1. Because I have a small all-in-one - seen any cheap, small, all in one printers using laser tech yet? 2. Because I've just bought my second cardridge, after a year or so. 3. Because I don't have the time nor patience to go out printer hunting. 4. Because laser printers are way slower if you just need one or two pages. 5. Because a real good photo cannot be printed as good as even a very cheap inkjet printer. 6. But mostly, because my old printer still works. Pretty well too. This environmental disaster is only going to be replaced when it breaks down.
Of course, at work the single only inkjet is hooked up to a small printer server. The only reason it is is because there aren't too many cheap A3 color laser printers.
I once read a funny article that went through all the known natural forces and - at the end - decided that actual walls use the strongest forces out there to stop projectiles.
Two full dual-link DVI ports on a $150 card is a very nice addition. With the move from analog to digital displays, seeing a reduction in maximum resolution on budget parts because of single-link bandwidth limitations, while not devastating, isn't desirable. There are tradeoffs in moving from analog to digital display hardware, and now an additional issue has a resolution. Now we just need to see display makers crank up pixel density and improve color space without reducing response time and this old Sony GDM-F520 can finally rest in peace.
Well, that and the improved support for high definition codecs and HDMI does it for me. If they make reasonably priced OEM products with dual DVI, many OEMs would be happy as well; there are not that many motherboards out there with dual screen support. Sometimes (say, 99% of the times) the reviewers forget, it is not always the graphics performance that people are after.
Now for the monitor makers: I want those 4:3 20" screens with 30 bit color space and 2000:1500 resolutions already. Non-degrading OLED's if anywhere possible. Ok, time to stay of the booze, I am nightdreaming again.
Re:Question on how PRAM works and is manufactured
on
Intel Set To Demo PRAM
·
· Score: 1
"Unfortunately, the quote you made is quite right, except that you want to write at a rate 10k greater in order to beat out hard disks, so that 0.744 years instead of 744"
Eh? We just want to beat out hard disks because they are mechanical, slow spinning up, slow reading, slow seeking, noisy, energy hogging, big, untrustworthy SOB's. Most of us couldn't care less on the number of write cycles, as long as the filesystem and OS portions of it can be written over many times within the life time of the equipment. Flash drives can already do that it seems, so what is the problem? I'll be doing *a lot* more reading than writing and I would certainly not constantly write to my flash drive at maximum speed. Why the heck would I?
The article fortunately does not talk about removing all programming from the studies. If you work with a computer it is important that you know how computers work, and why errors sometimes pop-up, and what the architecture is under the application. It is pretty impossible to completely ignore all these things, and still think you can do Computer Science on any serious level.
But CS is not very much about programming, and a good CS course should not stress programming, or maths for that matter. There is some discussion if Computer Science really is science, but that is just definitions; there is a lot of complex stuff to study besides programming and maths. Talking about maths, these "cryptoanalyst woman" most certainly know more about maths than computer science. Actually, I would be very surprised if they would call themselves computer scientists (instead of mathematicians, for instance).
I had the displeasure of using Office 97 Word to get security certification on an application of mine. Once I was bored (not difficult to get bored if you are rewriting documents you created one year ago) so I started to write down the most *obvious* annoyances.
After 4 pages of the most obvious annoyances I gave up, because my blood pressure was getting way to high. Of course, it doesn't help if the guys on the other side use a different language version, as does your collegue. Maybe users in the VS don't know, but *all* styles will be present; in 3 different languages. And each style will also be listed *again* if you happen to use a slightly bigger font, bold, italics, *the works*.
Word 2003 did nothing to the format, but at least the sidebar - if you manage to get that thing on your screen - helps you with removing all the styles you don't want. Until it is send to the other side, and all starts over again. This - and other annoyances like crashes etc - easily cost me about a month additional work.
The article says that with 1% of the higher winds harnassed, we could power the human race. Presumely a few of these devices will only use.001% of the power available to them. If this works it would stop us from converting oil to CO2, but the direct cooling effect is not something I am going to count on to stop global warming. It's nice that it would be energy-neutral in the *very* long run, I give you that. It won't heat up the earth.
