I'm gonna call BS on this one. Why would a ram disc need a fan?
MacOS System 6 had RAMdisk applications available for it (one was called AppDisk), and by System 7 this functionality was built into the OS via a system control panel. The software allowed you to donate whatever RAM you had available to a disk that mounted on the desktop. You could use it for cache files, or copy entire applications to it to run at blazing speeds off the RAMdisk instead off the comparatively slow SCSI-1 HDD, or the mind-numbingly slow floppy disk drive. In 1989, when RAM was prohibitively expensive, if you had a Mac IIfx (not publicly available until 1990) or Mac SE/30 and were very wealthy, you could have a desktop with 128MB of RAM (along with the MODE32 control panel that allowed the SE/30 to see all that memory, or the ROM from a Mac IIfx or Mac IIsi which accomplished the same thing, unless you ran A/UX which was natively 32-bit clean), and with the RAMdisk software you could designate amounts up to whatever the system didn't need to be used as a RAMdisk... say... about 120MB, which at the time would have been about as large as the biggest HDDs available to consumers. You can still find this software on Gamba's site.
To answer your question, the Mac Plus was an AIO or all-in-one computer. I'm not sure if you are old enough to know or remember what a cathode ray tube is, but the Mac Plus used one as a display, and it generated a substantial amount of heat, requiring a fan to cool the machine.
Also, RAM itself will generate some heat, usually not enough to need its own fan, and RAM in a Mac Plus didn't have a dedicated fan. A RAMdisk is not the same as an SSD, which runs off the disk bus. Like RAM, a RAMdisk runs off the system bus... generally much faster than the disk bus.
Like... Dave Cultler and his entire engineering team that developed NT at DEC before stealing away to Microsoft with DEC's intellectual property, what we know today as Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8.
'Stupid' is a stupendously loose term, in that particular context intended to convey ironically its most literal form, i.e. illogical — regarding what is commonly known about the science of procreation cleverly described merely as biology.
It sounds like someone didn't get the grades they expected to get and thus didn't get accepted into the PhD program they always dreamed of pursuing... or perhaps has a chip on their shoulder because even though they might have found some economic success, they find they are dismissed socially for lack of formal education, even if they did restore and still drive an '81 Thunderbird, yet still must further constantly overcompensate for mental and academic deficits by scrutinizing those that did study hard and did achieve non-trivial academic success.
Ph.D.s, M.D.s, D.O.s, D.V.M.s and even J.D.s have earned the right to be arrogant. Undereducated egoists who childishly identify themselves with material objects have not.
Actually, science is pretty gay, since science has lots of smart people and smart people tend to be gay.
Everyone knows that everything and everyone in this world is either gay or stupid. Obviously, if something isn't stupid, then it must be gay. Science isn't stupid, it therefore must be gay (and you can check my math on that). Ironically enough, homosexuality is literally biologically stupid, and while no one would deny that girls are stupid, at the same time there are few things in this world more gay than young heterosexual women. Paradoxically, very smart people, by and large, are stupid and not gay, even the homosexual ones.
For the love of Pete!! Pulse oximetry is not the same thing! Will ignorance ever tire of dismissively posting wildly inaccurate information to slashdot summaries??!!
Yeah, I was thinking that something like this could be applied rather easily to monitor breathing and heart rates...
There are iPhone apps that relatively accurately detect heart rate... Cardiograph is one that seems to work well as an pulse oximeter,... and I was about to try to explain what that was... those things that check heart rate with a sensor on your finger... I read the wiki article... don't ask me how it works... something about arterial globins.
AutoDesk doesn't run in a browser and: "Note: The Autodesk Design Review Browser Add-in does not support scripting or automation in the browser because Firefox and Chrome do not support COM controls." - Windows only restrictions on their browser plugin.
Autodesk in a browser. Of the particular plugin of which you speak, that is true. But since you last looked, they have made a new, different, web based CAD application that indeed allows you to create, edit and use the familiar tools of the native application.
Hardware drivers don't run in a browser and again the alternatives don't always support hardware as well as Windows does - look at the criticism of both NVidia and AMD this week for worse support for Linux than Windows.
I don't see how this matters, but you got me! I can't find any browser based hardware drivers.
Face it. You and your hysterical friend below are wrong. Windows is entrenched. It's the 21st century mainframe. It might go away eventually but we're stuck with it for now and for a long time to come. There is no realistic alternative to it. That's realistic, not just another OS with a GUI and an slightly worse office suite, but an OS that can run whatever people want and need it to. That is Windows largely.
