Or spray your license plate with a clear material which either absorbs the light frequencies typically used by lidar guns, acts essentially a spray-on dichoric coating to screw up intersection photo radar units, etc..
Of course, to beat radar-triggered devices, you need to deal with that big flat piece of metal that is a good microwave reradiator (like, replace it with a plastic facsimile)...
Skin grafts do not do very much. I think that what they do is provide enough temporary covering to allow scar tissue to grow in place anyways. And, besides, the scar tissue that does grow is not all that flexible at all, either.
The "face transplant" only involves taking off the dermal layers of the face, no facial muscles (dermis, epidermis and subcutaneous layer).
They are looking for recipients that have not suffered too much muscle or nerve damage, and still have a good amount of the blood supply available (obviously). Did you not read the article?
If there ever was a legitimate cosmetic surgery, this is one.
Of course, for many of the more popular magazines, at least in US libraries, it's more or less easy enough to go in, grab the magazine of interest (sorry, no "Playboy" in most US libraries...), and photocopy the article/s you want, read the whole thing in one sitting, etc.
You could make the same arguments re: grocery stores vs farmers' markets. And I'm sure it will come to be eventually in some cities, like Portland. There will come a time for mid-tier regional stores to start pushing municipal, county and state legislation to start applying the thumbscrews to farmer's markets (Portland has at least 3 local grocery store chains that pretty much compete with the successful farmer's markets here, not including Whole Foods, whom they also compete against). If Safeway, Albertsons and Kroger's (dba QFC and Fred Meyer) decide that the PDX market is being threatened by the little guys, they may decide it's worth getting some legislation "reinterpretations" paid for, too.
It is silly to assume that "success" can only be measured on the scale of Microsoft, Sun, Adobe, etc. There are several people who do well with free software (SugarCRM), who sell services. There are others with commercial and non-commercial licenses (GhostScript). Etc.
FOSS is a threat because of the price point, and it can provide options that most COTS software may not (i.e., Apache allows choice in server platforms, while IIS does not. Is running ChiliSoft's ASP port on Linux really a good option?).
The funny thing about his business model isn't really viable for niche market software and a scaleable model has yet to be found is that for years that is what the pundits saw as Linux' best growth area, i.e., vertical market applications and other "niche" markets.
And how do their outbursts compare in professionalism compared to SteveB's famous outbursts? To be fair, let's throw in Sun's executives spouting off, Larry Ellison, et al.
As far as "RTFM", let's say you just bought a new construction house, "custom built", and yours was one of the last ones in the development to be built. 6 months later, the developer and builder, their stuff that was onsite a few months ago, is gone on to the next job. Suddenly, you've got a leaky roof and a cracked foundation. You call the developer, and the developer and builder basically says, "fix it yourself".
Custom software? Well, ever hear "sure we'll fix it, but it'll cost you time-and-materials." Or, "you bought the source code so your programmers could add their own extensions and enhancements, so..."
Then there's COSS software... "that's not a bug, but a feature. See this in our knowledge base."
And how much COSS is really "innovative"? All it takes is for one innovative idea to get foothold, and everyone else starts copying it.
ESR, TdR, DJB, RS, et al., may be grating, but they don't hold a light to the major CxO's of our favorite companies (i.e., Steve Jobs, BillG, SteveB, LarryE, etc.) as far as being pure billionaire blowhard dickheads.
I'll listen to Ted Nugent's songs, but I can live without his "alpha male" bullshit, too.
Drs: "Doctors without Borders", and other humanitarian groups.
Pilots: Similar.
Notice the themes: providing specialized work for the betterment of the community (define community yourself), instead of the betterment of one's self.
Food & Shelter are easily had. Just go where all the other homeless people hang out.
You try to use the argument "why should software developers offer their products for free" as a cudgel against it, instead of accepting that there are software developers who DO want to offer their software and services for free for a variety of reasons.
"Knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing".
For me, for example, the value-add for using Tomcat/JBoss vs WebLogic, WebSphere etc. is pretty obvious, even when not considering the $$$ involved.
Re:News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
on
The Slurpee at 40
·
· Score: 1
And then you have kids...
"Daddy, can we get a slurpee, pleeeeeaaaaassseee?" (with typical kid's overdramatic exageration and drawing-out on 'please').
Me? Never really did like them.
