Everything you buy is a personal value proposition. If you don't like the software that comes with it, by all means -- don't buy it.
But don't try to extrapolate from your personal needs to that of everyone. A typical family that has some digital media devices (a DV camcorder, digital camera, iPod), who has an old PC will find some excellent value from this system. Using their existing monitor, keyboard and mouse they'll be able to plop in a relatively powerful media management system, surf the web, download music to their iPod, and let the kids do their homework without any additional cost.
For those PC users here who like to bitch about being able to buy cheaper PCs, do any of you really buy these cheap machines, or do you just like to sit around and point them out?
Personally, I wouldn't touch a cheap PC with a 10m clown pole. They are cheap for a reason, and I'm a power user who buys power equipment. But I am at least rational enough to know that not everyone has the same needs or desires I do.
You are gonna need a USB hub though. A decent one will run you about $30 - $50. The keyboard and mouse will fill up the existing USB ports.
Not necessarily. There are several instances where you won't:
You have a Bluetooth mouse and/or keyboard (admittedly exceedingly rare),
You have a USB keyboard with a built-in hub, or
You don't have any need for other USB devices.
Personally, if I were to buy one I already have an IBM USB mouse and keyboard, the latter of which has a built-in two port hub, allowing me to chain the mouse off the keyboard and have a port free on both the Mac mini and the keyboard for a digital camera and a Palm dock.
Here's a question: I'm not a Mac guy (although, I may be soon with prices like this). Do standard (i.e. Best Buy available) USB hubs work on Mac. My instinct is that its no problem, but I thought I'd ask.
Macs use 100% standard USB (in this case, USB 2), so yes -- you'll be just fine. You'll want to ensure you have a USB 2 hub if you want to use USB 2 speeds, of course, but otherwise any off-the-shelf USB hub will work (same goes for the Firewire port and Firewire hubs).
Of course, if I don't get modded to hell, there will be a dozen replys from the Apple "amen corner" telling me that the Apple is a better deal, etc.
I won't tell you which system is the better value for you, but let's for the pure fun of things look at that Mac Mini's software, and then figure out from there what you're paying for the naked hardware, okay?
Let's see -- the Mac Mini comes with (with prices listed at Apple's Online Store in brackets (using all USD prices):
For a grand total of $401.85 if you were to just buy the software alone, leaving the hardware portion costing you only $97.15. When you factor in the fact you don't need to outfit the system with firewall or anti-virus software, it looks like one damn fine deal to me.
Okay, the new Mac Mini is going to be perfect for my mother. It's certainly going onto the "iWant List".
iLife 05 and iWork I'm going to put on order today (if I can get through to the Apple Store -- that's for/.'ing Apple everyone;) ).
Damn. I had prepared myself this morning to find out that maybe one of the rumours was true, but all of the major rumours turned out to be true. Joy oh joy! It's like having another Christmas all over again:).
Please allow me to point one last thing out: to all of those here (and elsewhere) who complained that Macs were too expensive, it's now time to put up or shut up. Buy the new Mac Mini, or never speak of the purported high cost of Apple hardware again.
* All my development right now is on a Windows box. What's the best way to go about ensuring Linux/POSIX compatibility over the web? Compile farms? Recruiting a Linux maintainer?
This can be a really hard question to answer. Ideally you'd like to find yourself a maintainer to work with you on this sort of thing, but finding one is a different matter. Such a maintainer will either worm their own way out of the woodwork, or they won't. Recruiting one yourself will probably be a lengthy and fruitless prospect.
In the more than two years my project has been Open Source (it was closed source freeware for 5 years), recruiting more people to work on the project has been nearly useless. In that time, after lots of recruitment campaigns, I've found only 4 or 5 people who have actually made any significant contributions to the project and all of its sub-projects (the last time I tried to run a recruitment campaign a few weeks ago I got about 50 responses, virtually all from India, who somehow interpreted "looking for a volunteer developer" to mean I was looking to hire someone for a job:P).
* If I don't have access to my own server, where is the best place to host? Sourceforge (the only one I really know about) or somewhere else?
Depends completely on your project. SourceForge is a good general place to host your project if nothing else fits -- they provide a good service IMO -- but they also host any project which is Open Source. If you can find one, you might be better off using something which is a more targeted community for your type of project, whether it be by language/develpment environment used, target OS, application type, etc. That is, if you're developing a Java-based project, java.net is a good choice, as everyone there is working in Java. If you're developing on OS/2, netlabs.org is where you'll find other OS/2 developers (what few there still are). If you're coding for Linux on the PlayStation 2, playstation2-linux.com is the place for you.
Don't forget -- nothing really prevents you from registering your project on every project site that suits your project, although maintaining all of those active communities might prove very time consuming!
* Somebody's submitted a patch. What's the protocol for crediting them for the work?
Create your own. Typically what I do is credit the user by name and e-mail address during the CVS check-in. As I use the CVS log as the basis of the changelog for each release, this information also becomes part of the changelog. I also try to add an entry for them to my "Special Thanks" section of my Release Notes, and sometimes a comment crediting their fix/addition right in the source code. If the contribution is really significant, they usually also get a credit in the copyright statement.
One thing you should do, however, (something that I try to do at least), is to ask them if they want credit. Some people won't (and I've had a few contributions like this) for various reasons. Maybe they don't want to be bothered with questions, or maybe their employer has a draconian policy against this sort of thing (although in the latter case, you probably don't want to accept anything new from them so as to CYA. A minor fix that won't be subject to any copyright problems should be fine, however (ie: someone pointing out that an "i--" should be "i++", etc.).
