Not to mention that to win a trademark case you have to prove that not only is the name not sufficently different from a competitor, but that you are selling to the same audience. For example, you couldn't come along and name your own supermarket 'King Sooper' or 'Albertson', because the name would be confusing to the same group of potential customers.
So if you have a company that sells PCI cards named 'OogaBooga' and there's a company that sells watercoolers already with that name, most likely neither of you would be able to successfully win a trademark case against one another. (Plus simply for marketing's sake you usually want a name that's different, right?)
So short of calling your company Kod@k and trying to sell cameras & film, you're usually OK.
In this case, (Photoshop, GimpShop) the name is different, and the argument could be made that the target audience is different as well. They're perfectly safe on trademark. (at least in the US)
It's stifling technological innovation, as if there's not already enough of that at NASA (how old is the shuttle?) -- read the proposals. All of the planned missions will be done using reconfigurations of existing shuttle technology.
This is because no senator will ever approve the $100B if they don't get to keep their current pork barrel(s). This is purely political since NASA operates on public funding; One of the articles here on/. like 2 months ago, (back when they were talking about the space shuttle's replacement), linked to a space.com article that explicitly said reusing parts was a consideration in replacement shuttle designs for exactly this reason...
100ms? In my experience, (mind you this is with playing guitar), anything over about 12ms latency starts to get really annoying if you're actually trying to play in sync with other tracks while recording. 9ms is tolerable, 5ms is preferred, but I start getting funny pops and stuttering noises with the buffers that low... (start sounding like Linkin Park but without meaning to).
Having done tech support over the phone for a major US ISP on both Mac and Windows platforms, I can tell you the majority of Mac users knew their computers much better than the majority of Windows users...
I find this very hard to believe, (speaking from my own experience here). Maybe the Mac people who called you seemed more intelligent because they were the subgroup of Mac users who'd learned to operate a telephone.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not particularly attached to Windows either, but any system designed with, (as you point out), only one mouse button because they assume the users are too incompetent to be given more control says a lot about the company's philosophy about their own intended customers. ("I know, if they ask, we'll tell them it's a feature for their own user-friendly Mac Kool-Aid experience!!! Yeah, they'll buy that....")
Yeah, I thought that'd be the case.. I'm really rusty on my physics but after I wrote that I was thinking that you'd need expend a large amount of energy to try and cancel what you put into getting up to orbital velocity in the first place...
And... I'd imagine that adding the additional braking stages would add significantly more weight than we'd save by dumping the heat sheild. Oh well, it was a thought.
Then, if it were built, there'd be the touchy subject of trusting people's lives 100% to an engine system for them to return to Earth intact- I wouldn't want to be the engineer responsible for building it. I mean, I guess there's a phase of launch right now that's like that, but that's not to say it's a good idea.
Ok, reading #3 above, I've gotta ask: this may be a totally naive question, but since IANARS- what if instead of lighting retro rockets to break orbit and dropping into the atmosphere at better than mach 20, and relying on friction to slow us down, (and as you mention, relying on relatively fragile ablative plating)... Suppose you have a craft with enough fuel/big enough engine to not only break orbit, but to slow down enough to maintain reentry at a managable temperature?
For example, your braking maneuver would start with purely retrograde thrust... as the spacecraft's vector begins dropping earthward, maintain the braking in the opposite direction, pushing against both gravity and the prograde movement. Go into the atmosphere at a managable rate of speed, and you wouldn't have the heating problems of 6000'+, you'd get to pick the temp. you want based on how much braking thrust you build into the system. So, you want to come in at 1000km/hr? 500km/hr? Just build the engine and launch the propellant.
This seems reasonable to me, it's just needing to launch the weight of the extra fuel and possibly larger engine into orbit that causes the problem.
Re:...the same features we delivered seven years a
on
Windows 95 Turns 10
·
· Score: 1
I didn't see that one, but you'll LOVE this, M$ applied for a patent on "property" pages...
Problem is liability; as a company you don't want to get sued if the friendly script (allegedly) hoses some user's computer, who undoubtedly would tell the courts it had really expensive stuff on it.
I agree it would be useful, but we're graduating lawyers each year who need jobs....
