These Sansa e200 things have these neat little beveled screws that add approximately.04 microns to the width of the device. I actually WOULDN'T want a latch on my MP3 player that disengaged the battery, thank you very much. But beveled screws...I'm so excited about where this new technology will take pioneers like Apple!
The Sansa E200 series actually proves the grandparent's point. The Sansa E200 series contains the three most-requested features the iPod Nano lacks: FM radio. Expansion card slot. Easily swappable battery.
What do we get? A device almost exactly twice as thick as the thickest Nano.
Actually, the iPod also uses an "obscure and stupid protocol" (by your standards) built into iTunes (not plain Mass Storage Class) to sync and autosync iPod-playable music libraries that includes FairPlay files. When using plain MSC, those files won't play on the iPod
No - the iPod uses plain, vanilla, MSC. The reason files manually moved over won't play on your iPod is because the Apple iPod Firmware is a database based player, not a filetree based player, and the database is built PC side, not iPod side. This might be overly complicated, and this might seem backwards to you - but it has nothing to do with the USB protocol.
MTP, on the other hand, presents you with an overly abstracted version of the physical disk and severely limits what you are able to do with the disk.
I actually installed boinc with seti on several of my machines last night and it worked quite well to heat part of the house (us Canadians need to turn the heater on earlier). Took a bit of time to get started, but it was nice and toasty in the morning. Does anyone know if this method is less efficient in generating heat than using a apace heater? Slower perhaps..
Using your CPU as a space heater is not a bad idea. It is 100% efficient. Every watt it consumes gets turned into heat. Before someone says "but the cooling fans are wasteful" let me remind you that the air moved by those cooling fans will eventually come to a stop (inside your house) as a result of friction, releasing its energy as heat in the process.
Depending on what type of space heater you use, and the construction of your house, your computer can be more efficient than many other electric space heaters. Since none of the energy "consumed" by your CPU/GPU is converted to visible light, none of it has the opportunity to leave your house through your window panes (assuming you have IR reflective glass). Contrast this to quartz and halogen space heaters which produce a fair amount of visible light.
In much the same way, incandescent bulbs match the efficiency of compact fluorescents during the winter months. Every watt "wasted" as heat during the summer is now performing useful work heating your house. (Before someone says "you called a quartz/halogen space heater inefficient because of its waste light, and now an incandescent efficient because of its waste heat!' let me say that the space heater's light is not useful light, while the bulb's heat is useful heat (during the cool months.))
WTF? I'm not rallying against TV. Where you got that I don't know. I'm saying that I had good reason to question the existence of fact-checkers on that program. I don't understand how this conversation went from:
alienw: "air cars aren't practical - here's the math why" to whatshisname: "yeah huh, I saw it on TV" to me: "Forget what you saw on TV - the math is sound" to whatshisname: "I believe the TV program checks it facts" to me: "I can't believe they do, or if they do they don't care - for the math is sound." to you: "Trust me - TV programs have fact checkers - good ones." to me: "Then they messed up (if they exist) - for the math is sound." to you: "Why are you wasting your time rallying against TV. I don't understand nor care about the math."
They wouldn't use steel (iron) tanks. They most likely would use some sort of blown thermoplastic (HDPE?) tank wrapped nine-ways-to-Friday in fiber composite.
Fact checkers or not, the show allowed a company to make erroneous (if not fraudulent) claims. To claim a vehicle running off of compressed air is a suitable replacement for an ICE or battery powered consumer vehicle in all but the most extreme of cases is ludicrous.
Ailenw's math is simple, sound, and correct - as are the simple conclusions he draws. No one seems to be willing to attack his math - everyone keeps defending the idea of an air car because it passed the muster of a frickin' TV show. That is what compels me to continue this debate. Point out the flaws in his math or reasoning. Stop using the TV show as any sort of defense.
The people who produced the television apparently think that this is a feasable idea.
The people who produced the television show apparently think that this is an interesting enough show to get ratings. There is no reason to believe the network has fact checkers which do anything more that a cursory look. I really got turned off in the first place by your apparent willingness to trust the supposed fact checkers of a sensationalist "science" show over the (very easy to check) math of the post you replied to. Then to add insult to injury you use that fucking line saying basically you assume the network has fact-checkers more qualified than/. posters.
