I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Vista fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Dell (a Core 2 Duo w/1 Gig of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my G3 iMac, running OS9.2, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
1. Post (someone else's) copyright material on one of Viacom's sites 2. Sue them. 3. Win (by using their own "Viacom depends on us") 4. Shut them down.
So, the pilot flips a switch, and the autopilot takes over, and takes the plane to.... where, exactly?
Let's presume that it was pre-programmed on the ground. So, at LAX, it will take the plane to some Californian AFB. So far, so good. But, if the hijacker comes in on approach to JFK, does this mean the aircraft then does a 180 turn and heads back?
Fuel requirements may be to have 90min reserves, over and above what is required for the flight. So, this would have the plane run out of fuel 90 min after turning round.
OK, so the destination is set for the arrival airport, then. Even better - it will go straight there, and neatly ignore all the other traffic in the approach.
To be honest, I can see the airlines doing this deliberatle to keep to their schedules (nothing beats queue jumping!)
Maybe, the autopilot has no preset destination, then. OK, the aircraft will then head for 0 latitude, 0 longitude. Not a good move either.
So do the music execs *WANT* DRM, or do they *NOT* want it?
Having (unwittingly) handed their crown jewels (control of the industry) to Apple (Music Exec - "OK, Apple, you can sell downloads, but it must have DRM" Apple - "Done! (Heh, you certainly have been)" ), what they want is their control back.
So, they *WANT* DRM, but they *DO NOT* want Apple in charge of it (or MS, or... well anyone except the RIAA, really).
The thing is, once artists start extricating themselves from the major labels' shackles, (so that the artists can get better deals with Apple / other download store), the labels will become increasingly less relevant.
I reckon the scariest part is the following (from Chapter 3 - just before the bit about "imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever")
O'Brien: Now tell me why we cling to power. What is our motive? Why should we want power?
Winston: You are ruling over us for our own good,' he said feebly. 'You believe that human beings are not fit to govern themselves, and therefore --'
O'Brien:'That was stupid, Winston, stupid!' he said. 'You should know better than to say a thing like that.' 'Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power.'
The faceless little shits behind this will never be known. Their crimes will never go punished.
Actually, they are far from faceless - they are MPs. But they're still little shits, though.
John Reid and his ilk are the typical playground bully - they demand everything, but would never dream of doing it themselves, because they cannot take what they give out.
Just to get you back on earth... try visiting any commercial aircraft cockpit...
the altimeter is in feet (and so are flight levels of course)
airspeed is in knots
fuel and fuel consumption are often in gallons
...however military aircraft are often metric.
But temperature is in Celsius, and barometric pressure in millibars (both metric).
And the standard adiabatic lapse rate is 1.98 degrees Celsius per 1000 feet, which mixes both.
Back in the day (round about 1-2-3 v1.0a), MS-DOS ran on a multitude of machines, not all of which were fully IBM PC compatible. (Apricot Xen being one example). Standard magazine reviews would try to run 1-2-3 (and MS Flight Simulator, IIRC), to see how compatible they were.
The problem with 1-2-3, even on full IBM PC-compatibles, was that they used some pretty low level tricks to get it to run remotely fast, and these tricks often used memory addresses that MS would then try and use in a later version of DOS, which given DOS loaded first, would break 1-2-3.
By 1-2-3 v2.2, the problems had been mostly eradicated; by 1-2-3 v3, Lotus had gone from coding in Assembler to writing it in a higher level language (C, I think), which bumped up the executable size from ~400k to ~2Mb
Maybe, just maybe, it's a bit of both - MS would love to kill the iPod, while Apple would love to undermine Vista enough for people to consider switching (and let them use their existing XP under Boot Camp).
So, I think we are seeing a bit of brinksmanship from both sides - the one who admits first that their product is the one at fault loses mindshare.
Without accusing the crowd of being anything less than an ethical [insert gagging sounds here], this might be history repeating itself for competitive gain. With the Windows 95 upgrade came the "feature" that included the disabling of AOL software.
And, further back, the windows 3.1 upgrade that broke DR-DOS
The early adopters are generally the tech savvy ones, and in the past (think Win95 and XP launches) they are the ones who have been queueing up at midnight to buy the copies on the launch day.
