...if it recognizes revenue from the product at the time of sale...
Apple could have decided to take the "credit" at a point in time after the sale. Like after the 15 day return period. There is also the isue of when development is "R&D" leading to a product or when it is support.
I think Apple is wrong on this. If the computer was sold as having only "g" networking then delivering "n" later is not delivering the product late but a gift to users of something they didn't buy
The problem is the inability to test the software in a realistic environment. In fact you CAN'T fully test software. For example let's say you write a program to add to numbers and print the sum. Very simple program but all you can do is "spot check" it with a few test numbers. for example I doubt testing would catch the bug in the following program
get a value for "A"
get a value for "B"
if (a == 3248532346863247) Add 3 to A
print (A+B)
What or the chances you would use 3248532346863247 as a test value? You could run the abouve program for 100 years and no one would likerly ever find the bug. The only way to find it would be to read the code. It this case it is only four lines of code and anyone could find the error. But what it it were 1,000,000 lines? No human could ever read it but yet having a human read it is to only way to find errors. So you break it up and have 100 humans each read 10,000 lines. What if the bug is in the subtle interaction betwen the parts?
The ONLY solution is to design systems that are tolerent of software bugs. Lots of ways to do this. Put a human pilot inside the airplan or Lunerlander or build a computer to watch the computer or simply fly your test out over the ocean where if they blow up no one is harmmed. You just have to asume there will be bugs and you will not be able to detect them
I have a Nikon DSLR. It's frame size is 3000 x 2000. It would be nice to see my photos in full resolution on the LCD screen.
It would make a great computer monitor
As for industrial use. I'm thinking of an X-ray machine's view screen.
This is not for watching Hollywood movies but there is plenty of content
For example a painting a stolen 50 or 60 year ago. After that it changes hands a few times and the last two transactions went through art dealers who kept records and didn't know the painting was ever stolen. Now the painting is hanging on loan to an art museum. Then along comes an older woman who sees the painting in a museum an recognizes it is the one stolen from her grandparents.
We can't blame the two art dealers because in the past art was not tracked so well and ownership was transfered with just a handshake. The thief is long dead as is the owner.
I think even in these cases where there is no one alive to blame the current "owner" still looses out and the courts have to straighten it out. These kinds of art cases come up several times a year. The most famos recent cases are with the Getty which was found to be holding art looted from Italy.
OK, let's say they do this, they keep the data only in a centralized location and you access it by an encrypted link. The problem is that the data must be decripted before it can be displayed to the user. So there is no way out of it the user's machine will hold, some place plain text data. Even if just in RAM. Once the data are in RAM it can "leak" onto the hard disk. For example the swap file is used to back up RAM or the user might have some program that saves the data so he can work off line.
If the machine uses an encrypted disk then we don't have to care so much what is on the disk. I think you need to do other things too. Whole disk encryption does not solve the problem of spyware but does solve the stolen notebook problem
But the BEST thing here is that the US Government will set the standard of care. Now when some company notebook is stolen and my data is compromised I have a chance of suing them because they failed to use whole disk encryption like the government does.
Any charge on the CCD is created by the "Photoelectric effect". Voltage applied to the CCD by the camera is used to confine and move the charge that is created by light striking the sensor. Note also that the shutter is closed when the lens is off. Note also that the shutter is always closed except for a brief fraction of a second durring the actual expose. Most of the time the CCD is sealed behind the shutter.
I don't understand this "one of the joys of not having film is the ability to safely make a lens change any time".
You can change the lens whenever you need to with either film or digital.
Dust is simply not an issue. It does not stick to the sensor. If it does it can be removed in post processing. The Sensor is not like film the data needs to be byer interpolated to create an image so the interpolation done and RAW conversion is slightly modified for dust removal.
If money is an issue, like you said buy a film camera. I was able to afford black and while phtography back with I was 13, a few decades ago. Let me tell you from first hand experiance and thousnds of shots dust is far more of a problem with film based photography then with digital. far worse, like 10X worse..
You are right to say "look at the lens". but not all "kit lenses are crap. For example the Nikon 18-55mm is quite good. The one that comes with the canon Rebel has th same specs is poor. Like anything else read the reviews and look at the total system.
Don't say "no one". Some people only go up mountains or onto the ski slope so they can capture the images they see there. I'm into underwater photography right now but I've hauled medium format systems and big tripods up moutians just for the shot.