I think you might be a little out of touch... stuck in 2002 perhaps.
These days, that Windows is still most popular among commercial installations is, again, incidental. All it takes is a progressive CIO or CTO to unseat Windows from any particular installation. It is a desktop... it is not essential. Any desktop will do.
Mac OS X is great but the devices it runs on are far more expensive than Windows machines. No corporation will be spending twice as much on computers that won't run all their software and Mac home users tend to have a Windows machine/partition as well.
I don't know why this myth keeps getting perpetuated. Feature for feature, Apple's hardware is always proven to cost within 10% of the competition or less. This is
so they will do things that strategically make non-Windows software harder
Isn't it ironic one that of the primary goals of Linux is to make Windows easier? No good deed goes unpunished.
No, that was never a goal of Linux? Not primary, not even secondary.
Linus wanted a unix-like OS. (Not windows-like.) So did a bunch of other guys, as it turned out. These days, many of us wants a windowing system also - but bot windows. Linux never had a windows-goal. Some people make 'wine' and such - they have windows compatibility as a goal but they are a small part of the community.
Huh. You could have fooled me. Then why is it the Linux community always fixes everything that Microsoft strategicly breaks, usually within weeks, if not days? Why is interoperability always so highlighted as an important feature. I think you're probably mistaken... Linus is not an island. These days, the only reason Linux exists and is even remotely popular is because Windows is so broken. We don't need Linux, otherwise.
otherwise there would have been a mass exodus a long time ago
Oh, but there was a mass exodus away from Windows. Native applications have fallen prey to browser interfaces for server applications. That most of the machines are still running Windows is incidental, even if it superficially benefits Microsoft and explicitly benefits Windows desktop specialists.
A computer can't have rights any more than a hammer can. Not unless it's sentient, it's a tool that does what you tell it to.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
According to letter the First Amendment, as far as hammers or computers are concerned, the only rights that would be in contention would be rights to association and petition, which are explicitly for the people. Speech, press and religion are not attached to a being of any kind, sentient or otherwise. The First Amendment guarantees free religion, speech and press... and the clause does not specify further. There is no basis in the Bill of Rights suggesting that these same freedoms would not extend to rocks, fish, lizards, rodents, lower primates as well as people... or computers. It is not specific, therefore it is universal. The debate needs to be stepped back to whether the rights enumerated in the US Constitution are only for citizens of the US... which is actually a hotly debated ambiguity in the Preamble ("We the People..." not "We the citizens... "), and even then all this is defining is where the mandate of the power of the Contitution comes from, not to whom, or what, it is applicable.
yes, that's crazy fast... speed of sound in water is 3,319.2 MPH, almost a mile per second. The SR-71 isn't quite that fast, though the X-15 is, but if the X-15 counts as a plane... why not count the Space Shuttle: can do Mach 20 or as fast as we want to make it go in space...
I don't know if they have an equivalent option wherever you live, but in Austin (and a couple other areas in Texas), the Alamo Drafthouse is actually pretty awesome (http://drafthouse.com/).
I currently am a little pissed at the Alamo Drafthouse. Their theaters are only in Texas, yet somehow I was exposed (probably on Fandango) to their marketing for the "Summer of '82," and looking forward all summer to the theatrical re-release of John Carpenter's The Thing, this Friday, June 22, which I somehow missed in 1982. As I learned only this week, it's not a proper re-release, as far as I can tell it can only be viewed at the Alamo Drafthouse... in Texas... and I'm in Pennsylvania.
It's basically a bar merged with a theatre,.
Sounds like the "Pitcher Show" - a few theaters in FL used this gimmick to great success before the change in drinking age from 18 to 21... hung on for years after, but never as successful as prior to that.
But protecting against 0 atmosphere just isn't that big of a technological problem. As long as they're not using it for spacewalks, it should be able to be made very cheaply. I think a spacesuit for a spaceship's interior would need to be nothing more than a glorified ziplock bag with a way to allow the user to respire without suffocating. If the puzzle was making suit to protect a man at the bottom of the deepest ocean... that is a challenge.
Prove it. Show me any evidence whatsoever of this nefarious conspiracy. The veto rights which you mention are also held by China and Russia and are limited to U.N. provisions. The US can't veto an international agency, whatever that may mean.
Coca-Cola is now about 8th. FWIW Apple has about 4 times in cash than Senegal's GNP. Point is, I think you may want to find a better measuring stick as brand recognition in Senegal is nearly meaningless.
