http://www.broadbandmap.gov/su... The above link has data on how many people have service. (What is a SBDD grantee, and does this skew the data?) It claims 93% have local access to >3Mb down on wires, 98% have >3Mb down wireless. (I find the latter figure _very_ hard to believe...)
I use 1Mbit internet. This is the lowest tier service any cable or DSL provider will sell AFAIK (maybe there are still a few 768k DSL lines?). They don't even advertize it. You have to ask for it.
I have _never_ found myself inhibited. And that's with downloading IEEE/ACM papers with fair frequency. Pretty much the only things I have to walk away while downloading are lectures, video games, Linux isos, and those damn 8GB Xilinx installers.
All of this talk of second class citizens is a load.
The problem is not bandwidth, and it sounds like your mother has wiring issues in the house (too many splitters?).
If the cable is bad due to bad wiring or because you are on shared bandwidth with the neighbor, get DSL. Contrary to popular opinion, I have always had much more reliable service from DSL providers (they have much more skin in keeping phone lines operational), and I don't share bandwidth with the neighbor (*until far upstream).
Coming from a fault tolerant computing background, your non-trivial software could have bugs. There is a reason N-version programming exists (and it's not for fun).
Unless you have true N-version programming with totally separate teams writing on different platforms with different languages, different academic backgrounds, different cultural paradigms, etc, then you don't have perfectly reliable software. (And even then your application may lend itself to certain symantic commonalities.)
When done properly, reliability/availability is a numbers game, and you have to look at price, time to market, MTTF/A, etc. If you think you can claim any software is bug free, I've got news for you.
Mac OS has been like this since System 1. And it makes sense; whatever you're doing, its menu is going to be in the same place. Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen.
First, the corners of the screen are the fastest to access merely because they require less dexterity. And your menu button must actually occupy the most extreme pixel to work for this purpose, and the menu buttons do not. Perhaps they meet the edge of the screen, but I'm not even sure about that (I don't think they do). Second, the paradigm of universal menu location is a violation of basic psychology. Our brains prefer that things which are related are grouped together. E.g. if I have two windows open side-by-side, and I have the right-hand window selected, why are my menus adjacent to the window I am not using? My mouse, my eyes, and the scope of my perception are locked on the window at hand. Claiming I can move my mouse faster to some distant area on the screen does not seem like a good enough reason. (That you are used to it and don't want to learn a new paradigm is a valid reason to keep it, though.)
Single mouse click
Mac OS has supported multiple mouse buttons for at least 16 years.
I'm pretty sure he meant one click to open a program. (Or was the statement damaged in translation?) To be fair, I'm not entirely sold on the double-click paradigm, despite being thoroughly imersed. (Don't Macs use double-click to open desktop/folder contents still? And everyone does one-click dashboard/quickstart/panel open AFAIK.)
Hardwired application dependency locations (the whole point of application folders is to stop that!)
Wait, what? Apps install into/Applications by default, but the system works just fine with app in ~/Applications. Beyond that, moving apps around is making things needlessly complicated for yourself. Even then, the vast majority of apps are self-contained bundles and can be run from anywhere.
Don't Macs have a $PATH variable? If not, I consider this a huge flaw, but I'm pretty sure gp is clueless? (Why would Apple remove such a basic feature?)
2*pi = 0 is true in modulo 2*pi arithmetic (angles), which applies to Euler's formula. The space wraps around on itself with finite domain, and the point 2*pi is exactly the point 0. If you want to take the variables to a Euclidean space you need a non-1-1 transform, and any manipulations which appear to make the two numbers not equal is turning a finite space into an infinite one and obfuscating their true relationship. Variables do not exist in a vacuum, and while you may say the value of a variable is in R, that does not imply that it exists on the real number line.
I wonder how the vitamin content will look after three years of storage. "Edible" does not mean you are getting vitamins, and AFAIK vitamin C degredation is a big deal -- as Franklin would attest to. (I know nothing of more modern food preservation techniques, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
I'm still happily using my $50 (+contract) Nokia 5230 symbian phone with offline open maps GPS... 4 years and running strong!
I actually even love the "cheap" screen because I've dropped the thing in >10 parking lots and it never shatters.
I ran a Buffalo WHR-G125 with DD-WRT without restarting it for years. There were times when I was on vacation with it unplugged, so I'm not sure what the maximum continuous uptime was, but I never once had an issue which required a restart. Conclusion? Read reviews before you buy a router and see if people talk about having to restart it. They don't all need it. It's absurd that Linksys routers have been so bad for so long...
Slashdot Mirror
Then you've never done anything mission critical and interesting simultaneously ;)
Fault tolerance is a much studied field. Software faults exist with some probability no matter how much work you do.
I agree with you. And if the telephone cables are bad enough, upgrading the system to DSL could involve new lines :(
Looking at the map at
http://www.broadbandmap.gov/sp...
Coverage is pretty spotty anywhere but NJ,DE,RI,CN
http://www.broadbandmap.gov/su...
The above link has data on how many people have service. (What is a SBDD grantee, and does this skew the data?) It claims 93% have local access to >3Mb down on wires, 98% have >3Mb down wireless. (I find the latter figure _very_ hard to believe...)