But, were they really invented by Southland Corp? When were Icees introduced at KMart, since they always seemed to be there (KMart was probably Icee's biggest customer), and it wasn't until after 1980 I think when I first went into a 7-11...
No they won't. Eventually, this will go up to the VP/SVP level, and then you have several VP/SVP's squaring off at the IT department and its chain. Guess who loses the executive politics battle if the CEO decides that IT is "out of control"?
By this I mean giving the user the ability to make it as if a regular objectionable poster never existed in the forum. Making his/her original posts vanish, along with all replys to his/her post and any mention of him/her.
Illegal? Then it's gotta be illegal to render slaugherhouse byproducts into cosmetics, soap, glue, tallow, lard, "animal protein byproduct", collagen, keratin, etc. in Germany, too.
All he probably needs to do to get his supply of dead cats (and presumably, dogs) is get the leftovers from the veterinarians and animal shelters in his area.
Hey, I've been known to go out and pull dead cats off of the road, just because I don't like seeing housecats that have been run over turned into red smears. I avoid driving over them, at the very least.
But once it's dead, it's dead. It's far different to recycle already dead cats than to go out and kill them just to fuel your car, but in the long run, if the guy was doing this, he'd actually probably be doing his neighborhood good, at least from a naturalist's point of view. Cats are pretty efficient wild bird removers...
Now that we have two barn cats running outside, we don't have too many birds coming to our bird feeders now (it's that, or West Nile has killed them off. Why won't WN kill off the starlings and grackles, though?).
I'm not quite to the "Ted Nugent" level of self-absorption, er, self-actualization, er, I mean, resource recovery. I don't have the heart yet to skin a dead lamb, either to keep the skin as a memento, or to use the skin to try and graft another lamb onto the dead lamb's mother during lambing season. But it is part of the business, and will need to eventually.
If it was feasible to do this, at least in the US in most areas there's a plentiful supply of roadkill cats, oppossums, raccoons and skunks, at the very least.
I'd bet that many cases of malpractice are actually cases of "malpatients" -- the patient's own stupidity, irresponsibility, lack of candor, or failure to follow the doctor's recommendations contributed to or even caused the problem. Add to that the simple problem of mismatch of social styles and one person's "uncaring" physician is another person's efficient doctor.
Except...that most of the cases probably result from complications resulting during or after surgical procedures. Hard to blame the patient on these.
But again, in our risk-averse society, where bad things don't just happen, they happen because someone intended to screw up, one must find SOMEONE to blame.
Dad had a heart attack? Only treatment had a 30% success rate? Dad died? Well, sue the hospital then!
One of my daughters had a perinatal stroke (yes, left cerebral artery blockage. She's got no left temporal lobe...), and only presented with seizures that resulted in intermittent apnea. Luckily my wife (who was a nurse, oddly enough), noticed something was wrong, and things were dealt with before she had a long apneic episode (i.e., general ischemic damage -> cerebral palsy). She's fine now, just turned 5.
Ended up she had umbilical cord wrapped around her neck 3 times, and her heart rate was decellerating during contractions. Did the pressure on the cord cause a clot to form and make its way to her brain? Should she have been delivered by C-section at that point? How come it wasn't caught by the sonograph tech the day before (who did an echo, too)?
We do not know, but we did indeed send her files to a malpractice lawyer (but not enough indications to make a case) at the time.
Shit happens, yes. We're definitely fully aware of that (and are thankful every day that our shit wasn't worse that day...).
Now I have a farm, and a big blanket liability insurance policy. The potential for selling a $3.00/dz pack of farm eggs, and getting our pants sued off because a buyer got a sick stomach, must be planned for and mitigated against, as does an animal getting out, and getting hit by a family minivan which, while trying to avoid it, crosses into the other lane and tries to headbutt the logging truck. "Your sheep got out, your fence wasn't good enough, it's your fault!" If only it had been a deer instead...
It's more than easy enough to completely modify how your menus work and act. Grab one of Woody Leonhard's books.
Don't like the New File icon on the tool bar's default behavior compared to the File->New menu command? Then rewire the toolbar button to invoke the same command as the menu command.
You can completely modify the behavior of every menu command and toolbar button in Office, and have been able to do so since Word 2.0 days.
As for #2 being a red herring--the changes in a version upgrade of office are negilgble between the difference betwixt two unfriendly office software packages.
