And the general public gets nothing...errr...wait, better quality sound and image. hmmmm.
And that would be VERY important if it was necessary. Why is our government mandating what happens in the market? They should not have wasted our tax dollars forcing this change to occur.
Buying tuners and TVs gives money to the wrong people and takes it away from the wrong people. Personally it pisses me off that technically oriented people fail to realize the nonsense that HDTV is.
You were fucked in the ass by the government and private industry and now you are thanking them for it?
I may like Bush (ok, yeah, hit my karma) but I am scared to death of who he will put in charge...
Your wording is vague on whether you do or not but how could you possibly like a President that repeatedly puts your Constitutional rights at risk and may appoint people to high-ranking posts that might further endanger those rights?
When you vote for the office of President you aren't voting for just that single seat. You are voting for all the possible seats that President might appoint (ie the Supreme Court).
No matter how I feel about a particular individual I have to pay close attention to how that individual might change the course of history and the rights Americans have grown to ignore during his tenure.
Welcome to the real world. You don't have to wear Armani, but looking nice is usually a big plus as is being able to read your audiance.
I wear jeans and sweatshirts to work. I do my job. The work gets done. Its obvious that those before me did not get their work done.
If my superiors are concerned with how I dress and not how much I get done then they are the ones that need to go back and relearn their "social skills".
I was never aware that "social skills" had anything to do with fashion. Thanks for proving me wrong.
And in the end, it's social skills that really help in adult life.
I agree 100% but I also disagree 100% that high-school is the proper environment to learn these skills.
High-school is nothing more than a popularity contest/fashion show. If you are supposed to learn social skills please explain to me how you can apply those to the real world where no one worth a damn gives a flying rats ass what you wear and who you hang out with?
My suggestion is to just suffer through the shithole that is known as "high-school" and welcome your new-found freedoms in the real world.
Very good point, and I totally agree, seriously. As the great Judge Smails has stated, "the world needs ditch diggers to".
If you weren't trolling I'd be pissed off... I just wanted to state that from what I have seen most people start in the 30k to 40k range a year after attending a four-year college. An LPN around here starts at 36k. They went to two years (or less) of a technical college. Generally they are spending about 10k for those two years.
A typical four-year degree (from a similar state school) will run you closer to 32k. So you start in the same range, but as a two year degree holder it cost you less, and now you have the bankroll to continue on to possibly RN or higher instead of digging yourself deeper into debt.
Personally, I'd go the route of the two-year degree if I had to do it all over again.
Most of the people you graduate with, no matter how popular/smart/wonderful they were in high-school will probably be completely worthless in college. Some will likely come home to be with their group of friends from high-school again and may not even finish college. They will be happy in their small group of friends forever, which is fine, but certainly don't believe that you need to limit yourself to that.
Class
That the reason I did reasonably well in high-school with very little outside work was because I went to class. Even if I slept through some of it I was taking it all in. You cannot succeed unless you attend class. Don't think that when you get to college or the real world you can succeed by not showing up just because you don't have to. It doesn't work like that.
College
Going to a four-year college and getting a degree really isn't all that important anymore. Yeah, you get a job, yeah you get money, and yeah you have fun but honestly the pay off in the end really isn't all that worth it.
I have seen plenty of people with high-school diplomas or two year degrees from a community college/tech school do just as well (if not better) than me and my more expensive four-year degree.
Don't give in to the pressures put on you by your social group, family, and school when there are plenty of opportunities out there for those of you that aren't interested in jumping straight into four-year degrees.
LPNs, construction, HVAC, general laborers under Union guidance all make great money and may even make twice as much as a four-year graduate starting... If you aren't interested in school for the next four or five years explore some other options. They are open and ready to make you into something that you may not have had the chance to know about.
Wasting time
Honestly, you aren't going to have much of a chance to "waste time" once you are done with school. People graduate and either jump right into working or go to college. After these small steps they start families and their chance to "waste time" is over for the next 25 years.
I hear all the time that "thirty is the new twenty". Take advantage of your age, your freedoms, and your time. Use it however you want. Right now I'm more interested in doing things that I know I won't be able to do 10 years from now. Responsibility sucks use your time however you see fit.
What I learned was that I needed to decide for myself what I wanted. Anyone who might read his article (or mine) might want to as well.
