One feature that I eventually had to resort to Help to find was the Autocorrect settings (specifically to add context-specific abbreviations to the list that would automatically be expanded to the full text). This was very easily found via menus and damn near impossible via the ribbon.
As it should be. As something that's accessed never by most people, and rarely by the rest of us, it doesn't belong in the toolbar/ribbon at all. Is it no longer in the menus, by the way? If so, that would be a problem.
I have had nothing but problems opening doc files... The fact is, almost nobody has standardized around ODF in any meaningful way in the (i.e. "my") workplace. The gold standard is MS Office. Cost is almost never a consideration for the company--but it is for folks like me who either can't afford or don't wish to discharge a bag of cash to get a fully-featured version of MS Office.
If you're billable, think about your hourly rate. If not, divide your salary by ~1000 to get your loaded cost to the company. Now look at how many hours you spend every 3 years dealing with Office incompatibilities, and you'll see why cost is a concern for your company, and why they chose to stick with the same suite that, like it or not, almost everyone outside the company uses.
Those are all good reasons to tow in lower gears. However, the fact that "OD" refers to gears beyond 1:1 is still a marketing coincidence. Yes, a direct drive gear is stronger than the overdrive gear, but a.9 is similarly stronger to a.7 as well. Many automotive manufacturers choose not to allow full manual control of the automatic transmission, and have compromised on the "1-D" and "1-n" toggle, of which "1-D" is often a better choice for towing. These days though, with the massively overengineered transmissions we keep putting into full size trucks that people use to tow ski-boats, unless you're bumping up against your towing capacity leaving it in Drive ("1-n") is often just fine.
Why not get rid of a lot of stop signs? Are stop signs that require a complete stop really safer than a yield? I see so many that seem unnecessary. Could low volume intersections be made smart so that stopping (or even slowing) is only required if there is oncoming traffic?
Only if you can see far enough to either side to make sure that nobody is indeed coming, which even at 30mph is quite a long distance, far greater than that afforded by most controlled intersections.
Interestingly enough they tried this method shortly after the automobile was invented. Afterwards, other people invented stop signs and traffic lights.
This has the theoretical potential of being a rather nifty thing, but I don't know how the practical (engineering) side of things works out. It may be impractical, or may be not. Time will tell.
Its also, I believe, the same system that folk like UPS have been using for several years now on their Hybrid delivery trucks in the US. Very tried-and-true technology in general, the challenge is getting it out of the delivery/garbage market (heavy vehicles in which slightly overdesigned accessories (for reliability) are perfectly acceptable) and into the individual car/van market, where weight, NVH, and other considerations are more important.
Overdrive is a marketing term referring to an automatic transmission that has a top gear higher than 1:1. These days, most (all?) transmissions have at least two gears past a 1:1 ratio. In fact, there's absolutely nothing magic about 1:1 other than theoretical elegance. Its marketing, no more, no less.
Well, to be fair, its converting a more expensive metal into a less expensive metal and a lot of heat. After all, most people would pay more for coal than for soot too...
The best part of the common arguments is that they depend on all of Earth's governments being at the same time completely incompetent and corrupt and able to maintain a massive, planet-wide conspiracy at all levels for decades.
Not to mention that said incredible battery would be a) more acceptable, and b) extremely valuable, so they probably don't have one of those.
Besides, its not 'free energy.' It takes power and nickel, and returns power and less nickel. Huge difference from claiming to take in power and return more power.
There is a chance that they stumbled upon something useful without having a clue how it works, therefore unable to produce a good paper on it. Notably 'cold fusion' appears likely to have nothing to do with it.
Yes, and if they didn't claim "cold fusion" others might actually believe that they stumbled upon something useful...
While its probably a scam, please note that if you dig into any of the interviews with them directly that they specifically disclaim the term "cold fusion." Others continue to use it, however.
^TJX's issue was that they never spent any money on security that they didn't absolutely have to.
That's actually not a bad thing. I'd restate that to say, "They didn't realize that they absolutely had to spend money on security until it was too late." Not spending money on things that you don't need to spend money on is good business - there are a myriad of things that might be needed, but probably won't be, and covering all of your bases will quite literally put you out of business. They chose poorly, and should be criticized for that, but they shouldn't be criticized for making the choice in the first place.