The difference between a "photographer" and some one who just ownes a camera is the photographer thinks of the activity as "making images" and he just happens to be on a hike because that is how you get to the wildflowers or whatever his subject is. While the hiker hikes and just happens to also cary a camera.
The SLR is best used by the photographer.
Yes, I can think of one person who shoots mostly in bars with a 10.5mm or 12-24mm lens on a Nikon DSLR.
I agree about the need to more then one kind of camera.
Sounds like you have had some serious problems with dust in the past. I'm just starting with DSLR and after 3,500 images I've not run into a dust problem yet. It may depend on where you shoot and how carfull you are when you change lenses. It's just not the issue some people think it is. The CCD is only exposed when the shutter is open and of course you would have a lens on the camera when the shutter is open.
I'd say the ONLY reason not to buy one (other then lack of funds, or no interrest in photography) is that you don't want to cary such a large camera
Of course this could have beed solved any of 1,000 other ways. Your reference to Ada seems odd. The computers in questions and their software pre-date to introduction of Ada. Ada was standardized in 1983.
again, what's my incentive to buy an operating system that still has everything else wrong with it?
It works like this. Joe PC User is never going to upgrade his OS. Most users never do. OS upgrades are mostly a hobbyist thing. But someday Joe will replace the PC and it will come with a copy if Vista pre-instaled on it. In three or four years most all PCs are replaced and so most will being running Vista.
NPR is non-comercial radio. They are not the stations that you are complainiing about and are in fact about the only thing worth listening to. NPR is suported by donations by listeniers not advertising
They are in effect asking for a $200 donation. That is more than a lot of people have. I bet there are a lot more people with an extra $50 then with an extra $200 in their pocket. So why not sel them for $150 each?
I hate it when there not for profects get greedy ad start hitting you for "only a coule hunderd bucks" Not only thaat bu you don't know where the $200 goes not do you have much control over it.
What they need to do is be specific. Make a web page that says "We want to send 1,000 computers to THIS school. and have a picture of it. quotes from the people who run the school saying what they wil do with the compters. Show a plan about how they will be integrates into the classworks and so on. Then offer the sell the computers at much less then 300 percent markup. I think such a plan would work.
No, the pixel size is not related to the wavelenght of light. The pixel simply needs to be large enough in square area that some light hits it. Think of a buket outdoor catching rain. A large diameter bucket will catch lots of water but a small drinking glass will catch less. Now think of a soda straw turnned vertical. There is a chance that very litel or even no drop fall down the straw. The straw is so small that the amount of water collected is more goveren by luck then the amount of rainfall.
Apixel has to catch photons and it has to catch enough of them that the resulting charge closly matches the the amount of light reflected from the pixel's projection onto the subject. 0.4um would be a very small pixel. The Nikon D50 camera has pixels about 8um which are 20X larger and have 400X more area. It would be resonable to make pixels 1/2 this size but not 1/10th. OK let's assume 1/4 the size of the Nikon D40 that is 2um. This works out to a focal plane sensor of about 200mm across.
Some day it might be possible for a consummer to photograph a large ceiling like this but it would be by moving the camera and taking multiple frames and later stitching then together.
in short, photons are like rain, they come in packets and a rain collector needs enough square area to collect a statistically significant number of photons. You can solve this by using more light. A huge flash or using the camera only in direct noon-time sulight but still a 13GB sensor will not fit into a reasonable size camera.
So you think 10.4 to 10.5 will be a minor upgrade? How do you know? Apple is not telling us what will be included in 10.5 except for a few features they are previewing to developers. The best features ar being kept secret. You may be right but we won't know untill spring 2007.
Why pay? you don't have to. If you like Tiger (10.4) then stick with it abd if you buy a new computer in 2007 the newer OSX will be included for "free".
No one is forcing you tyo buy this. If you don't like the terms use something else. It's just like buying a car. You look at one and say "it costs a lot and only has two seats" so you just don't get that one. Some other buyer might find the corvett to be just what he wants.
Do you run Oracle on Ubuntu? If not then you are not even in this ball game. Red Hat and Oracle are not after home/hobbest users who shop at CompUSA. They are after the use who is willing to pay big $$ for support
No, consumer cameras will not record 13GP. Basic physics will prevent this. Pixels need to be a certain minimum phtsical size. If they are two smallthen not many photons bump into them. Light comes in packets called "photons" as this will not change. A 13GP sensor will have 114,000 pixels across each edge. So yu muliply the mini um pixel size times 114000 and you gt a sensor that is physically to large to stuff into a reasonable sized camera. And then how big is the lens that can project an image circle to cover the sensor>
Some things don't scale. You can make electronics smaller but things that measure and interact with the real world are many times constrained by the real objects they need to interact with. An obvious example is the bathroom scale. Could you make one that is 1/2 inch square? Yes but you wouldn't want to. Same with a 13GP camera.