I understood your attacks on them possibly having an "extremist environmentalist agenda." What didn't make sense was how an air powered car is better for the environment. It burned my ass again because it appeared to be an out-of-the-blue attack on a nonexistent foe.
They talk as if Microsoft having 90% of worldwide OS market is the reason why Zune beats iPod.But does it matter much? iPod has 70% of the mp3 market anyway even without the 90% OS share that microsoft enjoys
I think you are underestimating what Microsoft can do with that 90% (desktop) OS market share. If Apple was able to capture 70% of the digital audio player market by leveraging their 5% OS market share, by my calculations Microsoft should be able to capture 1260% of all DAP sales within five years.
Next MP3 player won't be one of these, I'll get something cheep, like that little jobby that works with a USB drive, which i can then plug into the new generation of car stereos with USB. Hoo Hah!
You can mount an iRiver, an iPod, (and I gotta believe a Zune) as a UMS device, working just fine on the "next generation of car stereos with USB."
That's not what he asked. He asked if you would like it if the waiter tried to pressure you against the lamb, not because of the taste/quality, but because lamb is bad for you/the enviroment/animal rights/etc.
1- All the iPods have dual ARM cores. 2- Sandisk has been milking rockbox for good press. They haven't delivered half of what they promised to the developers. Reverse engineering the bootloader (for starters) would not be needed if Sandisk wanted anything more than good press from rockbox.
From Daniel Stenberg's own site: "We didn't get anything to help us actually make Rockbox to these players. We got two players, yes, but we got no info, no docs. No help at all."
ogg playback on RockBox gives you better battery life than mp3 playback on RockBox. An ideal ogg decoder might need more horsepower than an ideal mp3 decoder, but RockBox's ogg decoder is much faster than its mp3 decoder.
How the fuck did the parent get moderated informative?
1-Higher octane fuel will not increase carbon buildup. 2-As a car gets older, it does not need higher octane fuel. The idea that even a severe case of combustion-chamber carbon buildup could cause a measurable increase in compression ratio is silly. As a car ages, its compression ratio tends to decrease due to ring blow-by, and carbon buildup preventing the valves from sealing well. 3-Higher performance cars often need higher octane fuel because they run at a higher compression ratio, run hotter, and therefore have an increased likelihood of pre-ignition. 4-If you car was designed for 87 octane, and it is knocking during acceleration, that is NOT good, and is often a sign of a timing issue you should fix, not mask with higher octane fuel. Even occasional knocking during heavy load conditions is bad, as it can cause damage to the engine. Fuel pre-ignition not only causes waste heat (leading into the cycle of more pre-ignition), but the shock of pre-ignition on a rising piston can cause a great deal of damage if allowed to continue for very long, which is (one of the reasons) why many modern cars have knock detectors, and retard the timing if it is detected.
Even a missile launched from a distance of only a couple hundred yards?
Impressive if so.
I wasn't thinking of shooting down a plane hundreds or even thousands of feet up, but one having just taken off or landing. I know the damage potential of an extremely low altitude hit would be greatly reduced, but the intended terror effect would still be achieved.
The company I work does more airport approach clearance surveys than anyone else in the United States. I'm not sure how Northrop can claim they will be able to offer 20km protection against shoulder-fired missiles. I'm not sure how they could offer 2km protection. While most airports have a great view of everything more than 20-30 feet in the air, many are in congested areas where there is no way they would be able to see an individual with a Stinger. Since shoulder-fired missiles seem to be the most plausible form of attack, I simply can't see how this system offers much protection at all to urban/suburban commercial airports.
You don't need the "military" code. By comparing the propagation delay between the L1 (1575.42 MHz) and the L2 (1227.6 MHz) frequencies you can model ionosphere effects and achieve quite a bit of improvement. Real Time Differential only gives you sub-meter results, regardless of what wikipedia states. Real Time Kinematic; using a receiver set up on a know point which transmits a correction factor for every satellite to your rover, is the best way to achieve cm level results (in real time).