* What are the criteria for determining whether or not something is "pre-alpha", "alpha", "beta", etc. Is there a set standard, or do I get to determine this on my own?
Well, there used to be a standard, but far too many projects have v
I recall OS/2 2.1 being out before Win95, but I'm pretty sure Warp came out later.
Quite incorrect. OS/2 v2.1 was released in 1992, whereas OS/2 WARP v3 was released in November 1994, about 10 months before Windows 95 was released (ref: http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2Warp.html). I still have the boxes to prove it.
2.1 was still better than Win95...except for software availability when developers started developing to the Win9x-specific libraries.
Well, that's what happens when you abuse your monopoly position. Let's not all forget this was the time period when Microsoft was at their worst, with per-processor licensing (you paid for DOS and Windows on every machine, whether it came with DOS and Windows pre-installed or not, causing OS/2 machines to be more expensive), threats to hardware manufacturers ("Install only our software or we'll raise prices on you"), and secretive pricing schedules (so you never knew if your competition was getting a better price then you were).
Incorrect - that perfect PC I want costs $2000 15 freaking years in a row!!! Ok, its specs changed quite a bit, but so did software's.
Look who is wrong...as I said, I bought that XT clone (an NEC V20-based system) in around the same time Compaq introduced their first 80386-based machine, in 1987 -- it was already TWO generations behind, and was hardly a "perfect PC". If you wanted a "perfect PC", you were looking at closer to $10 000.
Thus my original statement still stands, and you're an idiot for not reading the rest of my post. Enjoy!
This was bound to happen anyway, and was more a factor of hardware getting faster, more capable, and cheaper.
Microsoft's software hasn't got any cheaper, while PC's have. It's been the driving down of the TCO which has brought PC's into the average home. Microsoft was around back when I bought my first XT clone (with no modem, networking, or even a hard drive, and only CGA graphics) for about $2500 (CDN) -- and this was at a time when Compaq was releasing their first 80386-based machine. Now you can get machines that absolutely nuke this machine out of the water for $500 or less. They do more and cost less. No amount of software wizardry would have brought the PC to everyone's home if the hardware hadn't advanced as well as it has, and if not for for Internet and audio and video improvements.
Give them a platform that is virtually universal in the industry.
There is no definnable benefit to this. Besides which, it's quite likely that without Microsoft Windows, the PC would have mostly consolodated around OS/2 a long, long time ago.
Make computing easy
When? Sorry, but that title goes to Apple, which made computing easy 11 years before Microsoft even started to get close.
Make computing cheap via making it everywhere and driving down the cost of hardware.
They did no such thing. Business demand for faster spreadsheet processing was the initial impetus. Hardware costs were being driven down for decades before Microsoft ever came along. Just look at the simple calculator, and what one would have cost you in the late 60's versus now.
Managing to get on the internet truck late and yet still be the driving force that brought it to home users via making it so easy to get on and use.
No, IBM's OS/2 WARP v3 beat them to that title a year before Windows 95 was released. It had a built-in web browser, e-mail client, news reader, gopher client, decent telnet client (something the base Windows distros still don't have...) and other useful Internet tools. When Windows 95 was released in August of 1995, it didn't even have a decent web browser.
Sorry, but Microsoft didn't so any of the things you've claimed, and all of them would have happened without Microsoft. It's called "progress", and it would have driven on ahead with or without Microsoft. If anything, Microsoft has stifled tech growth through their monopolistic practices. Operating systems like Mac OS X show us where we all could be if there wasn't a single dominant software company running the show.
I've got nothing personal against Canada. It's just that it kinda makes me scratch my head when I hear somebody ask, "Why is X available in America but not available in Canada?" That's a big "duh," as far as I'm concerned. Itty bitty market
That's not the reason. Tivo at one time licensed their set-top box technology to other companies, including the likes of Sony. Sony already has channels here in Canada, and could have put boxes into their Sony Stores (which are in virtually every major mall in Canada). Or they (Tivo) could have sold online to Canadian addresses. But they don't.
What with the FTA and NAFTA, setting up channels is hardly any more difficulat then in the US -- indeed, there are many channels which deal with both countries. They could have sold in the likes of Sears or Walmart for example -- but again, didn't.
But that's besides the point. Myy intent wasn't to grouse about the lack of Tivo in Canada. I would have liked to own one, but if Tivo doesn't want to sell here, they won't get my money. Simple as that, so be it, and such-and-such.
My point was that devices like the EyeTV do fill a niche in places like here in Canada where the usual competing offerings simply aren't available. I can buy an EyeTV unit through Apple Canada's website (and probably elsewhere -- I haven't bothered to check around), but I can't buy a Tivo through either a Canadian source or through Tivo directly (although if I really wanted one, I could find someone to buy one in the US and ship it to me. There aren't any export or import restrictions on the device itself that prevents me from actually owning one).
I'm somewhat interested whether playback using Apple's QuickTime MPEG-2 Playback Component makes a significant difference here. It's only $30 CDN ($19.95 US -- I guess they haven't changed their pricing since the Canadian dollar gained on the US dollar), and doesn't require QuickTime Pro, so I imagine a non-dual G5 user who wanted to use this system to watch their captured video could just buy this.
