First, drop the Star Wars franchise, at least for a decade. You have exhausted any creativity or appeal to this tired concept and ideas like television shows and new games will fall flat.
Second, Lucas, the future of movies isn't in making everything a special effect. I am sure if George had his way he would have preferred making the last Star Wars film entirely digital, including the actors. For God's sake, there was more emotion and conviction in digital Yoda's performance then ALL the live actors combined (largely because Lucas can't direct, period). As much as computer special effects and 3D rendering is growing in leaps and bounds, it is a fad that will wain. The goal of 3D effects is to make it look realistic, to integrate it into live action to a point where you can no longer tell the difference, not to simply cheap out on set design by having actors jump around in front of green screens.
Lucasarts/film need a new muse, a new product that ISN'T Star Wars or even Indiana Jones to concentrate on. I mean, literally, Lucas is on-hit-wonder, stretching out Star Wars: A new hope over the last 30+ years.
I would love to see Lucasarts concentrate on new ideas, start making movies or games with other themes or offering their skills to other movies. Instead, Lucasarts is just some ego stroking ulterior entity of George Lucas filled with people that need to learn to say "No George, I don't want to ruin creativity and innovation just because you want Yoda spinning around like a Tasmanian devil". Lucas needs to retire and let his enterprises spread innovation around in Hollywood rather then working on yet another Star Wars spin off product.
Honestly, Lucas needs to see a shrink because I think he has escaped to a galaxy far far away and long ago and can't let go of it. Time for a new thought Lucas, 30+ years is enough obsessing about Leia.
Look, ANYTHING Microsoft does, it is held under scrutiny and generally people will bitch and complaining about it.
Apple CAN exclude legacy support largely because they control every aspect of their products. Apple is their own monopoly.
If Microsoft deiced, hey, lets abandon serial ports you would have an uprising of epic proportions. First, slews of customers that rely on serial port items like data entry devices or signal sampling, or a slew of other legacy devices that only support serial ports will be up in arms over the loss of support.
Second, slews of companies will be up in arms over Microsoft deciding to drop legacy support of serial ports because they will be forced to have to redesign their products and possibly find solutions to send out to existing customers so they could continue to support that product.
Remember Microsoft is installed on over 90% of the world's PC's. If Microsoft makes a decision to drop Floppy support, or any other legacy technology, they have to answer to BILLIONS of customers. If someone doesn't like the fact that Apple dropped floppy support, then they just won't buy a Mac. If Windows drops support for floppies, then what will that customer buy?
It is so trite to say that Apple should be lauded for dropping legacy support while Microsoft should be reprimanded. Regardless of how people believe Microsoft owns a monopoly and controls every aspect of the PC, this couldn't be further from the truth. Microsoft has to cater to millions of consumers that can't drop their DOS games, or 10 year old devices, or legacy printers, even those applications and equipment belong in a museum (or landfill).
I am sure that Microsoft would love to end legacy support for a slew of devices. Do you actually think Microsoft WANTS their OS to be slow? Are some of you so delusional to think that Bill Gates sits there in his office wringing his hands and finding out ways to make his OS more insecure and slower????
If Microsoft made a grand decision to drop, say, analog CRT technology, or floppy drive support, or whatever, the uproar would be defining. Apple drops a legacy product, and largely the market say, so what, I still won't buy a Mac regardless.
Overall, this doesn't slow down Windows while running, only on installation of the OS and installation of device drivers. If you don't have certain legacy hardware, Windows isn't slow because it is trying to detect them, or running devices drivers for non-existent hardware. At least Microsoft has made their OS efficient enough to unload drivers for devices not found.
What truly slows down Windows is Microsoft's reliance on virtual memory, and even if you have 2 - 4 gigabytes of RAM, Microsoft still insists on a swap file. HARD DRIVES are the major bottleneck in performance on computers today, and when Microsoft forces gigabytes of data to be swapped to the hard drive, this reduces performance, PERIOD!
I can't stand the double standards imposed on Microsoft. Apple always gets a slap on the back anytime they do something, but if Microsoft does the same thing, they will be chastised. Microsoft gets brought to court for installing media players and browsers in their OS, but Apple is celebrated by including iTunes and Safari in theirs.
I am no big supporter of Microsoft by any means, I think they need to start getting some balls and telling their legacy clenching customers to drop DOS apps and old hardware and say enough is enough, but to laud Apple for doing that is just down right troll bait.
The problem is Microsoft is damned if they do, damned if they don't. Millions of people complain that Windows is slow because of legacy support and complain while millions more will be very vocal against Microsoft if they ever touch that floppy interface or serial port. Microsoft can't please anybody at anytime. Microsoft has had to support millions of devices and configurations, and guess what, they have done a good freakin job of it. Apple couldn't do it, Linux can't do it. The only reason why Windows has 90% of the market is because they have supported and will continue to support millions of devices.
They don't sell the same volume as a Dan Brown or RK Rowling novel.
When you consider how many books those author's sell, then ask yourself by those books are so expensive.
They are also reference manuals, sources of information intended to support your work, which they largely assume your being paid to do. Buying a book on SQL or PHP or C++ programming is expensive because they consider these to be books used by professionals to make money. They don't consider these books to be bought by hobbyists having a passing interest in these technologies. The books predominantly are purchased by paid professionals seeking solutions and answers to products they intend to make a profit off of, or get paid to develop.
There is also a certain mentality that there are people willing to pay $80 for a C++ reference manual, and I would suggest, there are lots of people that can't think on their own unless their ideas and education can be supported by a large reference library.
I learn by doing. I learned PHP and MySQL by actually developing a website, throwing myself into the thick of it using only online reference manuals. Granted, it may not be the greatest website on the planet, but I learned how to implement a message board and dynamic content and advertising simply by doing it, not reading about it in a book. These book authors don't make money of competent individuals that can learn and explore new ideas on their own, they make their money off the people that feel it necessary to read about something for weeks before actually touching a computer. I found that usually picking up a book about mySQL or PHP AFTER doing my website, most of the books offer few new insights into using these technologies.
If you think that these books are too expensive, realize there is a slew of free resources on the web at your finger tips. Largely, these books simply collect that information and consolidate it into a single source. If you have any programming experience, then you shouldn't need to buy a book about any other scripting or programming language, you already know the basic concepts and premises, you just need to understand the syntax, which you can find from countless online resources. If its not based on a programming language, such as learning how to use Windows 2003 server or Apache, etc. Try and learn about these technologies on your own by setting up your own server and using the web as a reference.
If you still find you can't learn enough on your own, using the web as your guide, then you will at least learn to appreciate that buying a book, even an expensive one, is a better aid for you to learn new technologies. But I think you will find that learning by doing, rather then reading, is both inexpensive and more enjoyable in the long run.
Finally, if your working for an employer that demands you setup a PHP server and develop a website next week, then get them to pay for the books if you have no experience. These book author's also assume that these books are paid for by employer's to enhance the skills and experience of their employees, and anything sold to businesses is generally more expensive then to individuals.
I think there is one syndrome that is being overlooked here, the need for attention starved people to start labelling something as a syndrome to get 15 minutes of fame. I call it RCS (Repetitive Crap Syndrome).
I am not only a member of the RCS Anonymous help group, I am its president.
Why should the MacBook be any faster then any other DuoCore notebook out there. They use the same CPU, memory technology, hard drive technology, etc, etc, etc. Either the original article is biased or people just are not aware of how similar the MacBook is to any other PC notebook running the DuoCore CPU.
Can anyone name one reason (not "because its an Apple") as to why the technology in the MacBook should run faster then in an equivalently equiped PC? And I don't believe EFI has anything to do with it either.
Perhaps Intel purposely gave Apple a leg up on the DuoCore chipset by perhaps slightly overclocking them to give them an edge, or some special hardware tweak that only the MacBook is getting over other PC notebooks. I just can't see how the same equipment can run better on one system over another.
