Digital Research had a DOS product and a GUI product that had MS products beat hands down. There was no technical reason to use Windows until 3.1 and then only if you preferred Word or other MS product. At the time, in my business life, Novell clearly understood networking, MS not so much. When Windows95 came out and did not require a copy of DOS, MS began it's dubious selling tactics, and we all know how that worked out. Real innovation happened rarely, and was more often than not squelched. Apple did a bit, MS bought some companies that did a bit, then Linus stepped up. That's a brief summary. MS did not revolutionize the world, they just made everyone buy a copy of Windows. Anyone remember the NeXT systems? There have been better ways to do things than Windows since day one. You can argue, but it's true. Rough cut is that Windows managed to work for most things most of the time so MS got away with forcing everyone to pay for a license for it. If you can't get around paying for it, you might as well use it.
I'm not saying that the people who worked on windows are bad people, just that on technical merits it should already have died long ago.
Sorry AC, just threw out a whole box of late 80s/early 90s install stuff (Win, DR, IBM DOS etc)
It occurs to me to think that real encryption is not beatable, but workable encryption is. The problem is not who has the best or admits to not having it, it's who has best real encryption that is workable between arbitrary peers. I can easily encrypt a drive that you will NEVER decrypt, but then neither will I be able to. It's the secrecy of the key that is the quest, not the encryption particularly. Hiding the key when it is shared publicly is a problem, will always be a problem, and the race is not necessarily one brain trust against another for the best hiding technique, but rather a race to figure out the best way to hide it for a reasonable amount of time from the most people. The fastest car on the planet is not declared the Indy500 winner, only the car that conforms to the rules of the race is. This race is not winable in the long term, and only valid as a race in the very short term. Don't count on your encrypted hard drive to protect your data from everyone, for all time. That's simply not going to happen.
The Internet is not a thing like the 'winter olympics' or recording industry. The Internet is the system of communications systems which allow the transfer of information (as well as aggregation, falsification, and overload of). It changes the source of information for those who regularly access it when compared to the time before the Internet.
What needs to be discussed is not cyber this, or virtual that, but how users use information. Lets face it, for a large portion of the population the phrase 'use information' is rather optimistic. Aggregating information, presenting it in a way that is both intuitive and useful is something of a holy grail. We've seen many attempts to do things like this, and each of them has their fans and foes. What is being suggested is essentially that we all need to have one set of cultural values. Looks good on paper, but it makes a huge mess of things in real life.
Then again, look at Microsoft Windows. How may people do you know that think this is how computers are supposed to work, and anything not like Windows is weird?
This whole thing is ridiculous. At face value and and in the deeper business meanings. Stupid, pure and simple stupid. It's 800lbs of stupid.
This should be avoided, and can be avoided if the last mile is not owned by the content provider. The last mile is community infrastructure that is paid for by subscribers, and should be owned by them. Yes, it seemed easier to outsource this laborious task to someone with a vested interest, but in the end it is not. All those Cablevision subscribers should be able to call customer support and have their content service provision switched while they are on the phone. They should be able to demand a la carte pricing too.
Instead we continue to allow the last mile community infrastructure to be owned and operated by those who fix the price of using the service. No, what I suggest is not the perfect answer, but it puts the ownership and decision making in the hands of the local community, not hot-headed corporate officers whose interest is bottom line dollars. When the infrastructure is owned by the community, and each 'service provider' is tied to the network, subscribers can choose who they want, not suffer until a new provider is in their neighborhood. As it is, we pay for multiple half assed last mile networks instead of paying for one damn good last mile network. We are charged stupid fees to use those half ass networks, and are at the mercy of 'service providers' marketing groups as to what bundles we have to purchase to watch the few channels we do like.
This community owned infrastructure would appear to give ABC an upper hand, but it does not. When I'm allowed to choose who I want to pay for service, and choose what channels I don't want to watch, the financing will do an amazing free market thing: kill off content that nobody wants to watch, lower the price of content that people do want to watch, and redirect monies to making content that is worth watching. ABC is going to have this coverage of the Oscars. Why do I have to pay for ABC crap content 24/7/365 to watch it? Why can't I use the pay per view options?
Television has been made an integral part of American society, and I think it's a sad reflection on that society that it is controlled by so few people, that so little choice is given to the same consumers that have to choose from 400+ options to buy a pair of running shoes. Personally, I think anti-trust laws were created with the intent of stopping this kind of thing. Screw ABC and screw Cablevision, and all their equals. Senator? Congresswoman? if you're listening, I'm holding YOU accountable.