I'm tempted to buy this to test it out and post the results here. Does anyone here have the MPEG-2 playback add-on for QuickTime who can comment on this?
On Monday, comcast will install a $10 a month PVR with dual tuner and one that can record 15 hours of HDTV and 60 of regular TV. Why should I invest in a dual G5 power mac and an additional $350 to basically get the same functionality.
Well, not everyone in this world lives in your country.
Lots of people take it for granted that PVRss are available everywhere. They aren't. Here in Canada, I have never been able to buy a Tivo up here, because Tivo has never sold their devices up here. Why? Who the hell knows.
The only traditional PVR games in town up here rquire you to sign up for a digital satellite or digital cable service. Me, I'm happy with a basic cable package as I don't watch that much TV -- so long as I get the CBC, CBC Newsworld, and the Space channel, I'm completely happy.
But I'd still love to own a PVR. The only way that is going to happen for me is to buy a PC (in this case being "personal computer", and not just the "IBM PC compatible" platform) add-on PVR. And as I'm already a Mac user, a solution like this make sense for me (although IMO it's still a bit too expensive for my tastes).
Starbucks is in the business of providing gourmet coffee bean derivatives in a seemingly up-scale environment. The fact that people decide to bring their laptops, jack in, and suck power, wasn't their choice.
Then why offer WiFi access, and electrical outlets near customer seating?
You know, if businesses are really having problems with this, all they need to do is not put electrical outlets in seating areas.
I see this from time to time -- electrical outlets in unnecessary places. Sure, the person who runs the vacuum at the end of the day may need an outlet or two, but nowhere near the number many establishments have in place, nor in locations directly adjacent to customer seating.
If a business doesn't like people plugging in, the simple solution is to remove the outlet, splice the wires together, and put a plate over the wiring box. Problem solved.
Tomorrow, we may find out your most precious "science" was fraudulantly doctored, but 1 plus 1 will always equal 2. Period.
Not true (or, at least not true without qualification), as it depends upon the field under which these values are defined. Indeed, in the field of boolean algebra, the third postulate is 1 + 1 = 1.
The above quote, by the way, shows you know absolutely nothing, nada, zip, zilch about mathematics
I wouldn't want to accuse you of anything so strongly worded, but I don't know how to finish this sentance.
Just to add to this, for non-Mac users who don't know, Apple's X11 support isn't even installed in a default OS X install. Nor is it preloaded onto their systems. If you want it, you either have to select it at install time, or use your OS X install disc(s) to install it yourself, as I had to do on my pre-installed PowerBook G4.
Technical users will have no problem installing this to get OpenOffice installed and running, but many Mac users won't have any desire to do so to run an office suite which has a terrible look and feel on OS X.
How the hell could a damn droid use lightsabers? I thought there was some form of force sensativity needed (to use the terms from the RPG)? Or perhaps that is only needed to do all the whiz-bang tricks with 'em.
I would think the latter is probably the case. You probably need the Force to be able to make a lightsabre useful in combat against blasters (if you're a humanoid at least).
But let's not forget -- Han Solo used Luke's lightsabre in Empire Strikes Back to open the stomach of his tauntaun, and Han certainly isn't a Jedi.
The only way any product in this space is going to go places is if it works just like Office, acts just like Office, feels just like Office, etc. Office is the standard, and for 99% of people that use it, it's flawless. Any deviation from this standard suite, even if it's an improvement, is nothing but a nuisance to the average user.
Let's clarify a bit -- are you talking about average MS Office user, or average home computer user?
Because if it's the latter, most of them don't use or have much need of an Office suite, never mind MS Office. Most computer users aren't sitting around writing documents anymore -- the time when people bought computers as a typewriter replacement is long gone, surpassed by the ascendance of the Internet and digital music and photos (and in the very near future, digital video). 99% of home computer users aren't sitting around word processing, and if they are, most don't need to exchange documents (as chances are they're using it for writing school essays and such).
I'm not an average user, but my need for a word processor is minimal. I've never owned a copy of Microsoft Office, and have only used it a handful of times in my lifetime. I got through University running applications like IBM Works and Lotus WordPro, and my first job (with IBM) likewise had standardized on Lotus WordPro.
Admittedly, I'm a developer, and don't need a word processor terribly often. If I'm creating documents, it's often for digital dissemination anyhow, in which case I can use HTML, TXT, RTF, or PDF for document distribution, all of which can be created by any tool.
I've been thinking about picking up Keynote (as I do have need to do presentations from time to time), and if this article is accurate I'd pick up this new suite in an instant. My PowerBook G4 didn't come with a word processor of any sort, and OpenOffice on the Mac has a terrible UI. I rarely need to do any document exchange, so more important to me is something with a good UI and a good price. Such a suite from Apple could fit both of my needs quite well.
Okay -- I don't have any special inside information or anything, but I have been watching the commentary on the new Star Wars DVDs this past week, and after looking at these pictures have some thoughts to share.
Many of these pictures look to be of the type that are taken for marketing purposes, and at least one of them looks to be unfinished. Take a look at the pictures of General Grevious (sp? -- the robot with the lightsabres). All computer generated of course, with what you'd expect a lightsabre to look like. Now take a look at the shot of Darth Sideous/Anakin, in particular their sabres. Note they are just coloured poles -- no "glow". It would appear that these photos haven't gone through post processing yet, as I can't imagine Lucasfilm's marketing department releasing them that way.