Well, fun aside, a barely visible line of aluminium would be pretty hard to see for pilots. Of course, you wouldn't put it in air lanes, but a stray plane would be toast (literally, with all the power going through the lines) if it would fly against it. I presume it also handles thunder(storms) but lets be naive and think they've thought this all through.
At Gateway we sold Creative Labs soundcards, but because they lacked PCI we went to Ensoniq. Not for long, because the exact same soundcard suddenly became the new Soundblaster when Creative scooped them up. What you are talking about is the last real SoundBlaster. AFAIK E-Mu and Ensoniq are still subsidairies. Not that it mattered too much, the Ensoniq cards were pretty decent cards with pretty good MIDI as well. I've even kept my 8 bit SoundBlaster Pro for quite some time, but MP3's really did not sound too good:)
I can see how people would want to do this when hacking their own motherboard, but I would not like to see this become commonplace. For a starter, what to do with the oil after it has been used. I presume that you cannot reuse the oil to bake fries in. And I would really like to know if this would have negative implications considering the life-time of the equipment as well.
You obviously misspelled object. Ok, ok, and static methods.
Even then I still copy a lot of code; when I think the ties between applications is not very high and it is not complex enough to put it in seperate functions. It also makes it easier to get rid of bugs, without having to rebuild every application that was running fine - despite of the bugs.
E.g. today I made a new copy of a command registry. The command in this registry are pretty complex, so I used a design pattern instead of a simple function for the commands. Now, the commands for the applications are almost completely different. The registry however isn't. Should I put it in a seperately maintained library because I use it at two or three places? I don't think so. Besides the obvious problem with the dependency of both projects on this library, I would also have to maintain seperate design documents, test cases, use cases and what not. Before I would know it one of my collegues would use it in the wrong way, and I would have to support and keep compatability for his/her applications as well.
Nope, sometimes the copy button is your best friend. It's at least better than rewriting the same code all over again.
"Ideally, in pure capitalism, consumers would either be savvy enough to see through these 'deceptions', or at least principled enough to refuse to purchase from merchants they deem to use deceptive business practices."
Indeed, that's the ideal situation. In practice, this becomes impossible and there is a strong need for governmental regulation. If, e.g. I want to choose an ISP, there are the following (possible) variables to consider: * mail service * mail scanning (free, not free) * helpdesk * news service * binary news service * monthly fee * setup fee * run my own server * server if you are a business * geeky features (home mail server with backup, shell access) * mobile phone access * wifi access * well, you get the point, glad you made this so far *...
For an average consumer this is simply too much to handle. It's like going to the supermarket and having to check each and every good-until date for each and every product that you buy. It's like having to check on the internet what food product uses good or bad embalage for the environment.
There has got to be stronger rules in force, both to protect the customer, and in this case, to have better competition. Capitalism fails if these anti-compatitative measures are allowed to take place. Just relying on the consumer is bound to fail - even if there was choice.
"Why should it be the bank's responsibility to tell the customers, "It is not a good idea to paint your user name and password on the side of your home in 26inch high letters"."
It is, because just a simple username and password for something like banking is like putting things in a safe and leave the key on the hook next to it.
You need at least two way authentication, using a secure token, SMS feedback, a list of secure numbers etc. All these have been used by the Dutch banking industry and afaik NO bank has ever relied just on username password. All do two factor transaction based authentication.
I am not saying that this will fend of all attacks but most attacks from bogus sites will definately be stopped. Anyway, what's the difference between e.g. a bogus site and a DNS-attack? How can *you* be sure that you are talking to your bank? Believe me, just relying on the certificate may not be enough.
Except that less CO2 is always a good thing, of course. Bit of a weird analogy, if you ask me. This.safe top level domain is much more debatable than that.