Back in the old days people used to walk to the market to buy bread. Then they invented the bicycle. Why didn't some one patent "riding a bicycle to the market to buy bread" so they could then sell lincenses.
I can understand a patent if people had always been using wires to carry data and then you figure out how to use packet radio to do this. You patent that. But then when you use the new wireless network to do what the old wired network did that should be covered under the patent for the general purpose wireless network. Wireless is like the bicycle. The bike is a __general purpose__ transportation device. You do can't pantent using a bicycle for each place you might ride it.
OK maybe you can Maybe I should file this: "A method for two wheeled human powered transportation between Joe's home at 123 AntyStreet and Bill's Barbar Shop on 34 Grand on Saturady afternoons when it is not raining." Let's see if the USPO will accept that. this is not much worse then filling a patent for sending a specifically formated block of data over an existing network when that same data has already been send over a different network
So a supernova of 20 suns equivalent managed to explode and leave behind thousands of sun-like stars?
Apparently conservation of mass laws were different back then.
conservation of mass is not the issue. The sun-like stars were not made from the mass of the exploded star. The explosion caused a shock wave in the interstaller gas. The shock wave is a density variation that trigged gravatational colapse at hundrds of points in the cloud. Some of those points became stars.
Didn't these guy read Apples recent fourth quart report. To suggest that Apple change anything would not be very smart. All they are saying is It can't go on like this forever. Did you hear what Steve Jobs said some months ago. To paraphrase -- "having only a 4% market share is good because we have the potential to double the size of the company if we could only gain another 4%" If we beleave the recent report then Apple is well on the way to doubling it's size.
Apple's products are better because of the software, the industrial design and the build quality. But the real kicker is that if you want to run Mac OSX you have to buy Apple hardware. People will do that. Apple can always command a higher price.
The BEST copy protection system would let the user do anything he wants with the data except give it to someone else. This might work:
1) User goes to web site decides to buy a file of data (music, movie, porno, software....) so he enters his name and credit card info.
2) vendor encrypts the data using the above supplied infor as a key
3) Ecrypted data is downloaded to the users PC where user is free to make as many copies as he wants
4) User can give away a copy too if he wants but when he does his name and credit card info will also have to be given away too if the data is ever to be used.
Users like the idea of being able to move their data from device to device and make backups. This will let them do this. All the DRM does is permeinently tie the owner's name to the file. So now if he gives it away it will be easy to know the source and who gave it away and catch the guy.
This is kind of like what you can do with a movie script to make sure it is not leaked. You don't print them with a Xerox machine. You print them one at a time with a laser printer and use software that insures that each copy is unique The software can introduce an added between space two words or change the font on a few characters. Make 3 or 4 of these changes at random on every page and then print a serial number on each page and sign out the scripts.
Same idea here. Illeagal copying happens because you can't trace the source. If every CD and DVD was unique people would not put there copy on the Internet. OK you can't do this with physical media but now that we are moving to digital downloads each CAN be made unique.
Slashdot Mirror
...if it recognizes revenue from the product at the time of sale...Apple could have decided to take the "credit" at a point in time after the sale. Like after the 15 day return period. There is also the isue of when development is "R&D" leading to a product or when it is support.
I think Apple is wrong on this. If the computer was sold as having only "g" networking then delivering "n" later is not delivering the product late but a gift to users of something they didn't buy
I wonder if these Codecs could also be made to run under Solaris or BSD or other open source OSes?