That flaw has always been there, and similar was included in every version of every printed encyclopedia. It's hard to get around that without thousands of editors working full time. The premise of Wikipedia is good, but if you want to trust some information you found on the Internet... errrmm, you need to validate it, corroborate it, and research it yourself if necessary. For me, Wikipedia makes a great starting point to learn about something, just as any single book on any given subject is a good place to *start*. The principle of trust but verify applies for many things, but caveat emptor equally applies. Personally, much of the content of Wikipedia is better than asking Yahoo! Answers and others. meh, it's a thing. If you were supposed to get all your answers from a single source, god wouldn't have made Al Gore invent the Internet. Get off my lawn!
Welcome to the multi-tiered storage world. There are places and applications where SSDs are a perfect fit, and places where they are not. Eventually server builders will find a place where both work in tandem to give you the performance you were wanting to begin with. SSD is a fully cached drive. That's not necessary in all applications. For some applications, TB's of RAM is the better option. Combinations of various storage technology will find their niche market. SSDs are not financially practical for all applications, and might never be. The humble magnetic tape is still hanging in there, and not for performance (speed) reasons. In the near future, SSD options will be like networking options, just pick the one that fits your application. No evangelizing needed.
Well, there are a few other things that seem to fall out when you go to ebooks, diagrams and pictures can 'move' if you want. The book's language can change. If your eyes are tired, the book can read to you. The book can remember what page you last read. It can find related material regarding any of the characters, both fictional and real. It can find a map for you of the country the story is set in. The list gets longer if you want, and all things you can't get from a printed version. When people eventually have fond memories of sitting in the front room reading a story on their ebook, paper books will be a thing of the past. When there is an ebook laying in a basket in the bathroom with Readers Digest and that almanac thingy on it, paper books will be a thing of the past. When you can go to a library and 'borrow' a cartridge with a book or two on it, paper books will be a thing of the past. The problems are part cultural and part functionality. Both will be overcome. ebooks have the capability of combining moving images with text, creating an art form that does not yet truly exist. Remember when people used to say the book was much better than the movie? Any of these features can increase the value of the media, the price, or the DRM capabilities. Publishers will have to get over the desire to sell a separate copy to every person who reads and just let them share. Anyone remember when they thought photocopiers were going to ruin their business? This is more or less the same thing.
This is the thing, more than one problem to deal with in the same physical space. Cheap AP equipment may give you issues under load. With just a couple connections a cheap Linksys will work fine, push the load on it and I find that performance degrades exponentially with traffic increase. Home routers are not built/designed for business loads, or 500 user environments.
The problems: limited mounting space, limited frequencies, limited to mix mode, client movement, (re)registration issues and so on.
Since none of us know the exact physical construct of your problem, suggestions of directional antenna systems, alternating channels etc. have to be used. Cellular systems work in similar ways. 11g mode pointing north/south on chan 2 and 8, 11g mode east/west on chans 5 and 11, ne corner with chan 3 etc etc etc. The low tech testing/wardriving to find the right power levels is a solid suggestion, though this might limit your choices of AP equipment. Pick AP gear that can give you flexibility with antenna systems, power levels, op mode and channel settings.
You will also have to adjust your planning to account for movement of clients. If they are likely to move from ne to se physically, will they need to re-register? Is that a problem? It takes a lot of thinking to get this job done. Enterprise gear will take you toward meshing, and on the pricier end of things move the control out of the AP to allow better performance independent of physical movement.
All of this can get a bit trickier if you have multiple floors with large signal loss between floors. At that point, antenna systems become a stronger tool. At some physical point you'll find clients seeing enough sig strength to end up bouncing on/off one ap and off to another, then back again, never really staying registered long enough to do any good. There you have to fine tune signal strength. Some of the higher end meshing gear gives you options to deal with that, but that becomes a budget issue.
Start with your fixed constraints, evaluate how fixed they are. With some antenna systems, you might find that you have room in more than three places to use APs which would dramatically change your overall problems. The actual AP gear you choose will help discern what you can do about the remaining problems. Don't be afraid to call a sales/marketing engineer for advice, it's usually given free at some level of interest. That's not even to mention this: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+set+up+mesh+mode+wireless+networking
I think that the process of trying more to understand what the real problems you will have is going to help you further figure out what you need to do.
One last thought, an extra 1500 bucks on the limo now is a lot less than you would spend to find one ready to go on prom night, so to speak. Read to see what the equipment on your short list does under load, how it works in high volume situations etc. that lmgtfy link might show you some good examples to read about.
Not only that, but confiscating video game consoles is sure, without doubt, 100% going to make those people more calm ! Not sure about everyone else, but if you want me to not turn into a dangerous driver, taking my car is not how you do that, and if you do, I'm going to be... well, not very happy!
Over the years I've heard people talk about social responsibility of corporations. It was always a bit of a joke, but you know what? I think Google was listening too. It's one of the few companies I can think of that I would say is 'socially responsible' as a corporation. There has to be some record somewhere of the first business to take on a government head to head or something along those lines. Does anyone know if this qualifies Google in some special category?
