I'm almost ready to teach myself multimedia programming -- i'd love to have a simple program that would show a picture of an object, say the name of the object ("Say 'snake'") and then record the child saying the word, then play it back for them to hear themselves saying it through headphones. Icing would be if it could somehow evaluate the word and maybe have them try a 2nd or third time if they didn't get it right.
Even more icing would be to make it fun on some level.
There's lots of stuff out there but it's way more expensive and/or complex then just the simple computer program described used to augment traditional speech therapy.
I am not a meteorologist, but don't tornadoes occur because there is a horizontal boundary between two different types of air masses, and the tornado acts as a funnel to equalize the pressure between the two or something? Maybe wind turbines, and the mixed and turbulence they cause actually prevent tornadoes. Who knows? And, don't many tornadoes occur over particularly flat land? The turbines might reshape the landscape enough to disturb the atmosphere enough to prevent them. Turbines looking like tornadoes on radar make me think i'm not totally crazy.
It seems they "fixed" it for the second one; at least now they have a bunch of transforming transformers. But for the first movie, it seemed the majority of the toys did not transform. My son has a rather neat looking Optimus robot, about a foot tall, that has wheels and doors, looks like the movie character, but does not transform.
I suppose I can agree with the summary if we are talking about the George Lucas that made "Jar Jar" -- but not the George Lucas I imagine existed before that.
The movie has a strange mix of incredibly awesome and stunningly amateurish or "dumbed down by committee" pieces that kind of made me angry that it fell short of its total awesomeness potential.
Kind of like making a Transformer movie and then produce toys that don't transform. Who would think that's a good idea? Thank god Hollywood would never do something like that, so I wouldn't ever have to explain to a three year old on Christmas, "No, honey, it doesn't transform into a semi truck; it's just a robot"
ANYWAY you should see District 9 if you haven't but don't expect it to be soo awesome in total, it's pretty good, though. My wife is the true sci-fi fan so I'll wait for her report back tomorrow.
it wasn't designed for doing any of those things well I (and Microsoft, i think, if you look how exchange is architected) would disagree. How many other email systems can you map a drive letter directly into the datastore? It's awesome. Have you ever used GMail? There was some excitment here when someone wrote a file system driver for it. I'm pretty sure GMail is built around everyone keeping thier email forever. Or did the paradigm shift back again to 20MB inboxes and I missed it? I'm not saying we should keep everything in email, but certainly emails in email make sense.
absolute pain in the ass it is to manage the monolithic database files that Exchange uses. Go ask the poor IT folks that have to manage your company's mail databases. That would be me. Couldn't be easier!
Ask them how long it takes to recover e-mails from backups when someone inadvertently deletes something. The hardest part is getting the user to remember what it was they deleted and now want recovered. It takes minutes, once they remember.
disk space, employee time, IT management time, and, ultimately, dollars. Exchange does quite well in all the areas you mention. You really don't see any value in having all your email in your... email? For instance, lots of folks have rules that move emails from certain people into certain folders. I actually advocate keeping all your emails in your inbox, and moving copies into subfolders, so that you can retain the full "story" of the inbox. All the "bob smith" emails in alone in a separate folder loses a lot of context. GMail doesn't even have "folders". I suppose you could recreate that in some other system somewhere just for the purpose of not having it in email, but it has to "cost" more (not just $$) simply because it's already there for free if you do nothing at all.
How did we get here, anyway? My original point was that Safari on Windows means 1 less reason to boot osx.
Vista is not a great comparion to Mac OS X 10.4. Heck its not a great comparison to Mac OS X 10.2 if you want to get serious. I'm not a windows zealot, and I'm not clinging, either. I really don't care what os i'm running. I use a computer, like many people, for two things: working, and playing games. For me, OSX doesn't offer anything in either area. What does it have that Vista doesn't at this point? I'm not trolling, i'm seriously wondering if i missed something.
I don't know what you're trying to say the Mac can't do there I'd guess there's about a million apps in the corporate world that don't work on Mac, without virtualization or something else. For me, not being able to run VirtualCenter natively means I have to live in Windows. And it wasn't so long ago that Java in OSX was... painful. Can Navisphere run on OSX yet? I haven't tried in at least a year. Obviously, these are not OSX's "problems" but they are unfortunately reality.
I find Mail.app to be very capable but if you don't like it there's Thunderbird, Evolution or Microsoft's Entourage The thing is, none of what you mentioned can touch Outlook/Exchange on a PC, especially when you've got upwards of 40,000 emails and multiple gigs in your mailbox. Believe it or not, we have many Mac users longing for the days of Outlook on OS9. It was so much faster when dealing with huge mailboxes, as MAPI is simply a superior protocol in that arena. You might say "well, clean up your mailbox"... and you might get a blank stare back at you.
