As a challenge to Linux in the enterprise that is, not necessarily for home users which are predominantly on Windows anyway, and this is unlikely to change very much in the Western world over the next 3 years.
The other potential win is creating a version of Linux that is more interoperable with Windows, thus making Red Hat a good choice for those transitioning, also allowing transitioning from Linux easy at some point in the future. The problem with this strategy is that it will be difficult to ensure interoperability without the code being touched by the GPL and thus being available to customers (namely Novell/SuSE and IBM, companies that provide more total support for Linux, and much more serious competitors to Microsoft). So it would a risky strategy for Microsoft, but who is to know what it will do. Given the enhancement of interoperability announced between Solaris and Windows I would suspect, though, that the emphasis will be on Solaris x86 as a challenge to Linux rather than buying Red Hat.
The objective of education is suppose to get people ready for life.
In which case the imperative should be to teach them to think and to help them think teach them about general principles (in this case of computer use) rather than a specific operating system.
Our district along with countless others receive large grants, last year a total of $200,000, from Microsoft.
And how much does the Microsoft software cost? If more than $200,000 then going with Microsoft presents a net loss.
Many laxatives have their laxative effect due to toxicity. The laxative effect generally comes at a lower dose than the dose required to cause serious and irreversible damage. In fact cyanides (in low doses) has been used as a laxative, and I wouldn't call those non toxic!
Indeed, the correct figure to look at would be GDP PPP (purchasing power parity) for the middle class in the USA and India, plus an indication of how many fall into this middle class bracket in each nation.
circa 3" on a PDA makes them handy, but a bit small for some tasks, and you have less choice in applications due to the OS used on most (Windows mobile).
A 15" screen laptop is a bit too bulky for some people.
7.5" to 10" screens fit for some people. In fact I nearly picked up a transmeta based system once on ebuyer which had about a 9" screen. It wasn't going to be powerful, but would be able to a bit more than my PDA without the weight of a bigger laptop.
Provided there is enough graphics and CPU power available than a 7.5" to 10" screen on a relatively low CPU power/memory machine is enough for powerpoint, Word, and when you need more power you can access that remotely via one of the thin client or Grid paradigms.
In the USA some carriers have equipment that is mutually incompatible. In other words if you are in an area with provider X then your phone from provider Y may simply not work. I am not aware of this being the case in the UK. In the UK there are multiple carriers but at the hardware level there is at least signal compatibility so you have a possibility of connecting if your phone is configured such that it may connect to more than one network provider (which is pretty common).
A good digital camera and 'intelligent scissors' as in gimp would go some way to do this, but an automated way of doing the subimage extraction would be nice.
"First, linux requires you to deal with source code."
No, it doesn't. You can choose to deal with source code if you wish but for 99% of home users with decent distributions you can just use the packaged update GUI.
In a fairly recent demo of HDTV one of the manufacturers demonstrated 1080i on a 720p display and even the washed elite of the press largely failed to notice. So what chance do the unwashed masses have?
If MPs were required to have at least 50% of the vote (ignoring my 'none of the above' option) then democracy would grind to a halt quite rapidly.
The only way round this would be to have some form of proportional representation. Pooled consituency areas and electing a number of representatives for a larger area gives a better sense of being represented by someone who shares your views but it dilutes the local nature of an MP and means that you end up with half a dozen MPs from different parties representing the same area and bickering about it. Who do you write to if you have a problem?
So that leaves you with other PR schemes that elect a single MP and then you might find that the second choice of many but the first choice of noone gets elected.
In terms of claims per capita (based on granted patents) I think Japan leads the world, followed by the USA. But there is a bias in these figures in terms of how easy it is to patent something, so who knows what the level of inventiveness, innovation, or production of IP is. Other measures of IP production might be number of academic papers published per capita, but then if you publish 5 similar papers is that more or less IP production than someone who produces 3 that contain 3 separate big ideas? And what if the academic culture in one country encourages lots of publication and another does not? Production of IP (even in the scientific/technical arena) is hard to gauge.
In the UK we vote for local representatives, though, not for a president. So your vote can count locally even if the local result doesn't have a deciding effect on the overall result.
What I would dearly love to see, though, is a 'none of the above' option on the ballot with a stipulation that if 'none of the above' wins in an constituency then a byelection must be held with none of the previous candidates able to stand again.
Re:PC-based DVRs have massive drawbacks...
on
Build Your Own DVR
·
· Score: 1
"If I could get a DVR for the price of TV card + the software, and no more hassle, I'd buy one."
