It was a popular way to control toy robots in the 80's. I had an Omnibot that operated entirely on something resembling DTMF tones. The remote control just piped the tones over an AM channel. You could "program" the robot using it's on-board tape recorder, which just recorded the tones it received from the remote. One of the smaller 'brothers' of the Omnibot could be controlled by whistling different notes, or clapping. Same idea.
Archos devices can act as USB hosts for some devices, a holdover from their ability to act as PVRs. Unfortunately the Archos firmware release cycle is awful, and it's broken in every other release.
That's a seven year old report asking for an updated nuclear arsenal. This bomb isn't a nuclear bomb. The US already has nuclear bombs with that payload:
If the GPS get's traffic info from FM or satellite services, then the patent doesn't cover it. If it uses a cell data network to access the web, then it probably does.
I take it you never had to deal with Microsoft in the 90's. The "Tech support for NT is $80 per non-bug incident - no that's not a bug it's a feature this call just cost you $80" then your "feature" gets removed in service pack 4 - version of Microsoft. The "Don't use DAO anymore use RDO it's awesome - well OK it's crap rewrite everything to use ADO... Whoops! That's crap too well rewrite everything in.NET and you'll be good!" version of Microsoft.
Obligatory car metaphore: Most car manufacturers put old technology in cars they bring out today as well, just because the cost of developing new technology and building production lines is commercially prohibitive.
Not quite - car technology lags behind the marketplace because type acceptance on electronics takes years. A new engine can take six or seven. Especially on low-margin cars, like compacts. A single warranty recall can blow the profit margin on an entire production run. They want the latest tech in their products, but they aren't going to throw profit out the window if it breaks.
The Kindle App is the single app I use most on my iPad (but far from the most used app as I am not the only user), but it is far easier to get an epub or PDF onto an iPad (and into the Apple iBooks) than it is to do the same on a Kindle device.
With Calibre it's every bit as easy with a Kindle as with an iPad. You tell it where your books are, you tell it what device you have, and it figures out the best format to use, then converts on the fly.
Aside from that, the iPad is a better device for technical documentation, if you're going to be flipping around a lot and looking at diagrams. The Kindle is a better device if you are going to read something straight through.
I was thinking more 90's HP calculator, which I consider to be a good thing. I think the Kindle 3 is a pretty well designed device for it's price point and function. The GUI is awful, but the industrial design is nice.
+1. There's a difference between useful feedback and eye candy. A window animation showing you where it minimized to = good. The start menu sliding open = bad. A simple icon animation indicating an app needs attention = good. Menus dissolving when deselected = bad.
+1 on Explorer. XP had it *almost* right. Then Vista/7 came out and it veered into insanity.
WHY IS EVERYTHING LISTED UNDER THE "DESKTOP" IN THE TREE? My Computer wasn't a great metaphor but it made sense - here's stuff on my computer. Now there's a whole list of stuff on the "desktop" that doesn't show up on my desktop.
Are you nuts? Are you suffering from a Cupertino induced delusion?
Android is doing better than iPhone in the market,not worse. So clearly those flim flam infested ads aren't hurting Android any.
The idea that those things are an attempt to "market to geeks" is just nonsense.
They are no less mindless then Apple ads that are just a string of disjoint screenshots.
Who said anything about market share? iPhone is, by any measure, doing extremely well. So are many Android devices.
As far as targeting demographics - who are those whiz-bang Android ads aimed at? How much market share are those ads buying Motorola or HTC, compared to the iPhone? I'll answer for you - not very much. Apple sold more iPhones in 2010 than Motorola sold *phones*. That's ALL phones.
The national Android device commercials in the US feature CGI laden whiz-bang special effects - a guy piloting a spaceship with a Xoom tablet, robots flipping phones around in the air, Droid Razrs ripping through the air, slicing through light posts, etc...
The Apple ads show an iPhone on a plain white background, with people using them, accompanied by the "Apple jingle" piano piece. "This is an iPhone, you can do this with it, and this, and this..."
