on mine, it's inside the battery compartment - not exactly convenient, but it is there.
That's not so inconvenient, because you can close the lid (so that the Powerbook goes to sleep), turn the machine around, open the battery compartment (you will need a coin for this), take the battery off, write down the serial number (you will need pen and paper because your computer is sleeping), put the battery back on and roll on.
This works both with the power cord attached and without it. It's very handy when you want to swap batteries.
If we elect the President by a simple plurality (or majority) then Presidential candidates will simply spend huge amounts of money in a few population dense markets. Your vote won't count unless you live in the North East, Los Angeles, and a few other places. And as a side effect the views of rural America won't be represented at all, they might as well not even vote. So if disenfranchising 40% or more of the population is your goal, by all means eleminate the Electoral College.
Well, right now your vote only counts if you belong to a flip-flop state. If your state is strongly Democrat or Republican, you might as well not vote. And the effect is similar to what you fear: the candidates only concentrate their campaigns in the flip-flop states, ignoring the other ones (unless they are populous because then they have too many electoral votes).
A way to prevent the problems that you cite and still use the popular vote, is to multiply the counts of each state by a state-specific factor, for example 3/1 for Wyoming, 12/10 for Massachusetts, and 55/53 for California. (As you may guess, I didn't pick the numbers randomly). That way, each individual voter from Wyoming would have more weight than each Californian, and the Republicans from California and Democrats from Wyoming would still have a chance of making a difference.
Or at least all the states should function like Maine and Nebraska so the electoral votes may be split among the candidates and the effect of potential situations like these would be less pathetic.
(By the way, some studies show that the Electoral College system as implemented now is actually biased in favor of the populous regions. I'm not sure if that is reasonable, though.)
As several other posters have pointed out, you can get the solution to your problem here.
Why isn't something like this possible by default? Because for most people it doesn't make sense to work with a closed laptop. Yes, for some people like you it does, but that's not common. So, given the fact that venting some air through the keyboard helps cool some laptops, it's a better bet to give a simple, reasonable default behavior. Let the power users come up with workarounds.
That reminds me of a friend whose Dell laptop got severely overheated because he forgot that he had change the settings. He closed the lid, placed the laptop in a computer sleeve and the sleeve in his backpack and kept it there for quite long. I think that the computer survived, fortunately, although it performed very sluggishly for many minutes after rescuing it (I guess while the processor cooled down).
The U.S. is not a democracy. She is a constitutional republic.
Yes, you are completely right about that. But the U.S. citizens take pride on their "democratic" tradition, criticize antidemocratic governments, and even the president takes pride at introducing democracy to the formerly oppressed iraquis (whether you agree with him or not is beside my point).
Look all around you (assuming you are in the U.S.): (almost) everyone believes that they live under a democratic government. The fact that technically it's not a democracy is irrelevant to most people. The U.S.A. wants to be a democracy and sells itself (herself?) to the world as a democracy.
You are of the opinion that there is no added value in being a true democracy (or at least that is the impression I get). But most of the "confused" people think that "electing our representatives in the government is one of the things that make this country great".
I kind of agree with these people: it would be great if the U.S.A. was a real democracy where the people who govern are the ones that the citizens want in those offices. So don't call that democracy if you don't want to, but the fact is that in the present system that frequently doesn't happen and can eventually turn all wrong.
The founding fathers had very good intentions but nowadays the US electoral system is prone to producing the most antidemocratic results (as compared to almost any other "democracy"). Let me give you two examples:
Scenario 1:
There are three candidates A, B, C. A is quite popular, while B is very popular in half the country (labeled as X) and very unpopular in the other half (labeled as Y). C is very popular in Y and very unpopular in X. For the sake of discussion lets assume that X an Y have the same number of electoral votes, and that in all the states of each kind (X and Y) the popular votes are distributed equally, like this:
Candidate A Candidate B Candidate C X states 49 % 51 % 0 % Y states 49 % 0 % 51 %
So candidate A is supported by almost half the population, but gets absolutely no electoral votes. The other two candidates, who are supported by just over a quarter of the voters, share all the electoral votes and one of them is the next president. Sweet.
