The Vic 20 supported 22 columns and 23 rows of 8-by-8-pixel characters. This wasn't however due to TV limitations - It was done that way so the Vic could use a very inexpensive display chipset.
The Vic 20's successor, the Commodore 64, supported 40 columns, which, as you say, was pretty much the max for these TV displays.
We wrote BASIC programs, played ZORK, and labouriously keyed in source code printed in the likes of "Creative Computing." Today, none of us are blind. Well, some of us are. But likely for other reasons than reading text on an SDTV.
See "How much sleep do you really need" table 2/3s of the way down.
Quote: Though research cannot pinpoint an exact amount of sleep need by people at different ages, the table identifies the "rule-of-thumb" amounts most experts have agreed upon.
I personally fall within the majority on the bell curve - I need around 8 hours per night. Sounds like you're in the minority and do well with less.
Also, if you go to bed "10ish", it's no wonder you have little spare time. Try adding 1 or 2 hours to your waking life and see how much you can accomplish
Huh? Every sleep scientist on the planet will tell you most humans need 8-10 hours sack time a night. I get up at six, so it's lights-out by 10:15. You suggesting I should sleep-deprive myself? To what end? An early grave?
try not to be too jealous of those who have chosen to live their life in a manner that doesn't match yours.
I'm not jealous - I'm perfectly happy with my life choices. I'm just (poorly) trying to explain to most of/. that those people with kids don't understand how people have the time to invent nifty badges, and those people with the time to invent nifty badges don't understand why everyone else can't do the same thing...
You obviously don't understand the value of a side project.
To some degree I'm with the parent, or, to put it another way, "Who has time for this stuff?!"
I'm 43, married, with a 27 month old toddler, and another kid due in a month. A typical day for me goes like this: Get up at 6am, feed dog, have shower, make breakfast for fam-damly. Wake up pregnant wife, feed family breakfast, walk dog. At bus stop by 745, at desk at software co by 830. Leave work a little after 5, home by 5:30ish. Play with kid, eat dinner, help clean up after dinner. Bathe kid, story time. Walk dog. 830pm - Hang with wife for an hour. In bed by 945-10ish, lights out by 1015.
Weekends - Work on fixing up old house, walk dog, take kid to park or home depot or go swimming, grill steaks. I certainly don't have time to design nifty badges...
I'm pro-roundabout, but it's important to remember that while roundabouts are fine for new intersections, it's difficult to retro-fit them to existing intersections because they require a lot more land.
They're also not friendly to scenarios where pedestrians also cross the intersection, i.e. scenarios where the lights stop both cars so people can cross in front of them.
How about we just make it the consequences for stealing cars so much worse than the possible payoff that nobody would bother to try?
Because most western societies won't accept executing someone from car theft, and putting a car thief in jail for 20 years costs too many of my tax dollars and doesn't act as a deterrent.
This is slashdot. All digital content "wants" to be free. Just as/.ers should haven't to pay for music, movies or audiobooks, neither should corporations.
I remember seeing an interview somewhere or other with an American gun-nut. The gun-nut's point was that he didn't have all kinds of guns because they were cool or neat - He had them for 'protection.' That's why he needed to conceal-carry and had one under his bed and under his car seat and under his jacket etc.
The interviewer then said something to the effect of "So since your concealed guns are for protection only, you'd be fine if all guns were required to be powder-coated bright pink?" The spluttering response from the gun-nut was very amusing.
Solar panels were not viable for any widespread usage back in the 70's (sic). They are only now starting to become viable, and even then only with significant government subsidies
Photovoltaic solar panels for power generation? Sure... Solar panels to heat/cool your home and your water? That science has been around for hundreds of years...
The "general consensus" among photographers was that Kodachrome displayed better colours than Ektachrome and Ektachrome's stepbrothers (Fujichrome etc.). However, today the difference is probably negligible and/or subjective (especially as Kodachrome is now gone) but the opinion lingers, in the same way people will always think French wine is better than California wine.
My dad has 50-year-old-slides shot on Kodachrome (that were stored in a cool, dark basement) that still look like brand new. It's primarily due to the design of the film and the way the colour is placed onto the film.
Ektachrome is a "subtractive" process where all the colors needed are built into the film. During processing, the "unneeded" colors are removed by the developer and the bleaches.
Kodachrome was a "dye additive" process whereby whatever colours you photographed in your subject matter were *applied* during processing. The film basically "grabbed" the colors it needed during processing. This meant there was virtually no grain in the resultant images. ('Tecnicolor' movie film was also "dye additive" and this helps explain why a 35mm movie frame could be projected to enourmous sizes.)
The dyes were also very stable and don't fade with time.
but was there actually anything about Kodachrome that made it unique
I'm 43 and shot a lot of Kodachrome & Ektachrome in High School (1980 - 1985). WRT Kodachrome, it's exactly like Paul Simon says in his song - The colours were very rich and warm, particularly the blues, and the blacks were very, well, black. The developing process (called K-14) meant the film had almost no grain. The main limitations to the film was the very low ASA (ISO) rating. Even on a bright sunny day on the top of a snow capped mountain you were shooting Kodachrome 25 at F2.8 at 125th/second. Well, I exaggerate, but you get the idea...
you do realize that selling ads to small markets makes no sense?