>If your time is worth anything at all, the $200 license fee
It's not that big of a hassle to set up dual boot really...
Use a partition tool (open or otherwise), to carve a section out of your (windows) drive, insert Linux install disc, be sure to let its setup install Lilo or Grub in the MBR of your disc, and away you go! 15 minutes (tops!) + linux install time.
Say linux install time is 2 hours, you're at 2hours 15mins total install to up&running time. Most people don't make $89/hour to justify VMware's $200 tag.
VMware is fine, (I use it myself) but I also have dual-boot on two machines... And you can also configure vmware to boot your actual linux partition to make changes, and then reboot over there if you want...
But getting back to the topic: I'm not really in favor of M$ spending a great deal of time making themselves Ext2/3 compatable, (since it would never happen anyway and it probably would take several versions before they got it right). What would really be nice though is if they'd just publish the NTFS format so we could make our plugins access (and write to) these drives as easily as FATs.
It's not an outrageous request to ask that they publish a storage format that is aging and that everyone with an NT/2000/XP Windows system generally already uses...
Must be some of that "interoperability" he talks about.
Anyway, there's got to be more to this story for this to be a 'problem', considering they could donate the whole system to any university, and the stuff would eventually get copied... I'm beginning to think this is just NASA's newest attempt to threaten a beloved program to try and get more money out of the gov't. You know, when a bunch of civilians sucessfully designed, built and launched a spacecraft for, what, $35 million, how much bloat must be in NASA for us to give them umpteen-billion $ every year, and have them only fly a 'truck' into low orbit once or twice a year, and play around with the leo spacestation?
Wonder how much it'd cost a private company to do the same service...
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention that to win a trademark case you have to prove that not only is the name not sufficently different from a competitor, but that you are selling to the same audience. For example, you couldn't come along and name your own supermarket 'King Sooper' or 'Albertson', because the name would be confusing to the same group of potential customers.
So if you have a company that sells PCI cards named 'OogaBooga' and there's a company that sells watercoolers already with that name, most likely neither of you would be able to successfully win a trademark case against one another. (Plus simply for marketing's sake you usually want a name that's different, right?)
So short of calling your company Kod@k and trying to sell cameras & film, you're usually OK.
In this case, (Photoshop, GimpShop) the name is different, and the argument could be made that the target audience is different as well. They're perfectly safe on trademark. (at least in the US)
It's stifling technological innovation, as if there's not already enough of that at NASA (how old is the shuttle?) -- read the proposals. All of the planned missions will be done using reconfigurations of existing shuttle technology.
/. like 2 months ago, (back when they were talking about the space shuttle's replacement), linked to a space.com article that explicitly said reusing parts was a consideration in replacement shuttle designs for exactly this reason...
This is because no senator will ever approve the $100B if they don't get to keep their current pork barrel(s). This is purely political since NASA operates on public funding; One of the articles here on
100ms? In my experience, (mind you this is with playing guitar), anything over about 12 ms latency starts to get really annoying if you're actually trying to play in sync with other tracks while recording. 9ms is tolerable, 5ms is preferred, but I start getting funny pops and stuttering noises with the buffers that low... (start sounding like Linkin Park but without meaning to).
politicians should not be allowed to run until they have passed a basic course on economics
I've been saying this for years, it's nice to hear it from someone else!
Maybe they recorded all their data on media that became obsolete, or did not degrage gracefully.
NASA should include this in their Voyager discontinuation threat.
Yeah for me it's Project5(Cakewalk).
Having done tech support over the phone for a major US ISP on both Mac and Windows platforms, I can tell you the majority of Mac users knew their computers much better than the majority of Windows users...
I find this very hard to believe, (speaking from my own experience here). Maybe the Mac people who called you seemed more intelligent because they were the subgroup of Mac users who'd learned to operate a telephone.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not particularly attached to Windows either, but any system designed with, (as you point out), only one mouse button because they assume the users are too incompetent to be given more control says a lot about the company's philosophy about their own intended customers. ("I know, if they ask, we'll tell them it's a feature for their own user-friendly Mac Kool-Aid experience!!! Yeah, they'll buy that....")
Just $.02.
Often, the result is that people who don't know much will buy what "everyone else has", meaning a Dell with Windows.