Scenario 2:
There are only two candidates, A and B. Candidate A is absolutely loved in the X states, where B is detested. In the Y states, B is slightly preferred over A. Again, for the sake of discussion suppose that the Y states have exactly one more electoral votes than X in total. If the popular votes are distribute like this:
Candidate A Candidate B X states 100 % 0 % Y states 49 % 51 %
the candidate with almost 75 % of the popular votes will lose the elections to the one that got just over 25%. That's what I call democracy!
One way to maintain the advantages that the "founding fathers" saw in the electoral college is to multiply the total number of votes in each state by a weighting factor, in such a way that the influence of each individual voter from Wyoming will be much greater than the one of a voter from California.
But as a minimum all the states should operate like Maine and Nebraska, where in certain situations the electoral votes may get divided among the candidates (although that has never happened so far).
Stupid slash code didn't allow me to link this as I wanted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Elector al_College#Electors"
I did not know that english and spelling pedants actually used computers.
Oh, actually if you look closely enough you will find us lurking all around Slashdot.
I hoped that the way I told you about your rather minor mistake would not seem insulting, but I guess I failed.
Personally, I like when people correct my mistakes: that helps me to learn. Although the fact that I am not even an English native speaker may have some influence on my attitude. No, on second thought I also appreciate when someone corrects me in my native language.
Precisely the first kind of "alcohol" that I referred to is a type of denatured ethanol. In this case, mixed with methanol, which makes it extremely poisonous.
Of course, you can also mix isopropanol with other stuff, but that's not what we were talking about.
I think you are mixing up three different kinds of alcohol. One is a mixture of Ethyl and Methyl alcohol, used as fuel and for some specific cleansing applications, which is extremely poisonous. Ethanol is the common alcohol in beverages, but Methanol can get you blind in low doses and kill you in higher ones.
The second type is the rubbing alcohol used in some countries other than the U.S. It's 70% ethanol, and the rest is water and another substance that I can't recall. The third substance is added to give the mixture a horrible taste so drunkards won't consume it. This rubbing alcohol isn't more toxic than 70% ethanol, and some alcoholics actually drink it mixing it with sweet juices/sodas! (Yuck!)
The third type is isopropyl alcohol, used in many other countries, including the U.S. In moderate amounts it is not toxic (of course if drink a lot it will harm you, but also too much ethanol will kill you). It is used because it has the same disinfectant properties as Ethanol, but it smells and tastes nasty so people don't feel compelled to drink it. If I'm not wrong, it doesn't get you drunk so there is no point on trying it (and that is the reason it is favored over the ethanol rubbing alcohol).
My point is that is isopropyl alcohol was poisonous it wouldn't be used to disinfect wounds, or even as rubbing alcohol.
You're not stupid, just too lazy to read through the page.
The MacOS X installer is linked after the Linux installer, in the line that says:
Full Install for Macintosh OSX (Current Status: BETA): mirror
Re:Yup, Hires MOV==corrupt halfway through.
on
A Sound of Thunder
·
· Score: 1
Strangely enough, the "large", "medium", and "small" Quicktime trailers have the exact same sizes as the "very large", "large", and "medium" Real Player and WMP trailers respectively. The Real/WMP "small" option is a joke.
Are they assuming that Quicktime users expect better quality?
Re:Yup, Hires MOV==corrupt halfway through.
on
A Sound of Thunder
·
· Score: 1
But the trailer isn't up on the Apple trailers website (at least not yet)!
Humm... I think I'll wait. OK, maybe I'll use one of the other formats, some times they don't suck.
Anyway, I reported the issue to scifi.com. Let's hope they fix it.
HFS+ already existed, but Dominic Giampaolo added journaling to it (beta in Jaguar, on by default in Panther), and apparently is the brain behind spotlight.
So you are right, it's not a new file system, but it's certainly renewed.
Aqua Dock seems great. If I had a permanent PC I would try it. Half of the users on download.com didn't like it, though (and some say that it's hard to un-install).
