What's to prevent the traditional phone companies from rolling out their own VoIP services? They have all they infrastructure for regular phones and DSL, so why not? They could see whether VoIP start-ups are successful, and roll back the curtain on a whole new secretly-installed VoIP infrastructure.
Your idea isn't complete without the goatse vending machine. Here, let me show you a picture....no, I'll just let everyone reference the one burned into their brains. Now, that's brand awareness.
Microsoft makes (or tries to) lots of products. Any market share taken from them is a win. Firefox and OpenOffice.org on Windows are a win, as is Apache on Windows, J2EE on Windows, Perl on Windows, etc. etc. etc.
To me, not being able to use a brand new item for weeks is totally unacceptable.
The worst part about waiting for an entertainment item is that the customer's enthusiasm is easily defeated. Imagine being all hyped up about a console, spending several hundred dollars on the console, games, and accessories, only to be left embarrased having to go to a friends house. Entertainment is such a fickle industry that either Sony doesn't care (what's a few lost customers) or they don't understand.
There was an article a while ago that says consumer products have a shelf life of months. The designers and manufacturing engineers must be lucky if things even stay in one piece in the box with such high turnover of designs.
The Monitor for my Ultra 10 has Sony Guts in it. And it worked fine.
It's kinda hit-or-miss. I saw two other Sun monitors go belly-up after a couple of years. It depended on the model, as other ones would last forever.
Re:Virtual Java Virtual Machine
on
A .Net CPU
·
· Score: 1
It was not an economically viable CPU and I think this's one of the reasons why Sun released it.
I have seen advertisements for other embedded JVM chips, but I've never seen one in person. This was several years ago, so who knows if they are still around.
Regardless, Sun has tried and shelved two new chip architectures in the last decade: picoJava (JVM) and MAJC (VLIW). I suppose it shouldn't be much of a surpise when/if this.NET CPU (JVM) and the Itanium (VLIW) go the way of the dodo. And the MAJC wasn't a dud, either (something like several gflops at 500MHz).
I've come to the same conclusion about myself, in spite of my high GPAs, IQ, several 5s on AP tests, prestigious undergrad degree, and always being the "smart kid". Well, none of that matters in real life, and your attitude will be corrected, too, whether you like it or not, someday.
Also, it's usually considered bad form to mention your IQ...
I agree. I hate having ever taken an IQ test. The older I get and the more modest I get in face of reality, the more I realize that school, baseless competitiveness, and standardized tests did a lot to sabotage my progress later on. Now that I'm back among "regular folk" outside of my limited school environment, I realize that even "below average" people are just fine. They do their work just fine, they are good people, and it's usually the attitudes of the "smart" people that get in the way.
If I were you, and I were a teacher, I would be insecure with such incompetence.
Just as often, the teacher would spend 1/3 the period troubleshooting the computer (where is the missing parentesis...does this need a semicolon...how do I make this line blue...). Computers can have a place in schools, just in no way should they be central to a math program. There is very little math taught that solidly benefits from high-powered graphics beyond merely looking good, which is insufficient reason for spending thousands of dollars on computers. If some graphing capability were truly necessary to get a point across, then just get a TI-82 with an overhead display. A couple hundred bucks, max.
Restating previous results due to new accounting and disclosure policies regarding Slashdot Rule 223:
Also, couple the ADD with cheap-ass Windows computers (made possible by George Bush letting Microsoft off the hook for using copyright and patent law to crush competitors and for releasing negligently defective drivers) and a clueless teacher (who is punishingly underfunded by No Child Gets Ahead and never gets a piece of the football stadium bond referendum), and you have bonefide anti-progress (not seen since before the advent of Linux, a free open source operating system kernel).
LOL, what kind of math did you take in High School? I was taking A.P. classes in High School.
So was I. I even got a 5 on the AP test (like it ever mattered). Mathcad was a drag. Mathematica would have been hell. We spent so much time dicking around with the computers, we could probably have covered half a chapter in that time! Computers add so much complexity that they are really only a benefit for very large problems, like CFD over an airplane wing. High school students really don't need a computer, unless the class is specifically for programming, which is not math (don't confuse programming with Comp Sci, please).
Highschools that want to do CalculusI thru DiffEq for their advanced students use Mathematica and Calculus Remote from The Ohio State University (CROSU), or University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Netmath program. I believe Harvard does the same.
Differential Equations taught through a high school? The only place I've seen that is at state "math and science" schools, and, even then, only one class per year out of 500+ students. Okay, so the top 0.001% of the population can handle Mathematica in high school. This still does not make Mathematica appropriate for high school, because the top 0.001% will probably be successful whether or not they had ever heard of Mathematica in their lifetimes (something about that 175 IQ...).