The targeted demographics are pretty clear. Androids are for the kinda guys who would use nothing less than a five-bladed razor. iPhones are for people who just want an easy to use smartphone that gets out of their way.
It's not just the IDE, but the third party controls available. There are some *really* outstanding controls available for.NET/VCC/WPF. They are usually the first thing I miss when playing around with GTK/Qt development. Grids especially. The DevExpress grid is amazing - built-in filtering, sorting, grouping, basic report generation, paging, editor embedding, multiple binding modes, hybrid data types, runtime layout retention - that's weeks worth of coding for a couple thou (which gives you the rest of the suite)
There's a computer chronicles on YouTube from ~1990 that features Toshiba announcing flash ram, a technology that would replace hard drives and floppies within a couple of years. Twenty years later and it's starting to happen.
Sometimes this stuff takes a while to get to market in a usable form.
This is stupid. Virus and Trojans are not coming through the App Store.
That's not the point. Sandboxing makes it much harder for viruses/malware to exploit security vulnerabilities in otherwise clean applications. Think of all the security holes in Acrobat, Word, Excel, Access, etc...
Relays do not exclude toggle switches, but with the paperclip computer you had to execute everything by hand, there was no automation of any sort.
Right, that's the point. Unless you wire up a light to either pole of a relay you don't know what state it's in. You can look at the accumulator of the paperclip computer and know immediately what's going on. The purpose isn't to build an even vaguely useful machine, but to figure out the nuts and bolts of how a computer works.
Besides, most of the fun of the paperclip computer is building it - hacking together stuff that was never meant to process data. Screwing bent paperclips into particle board and rigging a toilet tissue roll to store bits - the thing is ridiculous on it's face. I was considering automating data input by hooking up the drum to a water wheel wheel fed by a 2L pop bottle.
If we want to get a bit more advanced, as my sig suggests, I have a functioning Nova III in my basement that is programmed in the following manner:
1. Reset to clear registers 2. Initialize system and set pointer to first memory location 3. Enter first opcode/operand by toggling 16 switches on/off/off/on/off/off/off.... 4. Increment memory pointer, repeat step 3 until done programming
Eventually you can load in enough code to bootstrap off the drive controller, but I don't have a working Shugart laying around:)
The very first computer class I took, the teacher had us emulate a computer using graph paper as memory/accumulators/stack, and ruled paper as storage.
I was thinking something a little more hands-on for my son. Relays are cool, but if you have big toggle switches and lights you can really see what's going on. I also have those old Radio Shack science fair electronics kits that were a blast - he'll have a lot of fun with those.
I had the same experience. I learned Pascal up to pointers, the implementation didn't make much sense to me. My next class was C, and it seemed pretty straightforward.
I've seen that list before - is there a better study than that? All they did was ask a bunch of experts which drugs they thought were the most dangerous to kick, which were the hardest to kick, which were the most addictive, etc... Not incredibly scientific.
Also, boiling their categorical estimates down to a single list is dubious. Was the integration weighted? Were the scales matched (since each scale was relative)?
I think it's possible marijuana is less addictive than nicotine, and possibly has lesser withdrawal side effects, but this "study" really isn't proof of anything.
Snare rolls. I can never get LAME to encode them properly no matter what setting I use. It interprets them as noise and crushes them down into gibberish. There's a slowly building snare roll at the beginning of Royal Oil by the Mighty Mighty Bosstones that no lossy codec can seem to compress correctly.
I can usually hear artifacts, even at high bitrates, in lossy codecs in the quiet passages of some songs. I listen with good quality headphones through an Audigy 2ZS PCMCIA sound card, which has a surprisingly low noise floor and excellent frequency response for a 'consumer' grade sound card.
Slashdot Mirror
It was a popular way to control toy robots in the 80's. I had an Omnibot that operated entirely on something resembling DTMF tones. The remote control just piped the tones over an AM channel. You could "program" the robot using it's on-board tape recorder, which just recorded the tones it received from the remote. One of the smaller 'brothers' of the Omnibot could be controlled by whistling different notes, or clapping. Same idea.
