Add in an on par word processor, powerpoint tool, and outlook-esque client and you'll win a lot of new clients.
Powerpoint is Microsoft's branding of their presentation tool. This just goes to show you how pervasive Microsoft is; they're getting to be like Band-Aid and Vaseline - people refer to any adhesive bandange or petroleum jelly (respectively) using these brand names.
BTW - there are plenty of e-mail clients for Linux that have similar layouts to Outlook. A windows user would likely switch just because of Outlook's insecure nature. You don't need to be compatible with Outlook in order to read emails;)
I disagree. Microsoft gained said edge by copying someone else's product (Apple copied Xerox, then Microsoft copied Apple) and "improving" on it (read: bastardizing). Same thing with Japanese automobile companies.
To claim that compatibility reinforces exclusive file format proliferation is like saying putting a supercharger on an engine only reinforces the proliferation of less powerful engines.
Look at it practically: how do you expect business to want to migrate users to Linux from Microsoft if *nix developers go out of their way to make it more difficult? IMHO, this is the perfect venue: introduce a product that has everything M$'s product has, and things that it doesn't. Very quickly you'll find that the tables have turned and it's Microsoft trying to "catch up" to the other product. Who has the edge then?
Most people don't ever use mathematics much more complicated than basic arithmatic, so why do we have to take it in school? Math isn't about math; it's about thinking. Complicated problem teach impressionable young minds how to tackle problems logically, using what you know to be true to determine what you do not. I happened to love it (of course), but a lot of kids were always complaining about how they were never going use Modus Ponens in life. Turns out they were very wrong...
Well, I drive to work and I don't go to the beach. I'm also not dumb enough to try to read books while I'm driving. It turns out that whenever I have time to read books I also have internet access, so one must have precedence...
The presence of detailed development specifications is arguably directly related to the size of a design team.
If your development team is two guys sitting next to each other all day long, there isn't much need for very detailed specs or a set structure. You tell then what your project must have, and they deliver (if they're good).
On the other hand, the larger the team, the more structure is required; you don't want one person breaking what another person took four weeks to complete.
I think in the US, the relative lack of specs is probably because most US firms are in one location where the developers are in close proximity, making communcation quite easy (you don't even have to take your eyes off of your screen to yell over a cubicle).
Why not indeed. I had a 6GB Creative Nomad Jukebox, and filled that up QUICK. I now have a 40GB iPod and love it.
It's easy to gather up 10,000 songs when you have a CD collection from two generations of people; not to mention the downloads (purchased *and* free). Ripping CDs and stuff, I currently have 1760 songs, and that's without all the comedy routines and prank calls that i've downloaded, and I'm not even doen ripping CDs. 1000 songs? bah.
The question "How often do you have a car trip where you can play 1000 songs?" is simply missing the point - the point is not playing that much music, the point is, when I want to listen to Disturbed, I can. If I want to hear Tribal Tech, I can. If I want to hear Black Eyed Peas, I can. And I don't have to fumble through 100 CDs while driving to do it. The point is choice, not volume.
2 megapixels is sufficient for most applications. Remember, the digital camera on the Mars Rover is only 1 megapixel. If you need to take higher quality picture / movies, buy a higher quality piece of hardware. Something tells me that the truly useful applications for this type of device (e.g. clandestine) do not cry out for super-high quality photos.
It's also good for getting that quick shot of your buddy spewing chunks because who carries around a big digital camera everywhere they go? This you can keep with you at all times.
I downloaded LindowsOS that one day that they were offering for free (still haven't installed it), and I get these periodic emails from Michael Robertson (ceo Lindows?). This is the entire text:
Michael's Minute: Name Change:
Last week Judge Coughenour denied our request to block Microsoft's international legal barrage against Lindows.com. Two years ago Microsoft tried to stop Lindows in a U.S. court, but they were denied. Recently, they started piling on lawsuits from around the world attempting to achieve the same result. At the same time, Microsoft is publicly demanding that the EU respect the U.S. court actions concerning their monopolistic behavior and not impose their own rulings. Microsoft hypocritically has no such respect for the U.S. court decision which determined we can operate under the term Lindows pending a final resolution of the litigation.