Hmm... do you remember how much fun the upgrade from Office 6.0 to Office 95 was? I still do. It was laughable. As was upgrade from Office 95/97 to 2000 in some situations.
Field codes, OLE, etc. are edge cases that "power users" will throw into the mix, but really won't matter, because they're...well...edge cases. But since no one in the real world really uses them intentionally, they won't matter. The automatically inserted ones (i.e,. page numbers, automatic list numbering, etc.) will probably work out well. But a {PRINT} field code with an embedded Postscript or PCL watermark coded in it (left over from Word 2.0 days...)?
Styles? Again, these could be hard thing, if only people used them. But they don't.
And, as far as #2 goes, it sure didn't stop the mass migrations from WP to Word, did it? Again, it's a red herring, and I should go green salmon fishing with it.
MDBs? Well, I'll take fixing an Access database over "upsizing" an excel app (that really should be in a database) any day. I've yet to come across one of those evil user-created Access DBs that are glorified address books, because those are usually done in Excel anyways.
And, again, have you been paying attention to how different Office 12 will be compared to Office 11 (aka Office 2003)? As per Microsoft, there will be far too much change for change's sake, touted as "innovation". Too many "entry points" to things will be "streamlined", instead of left as-is. THAT will then cause lots of retraining and reorientation time, purchasing of yet more "dummies" books, etc.
Been there, done that, happens every office version.
If OO.org 2.0's UI can be made to work about 90% of how Office 2003's UI works, then it'll be far easier to push people to OO.Org rather than Office 12, but because everyone will be drinking the "Office Upgrade!" koolaid and look at it with joy, rather than trepidation...
OO's target *is* Office. These migrations will work far better than migrating to Office from, say, Lotus SmartSuite.
No, that image would have been like in the early 30's just after the depression got going.
Farmers: "we need 11 cents/gallon just to cover our feed bills."
Milk buyer: "sorry. 9 cents/gallon is our final offer."
F: "F*** that!" pours milk out on the delivery dock.
---------
The modern replacements for the milk buyers have become ADM, ConAgra, Cargill, Monsanto, IBP/Tyson, et al. The producer is completely isolated by these companies from the retail end of the market (and vice versa, but like most retailers even care...).
To the producers, groups like R-CALF are bad, evil communistic groups. Maybe it's because the producers are actually fed up with being given the royal shaft by the big agribusiness commodity buyers who set prices based only on their needs, because these companies are much like deBeers - they buy so much and have so much in inventory that they can isolate their buying and selling cycles. Instead of producers also getting a good benefit from rising futures prices (say, bad winter or dry spring causing pressure on calf production) to make up for any bad events on their side, it's the commodity buyer who benefits. Their prices to the producers go up very little while the prices they charge to retailers fluctuates much more closely with the futures market (and there are more and bigger "areas under the curve").
Imagine ADM, ConAgra and Cargill (ostensibly, they're American companies...) fed up with dealing with US corn and soybean producers' demands for marginally higher price points, and just deciding to only buy from Brazil, Australia, Canada and Argentina for a couple of years...
You mean, running the damn thing overnight or over the weekend isn't an option? Again, if it's done when you come back in next, who cares if it took 10 minutes or 10 hours?
Besides, the more meaningful way for most users to do a mass conversion will be to do some combination of converting the last 4-9 docs a given user has opened (i.e., peek in their registry), or just convert all docs created after 1/1/2005, or something like that. Older stuff will be converted on an as-opened basis.
Just like you'll (need to) do when you install Office 12.
I should add, I just helped with this for Office 2K->Office 2K3. Not as big of a deal as the upgrade to Office 95 was, though (that seriously had some conversion issues with Word 6.x->Word 95 and Word 2.0->Word 95, and then you had the occaisional Excel 5.0/95 "fat files" too - Excel 5.0 and Excel 95 parts were stored in same file in two different Compound Doc areas...think Mac's fat binaries).
Still, nothing like converting a spreadsheet app to Excel 2000, which was imported into Excel 95 from the original version written in Lotus 1-2-3, because Excel 97 dropped Lotus inline macro conversions (but the spreadsheet functions worked), so they kept running Excel 95 just for this critical capital expenditure ROI calculator for this Fortune-100 corp. But converting those to VBA functions wasn't the bad part.
The bad part of it was that it involved too many stupid unnecessary transformations (i.e., RC->CR->RC) that I couldn't just change one function in an area and fill it into the rest of the matrix area (thus letting all the references adjust correctly as well). Nosiree. Lots of fun modifying functions manually in several 10x10 for the model. Joy. Rapture.