On the other hand, the Dock substitutes for Windows that I have seen so far (as well as the Exposé knock-off) have been quite pitiful. They give me the impression that people who use them haven't really spent enough time on a Mac.
The Mac experience is not just about looks. Those can be easily copied. It's about integration and consistency. But you only realize that after working on a Mac for several days.
1) into Windows by 2006 what is already in OS X 2) I.E. does less than Firefox
No, no, he's actually correct. Check the features in Panther (and Jaguar) from the Apple site (ignore Tiger, since we are talking about the present). Admittedly, Longhorn will feature some things not currently in OS X, but that's if they don't shave them off also.
Then go to the Mozilla site and download Firefox. It's free! You have an excuse for not trying OS X, but there is no excuse for not trying Firefox. (And yet, I still prefer Safari.)
You will be surprised by how the herd mentality that ties you to MS's products is making you miss. Now. Not in two years.
Let's see if I understand: You pay $400 per semester for four semesters, and $400 afterwards, and the laptop is yours. That's $2000 in total which may be reasonable (depending on the specs of the ThinkPads) because that includes the "interest fees" you would have to pay if you got the laptop through a loan.
But the art students are paying MORE than $2000 (how much more?). Since the educational price of the most expensive iBook is $1400, it seems to me that the artists are getting screwed.
And what if I am, say, an engineer and happen to prefer Macs? Would I have a choice?
The lime vs. lemon problem also exists for Spanish speakers. Only after living in the USA for a couple of months did I understand that the rather large yellow fruits (called "lima" in Spanish) are called "lemons" here, while the deep green ones ("limon común" or "limon Tahití") were called "limes" and "leech limes".
Interestingly, Minute Maid juices are labeled "lemonade" if made from the yellow fruit, and both "limade" and "limonada" if made from the green fruits (obviously as a nod to Spanish and Portuguese speakers).
From the responses so far, Chinese, British, Brazilians (Portuguese), and Spanish/Hispanoamericans all have the lime and lemon concepts upside down... well... maybe the ones who have them upside down are the USAians... (I don't want to start a citric-based religious war here, though).
Interesting, my allofmp3.com stats page shows that I've downloaded 142 songs so far. [...] The total cost of this was less then $10,
So in average every song costs you far less than 8 cents. Taking away the slice that allofmp3.com takes (or do you believe they maintain the service out of the goodness of their heart?), the artists must really be getting filthy rich with your purchases.
Sarcasm aside, please get real: most artists have a contract with their labels, and they can't offer their music directly to sites like allofmp3.com. The labels will never, ever, accept such a low price. Please note that you will find music from such artist in allofmp3.com, (even bootlegs that are certainly not officially endorsed).
And even for artists who can deal directly with the site (legally), they won't be much happy receiving far less than the 11 cents that they receive from iTunes after the label and the RIAA have taken their slices.
Please, get this in your head: allofmp3.com is lying to you when they say that they aren't ripping the artists. In fact, such sites exist because of the several loopholes in the Russian legislation (and that is true for most of the Russian commerce that is considered illegal in most other countries).
In my opinion, sooner or later the North American and European governments are going to squeeze Russia commercially until they straighten up their laws, and you will see all those bootlegs disappear and the prices go up. (Or maybe the service will be made inaccessible to people from the offended countries, just as US customers can't buy music form the French iTunes site, etc).
Allofmp3.com knows that what they are doing will eventually be acknowledged as a crime, and they are trying to get as much money from you meanwhile. People of such so low moral stature can be expected to lie in your face directly, so don't be surprised if what you are buying is actually pure pirated music, and the artists are getting nothing from it. If they are lying about giving them a fair share of the profit, they can be lying about everything else.
Slashdot Mirror
You're missing the stated "runs on my computer" requirement.
Uh..., no, actually that requirement wasn't stated.
So, one can see intuitively that a stereo 24-bit 192Khz audio file will be 24 times larger than a stereo mp3 file that is 192kpbs.