Some people may be puzzled about why Microsoft is attacking Lindows and not doing the same for Red Hat - a leading Linux server company. Microsoft has their targets set on Lindows because we are a desktop company. Microsoft has used that desktop dominance to move into other areas and to fund campaigns to wipe out potential competitors (Netscape, Be, Lotus, etc.). Microsoft will attack anything that it believes challenges its desktop monopoly, since it is their life blood. I'm confident that when we get to trial in the U.S., Microsoft employee testimony and internal communications will reveal their true motivations. However it's going to take some time to get resolution due to Microsoft's delay tactics. In the interim, Lindows is unable to fully respond to demand for desktop Linux from countries around the world due to name uncertainty.
To assure that we can do business globally, we are in the process of selecting a different name for our web presence and product name. I believe it's the only way to respond to an onslaught from such a rich company, since we need to be able to continue to grow our business. (Only one of the richest companies in the world would launch 8 identical lawsuits from different countries.) Our US corporate name will remain Lindows Inc. since we have meaningful name recognition and product distribution.
Outside the US we will go by a different name until we can battle for the right to use Lindows internationally. The US case will probably take a year to go through the 9th circuit court of appeals and perhaps another year for possible Supreme Court review. Our plan is to go to trial in the US as soon as possible, at which time we hope to get windows declared a generic word. If we win, we plan to approach the State Department and ask them to petition foreign governments to invalidate the windows trademark as they have done for other generic computing terms like "database," "operating system" and "pascal," which companies have tried to register as trademarks in foreign countries.
Selecting a new name is more complex then you might think. A few weeks ago we asked for suggestions, and we were flooded with some creative ideas. My favorite was one user writing in to say our name should be "lindos" and our new slogan should be "because it's the W that is causing all the problems.":-) Finding a unique name for which domain names and trademarks are available takes real searching. We're now reviewing candidates and we will identify our new international name on April 14th. Once we identify a name, then we'll start the migration. Since we have thousands of web pages and more than 100 servers it will take considerable time to completely transition. The functionality in our product won't change, but outside the US people will know our products by a different name.
We're not taking this change lightly. We need to keep our business from being held back by legal uncertainty. So visit the website next week, April 14th after 1:00 p.m. PST for the unveiling of our new name.
If it does, it could be some sort of Nielsen type of rating system. Real gets this info, then sells to advertisers based on who is listening to what. [Ever seen a menopause commercial while watching SpongeBob?] It's not exactly bad, but they should tell users what they are doing.
Then again, most people just click 'I Agree' when the EULA comes up during installations...
The coin doesn't have seven sides, it's flat like a normal coin, just "septagonal" in shape. When you said seven sides, i was thinking of a more three-dimensional coin. Would be a pain to keep in your pocket, I'd imagine...
The bike in the article is a trike (i.e. three wheels). Riding one of this would be no different than riding a normal trike. There would be no advantage - it may actually be counterproductive to teach someone ride on a two-wheeler with square wheels. That's much harder than normal wheels.
While a mathematical solution is technically perfect, I can think of an easy way to determine the requisite road shape: use a square wooden block, cut a hole in teh center so you can roll it, then do so over a reasonably soft surface. You can even observe how the shape of the catenaries elongates as the rotational speed stays constant but the horizontal velocity increases. Would be fun for downhill rides.:)
Imagine you could watch two one-hour long TV shows simultaneously superimposed onto each other on the same TV (and understand both shows seperately.) Now imagine you have have two TV with the same capability. Now you can watch four shows in one hour. This is the essence of this computing theory: you can do more calculations in less time but not in the normal computing sense. I prefer to think of standard binary computing as a direct derivative of quantum computing, much like velocity is a derivative of acceleration.
The chaos theory simply describes the elements that are involved in forming these calculations. This would directly affect a computer's ability to multitask - instead of a data flow going in a straight line and different parts of the processor performing different operations on it, a function could be self-contained and processed recursively, with the data passing through the same matrix, while that matrix changes itself to perform different functions. In theory, this could take far less ticks, increasing speeds exponentially. Add more matrices to this and you can see the benefits.