I'm not sure that you thought that through really well. I've lived in the UK and the US. In the US people pay for all kinds of programming they don't want just to get a few channels they do want, and they pay much more than 142.50 pounds sterling per year for the privilege of watching the A team in Spanish and hearing the holy rollers who want to save you... for a price. I know it's not the same, but the fact remains the British public is actually getting good value for the money. If the BBC were scrapped altogether, the British public would be MUCH worse off. That it operates in the black is a good thing, even if you have quibbles about what black actually means in this case. It appears that no matter what you pick, the viewers end up paying for stuff they don't want, don't need, and can truly live better without. Complaining does not get you perfection. Replacing the BBC on the basis that it's not a free market enterprise ignores the fact that the free market has not shown a desire to bring you programming of the same quality. Baby and bathwater as they say. If other broadcasting firms were to provide the same quality or better, it would be silly to argue, but that is not the case. Would you throw away a great painting because it was commissioned by the King? Or worse, jail the painter?
June, 1990 - The movie Total Recall used location based advertising as well as targeted advertising by identification of the pedestrian. 1991-1992-ish - messaging system services providers attempted location aware advertising. Lead balloon effect due to the similarity to spam it represents.
Getting a patent on the obvious is... well, it shouldn't happen, but it does.
An awesome point that can't be overstated. Well, probably not anyway. There are modems, converters, terminal servers and several other ways to use a serial port on important hardware. Out of band management is one of the best reasons for ever using it. The dial up modem as fall back to access servers has not been replaced yet. I imagine that there are a few reading these posts that know serial backup saved their bacon more than once.
I was not trying to shame you, only put a perspective on the situation. The original poster spoke of having a warning time which should be taken into consideration given the number of other people who WILLINGLY put other drivers/passengers at risk.
"Your attempt to shame me with guilt through my personal behavior be fails because in all of these instances I a) choose to participate in these actions and b) still have reasonable control of both my faculties and the vehicle. "
Isn't that reasoning something along the lines of why/how drunk drivers get behind the wheel? Recent studies show using a pda or phone make you less safe than someone mildly inebriated. Many places in the USA now make it illegal to use your mobile device in school zones for just this reason.
Do you think it would be fair to revoke a driving license for two or three infractions of the no pda/phone while driving law? At that point, it's rather obvious that the driver cannot modify their behavior, or has no control of it, isn't it?
The truth is that there are FAR too many drivers on the road who should not be for one reason or another. Eliminating one very small group based in irrational judgments is not how to fix the problem. It truly is not a case of 'we just need to restrict this group and the problem will go away'. The problem is not one set of drivers or one set of medical conditions, it's the transportation system on the whole. If we don't think of how and why it should be fixed, then slowly we begin to screw over larger and larger parts of the public. This is counterproductive, and wasteful of resources in the long term.
If I got hit by someone having a seizure, it would make more sense than being hit by someone who was texting a friend at the time. Not everyone knows they are prone to getting seizures, EVERY time you text while driving you put other drivers at risk voluntarily. Why shouldn't you be penalized instantly as well?
The original post has a point, a valid point. There is an inequity in how things are done and society as a whole does nothing to prevent this, and in fact promotes it. This is not good for our society. period. That's what I'm saying. The original poster may indeed be someone that really shouldn't be driving, but what he is saying is there is a problem, and he is right.
I'm going to guess you never use your pda/phone while driving? That you never have a conversation with another passenger while driving? That you never have the music too loud while driving? That you never drink a beverage or eat anything while driving? that you never allow passengers in your vehicle that might distract you? That you never operate a motor vehicle while suffering the affects of a cold?
To single out one small group of people and say they are dangerous is to completely ignore the huge impact that blonde hair makes... kidding aside, there are millions of dangerous drivers on the roads of North America who can not be medically denied a driving license, but who otherwise should be denied the privilege of driving just because they are reckless. I'm not saying I want a head on with someone having a seizure, but to single that problem out and not also fairly suggest that there are a great many people who should not be driving along with him is wrong.
The simple fact is that North America is not designed such that driving is a privilege. It is a necessity, for most people outside large metropolitan areas. I live in a large metro area and outside of the main downtown areas, it's practically impossible to use public transport unless you combine it with some driving of your own. I like public transport, it's just not feasible here to use it only.
That means that there will be millions of drivers driving who a) really don't need to be and/or b) who really shouldn't be. Until you address the initial issue, subjugating some drivers to an unfair situation is really not in the spirit if American freedoms.