#1 is almost a red herring. Not all of the documents will be checked. The critical ones (i.e., current rules, policies, public documents) will be checked, of course.
Others that most of the users think will be tough to convert will actually convert quite well, because 99% of Word users do not use styles, really know much about using fieldcodes or embed/link to parts of other Office documents via OLE, and a few more might actually use tables meaningfully. So the big problem here then becomes how badly does OO mangle any typeface conversions w.r.t. layout-by-whitespace, especially with regards to forms.
Instead of linking to other Office docs, it's generally just easier and more meaningful to copy-and-paste the information, and it's far easier to distribute that way, because it avoids the "F9 to refresh/can't find parent document" scenario. Especially if you've got a chunk of data that you really want to span a page break (OLE link container cannot span page breaks).
The poweruser spreadsheets might also not convert well, especially if they use user-written VBA functions or add-ins. But that won't be too many XLS files, either.
The rest will be checked when they're opened or when someone tells them there is a problem with them, and at some point, old documents might even just be left as-is.
But, really, #2 is going to be a red herring anyways, because it can be of concern whenever a new version of Office is released as well.
Access databases? Well... The data should be in a server RDBMS (even if it's on a workstation) anyways. Postgres could fill in nicely. Front-end? There are ways around that (even use OO's spreadsheet to do the front-end). This is one tool that will require probably a suprising amount of developer time, but there's always just linking to the data via ODBC, and keeping the front-end part. The data should not be in MDB files, though (this is good Access design practice anyways. move data to separate MDB/RDBMS ).
They carried a complement of fighter airplanes on board, and could launch them at will for self defense
Well, that was the hope, but the planes carried were not called "peashooters" for no reason. They were basically about the size of a Pitts Special biplane, with one or maybe two.30 cal machine guns (think: M-60's). They had to be pretty damn light, just like everything else on an airship.
Later on in the 50's, the techniques were revisited with the hopes of making a little jet-powered fighter that could be carried in the bay of the B-36 bomber, launched while over target or as the need arose, and then recovered for the long flight back home. It had an elaborate "trapeze" catcher that would have been a joy to try and fly back into.
The little plane itself, in the toyworld, was transmorgified into a goofy model by Monogram.
How fast does CAB burn in a hydrogen-air atmosphere, for different percentages of hydrogen?
SRB fuel *CAN* burn explosively. Witness the aerial footage of the SRB fuel plant burning, and then conflagrating rather quickly and abruptly...
SRB fuel might have a slow burn rate, but it does make a lot of gas, and if you contain it and leave it only one way out (as you would in a rocket motor), it does have some force. Plus, you have to remember that the area burning in the SRB is essentially the length of the SRB itself, on the inside surface, much like if you could light a roll of lifesavers on fire from the inside.
The fuel is poured around a mandrel in each section, and the shape of the hole left after the mandrel is removed determines some of the burn characteristics of the motor.
Actually, this is probably one of the worst applications for one of these.
For one, the cycle time for loading that much water will SUCK.
For another, fly one of these babies over a hot spot, where the air is suddenly a lot less dense, and your 500 tons of water suddenly gets a lot of inertia heading down. With the size of the thing, even if they suddenly dropped the water, it might be too late to counteract actively, with its huge moment of inertia (even if it weighs 100 tons empty).
But it would sure fly to a disaster area a lot faster than moving a huge oil tanker (USNS Mercy & Comfort, the military's huge hospital ships), and gets a heck of a lot further inland...
Eventually, there was so much debris on the forest flaw that when it inevitably caught fire we got huge "superfires" that were very difficult to put out and damaged a lot of property.
Well, when rich dorks build log cabins in the western mountains, especially in the drier parts, and put shake roofs on them, they're just begging for their dream homes to be burned down, much like living in a mobile home park in the Midwest almost ensures that you will have a tornado unleash its wrath on you and your neighbors.
The worst part of the "superfires" is that they kill the soil. Trees need a bunch of little microflora in the soil to grow. The process of forest development helps that microflora develop to support the trees. A superfire essentially sterilizes the soil.
Slashdot Mirror
Or spray your license plate with a clear material which either absorbs the light frequencies typically used by lidar guns, acts essentially a spray-on dichoric coating to screw up intersection photo radar units, etc..