This then provides extra free publicity, as the queue story inevitably gets picked up by the TV news media, which in turn will drive extra sales, as "Joe Average" sees that and thinks "Must be good, if people are prepared to wait up until midnight for it".
However, this time round, the tech savvy early adopters will be sitting at home waiting to download it. So no midnight queues. No TV news coverage. No "Joe Average" sales (at least not in the first couple of weeks)
Going back a few years, NT 3.1 was available in Server and Workstation versions. However, "Server" required that you already purchased Workstation, as inside the box was a brief manual and a 3.5" floppy disk. You converted WS to Server by applying the software on the disk.
In other words, all the software was installed on one version, but some extra bits were only enabled by coughing up extra money to unlock them.
Surely, a more apposite last chapter title is "The Man Who Died". By that time, Harry will be officially an adult, so it can then refer to either Harry or Voldemort (since everyone has pretty much reckoned that there will be the final showdown)
Call that a formula? It may be long, but it's still fairly simple. When you want to check what value someone was given in another experiment, and (for convenience) give the explanation, it gets a bit more complicated (but still simple enough to do as a formula)
=VLOOKUP(VLOOKUP(A3,OtherSheetName!A:D,4,FALSE),Ot herSheetDecode!A:B,2,FALSE)
(put in some IF( ) parts to hide the #N/A entries, and it gets long, but still not complicated)
On the other hand, if you want to pull dates from a whole string of text entered (and the date may be input as dd/mm/yy or dd mmm yyyy or any combination of the two), then VBA is pretty much the only way to go without making the spreadsheet even larger (and slower) than it already is.
And if the "truthiness" of the situation doesn't make you like the word "truthiness", then I suggest "drismal" (which describes the weather here a lot of the time - a portmanteau word of "dreich" and "dismal"
Slashdot Mirror
But... doesn't that comment breach that Viacom lawyer's copyright?
Finally, a chance to turn the tables...
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Vista fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Dell (a Core 2 Duo w/1 Gig of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my G3 iMac, running OS9.2, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
(the original rant)
1. Post (someone else's) copyright material on one of Viacom's sites
2. Sue them.
3. Win (by using their own "Viacom depends on us")
4. Shut them down.
Simple.
(Chance of happening - slim to none)
...every engineer - software or hardware...the DIY radio geek...geeks amongst the wargamersDifferent sides, same coin.
Or, in this case, "different sides, same d4"
So, the pilot flips a switch, and the autopilot takes over, and takes the plane to .... where, exactly?
Let's presume that it was pre-programmed on the ground. So, at LAX, it will take the plane to some Californian AFB. So far, so good. But, if the hijacker comes in on approach to JFK, does this mean the aircraft then does a 180 turn and heads back?
Fuel requirements may be to have 90min reserves, over and above what is required for the flight. So, this would have the plane run out of fuel 90 min after turning round.
OK, so the destination is set for the arrival airport, then. Even better - it will go straight there, and neatly ignore all the other traffic in the approach.
To be honest, I can see the airlines doing this deliberatle to keep to their schedules (nothing beats queue jumping!)
Maybe, the autopilot has no preset destination, then. OK, the aircraft will then head for 0 latitude, 0 longitude. Not a good move either.
Pretty rubbish idea, really.
Don't forget "PIN Number" and "AC current". Now whether that's still too good for "paradigm shift"...
Having (unwittingly) handed their crown jewels (control of the industry) to Apple (Music Exec - "OK, Apple, you can sell downloads, but it must have DRM" Apple - "Done! (Heh, you certainly have been)" ), what they want is their control back.
So, they *WANT* DRM, but they *DO NOT* want Apple in charge of it (or MS, or... well anyone except the RIAA, really).
The thing is, once artists start extricating themselves from the major labels' shackles, (so that the artists can get better deals with Apple / other download store), the labels will become increasingly less relevant.
I think you have an insight into how Britain's Prime Minister thinks...
I reckon the scariest part is the following (from Chapter 3 - just before the bit about "imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever")
O'Brien: Now tell me why we cling to power. What is our motive? Why should we want power?
