Sounds like I could sell this guy a 17" wide empty plastic box just tall enough to hold one Mac Mini and maybe an external drive ot two. The trouble is that I doubt I'd find two many more "equipment philes" who would prefer the PC tower laying sideways form factor to a Mini's
Yes, but thier deffinition if "interfere with those signals" means that you can't transmit on the cell phones frequency. There are no laws aginst thing like building with concrete or routing roads through tunnels or using sheet metal to cover your walls, or using this paint.
"you can get a machine from Dell with similar specs for about $100 less!" Yes but try as you might and Dells cheap box will not run Mac OSX.
The only reason people buy Apple computers is because of the software.
Oh yes, now back to hardware. Is that cheap Dell box two and one half inches tall and six inches square and compleatly silent
And guess what? A small BMW and a Ford Escort have the same specs too. 4 wheels, 4 seats and a steering weel. People don't buy BMWs to save a buck, they buy then because they like BMWs Same with Apple - Both are a high end luxery brand targeted at a small segment of the market who is wiling to pay for quality.
But the bottom line is you have to buy Apple hardware to run Apple software
I agree entirely. WHat's really needed is VMware or QEMU hosted on Mac OSX, or "Vitual PC" to be available. This will happen in time.
But or some reason many people seem to really think they want to dual boot and run either OSX or Win XP. Lots of people in this camp. One example is the guy who posted to origenal comment here. We says he is 100% MS Windows at work but at home he is 100% Mac. He does not need to mix.
As for myself, I'm comming to the Apple Mac as a long time UNIX/Linux user. (I've never had a use for MS Windows.) and I find the Mac does everytrhing the my Solaris and Linux system do but adds a nice desktop UI.
The Windows install disks don't install directly but you can get Linux to boot on an Intel Mac. This should be no surprze because Linux is open source and you can modify it to do what ever you want. OK so Linux is running, next you install VMware and create one or more virtual machines. Next you go get that Windows XP install CD and "it works" Next switch the virtual screen to full screen mode and you can't tell the rsult from "real windows". VMWare is NOT an emulator it best to think of VMware as a kind of "sandbox". OK so the procedure is not effortless but the end result is exactly what was desired.
Re:Why do people care about this guy? (serious inq
on
Woz On Apple's Success
·
· Score: 1
Whether you use Windows or Linux, it all traces back to Apple.
Not realy, UNIX came into being in 1969. That was long before the first Apple. It Apple and "Woz" never existed there'd still be the unix-like OSes The "BSD" line of UNIXes started in 1978 and about 20 years later became the core of Mac OSX.
UNIX clearly predates DOS and Windows, DOS's command.com was pretty much a vastly striped down version of a UNIX command shell.
Open GL can take advantge of a hardware graphics processor from say Nvidia. Now you can afford to do things like smooth zooms and pans with no or little CPU and you can do image and video processing. Just look at what Apple does with Core Image.
There really is a use for semi transparent windows and animated graphics if they are used for the right purposes.
Current brute force CPU intensive methods require a powerfull CPU, 100+ watts of power and a cooling fan.
Not only would it be a good technical fit Mac OSX on Solaris but both would gain what they need. I'm typing this on a Solaris 10 system. The desktop is horable. It's OK for doing server admin stuff but that's it. Mac OSX's kernal is not fast nor scalable to 16 or 56 processors. and Don't laugh, Sun is selling 8 core SPARC chips today. Intel might have them in a couple years.
A Sun/Apple partnership would be the best thing to happen in years. Just thnk a platform that scales from an iBook to a 128-CPU Sunfire data center
Heck, I'd be hapy to see Mac OS running on one of Suns four core Operon systems
It's a perty poor virus. The OS puts up a dialog box stating that there is an executable program inside and asks you to type in the Admin password and click OK to run it. A user would need to be "way stupid" to do that when he thought he was just going to look at aJPG image file.
Needless to say this "virus" did not get very far ad no one knows of any damage caused by it.
wouldn't it be cool to build your own digital camera? Has anyone tried this out? or even thought about this?
I can take care of the software/firmware and a bit of the electronics side of things, but I don't know much about the camera parts that actually take the picture.