And I personally stopped buying Microsoft's Office Suites a LONG time ago. When you hit volumes where it's something like $20 a person to license MS Office for a year, it's practically free at that point, anyway.
You are actually suggesting that if someone simply builds a great laptop that Apple will have something to worry about? That's a joke, right?
People do not purchase Macs for their hardware (you and I'm sure a few others excluded). They never have. They purchase Macs to get to their OS. I have a reply a little further up, too, so this comment is in that context. Anyway, when I first read this, I agreed and thought I was wrong. Now that I've had lunch and thought about it a bit, I think I'm a little more right than you think. So, no, it's not a joke. You can't seriously think the average user gives a darn about the "operating system", do you? Certainly some significant percentage of *new* mac users bought macs because they are "sexier"... you have to agree with that, at least a little bit, right? Especially "first time computer buyers" and "folks on the fence" - not a small number of people, I assure you. I would bet there is a whole percentage point of new mac users who bought them simply because when they open their laptop on an airplane or the subway, they want people to think "oooh a mac user they must be (rich/successful/artsy... pick one)".
This is not directed solely at you, Carrot007, but also to the other two who responded to my comment (amyhughes and eclectic4). Anyway, at first, I thinking you all had a point, and that my angle was dead wrong. Then I thought about it a bit more, am I'm at minimum back on the fence. I believe bootcamp has had a significant impact on mac purchases. I bought a Mac because of it. I know of others. As a matter of fact, I'd say that informally, at least 70% of folks I know at work and personally who have switched from ThinkPads to Macs have done so because of bootcamp. I know that I now *only* recommend macs to people who are looking for new systems, and when I mention it can run windows now, people take the idea seriously. The only folks who don't take it seriously are those looking to get a laptop for under $600. I think I can safely say I've directly influenced something like 100 folks to go with Macs since bootcamp came out, not counting actual work related purchases. My point is that Apple, with Bootcamp, has to have people like me and my "story" on their radar, somewhere - or why did they do anything with bootcamp at all? And windows on mac is and was a *big deal* - remember that contest for who could do it first? Haven't apple ads mentioned it, too? I can safely say I've "tried out" OSX about as extensively as possible, my staff and I been through Apple's ACHDS training and certification, and at the end of the day, I found the only reason I would use it was to make sure a web page looks ok in Safari. I also used to use it for the DVD player, but then I found out VLC plays DVDs for free. What else is there on a Mac that's so "magical" now that Vista and Office 2007 are out? I might have stuck with OSX a bit more if they had a decent Mail client. But perhaps I have too much of a "corporate" perspective? I dunno.. anyway, you all have a valid point, and have swayed me substantially, hopefully I have done the same for you and all can have more moderate views.
I basically boot into OSX to test stuff in Safari. My MacBook Pro is essentially a Vista laptop, and the best PC I have ever owned. Now that Safari works in Vista, i have no compelling reason to boot into OSX.
If someone comes out with a vista laptop as nice as a MacBook Pro, then apple will really have something to worry about. Safari on Windows means OSX has become less compelling for me!
Computers are giant calculators. So, understanding the science of computers would seem to require a lot of math.
The world that allows you to major in "web development" was imagined, designed, and built by the computer scientist types.
I suspect the next big post-Internet computer thing, whatever it is, will be, too.
http://www.paytrust.com/ - They receive your bills, open them, post them online, and allow you to pay them. It's awesome... i've moved 4 times since i started using the service, and only had to notify the gas/electric company!
If you've never heard of Van Eck Phreaking, it is facinating. I've seen it demonstrated. Scary, indeed. Essentially using some equipment and an antenna, you can view from a distance whatever is displayed on a screen by picking up the EMF emmissions and reconstituting them into an image.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_Phreaking
The Wise Wiki references "LCDs" - although I've never seen an LCD eavesdropped in this way. I don't doubt it's possible, though.
We have an assortment of toy cars, with which we do play. There is a place for the futuristic... what makes me sad is what seems like a total lack of realistic toys - which (for me, as a child) had a seperate place and fosters a different type of play.
Your are correct, hot wheels were/are the crazy ones; but have you seen matchbox these days? I don't know that they are any better.
Re:Why does everything need to be tech based?
on
Re-Inventing Hotwheels
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Context: I was born in 1976.
Does anyone else find the tech stuff a "turn off"? If I want to play with tech stuff, I will play with my computer. If I want to play with toy cars, I want to play with... TOY CARS!!
Why in the world can't I buy my 3 year old a decent quality hot wheels/matchbox sized Dump truck? Or bull dozer? Or car that actually looks like a car that actually exists on this planet? Why do they all have to be "pimped out"? Or have crazy high tech styling?