No, as far as I understand it's 24 bits per sample per channel. So if it's in stereo, the file would be 48 times larger than the MP3.
on mine, it's inside the battery compartment - not exactly convenient, but it is there.
That's not so inconvenient, because you can close the lid (so that the Powerbook goes to sleep), turn the machine around, open the battery compartment (you will need a coin for this), take the battery off, write down the serial number (you will need pen and paper because your computer is sleeping), put the battery back on and roll on.
This works both with the power cord attached and without it. It's very handy when you want to swap batteries.
Well, right now your vote only counts if you belong to a flip-flop state. If your state is strongly Democrat or Republican, you might as well not vote. And the effect is similar to what you fear: the candidates only concentrate their campaigns in the flip-flop states, ignoring the other ones (unless they are populous because then they have too many electoral votes).
A way to prevent the problems that you cite and still use the popular vote, is to multiply the counts of each state by a state-specific factor, for example 3/1 for Wyoming, 12/10 for Massachusetts, and 55/53 for California. (As you may guess, I didn't pick the numbers randomly). That way, each individual voter from Wyoming would have more weight than each Californian, and the Republicans from California and Democrats from Wyoming would still have a chance of making a difference.
Or at least all the states should function like Maine and Nebraska so the electoral votes may be split among the candidates and the effect of potential situations like these would be less pathetic.
(By the way, some studies show that the Electoral College system as implemented now is actually biased in favor of the populous regions. I'm not sure if that is reasonable, though.)
As several other posters have pointed out, you can get the solution to your problem here.
Why isn't something like this possible by default? Because for most people it doesn't make sense to work with a closed laptop. Yes, for some people like you it does, but that's not common. So, given the fact that venting some air through the keyboard helps cool some laptops, it's a better bet to give a simple, reasonable default behavior. Let the power users come up with workarounds.
That reminds me of a friend whose Dell laptop got severely overheated because he forgot that he had change the settings. He closed the lid, placed the laptop in a computer sleeve and the sleeve in his backpack and kept it there for quite long. I think that the computer survived, fortunately, although it performed very sluggishly for many minutes after rescuing it (I guess while the processor cooled down).
Yes, you are completely right about that. But the U.S. citizens take pride on their "democratic" tradition, criticize antidemocratic governments, and even the president takes pride at introducing democracy to the formerly oppressed iraquis (whether you agree with him or not is beside my point).
Look all around you (assuming you are in the U.S.): (almost) everyone believes that they live under a democratic government. The fact that technically it's not a democracy is irrelevant to most people. The U.S.A. wants to be a democracy and sells itself (herself?) to the world as a democracy.
You are of the opinion that there is no added value in being a true democracy (or at least that is the impression I get). But most of the "confused" people think that "electing our representatives in the government is one of the things that make this country great".
I kind of agree with these people: it would be great if the U.S.A. was a real democracy where the people who govern are the ones that the citizens want in those offices. So don't call that democracy if you don't want to, but the fact is that in the present system that frequently doesn't happen and can eventually turn all wrong.
The founding fathers had very good intentions but nowadays the US electoral system is prone to producing the most antidemocratic results (as compared to almost any other "democracy"). Let me give you two examples:
r al_College#Electors"
Scenario 1:
There are three candidates A, B, C. A is quite popular, while B is very popular in half the country (labeled as X) and very unpopular in the other half (labeled as Y). C is very popular in Y and very unpopular in X. For the sake of discussion lets assume that X an Y have the same number of electoral votes, and that in all the states of each kind (X and Y) the popular votes are distributed equally, like this:
Candidate A Candidate B Candidate C
X states 49 % 51 % 0 %
Y states 49 % 0 % 51 %
So candidate A is supported by almost half the population, but gets absolutely no electoral votes. The other two candidates, who are supported by just over a quarter of the voters, share all the electoral votes and one of them is the next president. Sweet.
Scenario 2:
There are only two candidates, A and B. Candidate A is absolutely loved in the X states, where B is detested. In the Y states, B is slightly preferred over A. Again, for the sake of discussion suppose that the Y states have exactly one more electoral votes than X in total. If the popular votes are distribute like this:
Candidate A Candidate B
X states 100 % 0 %
Y states 49 % 51 %
the candidate with almost 75 % of the popular votes will lose the elections to the one that got just over 25%. That's what I call democracy!