Of course, to beat radar-triggered devices, you need to deal with that big flat piece of metal that is a good microwave reradiator (like, replace it with a plastic facsimile)...
Dye, what dye? Do you mean caramel color?
Have you ever known a burn victim?
Skin grafts do not do very much. I think that what they do is provide enough temporary covering to allow scar tissue to grow in place anyways. And, besides, the scar tissue that does grow is not all that flexible at all, either.
The "face transplant" only involves taking off the dermal layers of the face, no facial muscles (dermis, epidermis and subcutaneous layer).
They are looking for recipients that have not suffered too much muscle or nerve damage, and still have a good amount of the blood supply available (obviously). Did you not read the article?
If there ever was a legitimate cosmetic surgery, this is one.
You mean, like Michael Jackson has been doing?
Of course, for many of the more popular magazines, at least in US libraries, it's more or less easy enough to go in, grab the magazine of interest (sorry, no "Playboy" in most US libraries...), and photocopy the article/s you want, read the whole thing in one sitting, etc.
sorry, I should have made it clear I was piling on along with Einhvefr's rebuttals.
You could make the same arguments re: grocery stores vs farmers' markets. And I'm sure it will come to be eventually in some cities, like Portland. There will come a time for mid-tier regional stores to start pushing municipal, county and state legislation to start applying the thumbscrews to farmer's markets (Portland has at least 3 local grocery store chains that pretty much compete with the successful farmer's markets here, not including Whole Foods, whom they also compete against). If Safeway, Albertsons and Kroger's (dba QFC and Fred Meyer) decide that the PDX market is being threatened by the little guys, they may decide it's worth getting some legislation "reinterpretations" paid for, too.
It is silly to assume that "success" can only be measured on the scale of Microsoft, Sun, Adobe, etc. There are several people who do well with free software (SugarCRM), who sell services. There are others with commercial and non-commercial licenses (GhostScript). Etc.
FOSS is a threat because of the price point, and it can provide options that most COTS software may not (i.e., Apache allows choice in server platforms, while IIS does not. Is running ChiliSoft's ASP port on Linux really a good option?).
The funny thing about his business model isn't really viable for niche market software and a scaleable model has yet to be found is that for years that is what the pundits saw as Linux' best growth area, i.e., vertical market applications and other "niche" markets.
And how do their outbursts compare in professionalism compared to SteveB's famous outbursts? To be fair, let's throw in Sun's executives spouting off, Larry Ellison, et al.
As far as "RTFM", let's say you just bought a new construction house, "custom built", and yours was one of the last ones in the development to be built. 6 months later, the developer and builder, their stuff that was onsite a few months ago, is gone on to the next job. Suddenly, you've got a leaky roof and a cracked foundation. You call the developer, and the developer and builder basically says, "fix it yourself".
Custom software? Well, ever hear "sure we'll fix it, but it'll cost you time-and-materials." Or, "you bought the source code so your programmers could add their own extensions and enhancements, so..."
Then there's COSS software... "that's not a bug, but a feature. See this in our knowledge base."
And how much COSS is really "innovative"? All it takes is for one innovative idea to get foothold, and everyone else starts copying it.
ESR, TdR, DJB, RS, et al., may be grating, but they don't hold a light to the major CxO's of our favorite companies (i.e., Steve Jobs, BillG, SteveB, LarryE, etc.) as far as being pure billionaire blowhard dickheads.
I'll listen to Ted Nugent's songs, but I can live without his "alpha male" bullshit, too.
Lawyers: pro bono work.
Drs: "Doctors without Borders", and other humanitarian groups.
Pilots: Similar.
Notice the themes: providing specialized work for the betterment of the community (define community yourself), instead of the betterment of one's self.
Food & Shelter are easily had. Just go where all the other homeless people hang out.
You try to use the argument "why should software developers offer their products for free" as a cudgel against it, instead of accepting that there are software developers who DO want to offer their software and services for free for a variety of reasons.
"Knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing".
For me, for example, the value-add for using Tomcat/JBoss vs WebLogic, WebSphere etc. is pretty obvious, even when not considering the $$$ involved.
And then you have kids...
"Daddy, can we get a slurpee, pleeeeeaaaaassseee?" (with typical kid's overdramatic exageration and drawing-out on 'please').
Me? Never really did like them.