I think the Hatton Hoover sounds cool. Although it will probably get changed to "keep-your-hat-on, hoover!" when this thing gets to be deployed for surveilance:)
Here are some advantages of one approach against the other: * better organization and looking at different (two) applications at the same time: dual monitors * GUI development: wide screen monitor * side bars, additional content: wide screen monitor (and a window manager app) * 100 programs open at the same time: dual monitors (and multiple desktops) * multimedia (video/games): wide screen monitor * internet browsing: dual monitors * email: dual monitors
At work I have significant speedups for dual monitors. But then I am creating applications where I have to debug both the client and the server at the same time. Also, when programming it is really good to have documentation next to the code. With a good IDE it is also possible to have the debug and code perspectives on different screens (e.g. Eclipse handles this *really* well). I would always go for dual monitors at work if I had the choice. Using two 17" monitors is not that expensive, with 19" you get bigger letters, but most of them are 1280x1024, just like the 17" - so only go for 19" if the price difference is neglectible.
I feel that my speedup is between 5-10% easily. So the company started saving money in about, oh, two weeks time, tops.
If you have a choice in choosing the flat screens for work: * 4:3 aspect ratio (two flat screens does not work well, too big a turning angle for your head/eyes) * anti-glare * 170 degrees looking angle (if you have a rotating screen, this becomes *really* important) * DVI is nice (better colors, less chance of syncing problems, needs a - passive - video card with dual DVI output) * height adjustable, tiltable (forget about rotation and pivoting the screen - you won't use it) * USB hubs are nice (but don't work well in combination with a rotating screen) * refresh rate is not important anymore
At home I am used to watch video and play games, so I went for the wide screen. Some websites do look a bit weird on 1680 pixels wide though.
Oh, I hate those kind of things. With Java Blackbelt for example they ask if something compiles. You get 3 classes or something and they then ask what goes wrong. Then I have to see the strange compiler error within that somehow. Well, bugger that, my Eclipse environment will alert me on any compiler error long before I do any testing. What's the freakin' use? I'm too old to have to worry about trick questions, so I'll leave these particular tests where they are as well.
Bah, only 1-1 pixel resolution, I'll wait until higher resolutions become available. Also, only a one/two second refresh rate? Who are they kidding? Dial knob? Don't they know that small push buttons are all the hype at the moment?
Slashdot Mirror
"Why don't you just buy a laser printer?"
1. Because I have a small all-in-one - seen any cheap, small, all in one printers using laser tech yet?
2. Because I've just bought my second cardridge, after a year or so.
3. Because I don't have the time nor patience to go out printer hunting.
4. Because laser printers are way slower if you just need one or two pages.
5. Because a real good photo cannot be printed as good as even a very cheap inkjet printer.
6. But mostly, because my old printer still works. Pretty well too. This environmental disaster is only going to be replaced when it breaks down.
Of course, at work the single only inkjet is hooked up to a small printer server. The only reason it is is because there aren't too many cheap A3 color laser printers.
Yes, but why do they have to rime with time? Darn!
Something seems to be wrong with your comment, but what is it ?????
"...a force shield..."
I once read a funny article that went through all the known natural forces and - at the end - decided that actual walls use the strongest forces out there to stop projectiles.
Well, that and the improved support for high definition codecs and HDMI does it for me. If they make reasonably priced OEM products with dual DVI, many OEMs would be happy as well; there are not that many motherboards out there with dual screen support. Sometimes (say, 99% of the times) the reviewers forget, it is not always the graphics performance that people are after.
Now for the monitor makers: I want those 4:3 20" screens with 30 bit color space and 2000:1500 resolutions already. Non-degrading OLED's if anywhere possible. Ok, time to stay of the booze, I am nightdreaming again.
"Unfortunately, the quote you made is quite right, except that you want to write at a rate 10k greater in order to beat out hard disks, so that 0.744 years instead of 744"
Eh? We just want to beat out hard disks because they are mechanical, slow spinning up, slow reading, slow seeking, noisy, energy hogging, big, untrustworthy SOB's. Most of us couldn't care less on the number of write cycles, as long as the filesystem and OS portions of it can be written over many times within the life time of the equipment. Flash drives can already do that it seems, so what is the problem? I'll be doing *a lot* more reading than writing and I would certainly not constantly write to my flash drive at maximum speed. Why the heck would I?
The article fortunately does not talk about removing all programming from the studies. If you work with a computer it is important that you know how computers work, and why errors sometimes pop-up, and what the architecture is under the application. It is pretty impossible to completely ignore all these things, and still think you can do Computer Science on any serious level.