Except that all the interceptor need do is force an HTTP connection to themselves, then make the HTTPS connection outbound. How many people would actually check for an HTTPS connection before logging in to Facebook?
Don't forget that battlegrounds tend to grow really well a couple of years after the bloodletting and mass burials. All those nutrients, don't'cha know.
Not only that, but its been shown that millions upon millions of people do have the unchanged, original-design iPhone 4, and don't have the problems you're talking about. That's exactly what I mean when I said "overblown." Most if not all people complaining about the problem do not have (and would never purchase) an iPhone.
If millions of people were really in a situation where holding their only celphone in a normal way caused the call to drop, do you really think they'd all go, "Oh, well, it's an Apple so it must be perfect."? Of course not. The media was looking for weaknesses, thought they'd found one, didn't, and it all blew over.
Except on sites like/. when people want to be all l33t and complainy.
So it could be bundled in with a "voice changer" app or, probably more successfully, one that randomly inserts background noise (train station, jungle, room-o-farts) into your call. For freez!
Probably because, while they're far from perfect, more of Apple's mistakes have been both relatively harmless and also overblown by the media ( they mysterious "death grip" is a good example). Alternatively, many of Microsoft's mistakes have been glossed over my the media and have actually been quite annoying.
In this case, there seems to be no good reason why Microsoft couldn't have revealed exactly what was going on. If its a telco app, then just say "We can't reveal any more details due to our non-disclosure with Verizon" or whatever it is.
I'm not sitting at my desk thinking "I wish this browser would just be faster!" at this stage of the game - all the browsers I have tried have been pretty good in recent years. What does affect me are large swings in usability that make a browser annoying to use - like the removal of the status bar, or whatever bug has been added to Webkit that causes the hyper annoying "no paste" in some slashdot comment boxes on Safari.
At this stage, I'd say that predictability was far more important than pure benchmark speed. I'd much rather have a browser that always took 100ms to perform an action than one that took 50ms 99 times out of 100, and 5 seconds the other 1% of the time. Its the same overall speed to perform x-thousand iterations, but the first is highly usable and the second is a big pile of steaming.... bugs.
[T]hat argument falls down a little when something like Pandora is rolled in as a primary feature and something as simple and useful as the status bar is taken out
Truly said. Either they're building a kernel, or they're building a system. You can't do both successfully, especially if you're unwilling to admit it to yourself.
Good points here. Additionally, learning the command line is like learning the wrench. It takes a few minutes to get the basics down, the rest is all in how you use it in different ways to solve different problems.
Besides, after the first week, what you should be teaching is scripting, the concept of gluing together prebuilt tools to work on a given data stream to do wonderful things.
The Power Tools book could be a good asset to you, here. Tons of great, short, impressive examples of things that are relatively trivial to a scripter, and very hard to someone else.
Although to an individual developer, suing someone with limited liability can still result in a reasonably sizable settlement; possibly far less than Capcom might make on the rip-off, but more than the indie dev was likely to make on it, which is arguably a reasonable solution.
What they won't get is 10% of Capcom which, ironically, may mean that the studio is more likely to go with the settlement rather than tying it up for decades.
It does not matter the odds? So since crossing the street at a crosswalk and jumping out of a plane without a parachute might both kill you or leave you unscathed, they're equally dangerous? Come on.
MPEG-LA is comprised of everyone the group could find that might conceivably hold patents. They are also agreed to help fight, buy, or otherwise mitigate any new patent claims that arise. Google is comprised of... google. Who steadfastly denies any claim that they'll fight on behalf of the adopters of WebM if patents come up.
No, you're granted protection from Google. Google steadfastly refuses to grant you future protections against others who may sue you, as a user of WebM, for violating their patents (that Google claims do not exist). Massive legal difference.
Slashdot Mirror
One feature that I eventually had to resort to Help to find was the Autocorrect settings (specifically to add context-specific abbreviations to the list that would automatically be expanded to the full text). This was very easily found via menus and damn near impossible via the ribbon.