IE was integrated because the same kind of display used to show files and directories could be used to display web content, and it made sense to integrate the same technology in order to save on system resources.
Today, with people having more horsepower in their computer then they know what to do with, same goes for hard drive space, having a tightly integrated web browser / file browser doesn't make sense, and it has been a source of Microsoft's security problems.
Yes, you will still be able to type a web address in the file explorer in Vista and have a web page display . While explorer and internet explorer are no longer integrated, Vista will transparently switch between the applications and maintain the same window view.
I am sure that I.E. components will still be launched at system startup, to give Microsoft and edge over 3rd party browsers for quick browser launching, but by removing the integration with the file explorer, this will definitely be a welcomed change that should offer better security in the long run, which Microsoft desperitely needs.
Laptops have no place in the classroom. They are an excellent educational tool, but when it comes to taking lecture notes, they are annoying.
First, it is annoying for other people in the class to hear the click click click of someone trying to frantically type everything the professor says. When I was in university, it was also annoying when those using a laptop would constantly ask the professor to repeat what they said because they couldn't keep up, even to repeat something said like 5 minutes earlier.
Second, while for some course you might only need to take verbal notes, many of the engineering courses I took involved math formulas and diagrams, and there would be those with a laptop trying to draw or use Matlab to take down the notes, adding to further annoyance when the professor wanted to erase the board 15 minutes later while the notebook guy was still drawing our creating the math formula.
What was also annoying was those people that were not actually taking lecture notes, those that use the notebook as a source of entertainment to them and others because they were board with the lecture. Wireless internet wasn't prevalent back when I went to school, but I am sure now that many people probably browse the web while in a lecture.
Finally, I agree that going to a lecture isn't about transcribing everything the professor says. Listening to them, engaging them in dialogue, and actually participating in the class is the best way to learn rather then just writing down everything and reviewing your notes come exam time. In my senior year, I stopped taking lecture notes, period. I found that by getting the gist of what the professor was saying was enough to do well on the exams, rather then a word for word regurgitatory review of his notes. Professors come to know people that talk to them in class, and generally I think you get better marks in the long run, you get better marks.
That, and most professors in the know simply photocopy their overheads or lecture notes and sell them at the book store or post them online.
I wanted to use something like a tablet PC when I was in university, being able to scratch both notes and formulas down on a touch sensitive screen makes more sense in the class environment then typing them down.
Ultimately, its up to the professor to decide how people take his/her course. Most schools cater to the specific needs of the professor, these are people that make the university what it is, they bring money into the school by doing research and writing books, teaching is a secondary task for many university professors. Few schools would force a professor to accept notebooks in the classroom if they are against it. If you don't like that policy, then drop the course, you ain't going to win either way.
I have heard of lots of little applications for helping to organize your books and records and such, but I never understood how cataloguing your collection in a computer really helps you find that book in real life.
You can waste your time scanning in bar codes or typing in book and author names and such, the best way to organize large collections of books is just to take the time stack them alphabetically on shelves. If you find you don't remember what books you have, you have too many books, period. Give some away or sell them to a book store, you probably will never look at them again if you can't remember anything about them.
I don't think your solution can be found in software. Sure, you might be able to search for and find a book your looking for in a nice slick piece of software, but then where you last left that book somewhere in your home is the problem your having that software can't solve.
I mean, the Mac is a PC with EFI. The hardware in it is PC hardware. I am sure it is slightly more complicated then that, considering that Mac's typically take PC components like video cards and slightly alter the firmware or BIOS on them in order to make them "Mac" hardware (and charge 50% more for the same equivalent PC card), but again, how hard is it to get Windows to run on a PC?
Come one, this isn't news. Mac's are now 98% PC's, getting Windows to run on them is trivial considering Windows is an OS designed to run on millions of configurations of PC's as opposed to the 3 Macintel models Apple offer. Once EFI support is built into Vista, it will become even more trivial to run Windows on a "Mac".
Apple lost, period. They are a PC clone with a Unix based OS, everything Apple despised in the past is now their flagship product! Apple's new motto "Think Same!" or "If you can't beat em, join em!"
I mean, Mozilla used to be slow and steady, now they are firing out updates on.5 increments.
Is this good or bad? I think Firefox will end up becoming bloated and bug ridden just like IE if they keep up this kind of product update cycle. Firefox 1.5 hasn't even been out for 6 months and they are previewing version 2.0.
While I do think that some open source projects move a long at a pace that make snails impatient, I have found that this quick turnaround for FireFox versions isn't beneficial in the long run. I have found there to be more problems in each new version, and I have stopped using Thunderbird for several problems that haven't been addressed yet (such as opening up the wrong email when you click on a header).
I think Mozilla should slow down a bit, or at least go back to the.1 version increments. If they are just trying to drive up the version number to match I.E.'s 7.0, then they will find that Firefox performs about as well as I.E. 7.0, or even less so considering it took Microsoft 10 years to get there.
Think of it, those boring little static images you get on your snail mail. What if they could show you the latest Madonna video, or episode of Lost? Think of how much money the music, television and movie industries could make if they could beam their content to stamps?
I am surprised Apple isn't realizing the potential of showing videos and playing music on stamps. I mean, the iPod Nano is slightly bigger then a stamp.
I am also surprised Google hasn't figured this out yet, all that wasted space on a letter that Google could put ad words and Google adds on. That stamp is just dying to display Google content.
Also, think of the potential of not having to buy extra postage stamps when the Post office increases their delivery charges on a monthly basis. You could setup a stamp website that takes people's credit cards and automatically bills them for the increase in delivery charges and update the stamps face value, while the letter is CURRENTLY in transit! The post office could change their postage fees as easily as Gas companies change the price of oil!!!! No more returned mail for insufficient funds... unless of course your credit card is maxed out from all the subscription service fees your paying to get tv, music, movies and video on a stamp.
Why is this so laughable, I mean, they thought TV on cellphones would work, why not stamps?
I don't know, I think the telecommunications industry has exhausted all their ideas for cell phones, I mean, TV on cellphones was so last week. The future is in Stamps I tell you, STAMPS!
By offloading physics from the CPU to the graphics card, this improves frame rates?
Why would I waste precious GPU processing to process Physics? I mean, all the CPU does these days is handle AI, physics, and texture loading. If you offload physics to the GPU, then the CPU is doing less and your swamping the GPU with more work.
If it does increase frame rates, then I would suggest why not improve graphics rendering rather then physics processing. I find that for all the advances nVidia and ATI have made over the years, 3D gaming visual quality is still inferior to cinematic quality 3D rendering. I mean, playing F.E.A.R, a relatively new game on the market, with ALL the settings to maximum, while I get 12 FPS the image quality just isn't that great on a current generation card.
I would prefer if nVidia and ATI actually focused on bringing cinematic quality 3D rendering to gaming, instead of just claiming they do. I want smooth high-poly models with realistic lighting and 60fps. I could care less about a game running at 120fps that looks bad. All 3D games suffer from a kind of mundane pseudo style of 3D modeling that leaves relatively well designed models playing in big rectangles with high-res texture cheats. Give me more lushes organic environments. Bring nurbs into the mix by creating actual curved surfaces into real time 3D rendering instead of just lots of triangles mimicking a curved surface.
So, while nVidia may have its heart in the right place, the last thing people need is their GPU being taxed with physics processing. Isn't there supposed to be a physics add-on card entering the market soon anyways? Won't multi-core CPU's offer better physics performance then a single GPU? Instead of trying to compete against add-in cards and multi-core CPU's, nVidia should just focus on improving 3D rendering quality and actually start delivering on their promises of offering cinematic 3D rendering to each new generation of video card they hype about.