This is important, as it's a vector upon which Lucasfilm will probably focus to try to track the source of the leak. Expect someone to get sacked. Some of the photos are obviously unfinished, and it won't be hard to get a list of people who have access to the originals.
Now I'm going to hypothesize about a few things here which, if correct, may turn out to be spoilers. Or they might be worth less than the electrons used to transmit this message. You've been warned. If you don't want to risk potentially reading about something that happens in the film, stop reading here.
With that out of the way, the other photos I find interesting are the ones of the Emperor in the background with Anakin and Darth Tyrannus in a lightsabre duel. It appears to be shades of Eps 6 (Return of the Jedi), with Luke facing off against Vader. In this case, however, I'm presuming that Anakin wins (looking at one photo, apparently by cutting off both Tyrannus' hands, again much like Eps. 6). Thus, it appears to be somewhat of a redux of Return of the Jedi, but with the difference that where Luke wouldn't turn towards the dark side, Anakin (obviously) did.
Which brings up a few interesting questions. Apparently Lucas is going with the whole concept that there can never be any more than two Sith at any given time -- a student and a master. And that as the student gets older, Sideous/Palpatine gets an up-and-coming Jedi to kill them off for him, becoming the new "student" in the process. This could put the whole duel in ROTJ in a new light.
It also adds some new evidence to something I've long wondered about in the prequels, having to do with Anakin being the one prophisized to "bring balance to the Force". Qui-gon, Yoda, and the other Jedi appear to have made the assumption that this can only be a positive thing. However, look at those who are the masters of the Force. There are at least a dozen (or more) Jedi, but only ever two Sith at any given time. If the Force is out of balance, it would appear to be in favour of the "light" side, in which case the imbalance is a good thing. To bring balance to the Force could entail equalizing those who are its masters. If Anakin kills Tyrannus, that leaves two Sith. And from the original trilogy, we know after Eps 3 there are only two Jedi left (Obi-wan and Yoda). Perfectly balanced.
It's good to see Kit Fisto makes another showing, at least:).
THANKS! That seems to have helped a lot. my ssh connection is at least still up... going to try it out later.. this will help me a *lot* next time i'm oncall (the reason i got the nokia 6230).
I'm glad to hear this helped you out. Feel free to drop me a line if you run into any other problems -- I'm fairly new at this myself, but am happy to share my experiences.
it's more of a function of the provider than the phone/setup i have going.>/I>
Try this. Go into System Preferences -> Network -> Bluetooth (or whatever connection type you're using) -> PPP -> PPP Options, and disable "Send PPP Echo Packets".
Apparently this is a somewhat common problem when using GPRS connections o Mac OS X. I was experiencing similar disconnections before I found this tip online.
Other than for documentation/support helping you to initially set these things up, both are functions of your phone rather than your cell provider.
I just got a Sony Ericsson T610, running on the Fido network hre in Canada. They aren't Mac friendly from what I can see (they provide no mention of it anywhere in their documentation or online), and provide very little Bluetooth information, but I was still able to get full connectivity between my T610 and my PowerBook G4 quickly and easily just by using Apple's Bluetooth setup wizard.
If you're having problems, chances are it's either user error or due to problems with the phone you've chosen (some early Bluetooth cells don't properly implement the spec, for example), and should have nothing to do with your provider.
The PowerBook is outfitted with WiFi (802.11g) and Bluetooth, using WiFi when at home/office, and GPRS through the T610 via Bluetooth when on the road.
The Tungsten C is outfitted with WiFi (802.11b) and InfraRed, using WiFi when at the home/office, and GPRS through the T610 via IR when on the road (technically I can get it online via WiFi if I use the PowerBook as a bridge in ad-hoc mode, but it is exceedingly rare that I'd ever need to have both the laptop and the T|C online at the same time when outside WiFi range).
So far, this is a set-up I'm quite pleased with. The only way it could be better were if the Tungsten C supported Bluetooth as well as 802.11b.
I can't recommend Bluetooth highly enough for this sort of connectivity either. So long as I'm within 10m of the phone, I can connect to it from the laptop. And Mac OS X's Bluetooth support is excellent -- I'm able to synchronize my contact list and calendar, transfer files back and forth, send and receive SMS messages from my desktop, dial phone numbers, and connect to the internet -- all without wires, or any set-up hassle.
SSH has been important for me, as one of my primary uses for this sort of connectivity will be CVS source repository access through SSH.
I've only had the phone for a week, but I'm quite pleased with it in general. I could have done without the camera portion I suppose (the resolution and quality is terrible), but might come in handy for something someday.
Overall, the set-up appears to be working well, and I'm as pleased as punch with it. Everything is nicely portable, and I have instant access everywhere I go. Set-up has been a snap, and everything works as expected. Now if only I could get cable modem speeds out of this set-up, I'd never work at a desk ever again:).
Far be it for me to assume, but couldn't nasa build build theyselves a telescoping observation point, and script out a whole series of movements? After all, it's not like things are all a hustle bustle on mars.
They do script out a whole series of moves, but terrain can limit how far they can see ahead. Take the one moving up the side of the crater at this very moment. Where to head when it reaches the lip? What if there is a big rock in the way? How to tell what's behind it?