Evidence provided by either the USA or any country associated with or influenced by the USA lacks credibility, specially after all the evidence that the USA, UK and NATO provide about the so far non existing weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein allegedly had. (In short, their evidence was bullsh#$t
Unless you can back that up, it is only you that lacks credibility. The IAEA is an international agency whose charter was granted from the United Nations.The New York Times is not the USA, and by the most powerful law we have, the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, it cannot be influenced by the government. Further, Iran is not Iraq. Pick up a book. Read. Learn. Stop confabulating.
Hell, backward compatability could still be maintained via virtualization and compatibility layer like (like WINE only with access to the source code). Singularity kernel does look interesting, but I think a more UNIX-like kernel would be better and give them a larger code base to draw from go with something closer to say plan9 with a integrated supervisor for running legacy applications.
FTFY
Singularity is a UNIX flavor. I simply don't believe maintaining compatibility with old applications is in anyone's best interest, neither users nor developers, and certainly not Microsoft. But I must agree that if backward compatibility was essential, virtualization is the way to go, and not kernel-level compatibility of legacy code.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm gonna call BS on this one. Why would a ram disc need a fan?
MacOS System 6 had RAMdisk applications available for it (one was called AppDisk), and by System 7 this functionality was built into the OS via a system control panel. The software allowed you to donate whatever RAM you had available to a disk that mounted on the desktop. You could use it for cache files, or copy entire applications to it to run at blazing speeds off the RAMdisk instead off the comparatively slow SCSI-1 HDD, or the mind-numbingly slow floppy disk drive. In 1989, when RAM was prohibitively expensive, if you had a Mac IIfx (not publicly available until 1990) or Mac SE/30 and were very wealthy, you could have a desktop with 128MB of RAM (along with the MODE32 control panel that allowed the SE/30 to see all that memory, or the ROM from a Mac IIfx or Mac IIsi which accomplished the same thing, unless you ran A/UX which was natively 32-bit clean), and with the RAMdisk software you could designate amounts up to whatever the system didn't need to be used as a RAMdisk... say... about 120MB, which at the time would have been about as large as the biggest HDDs available to consumers. You can still find this software on Gamba's site.
To answer your question, the Mac Plus was an AIO or all-in-one computer. I'm not sure if you are old enough to know or remember what a cathode ray tube is, but the Mac Plus used one as a display, and it generated a substantial amount of heat, requiring a fan to cool the machine.
Also, RAM itself will generate some heat, usually not enough to need its own fan, and RAM in a Mac Plus didn't have a dedicated fan. A RAMdisk is not the same as an SSD, which runs off the disk bus. Like RAM, a RAMdisk runs off the system bus... generally much faster than the disk bus.
including a large contingent of ex-DEC people
Like... Dave Cultler and his entire engineering team that developed NT at DEC before stealing away to Microsoft with DEC's intellectual property, what we know today as Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Vista, Windows 7, and Windows 8.
'Stupid' is a stupendously loose term, in that particular context intended to convey ironically its most literal form, i.e. illogical — regarding what is commonly known about the science of procreation cleverly described merely as biology.
It sounds like someone didn't get the grades they expected to get and thus didn't get accepted into the PhD program they always dreamed of pursuing... or perhaps has a chip on their shoulder because even though they might have found some economic success, they find they are dismissed socially for lack of formal education, even if they did restore and still drive an '81 Thunderbird, yet still must further constantly overcompensate for mental and academic deficits by scrutinizing those that did study hard and did achieve non-trivial academic success.
Ph.D.s, M.D.s, D.O.s, D.V.M.s and even J.D.s have earned the right to be arrogant. Undereducated egoists who childishly identify themselves with material objects have not.
Whats wrong with sexy female scientists - they have them in movies.
related: only 22% of movie scientists are sexy women
and oblig.
Actually, science is pretty gay, since science has lots of smart people and smart people tend to be gay.
Everyone knows that everything and everyone in this world is either gay or stupid. Obviously, if something isn't stupid, then it must be gay. Science isn't stupid, it therefore must be gay (and you can check my math on that). Ironically enough, homosexuality is literally biologically stupid, and while no one would deny that girls are stupid, at the same time there are few things in this world more gay than young heterosexual women. Paradoxically, very smart people, by and large, are stupid and not gay, even the homosexual ones.
In fact, there's already a bloody iPhone app!