I use 1Mbit internet. This is the lowest tier service any cable or DSL provider will sell AFAIK (maybe there are still a few 768k DSL lines?). They don't even advertize it. You have to ask for it. I have _never_ found myself inhibited. And that's with downloading IEEE/ACM papers with fair frequency. Pretty much the only things I have to walk away while downloading are lectures, video games, Linux isos, and those damn 8GB Xilinx installers. All of this talk of second class citizens is a load. The problem is not bandwidth, and it sounds like your mother has wiring issues in the house (too many splitters?). If the cable is bad due to bad wiring or because you are on shared bandwidth with the neighbor, get DSL. Contrary to popular opinion, I have always had much more reliable service from DSL providers (they have much more skin in keeping phone lines operational), and I don't share bandwidth with the neighbor (*until far upstream).
update 2: no I read you right. I still disagree with the idea that fault-free software doing anything interesting exists anywhere.
Update: I missed three important letters: cannot :) Please nevermind me :D
Coming from a fault tolerant computing background, your non-trivial software could have bugs. There is a reason N-version programming exists (and it's not for fun).
Unless you have true N-version programming with totally separate teams writing on different platforms with different languages, different academic backgrounds, different cultural paradigms, etc, then you don't have perfectly reliable software. (And even then your application may lend itself to certain symantic commonalities.)
When done properly, reliability/availability is a numbers game, and you have to look at price, time to market, MTTF/A, etc. If you think you can claim any software is bug free, I've got news for you.
Global menus
Mac OS has been like this since System 1. And it makes sense; whatever you're doing, its menu is going to be in the same place. Fitts' law indicates that the most quickly accessed targets on any computer display are the four corners of the screen.
First, the corners of the screen are the fastest to access merely because they require less dexterity. And your menu button must actually occupy the most extreme pixel to work for this purpose, and the menu buttons do not. Perhaps they meet the edge of the screen, but I'm not even sure about that (I don't think they do).
Second, the paradigm of universal menu location is a violation of basic psychology. Our brains prefer that things which are related are grouped together. E.g. if I have two windows open side-by-side, and I have the right-hand window selected, why are my menus adjacent to the window I am not using? My mouse, my eyes, and the scope of my perception are locked on the window at hand. Claiming I can move my mouse faster to some distant area on the screen does not seem like a good enough reason. (That you are used to it and don't want to learn a new paradigm is a valid reason to keep it, though.)
Single mouse click
Mac OS has supported multiple mouse buttons for at least 16 years.
I'm pretty sure he meant one click to open a program. (Or was the statement damaged in translation?) To be fair, I'm not entirely sold on the double-click paradigm, despite being thoroughly imersed. (Don't Macs use double-click to open desktop/folder contents still? And everyone does one-click dashboard/quickstart/panel open AFAIK.)
Hardwired application dependency locations (the whole point of application folders is to stop that!)
Wait, what? Apps install into /Applications by default, but the system works just fine with app in ~/Applications. Beyond that, moving apps around is making things needlessly complicated for yourself. Even then, the vast majority of apps are self-contained bundles and can be run from anywhere.
Don't Macs have a $PATH variable? If not, I consider this a huge flaw, but I'm pretty sure gp is clueless? (Why would Apple remove such a basic feature?)
In Soviet Russia, computer crashes you!
Maybe he's just going through a bit of a western phase. Pard'ner.
Can't wait for MintPhone, though.
We could always defund the FCC, I guess. ;)
I bet this started as a joke about grant proposals. I, for one, move to open a similar lab here.
2*pi = 0 is true in modulo 2*pi arithmetic (angles), which applies to Euler's formula. The space wraps around on itself with finite domain, and the point 2*pi is exactly the point 0. If you want to take the variables to a Euclidean space you need a non-1-1 transform, and any manipulations which appear to make the two numbers not equal is turning a finite space into an infinite one and obfuscating their true relationship.
Variables do not exist in a vacuum, and while you may say the value of a variable is in R, that does not imply that it exists on the real number line.
I expect you'll find that Pascal discussed this ages ago, too.
Poe's Law.
In this case
2*pi = 0
is accurate due to the modulo nature of the complex unit circle. :)
That people don't know that all spaces are not cartesian could certainly be a source for confusion!
flushdns, ping goatse.Solved!
Sex or drugs? I can't decide.
2*pi = 0
does not imply that
pi = 0
... :)
I wonder how the vitamin content will look after three years of storage. "Edible" does not mean you are getting vitamins, and AFAIK vitamin C degredation is a big deal -- as Franklin would attest to. (I know nothing of more modern food preservation techniques, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
It was in Orion's belt. What more do you need to know?
While TFS is a bit overblown, the idea is that currently employed people might go to the VFW website. (vet != retired)
I'm still happily using my $50 (+contract) Nokia 5230 symbian phone with offline open maps GPS... 4 years and running strong! I actually even love the "cheap" screen because I've dropped the thing in >10 parking lots and it never shatters.
Is "network company" an ISP?
I ran a Buffalo WHR-G125 with DD-WRT without restarting it for years. There were times when I was on vacation with it unplugged, so I'm not sure what the maximum continuous uptime was, but I never once had an issue which required a restart.
Conclusion? Read reviews before you buy a router and see if people talk about having to restart it. They don't all need it. It's absurd that Linksys routers have been so bad for so long...