Yes, I was involved in a project to build a astronomical camera. First off it's cheaper to simply go buy a DSLR from Nikon or Canon but you don't build a camera to save money. You build one because you can't buy what you need. For example one of the cameras ran in"drift scan" mode. We shifted the charge on the CCD so that we coul integrate an image of an object that moved relative to the fixed camera.
I've seen one project that that needed tilts and shifts like on a view camera
If you are willing to use a Pentium t control the camera you can do most everything in software
I'd liket o build a sensor for an adaptive optics system with the goal of keepingthe cost s_WAY_ down by putting PC hardware to best use
" Does anyone else here get the irony of/.-ers spending virtual lifetimes bashing 'Doze, hating every byte of M$ kruftware, and yearning for an environmental catastrophe in Redmond, then getting all excited about the potential of running XP on a new MacBook?
90% of the peopleherwe only "talk the talk". In real life it's just video games on PCs. Just read the comments about any hardware, most comments are PC gamming centric. Most readers I assume don't have a need for a computer other then as an entertainment device.
Now go onto any of the Apple Mac forums they keep aking how the new Intel CPUs will handle Photoshop and video editing and when will the universal binaries for this come out.
Everyone here thinks in terms of PC games. THis is for something else. Can you imagine a 4 by 6 inch hunk of black plastic maybe 3/8 inch think. It is a featurelass slab of black pollished plastic until you draw a circle on its face with your finger then it comes to life as a frameless LCD pannel that can show video lke an iPod. THere is even a picture of an iPod click wheel on the front of it. Had I turnned it on by drawing an "X" on the face rather then ther "O" it would come to life with a picture of a cell phone on the display and I could use it to make a call. Drawing a "V" turns it into a TV/TIVO remote with a live preview display.
1024x768 is perfect for what I'll call ther "vertual gadget"
THe rumer mills are saying Apple is woring on something like this. Recently filed pattents and trademarks back this up. I fuly expect them to sell some kind of touch sensitiv LCD scren handhald device that does NOT look or act like a small scale desktop.
Antitrust only applies to monopolies. None of the parties involved in this are monopolies.
I would avise people to use open stanards telephony. But your avarger PC user is dummer than a rock and you can't exvent get them to stop downloading random e-mail attachments and now we are ging to tell then to be sure and check out what protocols some free phone sevice uses?
"...Thus, in order to extract speed from the Itanium, the compiler was forced to extract parallelism from within functions. This is very difficult since most programming is fairly sequential.
No, it's not that hard. The CDC 6600 "super computer" build in the 1960's accepted "bundled" instructions to and required a compiler or human programmer to take advange of the 6600's parallelism. The old FORTRAN compiler could many times beat out an experianced assembly language programmer. It was not really that hard. You'd just fetch "A" from RAM then increment "B" and then add it to "C" and be thent he "fetch A" instruction would be done and you could issue the "add A to C instruction. The compiler used a kind of tree search algorium to find the best order of instructions and kept a dependancy graph. It's really a "classic" problem that's been well studied. What we are seeingnow is now really so many new ideas but just cheaper lower costs. the 40 year old tricks are now showing up in low cost processors
" unstable money management program... BRILLIANT!"
I assume you ment this as a joke. Of course the authors of the program don't want it to be unstable. One very good way to make sure it is stable is to widely test it. You would be really stupid to test it using your real data.
So here is YOUR chance to save the world from buggey unstable money managment. Download it, and send it well written reports of any bugs you find.
Why is dt/dt "nonsensical"? It more common cases dt/dt=1. It can be more or less if you compare objects moring relative to one another.
How did this get posted it's "nonsenseical" bunk.
It mayb e true the time travel is not possable but his reasoning is meaningless
I sugested this too, putting the insulation on the inside. However that means the aluminum skin needs to be made larger if the internal volue is to remain the same. Overall you'd have more weight. So you need more fuel so you need and even bigger tank and so on and so on. (Remember the "rocket equation" from high school physics?)
NASA's follow on vehicle solves the problem nicely by stacking the payload _above_ the boster so that when hunk of "whatever" fall off there is nothing for them to impact.