In the worst way. "Hey, those fractals look pretty cool, I think I'll sign up for this advanced fractals course." --semester begins-- "Holy flying fluke, Batman, where did these equations come from?!?" --drops class, ends with less motivation than before--
No it isn't. Nothing brings out the ADD more than a computer that can draw a graph in a few seconds plus a few easily-set parameters. The kids will waste the whole afternoon either screwing with meaningless variations or figuring out how to surf for game cheats once they get bored. Also, couple the ADD with cheap-ass Windows computers that have driver issues and a clueless teacher, and you have bonefide anti-progress.
Fractals and strange atractors were only unleashed once computers were available.
Fractals are merely a novelty at a high school level. What can students struggling with pre-calc do with fractals other than gawk at pretty pictures? To appreciate them beyond "hey, it's glittery...oooh, color cycling....drool" takes a motivation and interest not present in most students.
You don't even know what Mathematica is, don't you?
Actually, Mathematica is completely inappropriate for high school math courses. It is very complex, insanely powerful, and just way too much for simple stuff like plotting approximations of integrals or whatever. For high school math, there is nothing more fruitful than just working it out by hand. Plotting even a few points is sufficient to show a concept. Are students and teachers so damn insecure that they feel they need 3-D 24-bit color plots of data with animations and full-blown programming languages...for trig?!?!
I second the suggestions for pencil, paper, learning, and critical thinking. Whenever I started using software to do math, I pretty much always wasted hours tweaking parameters without doing much real work. Why do a proper optimization analysis, when it is so easy to change to numbers and re-run the program?
Using computers early on in math encourages laziness, unless the student really does have a firm grasp of the math and can use the computer for real discovery. Such firm understanding is rare among students even in college, so I'm skeptical that computers will add much beyond "Hey, neat, my computer can draw this fractal."
that's only because they're too damn cheap/lazy to get a 2nd phone line and a CC terminal.
When just the second phone line could be several hundred dollars per year, in addition to CC processing fees, it isn't a matter of laziness, it's a matter of the bottom line. Not accepting checks is understandable, too, since so many people don't have the money to back-up their checks that it just isn't worth the effort and money of collection agencies or small claims court.
Slashdot Mirror
What's to prevent the traditional phone companies from rolling out their own VoIP services? They have all they infrastructure for regular phones and DSL, so why not? They could see whether VoIP start-ups are successful, and roll back the curtain on a whole new secretly-installed VoIP infrastructure.
Your idea isn't complete without the goatse vending machine. Here, let me show you a picture....no, I'll just let everyone reference the one burned into their brains. Now, that's brand awareness.
Microsoft makes (or tries to) lots of products. Any market share taken from them is a win. Firefox and OpenOffice.org on Windows are a win, as is Apache on Windows, J2EE on Windows, Perl on Windows, etc. etc. etc.
To be an effective AC, you should omit your picture next time.
Nothing makes a male teenager's day like getting a glimpse down some girl's blouse.
To me, not being able to use a brand new item for weeks is totally unacceptable.
The worst part about waiting for an entertainment item is that the customer's enthusiasm is easily defeated. Imagine being all hyped up about a console, spending several hundred dollars on the console, games, and accessories, only to be left embarrased having to go to a friends house. Entertainment is such a fickle industry that either Sony doesn't care (what's a few lost customers) or they don't understand.
There was an article a while ago that says consumer products have a shelf life of months. The designers and manufacturing engineers must be lucky if things even stay in one piece in the box with such high turnover of designs.
(on that note, I love my DS, maybe a little too much)
No no, that's not what the headphone jack is for...
The Monitor for my Ultra 10 has Sony Guts in it. And it worked fine.
It's kinda hit-or-miss. I saw two other Sun monitors go belly-up after a couple of years. It depended on the model, as other ones would last forever.
It was not an economically viable CPU and I think this's one of the reasons why Sun released it.
.NET CPU (JVM) and the Itanium (VLIW) go the way of the dodo. And the MAJC wasn't a dud, either (something like several gflops at 500MHz).
I have seen advertisements for other embedded JVM chips, but I've never seen one in person. This was several years ago, so who knows if they are still around.
Regardless, Sun has tried and shelved two new chip architectures in the last decade: picoJava (JVM) and MAJC (VLIW). I suppose it shouldn't be much of a surpise when/if this
You really are a moron.
I've come to the same conclusion about myself, in spite of my high GPAs, IQ, several 5s on AP tests, prestigious undergrad degree, and always being the "smart kid". Well, none of that matters in real life, and your attitude will be corrected, too, whether you like it or not, someday.
Also, it's usually considered bad form to mention your IQ...
I agree. I hate having ever taken an IQ test. The older I get and the more modest I get in face of reality, the more I realize that school, baseless competitiveness, and standardized tests did a lot to sabotage my progress later on. Now that I'm back among "regular folk" outside of my limited school environment, I realize that even "below average" people are just fine. They do their work just fine, they are good people, and it's usually the attitudes of the "smart" people that get in the way.