I read the article "carefully" but I don't agree with their theory on the subject:
"Some of us have been toying with the idea that dinosaurs evolved to be a low-oxygen adaptation," resulting from this era, Ward said. "We know birds can live at much lower oxygen concentrations than we do, and we and think there were similar lung adaptations in dinosaurs."
Yeah, birds can live at lower oxygen levels because they fly at altitude on a regular basis. They also come down to the ground for various reasons. That way they are cross-training at different altitudes and thus able to adapt to varying conditions.
As far as I am aware MOST dinosaurs did not have the ability to fly. And supposedly if you weren't near sea-level you weren't going to live. So, the dinosaurs were not cross-training at differing altitudes and probably did not gain the same sort of breathing abilities that birds did.
I think it was quite a leap for the scientists in this article to make. Then again IANAS.
but my impression from the article is that the oxygen rate didn't decrease in a day, but happened over a couple million years as a result of the global warming
As I said they might have lacked the ability to adapt to the changes over that time frame.
When people climb tall mountains, they have to deal with lower oxygen. (Some people bring oxygen with them, but some don't)....16% oxygen in the atmosphere doesn't sound like it would kill all those people...
It might not kill people who are trained to deal with the differences in the levels. For the elderly, for those that have weakened immune systems, and for young children these changes might have consequences.
People train at altitude for months to get their bodies prepared for thin air. I have a feeling that dinosaurs might not have had the chance (or possibly even the evolutionary ability) to make those changes over a short period of time.
I'm a Minnesotan and this is supposed to be Insightful? Even though this winter has been rather mild for us last winter I was frequently out in temps well below zero.
Hell on my birthday I was in the middle of a frozen lake in -25 degree temps with gusts of wind dropping the windchill to -35 and below.
GPs say exercise and reading up on depression are ways to beat the blues.
All reading up on the topic does is make you realize that you exhibit more symptoms of depression than you thought. Realizing that you are depressed 90% of the time only spells deeper depression.
I suggest exercise, reading stuff OTHER than depression/illness related material (especially work related), and getting your ass outside.
I just recently purchased my first Mac. Scary I know but I promise not to become a Slashmacbot... Anyway, in line with the purchase I figured why not move to an LCD setup as well? This article explains several of my reasons for doing so but leaves one out...
Energy Consumption
LCD monitors definitely hold the edge over CRT monitors when it comes to being energy efficient. The huge tube in a CRT monitor is the source of most of its energy consumption, and a comparably sized LCD may use just a fraction of the electricity. Taking a look at this 19" Jetway LCD monitor shows that it consumes 48 Watts during normal operation, which is less than your typical light bulb. In contrast, a 19" CRT such as this one from Viewsonic may draw up to 160 Watts. Therefore the fraction of electricity used in this case is 3/10, and could translate to noticeable savings on your electric bill.
I currently have two 17" CRT monitors on my L-shaped desk. One is a newer model "flat screen" and the other was a freebie HP branded CRT. I know that they are sucking power and sending that power back out as radiation directly into the side and front of my face (as they are surrounding two of the three sides of my head). I have switched to a lot of energy saving bulbs in my house and I plan to switch more as the bulbs die off. I have switched to a programmable thermostat (that isn't 5 degrees off like the one that the original owners had) to save electricity/gas during the day and evenings. Why not my computer crap too?
I have even gone so far as to make sure that if I am not going to be home for more than 24 hours my non-essential computer equipment is off. A few bucks here and there equals beer later.
Personal Health and Comfort
The main benefit that LCDs have when it comes to comfort is the reduced strain on your eyes. The reduced glare on the screen's surface, and the elimination of a typical CRT's "refresh", can prevent your eyes from getting tired from extended use. A CRT monitor redraws the image on the entire screen as it refreshes, whereas an LCD monitor only changes the necessary pixels during a refresh.
There may also be the unquantifiable effect of reduced electromagnetic emissions on LCD monitors. The exact impact of electromagnetic emissions may not be fully understood, but in general less is considered to better, as addressed in this article. And, your back may also appreciate an LCD when it comes time to move, as the example above shows a 19" LCD monitor weighs about ¼ as much as its CRT counterpart.