Archos devices can act as USB hosts for some devices, a holdover from their ability to act as PVRs. Unfortunately the Archos firmware release cycle is awful, and it's broken in every other release.
That's a seven year old report asking for an updated nuclear arsenal. This bomb isn't a nuclear bomb. The US already has nuclear bombs with that payload:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb
The bomb itself isn't nuclear. The nuclear targets are speculative. Your original post is hyperbole.
If the GPS get's traffic info from FM or satellite services, then the patent doesn't cover it. If it uses a cell data network to access the web, then it probably does.
I take it you never had to deal with Microsoft in the 90's. The "Tech support for NT is $80 per non-bug incident - no that's not a bug it's a feature this call just cost you $80" then your "feature" gets removed in service pack 4 - version of Microsoft. The "Don't use DAO anymore use RDO it's awesome - well OK it's crap rewrite everything to use ADO... Whoops! That's crap too well rewrite everything in .NET and you'll be good!" version of Microsoft.
Obligatory car metaphore: Most car manufacturers put old technology in cars they bring out today as well, just because the cost of developing new technology and building production lines is commercially prohibitive.
Not quite - car technology lags behind the marketplace because type acceptance on electronics takes years. A new engine can take six or seven. Especially on low-margin cars, like compacts. A single warranty recall can blow the profit margin on an entire production run. They want the latest tech in their products, but they aren't going to throw profit out the window if it breaks.
The Kindle App is the single app I use most on my iPad (but far from the most used app as I am not the only user), but it is far easier to get an epub or PDF onto an iPad (and into the Apple iBooks) than it is to do the same on a Kindle device.
With Calibre it's every bit as easy with a Kindle as with an iPad. You tell it where your books are, you tell it what device you have, and it figures out the best format to use, then converts on the fly.
Aside from that, the iPad is a better device for technical documentation, if you're going to be flipping around a lot and looking at diagrams. The Kindle is a better device if you are going to read something straight through.
I was thinking more 90's HP calculator, which I consider to be a good thing. I think the Kindle 3 is a pretty well designed device for it's price point and function. The GUI is awful, but the industrial design is nice.
You could learn a thing or two from an educatinator.
+1. There's a difference between useful feedback and eye candy. A window animation showing you where it minimized to = good. The start menu sliding open = bad. A simple icon animation indicating an app needs attention = good. Menus dissolving when deselected = bad.
+1 on Explorer. XP had it *almost* right. Then Vista/7 came out and it veered into insanity.
WHY IS EVERYTHING LISTED UNDER THE "DESKTOP" IN THE TREE? My Computer wasn't a great metaphor but it made sense - here's stuff on my computer. Now there's a whole list of stuff on the "desktop" that doesn't show up on my desktop.
Are you nuts? Are you suffering from a Cupertino induced delusion?
Android is doing better than iPhone in the market,not worse. So clearly those flim flam infested ads aren't hurting Android any.
The idea that those things are an attempt to "market to geeks" is just nonsense.
They are no less mindless then Apple ads that are just a string of disjoint screenshots.
Who said anything about market share? iPhone is, by any measure, doing extremely well. So are many Android devices.
As far as targeting demographics - who are those whiz-bang Android ads aimed at? How much market share are those ads buying Motorola or HTC, compared to the iPhone? I'll answer for you - not very much. Apple sold more iPhones in 2010 than Motorola sold *phones*. That's ALL phones.
The national Android device commercials in the US feature CGI laden whiz-bang special effects - a guy piloting a spaceship with a Xoom tablet, robots flipping phones around in the air, Droid Razrs ripping through the air, slicing through light posts, etc...
The Apple ads show an iPhone on a plain white background, with people using them, accompanied by the "Apple jingle" piano piece. "This is an iPhone, you can do this with it, and this, and this..."