The fact is, Apple hasn't gained markeshare over Windows since OSX was introduced in 2000. Even though each new generation of OSX has improved upon itself and offered an superior OS to Windows, still, few people are making the switch. Even Apple admits that it's switch campainge has failed, and if it were not for the iPod, Apple probably would have seen far less Mac sales then there has been.
The fact it, most companies are not going to switch to OSX for the simple cost of ownership. Having to replace your existing desktop systems with expensive Mac systems just to switch OS'ses doesn't make good business sense. You are talking about corporations with thousands of desktop computers, not just a home user deciding if they want to swap their Dell desktop or notebook for a fancy Apple. No company is going to justify buying 1000 new G5 PowerMac's just to run OSX. Once you switch to OSX, you have to buy a whole slew of applications for it as well, which compounds the cost.
Application support just isn't in OSX also because the development environment for Windows is so much easier and more robust then OSX. XCode and Objective C, while free, represents everything that is wrong with Apple, their adherance to old philosophies that are failing, but too much ego is involved to let it go. XCode and ObjectiveC was supposed to make designing apps for Macs easy and braindead, even for the non-programmer, instead it confounds real programmers and hobbyists alike. If your serious about Mac programming, then you use CodeWarrior instead of Apple's free tools. Without good software tools, then the slew of shareware and freeware apps that PC users get to use just isn't available on the Mac platform.
I will whole heartedly agree that Microsoft has a lot to fear with Ubuntuu and other Linux alternatives. The ability to install a "free" OS on their existing hardware, often brining old hardware back to life with a more robust OS that isn't heavily laden with extras is very enticing. But to suggest that people are adopting OSX in droves is just unfounded.
Microsoft will never have to worry about OSX, in fact, with people finding ways of running WindowsXP aond the new Macintels, Microsoft is laughing their way to the bank as PC users buy Apple's to run Windows in a fancy box.
Slashdot ain't that pretty, honestly. But what draws people here is the content. PlentyOfFish is a dating service, that is free, and there are lots of people looking for love out there.
The quality of the website can't be judged by how good or bad it looks. Just like a book cover or people, beauty rarely is the sole reason something is ever successful or popular.
Some of the best looking websites out there don't get an audience because the content sucks or is irrelevant.
If you have a website that is making tonnes of money, why bother wasting any of it to glam it up?
I mean, this is an organization that used to offer product releases of.001 increments over the course of years, now they went from 1.0 to 1.5 and already talking about 2.0 versions of Firefox.
Is Mozilla looking to become Microsoft?
Slow and steady is what has founded Mozilla and Firefox, don't blow it by having version upgrades that coincide with the frequency of changing underwear.
I mean, if you can not imagine how much technology could improve, that you were happy with the current state of technology, and thus, didn't dream about what improvements could be made upon it, then yes, innovation is dead.
I would sell my off my stock of IBM if this is the company's outlook of their executive officers, that they had done all they can dream about and don't have any new dreams to aspire to.
Simply put, we are still in the infancy of technology. Its only been in the last 30 years that we have hit upon the idea that simple bits of silicon and metals could offer us such a huge potential for technical innovation, not just in computing, but in all aspects of science and technology. Nanotechnology would have been a joke 20 years ago, now CPU's are shrinking into the nanoscale realm which is spawning off other imaginative innovators to create smaller machines and other nanoscale products and technology.
While the industry may be slowing down in the number of awe-inspiring innovations per year ratio, to say that there will be no more great innovations is the sign of someone that has grown weary of this industry and probably should retire. I mean, they are working on quantum computing which completely blows my mind. They have also figured out how to slow and trap light and there have even been reports of small scale fusion using crystals. There is a very conceivable plan to build a space elevator using thousands of miles of carbon nanotubes. If these don't lead to impressive innovations in the near to not so near futures, then what is this guy thinking? Perhaps he just needs to spend a day browsing Slashdot.
I think it is quite short sighted to say, "Well, we done it all folks, nothing left to see here, move along!". If companies like IBM are believing this is possible, then I think it is part of a common emerging trend I see happening in the computer and technology industry. Legacy companies like IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Apple, etc, I.e. the grandfathers with 30+ years of experience under their belts are starting to get shoehorned into a line of thinking that is being plagued by baby boomers who never thought the current level of technology and innovation was ever possible or imagined.
I mean, sure Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Gordon E. Moore, and Thomas J. Watson Sr were all innovators, they helped to define the technology today. But after spending most of their lives in this industry wrapped up in their own ego's don't you think they have become a little jaded and contrived?
Intel started down a path that lead them to hit a brick wall. The idea of simply doubling transistors and Mhz would perpetually gain them higher performing CPU's on an 18 month clock cycle. That idea has failed utterly with the Pentium 4 Netburst architecture. Instead, going back and designing new architecture that focuses on performance per watt, rather then performance per millions of transistors is now starting to turn around a slump in Intel's products. While AMD is no spring chick in the electronics industry, it wasn't until the fresh idea of the Athlon came about, when AMD started focusing on performance per watt from the start that Intel realized their legacy ideas were failing them.
Honestly, I think the baby boomers need to retire and let their offspring enter the market. I don't see this industry slowing down or nearing its end, I see it only just starting to take off. I can imagine in so many ways how technology can not just be improved upon like building the better mouse trap, but new innovations that blow the current technology out of the water.
Maybe some old CEO of a company waking up in the morning with a stiff back dreading the morning commute in his Merc or Bimmer or even Limo might feel that innovation is entering its golden years because he just isn't inspired anymore. But I can honestly and safely say that its just him that is slipping into the light, not innovation.
Baby boomers move over, your starting to stink up the joint with Bengay!
I mean, this concept isn't even original. A few months ago a company displayed technology allowing up to 8 points of contact on a touch screen display. One of the demo videos shows a bunch of photo images scattered on the background where the user could drag photos around, scale them, rotate them, etc, all in a simple environment using 2 fingers.
Apple even has a patent on multipoint touch displays, I am sure some future version of iPhoto is already patented with this concept in mind.
If your going to hype about some new concept or idea, make sure you thought of it first, otherwise you look like an ass. Anybody that sponsor's one penny to this crack will deserve the feeling of being duped.
I mean, honestly, these children in developing countries need access to clean drinking water and such trivial things as medicine to keep them alive. They don't need some underpowered gadget they have to crank on in order to learn about the world they are missing out on.
I find that most university students in developed countries seem to believe that every child in the world needs the same access to information and lifestyles that they enjoy, and this isn't the case. It is wrong to impose western philosophies on the developing nations. In many cases, it is unsustainable. These nations are poor and children are dying because the economy isn't strong enough to support the kind of lifestyle western people are trying to impose on these children.
Education will not solve famine and drought. It is one thing to understand what famine and drought are, or even devise a solution, but if a country isn't rich enough to implement some solution, and the world keeps flooding these regions with cheap recycled computers, how will this solve famine and drought?
Computers are an excess technology. Something not required for life but only attained once a person has reached a quality of life where they can sustain themselves with food, clothing and shelter and have enough excess money to afford a computer. Computers do not improve a person's quality of life, they are a result of having a high quality of life. I am so disappointed when people claim that all a poor nation needs are computers, that computers will help them and aid them in developing their economy. Sorry, these nations need money, period. They need food, clothing, shelter, clean drinking water and medicine, period. And they need to be able to sustain themselves with these basic necessities. Selling trinkets on eBay is not the kind of economy that a developing nation needs to gain access to their basic needs.
Once you can live without threat of dying from starvation, and have a roof over your head, and can sustain that lifestyle, THEN you can worry about education and gaining such materialistic things such as computers.
The western world sees some children playing in the dust over in some poor country and feels that they need to go to some ivy league university in order to have a meaningful and enjoyable life. I think the child will be just as happy to play in the dust if he or she new they would have a full meal waiting for them at home and could eventually contribute to the family by growing their own food on a farm that can sustain plants or helping the community by building wells or farming. These children do not aspire to become doctors or lawyers making a quarter of a million dollars to drive their SUV's around town destroying a little bit of the Earth in their wake.