Remember too that part of the movement isn't just a path planning problem. It isn't only "what is the best route to get from A to B" -- it's also a matter of "where should we go next for the best science bang for our buck?". If you don't stop and look around every so often and wait for instructions, you could easily bypass a potentially scientifically interesting site. You don't want to script it to move 50m meters at once, only to find afterwards that you've passed a small depression containing ice (remember, this isn't realtime -- if you find out at all that you've passed something interesting it won't be for several hours after the rover has actually done so).
This isn't a race -- it's a sight-seeing tour. As such, you move a bit, look around for anything interesting in your local area, test some rocks, move a bit more -- etc.
I know it isn't going to happen due to the distances involved, but I'd love it if one of these rovers (or one of the rovers to follow...) were to come across Viking I and/or II. It would be interesting to see how they have withstood the test of time in the last 28 years since their landing. I imagine there is quite a bit of useful science that could be conducted, as both are known variables from nearly 30 years ago, and we have a lot of data from them about their surroundings.
At the same time, Viking I and Viking II are two of the extraterrestrial missions I have early memories of. I was three when they landed, and continued transmitting data until I was nine. So these are old friends I wouldn't mind revisiting.
The current missions aren't close enough to either one to make it, but maybe a future mission will give up a glimpse of these past heroes. One can hope:).
Slashdot Mirror
Everything you buy is a personal value proposition. If you don't like the software that comes with it, by all means -- don't buy it.
But don't try to extrapolate from your personal needs to that of everyone. A typical family that has some digital media devices (a DV camcorder, digital camera, iPod), who has an old PC will find some excellent value from this system. Using their existing monitor, keyboard and mouse they'll be able to plop in a relatively powerful media management system, surf the web, download music to their iPod, and let the kids do their homework without any additional cost.
For those PC users here who like to bitch about being able to buy cheaper PCs, do any of you really buy these cheap machines, or do you just like to sit around and point them out?
Personally, I wouldn't touch a cheap PC with a 10m clown pole. They are cheap for a reason, and I'm a power user who buys power equipment. But I am at least rational enough to know that not everyone has the same needs or desires I do.
Yaz.
Not necessarily. There are several instances where you won't:
Personally, if I were to buy one I already have an IBM USB mouse and keyboard, the latter of which has a built-in two port hub, allowing me to chain the mouse off the keyboard and have a port free on both the Mac mini and the keyboard for a digital camera and a Palm dock.
Macs use 100% standard USB (in this case, USB 2), so yes -- you'll be just fine. You'll want to ensure you have a USB 2 hub if you want to use USB 2 speeds, of course, but otherwise any off-the-shelf USB hub will work (same goes for the Firewire port and Firewire hubs).
Yaz.
I won't tell you which system is the better value for you, but let's for the pure fun of things look at that Mac Mini's software, and then figure out from there what you're paying for the naked hardware, okay?
Let's see -- the Mac Mini comes with (with prices listed at Apple's Online Store in brackets (using all USD prices):
For a grand total of $401.85 if you were to just buy the software alone, leaving the hardware portion costing you only $97.15 . When you factor in the fact you don't need to outfit the system with firewall or anti-virus software, it looks like one damn fine deal to me.
Yaz.
It's all so beautiful...[sniff].
Okay, the new Mac Mini is going to be perfect for my mother. It's certainly going onto the "iWant List".
iLife 05 and iWork I'm going to put on order today (if I can get through to the Apple Store -- that's for /.'ing Apple everyone ;) ).
Damn. I had prepared myself this morning to find out that maybe one of the rumours was true, but all of the major rumours turned out to be true. Joy oh joy! It's like having another Christmas all over again :).
Please allow me to point one last thing out: to all of those here (and elsewhere) who complained that Macs were too expensive, it's now time to put up or shut up. Buy the new Mac Mini, or never speak of the purported high cost of Apple hardware again.
Yaz.
One minor typo/error in my list of release stages. The entry for "beta" reads:
...when it should actually read:
Sorry if this caused any confusion.
Yaz.
As an Open Source developer myself, who likewise has their project hosted on SourceForge, maybe I can help somewhat.
* All my development right now is on a Windows box. What's the best way to go about ensuring Linux/POSIX compatibility over the web? Compile farms? Recruiting a Linux maintainer?This can be a really hard question to answer. Ideally you'd like to find yourself a maintainer to work with you on this sort of thing, but finding one is a different matter. Such a maintainer will either worm their own way out of the woodwork, or they won't. Recruiting one yourself will probably be a lengthy and fruitless prospect.
In the more than two years my project has been Open Source (it was closed source freeware for 5 years), recruiting more people to work on the project has been nearly useless. In that time, after lots of recruitment campaigns, I've found only 4 or 5 people who have actually made any significant contributions to the project and all of its sub-projects (the last time I tried to run a recruitment campaign a few weeks ago I got about 50 responses, virtually all from India, who somehow interpreted "looking for a volunteer developer" to mean I was looking to hire someone for a job :P).
* If I don't have access to my own server, where is the best place to host? Sourceforge (the only one I really know about) or somewhere else?Depends completely on your project. SourceForge is a good general place to host your project if nothing else fits -- they provide a good service IMO -- but they also host any project which is Open Source. If you can find one, you might be better off using something which is a more targeted community for your type of project, whether it be by language/develpment environment used, target OS, application type, etc. That is, if you're developing a Java-based project, java.net is a good choice, as everyone there is working in Java. If you're developing on OS/2, netlabs.org is where you'll find other OS/2 developers (what few there still are). If you're coding for Linux on the PlayStation 2, playstation2-linux.com is the place for you.