What I have noticed is that using both at work (and now both at home) that I have significantly MORE eyestrain. Moving back and forth between the two seems more harmful than just sticking with one or the other. Sadly I am going to be in this situation at home for a while yet but at work I have only this 20" CRT to replace. The 23" LCD is in IT and waiting for install so it won't be too long. I was QUITE surprised when I went to pick up the 17" LCD at the FedEx hub that it fit easily in my trunk and was light enough for me to hold with one arm safely. I can't say that much about lugging my 17" CRTs around. Woo for that.
My other reason for loving LCDs is desk real estate. With my CRTs tons of desk space is lost to their screen, their rear ends, and their bases. With the new LCDs I have quite a bit more room to stack cans, plates, etc. It also makes me feel more "free" to move around in the tight space that my computer area is located.
I look forward to my second LCD at home and the savings in health, energy, and space it will give me.
Gates isn't an idiot. He's seeing the ever increasing upgrade cycle. Let's face the facts, Office 2003 offers very few new useful features to your typical Office user than was there in Office 2000. Some would argue that all the way back to Office 98. He would love to get users into a subscription model. If you don't pay the yearly tax, your cut off, just like that.
And that's why he's not exactly inclined to allow for a fully open format. No one will pay the price when they don't have to use MSFT's software to read/write the document formats.
The only problem that I see is that Office works just fine as it is (as you said since 2000). People are still hanging on to Win98. Why wouldn't they still hang on to the older versions that don't come on a yearly subscription/release cycle?
I have a feeling that this may either be the most lucrative thing that they might do or it will be one of the worst.
Email the pictures off and import them straight to Gallery.
That's what I do although the Bash script I use is a bit more complex as I have it update my changelog automatically and sort things into month galleries too.
And people say they just want their phone to make calls. Bah:)
OS4 boots remarkably quickly. From a cold boot, including waiting for power up, BIOS messages, straight to a usable desktop took slightly over 30 seconds. A "warm boot," which bypasses the BIOS startup and merely reloads the operating system, takes slightly over 10 seconds.
Interesting. Is that because there are no useful programs to be loaded at boot time, the test OS didn't happen to load anything at boot time, or because the OS continues to load stuff even though there is a "usable desktop" after 30 seconds?
In looking at the developer OS screen shots I notice memory listed at the top as "122,691,288 graphics mem 122,691,288 other mem". I assume this will either be listed in a more human readable format or done away with completely? The rest of the desktop looks like any modern windowmanager/desktop. Docked icons, random "My Computer"-like icons, etc. It looks clean but still cartoonish to me.
There are two icons on the OS4 desktop by default. One is the icon representing your hard disk, which looks like a drive with a little red and white Boing ball in front of it. The other is the RAM Disk icon. AmigaOS has always had a built-in RAM disk, long before it ever had virtual memory, and many applications assume its presence. Items in the Clipboard, for example, will appear here.
RAM disks were probably more prevalent when the AmigaOS originally came out. I think that they could have done something more modern so that new users that might want to use the OS wouldn't be left out. A RAM disk might be confusing or even scary for an uneducated user in this day and age.
AmigaDOS has always been a bit "different" and even the article notes that:
Over the years, many Amigans who use multiple systems have created an elaborate system of aliases to make the AmigaDOS commands more closely resemble DOS or Unix ones.
Why couldn't they just update DOS to either include these aliases by default or do a complete overhaul? Don't they want to attract new users to their OS? Seems like they would be alienating a large group that might not be willing to learn this stuff especially when Windows has pretty much done away with the need for DOS all together.
Neither browser supports CSS, for example, which on many websites merely degrades the appearance somewhat, but on some sites messes up the formatting completely. Also, some poorly-coded Javascript code will sometimes cause problems with AWeb and iBrowse.
Oh nothing like shipping an OS in the Internet-age without a working browser. Seems a bit silly to even bother when most people's computers are SOLELY intended for the Web and Email.
I'll hold off on buying one of these for a while. Who knows it might be the next BIG thing but it may take many years...
If passed and signed into law, it could expose file-swapping software developers to fines of up to $2,500 per charge, or a year in jail, if they don't take "reasonable care" in preventing the use of their software to swap copyrighted music or movies--or child pornography.
The P2P developers need gun lobbyists on their side! Since when was a gun developed that took "reasonable care" in preventing accidental death? The gun should be able to detect human presence and not fire a round! Yeah, it might cost a lot of money and time to develop that feature but we have to make sure that people don't use it the wrong way!
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has sought to ban illegal downloading on any state computers, including those owned by the state university systems.