One way to maintain the advantages that the "founding fathers" saw in the electoral college is to multiply the total number of votes in each state by a weighting factor, in such a way that the influence of each individual voter from Wyoming will be much greater than the one of a voter from California.
But as a minimum all the states should operate like Maine and Nebraska, where in certain situations the electoral votes may get divided among the candidates (although that has never happened so far).
Stupid slash code didn't allow me to link this as I wanted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electo
I did not know that english and spelling pedants actually used computers.
Oh, actually if you look closely enough you will find us lurking all around Slashdot.
I hoped that the way I told you about your rather minor mistake would not seem insulting, but I guess I failed.
Personally, I like when people correct my mistakes: that helps me to learn. Although the fact that I am not even an English native speaker may have some influence on my attitude. No, on second thought I also appreciate when someone corrects me in my native language.
I'm pretty sure that having to set up ClearCase will effect your perception, since you will necessarily get an opinion of it.
I'm not so sure if setting it up will affect the perception you would get if you only interacted with it as an end user.
Precisely the first kind of "alcohol" that I referred to is a type of denatured ethanol. In this case, mixed with methanol, which makes it extremely poisonous.
Of course, you can also mix isopropanol with other stuff, but that's not what we were talking about.
Oh, my God! Where are those mod points when you need them?
On the other hand, I wouldn't know if I should mod you Funny or Insightful...
I think you are mixing up three different kinds of alcohol. One is a mixture of Ethyl and Methyl alcohol, used as fuel and for some specific cleansing applications, which is extremely poisonous. Ethanol is the common alcohol in beverages, but Methanol can get you blind in low doses and kill you in higher ones.
The second type is the rubbing alcohol used in some countries other than the U.S. It's 70% ethanol, and the rest is water and another substance that I can't recall. The third substance is added to give the mixture a horrible taste so drunkards won't consume it. This rubbing alcohol isn't more toxic than 70% ethanol, and some alcoholics actually drink it mixing it with sweet juices/sodas! (Yuck!)
The third type is isopropyl alcohol, used in many other countries, including the U.S. In moderate amounts it is not toxic (of course if drink a lot it will harm you, but also too much ethanol will kill you). It is used because it has the same disinfectant properties as Ethanol, but it smells and tastes nasty so people don't feel compelled to drink it. If I'm not wrong, it doesn't get you drunk so there is no point on trying it (and that is the reason it is favored over the ethanol rubbing alcohol).
My point is that is isopropyl alcohol was poisonous it wouldn't be used to disinfect wounds, or even as rubbing alcohol.
OK, I apologize for calling you lazy. I guess you are simply looking at another page.
The link is in this page: http://www.atitd.com/download.html.
I'm also using Safari, so that probably isn't the problem.
You're not stupid, just too lazy to read through the page.
The MacOS X installer is linked after the Linux installer, in the line that says:
Full Install for Macintosh OSX (Current Status: BETA): mirror
Strangely enough, the "large", "medium", and "small" Quicktime trailers have the exact same sizes as the "very large", "large", and "medium" Real Player and WMP trailers respectively. The Real/WMP "small" option is a joke.
Are they assuming that Quicktime users expect better quality?
But the trailer isn't up on the Apple trailers website (at least not yet)!
Humm... I think I'll wait. OK, maybe I'll use one of the other formats, some times they don't suck.
Anyway, I reported the issue to scifi.com. Let's hope they fix it.
HFS+ already existed, but Dominic Giampaolo added journaling to it (beta in Jaguar, on by default in Panther), and apparently is the brain behind spotlight.
So you are right, it's not a new file system, but it's certainly renewed.
Aqua Dock seems great. If I had a permanent PC I would try it. Half of the users on download.com didn't like it, though (and some say that it's hard to un-install).
