack rates right up. It's always better in the long run to only sign up for what you actually want*. And don't believe what the salesweasel tells you about how the bundle will be cheaper - they are lying.
Though I'd just drop Comcast if you can. I'm glad I can get decent naked DSL through the phone company here - that's all I need.
* Or call them up every once and a while and threaten to cancel, they'll usually offer you a deal to stay
I can't speak for the Alps, but around here in the American Midwest I don't need photographs because the climate has noticeably changed within my own lifetime. And I'm only in my 30's, which makes it a bit concerning to say the least.
That doesn't make any sense. All other things equal, if a star can accelerate a probe with a solar sail to a certain speed away from the star, the same star should be able to deaccelerate the same probe back to the speed it started at when it approaches the star.
Of course, a few things that might make it unequal is that we could bounce the probe around our solar system and sling it around some planets to give it a boost (and the probe would get a boost simply because we would launch it from Earth which itself is moving). We could reverse that in the target solar system but pulling that off might require knowing more about the characteristics of the target solar system than the data we'd have at launch.
Another factor would be how luminous the target star is - a star less bright than the Sun obviously won't be as effective at slowing the probe down than our Sun would be at accelerating it. But that could be used to our advantage in the case sending probes to stars that are more luminous than the sun.
Somehow I doubt that. Take the Raspberry Pi Zero. It has a MicroSD slot and 2 micro USB ports on it, which by your numbers would be about $2 or so. Since they sell for $5.00 retail, that leaves $3 for the rest of it, which includes a micro HDMI port. Don't forget other bits like packaging, distribution, etc.
I'm not so sure of that. I've sat there for literally several minutes of clicking through ever-so-goddamn-slow-loading pictures of buses or stop signs or whatever before giving up. Maybe it would eventually let me in, or maybe it's really an endless loop. But most people aren't going to have the patience to sit through several minutes of captcha bullshit, with no indication that it's ever going actually going to let you through.
This has been studied multiple times and the energy savings, at best, are minor. It's not 1945 anymore, and we no longer use a significant fraction of our electricity just for lighting. In hot climates, it can even be counter-productive, as it's better if everyone is at the office later in the afternoon and you only have to keep one, large building cool than it is for everyone to go home during the heat of the day and crank up their home AC.
Plenty of them. It's common with high end laptops to support at least a M.2 drive and a 2.5" SATA drive. Many can hold even more than that. The Lenovo P50-series support two up to M.2 drives and a SATA drive, so you can easily cram more than 4TB into one if you're willing to spend the money. Granted, I don't know if Lenovo sells them that way, but it's a standard slot so just buy the drive you want and pop it in there.
So yes, you can get 4TB in a laptop, just not one with a fruit on the lid.
That's like saying Nintendo is 130 years old. Which it actually is. Except the Nintendo that everyone knows (the video game company) really only goes back to the 80's. The Apple of today really only goes back to 2007 when they decided to be a mobile phone company. You'll note that they also changed their name in 2007 from Apple Computers, Inc. to Apple, Inc.
The vehicles were required to crushed/shredded after a certain amount of time. While they could strip them for
parts beforehand, the large sudden influx of vehicles meant they had to get started with crushing them right away, and the fact the most valuable part (the engine) was ruined meant a lot of dismantlers didn't even want to deal with them and the paperwork. So while some did get parted out, many of them did not.
Given that one of the requirements that the vehicle was driveable when it was turned in, it was sad to see intact vehicles, most of which were still in good condition cosmetically, get fed to shredder one after the other.
Those things aren't completely mutually exclusive. It's possible make a car that's safe in a collision but still resilient against damage in minor collisions like in a parking lot. Today's cars are very fragile, and it's not just the tech. They've basically eliminated the protruding bumpers in favor of internal bumpers, which means that if you hit anything now you'll smash a light or a grill, and the lights on today's cars are very expensive and easy to damage (compare to the sealed beams from 30 years ago - cheap, standardized, and easy to replace if damaged). A lot of cars have also eliminated the rub strips along the side which makes them more susceptible to dings and scratches.
A lot of the problem with the tech in the examples isn't that the sensors and cameras themselves are getting damaged, it's just that they are built into parts that are easily damaged in a minor accident and end up further complicating the repair.
Personally, I have to wonder if this isn't done on purpose a bit. Building a car that falls apart or has a major mechanical failure after a few years is no longer acceptable. So instead build a car that is overly fragile and expensive to fix, and therefore tip the fix vs. scrap and replace scale in your favor. And since insurance is paying for, people aren't going to mind as much.
The King Ranch version is not the version that people who buy a truck to do work purchase. The King Ranch version is basically the 2010's version of the "personal luxury vehicles" of the 60's-70's like the Cadillac Eldorado. Big, garish, over the top, not particularly fuel efficient, and all about image. A person buying a truck like that isn't going to look at vans.
Also, the problem with the E-Series is that Ford discontinued them (well, they still make the cabs for things like box trucks, but no more vans). You can get a Transit van though, or try to buy used. Problem with used ones is that these vans live hard lives, and people who have them tend to hold onto them until they have pretty much used them up. Though the thing nowadays is to buy a used conversion van for cheap since they tend to live easier lives and have horrible resale value, and then rip out the interior.
If you're running a VM for all current versions of Windows, at the same time, along with 10 Linux VM's just because, you might be a power user. Or maybe nuts.
If you're not trying to run all those all at once, you could easily get away with a pretty normal PC. Maybe the only slightly pricy bit could be a large enough SSD to hold all those VM's. Or just buy a hard drive for $75.