As for why - land surveyors love the shit. Not a replacement for conventional instruments, never will be, but a very useful tool.
Slashdot Mirror
The Sansa E200 series actually proves the grandparent's point.
The Sansa E200 series contains the three most-requested features the iPod Nano lacks:
FM radio.
Expansion card slot.
Easily swappable battery.
What do we get?
A device almost exactly twice as thick as the thickest Nano.
No - the iPod uses plain, vanilla, MSC. The reason files manually moved over won't play on your iPod is because the Apple iPod Firmware is a database based player, not a filetree based player, and the database is built PC side, not iPod side.
This might be overly complicated, and this might seem backwards to you - but it has nothing to do with the USB protocol.
MTP, on the other hand, presents you with an overly abstracted version of the physical disk and severely limits what you are able to do with the disk.
Is that not why they also are using the tamper-evident seals?
Using your CPU as a space heater is not a bad idea. It is 100% efficient. Every watt it consumes gets turned into heat. Before someone says "but the cooling fans are wasteful" let me remind you that the air moved by those cooling fans will eventually come to a stop (inside your house) as a result of friction, releasing its energy as heat in the process.
Depending on what type of space heater you use, and the construction of your house, your computer can be more efficient than many other electric space heaters. Since none of the energy "consumed" by your CPU/GPU is converted to visible light, none of it has the opportunity to leave your house through your window panes (assuming you have IR reflective glass). Contrast this to quartz and halogen space heaters which produce a fair amount of visible light.
In much the same way, incandescent bulbs match the efficiency of compact fluorescents during the winter months. Every watt "wasted" as heat during the summer is now performing useful work heating your house. (Before someone says "you called a quartz/halogen space heater inefficient because of its waste light, and now an incandescent efficient because of its waste heat!' let me say that the space heater's light is not useful light, while the bulb's heat is useful heat (during the cool months.))
WTF?
I'm not rallying against TV. Where you got that I don't know.
I'm saying that I had good reason to question the existence of fact-checkers on that program.
I don't understand how this conversation went from:
alienw: "air cars aren't practical - here's the math why"
to
whatshisname: "yeah huh, I saw it on TV"
to
me: "Forget what you saw on TV - the math is sound"
to
whatshisname: "I believe the TV program checks it facts"
to
me: "I can't believe they do, or if they do they don't care - for the math is sound."
to
you: "Trust me - TV programs have fact checkers - good ones."
to
me: "Then they messed up (if they exist) - for the math is sound."
to
you: "Why are you wasting your time rallying against TV. I don't understand nor care about the math."
They wouldn't use steel (iron) tanks. They most likely would use some sort of blown thermoplastic (HDPE?) tank wrapped nine-ways-to-Friday in fiber composite.
Fact checkers or not, the show allowed a company to make erroneous (if not fraudulent) claims. To claim a vehicle running off of compressed air is a suitable replacement for an ICE or battery powered consumer vehicle in all but the most extreme of cases is ludicrous.
Ailenw's math is simple, sound, and correct - as are the simple conclusions he draws.
No one seems to be willing to attack his math - everyone keeps defending the idea of an air car because it passed the muster of a frickin' TV show.
That is what compels me to continue this debate. Point out the flaws in his math or reasoning. Stop using the TV show as any sort of defense.
The people who produced the television show apparently think that this is an interesting enough show to get ratings.
There is no reason to believe the network has fact checkers which do anything more that a cursory look. I really got turned off in the first place by your apparent willingness to trust the supposed fact checkers of a sensationalist "science" show over the (very easy to check) math of the post you replied to. Then to add insult to injury you use that fucking line saying basically you assume the network has fact-checkers more qualified than
I understood your attacks on them possibly having an "extremist environmentalist agenda." What didn't make sense was how an air powered car is better for the environment. It burned my ass again because it appeared to be an out-of-the-blue attack on a nonexistent foe.
(bye bye karma)
But can it run Rockbox?
This does not work well in an enviroment with lots of phone usage.
I think you are underestimating what Microsoft can do with that 90% (desktop) OS market share.