On the other hand, the Dock substitutes for Windows that I have seen so far (as well as the Exposé knock-off) have been quite pitiful. They give me the impression that people who use them haven't really spent enough time on a Mac.
The Mac experience is not just about looks. Those can be easily copied. It's about integration and consistency. But you only realize that after working on a Mac for several days.
No, no, he's actually correct. Check the features in Panther (and Jaguar) from the Apple site (ignore Tiger, since we are talking about the present). Admittedly, Longhorn will feature some things not currently in OS X, but that's if they don't shave them off also.
Then go to the Mozilla site and download Firefox. It's free! You have an excuse for not trying OS X, but there is no excuse for not trying Firefox. (And yet, I still prefer Safari.)
You will be surprised by how the herd mentality that ties you to MS's products is making you miss. Now. Not in two years.
My Powerbook is my primary computer, but my iPod is formatted as a Windows HDD and it works beautifully on PCs...
Did you format it using the Powerbook or a PC? If it's the first case, can you please tell me what tool you used?
I used to have my iPod formated as a Windows HD, but an update forced me to reformat it. Some updates suck.
Let's see if I understand: You pay $400 per semester for four semesters, and $400 afterwards, and the laptop is yours. That's $2000 in total which may be reasonable (depending on the specs of the ThinkPads) because that includes the "interest fees" you would have to pay if you got the laptop through a loan.
But the art students are paying MORE than $2000 (how much more?). Since the educational price of the most expensive iBook is $1400, it seems to me that the artists are getting screwed.
And what if I am, say, an engineer and happen to prefer Macs? Would I have a choice?
The lime vs. lemon problem also exists for Spanish speakers. Only after living in the USA for a couple of months did I understand that the rather large yellow fruits (called "lima" in Spanish) are called "lemons" here, while the deep green ones ("limon común" or "limon Tahití") were called "limes" and "leech limes".
Interestingly, Minute Maid juices are labeled "lemonade" if made from the yellow fruit, and both "limade" and "limonada" if made from the green fruits (obviously as a nod to Spanish and Portuguese speakers).
From the responses so far, Chinese, British, Brazilians (Portuguese), and Spanish/Hispanoamericans all have the lime and lemon concepts upside down... well... maybe the ones who have them upside down are the USAians... (I don't want to start a citric-based religious war here, though).
So did I, but I'm safe. Make sure that your model number is A1045, as other models (e.g. A1075) have been used in 15 inch Al Powerbooks.
No more skull-to-the-microwave-window pressing for me either.
;)
Uhh... but you DO press your skull against the phone handset, which allegedly transmits a stronger signal (at least at that frequency)...
May I recommend a tin foil hat?
So in average every song costs you far less than 8 cents. Taking away the slice that allofmp3.com takes (or do you believe they maintain the service out of the goodness of their heart?), the artists must really be getting filthy rich with your purchases.
Sarcasm aside, please get real: most artists have a contract with their labels, and they can't offer their music directly to sites like allofmp3.com. The labels will never, ever, accept such a low price. Please note that you will find music from such artist in allofmp3.com, (even bootlegs that are certainly not officially endorsed).
And even for artists who can deal directly with the site (legally), they won't be much happy receiving far less than the 11 cents that they receive from iTunes after the label and the RIAA have taken their slices.
Please, get this in your head: allofmp3.com is lying to you when they say that they aren't ripping the artists. In fact, such sites exist because of the several loopholes in the Russian legislation (and that is true for most of the Russian commerce that is considered illegal in most other countries).
In my opinion, sooner or later the North American and European governments are going to squeeze Russia commercially until they straighten up their laws, and you will see all those bootlegs disappear and the prices go up. (Or maybe the service will be made inaccessible to people from the offended countries, just as US customers can't buy music form the French iTunes site, etc).
Allofmp3.com knows that what they are doing will eventually be acknowledged as a crime, and they are trying to get as much money from you meanwhile. People of such so low moral stature can be expected to lie in your face directly, so don't be surprised if what you are buying is actually pure pirated music, and the artists are getting nothing from it. If they are lying about giving them a fair share of the profit, they can be lying about everything else.