On topic: while having a camera sit and record license plates is no more intrusive on a public road than someone physically standing there doing so, recording my travels is tantamount to stopping all travelers and asking for their papers. Such an activity is clearly not within the bounds, intent, or scope of the Constitution. Operating a motor vehicle may be believed to not be a right, but traveling unfettered by having to produce your papers is. There are those who believe that licensing for drivers and for motor vehicles is contrary to standing law, and there is room for the argument as some folk to drive unlicensed vehicles without an operator's permit. Unfettered travel within the borders is a right.
"Special needs" is not a slur against you or anyone who happens to be disabled. You do point out that you have special needs or requirements for your computer.
-- "I needed a computer that could be packed into its box very quickly, was easy to transport, could run Windows, __could run OS X__ and had a large LCD screen. The iMac fit that niche perfectly. I put a bigger HD in it recently, but it is otherwise the same machine I bought in 2006. Best £1100 I ever spent....."
Having such specific special or non-generic (you choose) needs for your computer qualifies you in the category of people who genuinely want and need the expense of an Apple computer. I don't think I've ever spent more than about 1/3 that much on decent computers, but I tend to 'like' building my own.
I drive what looks like the progeny of a soccermom van and a small suv. The deal was a good one and over 5 years, a better proposition than other used vehicles. So, evaluating needs (special and not) or requirements then finding the most suitable tool for the job is how to do things. The halo effect that Apple has should not be in the mix. You sir, found a genuine requirement for the expense. Many people who buy iStuff do not have that, they buy because of the halo and coolness status.
I'm not even trying to imply that there is no special niche for Apple products, only that they are not head and shoulders above the competition. Each has it's benefits and detractions, problems and good points. If you simply want the coolness and are willing to spend the cash for it, Apple is ready to take it from you.
As an aside, I think Windows is a great OS, till you connect a network card. It's stable, usable, even fun... till you put that network card in.
If I could get Apple OS running on some hardware I can afford or have already, I'd use it. I'm skittish about having to spend money to do things I can do just as well without spending money for. I find it a silly proposition. If I got a job which required it, that's justification. The lock-in function of Apple products is a deterrent for me. Spending money on something that will be difficult to make it compatible with the rest of my 'stuff'.
More expensive, lock-in, compatibility issues... ruins any coolness effect for me, no matter how capable it is, or how easy to use. The recent app store changes re-affirm for me my decision to avoid Apple products wholesale. Not that I'm into pr0n, but I really don't want that sort of control over my device use being in the hands of a corporation, no matter how cool that corporation might seem.
Yes, I do think you have been duped, tricked, or confused by marketing hype. Your point is? I did not say all, every, or always. The Apple products do meet the special needs of some users better than any other product. I'm just saying that the market covering that situation is very very small. If it's the only tool that will help you accomplish your special needs job, by all means, use it. If all you need is to look up recipes and do your taxes, it's not a value option. BTW, Mac OS is *nix, but with a GUI on top. A very expensive GUI that needs very expensive hardware. While a nice clean used Honda works for many people you can feel free to buy a Lamborghini. Many people will be impressed. You'll know who I am because I'll be laughing as I walk away when you're showing it off.
There are those of us who think that you are not only correct, but that is what we should be attempting to do with AI. The most brilliant outcomes of human activity seem to be based on decision making that was not pragmatic, but irrational. True AI must be capable of this to be the I part. The human brain is not a perfect system, and it is the imperfections that make for the stuff which give us advancements. For the most part, mimicking humans is attempting to fail. You only have to ask a few questions to see this is true: why is she dating him? Why did they buy a house that is so expensive? Why did they do this or that? Why did so many people vote to enact that law? and so on. Humans are not, on the whole, rational. True AI would also not be rational.
I've seen this argument before. Lets throw in a car analogy. When you go to the go-kart track, those things just work, right? What good would it be if you had to work on it to get it going.
Well, Apple products just work, I'll give you that. They are more expensive, and come with DRM, but they work. You never have to spend time figuring out how to get them to do what they are supposed to do... unless you don't use other Apple products. Apparently it's my day to rant about Apple. You seem certain that Apple is better than other products of the same ilk, yet you denigrate them on flash and features. You are sold on Apple products, not because each product meets your needs exactly, but because you believe in the Apple brand. Good for you. Please don't let my unworthy opinion stop you from spending your cash on iStuff. By all means, go spend some at an Apple store immediately. While you're spending it, ask yourself if you are getting real value for dollar, or just buying what everyone else tells you is a good thing. Yes, I just asked you to evaluate your buying choices on technical merit and value. That takes a bit of effort and if it's too much work, just forget about it and go buy an iWhatever and be done with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Digital Research had a DOS product and a GUI product that had MS products beat hands down. There was no technical reason to use Windows until 3.1 and then only if you preferred Word or other MS product. At the time, in my business life, Novell clearly understood networking, MS not so much. When Windows95 came out and did not require a copy of DOS, MS began it's dubious selling tactics, and we all know how that worked out. Real innovation happened rarely, and was more often than not squelched. Apple did a bit, MS bought some companies that did a bit, then Linus stepped up. That's a brief summary. MS did not revolutionize the world, they just made everyone buy a copy of Windows. Anyone remember the NeXT systems? There have been better ways to do things than Windows since day one. You can argue, but it's true. Rough cut is that Windows managed to work for most things most of the time so MS got away with forcing everyone to pay for a license for it. If you can't get around paying for it, you might as well use it.