MIT has to KISS it. Keep It Simple Stupid. And the simplicity of this situation is that these children do not need cheap recycled computers, they need access to the basic necessities of life.
Besides, where the heck are these kids going to get internet access?
I have been programming for over 10 years, 8 - 12 hours a day, 5 - 6 days a week, and have never suffered RSI. I am a touch typist and can type 50 - 80 wpm, never really bothered to measure it.
The problem I find with most people that have RSI caused by typing is that they tend to keep their wrists in a rigid locked position and they tend to pound on the keys with their fingers. This WILL cause RSI because you are constantly straining your tendons unnaturally. My brother-in-law types fast, but he does it in short bursts, his wrist and arms go rigid and he types blazingly fast, fingers pounding on the keyboard for about 30 seconds, then he has to stop and rub his wrists because they are sore. RSI is repetitive STRAIN injury, and by keeping your wrist rigid and tendons strained, this is how you cause the condition.
My typing style is relaxed, and I am not measuring or care how fast I type. By not keeping my wrist rigid and only applying enough pressure on the keys to depress them enough to register a press, I quite honestly that this prevents me from the kind of RSI problems most people suffer from. I find that relatively slow and steady will beat out the productivity and discomfort of trying to type blazingly fast for short bursts. I can maintain a consistent typing rate for hours that will exceed someone typing in quick short bursts and having to stop because the pain becomes unbearable.
Another thing I believe in is that your company or boss has to give you the right tools to do the job. I will refuse to program if I don't use Microsoft's Natural Keyboard. I have used one almost my entire programming career, and before it, in the early days of using those straight unnatural keyboards, I did feel I was starting to suffer some strain in my wrists. Since then I have found this keyboard layout to cause no undue strain on my wrists. If your boss is too cheap to buy you the right equipment then it will pay in the long run for you to invest in your own equipment. If your not allowed to bring your own keyboard and/or mouse into your office, then quit. You work to live, you don't live to work, and any company that doesn't recognize that they must cater to your personal comfort and safety at work is not a company you should work for. This goes too for the kind of desk and chair you sit in. A chair without adjustable height and adjustable arms so that you can position your arms appropriately to the height of the keyboard is essential to proper typing technique that does not involve RSI.
Another important factor is to simply take a break, at least 5 minutes every hour. Get up and walk around, get a drink from the water cooler or something, go to the washroom. I rarely spend more then an hour of solid typing without giving my body a break. Even if your boss ties you to your desk, just stop, drop your arms and take a rest for 5 minutes.
Most people assume that typing causes RSI, that there is no way to avoid it because the motions of striking fingers onto a keyboard is the fundamental definition of RSI. Bullsh*t! If you are suffering from RSI then you significantly underestimated the importance of ergonomics in your work environment. Change that keyboard and change your typing habits, pay attention to how your holding your wrists, if rigid learn to loosen them up, stop trying to go for speed records typing as many words per minute as possible (its not a competition) and realize you don't have to strike your keyboard with a lots of force in order to move those keys. If you can't touch type, then learn to, its more efficient the the 4 fingered speed hunt and peck that most people do when they don't know how to type. Your wrist splints are probably more of a hindrance then they benefit, and the fact you mentioned they slow down your typing suggests you feel quantity is better then quality.
There is no one single thing you can do to prevent RSI, its a collection of habits and the tools you are using that are causing it. But I can safely say with the right combination of both, you should experience no pain or RSI symptoms, period.
They could be vaporware, but they were hitting the news sites in January. It didn't take long for an Asian company to rip off the idea though. Hopefully iLoad got a few patents in place first.
I mean, the moment a journalist is involved in any form of investigation, every one cries out, "freedom of the press, freedom of speech, how dare they!"
Look, if a reporter breaks the law in order to get the news, then no, they don't have that freedom. Being a journalist does not entitle them to break the law, period.
Unfortunately, the only way to investigate these claims is to seize the computer equipment, which violates the journalists privacy because there is information that has no business being looked at. But there obviously was merit or seizing the equipment.
I just don't buy the whole freedom of speech angle in this story. If it turns out that PA didn't want the journalists to publish a story, and so used some fake warrant to seize computers, then I will jump on the free speech bandwagon. But if journalists are being investigated for possible criminal behaviour then they have no right to cry about about their lack of freedom of the press or freedom of speech. People too often hide behind this crutch, especially when they are guilty of criminal behaviour.
It clearly states that Content in this statement concerns information about Amazon's products and services, that is, if you store Content that originated from Amazon, they have the right to use that content.
This does not mean that your pictures, music, etc, etc, i.e. Personal Information is valid for Amazon to use.
The part about tracking your content or accessing your content through supeonas, etc is valid. Look, don't store pirated movies and porn on Amazon's web service. Use it as a backup for personal photos and music you legitimately own, and you won't have a problem. Amazon wants to ensure they are not being used to move pirated content over the net or used for illegal purposes, and they have the right to ensure you are not violating their trust by using them to easily distribute illegal content.
I think your trying to read something into this that doesn't exist. The language might be a little difficult to understand, but it is clear what they can and can't do with your personal content and what they are allowed to do about their own content that you may store with the service.
I mean, we do know that PS3 is the next generation of Sony gaming platform, Apple seems fit to surprise us every few months with "just one more thing". We don't even know if Apple is truly has a new video iPod that may or may not be released in March or April. If Sony's strategy has been insane, I think most Apple's exec's should be locked away in straight jackets with the key thrown away.
For Sony, the bottom line is that the PS3 is hotly anticipated and we are aware that it WILL be released and basically what it is. If it was released today, you can be assured that they will sell millions in just a few hours. Does Sony really need a firm release date?
Late? How many Dell computers use EFI? I mean, if a PC currently doesn't support the technology, why stall an OS release to support it? This is one of those things that can be dropped into Windows from a simple update.
While I am disappointed that Vista won't have WinFS at launch either, Vista will offer developers an unprecedented level of customization and control over how their application looks from their WinFX presentation layer. Most people thinks its just eye candy that Vista is offering, but the API's being offered will allow for Flash like animation adding more dynamics and richness to applications that NO OTHER OS can boast yet, even OSX. From a programmers perspective, Vista is bringing a lot to the table.
I get tired of the constant barrage of newer and faster video cards on a 6 month cycle. Most people can't afford $700 for the latest video card, so its like 12 months before these video cards become feasible for the average user to consider in their new system, and by then a newer faster $700 video card has already come out.
The problem is, with each generation of video card, full of hype and claims of high performance, wait 6 months and a video game is usually released where it cripples the card. I have an x700 video card and, while not the x800, it was still in a generation of video cards that can play the newest games at the highest resolutions with the best quality settings. Playing F.E.A.R I can barely get 30 fps out of the card with minimum to medium quality settings, that on a video card not more then a year old.
Video cards are one of those products that are sold for way too much money when it is first released. I mean, nVidia and ATI may think it is necessary to jack up the cost to cover R&D investment, but how much R&D is really going on? With the 7900, nVidia just looked to shrink some of the components and optimize existing architecture, something they have been doing consistently with the Geforce lineup. Are they spending billions in R&D, or just millions? Do they need to sell new cards for $700, or perhaps can we start seeing a price war that will drive down costs of new products to reasonable prices.
In any case, so what, nVidia has a new lineup of video cards. Add that to the list of literally hundreds of available video cards on the market, with 16 versions of every model and generation by 16 different companies, the video card market has become muddy and overly complicated and I just don't care when something new enters the market now because it won't run the games well that I want to play 6 months from now, and I don't have $700 burning a hole in my pocket every 6 months to buy the next latest and greatest.
Slashdot Mirror
First, drop the Star Wars franchise, at least for a decade. You have exhausted any creativity or appeal to this tired concept and ideas like television shows and new games will fall flat.
