To be fair, I noticed that using a CRT with a digital source (e.g. satellite), it seemed like there was some interval after changing a channel where the receiver needed some amount of data (or some time interval) before it could start displaying an image. This timing seemed to be aggravated by water between the satellite and dish (rainclouds), or a poor calibration resulting in a low signal strength.
Also, managing digital pixel data is a bit more complex than syncing an analog signal to a scanning cathode. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the process (I agree with you that the delays are annoying).
Yes! Plus, they made the ribbon to make "hidden" features more visible, but in Office 2003 a seasoned user can add all the "hidden" features into a custom button on a custom toolbar; all that without having to take up 1/5 of the screen real estate.
You can bet money that usage-based billing is the cable company's answer to this "ask slashdot." They're fearing people dropping their "just add more customers and make more money without moving any more product" business model. I never picked up cable since I moved out on my own and I've never regretted it. At the very least, I will read web pages (typically science stuff:P) while I'm bored, eating, or whatever. Sometimes I will even go to stations that offer their shows for free and watch that (e.g. space or CTV).
Technically, conventional wireless is also in the UHF range, so it makes proper sense to say that these new-application frequencies are lower (which they are).
On a side note, some applications of the conventional wireless are in the SHF range, which is higher-frequency than UHF.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_spectrum#By_frequency
It's probably justified by the fact that network speeds are always quoted in bits, so it makes sense that the cap would also be put into bits. But the real reason is probably to make the cap sound sound larger than 29.1 GB per month, which it is [250x10^9/8/(2^30) = 29.1 GB].
I never said it was feasible; all my statement implied was that the aesthetics of food are the last thing you're going to be thinking about if you're starving.
Yeah; I heard RF in the range of about 600 THz is especially dangerous, and it's everywhere. What is this world coming to? Let's sign a petition to reduce all sources of radiation in that range (yes, all of them:P).
Exactly! For a non-moving computer, game system, etc., why use wireless? Too many issues with signal quality for it to be worthwhile if you're not using a cordless device in the first place.
Depends how you define "nice". I am against wireless unless I actually need it (maybe like using a laptop on the couch). Aside from that, if you have a station where you work, a CAT 5 cable is rock-solid. For the most part if you are connected at 100 Mbit/s on a common LAN, you can expect some decent network performance within that LAN. Connect with a 54 Mbit/s wireless connection and then you are at mercy to signal strength, noise, other people on your channel, dropped connections, etc.
Myths, old wives tales, movie physics, or just strange experiments. Part of the fun is in the building, and sometimes part of the fun is packing what you've built full of high explosives. Sounds like a good recipe to me, and much more entertaining than most of the drivel on TV.
Slashdot Mirror
Or change that requires 3 mouse clicks where there used to be 1. Not to mention change where you lose on-screen vital information.
Why are we using our hands at all? Just make the car drive where you look. Sounds great; what could possibly go wrong?
Or they use the cheapest microprocessor they can get away with
To be fair, I noticed that using a CRT with a digital source (e.g. satellite), it seemed like there was some interval after changing a channel where the receiver needed some amount of data (or some time interval) before it could start displaying an image. This timing seemed to be aggravated by water between the satellite and dish (rainclouds), or a poor calibration resulting in a low signal strength.
Also, managing digital pixel data is a bit more complex than syncing an analog signal to a scanning cathode. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the process (I agree with you that the delays are annoying).
Computer's isn't good at grammer anyways, they always tell me is wrong.
Porblem sloved.
Yes! Plus, they made the ribbon to make "hidden" features more visible, but in Office 2003 a seasoned user can add all the "hidden" features into a custom button on a custom toolbar; all that without having to take up 1/5 of the screen real estate.
You can bet money that usage-based billing is the cable company's answer to this "ask slashdot." They're fearing people dropping their "just add more customers and make more money without moving any more product" business model. I never picked up cable since I moved out on my own and I've never regretted it. At the very least, I will read web pages (typically science stuff :P) while I'm bored, eating, or whatever. Sometimes I will even go to stations that offer their shows for free and watch that (e.g. space or CTV).
Maybe it withstands advanced torture techniques better than steel does.
The nomenclature is standardized, and "low frequency" refers to frequencies four orders of magnitude lower than UHF
True, but then it would be Low Frequency; the caps denoting a proper label and not a relative term
Patient: "well doctor, what's the result of the radio image?"
Doctor: "This blobby thing here is your body"
Patient: "... and?"
Doctor: "That's all"
Maybe she redeemed her "one free internet" coupon
Technically, conventional wireless is also in the UHF range, so it makes proper sense to say that these new-application frequencies are lower (which they are). On a side note, some applications of the conventional wireless are in the SHF range, which is higher-frequency than UHF. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_spectrum#By_frequency
You can attribute it to further blood loss from the brain
What about in BTU/coulomb?
Think about what can happen when you go over 9000
It's probably justified by the fact that network speeds are always quoted in bits, so it makes sense that the cap would also be put into bits. But the real reason is probably to make the cap sound sound larger than 29.1 GB per month, which it is [250x10^9/8/(2^30) = 29.1 GB].
I never said it was feasible; all my statement implied was that the aesthetics of food are the last thing you're going to be thinking about if you're starving.
Don't forget that mobile phones also broadcast in the microwave region; but really, who uses a mobile phone?
Or that their computer is not the monitor?
'Scuse me, mentlegen... what are you trying to say here?
Yeah; I heard RF in the range of about 600 THz is especially dangerous, and it's everywhere. What is this world coming to? Let's sign a petition to reduce all sources of radiation in that range (yes, all of them :P).
I don't even know why you make the effort; the scotch death of the universe is inevitable.
Exactly! For a non-moving computer, game system, etc., why use wireless? Too many issues with signal quality for it to be worthwhile if you're not using a cordless device in the first place.
Except the honeybees would love it
Depends how you define "nice". I am against wireless unless I actually need it (maybe like using a laptop on the couch). Aside from that, if you have a station where you work, a CAT 5 cable is rock-solid. For the most part if you are connected at 100 Mbit/s on a common LAN, you can expect some decent network performance within that LAN. Connect with a 54 Mbit/s wireless connection and then you are at mercy to signal strength, noise, other people on your channel, dropped connections, etc.
Myths, old wives tales, movie physics, or just strange experiments. Part of the fun is in the building, and sometimes part of the fun is packing what you've built full of high explosives. Sounds like a good recipe to me, and much more entertaining than most of the drivel on TV.