In the UK you can pick up a PC with sufficient specification for about 220 pounds, and about 50 pounds for a single Freeview card, about 270 total. You can pick up a hard disk Freeview standalone recorder for as little as 179. If you want two Freeview connections than you are talking 320 (PC) versus around 250 (standalone). Either way unless you have spare PC parts of want something with more than the function of a PVR then a standalone system is probably cheaper.
The 787 is more competition for smaller Airbus models. The A380 and 787 are complementary in terms of total air traffic. One serves hub-to-hub, or big city to big city. If you can pack 550 people in an A380 and make the hub-to-hub travel sufficiently cheap you may make it cheap enough to fill all those seats even if people want to end up in a city other than the hub city. Other people may want to travel direct to their destination. So you might end up with a split or customer types based on the economics. On a per-passenger cost I can't see the 787 beating the A380 as you need to double up on some of the maintenance tasks plus pilots to shift the same number of bodies or have the fuel economy be very much better than the A380, but the convenience factor of more direct travel is definitely going to convince some. It's basically the same argument that makes the 747 worthwhile in some instances and not in others, except that the A380's a bit more fuel efficient.
The take off and landing run length is pretty much the same as a 747-400 (by design), not as some have suggested that the runways need to be lengthened for the A380. It is just that the landing track and wing size means that some airports can't accomodate the width, especially when taxiing. For some airports the runways are wide enough and the taxi ways sufficiently spaced that no work needs be done, but it varies.
The A380 is more fuel efficient than older designs so it is possible that you could run it less occupied than older designs before making a loss. So if you look at it that way if current designs can be run between big hubs and make a profit the A380 probably can too with the same passenger numbers (discounting capital cost for a moment) and any additional passengers are just more profit. The question is - is it worth taking the risk given the capital outlay compared to buying an older design which might be a little bit cheaper?
Indeed, I would rather an OASIS-supported format be available. I am not sure if the new open document format (essentially a.doc replacement) extends as far as pdf-like specification.
The other reason why a truly open format is preferable is related to issues of data curation. If you are storing documents for a long period of time you want to be able to possibly recreate a viewer without having to pay licensing fees. (You can also look at keeping old viewers on OSes virtualised onto other machines, but this is a heavyweight requirement for reading documents in 50 years time).
Slashdot Mirror
As a challenge to Linux in the enterprise that is, not necessarily for home users which are predominantly on Windows anyway, and this is unlikely to change very much in the Western world over the next 3 years.
The other potential win is creating a version of Linux that is more interoperable with Windows, thus making Red Hat a good choice for those transitioning, also allowing transitioning from Linux easy at some point in the future. The problem with this strategy is that it will be difficult to ensure interoperability without the code being touched by the GPL and thus being available to customers (namely Novell/SuSE and IBM, companies that provide more total support for Linux, and much more serious competitors to Microsoft). So it would a risky strategy for Microsoft, but who is to know what it will do. Given the enhancement of interoperability announced between Solaris and Windows I would suspect, though, that the emphasis will be on Solaris x86 as a challenge to Linux rather than buying Red Hat.
It's the SEC that deals with the accounting scandals, not the FTC, AFAIK.
In which case the imperative should be to teach them to think and to help them think teach them about general principles (in this case of computer use) rather than a specific operating system.
Our district along with countless others receive large grants, last year a total of $200,000, from Microsoft.
And how much does the Microsoft software cost? If more than $200,000 then going with Microsoft presents a net loss.
Many laxatives have their laxative effect due to toxicity. The laxative effect generally comes at a lower dose than the dose required to cause serious and irreversible damage. In fact cyanides (in low doses) has been used as a laxative, and I wouldn't call those non toxic!
The legal support is free. So the fact that Wine has legal support now does not in any way mean that they suddenly also have money.
If there is a lawsuit and Wine loses Microsoft doesn't get to take the lawyers to the cleaners.
So this development does not mean there is any more money to gain from Microsoft's point of view.
Indeed, the correct figure to look at would be GDP PPP (purchasing power parity) for the middle class in the USA and India, plus an indication of how many fall into this middle class bracket in each nation.
circa 3" on a PDA makes them handy, but a bit small for some tasks, and you have less choice in applications due to the OS used on most (Windows mobile).
A 15" screen laptop is a bit too bulky for some people.
7.5" to 10" screens fit for some people. In fact I nearly picked up a transmeta based system once on ebuyer which had about a 9" screen. It wasn't going to be powerful, but would be able to a bit more than my PDA without the weight of a bigger laptop.