Don't forget -- nothing really prevents you from registering your project on every project site that suits your project, although maintaining all of those active communities might prove very time consuming!
* Somebody's submitted a patch. What's the protocol for crediting them for the work?Create your own. Typically what I do is credit the user by name and e-mail address during the CVS check-in. As I use the CVS log as the basis of the changelog for each release, this information also becomes part of the changelog. I also try to add an entry for them to my "Special Thanks" section of my Release Notes, and sometimes a comment crediting their fix/addition right in the source code. If the contribution is really significant, they usually also get a credit in the copyright statement.
One thing you should do, however, (something that I try to do at least), is to ask them if they want credit. Some people won't (and I've had a few contributions like this) for various reasons. Maybe they don't want to be bothered with questions, or maybe their employer has a draconian policy against this sort of thing (although in the latter case, you probably don't want to accept anything new from them so as to CYA. A minor fix that won't be subject to any copyright problems should be fine, however (ie: someone pointing out that an "i--" should be "i++", etc.).
* What are the criteria for determining whether or not something is "pre-alpha", "alpha", "beta", etc. Is there a set standard, or do I get to determine this on my own?Well, there used to be a standard, but far too many projects have v
Quite incorrect. OS/2 v2.1 was released in 1992, whereas OS/2 WARP v3 was released in November 1994, about 10 months before Windows 95 was released (ref: http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2Warp.html). I still have the boxes to prove it.
Well, that's what happens when you abuse your monopoly position. Let's not all forget this was the time period when Microsoft was at their worst, with per-processor licensing (you paid for DOS and Windows on every machine, whether it came with DOS and Windows pre-installed or not, causing OS/2 machines to be more expensive), threats to hardware manufacturers ("Install only our software or we'll raise prices on you"), and secretive pricing schedules (so you never knew if your competition was getting a better price then you were).
Yaz.
Look who is wrong...as I said, I bought that XT clone (an NEC V20-based system) in around the same time Compaq introduced their first 80386-based machine, in 1987 -- it was already TWO generations behind, and was hardly a "perfect PC". If you wanted a "perfect PC", you were looking at closer to $10 000.
Thus my original statement still stands, and you're an idiot for not reading the rest of my post. Enjoy!
Yaz.
This was bound to happen anyway, and was more a factor of hardware getting faster, more capable, and cheaper.
Microsoft's software hasn't got any cheaper, while PC's have. It's been the driving down of the TCO which has brought PC's into the average home. Microsoft was around back when I bought my first XT clone (with no modem, networking, or even a hard drive, and only CGA graphics) for about $2500 (CDN) -- and this was at a time when Compaq was releasing their first 80386-based machine. Now you can get machines that absolutely nuke this machine out of the water for $500 or less. They do more and cost less. No amount of software wizardry would have brought the PC to everyone's home if the hardware hadn't advanced as well as it has, and if not for for Internet and audio and video improvements.
There is no definnable benefit to this. Besides which, it's quite likely that without Microsoft Windows, the PC would have mostly consolodated around OS/2 a long, long time ago.
When? Sorry, but that title goes to Apple, which made computing easy 11 years before Microsoft even started to get close.
They did no such thing. Business demand for faster spreadsheet processing was the initial impetus. Hardware costs were being driven down for decades before Microsoft ever came along. Just look at the simple calculator, and what one would have cost you in the late 60's versus now.
No, IBM's OS/2 WARP v3 beat them to that title a year before Windows 95 was released. It had a built-in web browser, e-mail client, news reader, gopher client, decent telnet client (something the base Windows distros still don't have...) and other useful Internet tools. When Windows 95 was released in August of 1995, it didn't even have a decent web browser.
Sorry, but Microsoft didn't so any of the things you've claimed, and all of them would have happened without Microsoft. It's called "progress", and it would have driven on ahead with or without Microsoft. If anything, Microsoft has stifled tech growth through their monopolistic practices. Operating systems like Mac OS X show us where we all could be if there wasn't a single dominant software company running the show.
Yaz.
That's not the reason. Tivo at one time licensed their set-top box technology to other companies, including the likes of Sony. Sony already has channels here in Canada, and could have put boxes into their Sony Stores (which are in virtually every major mall in Canada). Or they (Tivo) could have sold online to Canadian addresses. But they don't.
What with the FTA and NAFTA, setting up channels is hardly any more difficulat then in the US -- indeed, there are many channels which deal with both countries. They could have sold in the likes of Sears or Walmart for example -- but again, didn't.
But that's besides the point. Myy intent wasn't to grouse about the lack of Tivo in Canada. I would have liked to own one, but if Tivo doesn't want to sell here, they won't get my money. Simple as that, so be it, and such-and-such.
My point was that devices like the EyeTV do fill a niche in places like here in Canada where the usual competing offerings simply aren't available. I can buy an EyeTV unit through Apple Canada's website (and probably elsewhere -- I haven't bothered to check around), but I can't buy a Tivo through either a Canadian source or through Tivo directly (although if I really wanted one, I could find someone to buy one in the US and ship it to me. There aren't any export or import restrictions on the device itself that prevents me from actually owning one).
Yaz.