As it should be. As something that's accessed never by most people, and rarely by the rest of us, it doesn't belong in the toolbar/ribbon at all. Is it no longer in the menus, by the way? If so, that would be a problem.
I have had nothing but problems opening doc files ... The fact is, almost nobody has standardized around ODF in any meaningful way in the (i.e. "my") workplace. The gold standard is MS Office. Cost is almost never a consideration for the company--but it is for folks like me who either can't afford or don't wish to discharge a bag of cash to get a fully-featured version of MS Office.
If you're billable, think about your hourly rate. If not, divide your salary by ~1000 to get your loaded cost to the company. Now look at how many hours you spend every 3 years dealing with Office incompatibilities, and you'll see why cost is a concern for your company, and why they chose to stick with the same suite that, like it or not, almost everyone outside the company uses.
Those are all good reasons to tow in lower gears. However, the fact that "OD" refers to gears beyond 1:1 is still a marketing coincidence. Yes, a direct drive gear is stronger than the overdrive gear, but a .9 is similarly stronger to a .7 as well. Many automotive manufacturers choose not to allow full manual control of the automatic transmission, and have compromised on the "1-D" and "1-n" toggle, of which "1-D" is often a better choice for towing. These days though, with the massively overengineered transmissions we keep putting into full size trucks that people use to tow ski-boats, unless you're bumping up against your towing capacity leaving it in Drive ("1-n") is often just fine.
Why not get rid of a lot of stop signs? Are stop signs that require a complete stop really safer than a yield? I see so many that seem unnecessary. Could low volume intersections be made smart so that stopping (or even slowing) is only required if there is oncoming traffic?
Only if you can see far enough to either side to make sure that nobody is indeed coming, which even at 30mph is quite a long distance, far greater than that afforded by most controlled intersections.
Interestingly enough they tried this method shortly after the automobile was invented. Afterwards, other people invented stop signs and traffic lights.
This has the theoretical potential of being a rather nifty thing, but I don't know how the practical (engineering) side of things works out. It may be impractical, or may be not. Time will tell.
Its also, I believe, the same system that folk like UPS have been using for several years now on their Hybrid delivery trucks in the US. Very tried-and-true technology in general, the challenge is getting it out of the delivery/garbage market (heavy vehicles in which slightly overdesigned accessories (for reliability) are perfectly acceptable) and into the individual car/van market, where weight, NVH, and other considerations are more important.
Overdrive is a marketing term referring to an automatic transmission that has a top gear higher than 1:1. These days, most (all?) transmissions have at least two gears past a 1:1 ratio. In fact, there's absolutely nothing magic about 1:1 other than theoretical elegance. Its marketing, no more, no less.
Solar powered wood stoves FTW!
The machine itself is under patent, that's why we don't know anything of its insides.
Taken by itself, that's one of the most absurd single sentences I've seen on /. And that's saying a lot.
Well, to be fair, its converting a more expensive metal into a less expensive metal and a lot of heat. After all, most people would pay more for coal than for soot too...
The best part of the common arguments is that they depend on all of Earth's governments being at the same time completely incompetent and corrupt and able to maintain a massive, planet-wide conspiracy at all levels for decades.
Not to mention that said incredible battery would be a) more acceptable, and b) extremely valuable, so they probably don't have one of those.
Besides, its not 'free energy.' It takes power and nickel, and returns power and less nickel. Huge difference from claiming to take in power and return more power.
There is a chance that they stumbled upon something useful without having a clue how it works, therefore unable to produce a good paper on it. Notably 'cold fusion' appears likely to have nothing to do with it.
Yes, and if they didn't claim "cold fusion" others might actually believe that they stumbled upon something useful...
While its probably a scam, please note that if you dig into any of the interviews with them directly that they specifically disclaim the term "cold fusion." Others continue to use it, however.
^TJX's issue was that they never spent any money on security that they didn't absolutely have to.