I'm not saying that the people who worked on windows are bad people, just that on technical merits it should already have died long ago.
Sorry AC, just threw out a whole box of late 80s/early 90s install stuff (Win, DR, IBM DOS etc)
It occurs to me to think that real encryption is not beatable, but workable encryption is. The problem is not who has the best or admits to not having it, it's who has best real encryption that is workable between arbitrary peers. I can easily encrypt a drive that you will NEVER decrypt, but then neither will I be able to. It's the secrecy of the key that is the quest, not the encryption particularly. Hiding the key when it is shared publicly is a problem, will always be a problem, and the race is not necessarily one brain trust against another for the best hiding technique, but rather a race to figure out the best way to hide it for a reasonable amount of time from the most people. The fastest car on the planet is not declared the Indy500 winner, only the car that conforms to the rules of the race is. This race is not winable in the long term, and only valid as a race in the very short term. Don't count on your encrypted hard drive to protect your data from everyone, for all time. That's simply not going to happen.
Exactly, kind of, I think.
The Internet is not a thing like the 'winter olympics' or recording industry. The Internet is the system of communications systems which allow the transfer of information (as well as aggregation, falsification, and overload of). It changes the source of information for those who regularly access it when compared to the time before the Internet.
What needs to be discussed is not cyber this, or virtual that, but how users use information. Lets face it, for a large portion of the population the phrase 'use information' is rather optimistic. Aggregating information, presenting it in a way that is both intuitive and useful is something of a holy grail. We've seen many attempts to do things like this, and each of them has their fans and foes. What is being suggested is essentially that we all need to have one set of cultural values. Looks good on paper, but it makes a huge mess of things in real life.
Then again, look at Microsoft Windows. How may people do you know that think this is how computers are supposed to work, and anything not like Windows is weird?
A single cultural viewpoint is wrong.
If you read xkcd, I'm sure you'll understand why it's possible to think allegorically about math. Theorems and proofs and magic!
I don't think that was arrogance. I think he simply assumed they would be smarter than humans.
This whole thing is ridiculous. At face value and and in the deeper business meanings. Stupid, pure and simple stupid. It's 800lbs of stupid.
This should be avoided, and can be avoided if the last mile is not owned by the content provider. The last mile is community infrastructure that is paid for by subscribers, and should be owned by them. Yes, it seemed easier to outsource this laborious task to someone with a vested interest, but in the end it is not. All those Cablevision subscribers should be able to call customer support and have their content service provision switched while they are on the phone. They should be able to demand a la carte pricing too.
Instead we continue to allow the last mile community infrastructure to be owned and operated by those who fix the price of using the service. No, what I suggest is not the perfect answer, but it puts the ownership and decision making in the hands of the local community, not hot-headed corporate officers whose interest is bottom line dollars. When the infrastructure is owned by the community, and each 'service provider' is tied to the network, subscribers can choose who they want, not suffer until a new provider is in their neighborhood. As it is, we pay for multiple half assed last mile networks instead of paying for one damn good last mile network. We are charged stupid fees to use those half ass networks, and are at the mercy of 'service providers' marketing groups as to what bundles we have to purchase to watch the few channels we do like.
This community owned infrastructure would appear to give ABC an upper hand, but it does not. When I'm allowed to choose who I want to pay for service, and choose what channels I don't want to watch, the financing will do an amazing free market thing: kill off content that nobody wants to watch, lower the price of content that people do want to watch, and redirect monies to making content that is worth watching. ABC is going to have this coverage of the Oscars. Why do I have to pay for ABC crap content 24/7/365 to watch it? Why can't I use the pay per view options?
Television has been made an integral part of American society, and I think it's a sad reflection on that society that it is controlled by so few people, that so little choice is given to the same consumers that have to choose from 400+ options to buy a pair of running shoes. Personally, I think anti-trust laws were created with the intent of stopping this kind of thing. Screw ABC and screw Cablevision, and all their equals. Senator? Congresswoman? if you're listening, I'm holding YOU accountable.