Winston: You are ruling over us for our own good,' he said feebly. 'You believe that human beings are not fit to govern themselves, and therefore --'
O'Brien:'That was stupid, Winston, stupid!' he said. 'You should know better than to say a thing like that.' 'Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power.'
Actually, they are far from faceless - they are MPs. But they're still little shits, though.
John Reid and his ilk are the typical playground bully - they demand everything, but would never dream of doing it themselves, because they cannot take what they give out.
But temperature is in Celsius, and barometric pressure in millibars (both metric).
And the standard adiabatic lapse rate is 1.98 degrees Celsius per 1000 feet, which mixes both.
er... Commodore machines were among the few that didn't use MS BASIC (the startup came up "Commodore BASIC xxxx Bytes free")
;-)
but why let facts get in the way of a joke
when it ships in 20012...
Eighteen thousand and five in years in development. Wow!
Back in the day (round about 1-2-3 v1.0a), MS-DOS ran on a multitude of machines, not all of which were fully IBM PC compatible. (Apricot Xen being one example). Standard magazine reviews would try to run 1-2-3 (and MS Flight Simulator, IIRC), to see how compatible they were.
The problem with 1-2-3, even on full IBM PC-compatibles, was that they used some pretty low level tricks to get it to run remotely fast, and these tricks often used memory addresses that MS would then try and use in a later version of DOS, which given DOS loaded first, would break 1-2-3.
By 1-2-3 v2.2, the problems had been mostly eradicated; by 1-2-3 v3, Lotus had gone from coding in Assembler to writing it in a higher level language (C, I think), which bumped up the executable size from ~400k to ~2Mb
Maybe, just maybe, it's a bit of both - MS would love to kill the iPod, while Apple would love to undermine Vista enough for people to consider switching (and let them use their existing XP under Boot Camp).
So, I think we are seeing a bit of brinksmanship from both sides - the one who admits first that their product is the one at fault loses mindshare.
And, further back, the windows 3.1 upgrade that broke DR-DOS
The early adopters are generally the tech savvy ones, and in the past (think Win95 and XP launches) they are the ones who have been queueing up at midnight to buy the copies on the launch day.
This then provides extra free publicity, as the queue story inevitably gets picked up by the TV news media, which in turn will drive extra sales, as "Joe Average" sees that and thinks "Must be good, if people are prepared to wait up until midnight for it".
However, this time round, the tech savvy early adopters will be sitting at home waiting to download it. So no midnight queues. No TV news coverage. No "Joe Average" sales (at least not in the first couple of weeks)
...or maybe just us some of his SS-18s, with the warheads refitted.
Problem solved!
Going back a few years, NT 3.1 was available in Server and Workstation versions. However, "Server" required that you already purchased Workstation, as inside the box was a brief manual and a 3.5" floppy disk. You converted WS to Server by applying the software on the disk.
In other words, all the software was installed on one version, but some extra bits were only enabled by coughing up extra money to unlock them.
Surely, a more apposite last chapter title is "The Man Who Died". By that time, Harry will be officially an adult, so it can then refer to either Harry or Voldemort (since everyone has pretty much reckoned that there will be the final showdown)
6 x 9 = 42, but only in base 13. (Douglas Adams had that one pointed out to him after he wrote it)
Which would spend 10 million years to come up with "What do you get when you multiply six by nine", no doubt
Being released to the public would be great. I suspect that it will only be licenced.
Call that a formula? It may be long, but it's still fairly simple. When you want to check what value someone was given in another experiment, and (for convenience) give the explanation, it gets a bit more complicated (but still simple enough to do as a formula)
=VLOOKUP(VLOOKUP(A3,OtherSheetName!A:D,4,FALSE),O
(put in some IF( ) parts to hide the #N/A entries, and it gets long, but still not complicated)
On the other hand, if you want to pull dates from a whole string of text entered (and the date may be input as dd/mm/yy or dd mmm yyyy or any combination of the two), then VBA is pretty much the only way to go without making the spreadsheet even larger (and slower) than it already is.
In short, VBA has its place, but so do formulas.
And if the "truthiness" of the situation doesn't make you like the word "truthiness", then I suggest "drismal" (which describes the weather here a lot of the time - a portmanteau word of "dreich" and "dismal"