But, were they really invented by Southland Corp? When were Icees introduced at KMart, since they always seemed to be there (KMart was probably Icee's biggest customer), and it wasn't until after 1980 I think when I first went into a 7-11...
No they won't. Eventually, this will go up to the VP/SVP level, and then you have several VP/SVP's squaring off at the IT department and its chain. Guess who loses the executive politics battle if the CEO decides that IT is "out of control"?
By this I mean giving the user the ability to make it as if a regular objectionable poster never existed in the forum. Making his/her original posts vanish, along with all replys to his/her post and any mention of him/her.
You mean...like Usenet kill files?
Illegal? Then it's gotta be illegal to render slaugherhouse byproducts into cosmetics, soap, glue, tallow, lard, "animal protein byproduct", collagen, keratin, etc. in Germany, too.
All he probably needs to do to get his supply of dead cats (and presumably, dogs) is get the leftovers from the veterinarians and animal shelters in his area.
Hey, I've been known to go out and pull dead cats off of the road, just because I don't like seeing housecats that have been run over turned into red smears. I avoid driving over them, at the very least.
But once it's dead, it's dead. It's far different to recycle already dead cats than to go out and kill them just to fuel your car, but in the long run, if the guy was doing this, he'd actually probably be doing his neighborhood good, at least from a naturalist's point of view. Cats are pretty efficient wild bird removers...
Now that we have two barn cats running outside, we don't have too many birds coming to our bird feeders now (it's that, or West Nile has killed them off. Why won't WN kill off the starlings and grackles, though?).
I'm not quite to the "Ted Nugent" level of self-absorption, er, self-actualization, er, I mean, resource recovery. I don't have the heart yet to skin a dead lamb, either to keep the skin as a memento, or to use the skin to try and graft another lamb onto the dead lamb's mother during lambing season. But it is part of the business, and will need to eventually.
If it was feasible to do this, at least in the US in most areas there's a plentiful supply of roadkill cats, oppossums, raccoons and skunks, at the very least.
I'd bet that many cases of malpractice are actually cases of "malpatients" -- the patient's own stupidity, irresponsibility, lack of candor, or failure to follow the doctor's recommendations contributed to or even caused the problem. Add to that the simple problem of mismatch of social styles and one person's "uncaring" physician is another person's efficient doctor.
Except...that most of the cases probably result from complications resulting during or after surgical procedures. Hard to blame the patient on these.
But again, in our risk-averse society, where bad things don't just happen, they happen because someone intended to screw up, one must find SOMEONE to blame.
Dad had a heart attack? Only treatment had a 30% success rate? Dad died? Well, sue the hospital then!
One of my daughters had a perinatal stroke (yes, left cerebral artery blockage. She's got no left temporal lobe...), and only presented with seizures that resulted in intermittent apnea. Luckily my wife (who was a nurse, oddly enough), noticed something was wrong, and things were dealt with before she had a long apneic episode (i.e., general ischemic damage -> cerebral palsy). She's fine now, just turned 5.
Ended up she had umbilical cord wrapped around her neck 3 times, and her heart rate was decellerating during contractions. Did the pressure on the cord cause a clot to form and make its way to her brain? Should she have been delivered by C-section at that point? How come it wasn't caught by the sonograph tech the day before (who did an echo, too)?
We do not know, but we did indeed send her files to a malpractice lawyer (but not enough indications to make a case) at the time.
Shit happens, yes. We're definitely fully aware of that (and are thankful every day that our shit wasn't worse that day...).
Now I have a farm, and a big blanket liability insurance policy. The potential for selling a $3.00/dz pack of farm eggs, and getting our pants sued off because a buyer got a sick stomach, must be planned for and mitigated against, as does an animal getting out, and getting hit by a family minivan which, while trying to avoid it, crosses into the other lane and tries to headbutt the logging truck. "Your sheep got out, your fence wasn't good enough, it's your fault!" If only it had been a deer instead...
It's more than easy enough to completely modify how your menus work and act. Grab one of Woody Leonhard's books.
Don't like the New File icon on the tool bar's default behavior compared to the File->New menu command? Then rewire the toolbar button to invoke the same command as the menu command.
You can completely modify the behavior of every menu command and toolbar button in Office, and have been able to do so since Word 2.0 days.
As for #2 being a red herring--the changes in a version upgrade of office are negilgble between the difference betwixt two unfriendly office software packages.