Probably because there really isn't much to be recycled. Cheap inkjet printers are probably 90% plastic, and I've never seen them made out of recyclable plastics so that's basically landfill fodder. There's also a few metal bits and a couple of motors which could be recycled as scrap metal, but it's not a lot and it's not worth separating them from the plastic bits. There's also a small logic board buried in somewhere which probably shouldn't be landfilled, but it's small and since RoHS there probably isn't actually much harmful there anymore. So basically because they are mostly non-recyclable and inert means they just get landfilled.
Well, there are different philosophies towards software. I don't need a gigantic, bloated piece of software like iTunes to manage my multimedia "experience". I prefer simple applications that only try to do one thing, and do it well. That's Winamp. I have no problems finding the music I want to play on my file system, and streaming audio through internet radio stations.
Though in reality, Winamp is actually kind of bloated, though it's positively lean by 2018 standards. But not as lean as something like Foobar2000, though with Winamp you can still slim it down a bit by removing some of the canned plugins that I don't use.
Really the biggest flaw that Winamp has is that it only runs on Windows. But each to their own.
Winamp includes some of its own decoders, but as a fallback anything it doesn't know what do with, it hands off to Windows to try to play it. That's one of the challenges I've found with trying to keep using it is that there's stuff it can't handle or can't handle well, but it tries anyway, so I end up needing to figure how to get Winamp to just hand it off unmolested to Windows because LAVFilters will do a better job anyway.
Back then ram was relatively expensive. Computers could support a lot more RAM than they usually shipped with. You could have a computer with 512 MB of ram in 1998 but be prepared to pay for it. A typical configuration would probably be 32-64 MB. This did come in handy a few years later when upgrading those PCs from Windows 98 (perfectly happy with 64 MB) to Windows XP (256 MB needed to run halfway decently).
Nowadays, RAM is comparatively cheap - though more expensive than it was just a few years ago, so it's not uncommon to buy a new computer already maxed out on RAM.
Against any modern adversary, or even one armed with cold war technology, the A10 would be a a big flying target. And they're are irreplaceable - in a conflict where A10's are getting shot down, we'd either have to ground the fleet or soon not have any A10's. That's part of the reason why the Air Force doesn't like them (at least officially), because the brass are worried about what would happen if we going up against someone like Russia or China, and not a bunch of camel-jockeys cruising around in Toyotas armed with AK47's. However, since we are fighting against a bunch of camel-jockeys with no air force and virtually no anti-air capability, the A10 absolutely excels at raining death from above with impunity and at a fraction of the cost of other aircraft. Since those seem to be the kind of wars we're going to be fighting, it makes no sense to get rid of the A10's or to replace them with other aircraft that could do the job, but at a much higher cost.
That's because AIO PCs are a niche product (I would argue that the AIO Macs are also a niche). If you start expanding your search to a regular desktop/tower and a separate 4K monitor you'll quickly find you can get much better hardware at a fraction of the price. And if you're so inclined, you can even make a DIY AIO PC by buying a small form-factor PC that has a kit to mount to a VESA mount on the monitor, and that will also be a fraction of the price, though it won't look quite as nice.
I don't know about "lots". Low-end laptops still ship with 5400RPM hard drives. As you move up eventually you start seeing the models with 256 GB SSDs. The big exception for this seems to be Apple (lol), where most of their models start with a meager 128 GB, and yes you pay dearly for this. The other exception are some of the tablets-with-keyboards, probably because they don't want to cram a hard drive in there but still want to keep the cost down.
Interestingly, major updates to Ubuntu also drop at the same time. Though with Ubuntu, they aren't forced and even if you do upgrade it will likely be without drama.
Functionality wise, I can't think of anything they've added to Windows 10 that I miss when I go back to Windows 7. Well, there's that handy right-click menu on the Start button - I guess they could port that back.
What they need to do is drop the Windows 7 GUI on top of the Windows 8 kernel with the driver support in Windows 10. And then stop messing with Windows because they would have reached perfection at that point.
I've run Windows 2000 on 64 MB. It runs but it's pretty painful. Windows 2000 really needs 128 MB, and really isn't happy until you have 256 MB.
With Windows XP double those numbers. For XP SP3, double them again.
Well, your 2004-era Mac is a different beast. I seriously doubt any of these new Macs will still be operable in 2032. At some point Apple will kill support for these models, and since they can only be repaired by Apple that means any of those machines still running are on borrowed time. Eventually something will go wrong, and even if you manage to find a second machine to salvage parts from, you still won't be able to get it running again.
Besides, your 2004 "Mac Book Pro" (actually a PowerBook) was obsoleted by Apple some time ago. A 2004-era PC could be upgraded to Windows 7* and still be supported today. Or just install Linux.
* But not Windows 10 because the processor most likely would lack the NX-bit
The TIE bombers from ESB are basically TIE fighters with a big gun that fires downwards instead of a gun that fires forward. Actually makes a lot of sense in the context of the Star Wars universe - it would be much easier to just fly over a capital ship while firing downwards than it is to fly towards it and strafe it with front firing weapons.
SVN absolutely tracks when a branch was made. It also tracks merges and history. Granted, the way it does it is very simplistic which leads to some additional steps and overhead and having to do things like recording a merge (when no actual merge took place) in order to fool its system. The only upside is that the way it does things is simple which makes it easy to understand what's going on under the hood, and once you have that understanding then it's obvious why you have to do some things even if it seems a bit silly.
The biggest problem I had when using SVN with others is they wouldn't use the built in tools, and instead would do things like checkout the code then check in a copy in order to "branch", and do their merges using some outside tool. Which lead to having to do things like recording the branch number because SVN had no idea what they were up to.
In comparison, git almost seems like magic sometimes since it just seems to "know" what you're trying to and is built to make branching and merging easy. Until of course it gets it wrong or does something non-obvious and you have no idea why it just did that. And while it gives you the tools to fix it (in theory), in practice using those tools often feels like playing with a loaded gun.