I'm somewhat interested whether playback using Apple's QuickTime MPEG-2 Playback Component makes a significant difference here. It's only $30 CDN ($19.95 US -- I guess they haven't changed their pricing since the Canadian dollar gained on the US dollar), and doesn't require QuickTime Pro, so I imagine a non-dual G5 user who wanted to use this system to watch their captured video could just buy this.
I'm tempted to buy this to test it out and post the results here. Does anyone here have the MPEG-2 playback add-on for QuickTime who can comment on this?
Yaz.
Well, not everyone in this world lives in your country.
Lots of people take it for granted that PVRss are available everywhere. They aren't. Here in Canada, I have never been able to buy a Tivo up here, because Tivo has never sold their devices up here. Why? Who the hell knows.
The only traditional PVR games in town up here rquire you to sign up for a digital satellite or digital cable service. Me, I'm happy with a basic cable package as I don't watch that much TV -- so long as I get the CBC, CBC Newsworld, and the Space channel, I'm completely happy.
But I'd still love to own a PVR. The only way that is going to happen for me is to buy a PC (in this case being "personal computer", and not just the "IBM PC compatible" platform) add-on PVR. And as I'm already a Mac user, a solution like this make sense for me (although IMO it's still a bit too expensive for my tastes).
Yaz.
Then why offer WiFi access, and electrical outlets near customer seating?
You know, if businesses are really having problems with this, all they need to do is not put electrical outlets in seating areas.
I see this from time to time -- electrical outlets in unnecessary places. Sure, the person who runs the vacuum at the end of the day may need an outlet or two, but nowhere near the number many establishments have in place, nor in locations directly adjacent to customer seating.
If a business doesn't like people plugging in, the simple solution is to remove the outlet, splice the wires together, and put a plate over the wiring box. Problem solved.
Yaz.
Not true (or, at least not true without qualification), as it depends upon the field under which these values are defined. Indeed, in the field of boolean algebra, the third postulate is 1 + 1 = 1 .
I wouldn't want to accuse you of anything so strongly worded, but I don't know how to finish this sentance.
Yaz.
I seriously doubt I'll ever be able to prove it, but I feel fairly confident than P != NP.
I hope someone proves me wrong -- I really do.
Yaz.
Just to add to this, for non-Mac users who don't know, Apple's X11 support isn't even installed in a default OS X install. Nor is it preloaded onto their systems. If you want it, you either have to select it at install time, or use your OS X install disc(s) to install it yourself, as I had to do on my pre-installed PowerBook G4.
Technical users will have no problem installing this to get OpenOffice installed and running, but many Mac users won't have any desire to do so to run an office suite which has a terrible look and feel on OS X.
Yaz.
I would think the latter is probably the case. You probably need the Force to be able to make a lightsabre useful in combat against blasters (if you're a humanoid at least).
But let's not forget -- Han Solo used Luke's lightsabre in Empire Strikes Back to open the stomach of his tauntaun, and Han certainly isn't a Jedi.
Yaz.
Let's clarify a bit -- are you talking about average MS Office user, or average home computer user?
Because if it's the latter, most of them don't use or have much need of an Office suite, never mind MS Office. Most computer users aren't sitting around writing documents anymore -- the time when people bought computers as a typewriter replacement is long gone, surpassed by the ascendance of the Internet and digital music and photos (and in the very near future, digital video). 99% of home computer users aren't sitting around word processing, and if they are, most don't need to exchange documents (as chances are they're using it for writing school essays and such).
I'm not an average user, but my need for a word processor is minimal. I've never owned a copy of Microsoft Office, and have only used it a handful of times in my lifetime. I got through University running applications like IBM Works and Lotus WordPro, and my first job (with IBM) likewise had standardized on Lotus WordPro.
Admittedly, I'm a developer, and don't need a word processor terribly often. If I'm creating documents, it's often for digital dissemination anyhow, in which case I can use HTML, TXT, RTF, or PDF for document distribution, all of which can be created by any tool.
I've been thinking about picking up Keynote (as I do have need to do presentations from time to time), and if this article is accurate I'd pick up this new suite in an instant. My PowerBook G4 didn't come with a word processor of any sort, and OpenOffice on the Mac has a terrible UI. I rarely need to do any document exchange, so more important to me is something with a good UI and a good price. Such a suite from Apple could fit both of my needs quite well.
Yaz.
Okay -- I don't have any special inside information or anything, but I have been watching the commentary on the new Star Wars DVDs this past week, and after looking at these pictures have some thoughts to share.
Many of these pictures look to be of the type that are taken for marketing purposes, and at least one of them looks to be unfinished. Take a look at the pictures of General Grevious (sp? -- the robot with the lightsabres). All computer generated of course, with what you'd expect a lightsabre to look like. Now take a look at the shot of Darth Sideous/Anakin, in particular their sabres. Note they are just coloured poles -- no "glow". It would appear that these photos haven't gone through post processing yet, as I can't imagine Lucasfilm's marketing department releasing them that way.
This is important, as it's a vector upon which Lucasfilm will probably focus to try to track the source of the leak. Expect someone to get sacked. Some of the photos are obviously unfinished, and it won't be hard to get a list of people who have access to the originals.
Now I'm going to hypothesize about a few things here which, if correct, may turn out to be spoilers. Or they might be worth less than the electrons used to transmit this message. You've been warned. If you don't want to risk potentially reading about something that happens in the film, stop reading here.