Are they talking about State University networks or just their computers? If I am paying tuition *and* a technology fee to directly support the network I am using it as an ISP and thus the University network should not fall under this... If I am using a University purchased computer connected to that network then I see no problems with it.
"We're only asking for reasonable controls. We're not asking for people to create new technology or recreate the wheel."
What's "reasonable"? When they realize that the swappers will immediately get around ANY filtering that the P2P apps do will they decide that the rudimentary filters aren't "reasonable"?
Napster banned individual songs from being traded and everyone started encoding entire albums as a single MP3 to throw them off. People hide, encrypt, and subvert tons of different "safety" measures all the time. When are they going to realize that "reasonable" is more difficult than they believe?
Let the MPAA and the RIAA track down and find the individuals serving these materials up and have them find their REAL NAMES, REAL ADDRESSES, and sue them themselves. I have no problem with them doing some real leg work to get the people at the heart of the issue. I do have a problem with allowing them to just be handed these records by ISPs, etc.
Stop paying off the local/federal governments to pass hasty laws to do your dirty work.
While I agree with your sentiment, just for clarity's sake I have to point out that Maroon5 has been around for quite a few years, previously by the name of Kara's Flowers.
And did they rise to the top of the charts? Did people know them? No. They know them as Maroon5.
From what I understand one of their more recent hits was recorded because the music industry thought it would be cool for them to do something "popish". They apparently weren't happy with it yet that's what the industry marketed and that's what was successful.
Exactly. When acts are commercially successful there are a number of things that could happen that the conglomorates won't like:
a) The band could be so independently successful that they could break off and start producing their own material or even start touring and releasing their live/new stuff on the Internet!
b) The conglomorates might see the successful band as a threat to the shit they have been releasing. People flock to the successful ones and they feel like they have to sink more money (marketing, payoffs, etc) into the shitty ones to keep them afloat.
They can only have SO much repeat in the rotations during the day on consolidated radio afterall.
c) The band might have had a shitty contract to start out with and now they have to resign them to something more lucrative. God forbid we allow that!
But in time, these predictions have always proved wrong.
The music industry has proven again and again that "time" no longer matters. Bands like The Stones, Aerosmith, etc, are all a thing of the past. They don't need them. They want acts like Spears, Maroon5, etc who rise to the top of the charts quickly through marketing, consolidation, and payoffs, and who are only there for a short time before the next big thing hits.
Touring, actual music playing, and actual singing are overrated. The HSS printout says so.
Just tweak this, this, and this. Add a synth here, here, and here. We have a hit. Two hits, maybe three, and we can continue to whine that we don't make any money because we spent it all marketing something that died after 3 years.
So it is "Safer" and "easier" to "shut the hell up" about something that is politically incorect if the price is a large amount of suffering?
We are talking about the President of Harvard not the leader of various Women's Rights movements. The President of Harvard should keep his mouth shut when it comes to saying something that isn't politcally correct.
It is his job to represent the University and the alumni who donate to it. Personally, if I was a wealthy graduate of Harvard and female (especially one in the sciences) I'd be pretty willing to remove my $10 million grant from my will.
and why I would never buy any piece of hardware that relies on a subscription. All the more if they offer a "lifetime" subscription where you pay up front. People have fallen into this trap with health clubs as well - what is the chance that the company behind the hardware will outlive me?
Well, in this case I think that because of how Tivo has been created (hardware and OS wise) and the fact that it has been relatively easy to hack Tivo units will continue to function in their current state for years to come.
People who owned Tivos and find it dead will throw them up on Ebay for whoever to grab them. A team of hackers will have available changes to be made that will allow you to pull down the information for your CATV or SATTV and do the same shit as before.
Yeah, it'll be a bit more difficult to get updates (as if they come all that frequently with Tivo as I'm STILL waiting for my 7.x update for Tivo2Go) and it might cause a bit of a struggle to get it working but after that it'll likely be much like MythTV is now.
So, it was great that I paid for my Tivo unit when they were taking subscriptions because I ended up with a $50 unit that would have cost me at least $500 for MythTV and I will likely end up w/the same functionality.
Slashdot Mirror
And the general public gets nothing...errr...wait, better quality sound and image. hmmmm.
And that would be VERY important if it was necessary. Why is our government mandating what happens in the market? They should not have wasted our tax dollars forcing this change to occur.