Seems to me one wway to prevent the foam from faling off in chunks is to embed a net over the foam. Make a fishnet out of Kevlar or Spectra fiber. Put the net over the foam. These fibers are strong. in the worst case the foam still comes off but not after being forced through the holes in the net and in the process being cut into many very small pieces. These fibers are stronger then stainless steel of the same size and much lighter.
Of couse the other option is to re-design the tank so that the insilation is _inside_ the aluminum skin but then that adds weight
I wonder if there is a cattle version of the virus? Find a way to infect the whole herd some rancher can save a bundle on feed. I mean cows and chickens get fat even on a lean diet? And what about humans who live in places where food is expensive or hard to get? Finally a way to feed the world's staving chilren. But then I kind of doubt it.
I think it's a given fact that people will dig up and burn all of the fossel fuel on Earth. I mean Why Not. It's "free energy". What will eventually save us from run away warmming is that one day there will be no more of this. THey will eventuall pump the last barrel of oil or dig the last lump or coal. It will hapen sooner then we think too. Just wait until every family in China is like the typical American family and has two cars and wants to run air conditioning 24x7. if (no when) this happens it will all be gone in 50 years. This is a self limiting problem the more of the stuff we burn up the fast the problem goes away. THere is little doubt that as long as there is oil people will burn it the only question is the rate
The future looks good 1000 years from now there will certainly be none left but the 50 to 100 year outlook is not so good
Most people who just need to get to work in the morning don't need to buy an 18 wheel semitruck and trailer. Heck, most don't even need an SUV. So if freightliner (who makes the big trucks) started giving them away most people wouldn't even want one
Same here. DB2 is not something your avaerage home computer user would want. It is something of an 18-wheeler of a DBMS. Something only someone with a really big job would need.
It's not surprizing that for most uses mysql works. There are far more users with small and simple neds then large 1000+ emplyee enterprizes.
What you gain by using the likes of DB2, Oracle and maybe even POstgresql is "scalablility". The ability to handle larger demands by adding hardware. Notice that IBM be limiting use of the free version to machines with "only four CPU cores and 4GB RAM figures that the free version wil not compete witht ehothr version. So the "real users" of DB2 are using much more powerful servrers.
Yes this IS serius, someone who already has an account on the system could in effect raise thier level of access.
An analogy for people who don't understand computers: There is a hallway with a series of vault-like steel doors. The second door in the series has a slightly defective lock that an expert safecracker could learn to open. However no expert would get to this door without having the combinatin to the first door. That said, sometimes dumb users do forget to close the first door.
Looks like have simply redefined "evil" so in that case they are not doing any -- no conflict. Seems like G. Bush had the idea first however. What's happening to Google?
"How is a web-based service going to accomplish this?"
They write an application that you download from a web page and install on your computer. Or they write several, one for each platform.
"How can we prove there is life on a distant planet when we have problems seeing if there is life on Mars?"
It's easy, you look for oxigen in the atmosphere. O2 would be almost certain proff of life while not finding O2 saya nothing. But you asked "How can we prove...?" and the answer is O2 would be a near certain proof. By "easy"I ment in theory. Getting a spectrum of a exo-planet would be no easy thing
Why don't we see O2 on Mars? Not seeing it only means that if there is life the ecosystem is nothing like Earth's
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like I could sell this guy a 17" wide empty plastic box just tall enough to hold one Mac Mini and maybe an external drive ot two. The trouble is that I doubt I'd find two many more "equipment philes" who would prefer the PC tower laying sideways form factor to a Mini's
Yes, but thier deffinition if "interfere with those signals" means that you can't transmit on the cell phones frequency. There are no laws aginst thing like building with concrete or routing roads through tunnels or using sheet metal to cover your walls, or using this paint.
The only reason people buy Apple computers is because of the software.