That flaw has always been there, and similar was included in every version of every printed encyclopedia. It's hard to get around that without thousands of editors working full time. The premise of Wikipedia is good, but if you want to trust some information you found on the Internet... errrmm, you need to validate it, corroborate it, and research it yourself if necessary. For me, Wikipedia makes a great starting point to learn about something, just as any single book on any given subject is a good place to *start*. The principle of trust but verify applies for many things, but caveat emptor equally applies. Personally, much of the content of Wikipedia is better than asking Yahoo! Answers and others. meh, it's a thing. If you were supposed to get all your answers from a single source, god wouldn't have made Al Gore invent the Internet. Get off my lawn!
Welcome to the multi-tiered storage world. There are places and applications where SSDs are a perfect fit, and places where they are not. Eventually server builders will find a place where both work in tandem to give you the performance you were wanting to begin with. SSD is a fully cached drive. That's not necessary in all applications. For some applications, TB's of RAM is the better option. Combinations of various storage technology will find their niche market. SSDs are not financially practical for all applications, and might never be. The humble magnetic tape is still hanging in there, and not for performance (speed) reasons. In the near future, SSD options will be like networking options, just pick the one that fits your application. No evangelizing needed.
Well, there are a few other things that seem to fall out when you go to ebooks, diagrams and pictures can 'move' if you want. The book's language can change. If your eyes are tired, the book can read to you. The book can remember what page you last read. It can find related material regarding any of the characters, both fictional and real. It can find a map for you of the country the story is set in. The list gets longer if you want, and all things you can't get from a printed version. When people eventually have fond memories of sitting in the front room reading a story on their ebook, paper books will be a thing of the past. When there is an ebook laying in a basket in the bathroom with Readers Digest and that almanac thingy on it, paper books will be a thing of the past. When you can go to a library and 'borrow' a cartridge with a book or two on it, paper books will be a thing of the past. The problems are part cultural and part functionality. Both will be overcome. ebooks have the capability of combining moving images with text, creating an art form that does not yet truly exist. Remember when people used to say the book was much better than the movie? Any of these features can increase the value of the media, the price, or the DRM capabilities. Publishers will have to get over the desire to sell a separate copy to every person who reads and just let them share. Anyone remember when they thought photocopiers were going to ruin their business? This is more or less the same thing.
This is the thing, more than one problem to deal with in the same physical space. Cheap AP equipment may give you issues under load. With just a couple connections a cheap Linksys will work fine, push the load on it and I find that performance degrades exponentially with traffic increase. Home routers are not built/designed for business loads, or 500 user environments.
The problems: limited mounting space, limited frequencies, limited to mix mode, client movement, (re)registration issues and so on.
Since none of us know the exact physical construct of your problem, suggestions of directional antenna systems, alternating channels etc. have to be used. Cellular systems work in similar ways. 11g mode pointing north/south on chan 2 and 8, 11g mode east/west on chans 5 and 11, ne corner with chan 3 etc etc etc. The low tech testing/wardriving to find the right power levels is a solid suggestion, though this might limit your choices of AP equipment. Pick AP gear that can give you flexibility with antenna systems, power levels, op mode and channel settings.
You will also have to adjust your planning to account for movement of clients. If they are likely to move from ne to se physically, will they need to re-register? Is that a problem? It takes a lot of thinking to get this job done. Enterprise gear will take you toward meshing, and on the pricier end of things move the control out of the AP to allow better performance independent of physical movement.
All of this can get a bit trickier if you have multiple floors with large signal loss between floors. At that point, antenna systems become a stronger tool. At some physical point you'll find clients seeing enough sig strength to end up bouncing on/off one ap and off to another, then back again, never really staying registered long enough to do any good. There you have to fine tune signal strength. Some of the higher end meshing gear gives you options to deal with that, but that becomes a budget issue.
Start with your fixed constraints, evaluate how fixed they are. With some antenna systems, you might find that you have room in more than three places to use APs which would dramatically change your overall problems. The actual AP gear you choose will help discern what you can do about the remaining problems. Don't be afraid to call a sales/marketing engineer for advice, it's usually given free at some level of interest. That's not even to mention this: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=how+to+set+up+mesh+mode+wireless+networking
I think that the process of trying more to understand what the real problems you will have is going to help you further figure out what you need to do.
One last thought, an extra 1500 bucks on the limo now is a lot less than you would spend to find one ready to go on prom night, so to speak. Read to see what the equipment on your short list does under load, how it works in high volume situations etc. that lmgtfy link might show you some good examples to read about.
Not only that, but confiscating video game consoles is sure, without doubt, 100% going to make those people more calm ! ... well, not very happy!
Not sure about everyone else, but if you want me to not turn into a dangerous driver, taking my car is not how you do that, and if you do, I'm going to be
Over the years I've heard people talk about social responsibility of corporations. It was always a bit of a joke, but you know what? I think Google was listening too. It's one of the few companies I can think of that I would say is 'socially responsible' as a corporation. There has to be some record somewhere of the first business to take on a government head to head or something along those lines. Does anyone know if this qualifies Google in some special category?