Even for the people who use i386, this means there would be a legal codec so the big distos could include it with video players out of the box
What or the chances you would use 3248532346863247 as a test value? You could run the abouve program for 100 years and no one would likerly ever find the bug. The only way to find it would be to read the code. It this case it is only four lines of code and anyone could find the error. But what it it were 1,000,000 lines? No human could ever read it but yet having a human read it is to only way to find errors. So you break it up and have 100 humans each read 10,000 lines. What if the bug is in the subtle interaction betwen the parts? The ONLY solution is to design systems that are tolerent of software bugs. Lots of ways to do this. Put a human pilot inside the airplan or Lunerlander or build a computer to watch the computer or simply fly your test out over the ocean where if they blow up no one is harmmed. You just have to asume there will be bugs and you will not be able to detect them
I have a Nikon DSLR. It's frame size is 3000 x 2000. It would be nice to see my photos in full resolution on the LCD screen. It would make a great computer monitor As for industrial use. I'm thinking of an X-ray machine's view screen. This is not for watching Hollywood movies but there is plenty of content
We can't blame the two art dealers because in the past art was not tracked so well and ownership was transfered with just a handshake. The thief is long dead as is the owner.
I think even in these cases where there is no one alive to blame the current "owner" still looses out and the courts have to straighten it out. These kinds of art cases come up several times a year. The most famos recent cases are with the Getty which was found to be holding art looted from Italy.
OK, let's say they do this, they keep the data only in a centralized location and you access it by an encrypted link. The problem is that the data must be decripted before it can be displayed to the user. So there is no way out of it the user's machine will hold, some place plain text data. Even if just in RAM. Once the data are in RAM it can "leak" onto the hard disk. For example the swap file is used to back up RAM or the user might have some program that saves the data so he can work off line. If the machine uses an encrypted disk then we don't have to care so much what is on the disk. I think you need to do other things too. Whole disk encryption does not solve the problem of spyware but does solve the stolen notebook problem But the BEST thing here is that the US Government will set the standard of care. Now when some company notebook is stolen and my data is compromised I have a chance of suing them because they failed to use whole disk encryption like the government does.
Russians wil works for much less money. Same reason China beats the US when it come to making shoes.
Any charge on the CCD is created by the "Photoelectric effect". Voltage applied to the CCD by the camera is used to confine and move the charge that is created by light striking the sensor. Note also that the shutter is closed when the lens is off. Note also that the shutter is always closed except for a brief fraction of a second durring the actual expose. Most of the time the CCD is sealed behind the shutter.
You can change the lens whenever you need to with either film or digital.
Dust is simply not an issue. It does not stick to the sensor. If it does it can be removed in post processing. The Sensor is not like film the data needs to be byer interpolated to create an image so the interpolation done and RAW conversion is slightly modified for dust removal.
If money is an issue, like you said buy a film camera. I was able to afford black and while phtography back with I was 13, a few decades ago. Let me tell you from first hand experiance and thousnds of shots dust is far more of a problem with film based photography then with digital. far worse, like 10X worse..
You are right to say "look at the lens". but not all "kit lenses are crap. For example the Nikon 18-55mm is quite good. The one that comes with the canon Rebel has th same specs is poor. Like anything else read the reviews and look at the total system.
The difference between a "photographer" and some one who just ownes a camera is the photographer thinks of the activity as "making images" and he just happens to be on a hike because that is how you get to the wildflowers or whatever his subject is. While the hiker hikes and just happens to also cary a camera.
The SLR is best used by the photographer.
Yes, I can think of one person who shoots mostly in bars with a 10.5mm or 12-24mm lens on a Nikon DSLR.
I agree about the need to more then one kind of camera.
I'd say the ONLY reason not to buy one (other then lack of funds, or no interrest in photography) is that you don't want to cary such a large camera
Of course this could have beed solved any of 1,000 other ways. Your reference to Ada seems odd. The computers in questions and their software pre-date to introduction of Ada. Ada was standardized in 1983.
It works like this. Joe PC User is never going to upgrade his OS. Most users never do. OS upgrades are mostly a hobbyist thing. But someday Joe will replace the PC and it will come with a copy if Vista pre-instaled on it. In three or four years most all PCs are replaced and so most will being running Vista.
NPR is non-comercial radio. They are not the stations that you are complainiing about and are in fact about the only thing worth listening to. NPR is suported by donations by listeniers not advertising
They are in effect asking for a $200 donation. That is more than a lot of people have. I bet there are a lot more people with an extra $50 then with an extra $200 in their pocket. So why not sel them for $150 each? I hate it when there not for profects get greedy ad start hitting you for "only a coule hunderd bucks" Not only thaat bu you don't know where the $200 goes not do you have much control over it. What they need to do is be specific. Make a web page that says "We want to send 1,000 computers to THIS school. and have a picture of it. quotes from the people who run the school saying what they wil do with the compters. Show a plan about how they will be integrates into the classworks and so on. Then offer the sell the computers at much less then 300 percent markup. I think such a plan would work.