Buying tuners and TVs gives money to the wrong people and takes it away from the wrong people. Personally it pisses me off that technically oriented people fail to realize the nonsense that HDTV is.
You were fucked in the ass by the government and private industry and now you are thanking them for it?
No thanks.
I may like Bush (ok, yeah, hit my karma) but I am scared to death of who he will put in charge...
Your wording is vague on whether you do or not but how could you possibly like a President that repeatedly puts your Constitutional rights at risk and may appoint people to high-ranking posts that might further endanger those rights?
When you vote for the office of President you aren't voting for just that single seat. You are voting for all the possible seats that President might appoint (ie the Supreme Court).
No matter how I feel about a particular individual I have to pay close attention to how that individual might change the course of history and the rights Americans have grown to ignore during his tenure.
Welcome to the real world. You don't have to wear Armani, but looking nice is usually a big plus as is being able to read your audiance.
I wear jeans and sweatshirts to work. I do my job. The work gets done. Its obvious that those before me did not get their work done.
If my superiors are concerned with how I dress and not how much I get done then they are the ones that need to go back and relearn their "social skills".
I was never aware that "social skills" had anything to do with fashion. Thanks for proving me wrong.
And in the end, it's social skills that really help in adult life.
I agree 100% but I also disagree 100% that high-school is the proper environment to learn these skills.
High-school is nothing more than a popularity contest/fashion show. If you are supposed to learn social skills please explain to me how you can apply those to the real world where no one worth a damn gives a flying rats ass what you wear and who you hang out with?
My suggestion is to just suffer through the shithole that is known as "high-school" and welcome your new-found freedoms in the real world.
Very good point, and I totally agree, seriously. As the great Judge Smails has stated, "the world needs ditch diggers to".
If you weren't trolling I'd be pissed off... I just wanted to state that from what I have seen most people start in the 30k to 40k range a year after attending a four-year college. An LPN around here starts at 36k. They went to two years (or less) of a technical college. Generally they are spending about 10k for those two years.
A typical four-year degree (from a similar state school) will run you closer to 32k. So you start in the same range, but as a two year degree holder it cost you less, and now you have the bankroll to continue on to possibly RN or higher instead of digging yourself deeper into debt.
Personally, I'd go the route of the two-year degree if I had to do it all over again.
What I wished I had known:
People
Most of the people you graduate with, no matter how popular/smart/wonderful they were in high-school will probably be completely worthless in college. Some will likely come home to be with their group of friends from high-school again and may not even finish college. They will be happy in their small group of friends forever, which is fine, but certainly don't believe that you need to limit yourself to that.
Class
That the reason I did reasonably well in high-school with very little outside work was because I went to class. Even if I slept through some of it I was taking it all in. You cannot succeed unless you attend class. Don't think that when you get to college or the real world you can succeed by not showing up just because you don't have to. It doesn't work like that.
College
Going to a four-year college and getting a degree really isn't all that important anymore. Yeah, you get a job, yeah you get money, and yeah you have fun but honestly the pay off in the end really isn't all that worth it.
I have seen plenty of people with high-school diplomas or two year degrees from a community college/tech school do just as well (if not better) than me and my more expensive four-year degree.
Don't give in to the pressures put on you by your social group, family, and school when there are plenty of opportunities out there for those of you that aren't interested in jumping straight into four-year degrees.
LPNs, construction, HVAC, general laborers under Union guidance all make great money and may even make twice as much as a four-year graduate starting... If you aren't interested in school for the next four or five years explore some other options. They are open and ready to make you into something that you may not have had the chance to know about.
Wasting time
Honestly, you aren't going to have much of a chance to "waste time" once you are done with school. People graduate and either jump right into working or go to college. After these small steps they start families and their chance to "waste time" is over for the next 25 years.
I hear all the time that "thirty is the new twenty". Take advantage of your age, your freedoms, and your time. Use it however you want. Right now I'm more interested in doing things that I know I won't be able to do 10 years from now. Responsibility sucks use your time however you see fit.
What I learned was that I needed to decide for myself what I wanted. Anyone who might read his article (or mine) might want to as well.
I read the article "carefully" but I don't agree with their theory on the subject:
"Some of us have been toying with the idea that dinosaurs evolved to be a low-oxygen adaptation," resulting from this era, Ward said. "We know birds can live at much lower oxygen concentrations than we do, and we and think there were similar lung adaptations in dinosaurs."