Oh yes, now back to hardware. Is that cheap Dell box two and one half inches tall and six inches square and compleatly silent
And guess what? A small BMW and a Ford Escort have the same specs too. 4 wheels, 4 seats and a steering weel. People don't buy BMWs to save a buck, they buy then because they like BMWs Same with Apple - Both are a high end luxery brand targeted at a small segment of the market who is wiling to pay for quality. But the bottom line is you have to buy Apple hardware to run Apple software
I agree entirely. WHat's really needed is VMware or QEMU hosted on Mac OSX, or "Vitual PC" to be available. This will happen in time. But or some reason many people seem to really think they want to dual boot and run either OSX or Win XP. Lots of people in this camp. One example is the guy who posted to origenal comment here. We says he is 100% MS Windows at work but at home he is 100% Mac. He does not need to mix. As for myself, I'm comming to the Apple Mac as a long time UNIX/Linux user. (I've never had a use for MS Windows.) and I find the Mac does everytrhing the my Solaris and Linux system do but adds a nice desktop UI.
Here is the link
http://www.osxbook.com/book/bonus/misc/vmware/
Whether you use Windows or Linux, it all traces back to Apple. Not realy, UNIX came into being in 1969. That was long before the first Apple. It Apple and "Woz" never existed there'd still be the unix-like OSes The "BSD" line of UNIXes started in 1978 and about 20 years later became the core of Mac OSX. UNIX clearly predates DOS and Windows, DOS's command.com was pretty much a vastly striped down version of a UNIX command shell.
Open GL can take advantge of a hardware graphics processor from say Nvidia. Now you can afford to do things like smooth zooms and pans with no or little CPU and you can do image and video processing. Just look at what Apple does with Core Image. There really is a use for semi transparent windows and animated graphics if they are used for the right purposes. Current brute force CPU intensive methods require a powerfull CPU, 100+ watts of power and a cooling fan.
Not only would it be a good technical fit Mac OSX on Solaris but both would gain what they need. I'm typing this on a Solaris 10 system. The desktop is horable. It's OK for doing server admin stuff but that's it. Mac OSX's kernal is not fast nor scalable to 16 or 56 processors. and Don't laugh, Sun is selling 8 core SPARC chips today. Intel might have them in a couple years. A Sun/Apple partnership would be the best thing to happen in years. Just thnk a platform that scales from an iBook to a 128-CPU Sunfire data center Heck, I'd be hapy to see Mac OS running on one of Suns four core Operon systems
It's a perty poor virus. The OS puts up a dialog box stating that there is an executable program inside and asks you to type in the Admin password and click OK to run it. A user would need to be "way stupid" to do that when he thought he was just going to look at aJPG image file. Needless to say this "virus" did not get very far ad no one knows of any damage caused by it.
wouldn't it be cool to build your own digital camera? Has anyone tried this out? or even thought about this? I can take care of the software/firmware and a bit of the electronics side of things, but I don't know much about the camera parts that actually take the picture. Yes, I was involved in a project to build a astronomical camera. First off it's cheaper to simply go buy a DSLR from Nikon or Canon but you don't build a camera to save money. You build one because you can't buy what you need. For example one of the cameras ran in"drift scan" mode. We shifted the charge on the CCD so that we coul integrate an image of an object that moved relative to the fixed camera. I've seen one project that that needed tilts and shifts like on a view camera If you are willing to use a Pentium t control the camera you can do most everything in software I'd liket o build a sensor for an adaptive optics system with the goal of keepingthe cost s_WAY_ down by putting PC hardware to best use
" Does anyone else here get the irony of /.-ers spending virtual lifetimes bashing 'Doze, hating every byte of M$ kruftware, and yearning for an environmental catastrophe in Redmond, then getting all excited about the potential of running XP on a new MacBook?
90% of the peopleherwe only "talk the talk". In real life it's just video games on PCs. Just read the comments about any hardware, most comments are PC gamming centric. Most readers I assume don't have a need for a computer other then as an entertainment device.
Now go onto any of the Apple Mac forums they keep aking how the new Intel CPUs will handle Photoshop and video editing and when will the universal binaries for this come out.
1024x768 is perfect for what I'll call ther "vertual gadget"
THe rumer mills are saying Apple is woring on something like this. Recently filed pattents and trademarks back this up. I fuly expect them to sell some kind of touch sensitiv LCD scren handhald device that does NOT look or act like a small scale desktop.