Hmm... do you remember how much fun the upgrade from Office 6.0 to Office 95 was? I still do. It was laughable. As was upgrade from Office 95/97 to 2000 in some situations.
Field codes, OLE, etc. are edge cases that "power users" will throw into the mix, but really won't matter, because they're...well...edge cases. But since no one in the real world really uses them intentionally, they won't matter. The automatically inserted ones (i.e,. page numbers, automatic list numbering, etc.) will probably work out well. But a {PRINT} field code with an embedded Postscript or PCL watermark coded in it (left over from Word 2.0 days...)?
Styles? Again, these could be hard thing, if only people used them. But they don't.
And, as far as #2 goes, it sure didn't stop the mass migrations from WP to Word, did it? Again, it's a red herring, and I should go green salmon fishing with it.
MDBs? Well, I'll take fixing an Access database over "upsizing" an excel app (that really should be in a database) any day. I've yet to come across one of those evil user-created Access DBs that are glorified address books, because those are usually done in Excel anyways.
And, again, have you been paying attention to how different Office 12 will be compared to Office 11 (aka Office 2003)? As per Microsoft, there will be far too much change for change's sake, touted as "innovation". Too many "entry points" to things will be "streamlined", instead of left as-is. THAT will then cause lots of retraining and reorientation time, purchasing of yet more "dummies" books, etc.
Been there, done that, happens every office version.
If OO.org 2.0's UI can be made to work about 90% of how Office 2003's UI works, then it'll be far easier to push people to OO.Org rather than Office 12, but because everyone will be drinking the "Office Upgrade!" koolaid and look at it with joy, rather than trepidation...
OO's target *is* Office. These migrations will work far better than migrating to Office from, say, Lotus SmartSuite.
No, that image would have been like in the early 30's just after the depression got going.
/gallon is our final offer."
Farmers: "we need 11 cents/gallon just to cover our feed bills."
Milk buyer: "sorry. 9 cents
F: "F*** that!" pours milk out on the delivery dock.
---------
The modern replacements for the milk buyers have become ADM, ConAgra, Cargill, Monsanto, IBP/Tyson, et al. The producer is completely isolated by these companies from the retail end of the market (and vice versa, but like most retailers even care...).
To the producers, groups like R-CALF are bad, evil communistic groups. Maybe it's because the producers are actually fed up with being given the royal shaft by the big agribusiness commodity buyers who set prices based only on their needs, because these companies are much like deBeers - they buy so much and have so much in inventory that they can isolate their buying and selling cycles. Instead of producers also getting a good benefit from rising futures prices (say, bad winter or dry spring causing pressure on calf production) to make up for any bad events on their side, it's the commodity buyer who benefits. Their prices to the producers go up very little while the prices they charge to retailers fluctuates much more closely with the futures market (and there are more and bigger "areas under the curve").
Imagine ADM, ConAgra and Cargill (ostensibly, they're American companies...) fed up with dealing with US corn and soybean producers' demands for marginally higher price points, and just deciding to only buy from Brazil, Australia, Canada and Argentina for a couple of years...
You mean, running the damn thing overnight or over the weekend isn't an option? Again, if it's done when you come back in next, who cares if it took 10 minutes or 10 hours?
Besides, the more meaningful way for most users to do a mass conversion will be to do some combination of converting the last 4-9 docs a given user has opened (i.e., peek in their registry), or just convert all docs created after 1/1/2005, or something like that. Older stuff will be converted on an as-opened basis.
Just like you'll (need to) do when you install Office 12.
So it's a red herring argument.
I should add, I just helped with this for Office 2K->Office 2K3. Not as big of a deal as the upgrade to Office 95 was, though (that seriously had some conversion issues with Word 6.x->Word 95 and Word 2.0->Word 95, and then you had the occaisional Excel 5.0/95 "fat files" too - Excel 5.0 and Excel 95 parts were stored in same file in two different Compound Doc areas...think Mac's fat binaries).
Still, nothing like converting a spreadsheet app to Excel 2000, which was imported into Excel 95 from the original version written in Lotus 1-2-3, because Excel 97 dropped Lotus inline macro conversions (but the spreadsheet functions worked), so they kept running Excel 95 just for this critical capital expenditure ROI calculator for this Fortune-100 corp. But converting those to VBA functions wasn't the bad part.