With that out of the way, the other photos I find interesting are the ones of the Emperor in the background with Anakin and Darth Tyrannus in a lightsabre duel. It appears to be shades of Eps 6 (Return of the Jedi), with Luke facing off against Vader. In this case, however, I'm presuming that Anakin wins (looking at one photo, apparently by cutting off both Tyrannus' hands, again much like Eps. 6). Thus, it appears to be somewhat of a redux of Return of the Jedi, but with the difference that where Luke wouldn't turn towards the dark side, Anakin (obviously) did.
Which brings up a few interesting questions. Apparently Lucas is going with the whole concept that there can never be any more than two Sith at any given time -- a student and a master. And that as the student gets older, Sideous/Palpatine gets an up-and-coming Jedi to kill them off for him, becoming the new "student" in the process. This could put the whole duel in ROTJ in a new light.
It also adds some new evidence to something I've long wondered about in the prequels, having to do with Anakin being the one prophisized to "bring balance to the Force". Qui-gon, Yoda, and the other Jedi appear to have made the assumption that this can only be a positive thing. However, look at those who are the masters of the Force. There are at least a dozen (or more) Jedi, but only ever two Sith at any given time. If the Force is out of balance, it would appear to be in favour of the "light" side, in which case the imbalance is a good thing. To bring balance to the Force could entail equalizing those who are its masters. If Anakin kills Tyrannus, that leaves two Sith. And from the original trilogy, we know after Eps 3 there are only two Jedi left (Obi-wan and Yoda). Perfectly balanced.
It's good to see Kit Fisto makes another showing, at least :).
Yaz.
I'm glad to hear this helped you out. Feel free to drop me a line if you run into any other problems -- I'm fairly new at this myself, but am happy to share my experiences.
Yaz.
Try this. Go into System Preferences -> Network -> Bluetooth (or whatever connection type you're using) -> PPP -> PPP Options, and disable "Send PPP Echo Packets".
Apparently this is a somewhat common problem when using GPRS connections o Mac OS X. I was experiencing similar disconnections before I found this tip online.
HTH!
Yaz.
Other than for documentation/support helping you to initially set these things up, both are functions of your phone rather than your cell provider.
I just got a Sony Ericsson T610, running on the Fido network hre in Canada. They aren't Mac friendly from what I can see (they provide no mention of it anywhere in their documentation or online), and provide very little Bluetooth information, but I was still able to get full connectivity between my T610 and my PowerBook G4 quickly and easily just by using Apple's Bluetooth setup wizard.
If you're having problems, chances are it's either user error or due to problems with the phone you've chosen (some early Bluetooth cells don't properly implement the spec, for example), and should have nothing to do with your provider.
Yaz.
I've recently hooked myself up with a similar set-up, and have recently been writing about it in my journal. I'll detail it a bit here.
Here's what I'm running:
How everything is connected:
So far, this is a set-up I'm quite pleased with. The only way it could be better were if the Tungsten C supported Bluetooth as well as 802.11b.
I can't recommend Bluetooth highly enough for this sort of connectivity either. So long as I'm within 10m of the phone, I can connect to it from the laptop. And Mac OS X's Bluetooth support is excellent -- I'm able to synchronize my contact list and calendar, transfer files back and forth, send and receive SMS messages from my desktop, dial phone numbers, and connect to the internet -- all without wires, or any set-up hassle.
SSH has been important for me, as one of my primary uses for this sort of connectivity will be CVS source repository access through SSH.
I've only had the phone for a week, but I'm quite pleased with it in general. I could have done without the camera portion I suppose (the resolution and quality is terrible), but might come in handy for something someday.
Overall, the set-up appears to be working well, and I'm as pleased as punch with it. Everything is nicely portable, and I have instant access everywhere I go. Set-up has been a snap, and everything works as expected. Now if only I could get cable modem speeds out of this set-up, I'd never work at a desk ever again :).
Yaz.
They do script out a whole series of moves, but terrain can limit how far they can see ahead. Take the one moving up the side of the crater at this very moment. Where to head when it reaches the lip? What if there is a big rock in the way? How to tell what's behind it?
Remember too that part of the movement isn't just a path planning problem. It isn't only "what is the best route to get from A to B" -- it's also a matter of "where should we go next for the best science bang for our buck?". If you don't stop and look around every so often and wait for instructions, you could easily bypass a potentially scientifically interesting site. You don't want to script it to move 50m meters at once, only to find afterwards that you've passed a small depression containing ice (remember, this isn't realtime -- if you find out at all that you've passed something interesting it won't be for several hours after the rover has actually done so).
This isn't a race -- it's a sight-seeing tour. As such, you move a bit, look around for anything interesting in your local area, test some rocks, move a bit more -- etc.
Yaz.
I know it isn't going to happen due to the distances involved, but I'd love it if one of these rovers (or one of the rovers to follow...) were to come across Viking I and/or II. It would be interesting to see how they have withstood the test of time in the last 28 years since their landing. I imagine there is quite a bit of useful science that could be conducted, as both are known variables from nearly 30 years ago, and we have a lot of data from them about their surroundings.
At the same time, Viking I and Viking II are two of the extraterrestrial missions I have early memories of. I was three when they landed, and continued transmitting data until I was nine. So these are old friends I wouldn't mind revisiting.
The current missions aren't close enough to either one to make it, but maybe a future mission will give up a glimpse of these past heroes. One can hope :).
Yaz.