If Apple was able to capture 70% of the digital audio player market by leveraging their 5% OS market share, by my calculations Microsoft should be able to capture 1260% of all DAP sales within five years.
Ahh, but you'll make than up after you buy your 397th song from the Zune Store.
249.99+397*0.9875=642.0275 (Zune)
249.00+397*0.9900=642.0300
You can mount an iRiver, an iPod, (and I gotta believe a Zune) as a UMS device, working just fine on the "next generation of car stereos with USB."
My Zippo is currently filled with diesel, and strikes just fine.
We must have different takes on "flammable."
That's not what he asked.
He asked if you would like it if the waiter tried to pressure you against the lamb, not because of the taste/quality, but because lamb is bad for you/the enviroment/animal rights/etc.
1- All the iPods have dual ARM cores.
2- Sandisk has been milking rockbox for good press. They haven't delivered half of what they promised to the developers. Reverse engineering the bootloader (for starters) would not be needed if Sandisk wanted anything more than good press from rockbox.
From Daniel Stenberg's own site:
"We didn't get anything to help us actually make Rockbox to these players. We got two players, yes, but we got no info, no docs. No help at all."
ogg playback on RockBox gives you better battery life than mp3 playback on RockBox.
An ideal ogg decoder might need more horsepower than an ideal mp3 decoder, but RockBox's ogg decoder is much faster than its mp3 decoder.
Herpes does a very good job of hiding in spinal nerve tissue when dormant. It is likely a harder virus than HIV to remove from the body entirely.
That's why real men only work in ellipsoidal heights!
How the fuck did the parent get moderated informative?
1-Higher octane fuel will not increase carbon buildup.
2-As a car gets older, it does not need higher octane fuel. The idea that even a severe case of combustion-chamber carbon buildup could cause a measurable increase in compression ratio is silly. As a car ages, its compression ratio tends to decrease due to ring blow-by, and carbon buildup preventing the valves from sealing well.
3-Higher performance cars often need higher octane fuel because they run at a higher compression ratio, run hotter, and therefore have an increased likelihood of pre-ignition.
4-If you car was designed for 87 octane, and it is knocking during acceleration, that is NOT good, and is often a sign of a timing issue you should fix, not mask with higher octane fuel.
Even occasional knocking during heavy load conditions is bad, as it can cause damage to the engine. Fuel pre-ignition not only causes waste heat (leading into the cycle of more pre-ignition), but the shock of pre-ignition on a rising piston can cause a great deal of damage if allowed to continue for very long, which is (one of the reasons) why many modern cars have knock detectors, and retard the timing if it is detected.
Why walk when you can drive to within a couple hundred yards of the runways in many cities?
Even a missile launched from a distance of only a couple hundred yards?
Impressive if so.
I wasn't thinking of shooting down a plane hundreds or even thousands of feet up, but one having just taken off or landing. I know the damage potential of an extremely low altitude hit would be greatly reduced, but the intended terror effect would still be achieved.
The company I work does more airport approach clearance surveys than anyone else in the United States. I'm not sure how Northrop can claim they will be able to offer 20km protection against shoulder-fired missiles. I'm not sure how they could offer 2km protection.
While most airports have a great view of everything more than 20-30 feet in the air, many are in congested areas where there is no way they would be able to see an individual with a Stinger. Since shoulder-fired missiles seem to be the most plausible form of attack, I simply can't see how this system offers much protection at all to urban/suburban commercial airports.
You don't need the "military" code.
By comparing the propagation delay between the L1 (1575.42 MHz) and the L2 (1227.6 MHz) frequencies you can model ionosphere effects and achieve quite a bit of improvement.
Real Time Differential only gives you sub-meter results, regardless of what wikipedia states.
Real Time Kinematic; using a receiver set up on a know point which transmits a correction factor for every satellite to your rover, is the best way to achieve cm level results (in real time).
As for why - land surveyors love the shit. Not a replacement for conventional instruments, never will be, but a very useful tool.
See the stagnation of Home Depot / Lowes for an example of what else can go wrong. Two entrenched players does not make a competitive market.