I remember when GI JOE was pretty realistic looking, then they got all spacey, and suddently it seemed stupid to try and play around in my back yard with them...
And at hotwheels.com, or matchbox.com, why can i find a listing of their products, such as which cars they sell?
What's wrong with realistic?
What are they fed up of it about?
I think it would be easier to recommend if we understood the current problems.
I mean, exchange is fairly awesome:
- MAPI for a mail client protocol is hard to beat
- The webmail client is quite good
- The integration of calendars as such
Isn't exchange the benchmark everyone is trying to reach? Why go backwards? I know not everyone loves microsoft, but exchange is really good stuff.
Google: "ppod download ipaq"
To be honest, i considered getting an ipod because my wife's is awesome, but i was also at the time carrying a samsung i700, so I said to myself "i need to make this i700 do more!", when i remembered the slashdot article about the pPod. So, I got myself a 1GB SD card and was on my way.
Now that I have the i730, the media player from MS is much better (i can actually play an album!), so i only use the pPod for show and tell.
Nothing beats experience and a supply of 'known good' replacement parts.
I have been out of the repair and troubleshooting business for years, but I always remember being frustrated at useless memory and system testing software that could not find anything wrong with memory chips, etcs, that were obviously bad. Even most hardware units (like ram testers) were almost useless. If the POST testing didn't find anything wrong, it seemed almost nothing else would either, most of the time.
If you think the part is bad, swap it out with an equivalent and see if the problem goes away.
Slashdot Mirror
And thank you -- tools for language study is an angle i haven't explored yet.
Thank you -- you've provided a whole new avenue I can craft Google searches around, and the linked software is very interesting, too.
I'm almost ready to teach myself multimedia programming -- i'd love to have a simple program that would show a picture of an object, say the name of the object ("Say 'snake'") and then record the child saying the word, then play it back for them to hear themselves saying it through headphones. Icing would be if it could somehow evaluate the word and maybe have them try a 2nd or third time if they didn't get it right.
Even more icing would be to make it fun on some level.
There's lots of stuff out there but it's way more expensive and/or complex then just the simple computer program described used to augment traditional speech therapy.
I believe the blades have a variable pitch, so you set the pitch to "zero" so the air moving past them does not make them rotate.
I am not a meteorologist, but don't tornadoes occur because there is a horizontal boundary between two different types of air masses, and the tornado acts as a funnel to equalize the pressure between the two or something? Maybe wind turbines, and the mixed and turbulence they cause actually prevent tornadoes. Who knows? And, don't many tornadoes occur over particularly flat land? The turbines might reshape the landscape enough to disturb the atmosphere enough to prevent them. Turbines looking like tornadoes on radar make me think i'm not totally crazy.
Are you saying you like Jar Jar or that movies should never fool with physics? Or that you just don't like Star Wars in total? I'm confused.
It seems they "fixed" it for the second one; at least now they have a bunch of transforming transformers. But for the first movie, it seemed the majority of the toys did not transform. My son has a rather neat looking Optimus robot, about a foot tall, that has wheels and doors, looks like the movie character, but does not transform.
I suppose I can agree with the summary if we are talking about the George Lucas that made "Jar Jar" -- but not the George Lucas I imagine existed before that. The movie has a strange mix of incredibly awesome and stunningly amateurish or "dumbed down by committee" pieces that kind of made me angry that it fell short of its total awesomeness potential. Kind of like making a Transformer movie and then produce toys that don't transform. Who would think that's a good idea? Thank god Hollywood would never do something like that, so I wouldn't ever have to explain to a three year old on Christmas, "No, honey, it doesn't transform into a semi truck; it's just a robot" ANYWAY you should see District 9 if you haven't but don't expect it to be soo awesome in total, it's pretty good, though. My wife is the true sci-fi fan so I'll wait for her report back tomorrow.
...at least we can be assured whatever disaster happens, it will happen slowly. Just kidding!
How did we get here, anyway? My original point was that Safari on Windows means 1 less reason to boot osx.
This is not directed solely at you, Carrot007, but also to the other two who responded to my comment (amyhughes and eclectic4). Anyway, at first, I thinking you all had a point, and that my angle was dead wrong. Then I thought about it a bit more, am I'm at minimum back on the fence. I believe bootcamp has had a significant impact on mac purchases. I bought a Mac because of it. I know of others. As a matter of fact, I'd say that informally, at least 70% of folks I know at work and personally who have switched from ThinkPads to Macs have done so because of bootcamp. I know that I now *only* recommend macs to people who are looking for new systems, and when I mention it can run windows now, people take the idea seriously. The only folks who don't take it seriously are those looking to get a laptop for under $600. I think I can safely say I've directly influenced something like 100 folks to go with Macs since bootcamp came out, not counting actual work related purchases. My point is that Apple, with Bootcamp, has to have people like me and my "story" on their radar, somewhere - or why did they do anything with bootcamp at all? And windows on mac is and was a *big deal* - remember that contest for who could do it first? Haven't apple ads mentioned it, too? .. anyway, you all have a valid point, and have swayed me substantially, hopefully I have done the same for you and all can have more moderate views.