Second, Lucas, the future of movies isn't in making everything a special effect. I am sure if George had his way he would have preferred making the last Star Wars film entirely digital, including the actors. For God's sake, there was more emotion and conviction in digital Yoda's performance then ALL the live actors combined (largely because Lucas can't direct, period). As much as computer special effects and 3D rendering is growing in leaps and bounds, it is a fad that will wain. The goal of 3D effects is to make it look realistic, to integrate it into live action to a point where you can no longer tell the difference, not to simply cheap out on set design by having actors jump around in front of green screens.
Lucasarts/film need a new muse, a new product that ISN'T Star Wars or even Indiana Jones to concentrate on. I mean, literally, Lucas is on-hit-wonder, stretching out Star Wars: A new hope over the last 30+ years.
I would love to see Lucasarts concentrate on new ideas, start making movies or games with other themes or offering their skills to other movies. Instead, Lucasarts is just some ego stroking ulterior entity of George Lucas filled with people that need to learn to say "No George, I don't want to ruin creativity and innovation just because you want Yoda spinning around like a Tasmanian devil". Lucas needs to retire and let his enterprises spread innovation around in Hollywood rather then working on yet another Star Wars spin off product.
Honestly, Lucas needs to see a shrink because I think he has escaped to a galaxy far far away and long ago and can't let go of it. Time for a new thought Lucas, 30+ years is enough obsessing about Leia.
Look, ANYTHING Microsoft does, it is held under scrutiny and generally people will bitch and complaining about it.
Apple CAN exclude legacy support largely because they control every aspect of their products. Apple is their own monopoly.
If Microsoft deiced, hey, lets abandon serial ports you would have an uprising of epic proportions. First, slews of customers that rely on serial port items like data entry devices or signal sampling, or a slew of other legacy devices that only support serial ports will be up in arms over the loss of support.
Second, slews of companies will be up in arms over Microsoft deciding to drop legacy support of serial ports because they will be forced to have to redesign their products and possibly find solutions to send out to existing customers so they could continue to support that product.
Remember Microsoft is installed on over 90% of the world's PC's. If Microsoft makes a decision to drop Floppy support, or any other legacy technology, they have to answer to BILLIONS of customers. If someone doesn't like the fact that Apple dropped floppy support, then they just won't buy a Mac. If Windows drops support for floppies, then what will that customer buy?
It is so trite to say that Apple should be lauded for dropping legacy support while Microsoft should be reprimanded. Regardless of how people believe Microsoft owns a monopoly and controls every aspect of the PC, this couldn't be further from the truth. Microsoft has to cater to millions of consumers that can't drop their DOS games, or 10 year old devices, or legacy printers, even those applications and equipment belong in a museum (or landfill).
I am sure that Microsoft would love to end legacy support for a slew of devices. Do you actually think Microsoft WANTS their OS to be slow? Are some of you so delusional to think that Bill Gates sits there in his office wringing his hands and finding out ways to make his OS more insecure and slower????
If Microsoft made a grand decision to drop, say, analog CRT technology, or floppy drive support, or whatever, the uproar would be defining. Apple drops a legacy product, and largely the market say, so what, I still won't buy a Mac regardless.
Overall, this doesn't slow down Windows while running, only on installation of the OS and installation of device drivers. If you don't have certain legacy hardware, Windows isn't slow because it is trying to detect them, or running devices drivers for non-existent hardware. At least Microsoft has made their OS efficient enough to unload drivers for devices not found.
What truly slows down Windows is Microsoft's reliance on virtual memory, and even if you have 2 - 4 gigabytes of RAM, Microsoft still insists on a swap file. HARD DRIVES are the major bottleneck in performance on computers today, and when Microsoft forces gigabytes of data to be swapped to the hard drive, this reduces performance, PERIOD!
I can't stand the double standards imposed on Microsoft. Apple always gets a slap on the back anytime they do something, but if Microsoft does the same thing, they will be chastised. Microsoft gets brought to court for installing media players and browsers in their OS, but Apple is celebrated by including iTunes and Safari in theirs.
I am no big supporter of Microsoft by any means, I think they need to start getting some balls and telling their legacy clenching customers to drop DOS apps and old hardware and say enough is enough, but to laud Apple for doing that is just down right troll bait.
The problem is Microsoft is damned if they do, damned if they don't. Millions of people complain that Windows is slow because of legacy support and complain while millions more will be very vocal against Microsoft if they ever touch that floppy interface or serial port. Microsoft can't please anybody at anytime. Microsoft has had to support millions of devices and configurations, and guess what, they have done a good freakin job of it. Apple couldn't do it, Linux can't do it. The only reason why Windows has 90% of the market is because they have supported and will continue to support millions of devices.
They don't sell the same volume as a Dan Brown or RK Rowling novel.
When you consider how many books those author's sell, then ask yourself by those books are so expensive.
They are also reference manuals, sources of information intended to support your work, which they largely assume your being paid to do. Buying a book on SQL or PHP or C++ programming is expensive because they consider these to be books used by professionals to make money. They don't consider these books to be bought by hobbyists having a passing interest in these technologies. The books predominantly are purchased by paid professionals seeking solutions and answers to products they intend to make a profit off of, or get paid to develop.
There is also a certain mentality that there are people willing to pay $80 for a C++ reference manual, and I would suggest, there are lots of people that can't think on their own unless their ideas and education can be supported by a large reference library.
I learn by doing. I learned PHP and MySQL by actually developing a website, throwing myself into the thick of it using only online reference manuals. Granted, it may not be the greatest website on the planet, but I learned how to implement a message board and dynamic content and advertising simply by doing it, not reading about it in a book. These book authors don't make money of competent individuals that can learn and explore new ideas on their own, they make their money off the people that feel it necessary to read about something for weeks before actually touching a computer. I found that usually picking up a book about mySQL or PHP AFTER doing my website, most of the books offer few new insights into using these technologies.
If you think that these books are too expensive, realize there is a slew of free resources on the web at your finger tips. Largely, these books simply collect that information and consolidate it into a single source. If you have any programming experience, then you shouldn't need to buy a book about any other scripting or programming language, you already know the basic concepts and premises, you just need to understand the syntax, which you can find from countless online resources. If its not based on a programming language, such as learning how to use Windows 2003 server or Apache, etc. Try and learn about these technologies on your own by setting up your own server and using the web as a reference.
If you still find you can't learn enough on your own, using the web as your guide, then you will at least learn to appreciate that buying a book, even an expensive one, is a better aid for you to learn new technologies. But I think you will find that learning by doing, rather then reading, is both inexpensive and more enjoyable in the long run.
Finally, if your working for an employer that demands you setup a PHP server and develop a website next week, then get them to pay for the books if you have no experience. These book author's also assume that these books are paid for by employer's to enhance the skills and experience of their employees, and anything sold to businesses is generally more expensive then to individuals.
I think there is one syndrome that is being overlooked here, the need for attention starved people to start labelling something as a syndrome to get 15 minutes of fame. I call it RCS (Repetitive Crap Syndrome).
I am not only a member of the RCS Anonymous help group, I am its president.
Why should the MacBook be any faster then any other DuoCore notebook out there. They use the same CPU, memory technology, hard drive technology, etc, etc, etc. Either the original article is biased or people just are not aware of how similar the MacBook is to any other PC notebook running the DuoCore CPU.
Can anyone name one reason (not "because its an Apple") as to why the technology in the MacBook should run faster then in an equivalently equiped PC? And I don't believe EFI has anything to do with it either.
Perhaps Intel purposely gave Apple a leg up on the DuoCore chipset by perhaps slightly overclocking them to give them an edge, or some special hardware tweak that only the MacBook is getting over other PC notebooks. I just can't see how the same equipment can run better on one system over another.