Depends on what you're selling and who you're selling to. If you're selling coca-cola, absolutely. However, many of the people in business-hub airports are a cherished segment - That's why, for example, you see ads in inflight magazines that you don't see anywhere else. For example, Barracuda Networks advertises extenively at airports.
it's 2010. in 5 years most of the country will have a multicore computer with 4g wireless in their pocket and you think people will want to stand around and use a shared computer? why? to do what?
There will still be a small market for these things for people from other jurisdictions. I'm Canadian - When I'm in the USA or Europe the roaming charges on my smartphone are so painful I don't turn it on. There are tons of stories about Americans travelling in Mexico and returning to $5000 mobile phone bills. Many airports have WiFi that you could connect to instead, but it might cost $20. I can't see that changing any time soon.
Why would someone want to replace something that they know works with a first-out-the-gate phone from Microsoft?
1) Because if someone is using something like a Nokia 7020 it might be nice to get a smartphone. I didn't have a smartphone under my employer "gave" me one. (No, I don't work for MS)
2) How many lemmings queued up overnight to buy the first iPhone? People were willing to go first-gen (with their own nickel) go get a nifty smartphone. I'm sure many would be more than willing with someone else's nickel.
Why would someone want to pay the costs of canceling their contract
If the phone is supported on your network you're not penalized to change the handset. People do this all the time when they lose/smash their phones. They just get a new one from somewhere and light it up on their old account, with no penalty.
Slashdot Mirror
I ended up reworking the font on mine and burning a new EPROM for it.
Cool. I remembering soldering a piggybacked chip onto the motherboard of my TRS-80 so I could get lowercase. Those kids can get off our lawn.
about 40 characters per line on the old Vic20
The Vic 20 supported 22 columns and 23 rows of 8-by-8-pixel characters. This wasn't however due to TV limitations - It was done that way so the Vic could use a very inexpensive display chipset.
The Vic 20's successor, the Commodore 64, supported 40 columns, which, as you say, was pretty much the max for these TV displays.
Hope that makes it clear for the non-technical readers out there
It won't really be, until the values are based on "Numbers of Libraries of Congress."
so presumably they'll be trying to read masses of blurry text on an older SDTV.
Until the "IBM PC" came along, most of us hooked our home computers to our televisions:
http://www.vintagecomputer.net/apple/appleII/appleII_display_graph.jpg
We wrote BASIC programs, played ZORK, and labouriously keyed in source code printed in the likes of "Creative Computing." Today, none of us are blind. Well, some of us are. But likely for other reasons than reading text on an SDTV.
Now get off my lawn.
please provide some backup for your claim of what "every sleep scientist on the planet" will tell me
A good source for this stuff is the National Sleep Foundation - Lots of good science. To cut to the chase -
http://www.sleepfoundation.org/article/how-sleep-works/how-much-sleep-do-we-really-need
See "How much sleep do you really need" table 2/3s of the way down.
Quote: Though research cannot pinpoint an exact amount of sleep need by people at different ages, the table identifies the "rule-of-thumb" amounts most experts have agreed upon.
I personally fall within the majority on the bell curve - I need around 8 hours per night. Sounds like you're in the minority and do well with less.
Also, if you go to bed "10ish", it's no wonder you have little spare time. Try adding 1 or 2 hours to your waking life and see how much you can accomplish
Huh? Every sleep scientist on the planet will tell you most humans need 8-10 hours sack time a night. I get up at six, so it's lights-out by 10:15. You suggesting I should sleep-deprive myself? To what end? An early grave?
You don't have time because you're busy living out the exact same life as millions upon millions of other people.
Alright, I've laid out my schedule. What would you do differently? How should I rework my day... Lay it on me.
try not to be too jealous of those who have chosen to live their life in a manner that doesn't match yours.
I'm not jealous - I'm perfectly happy with my life choices. I'm just (poorly) trying to explain to most of /. that those people with kids don't understand how people have the time to invent nifty badges, and those people with the time to invent nifty badges don't understand why everyone else can't do the same thing...
You obviously don't understand the value of a side project.
To some degree I'm with the parent, or, to put it another way, "Who has time for this stuff?!"
I'm 43, married, with a 27 month old toddler, and another kid due in a month. A typical day for me goes like this: Get up at 6am, feed dog, have shower, make breakfast for fam-damly. Wake up pregnant wife, feed family breakfast, walk dog. At bus stop by 745, at desk at software co by 830. Leave work a little after 5, home by 5:30ish. Play with kid, eat dinner, help clean up after dinner. Bathe kid, story time. Walk dog. 830pm - Hang with wife for an hour. In bed by 945-10ish, lights out by 1015.
Weekends - Work on fixing up old house, walk dog, take kid to park or home depot or go swimming, grill steaks. I certainly don't have time to design nifty badges...
I'm pro-roundabout, but it's important to remember that while roundabouts are fine for new intersections, it's difficult to retro-fit them to existing intersections because they require a lot more land.