Provided there is enough graphics and CPU power available than a 7.5" to 10" screen on a relatively low CPU power/memory machine is enough for powerpoint, Word, and when you need more power you can access that remotely via one of the thin client or Grid paradigms.
In the USA some carriers have equipment that is mutually incompatible. In other words if you are in an area with provider X then your phone from provider Y may simply not work. I am not aware of this being the case in the UK. In the UK there are multiple carriers but at the hardware level there is at least signal compatibility so you have a possibility of connecting if your phone is configured such that it may connect to more than one network provider (which is pretty common).
A good digital camera and 'intelligent scissors' as in gimp would go some way to do this, but an automated way of doing the subimage extraction would be nice.
Not always
So if you pimp your ride the OS may not recognise the new hardware and you won't be able to drive it about? I like the sound of this...
No, it doesn't. You can choose to deal with source code if you wish but for 99% of home users with decent distributions you can just use the packaged update GUI.
In a fairly recent demo of HDTV one of the manufacturers demonstrated 1080i on a 720p display and even the washed elite of the press largely failed to notice. So what chance do the unwashed masses have?
There's always something like www.windsave.com
The only way round this would be to have some form of proportional representation. Pooled consituency areas and electing a number of representatives for a larger area gives a better sense of being represented by someone who shares your views but it dilutes the local nature of an MP and means that you end up with half a dozen MPs from different parties representing the same area and bickering about it. Who do you write to if you have a problem?
So that leaves you with other PR schemes that elect a single MP and then you might find that the second choice of many but the first choice of noone gets elected.
None of the systems is perfect.
In terms of claims per capita (based on granted patents) I think Japan leads the world, followed by the USA. But there is a bias in these figures in terms of how easy it is to patent something, so who knows what the level of inventiveness, innovation, or production of IP is. Other measures of IP production might be number of academic papers published per capita, but then if you publish 5 similar papers is that more or less IP production than someone who produces 3 that contain 3 separate big ideas? And what if the academic culture in one country encourages lots of publication and another does not? Production of IP (even in the scientific/technical arena) is hard to gauge.
What I would dearly love to see, though, is a 'none of the above' option on the ballot with a stipulation that if 'none of the above' wins in an constituency then a byelection must be held with none of the previous candidates able to stand again.
In the UK you can pick up a PC with sufficient specification for about 220 pounds, and about 50 pounds for a single Freeview card, about 270 total. You can pick up a hard disk Freeview standalone recorder for as little as 179. If you want two Freeview connections than you are talking 320 (PC) versus around 250 (standalone). Either way unless you have spare PC parts of want something with more than the function of a PVR then a standalone system is probably cheaper.
The 787 is more competition for smaller Airbus models. The A380 and 787 are complementary in terms of total air traffic. One serves hub-to-hub, or big city to big city. If you can pack 550 people in an A380 and make the hub-to-hub travel sufficiently cheap you may make it cheap enough to fill all those seats even if people want to end up in a city other than the hub city. Other people may want to travel direct to their destination. So you might end up with a split or customer types based on the economics. On a per-passenger cost I can't see the 787 beating the A380 as you need to double up on some of the maintenance tasks plus pilots to shift the same number of bodies or have the fuel economy be very much better than the A380, but the convenience factor of more direct travel is definitely going to convince some. It's basically the same argument that makes the 747 worthwhile in some instances and not in others, except that the A380's a bit more fuel efficient.
The take off and landing run length is pretty much the same as a 747-400 (by design), not as some have suggested that the runways need to be lengthened for the A380. It is just that the landing track and wing size means that some airports can't accomodate the width, especially when taxiing. For some airports the runways are wide enough and the taxi ways sufficiently spaced that no work needs be done, but it varies.
The A380 is more fuel efficient than older designs so it is possible that you could run it less occupied than older designs before making a loss. So if you look at it that way if current designs can be run between big hubs and make a profit the A380 probably can too with the same passenger numbers (discounting capital cost for a moment) and any additional passengers are just more profit. The question is - is it worth taking the risk given the capital outlay compared to buying an older design which might be a little bit cheaper?
Hmmm that's like saying "My Hummer runs fine with a lawnmower engine installed. Sure it takes 10 to 15 minutes to get up to 60, but it runs"
The other reason why a truly open format is preferable is related to issues of data curation. If you are storing documents for a long period of time you want to be able to possibly recreate a viewer without having to pay licensing fees. (You can also look at keeping old viewers on OSes virtualised onto other machines, but this is a heavyweight requirement for reading documents in 50 years time).
I have never had any version of Acrobat crash on any platform since 5.0.