I'm not sure that you thought that through really well. I've lived in the UK and the US. In the US people pay for all kinds of programming they don't want just to get a few channels they do want, and they pay much more than 142.50 pounds sterling per year for the privilege of watching the A team in Spanish and hearing the holy rollers who want to save you... for a price. I know it's not the same, but the fact remains the British public is actually getting good value for the money. If the BBC were scrapped altogether, the British public would be MUCH worse off. That it operates in the black is a good thing, even if you have quibbles about what black actually means in this case. It appears that no matter what you pick, the viewers end up paying for stuff they don't want, don't need, and can truly live better without. Complaining does not get you perfection. Replacing the BBC on the basis that it's not a free market enterprise ignores the fact that the free market has not shown a desire to bring you programming of the same quality. Baby and bathwater as they say. If other broadcasting firms were to provide the same quality or better, it would be silly to argue, but that is not the case. Would you throw away a great painting because it was commissioned by the King? Or worse, jail the painter?
June, 1990 - The movie Total Recall used location based advertising as well as targeted advertising by identification of the pedestrian.
1991-1992-ish - messaging system services providers attempted location aware advertising. Lead balloon effect due to the similarity to spam it represents.
Getting a patent on the obvious is ... well, it shouldn't happen, but it does.
Actually, the Jewish people have been at war with everyone from day one, in later years settling down a bit and narrowing it to a smaller group
Sanford and Son in Mongolian?
That just goes to show that no backup system is 'fool' proof. sighs
An awesome point that can't be overstated. Well, probably not anyway. There are modems, converters, terminal servers and several other ways to use a serial port on important hardware. Out of band management is one of the best reasons for ever using it. The dial up modem as fall back to access servers has not been replaced yet. I imagine that there are a few reading these posts that know serial backup saved their bacon more than once.
I was not trying to shame you, only put a perspective on the situation. The original poster spoke of having a warning time which should be taken into consideration given the number of other people who WILLINGLY put other drivers/passengers at risk.
"Your attempt to shame me with guilt through my personal behavior be fails because in all of these instances I a) choose to participate in these actions and b) still have reasonable control of both my faculties and the vehicle. "
Isn't that reasoning something along the lines of why/how drunk drivers get behind the wheel? Recent studies show using a pda or phone make you less safe than someone mildly inebriated. Many places in the USA now make it illegal to use your mobile device in school zones for just this reason.
Do you think it would be fair to revoke a driving license for two or three infractions of the no pda/phone while driving law? At that point, it's rather obvious that the driver cannot modify their behavior, or has no control of it, isn't it?
The truth is that there are FAR too many drivers on the road who should not be for one reason or another. Eliminating one very small group based in irrational judgments is not how to fix the problem. It truly is not a case of 'we just need to restrict this group and the problem will go away'. The problem is not one set of drivers or one set of medical conditions, it's the transportation system on the whole. If we don't think of how and why it should be fixed, then slowly we begin to screw over larger and larger parts of the public. This is counterproductive, and wasteful of resources in the long term.
If I got hit by someone having a seizure, it would make more sense than being hit by someone who was texting a friend at the time. Not everyone knows they are prone to getting seizures, EVERY time you text while driving you put other drivers at risk voluntarily. Why shouldn't you be penalized instantly as well?
The original post has a point, a valid point. There is an inequity in how things are done and society as a whole does nothing to prevent this, and in fact promotes it. This is not good for our society. period. That's what I'm saying. The original poster may indeed be someone that really shouldn't be driving, but what he is saying is there is a problem, and he is right.
I'm going to guess you never use your pda/phone while driving? That you never have a conversation with another passenger while driving? That you never have the music too loud while driving? That you never drink a beverage or eat anything while driving? that you never allow passengers in your vehicle that might distract you? That you never operate a motor vehicle while suffering the affects of a cold?
To single out one small group of people and say they are dangerous is to completely ignore the huge impact that blonde hair makes... kidding aside, there are millions of dangerous drivers on the roads of North America who can not be medically denied a driving license, but who otherwise should be denied the privilege of driving just because they are reckless. I'm not saying I want a head on with someone having a seizure, but to single that problem out and not also fairly suggest that there are a great many people who should not be driving along with him is wrong.
The simple fact is that North America is not designed such that driving is a privilege. It is a necessity, for most people outside large metropolitan areas. I live in a large metro area and outside of the main downtown areas, it's practically impossible to use public transport unless you combine it with some driving of your own. I like public transport, it's just not feasible here to use it only.
That means that there will be millions of drivers driving who a) really don't need to be and/or b) who really shouldn't be. Until you address the initial issue, subjugating some drivers to an unfair situation is really not in the spirit if American freedoms.