For the love of Pete!! Pulse oximetry is not the same thing! Will ignorance ever tire of dismissively posting wildly inaccurate information to slashdot summaries??!!
Yeah, I was thinking that something like this could be applied rather easily to monitor breathing and heart rates ...
There are iPhone apps that relatively accurately detect heart rate... Cardiograph is one that seems to work well as an pulse oximeter, ... and I was about to try to explain what that was... those things that check heart rate with a sensor on your finger ... I read the wiki article... don't ask me how it works... something about arterial globins.
Not all native applications. The company I work for still has a few. The organisation I worked for before had a few ActiveX only solutions.
Fair enough.
Everywhere I've worked has used Outlook.
Outlook Web App
World of Warcraft doesn't run in a browser
I'm afraid it does
and only has official clients for Windows or a much more expensive alternative.
If you are referring to OS X, you are gravely mistaken:
Windows 7 for $72 - $239
OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard for $29,
OS X 10.7 Lion usb drive installer for $69,
OS X 10.7 Lion App Store download for $29.99, and
OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion for $19.99
Photoshop doesn't run in a browser.
Photoshop in a browser. and here's 9 more alternatives of varying complexity and ability.
AutoDesk doesn't run in a browser and: "Note: The Autodesk Design Review Browser Add-in does not support scripting or automation in the browser because Firefox and Chrome do not support COM controls." - Windows only restrictions on their browser plugin.
Autodesk in a browser. Of the particular plugin of which you speak, that is true. But since you last looked, they have made a new, different, web based CAD application that indeed allows you to create, edit and use the familiar tools of the native application.
Hardware drivers don't run in a browser and again the alternatives don't always support hardware as well as Windows does - look at the criticism of both NVidia and AMD this week for worse support for Linux than Windows.
I don't see how this matters, but you got me! I can't find any browser based hardware drivers.
Face it. You and your hysterical friend below are wrong. Windows is entrenched. It's the 21st century mainframe. It might go away eventually but we're stuck with it for now and for a long time to come. There is no realistic alternative to it. That's realistic, not just another OS with a GUI and an slightly worse office suite, but an OS that can run whatever people want and need it to. That is Windows largely.
I think you might be a little out of touch... stuck in 2002 perhaps.
These days, that Windows is still most popular among commercial installations is, again, incidental. All it takes is a progressive CIO or CTO to unseat Windows from any particular installation. It is a desktop... it is not essential. Any desktop will do.
Mac OS X is great but the devices it runs on are far more expensive than Windows machines. No corporation will be spending twice as much on computers that won't run all their software and Mac home users tend to have a Windows machine/partition as well.
I don't know why this myth keeps getting perpetuated. Feature for feature, Apple's hardware is always proven to cost within 10% of the competition or less. This is
so they will do things that strategically make non-Windows software harder
Isn't it ironic one that of the primary goals of Linux is to make Windows easier? No good deed goes unpunished.
No, that was never a goal of Linux? Not primary, not even secondary.
Linus wanted a unix-like OS. (Not windows-like.) So did a bunch of other guys, as it turned out. These days, many of us wants a windowing system also - but bot windows. Linux never had a windows-goal. Some people make 'wine' and such - they have windows compatibility as a goal but they are a small part of the community.
Huh. You could have fooled me. Then why is it the Linux community always fixes everything that Microsoft strategicly breaks, usually within weeks, if not days? Why is interoperability always so highlighted as an important feature. I think you're probably mistaken... Linus is not an island. These days, the only reason Linux exists and is even remotely popular is because Windows is so broken. We don't need Linux, otherwise.
otherwise there would have been a mass exodus a long time ago
Oh, but there was a mass exodus away from Windows. Native applications have fallen prey to browser interfaces for server applications. That most of the machines are still running Windows is incidental, even if it superficially benefits Microsoft and explicitly benefits Windows desktop specialists.
so they will do things that strategically make non-Windows software harder
Isn't it ironic one that of the primary goals of Linux is to make Windows easier? No good deed goes unpunished.
A computer can't have rights any more than a hammer can. Not unless it's sentient, it's a tool that does what you tell it to.