But CS is not very much about programming, and a good CS course should not stress programming, or maths for that matter. There is some discussion if Computer Science really is science, but that is just definitions; there is a lot of complex stuff to study besides programming and maths. Talking about maths, these "cryptoanalyst woman" most certainly know more about maths than computer science. Actually, I would be very surprised if they would call themselves computer scientists (instead of mathematicians, for instance).
I had the displeasure of using Office 97 Word to get security certification on an application of mine. Once I was bored (not difficult to get bored if you are rewriting documents you created one year ago) so I started to write down the most *obvious* annoyances.
After 4 pages of the most obvious annoyances I gave up, because my blood pressure was getting way to high. Of course, it doesn't help if the guys on the other side use a different language version, as does your collegue. Maybe users in the VS don't know, but *all* styles will be present; in 3 different languages. And each style will also be listed *again* if you happen to use a slightly bigger font, bold, italics, *the works*.
Word 2003 did nothing to the format, but at least the sidebar - if you manage to get that thing on your screen - helps you with removing all the styles you don't want. Until it is send to the other side, and all starts over again. This - and other annoyances like crashes etc - easily cost me about a month additional work.
I've got stacks upon stacks of grey boxes, but somehow I cannot sell them for the world.
The article says that with 1% of the higher winds harnassed, we could power the human race. Presumely a few of these devices will only use .001% of the power available to them. If this works it would stop us from converting oil to CO2, but the direct cooling effect is not something I am going to count on to stop global warming. It's nice that it would be energy-neutral in the *very* long run, I give you that. It won't heat up the earth.
Well, fun aside, a barely visible line of aluminium would be pretty hard to see for pilots. Of course, you wouldn't put it in air lanes, but a stray plane would be toast (literally, with all the power going through the lines) if it would fly against it. I presume it also handles thunder(storms) but lets be naive and think they've thought this all through.
At Gateway we sold Creative Labs soundcards, but because they lacked PCI we went to Ensoniq. Not for long, because the exact same soundcard suddenly became the new Soundblaster when Creative scooped them up. What you are talking about is the last real SoundBlaster. AFAIK E-Mu and Ensoniq are still subsidairies. Not that it mattered too much, the Ensoniq cards were pretty decent cards with pretty good MIDI as well. I've even kept my 8 bit SoundBlaster Pro for quite some time, but MP3's really did not sound too good :)
Check out xs4all.general, xs4all.voip and xs4all.adsl and *then* say that again.
Yeah, those stupid Dutch persons don't know squat about other languages. Shame on them, making such blatant mistakes. C'est ridicule!
"But some former citizens of Hiroshima an Nagasaki probably have somewhat mixed feelings on the issue."
No they don't. That's the point of being a "former citizen".
I can see how people would want to do this when hacking their own motherboard, but I would not like to see this become commonplace. For a starter, what to do with the oil after it has been used. I presume that you cannot reuse the oil to bake fries in. And I would really like to know if this would have negative implications considering the life-time of the equipment as well.
You obviously misspelled object. Ok, ok, and static methods.
Even then I still copy a lot of code; when I think the ties between applications is not very high and it is not complex enough to put it in seperate functions. It also makes it easier to get rid of bugs, without having to rebuild every application that was running fine - despite of the bugs.
E.g. today I made a new copy of a command registry. The command in this registry are pretty complex, so I used a design pattern instead of a simple function for the commands. Now, the commands for the applications are almost completely different. The registry however isn't. Should I put it in a seperately maintained library because I use it at two or three places? I don't think so. Besides the obvious problem with the dependency of both projects on this library, I would also have to maintain seperate design documents, test cases, use cases and what not. Before I would know it one of my collegues would use it in the wrong way, and I would have to support and keep compatability for his/her applications as well.
Nope, sometimes the copy button is your best friend. It's at least better than rewriting the same code all over again.
"Ideally, in pure capitalism, consumers would either be savvy enough to see through these 'deceptions', or at least principled enough to refuse to purchase from merchants they deem to use deceptive business practices."