Yeah, birds can live at lower oxygen levels because they fly at altitude on a regular basis. They also come down to the ground for various reasons. That way they are cross-training at different altitudes and thus able to adapt to varying conditions.
As far as I am aware MOST dinosaurs did not have the ability to fly. And supposedly if you weren't near sea-level you weren't going to live. So, the dinosaurs were not cross-training at differing altitudes and probably did not gain the same sort of breathing abilities that birds did.
I think it was quite a leap for the scientists in this article to make. Then again IANAS.
but my impression from the article is that the oxygen rate didn't decrease in a day, but happened over a couple million years as a result of the global warming
As I said they might have lacked the ability to adapt to the changes over that time frame.
When people climb tall mountains, they have to deal with lower oxygen. (Some people bring oxygen with them, but some don't). ...16% oxygen in the atmosphere doesn't sound like it would kill all those people...
It might not kill people who are trained to deal with the differences in the levels. For the elderly, for those that have weakened immune systems, and for young children these changes might have consequences.
People train at altitude for months to get their bodies prepared for thin air. I have a feeling that dinosaurs might not have had the chance (or possibly even the evolutionary ability) to make those changes over a short period of time.
I'm a Minnesotan and this is supposed to be Insightful? Even though this winter has been rather mild for us last winter I was frequently out in temps well below zero.
Hell on my birthday I was in the middle of a frozen lake in -25 degree temps with gusts of wind dropping the windchill to -35 and below.
Dress warm and learn to get used to it.
GPs say exercise and reading up on depression are ways to beat the blues.
All reading up on the topic does is make you realize that you exhibit more symptoms of depression than you thought. Realizing that you are depressed 90% of the time only spells deeper depression.
I suggest exercise, reading stuff OTHER than depression/illness related material (especially work related), and getting your ass outside.
This is a corporation ripping off an individual not the other way around.
I just recently purchased my first Mac. Scary I know but I promise not to become a Slashmacbot... Anyway, in line with the purchase I figured why not move to an LCD setup as well? This article explains several of my reasons for doing so but leaves one out...
Energy Consumption
LCD monitors definitely hold the edge over CRT monitors when it comes to being energy efficient. The huge tube in a CRT monitor is the source of most of its energy consumption, and a comparably sized LCD may use just a fraction of the electricity. Taking a look at this 19" Jetway LCD monitor shows that it consumes 48 Watts during normal operation, which is less than your typical light bulb. In contrast, a 19" CRT such as this one from Viewsonic may draw up to 160 Watts. Therefore the fraction of electricity used in this case is 3/10, and could translate to noticeable savings on your electric bill.
I currently have two 17" CRT monitors on my L-shaped desk. One is a newer model "flat screen" and the other was a freebie HP branded CRT. I know that they are sucking power and sending that power back out as radiation directly into the side and front of my face (as they are surrounding two of the three sides of my head). I have switched to a lot of energy saving bulbs in my house and I plan to switch more as the bulbs die off. I have switched to a programmable thermostat (that isn't 5 degrees off like the one that the original owners had) to save electricity/gas during the day and evenings. Why not my computer crap too?
I have even gone so far as to make sure that if I am not going to be home for more than 24 hours my non-essential computer equipment is off. A few bucks here and there equals beer later.
Personal Health and Comfort
The main benefit that LCDs have when it comes to comfort is the reduced strain on your eyes. The reduced glare on the screen's surface, and the elimination of a typical CRT's "refresh", can prevent your eyes from getting tired from extended use. A CRT monitor redraws the image on the entire screen as it refreshes, whereas an LCD monitor only changes the necessary pixels during a refresh.
There may also be the unquantifiable effect of reduced electromagnetic emissions on LCD monitors. The exact impact of electromagnetic emissions may not be fully understood, but in general less is considered to better, as addressed in this article. And, your back may also appreciate an LCD when it comes time to move, as the example above shows a 19" LCD monitor weighs about ¼ as much as its CRT counterpart.
What I have noticed is that using both at work (and now both at home) that I have significantly MORE eyestrain. Moving back and forth between the two seems more harmful than just sticking with one or the other. Sadly I am going to be in this situation at home for a while yet but at work I have only this 20" CRT to replace. The 23" LCD is in IT and waiting for install so it won't be too long. I was QUITE surprised when I went to pick up the 17" LCD at the FedEx hub that it fit easily in my trunk and was light enough for me to hold with one arm safely. I can't say that much about lugging my 17" CRTs around. Woo for that.