On topic: while having a camera sit and record license plates is no more intrusive on a public road than someone physically standing there doing so, recording my travels is tantamount to stopping all travelers and asking for their papers. Such an activity is clearly not within the bounds, intent, or scope of the Constitution. Operating a motor vehicle may be believed to not be a right, but traveling unfettered by having to produce your papers is. There are those who believe that licensing for drivers and for motor vehicles is contrary to standing law, and there is room for the argument as some folk to drive unlicensed vehicles without an operator's permit. Unfettered travel within the borders is a right.
Thanks, am checking hardware lists to see if I can get one working... just for fun
"Special needs" is not a slur against you or anyone who happens to be disabled. You do point out that you have special needs or requirements for your computer.
-- "I needed a computer that could be packed into its box very quickly, was easy to transport, could run Windows, __could run OS X__ and had a large LCD screen. The iMac fit that niche perfectly. I put a bigger HD in it recently, but it is otherwise the same machine I bought in 2006. Best £1100 I ever spent....."
Having such specific special or non-generic (you choose) needs for your computer qualifies you in the category of people who genuinely want and need the expense of an Apple computer. I don't think I've ever spent more than about 1/3 that much on decent computers, but I tend to 'like' building my own.
I drive what looks like the progeny of a soccermom van and a small suv. The deal was a good one and over 5 years, a better proposition than other used vehicles. So, evaluating needs (special and not) or requirements then finding the most suitable tool for the job is how to do things. The halo effect that Apple has should not be in the mix. You sir, found a genuine requirement for the expense. Many people who buy iStuff do not have that, they buy because of the halo and coolness status.
I'm not even trying to imply that there is no special niche for Apple products, only that they are not head and shoulders above the competition. Each has it's benefits and detractions, problems and good points. If you simply want the coolness and are willing to spend the cash for it, Apple is ready to take it from you.
As an aside, I think Windows is a great OS, till you connect a network card. It's stable, usable, even fun... till you put that network card in.
If I could get Apple OS running on some hardware I can afford or have already, I'd use it. I'm skittish about having to spend money to do things I can do just as well without spending money for. I find it a silly proposition. If I got a job which required it, that's justification. The lock-in function of Apple products is a deterrent for me. Spending money on something that will be difficult to make it compatible with the rest of my 'stuff'.
More expensive, lock-in, compatibility issues... ruins any coolness effect for me, no matter how capable it is, or how easy to use. The recent app store changes re-affirm for me my decision to avoid Apple products wholesale. Not that I'm into pr0n, but I really don't want that sort of control over my device use being in the hands of a corporation, no matter how cool that corporation might seem.
Yes, I do think you have been duped, tricked, or confused by marketing hype. Your point is? I did not say all, every, or always. The Apple products do meet the special needs of some users better than any other product. I'm just saying that the market covering that situation is very very small. If it's the only tool that will help you accomplish your special needs job, by all means, use it. If all you need is to look up recipes and do your taxes, it's not a value option. BTW, Mac OS is *nix, but with a GUI on top. A very expensive GUI that needs very expensive hardware. While a nice clean used Honda works for many people you can feel free to buy a Lamborghini. Many people will be impressed. You'll know who I am because I'll be laughing as I walk away when you're showing it off.
There are those of us who think that you are not only correct, but that is what we should be attempting to do with AI. The most brilliant outcomes of human activity seem to be based on decision making that was not pragmatic, but irrational. True AI must be capable of this to be the I part. The human brain is not a perfect system, and it is the imperfections that make for the stuff which give us advancements. For the most part, mimicking humans is attempting to fail. You only have to ask a few questions to see this is true: why is she dating him? Why did they buy a house that is so expensive? Why did they do this or that? Why did so many people vote to enact that law? and so on. Humans are not, on the whole, rational. True AI would also not be rational.
I've seen this argument before. Lets throw in a car analogy. When you go to the go-kart track, those things just work, right? What good would it be if you had to work on it to get it going.
Well, Apple products just work, I'll give you that. They are more expensive, and come with DRM, but they work. You never have to spend time figuring out how to get them to do what they are supposed to do... unless you don't use other Apple products. Apparently it's my day to rant about Apple. You seem certain that Apple is better than other products of the same ilk, yet you denigrate them on flash and features. You are sold on Apple products, not because each product meets your needs exactly, but because you believe in the Apple brand. Good for you. Please don't let my unworthy opinion stop you from spending your cash on iStuff. By all means, go spend some at an Apple store immediately. While you're spending it, ask yourself if you are getting real value for dollar, or just buying what everyone else tells you is a good thing. Yes, I just asked you to evaluate your buying choices on technical merit and value. That takes a bit of effort and if it's too much work, just forget about it and go buy an iWhatever and be done with it.