IE was integrated because the same kind of display used to show files and directories could be used to display web content, and it made sense to integrate the same technology in order to save on system resources.
Today, with people having more horsepower in their computer then they know what to do with, same goes for hard drive space, having a tightly integrated web browser / file browser doesn't make sense, and it has been a source of Microsoft's security problems.
Yes, you will still be able to type a web address in the file explorer in Vista and have a web page display . While explorer and internet explorer are no longer integrated, Vista will transparently switch between the applications and maintain the same window view.
I am sure that I.E. components will still be launched at system startup, to give Microsoft and edge over 3rd party browsers for quick browser launching, but by removing the integration with the file explorer, this will definitely be a welcomed change that should offer better security in the long run, which Microsoft desperitely needs.
Laptops have no place in the classroom. They are an excellent educational tool, but when it comes to taking lecture notes, they are annoying.
First, it is annoying for other people in the class to hear the click click click of someone trying to frantically type everything the professor says. When I was in university, it was also annoying when those using a laptop would constantly ask the professor to repeat what they said because they couldn't keep up, even to repeat something said like 5 minutes earlier.
Second, while for some course you might only need to take verbal notes, many of the engineering courses I took involved math formulas and diagrams, and there would be those with a laptop trying to draw or use Matlab to take down the notes, adding to further annoyance when the professor wanted to erase the board 15 minutes later while the notebook guy was still drawing our creating the math formula.
What was also annoying was those people that were not actually taking lecture notes, those that use the notebook as a source of entertainment to them and others because they were board with the lecture. Wireless internet wasn't prevalent back when I went to school, but I am sure now that many people probably browse the web while in a lecture.
Finally, I agree that going to a lecture isn't about transcribing everything the professor says. Listening to them, engaging them in dialogue, and actually participating in the class is the best way to learn rather then just writing down everything and reviewing your notes come exam time. In my senior year, I stopped taking lecture notes, period. I found that by getting the gist of what the professor was saying was enough to do well on the exams, rather then a word for word regurgitatory review of his notes. Professors come to know people that talk to them in class, and generally I think you get better marks in the long run, you get better marks.
That, and most professors in the know simply photocopy their overheads or lecture notes and sell them at the book store or post them online.
I wanted to use something like a tablet PC when I was in university, being able to scratch both notes and formulas down on a touch sensitive screen makes more sense in the class environment then typing them down.
Ultimately, its up to the professor to decide how people take his/her course. Most schools cater to the specific needs of the professor, these are people that make the university what it is, they bring money into the school by doing research and writing books, teaching is a secondary task for many university professors. Few schools would force a professor to accept notebooks in the classroom if they are against it. If you don't like that policy, then drop the course, you ain't going to win either way.
I have heard of lots of little applications for helping to organize your books and records and such, but I never understood how cataloguing your collection in a computer really helps you find that book in real life.
You can waste your time scanning in bar codes or typing in book and author names and such, the best way to organize large collections of books is just to take the time stack them alphabetically on shelves. If you find you don't remember what books you have, you have too many books, period. Give some away or sell them to a book store, you probably will never look at them again if you can't remember anything about them.
I don't think your solution can be found in software. Sure, you might be able to search for and find a book your looking for in a nice slick piece of software, but then where you last left that book somewhere in your home is the problem your having that software can't solve.
I mean, the Mac is a PC with EFI. The hardware in it is PC hardware. I am sure it is slightly more complicated then that, considering that Mac's typically take PC components like video cards and slightly alter the firmware or BIOS on them in order to make them "Mac" hardware (and charge 50% more for the same equivalent PC card), but again, how hard is it to get Windows to run on a PC?
Come one, this isn't news. Mac's are now 98% PC's, getting Windows to run on them is trivial considering Windows is an OS designed to run on millions of configurations of PC's as opposed to the 3 Macintel models Apple offer. Once EFI support is built into Vista, it will become even more trivial to run Windows on a "Mac".
Apple lost, period. They are a PC clone with a Unix based OS, everything Apple despised in the past is now their flagship product! Apple's new motto "Think Same!" or "If you can't beat em, join em!"
I mean, Mozilla used to be slow and steady, now they are firing out updates on .5 increments.
.1 version increments. If they are just trying to drive up the version number to match I.E.'s 7.0, then they will find that Firefox performs about as well as I.E. 7.0, or even less so considering it took Microsoft 10 years to get there.
Is this good or bad? I think Firefox will end up becoming bloated and bug ridden just like IE if they keep up this kind of product update cycle. Firefox 1.5 hasn't even been out for 6 months and they are previewing version 2.0.
While I do think that some open source projects move a long at a pace that make snails impatient, I have found that this quick turnaround for FireFox versions isn't beneficial in the long run. I have found there to be more problems in each new version, and I have stopped using Thunderbird for several problems that haven't been addressed yet (such as opening up the wrong email when you click on a header).
I think Mozilla should slow down a bit, or at least go back to the
Think of it, those boring little static images you get on your snail mail. What if they could show you the latest Madonna video, or episode of Lost? Think of how much money the music, television and movie industries could make if they could beam their content to stamps?
... unless of course your credit card is maxed out from all the subscription service fees your paying to get tv, music, movies and video on a stamp.
I am surprised Apple isn't realizing the potential of showing videos and playing music on stamps. I mean, the iPod Nano is slightly bigger then a stamp.
I am also surprised Google hasn't figured this out yet, all that wasted space on a letter that Google could put ad words and Google adds on. That stamp is just dying to display Google content.
Also, think of the potential of not having to buy extra postage stamps when the Post office increases their delivery charges on a monthly basis. You could setup a stamp website that takes people's credit cards and automatically bills them for the increase in delivery charges and update the stamps face value, while the letter is CURRENTLY in transit! The post office could change their postage fees as easily as Gas companies change the price of oil!!!! No more returned mail for insufficient funds
Why is this so laughable, I mean, they thought TV on cellphones would work, why not stamps?
I don't know, I think the telecommunications industry has exhausted all their ideas for cell phones, I mean, TV on cellphones was so last week. The future is in Stamps I tell you, STAMPS!
By offloading physics from the CPU to the graphics card, this improves frame rates?
Why would I waste precious GPU processing to process Physics? I mean, all the CPU does these days is handle AI, physics, and texture loading. If you offload physics to the GPU, then the CPU is doing less and your swamping the GPU with more work.
If it does increase frame rates, then I would suggest why not improve graphics rendering rather then physics processing. I find that for all the advances nVidia and ATI have made over the years, 3D gaming visual quality is still inferior to cinematic quality 3D rendering. I mean, playing F.E.A.R, a relatively new game on the market, with ALL the settings to maximum, while I get 12 FPS the image quality just isn't that great on a current generation card.
I would prefer if nVidia and ATI actually focused on bringing cinematic quality 3D rendering to gaming, instead of just claiming they do. I want smooth high-poly models with realistic lighting and 60fps. I could care less about a game running at 120fps that looks bad. All 3D games suffer from a kind of mundane pseudo style of 3D modeling that leaves relatively well designed models playing in big rectangles with high-res texture cheats. Give me more lushes organic environments. Bring nurbs into the mix by creating actual curved surfaces into real time 3D rendering instead of just lots of triangles mimicking a curved surface.
So, while nVidia may have its heart in the right place, the last thing people need is their GPU being taxed with physics processing. Isn't there supposed to be a physics add-on card entering the market soon anyways? Won't multi-core CPU's offer better physics performance then a single GPU? Instead of trying to compete against add-in cards and multi-core CPU's, nVidia should just focus on improving 3D rendering quality and actually start delivering on their promises of offering cinematic 3D rendering to each new generation of video card they hype about.
Moving to OSX in droves? where is your proof?