My other reason for loving LCDs is desk real estate. With my CRTs tons of desk space is lost to their screen, their rear ends, and their bases. With the new LCDs I have quite a bit more room to stack cans, plates, etc. It also makes me feel more "free" to move around in the tight space that my computer area is located.
I look forward to my second LCD at home and the savings in health, energy, and space it will give me.
Gates isn't an idiot. He's seeing the ever increasing upgrade cycle. Let's face the facts, Office 2003 offers very few new useful features to your typical Office user than was there in Office 2000. Some would argue that all the way back to Office 98. He would love to get users into a subscription model. If you don't pay the yearly tax, your cut off, just like that.
And that's why he's not exactly inclined to allow for a fully open format. No one will pay the price when they don't have to use MSFT's software to read/write the document formats.
The only problem that I see is that Office works just fine as it is (as you said since 2000). People are still hanging on to Win98. Why wouldn't they still hang on to the older versions that don't come on a yearly subscription/release cycle?
I have a feeling that this may either be the most lucrative thing that they might do or it will be one of the worst.
Email the pictures off and import them straight to Gallery.
:)
That's what I do although the Bash script I use is a bit more complex as I have it update my changelog automatically and sort things into month galleries too.
And people say they just want their phone to make calls. Bah
OS4 boots remarkably quickly. From a cold boot, including waiting for power up, BIOS messages, straight to a usable desktop took slightly over 30 seconds. A "warm boot," which bypasses the BIOS startup and merely reloads the operating system, takes slightly over 10 seconds.
Interesting. Is that because there are no useful programs to be loaded at boot time, the test OS didn't happen to load anything at boot time, or because the OS continues to load stuff even though there is a "usable desktop" after 30 seconds?
In looking at the developer OS screen shots I notice memory listed at the top as "122,691,288 graphics mem 122,691,288 other mem". I assume this will either be listed in a more human readable format or done away with completely? The rest of the desktop looks like any modern windowmanager/desktop. Docked icons, random "My Computer"-like icons, etc. It looks clean but still cartoonish to me.
There are two icons on the OS4 desktop by default. One is the icon representing your hard disk, which looks like a drive with a little red and white Boing ball in front of it. The other is the RAM Disk icon. AmigaOS has always had a built-in RAM disk, long before it ever had virtual memory, and many applications assume its presence. Items in the Clipboard, for example, will appear here.
RAM disks were probably more prevalent when the AmigaOS originally came out. I think that they could have done something more modern so that new users that might want to use the OS wouldn't be left out. A RAM disk might be confusing or even scary for an uneducated user in this day and age.
AmigaDOS has always been a bit "different" and even the article notes that:
Over the years, many Amigans who use multiple systems have created an elaborate system of aliases to make the AmigaDOS commands more closely resemble DOS or Unix ones.
Why couldn't they just update DOS to either include these aliases by default or do a complete overhaul? Don't they want to attract new users to their OS? Seems like they would be alienating a large group that might not be willing to learn this stuff especially when Windows has pretty much done away with the need for DOS all together.
Neither browser supports CSS, for example, which on many websites merely degrades the appearance somewhat, but on some sites messes up the formatting completely. Also, some poorly-coded Javascript code will sometimes cause problems with AWeb and iBrowse.
Oh nothing like shipping an OS in the Internet-age without a working browser. Seems a bit silly to even bother when most people's computers are SOLELY intended for the Web and Email.
I'll hold off on buying one of these for a while. Who knows it might be the next BIG thing but it may take many years...
If passed and signed into law, it could expose file-swapping software developers to fines of up to $2,500 per charge, or a year in jail, if they don't take "reasonable care" in preventing the use of their software to swap copyrighted music or movies--or child pornography.
The P2P developers need gun lobbyists on their side! Since when was a gun developed that took "reasonable care" in preventing accidental death? The gun should be able to detect human presence and not fire a round! Yeah, it might cost a lot of money and time to develop that feature but we have to make sure that people don't use it the wrong way!
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has sought to ban illegal downloading on any state computers, including those owned by the state university systems.