The bad part of it was that it involved too many stupid unnecessary transformations (i.e., RC->CR->RC) that I couldn't just change one function in an area and fill it into the rest of the matrix area (thus letting all the references adjust correctly as well). Nosiree. Lots of fun modifying functions manually in several 10x10 for the model. Joy. Rapture.
#1 is almost a red herring.
Not all of the documents will be checked. The critical ones (i.e., current rules, policies, public documents) will be checked, of course.
Others that most of the users think will be tough to convert will actually convert quite well, because 99% of Word users do not use styles, really know much about using fieldcodes or embed/link to parts of other Office documents via OLE, and a few more might actually use tables meaningfully. So the big problem here then becomes how badly does OO mangle any typeface conversions w.r.t. layout-by-whitespace, especially with regards to forms.
Instead of linking to other Office docs, it's generally just easier and more meaningful to copy-and-paste the information, and it's far easier to distribute that way, because it avoids the "F9 to refresh/can't find parent document" scenario. Especially if you've got a chunk of data that you really want to span a page break (OLE link container cannot span page breaks).
The poweruser spreadsheets might also not convert well, especially if they use user-written VBA functions or add-ins. But that won't be too many XLS files, either.
The rest will be checked when they're opened or when someone tells them there is a problem with them, and at some point, old documents might even just be left as-is.
But, really, #2 is going to be a red herring anyways, because it can be of concern whenever a new version of Office is released as well.
Access databases? Well... The data should be in a server RDBMS (even if it's on a workstation) anyways. Postgres could fill in nicely. Front-end? There are ways around that (even use OO's spreadsheet to do the front-end). This is one tool that will require probably a suprising amount of developer time, but there's always just linking to the data via ODBC, and keeping the front-end part. The data should not be in MDB files, though (this is good Access design practice anyways. move data to separate MDB/RDBMS ).
They carried a complement of fighter airplanes on board, and could launch them at will for self defense
.30 cal machine guns (think: M-60's). They had to be pretty damn light, just like everything else on an airship.
Well, that was the hope, but the planes carried were not called "peashooters" for no reason. They were basically about the size of a Pitts Special biplane, with one or maybe two
Later on in the 50's, the techniques were revisited with the hopes of making a little jet-powered fighter that could be carried in the bay of the B-36 bomber, launched while over target or as the need arose, and then recovered for the long flight back home. It had an elaborate "trapeze" catcher that would have been a joy to try and fly back into.
The little plane itself, in the toyworld, was transmorgified into a goofy model by Monogram.
How fast does CAB burn in a hydrogen-air atmosphere, for different percentages of hydrogen?
SRB fuel *CAN* burn explosively. Witness the aerial footage of the SRB fuel plant burning, and then conflagrating rather quickly and abruptly...
SRB fuel might have a slow burn rate, but it does make a lot of gas, and if you contain it and leave it only one way out (as you would in a rocket motor), it does have some force. Plus, you have to remember that the area burning in the SRB is essentially the length of the SRB itself, on the inside surface, much like if you could light a roll of lifesavers on fire from the inside.
The fuel is poured around a mandrel in each section, and the shape of the hole left after the mandrel is removed determines some of the burn characteristics of the motor.
Actually, this is probably one of the worst applications for one of these.
For one, the cycle time for loading that much water will SUCK.
For another, fly one of these babies over a hot spot, where the air is suddenly a lot less dense, and your 500 tons of water suddenly gets a lot of inertia heading down. With the size of the thing, even if they suddenly dropped the water, it might be too late to counteract actively, with its huge moment of inertia (even if it weighs 100 tons empty).
But it would sure fly to a disaster area a lot faster than moving a huge oil tanker (USNS Mercy & Comfort, the military's huge hospital ships), and gets a heck of a lot further inland...
Eventually, there was so much debris on the forest flaw that when it inevitably caught fire we got huge "superfires" that were very difficult to put out and damaged a lot of property.
Well, when rich dorks build log cabins in the western mountains, especially in the drier parts, and put shake roofs on them, they're just begging for their dream homes to be burned down, much like living in a mobile home park in the Midwest almost ensures that you will have a tornado unleash its wrath on you and your neighbors.
The worst part of the "superfires" is that they kill the soil. Trees need a bunch of little microflora in the soil to grow. The process of forest development helps that microflora develop to support the trees. A superfire essentially sterilizes the soil.
Government welfare state or Corporate welfare state?
"I owe my soul to the Company Store"