The targeted demographics are pretty clear. Androids are for the kinda guys who would use nothing less than a five-bladed razor. iPhones are for people who just want an easy to use smartphone that gets out of their way.
It's not just the IDE, but the third party controls available. There are some *really* outstanding controls available for .NET/VCC/WPF. They are usually the first thing I miss when playing around with GTK/Qt development. Grids especially. The DevExpress grid is amazing - built-in filtering, sorting, grouping, basic report generation, paging, editor embedding, multiple binding modes, hybrid data types, runtime layout retention - that's weeks worth of coding for a couple thou (which gives you the rest of the suite)
There's a computer chronicles on YouTube from ~1990 that features Toshiba announcing flash ram, a technology that would replace hard drives and floppies within a couple of years. Twenty years later and it's starting to happen.
Sometimes this stuff takes a while to get to market in a usable form.
This is stupid. Virus and Trojans are not coming through the App Store.
That's not the point. Sandboxing makes it much harder for viruses/malware to exploit security vulnerabilities in otherwise clean applications. Think of all the security holes in Acrobat, Word, Excel, Access, etc...
Then it shouldn't be a big deal, right? Answer some questions and you're done.
Relays do not exclude toggle switches, but with the paperclip computer you had to execute everything by hand, there was no automation of any sort.
Right, that's the point. Unless you wire up a light to either pole of a relay you don't know what state it's in. You can look at the accumulator of the paperclip computer and know immediately what's going on. The purpose isn't to build an even vaguely useful machine, but to figure out the nuts and bolts of how a computer works.
Besides, most of the fun of the paperclip computer is building it - hacking together stuff that was never meant to process data. Screwing bent paperclips into particle board and rigging a toilet tissue roll to store bits - the thing is ridiculous on it's face. I was considering automating data input by hooking up the drum to a water wheel wheel fed by a 2L pop bottle.
If we want to get a bit more advanced, as my sig suggests, I have a functioning Nova III in my basement that is programmed in the following manner:
1. Reset to clear registers
2. Initialize system and set pointer to first memory location
3. Enter first opcode/operand by toggling 16 switches on/off/off/on/off/off/off....
4. Increment memory pointer, repeat step 3 until done programming
Eventually you can load in enough code to bootstrap off the drive controller, but I don't have a working Shugart laying around :)
The very first computer class I took, the teacher had us emulate a computer using graph paper as memory/accumulators/stack, and ruled paper as storage.
I was thinking something a little more hands-on for my son. Relays are cool, but if you have big toggle switches and lights you can really see what's going on. I also have those old Radio Shack science fair electronics kits that were a blast - he'll have a lot of fun with those.
Is a single sided coin Turing-complete? It's gonna have a wicked truth table.
I had the same experience. I learned Pascal up to pointers, the implementation didn't make much sense to me. My next class was C, and it seemed pretty straightforward.
Blasphemy. My son's first project will be a paperclip computer. I have the original book and everything :)
http://lab16.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/paperclip-computer/
I've seen that list before - is there a better study than that? All they did was ask a bunch of experts which drugs they thought were the most dangerous to kick, which were the hardest to kick, which were the most addictive, etc... Not incredibly scientific.
Also, boiling their categorical estimates down to a single list is dubious. Was the integration weighted? Were the scales matched (since each scale was relative)?
I think it's possible marijuana is less addictive than nicotine, and possibly has lesser withdrawal side effects, but this "study" really isn't proof of anything.
Snare rolls. I can never get LAME to encode them properly no matter what setting I use. It interprets them as noise and crushes them down into gibberish. There's a slowly building snare roll at the beginning of Royal Oil by the Mighty Mighty Bosstones that no lossy codec can seem to compress correctly.
I can usually hear artifacts, even at high bitrates, in lossy codecs in the quiet passages of some songs. I listen with good quality headphones through an Audigy 2ZS PCMCIA sound card, which has a surprisingly low noise floor and excellent frequency response for a 'consumer' grade sound card.