Are they talking about State University networks or just their computers? If I am paying tuition *and* a technology fee to directly support the network I am using it as an ISP and thus the University network should not fall under this... If I am using a University purchased computer connected to that network then I see no problems with it.
"We're only asking for reasonable controls. We're not asking for people to create new technology or recreate the wheel."
What's "reasonable"? When they realize that the swappers will immediately get around ANY filtering that the P2P apps do will they decide that the rudimentary filters aren't "reasonable"?
Napster banned individual songs from being traded and everyone started encoding entire albums as a single MP3 to throw them off. People hide, encrypt, and subvert tons of different "safety" measures all the time. When are they going to realize that "reasonable" is more difficult than they believe?
Let the MPAA and the RIAA track down and find the individuals serving these materials up and have them find their REAL NAMES, REAL ADDRESSES, and sue them themselves. I have no problem with them doing some real leg work to get the people at the heart of the issue. I do have a problem with allowing them to just be handed these records by ISPs, etc.
Stop paying off the local/federal governments to pass hasty laws to do your dirty work.
If the movie was really something worth seeing then maybe people would actually pay.
Nothing is better than free in most people's eyes.
Mirrordot takes care of that for them.
All that I can tell by looking at those photos is that there was a helluva lot better pot in 1983 than there is now.
While I agree with your sentiment, just for clarity's sake I have to point out that Maroon5 has been around for quite a few years, previously by the name of Kara's Flowers.
And did they rise to the top of the charts? Did people know them? No. They know them as Maroon5.
From what I understand one of their more recent hits was recorded because the music industry thought it would be cool for them to do something "popish". They apparently weren't happy with it yet that's what the industry marketed and that's what was successful.
Sad.
Comercially successful != good
Exactly. When acts are commercially successful there are a number of things that could happen that the conglomorates won't like:
a) The band could be so independently successful that they could break off and start producing their own material or even start touring and releasing their live/new stuff on the Internet!
b) The conglomorates might see the successful band as a threat to the shit they have been releasing. People flock to the successful ones and they feel like they have to sink more money (marketing, payoffs, etc) into the shitty ones to keep them afloat.
They can only have SO much repeat in the rotations during the day on consolidated radio afterall.
c) The band might have had a shitty contract to start out with and now they have to resign them to something more lucrative. God forbid we allow that!
But in time, these predictions have always proved wrong.
The music industry has proven again and again that "time" no longer matters. Bands like The Stones, Aerosmith, etc, are all a thing of the past. They don't need them. They want acts like Spears, Maroon5, etc who rise to the top of the charts quickly through marketing, consolidation, and payoffs, and who are only there for a short time before the next big thing hits.
Touring, actual music playing, and actual singing are overrated. The HSS printout says so.
Just tweak this, this, and this. Add a synth here, here, and here. We have a hit. Two hits, maybe three, and we can continue to whine that we don't make any money because we spent it all marketing something that died after 3 years.
So it is "Safer" and "easier" to "shut the hell up" about something that is politically incorect if the price is a large amount of suffering?
We are talking about the President of Harvard not the leader of various Women's Rights movements. The President of Harvard should keep his mouth shut when it comes to saying something that isn't politcally correct.
It is his job to represent the University and the alumni who donate to it. Personally, if I was a wealthy graduate of Harvard and female (especially one in the sciences) I'd be pretty willing to remove my $10 million grant from my will.
and why I would never buy any piece of hardware that relies on a subscription. All the more if they offer a "lifetime" subscription where you pay up front. People have fallen into this trap with health clubs as well - what is the chance that the company behind the hardware will outlive me?
;)
Well, in this case I think that because of how Tivo has been created (hardware and OS wise) and the fact that it has been relatively easy to hack Tivo units will continue to function in their current state for years to come.
People who owned Tivos and find it dead will throw them up on Ebay for whoever to grab them. A team of hackers will have available changes to be made that will allow you to pull down the information for your CATV or SATTV and do the same shit as before.
Yeah, it'll be a bit more difficult to get updates (as if they come all that frequently with Tivo as I'm STILL waiting for my 7.x update for Tivo2Go) and it might cause a bit of a struggle to get it working but after that it'll likely be much like MythTV is now.
So, it was great that I paid for my Tivo unit when they were taking subscriptions because I ended up with a $50 unit that would have cost me at least $500 for MythTV and I will likely end up w/the same functionality.
If they do die I'm crossing my fingers