According to letter the First Amendment, as far as hammers or computers are concerned, the only rights that would be in contention would be rights to association and petition, which are explicitly for the people. Speech, press and religion are not attached to a being of any kind, sentient or otherwise. The First Amendment guarantees free religion, speech and press... and the clause does not specify further. There is no basis in the Bill of Rights suggesting that these same freedoms would not extend to rocks, fish, lizards, rodents, lower primates as well as people... or computers. It is not specific, therefore it is universal. The debate needs to be stepped back to whether the rights enumerated in the US Constitution are only for citizens of the US... which is actually a hotly debated ambiguity in the Preamble ("We the People..." not "We the citizens... "), and even then all this is defining is where the mandate of the power of the Contitution comes from, not to whom, or what, it is applicable.
yes, that's crazy fast... speed of sound in water is 3,319.2 MPH, almost a mile per second. The SR-71 isn't quite that fast, though the X-15 is, but if the X-15 counts as a plane... why not count the Space Shuttle: can do Mach 20 or as fast as we want to make it go in space...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18529739
only 98% of the island of Lanai thou , the plan was for Google to pay for the other 2% but things didn't quite work out...
check Google Maps.... the island Is crawling with Street View... and in high definition.
Cleverly, you linked to some all encompasing fact sheet... elsewhere on the site are the actual reports. Many, like this report details military dimensions to Iran nuclear program including evidence for Iranian development of nuclear payload for missiles.
I don't know if they have an equivalent option wherever you live, but in Austin (and a couple other areas in Texas), the Alamo Drafthouse is actually pretty awesome (http://drafthouse.com/).
I currently am a little pissed at the Alamo Drafthouse. Their theaters are only in Texas, yet somehow I was exposed (probably on Fandango) to their marketing for the "Summer of '82," and looking forward all summer to the theatrical re-release of John Carpenter's The Thing, this Friday, June 22, which I somehow missed in 1982. As I learned only this week, it's not a proper re-release, as far as I can tell it can only be viewed at the Alamo Drafthouse... in Texas... and I'm in Pennsylvania.
It's basically a bar merged with a theatre, .
Sounds like the "Pitcher Show" - a few theaters in FL used this gimmick to great success before the change in drinking age from 18 to 21... hung on for years after, but never as successful as prior to that.
You can see non gimicky 3D right now: Prometheus.
The visuals in that movie were top notch. Unfortunately, in order to see them, you must sit through the movie. What a load of crap.
I thought that Steve Ballmer gave an excellent performance!
Why there is a logo of that famous HP-owned company in this article?
They are both IPC members?
Quick! Someone come up with a patent for disabling Time-Warner's method for disabling fast-forward function on DVRs!
But protecting against 0 atmosphere just isn't that big of a technological problem. As long as they're not using it for spacewalks, it should be able to be made very cheaply. I think a spacesuit for a spaceship's interior would need to be nothing more than a glorified ziplock bag with a way to allow the user to respire without suffocating. If the puzzle was making suit to protect a man at the bottom of the deepest ocean... that is a challenge.
Prove it. Show me any evidence whatsoever of this nefarious conspiracy. The veto rights which you mention are also held by China and Russia and are limited to U.N. provisions. The US can't veto an international agency, whatever that may mean.
to make Apple the most recognized brand in the world
ITYM Coca-Cola.
Go into the fetid, dank mangroves of Senegal. Show the first person you meet two logos.
As of May 2011, Apple is indeed the world's most recognized brand... overtook Coca-Cola some time ago.
citation 1
citation 2
Coca-Cola is now about 8th. FWIW Apple has about 4 times in cash than Senegal's GNP. Point is, I think you may want to find a better measuring stick as brand recognition in Senegal is nearly meaningless.
Evidence provided by either the USA or any country associated with or influenced by the USA lacks credibility, specially after all the evidence that the USA, UK and NATO provide about the so far non existing weapons of mass destruction that Saddam Hussein allegedly had. (In short, their evidence was bullsh#$t
Unless you can back that up, it is only you that lacks credibility. The IAEA is an international agency whose charter was granted from the United Nations.The New York Times is not the USA, and by the most powerful law we have, the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, it cannot be influenced by the government. Further, Iran is not Iraq. Pick up a book. Read. Learn. Stop confabulating.
Hell, backward compatability could still be maintained via virtualization and compatibility layer like (like WINE only with access to the source code). Singularity kernel does look interesting, but I think a more UNIX-like kernel would be better and give them a larger code base to draw from go with something closer to say plan9 with a integrated supervisor for running legacy applications.
FTFY
Singularity is a UNIX flavor. I simply don't believe maintaining compatibility with old applications is in anyone's best interest, neither users nor developers, and certainly not Microsoft. But I must agree that if backward compatibility was essential, virtualization is the way to go, and not kernel-level compatibility of legacy code.