The fact is, Apple hasn't gained markeshare over Windows since OSX was introduced in 2000. Even though each new generation of OSX has improved upon itself and offered an superior OS to Windows, still, few people are making the switch. Even Apple admits that it's switch campainge has failed, and if it were not for the iPod, Apple probably would have seen far less Mac sales then there has been.
The fact it, most companies are not going to switch to OSX for the simple cost of ownership. Having to replace your existing desktop systems with expensive Mac systems just to switch OS'ses doesn't make good business sense. You are talking about corporations with thousands of desktop computers, not just a home user deciding if they want to swap their Dell desktop or notebook for a fancy Apple. No company is going to justify buying 1000 new G5 PowerMac's just to run OSX. Once you switch to OSX, you have to buy a whole slew of applications for it as well, which compounds the cost.
Application support just isn't in OSX also because the development environment for Windows is so much easier and more robust then OSX. XCode and Objective C, while free, represents everything that is wrong with Apple, their adherance to old philosophies that are failing, but too much ego is involved to let it go. XCode and ObjectiveC was supposed to make designing apps for Macs easy and braindead, even for the non-programmer, instead it confounds real programmers and hobbyists alike. If your serious about Mac programming, then you use CodeWarrior instead of Apple's free tools. Without good software tools, then the slew of shareware and freeware apps that PC users get to use just isn't available on the Mac platform.
I will whole heartedly agree that Microsoft has a lot to fear with Ubuntuu and other Linux alternatives. The ability to install a "free" OS on their existing hardware, often brining old hardware back to life with a more robust OS that isn't heavily laden with extras is very enticing. But to suggest that people are adopting OSX in droves is just unfounded.
Microsoft will never have to worry about OSX, in fact, with people finding ways of running WindowsXP aond the new Macintels, Microsoft is laughing their way to the bank as PC users buy Apple's to run Windows in a fancy box.
Its the content.
Slashdot ain't that pretty, honestly. But what draws people here is the content. PlentyOfFish is a dating service, that is free, and there are lots of people looking for love out there.
The quality of the website can't be judged by how good or bad it looks. Just like a book cover or people, beauty rarely is the sole reason something is ever successful or popular.
Some of the best looking websites out there don't get an audience because the content sucks or is irrelevant.
If you have a website that is making tonnes of money, why bother wasting any of it to glam it up?
I mean, this is an organization that used to offer product releases of .001 increments over the course of years, now they went from 1.0 to 1.5 and already talking about 2.0 versions of Firefox.
Is Mozilla looking to become Microsoft?
Slow and steady is what has founded Mozilla and Firefox, don't blow it by having version upgrades that coincide with the frequency of changing underwear.
I mean, if you can not imagine how much technology could improve, that you were happy with the current state of technology, and thus, didn't dream about what improvements could be made upon it, then yes, innovation is dead.
I would sell my off my stock of IBM if this is the company's outlook of their executive officers, that they had done all they can dream about and don't have any new dreams to aspire to.
Simply put, we are still in the infancy of technology. Its only been in the last 30 years that we have hit upon the idea that simple bits of silicon and metals could offer us such a huge potential for technical innovation, not just in computing, but in all aspects of science and technology. Nanotechnology would have been a joke 20 years ago, now CPU's are shrinking into the nanoscale realm which is spawning off other imaginative innovators to create smaller machines and other nanoscale products and technology.
While the industry may be slowing down in the number of awe-inspiring innovations per year ratio, to say that there will be no more great innovations is the sign of someone that has grown weary of this industry and probably should retire. I mean, they are working on quantum computing which completely blows my mind. They have also figured out how to slow and trap light and there have even been reports of small scale fusion using crystals. There is a very conceivable plan to build a space elevator using thousands of miles of carbon nanotubes. If these don't lead to impressive innovations in the near to not so near futures, then what is this guy thinking? Perhaps he just needs to spend a day browsing Slashdot.
I think it is quite short sighted to say, "Well, we done it all folks, nothing left to see here, move along!". If companies like IBM are believing this is possible, then I think it is part of a common emerging trend I see happening in the computer and technology industry. Legacy companies like IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Apple, etc, I.e. the grandfathers with 30+ years of experience under their belts are starting to get shoehorned into a line of thinking that is being plagued by baby boomers who never thought the current level of technology and innovation was ever possible or imagined.
I mean, sure Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Gordon E. Moore, and Thomas J. Watson Sr were all innovators, they helped to define the technology today. But after spending most of their lives in this industry wrapped up in their own ego's don't you think they have become a little jaded and contrived?
Intel started down a path that lead them to hit a brick wall. The idea of simply doubling transistors and Mhz would perpetually gain them higher performing CPU's on an 18 month clock cycle. That idea has failed utterly with the Pentium 4 Netburst architecture. Instead, going back and designing new architecture that focuses on performance per watt, rather then performance per millions of transistors is now starting to turn around a slump in Intel's products. While AMD is no spring chick in the electronics industry, it wasn't until the fresh idea of the Athlon came about, when AMD started focusing on performance per watt from the start that Intel realized their legacy ideas were failing them.
Honestly, I think the baby boomers need to retire and let their offspring enter the market. I don't see this industry slowing down or nearing its end, I see it only just starting to take off. I can imagine in so many ways how technology can not just be improved upon like building the better mouse trap, but new innovations that blow the current technology out of the water.
Maybe some old CEO of a company waking up in the morning with a stiff back dreading the morning commute in his Merc or Bimmer or even Limo might feel that innovation is entering its golden years because he just isn't inspired anymore. But I can honestly and safely say that its just him that is slipping into the light, not innovation.
Baby boomers move over, your starting to stink up the joint with Bengay!
I mean, this concept isn't even original. A few months ago a company displayed technology allowing up to 8 points of contact on a touch screen display. One of the demo videos shows a bunch of photo images scattered on the background where the user could drag photos around, scale them, rotate them, etc, all in a simple environment using 2 fingers.
Apple even has a patent on multipoint touch displays, I am sure some future version of iPhoto is already patented with this concept in mind.
If your going to hype about some new concept or idea, make sure you thought of it first, otherwise you look like an ass. Anybody that sponsor's one penny to this crack will deserve the feeling of being duped.
I mean, honestly, these children in developing countries need access to clean drinking water and such trivial things as medicine to keep them alive. They don't need some underpowered gadget they have to crank on in order to learn about the world they are missing out on.
I find that most university students in developed countries seem to believe that every child in the world needs the same access to information and lifestyles that they enjoy, and this isn't the case. It is wrong to impose western philosophies on the developing nations. In many cases, it is unsustainable. These nations are poor and children are dying because the economy isn't strong enough to support the kind of lifestyle western people are trying to impose on these children.
Education will not solve famine and drought. It is one thing to understand what famine and drought are, or even devise a solution, but if a country isn't rich enough to implement some solution, and the world keeps flooding these regions with cheap recycled computers, how will this solve famine and drought?
Computers are an excess technology. Something not required for life but only attained once a person has reached a quality of life where they can sustain themselves with food, clothing and shelter and have enough excess money to afford a computer. Computers do not improve a person's quality of life, they are a result of having a high quality of life. I am so disappointed when people claim that all a poor nation needs are computers, that computers will help them and aid them in developing their economy. Sorry, these nations need money, period. They need food, clothing, shelter, clean drinking water and medicine, period. And they need to be able to sustain themselves with these basic necessities. Selling trinkets on eBay is not the kind of economy that a developing nation needs to gain access to their basic needs.
Once you can live without threat of dying from starvation, and have a roof over your head, and can sustain that lifestyle, THEN you can worry about education and gaining such materialistic things such as computers.
The western world sees some children playing in the dust over in some poor country and feels that they need to go to some ivy league university in order to have a meaningful and enjoyable life. I think the child will be just as happy to play in the dust if he or she new they would have a full meal waiting for them at home and could eventually contribute to the family by growing their own food on a farm that can sustain plants or helping the community by building wells or farming. These children do not aspire to become doctors or lawyers making a quarter of a million dollars to drive their SUV's around town destroying a little bit of the Earth in their wake.