The idea behind his work is to be able to control the input into these "chaotic elements" thus producing a predictable and reproducable output. A true 'quantum leap', if you will. This would be a significant jump in computing technology, skipping over "trinary" computing altogether.
Humans don't think in straight lines, why should computers? Then again, I could just be reading it wrong.
While Merriam-Webster defines vandalism as the "willful or malicious destruction or defacement of public or private property," this definition is insufficient to describe the inherent self-propagating nature of computer virii, therefore the definitions are not one and the same.
In order for the analogy to work, dropping the wrench into an engine would have to cause not only that engine to fail, but also have the same effect on any engines nearby and so on.
The only circumstance that comes close would have to be a real virus, created and spread intentionally by some malicious party. Then again, no one is expected to actually die from computer virii.
ARe you kidding? Everyone knows that Linux is a hacker Operating System. They also know that hackers break into your computer over the phone line and steal your credit card information! Crackers are just what you put cheese on...
One would imagine that the writer has a vested interest in having his submission published. A truly unique idea can generate quite a bit of money, much more than it would cost to publish such an idea.
One must also remember that these journals are the prevailing vehicle for viable discourse for the scientific community. A move towards Open Access would benefit the community; the idea is to increase access to the information, not lower the cost of submission.
Besides, doctors can afford to pay for publishing.:P
Slashdot Mirror
BTW - there are plenty of e-mail clients for Linux that have similar layouts to Outlook. A windows user would likely switch just because of Outlook's insecure nature. You don't need to be compatible with Outlook in order to read emails
I disagree. Microsoft gained said edge by copying someone else's product (Apple copied Xerox, then Microsoft copied Apple) and "improving" on it (read: bastardizing). Same thing with Japanese automobile companies.
To claim that compatibility reinforces exclusive file format proliferation is like saying putting a supercharger on an engine only reinforces the proliferation of less powerful engines.
Look at it practically: how do you expect business to want to migrate users to Linux from Microsoft if *nix developers go out of their way to make it more difficult? IMHO, this is the perfect venue: introduce a product that has everything M$'s product has, and things that it doesn't. Very quickly you'll find that the tables have turned and it's Microsoft trying to "catch up" to the other product. Who has the edge then?
Microsoft has security projects?
Most people don't ever use mathematics much more complicated than basic arithmatic, so why do we have to take it in school? Math isn't about math; it's about thinking. Complicated problem teach impressionable young minds how to tackle problems logically, using what you know to be true to determine what you do not. I happened to love it (of course), but a lot of kids were always complaining about how they were never going use Modus Ponens in life. Turns out they were very wrong...
Well, I drive to work and I don't go to the beach. I'm also not dumb enough to try to read books while I'm driving. It turns out that whenever I have time to read books I also have internet access, so one must have precedence...
Or you can just head over to TechComedy.com. I prefer my Techie humour online, not in books...
The presence of detailed development specifications is arguably directly related to the size of a design team.
If your development team is two guys sitting next to each other all day long, there isn't much need for very detailed specs or a set structure. You tell then what your project must have, and they deliver (if they're good).
On the other hand, the larger the team, the more structure is required; you don't want one person breaking what another person took four weeks to complete.
I think in the US, the relative lack of specs is probably because most US firms are in one location where the developers are in close proximity, making communcation quite easy (you don't even have to take your eyes off of your screen to yell over a cubicle).
Why not indeed. I had a 6GB Creative Nomad Jukebox, and filled that up QUICK. I now have a 40GB iPod and love it.
It's easy to gather up 10,000 songs when you have a CD collection from two generations of people; not to mention the downloads (purchased *and* free). Ripping CDs and stuff, I currently have 1760 songs, and that's without all the comedy routines and prank calls that i've downloaded, and I'm not even doen ripping CDs. 1000 songs? bah.
The question "How often do you have a car trip where you can play 1000 songs?" is simply missing the point - the point is not playing that much music, the point is, when I want to listen to Disturbed, I can. If I want to hear Tribal Tech, I can. If I want to hear Black Eyed Peas, I can. And I don't have to fumble through 100 CDs while driving to do it. The point is choice, not volume.
Think about it.
People that accept these will likely believe it will turn them into Jake 2.0. Sadly, it's more likely to turn them into human RFID tags.