What ever happened to Gateway? (remember the cow-painted boxes?) What ever happened to their market share?
They already do... and often.
>>What we must not do it build the damn city back the way it was. Yes, it will probably be cheaper right now. It won't be cheaper in the long run.
>Exactly. Which is why they should do the cheaper AND rational solution: Rebuild elsewhere.
This would imply some amount of foresight and common sense on the part of everyone involved, (especially politicians), so I'm not holding my breath.
Yeah, I thought that'd be the case.. I'm really rusty on my physics but after I wrote that I was thinking that you'd need expend a large amount of energy to try and cancel what you put into getting up to orbital velocity in the first place...
And... I'd imagine that adding the additional braking stages would add significantly more weight than we'd save by dumping the heat sheild. Oh well, it was a thought.
Then, if it were built, there'd be the touchy subject of trusting people's lives 100% to an engine system for them to return to Earth intact- I wouldn't want to be the engineer responsible for building it. I mean, I guess there's a phase of launch right now that's like that, but that's not to say it's a good idea.
Hey, thanks for humoring my question!
Ok, reading #3 above, I've gotta ask: this may be a totally naive question, but since IANARS- what if instead of lighting retro rockets to break orbit and dropping into the atmosphere at better than mach 20, and relying on friction to slow us down, (and as you mention, relying on relatively fragile ablative plating)... Suppose you have a craft with enough fuel/big enough engine to not only break orbit, but to slow down enough to maintain reentry at a managable temperature?
For example, your braking maneuver would start with purely retrograde thrust... as the spacecraft's vector begins dropping earthward, maintain the braking in the opposite direction, pushing against both gravity and the prograde movement. Go into the atmosphere at a managable rate of speed, and you wouldn't have the heating problems of 6000'+, you'd get to pick the temp. you want based on how much braking thrust you build into the system. So, you want to come in at 1000km/hr? 500km/hr? Just build the engine and launch the propellant.
This seems reasonable to me, it's just needing to launch the weight of the extra fuel and possibly larger engine into orbit that causes the problem.
I didn't see that one, but you'll LOVE this, M$ applied for a patent on "property" pages...
US Patent Application 20030007011
Problem is liability; as a company you don't want to get sued if the friendly script (allegedly) hoses some user's computer, who undoubtedly would tell the courts it had really expensive stuff on it.
I agree it would be useful, but we're graduating lawyers each year who need jobs....
>If your time is worth anything at all, the $200 license fee
It's not that big of a hassle to set up dual boot really...
Use a partition tool (open or otherwise), to carve a section out of your (windows) drive, insert Linux install disc, be sure to let its setup install Lilo or Grub in the MBR of your disc, and away you go! 15 minutes (tops!) + linux install time.
Say linux install time is 2 hours, you're at 2hours 15mins total install to up&running time. Most people don't make $89/hour to justify VMware's $200 tag.
VMware is fine, (I use it myself) but I also have dual-boot on two machines... And you can also configure vmware to boot your actual linux partition to make changes, and then reboot over there if you want...
But getting back to the topic: I'm not really in favor of M$ spending a great deal of time making themselves Ext2/3 compatable, (since it would never happen anyway and it probably would take several versions before they got it right). What would really be nice though is if they'd just publish the NTFS format so we could make our plugins access (and write to) these drives as easily as FATs.
It's not an outrageous request to ask that they publish a storage format that is aging and that everyone with an NT/2000/XP Windows system generally already uses...
Must be some of that "interoperability" he talks about.
And you wouldn't know for sure that you fixed it for maybe another 100 tries...
1: "Only the Sith deal in absolutes."
Which, in itself, is an absolute statement.
Anyway, there's got to be more to this story for this to be a 'problem', considering they could donate the whole system to any university, and the stuff would eventually get copied... I'm beginning to think this is just NASA's newest attempt to threaten a beloved program to try and get more money out of the gov't. You know, when a bunch of civilians sucessfully designed, built and launched a spacecraft for, what, $35 million, how much bloat must be in NASA for us to give them umpteen-billion $ every year, and have them only fly a 'truck' into low orbit once or twice a year, and play around with the leo spacestation?
Wonder how much it'd cost a private company to do the same service...
Now they're just sounding desperate.