Antitrust only applies to monopolies. None of the parties involved in this are monopolies. I would avise people to use open stanards telephony. But your avarger PC user is dummer than a rock and you can't exvent get them to stop downloading random e-mail attachments and now we are ging to tell then to be sure and check out what protocols some free phone sevice uses?
"...Thus, in order to extract speed from the Itanium, the compiler was forced to extract parallelism from within functions. This is very difficult since most programming is fairly sequential. No, it's not that hard. The CDC 6600 "super computer" build in the 1960's accepted "bundled" instructions to and required a compiler or human programmer to take advange of the 6600's parallelism. The old FORTRAN compiler could many times beat out an experianced assembly language programmer. It was not really that hard. You'd just fetch "A" from RAM then increment "B" and then add it to "C" and be thent he "fetch A" instruction would be done and you could issue the "add A to C instruction. The compiler used a kind of tree search algorium to find the best order of instructions and kept a dependancy graph. It's really a "classic" problem that's been well studied. What we are seeingnow is now really so many new ideas but just cheaper lower costs. the 40 year old tricks are now showing up in low cost processors
So here is YOUR chance to save the world from buggey unstable money managment. Download it, and send it well written reports of any bugs you find.
Why is dt/dt "nonsensical"? It more common cases dt/dt=1. It can be more or less if you compare objects moring relative to one another. How did this get posted it's "nonsenseical" bunk. It mayb e true the time travel is not possable but his reasoning is meaningless
NASA's follow on vehicle solves the problem nicely by stacking the payload _above_ the boster so that when hunk of "whatever" fall off there is nothing for them to impact.
Seems to me one wway to prevent the foam from faling off in chunks is to embed a net over the foam. Make a fishnet out of Kevlar or Spectra fiber. Put the net over the foam. These fibers are strong. in the worst case the foam still comes off but not after being forced through the holes in the net and in the process being cut into many very small pieces. These fibers are stronger then stainless steel of the same size and much lighter. Of couse the other option is to re-design the tank so that the insilation is _inside_ the aluminum skin but then that adds weight
I wonder if there is a cattle version of the virus? Find a way to infect the whole herd some rancher can save a bundle on feed. I mean cows and chickens get fat even on a lean diet? And what about humans who live in places where food is expensive or hard to get? Finally a way to feed the world's staving chilren. But then I kind of doubt it.
The future looks good 1000 years from now there will certainly be none left but the 50 to 100 year outlook is not so good
Most people who just need to get to work in the morning don't need to buy an 18 wheel semitruck and trailer. Heck, most don't even need an SUV. So if freightliner (who makes the big trucks) started giving them away most people wouldn't even want one Same here. DB2 is not something your avaerage home computer user would want. It is something of an 18-wheeler of a DBMS. Something only someone with a really big job would need. It's not surprizing that for most uses mysql works. There are far more users with small and simple neds then large 1000+ emplyee enterprizes. What you gain by using the likes of DB2, Oracle and maybe even POstgresql is "scalablility". The ability to handle larger demands by adding hardware. Notice that IBM be limiting use of the free version to machines with "only four CPU cores and 4GB RAM figures that the free version wil not compete witht ehothr version. So the "real users" of DB2 are using much more powerful servrers.
An analogy for people who don't understand computers: There is a hallway with a series of vault-like steel doors. The second door in the series has a slightly defective lock that an expert safecracker could learn to open. However no expert would get to this door without having the combinatin to the first door. That said, sometimes dumb users do forget to close the first door.
Looks like have simply redefined "evil" so in that case they are not doing any -- no conflict. Seems like G. Bush had the idea first however. What's happening to Google?
"How is a web-based service going to accomplish this?" They write an application that you download from a web page and install on your computer. Or they write several, one for each platform.
It's easy, you look for oxigen in the atmosphere. O2 would be almost certain proff of life while not finding O2 saya nothing. But you asked "How can we prove...?" and the answer is O2 would be a near certain proof. By "easy"I ment in theory. Getting a spectrum of a exo-planet would be no easy thing
Why don't we see O2 on Mars? Not seeing it only means that if there is life the ecosystem is nothing like Earth's