If I were you, and I were a teacher, I would be insecure with such incompetence.
Just as often, the teacher would spend 1/3 the period troubleshooting the computer (where is the missing parentesis...does this need a semicolon...how do I make this line blue...). Computers can have a place in schools, just in no way should they be central to a math program. There is very little math taught that solidly benefits from high-powered graphics beyond merely looking good, which is insufficient reason for spending thousands of dollars on computers. If some graphing capability were truly necessary to get a point across, then just get a TI-82 with an overhead display. A couple hundred bucks, max.
Restating previous results due to new accounting and disclosure policies regarding Slashdot Rule 223:
Also, couple the ADD with cheap-ass Windows computers (made possible by George Bush letting Microsoft off the hook for using copyright and patent law to crush competitors and for releasing negligently defective drivers) and a clueless teacher (who is punishingly underfunded by No Child Gets Ahead and never gets a piece of the football stadium bond referendum), and you have bonefide anti-progress (not seen since before the advent of Linux, a free open source operating system kernel).
LOL, what kind of math did you take in High School? I was taking A.P. classes in High School.
So was I. I even got a 5 on the AP test (like it ever mattered). Mathcad was a drag. Mathematica would have been hell. We spent so much time dicking around with the computers, we could probably have covered half a chapter in that time! Computers add so much complexity that they are really only a benefit for very large problems, like CFD over an airplane wing. High school students really don't need a computer, unless the class is specifically for programming, which is not math (don't confuse programming with Comp Sci, please).
Highschools that want to do CalculusI thru DiffEq for their advanced students use Mathematica and Calculus Remote from The Ohio State University (CROSU), or University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Netmath program. I believe Harvard does the same.
Differential Equations taught through a high school? The only place I've seen that is at state "math and science" schools, and, even then, only one class per year out of 500+ students. Okay, so the top 0.001% of the population can handle Mathematica in high school. This still does not make Mathematica appropriate for high school, because the top 0.001% will probably be successful whether or not they had ever heard of Mathematica in their lifetimes (something about that 175 IQ...).
Trying to make something easier to learn isn't insecurity. It's the teacher's job.
What's easier than plotting on a chalkboard? Trying to be fashionable and make math into a video game is 100% genuine insecurity.
But, those shiny colors can motivate them.
In the worst way. "Hey, those fractals look pretty cool, I think I'll sign up for this advanced fractals course." --semester begins-- "Holy flying fluke, Batman, where did these equations come from?!?" --drops class, ends with less motivation than before--
You should know the basics of anything mathematical, and be able to do it by hand before you use a calculator for it.
If you look closely in the pictures, you'll see that Einstein is holding a HP calculator...he tries to hide it, but you know it's there.
It's progress.
No it isn't. Nothing brings out the ADD more than a computer that can draw a graph in a few seconds plus a few easily-set parameters. The kids will waste the whole afternoon either screwing with meaningless variations or figuring out how to surf for game cheats once they get bored. Also, couple the ADD with cheap-ass Windows computers that have driver issues and a clueless teacher, and you have bonefide anti-progress.
I've been told it's unstoppable.
No, you just need a bigger cork, a mallet, and some steel strapping to hold it all in.
Fractals and strange atractors were only unleashed once computers were available.
Fractals are merely a novelty at a high school level. What can students struggling with pre-calc do with fractals other than gawk at pretty pictures? To appreciate them beyond "hey, it's glittery...oooh, color cycling....drool" takes a motivation and interest not present in most students.
You don't even know what Mathematica is, don't you?
Actually, Mathematica is completely inappropriate for high school math courses. It is very complex, insanely powerful, and just way too much for simple stuff like plotting approximations of integrals or whatever. For high school math, there is nothing more fruitful than just working it out by hand. Plotting even a few points is sufficient to show a concept. Are students and teachers so damn insecure that they feel they need 3-D 24-bit color plots of data with animations and full-blown programming languages...for trig?!?!
I second the suggestions for pencil, paper, learning, and critical thinking. Whenever I started using software to do math, I pretty much always wasted hours tweaking parameters without doing much real work. Why do a proper optimization analysis, when it is so easy to change to numbers and re-run the program?
Using computers early on in math encourages laziness, unless the student really does have a firm grasp of the math and can use the computer for real discovery. Such firm understanding is rare among students even in college, so I'm skeptical that computers will add much beyond "Hey, neat, my computer can draw this fractal."
that's only because they're too damn cheap/lazy to get a 2nd phone line and a CC terminal.
When just the second phone line could be several hundred dollars per year, in addition to CC processing fees, it isn't a matter of laziness, it's a matter of the bottom line. Not accepting checks is understandable, too, since so many people don't have the money to back-up their checks that it just isn't worth the effort and money of collection agencies or small claims court.