2 megapixels is sufficient for most applications. Remember, the digital camera on the Mars Rover is only 1 megapixel. If you need to take higher quality picture / movies, buy a higher quality piece of hardware. Something tells me that the truly useful applications for this type of device (e.g. clandestine) do not cry out for super-high quality photos.
It's also good for getting that quick shot of your buddy spewing chunks because who carries around a big digital camera everywhere they go? This you can keep with you at all times.
Someone's already beaten you to the punch.
When this guy figures out that he can actually sell these, watch out now!
Hopefully this sheds some light.
If it does, it could be some sort of Nielsen type of rating system. Real gets this info, then sells to advertisers based on who is listening to what. [Ever seen a menopause commercial while watching SpongeBob?] It's not exactly bad, but they should tell users what they are doing.
Then again, most people just click 'I Agree' when the EULA comes up during installations...
What a choice. DRM Whore or Spyware/Adware hijackery. That's like having to choose whether to be shot in the face or stabbed in the back.
The coin doesn't have seven sides, it's flat like a normal coin, just "septagonal" in shape. When you said seven sides, i was thinking of a more three-dimensional coin. Would be a pain to keep in your pocket, I'd imagine...
The bike in the article is a trike (i.e. three wheels). Riding one of this would be no different than riding a normal trike. There would be no advantage - it may actually be counterproductive to teach someone ride on a two-wheeler with square wheels. That's much harder than normal wheels.
While a mathematical solution is technically perfect, I can think of an easy way to determine the requisite road shape: use a square wooden block, cut a hole in teh center so you can roll it, then do so over a reasonably soft surface. You can even observe how the shape of the catenaries elongates as the rotational speed stays constant but the horizontal velocity increases. Would be fun for downhill rides. :)
I wonder what shape my wheels have to be to ride smoothly over the screwed up roads that my town refuses to fix?
Think of it this way:
Imagine you could watch two one-hour long TV shows simultaneously superimposed onto each other on the same TV (and understand both shows seperately.) Now imagine you have have two TV with the same capability. Now you can watch four shows in one hour. This is the essence of this computing theory: you can do more calculations in less time but not in the normal computing sense. I prefer to think of standard binary computing as a direct derivative of quantum computing, much like velocity is a derivative of acceleration.
The chaos theory simply describes the elements that are involved in forming these calculations. This would directly affect a computer's ability to multitask - instead of a data flow going in a straight line and different parts of the processor performing different operations on it, a function could be self-contained and processed recursively, with the data passing through the same matrix, while that matrix changes itself to perform different functions. In theory, this could take far less ticks, increasing speeds exponentially. Add more matrices to this and you can see the benefits.
The idea behind his work is to be able to control the input into these "chaotic elements" thus producing a predictable and reproducable output. A true 'quantum leap', if you will. This would be a significant jump in computing technology, skipping over "trinary" computing altogether.
Humans don't think in straight lines, why should computers? Then again, I could just be reading it wrong.
While Merriam-Webster defines vandalism as the "willful or malicious destruction or defacement of public or private property," this definition is insufficient to describe the inherent self-propagating nature of computer virii, therefore the definitions are not one and the same.
In order for the analogy to work, dropping the wrench into an engine would have to cause not only that engine to fail, but also have the same effect on any engines nearby and so on.
The only circumstance that comes close would have to be a real virus, created and spread intentionally by some malicious party. Then again, no one is expected to actually die from computer virii.
IAAL = I Am A Lawyer.
Just in case you thought it mean "If Anyone Actually Listens"
ARe you kidding? Everyone knows that Linux is a hacker Operating System. They also know that hackers break into your computer over the phone line and steal your credit card information! Crackers are just what you put cheese on...
/sarcasm
Ignorance:1
Knowledge:0
One would imagine that the writer has a vested interest in having his submission published. A truly unique idea can generate quite a bit of money, much more than it would cost to publish such an idea.
:P
One must also remember that these journals are the prevailing vehicle for viable discourse for the scientific community. A move towards Open Access would benefit the community; the idea is to increase access to the information, not lower the cost of submission.
Besides, doctors can afford to pay for publishing.
Until they start publishing Maxim magazine online, I don't care.