That's actually not a bad thing. I'd restate that to say, "They didn't realize that they absolutely had to spend money on security until it was too late." Not spending money on things that you don't need to spend money on is good business - there are a myriad of things that might be needed, but probably won't be, and covering all of your bases will quite literally put you out of business. They chose poorly, and should be criticized for that, but they shouldn't be criticized for making the choice in the first place.
Except that all the interceptor need do is force an HTTP connection to themselves, then make the HTTPS connection outbound. How many people would actually check for an HTTPS connection before logging in to Facebook?
The good news is that the answer to your question is spelled out explicitly in TFA...
Don't forget that battlegrounds tend to grow really well a couple of years after the bloodletting and mass burials. All those nutrients, don't'cha know.
Not only that, but its been shown that millions upon millions of people do have the unchanged, original-design iPhone 4, and don't have the problems you're talking about. That's exactly what I mean when I said "overblown." Most if not all people complaining about the problem do not have (and would never purchase) an iPhone.
If millions of people were really in a situation where holding their only celphone in a normal way caused the call to drop, do you really think they'd all go, "Oh, well, it's an Apple so it must be perfect."? Of course not. The media was looking for weaknesses, thought they'd found one, didn't, and it all blew over.
Except on sites like /. when people want to be all l33t and complainy.
So it could be bundled in with a "voice changer" app or, probably more successfully, one that randomly inserts background noise (train station, jungle, room-o-farts) into your call. For freez!
Probably because, while they're far from perfect, more of Apple's mistakes have been both relatively harmless and also overblown by the media ( they mysterious "death grip" is a good example). Alternatively, many of Microsoft's mistakes have been glossed over my the media and have actually been quite annoying.
In this case, there seems to be no good reason why Microsoft couldn't have revealed exactly what was going on. If its a telco app, then just say "We can't reveal any more details due to our non-disclosure with Verizon" or whatever it is.
I'm not sitting at my desk thinking "I wish this browser would just be faster!" at this stage of the game - all the browsers I have tried have been pretty good in recent years. What does affect me are large swings in usability that make a browser annoying to use - like the removal of the status bar, or whatever bug has been added to Webkit that causes the hyper annoying "no paste" in some slashdot comment boxes on Safari.
At this stage, I'd say that predictability was far more important than pure benchmark speed. I'd much rather have a browser that always took 100ms to perform an action than one that took 50ms 99 times out of 100, and 5 seconds the other 1% of the time. Its the same overall speed to perform x-thousand iterations, but the first is highly usable and the second is a big pile of steaming .... bugs.
[T]hat argument falls down a little when something like Pandora is rolled in as a primary feature and something as simple and useful as the status bar is taken out
Truly said. Either they're building a kernel, or they're building a system. You can't do both successfully, especially if you're unwilling to admit it to yourself.
Good points here. Additionally, learning the command line is like learning the wrench. It takes a few minutes to get the basics down, the rest is all in how you use it in different ways to solve different problems.
Besides, after the first week, what you should be teaching is scripting, the concept of gluing together prebuilt tools to work on a given data stream to do wonderful things.
The Power Tools book could be a good asset to you, here. Tons of great, short, impressive examples of things that are relatively trivial to a scripter, and very hard to someone else.
Although to an individual developer, suing someone with limited liability can still result in a reasonably sizable settlement; possibly far less than Capcom might make on the rip-off, but more than the indie dev was likely to make on it, which is arguably a reasonable solution.
What they won't get is 10% of Capcom which, ironically, may mean that the studio is more likely to go with the settlement rather than tying it up for decades.
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensors.aspx for the record, btw - a veritable who's who in the video space.
It does not matter the odds? So since crossing the street at a crosswalk and jumping out of a plane without a parachute might both kill you or leave you unscathed, they're equally dangerous? Come on.
MPEG-LA is comprised of everyone the group could find that might conceivably hold patents. They are also agreed to help fight, buy, or otherwise mitigate any new patent claims that arise. Google is comprised of ... google. Who steadfastly denies any claim that they'll fight on behalf of the adopters of WebM if patents come up.
No, you're granted protection from Google. Google steadfastly refuses to grant you future protections against others who may sue you, as a user of WebM, for violating their patents (that Google claims do not exist). Massive legal difference.