MIT has to KISS it. Keep It Simple Stupid. And the simplicity of this situation is that these children do not need cheap recycled computers, they need access to the basic necessities of life.
Besides, where the heck are these kids going to get internet access?
I have been programming for over 10 years, 8 - 12 hours a day, 5 - 6 days a week, and have never suffered RSI. I am a touch typist and can type 50 - 80 wpm, never really bothered to measure it.
The problem I find with most people that have RSI caused by typing is that they tend to keep their wrists in a rigid locked position and they tend to pound on the keys with their fingers. This WILL cause RSI because you are constantly straining your tendons unnaturally. My brother-in-law types fast, but he does it in short bursts, his wrist and arms go rigid and he types blazingly fast, fingers pounding on the keyboard for about 30 seconds, then he has to stop and rub his wrists because they are sore. RSI is repetitive STRAIN injury, and by keeping your wrist rigid and tendons strained, this is how you cause the condition.
My typing style is relaxed, and I am not measuring or care how fast I type. By not keeping my wrist rigid and only applying enough pressure on the keys to depress them enough to register a press, I quite honestly that this prevents me from the kind of RSI problems most people suffer from. I find that relatively slow and steady will beat out the productivity and discomfort of trying to type blazingly fast for short bursts. I can maintain a consistent typing rate for hours that will exceed someone typing in quick short bursts and having to stop because the pain becomes unbearable.
Another thing I believe in is that your company or boss has to give you the right tools to do the job. I will refuse to program if I don't use Microsoft's Natural Keyboard. I have used one almost my entire programming career, and before it, in the early days of using those straight unnatural keyboards, I did feel I was starting to suffer some strain in my wrists. Since then I have found this keyboard layout to cause no undue strain on my wrists. If your boss is too cheap to buy you the right equipment then it will pay in the long run for you to invest in your own equipment. If your not allowed to bring your own keyboard and/or mouse into your office, then quit. You work to live, you don't live to work, and any company that doesn't recognize that they must cater to your personal comfort and safety at work is not a company you should work for. This goes too for the kind of desk and chair you sit in. A chair without adjustable height and adjustable arms so that you can position your arms appropriately to the height of the keyboard is essential to proper typing technique that does not involve RSI.
Another important factor is to simply take a break, at least 5 minutes every hour. Get up and walk around, get a drink from the water cooler or something, go to the washroom. I rarely spend more then an hour of solid typing without giving my body a break. Even if your boss ties you to your desk, just stop, drop your arms and take a rest for 5 minutes.
Most people assume that typing causes RSI, that there is no way to avoid it because the motions of striking fingers onto a keyboard is the fundamental definition of RSI. Bullsh*t! If you are suffering from RSI then you significantly underestimated the importance of ergonomics in your work environment. Change that keyboard and change your typing habits, pay attention to how your holding your wrists, if rigid learn to loosen them up, stop trying to go for speed records typing as many words per minute as possible (its not a competition) and realize you don't have to strike your keyboard with a lots of force in order to move those keys. If you can't touch type, then learn to, its more efficient the the 4 fingered speed hunt and peck that most people do when they don't know how to type. Your wrist splints are probably more of a hindrance then they benefit, and the fact you mentioned they slow down your typing suggests you feel quantity is better then quality.
There is no one single thing you can do to prevent RSI, its a collection of habits and the tools you are using that are causing it. But I can safely say with the right combination of both, you should experience no pain or RSI symptoms, period.
Another company beat them too it, called it iLoad.
http://www.iload.com/index.html
They could be vaporware, but they were hitting the news sites in January. It didn't take long for an Asian company to rip off the idea though. Hopefully iLoad got a few patents in place first.
I mean, the moment a journalist is involved in any form of investigation, every one cries out, "freedom of the press, freedom of speech, how dare they!"
Look, if a reporter breaks the law in order to get the news, then no, they don't have that freedom. Being a journalist does not entitle them to break the law, period.
Unfortunately, the only way to investigate these claims is to seize the computer equipment, which violates the journalists privacy because there is information that has no business being looked at. But there obviously was merit or seizing the equipment.
I just don't buy the whole freedom of speech angle in this story. If it turns out that PA didn't want the journalists to publish a story, and so used some fake warrant to seize computers, then I will jump on the free speech bandwagon. But if journalists are being investigated for possible criminal behaviour then they have no right to cry about about their lack of freedom of the press or freedom of speech. People too often hide behind this crutch, especially when they are guilty of criminal behaviour.
Um no,
It clearly states that Content in this statement concerns information about Amazon's products and services, that is, if you store Content that originated from Amazon, they have the right to use that content.
This does not mean that your pictures, music, etc, etc, i.e. Personal Information is valid for Amazon to use.
The part about tracking your content or accessing your content through supeonas, etc is valid. Look, don't store pirated movies and porn on Amazon's web service. Use it as a backup for personal photos and music you legitimately own, and you won't have a problem. Amazon wants to ensure they are not being used to move pirated content over the net or used for illegal purposes, and they have the right to ensure you are not violating their trust by using them to easily distribute illegal content.
I think your trying to read something into this that doesn't exist. The language might be a little difficult to understand, but it is clear what they can and can't do with your personal content and what they are allowed to do about their own content that you may store with the service.
I mean, we do know that PS3 is the next generation of Sony gaming platform, Apple seems fit to surprise us every few months with "just one more thing". We don't even know if Apple is truly has a new video iPod that may or may not be released in March or April. If Sony's strategy has been insane, I think most Apple's exec's should be locked away in straight jackets with the key thrown away.
For Sony, the bottom line is that the PS3 is hotly anticipated and we are aware that it WILL be released and basically what it is. If it was released today, you can be assured that they will sell millions in just a few hours. Does Sony really need a firm release date?
Late? How many Dell computers use EFI? I mean, if a PC currently doesn't support the technology, why stall an OS release to support it? This is one of those things that can be dropped into Windows from a simple update.
While I am disappointed that Vista won't have WinFS at launch either, Vista will offer developers an unprecedented level of customization and control over how their application looks from their WinFX presentation layer. Most people thinks its just eye candy that Vista is offering, but the API's being offered will allow for Flash like animation adding more dynamics and richness to applications that NO OTHER OS can boast yet, even OSX. From a programmers perspective, Vista is bringing a lot to the table.
I get tired of the constant barrage of newer and faster video cards on a 6 month cycle. Most people can't afford $700 for the latest video card, so its like 12 months before these video cards become feasible for the average user to consider in their new system, and by then a newer faster $700 video card has already come out.
The problem is, with each generation of video card, full of hype and claims of high performance, wait 6 months and a video game is usually released where it cripples the card. I have an x700 video card and, while not the x800, it was still in a generation of video cards that can play the newest games at the highest resolutions with the best quality settings. Playing F.E.A.R I can barely get 30 fps out of the card with minimum to medium quality settings, that on a video card not more then a year old.
Video cards are one of those products that are sold for way too much money when it is first released. I mean, nVidia and ATI may think it is necessary to jack up the cost to cover R&D investment, but how much R&D is really going on? With the 7900, nVidia just looked to shrink some of the components and optimize existing architecture, something they have been doing consistently with the Geforce lineup. Are they spending billions in R&D, or just millions? Do they need to sell new cards for $700, or perhaps can we start seeing a price war that will drive down costs of new products to reasonable prices.
In any case, so what, nVidia has a new lineup of video cards. Add that to the list of literally hundreds of available video cards on the market, with 16 versions of every model and generation by 16 different companies, the video card market has become muddy and overly complicated and I just don't care when something new enters the market now because it won't run the games well that I want to play 6 months from now, and I don't have $700 burning a hole in my pocket every 6 months to buy the next latest and greatest.