...
Indeed, that's the ideal situation. In practice, this becomes impossible and there is a strong need for governmental regulation. If, e.g. I want to choose an ISP, there are the following (possible) variables to consider:
* mail service
* mail scanning (free, not free)
* helpdesk
* news service
* binary news service
* monthly fee
* setup fee
* run my own server
* server if you are a business
* geeky features (home mail server with backup, shell access)
* mobile phone access
* wifi access
* well, you get the point, glad you made this so far
*
For an average consumer this is simply too much to handle. It's like going to the supermarket and having to check each and every good-until date for each and every product that you buy. It's like having to check on the internet what food product uses good or bad embalage for the environment.
There has got to be stronger rules in force, both to protect the customer, and in this case, to have better competition. Capitalism fails if these anti-compatitative measures are allowed to take place. Just relying on the consumer is bound to fail - even if there was choice.
"Why should it be the bank's responsibility to tell the customers, "It is not a good idea to paint your user name and password on the side of your home in 26inch high letters"."
It is, because just a simple username and password for something like banking is like putting things in a safe and leave the key on the hook next to it.
You need at least two way authentication, using a secure token, SMS feedback, a list of secure numbers etc. All these have been used by the Dutch banking industry and afaik NO bank has ever relied just on username password. All do two factor transaction based authentication.
I am not saying that this will fend of all attacks but most attacks from bogus sites will definately be stopped. Anyway, what's the difference between e.g. a bogus site and a DNS-attack? How can *you* be sure that you are talking to your bank? Believe me, just relying on the certificate may not be enough.
Except that less CO2 is always a good thing, of course. Bit of a weird analogy, if you ask me. This .safe top level domain is much more debatable than that.
I think the Hatton Hoover sounds cool. Although it will probably get changed to "keep-your-hat-on, hoover!" when this thing gets to be deployed for surveilance :)
Here are some advantages of one approach against the other:
* better organization and looking at different (two) applications at the same time: dual monitors
* GUI development: wide screen monitor
* side bars, additional content: wide screen monitor (and a window manager app)
* 100 programs open at the same time: dual monitors (and multiple desktops)
* multimedia (video/games): wide screen monitor
* internet browsing: dual monitors
* email: dual monitors
At work I have significant speedups for dual monitors. But then I am creating applications where I have to debug both the client and the server at the same time. Also, when programming it is really good to have documentation next to the code. With a good IDE it is also possible to have the debug and code perspectives on different screens (e.g. Eclipse handles this *really* well). I would always go for dual monitors at work if I had the choice. Using two 17" monitors is not that expensive, with 19" you get bigger letters, but most of them are 1280x1024, just like the 17" - so only go for 19" if the price difference is neglectible.
I feel that my speedup is between 5-10% easily. So the company started saving money in about, oh, two weeks time, tops.
If you have a choice in choosing the flat screens for work:
* 4:3 aspect ratio (two flat screens does not work well, too big a turning angle for your head/eyes)
* anti-glare
* 170 degrees looking angle (if you have a rotating screen, this becomes *really* important)
* DVI is nice (better colors, less chance of syncing problems, needs a - passive - video card with dual DVI output)
* height adjustable, tiltable (forget about rotation and pivoting the screen - you won't use it)
* USB hubs are nice (but don't work well in combination with a rotating screen)
* refresh rate is not important anymore
At home I am used to watch video and play games, so I went for the wide screen. Some websites do look a bit weird on 1680 pixels wide though.
You shouldn't file this under "Geek to English" though.
Oh, I hate those kind of things. With Java Blackbelt for example they ask if something compiles. You get 3 classes or something and they then ask what goes wrong. Then I have to see the strange compiler error within that somehow. Well, bugger that, my Eclipse environment will alert me on any compiler error long before I do any testing. What's the freakin' use? I'm too old to have to worry about trick questions, so I'll leave these particular tests where they are as well.
Bah, only 1-1 pixel resolution, I'll wait until higher resolutions become available. Also, only a one/two second refresh rate? Who are they kidding? Dial knob? Don't they know that small push buttons are all the hype at the moment?