Apixel has to catch photons and it has to catch enough of them that the resulting charge closly matches the the amount of light reflected from the pixel's projection onto the subject. 0.4um would be a very small pixel. The Nikon D50 camera has pixels about 8um which are 20X larger and have 400X more area. It would be resonable to make pixels 1/2 this size but not 1/10th. OK let's assume 1/4 the size of the Nikon D40 that is 2um. This works out to a focal plane sensor of about 200mm across.
Some day it might be possible for a consummer to photograph a large ceiling like this but it would be by moving the camera and taking multiple frames and later stitching then together.
in short, photons are like rain, they come in packets and a rain collector needs enough square area to collect a statistically significant number of photons. You can solve this by using more light. A huge flash or using the camera only in direct noon-time sulight but still a 13GB sensor will not fit into a reasonable size camera.
Why pay? you don't have to. If you like Tiger (10.4) then stick with it abd if you buy a new computer in 2007 the newer OSX will be included for "free".
No one is forcing you tyo buy this. If you don't like the terms use something else. It's just like buying a car. You look at one and say "it costs a lot and only has two seats" so you just don't get that one. Some other buyer might find the corvett to be just what he wants.
Do you run Oracle on Ubuntu? If not then you are not even in this ball game. Red Hat and Oracle are not after home/hobbest users who shop at CompUSA. They are after the use who is willing to pay big $$ for support
Some things don't scale. You can make electronics smaller but things that measure and interact with the real world are many times constrained by the real objects they need to interact with. An obvious example is the bathroom scale. Could you make one that is 1/2 inch square? Yes but you wouldn't want to. Same with a 13GP camera.
I can understand a patent if people had always been using wires to carry data and then you figure out how to use packet radio to do this. You patent that. But then when you use the new wireless network to do what the old wired network did that should be covered under the patent for the general purpose wireless network. Wireless is like the bicycle. The bike is a __general purpose__ transportation device. You do can't pantent using a bicycle for each place you might ride it.
OK maybe you can Maybe I should file this: "A method for two wheeled human powered transportation between Joe's home at 123 AntyStreet and Bill's Barbar Shop on 34 Grand on Saturady afternoons when it is not raining." Let's see if the USPO will accept that. this is not much worse then filling a patent for sending a specifically formated block of data over an existing network when that same data has already been send over a different network
So a supernova of 20 suns equivalent managed to explode and leave behind thousands of sun-like stars? Apparently conservation of mass laws were different back then.
conservation of mass is not the issue. The sun-like stars were not made from the mass of the exploded star. The explosion caused a shock wave in the interstaller gas. The shock wave is a density variation that trigged gravatational colapse at hundrds of points in the cloud. Some of those points became stars.
Didn't these guy read Apples recent fourth quart report. To suggest that Apple change anything would not be very smart. All they are saying is It can't go on like this forever. Did you hear what Steve Jobs said some months ago. To paraphrase -- "having only a 4% market share is good because we have the potential to double the size of the company if we could only gain another 4%" If we beleave the recent report then Apple is well on the way to doubling it's size.
Apple's products are better because of the software, the industrial design and the build quality. But the real kicker is that if you want to run Mac OSX you have to buy Apple hardware. People will do that. Apple can always command a higher price.
The BEST copy protection system would let the user do anything he wants with the data except give it to someone else. This might work:
1) User goes to web site decides to buy a file of data (music, movie, porno, software....) so he enters his name and credit card info.
2) vendor encrypts the data using the above supplied infor as a key
3) Ecrypted data is downloaded to the users PC where user is free to make as many copies as he wants
4) User can give away a copy too if he wants but when he does his name and credit card info will also have to be given away too if the data is ever to be used.
Users like the idea of being able to move their data from device to device and make backups. This will let them do this. All the DRM does is permeinently tie the owner's name to the file. So now if he gives it away it will be easy to know the source and who gave it away and catch the guy. This is kind of like what you can do with a movie script to make sure it is not leaked. You don't print them with a Xerox machine. You print them one at a time with a laser printer and use software that insures that each copy is unique The software can introduce an added between space two words or change the font on a few characters. Make 3 or 4 of these changes at random on every page and then print a serial number on each page and sign out the scripts. Same idea here. Illeagal copying happens because you can't trace the source. If every CD and DVD was unique people would not put there copy on the Internet. OK you can't do this with physical media but now that we are moving to digital downloads each CAN be made unique.