They're also not friendly to scenarios where pedestrians also cross the intersection, i.e. scenarios where the lights stop both cars so people can cross in front of them.
So paint a gun some silly color and the mugger might not take it seriously
They would if all guns sold were powder-coated bright pink... They'd have to assume the gun was real.
How about we just make it the consequences for stealing cars so much worse than the possible payoff that nobody would bother to try?
Because most western societies won't accept executing someone from car theft, and putting a car thief in jail for 20 years costs too many of my tax dollars and doesn't act as a deterrent.
This is slashdot. All digital content "wants" to be free. Just as /.ers should haven't to pay for music, movies or audiobooks, neither should corporations.
I remember seeing an interview somewhere or other with an American gun-nut. The gun-nut's point was that he didn't have all kinds of guns because they were cool or neat - He had them for 'protection.' That's why he needed to conceal-carry and had one under his bed and under his car seat and under his jacket etc.
The interviewer then said something to the effect of "So since your concealed guns are for protection only, you'd be fine if all guns were required to be powder-coated bright pink?" The spluttering response from the gun-nut was very amusing.
Those big backpack radios they used in Vietnam were usually leftovers from WWII.
bzzzt. Thank you for playing.
http://www.tourofdutyinfo.com/ToDAdvisorwebpages/fieldradio2.html
Just google passive solar cooling...
Solar panels were not viable for any widespread usage back in the 70's (sic). They are only now starting to become viable, and even then only with significant government subsidies
Photovoltaic solar panels for power generation? Sure... Solar panels to heat/cool your home and your water? That science has been around for hundreds of years...
Kids these days and their ISO6400 sensors and image stabilized lenses.
Yeah. They need to get off my lawn
What's the difference?
The "general consensus" among photographers was that Kodachrome displayed better colours than Ektachrome and Ektachrome's stepbrothers (Fujichrome etc.). However, today the difference is probably negligible and/or subjective (especially as Kodachrome is now gone) but the opinion lingers, in the same way people will always think French wine is better than California wine.
My dad has 50-year-old-slides shot on Kodachrome (that were stored in a cool, dark basement) that still look like brand new. It's primarily due to the design of the film and the way the colour is placed onto the film.
Ektachrome is a "subtractive" process where all the colors needed are built into the film. During processing, the "unneeded" colors are removed by the developer and the bleaches.
Kodachrome was a "dye additive" process whereby whatever colours you photographed in your subject matter were *applied* during processing. The film basically "grabbed" the colors it needed during processing. This meant there was virtually no grain in the resultant images. ('Tecnicolor' movie film was also "dye additive" and this helps explain why a 35mm movie frame could be projected to enourmous sizes.)
The dyes were also very stable and don't fade with time.
but was there actually anything about Kodachrome that made it unique
I'm 43 and shot a lot of Kodachrome & Ektachrome in High School (1980 - 1985). WRT Kodachrome, it's exactly like Paul Simon says in his song - The colours were very rich and warm, particularly the blues, and the blacks were very, well, black. The developing process (called K-14) meant the film had almost no grain. The main limitations to the film was the very low ASA (ISO) rating. Even on a bright sunny day on the top of a snow capped mountain you were shooting Kodachrome 25 at F2.8 at 125th/second. Well, I exaggerate, but you get the idea...
I'm guessing there will be for a little while to come
E-6 "Ektachrome" processing? Sure. K-14 "Kodachrome" processing? Very unlikely.
you do realize that selling ads to small markets makes no sense?
Depends on what you're selling and who you're selling to. If you're selling coca-cola, absolutely. However, many of the people in business-hub airports are a cherished segment - That's why, for example, you see ads in inflight magazines that you don't see anywhere else. For example, Barracuda Networks advertises extenively at airports.
http://www.darrenbarefoot.com/archives/2009/01/barracuda-networks-and-more-acts-of-advertising-faith.html
it's 2010. in 5 years most of the country will have a multicore computer with 4g wireless in their pocket and you think people will want to stand around and use a shared computer? why? to do what?
There will still be a small market for these things for people from other jurisdictions. I'm Canadian - When I'm in the USA or Europe the roaming charges on my smartphone are so painful I don't turn it on. There are tons of stories about Americans travelling in Mexico and returning to $5000 mobile phone bills. Many airports have WiFi that you could connect to instead, but it might cost $20. I can't see that changing any time soon.
Why would someone want to replace something that they know works with a first-out-the-gate phone from Microsoft?
1) Because if someone is using something like a Nokia 7020 it might be nice to get a smartphone. I didn't have a smartphone under my employer "gave" me one. (No, I don't work for MS)
2) How many lemmings queued up overnight to buy the first iPhone? People were willing to go first-gen (with their own nickel) go get a nifty smartphone. I'm sure many would be more than willing with someone else's nickel.
Why would someone want to pay the costs of canceling their contract
If the phone is supported on your network you're not penalized to change the handset. People do this all the time when they lose/smash their phones. They just get a new one from somewhere and light it up on their old account, with no penalty.
There is no way I would spend that much money on a telephone.
?!?!
As many others have said, people do this all the time - They just spread the cost over their three year 'contract.'