I can safely say I've "tried out" OSX about as extensively as possible, my staff and I been through Apple's ACHDS training and certification, and at the end of the day, I found the only reason I would use it was to make sure a web page looks ok in Safari. I also used to use it for the DVD player, but then I found out VLC plays DVDs for free. What else is there on a Mac that's so "magical" now that Vista and Office 2007 are out? I might have stuck with OSX a bit more if they had a decent Mail client. But perhaps I have too much of a "corporate" perspective? I dunno
I basically boot into OSX to test stuff in Safari. My MacBook Pro is essentially a Vista laptop, and the best PC I have ever owned. Now that Safari works in Vista, i have no compelling reason to boot into OSX. If someone comes out with a vista laptop as nice as a MacBook Pro, then apple will really have something to worry about. Safari on Windows means OSX has become less compelling for me!
No discrete math? Isn't that more like a degree "about" computer science, than a degree "in" computer science?
Computers are giant calculators. So, understanding the science of computers would seem to require a lot of math. The world that allows you to major in "web development" was imagined, designed, and built by the computer scientist types. I suspect the next big post-Internet computer thing, whatever it is, will be, too.
http://www.paytrust.com/ - They receive your bills, open them, post them online, and allow you to pay them. It's awesome... i've moved 4 times since i started using the service, and only had to notify the gas/electric company!
If you've never heard of Van Eck Phreaking, it is facinating. I've seen it demonstrated. Scary, indeed. Essentially using some equipment and an antenna, you can view from a distance whatever is displayed on a screen by picking up the EMF emmissions and reconstituting them into an image. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Eck_Phreaking The Wise Wiki references "LCDs" - although I've never seen an LCD eavesdropped in this way. I don't doubt it's possible, though.
We have an assortment of toy cars, with which we do play. There is a place for the futuristic ... what makes me sad is what seems like a total lack of realistic toys - which (for me, as a child) had a seperate place and fosters a different type of play.
Your are correct, hot wheels were/are the crazy ones; but have you seen matchbox these days? I don't know that they are any better.
Context: I was born in 1976. Does anyone else find the tech stuff a "turn off"? If I want to play with tech stuff, I will play with my computer. If I want to play with toy cars, I want to play with ... TOY CARS!!
Why in the world can't I buy my 3 year old a decent quality hot wheels/matchbox sized Dump truck? Or bull dozer? Or car that actually looks like a car that actually exists on this planet? Why do they all have to be "pimped out"? Or have crazy high tech styling?
I remember when GI JOE was pretty realistic looking, then they got all spacey, and suddently it seemed stupid to try and play around in my back yard with them...
And at hotwheels.com, or matchbox.com, why can i find a listing of their products, such as which cars they sell?
What's wrong with realistic?
What are they fed up of it about? I think it would be easier to recommend if we understood the current problems. I mean, exchange is fairly awesome: - MAPI for a mail client protocol is hard to beat - The webmail client is quite good - The integration of calendars as such Isn't exchange the benchmark everyone is trying to reach? Why go backwards? I know not everyone loves microsoft, but exchange is really good stuff.
Google: "ppod download ipaq" To be honest, i considered getting an ipod because my wife's is awesome, but i was also at the time carrying a samsung i700, so I said to myself "i need to make this i700 do more!", when i remembered the slashdot article about the pPod. So, I got myself a 1GB SD card and was on my way. Now that I have the i730, the media player from MS is much better (i can actually play an album!), so i only use the pPod for show and tell.
Anyone remember this? http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/09/ 1654250&tid=176&tid=100&tid=3
From starbright? Basically an ipod interface for PocketPC?
Totally illegal alledgedly, but i love it on my Samsung i730!
Nothing beats experience and a supply of 'known good' replacement parts. I have been out of the repair and troubleshooting business for years, but I always remember being frustrated at useless memory and system testing software that could not find anything wrong with memory chips, etcs, that were obviously bad. Even most hardware units (like ram testers) were almost useless. If the POST testing didn't find anything wrong, it seemed almost nothing else would either, most of the time. If you think the part is bad, swap it out with an equivalent and see if the problem goes away.
This is a 'rtfm' - but in case you don't have tfm, it is:
edit->application settings
select the priority tab
This setting does help make a difference, but HT really is cool, especially if you don't want to make your VMs a lower priority.