It's not because you do it that it's better. I know I can't work for long if I don't have any distractions to change my mind every once in a while during my work.
I eagerly await how you're going to explain how regular video sites like YouTube or Google Video don't care about that sort of excuse. No seriously, that was a poor explanation.
I just think you're way overestimating the capabilities of such devices, regardless of their power, battery life, applications or inputs. Of course people will do lots with them, but I doubt they'd abandon their regular PC for these. I could turn on to be wrong, but that would defy common sense. Keep in mind that the biggest issues are controls and the screen, not any of the other technical aspects you mentioned. These are the real inherent bottlenecks.
WTF is wrong with Hulu, Fox, YouTube and the likes? Why obstinately limit themselves to the American market when it comes to online broadcasting? Why fight over the same fucking market when the European market (or as a matter of fact any other) is still waiting for a single decent offer. Why the hell won't they understand that the web can be treated like TV, if only they took the pain to provide the same kind of content! I mean, it's like they just don't see any potential there, or the little they see isn't enough for them to bother with foreign Web markets.
I'm not sure what you mean regarding the comment about Google but Google has anywhere to go but up. It's one of these companies that start with a huge momentum because they have a tremendous edge over the concurrence, but at some point (about now), they're just another big company with a huge power and market share but little momentum because, as I like to think of it, they reached their orbit, i.e. they did anything they could hope doing in the domain they started in, now the challenge for them is to keep the competition to a safe distance and try to thrive on less familiar grounds.
I disagree with your comment about mobile devices. Of course over the years as UMPCs and later mobile phones catch up in usability with desktop PCs (you can argue that it's already just mission accomplished for UMPCs considered they can run Ubuntu with Gnome), you'll realise that while you can do a lot on such devices you still need a desktop computer. I strongly doubt that the small screen issue will be resolved within that time frame, even with stabilised embedded micro projectors (I mean, you still need a suitable surface to project to), and neither will the controls issue. I'm talking to you by comfortably typing with both my hands on a large keyboard. You'll never get that comfort with a handheld device, and never within the foreseeable future will you be able to get things done as comfortably and fast as with a desktop/laptop computer. As for downloading apps and such, it's very hard to predict because things move pretty fast in that area, but even today a lot can be done in a web-based fashion, so I assume things will get better in that area, to the point all you'll feel you need will be a web browser to do anything.
But that's all off-topic anyways, it's silly to think that mobile devices will actually replace desktop machines, be it at home or even more at work.
Where are you going to people who will a) accept being deprived of the computer 'perks' they take for granted and b) qualified to work without a GUI? Also, what sort of business could run with just that nowadays?
Uh huh. The only reason why the Chinese let the "Communists" stay in power is because they deliver. I'm talking about 2-figure growth rates. Why else do you think China looks so hungry economically? China pays the price of its sky-rocketing economical success by letting these guys do their pseudo-Commie thing.
China isn't Tienanmen Square, if communism isn't worth it anymore it'll find the door, riot or no riot. But it's still worth it, and best believe it'll be worth it until it'll be bigger than USSR in its best days. If you were a broke farmer 10 years ago and that now you make 5-10 times more money you won't want to overthrow the guys in power who made that happen just because there's a few words you can't publicly say.
the computing demands of the casual user hasn't increased that much since the days of Windows 95
Right, just try watching YouTube on Firefox with a Pentium 133.
by giving everyone else thin clients, you'll give them less chance to screw up their system, thus giving them more uptime and more reliability, which users will appreciate.
Uh huh, you can solve the "chance to screw up their system" by keeping the thick client but virtualising the OS, and as for more uptime and reliability it will only be as reliable and uptimely as is your network/servers, which is in most contexts probably not any better, plus you have to deal with general downtimes, and this way people are going to end up with all their eggs in the same basket, which, although avoidably, could bring huge IT catastrophes. Relying entirely on a centralised network is absolute madness, a single network administrator's mistake, a lack of redundancy combined with a hardware failure, a bad decision or incompetence could paralyse an entire infrastructure. Centralising everything only looks nice on paper.
This isn't boxing, more like wrestling. So don't be surprised if you see VM "you trashed your OS here have this backup virtual image" ware jump up on the ring, headbutt in all directions and virtualise the shit out of your thick clients.
Am I the only one who believes that the future is not in thin clients but in desktop supervisors who make all your OSes run transparently virtualised? I'm talking about 10-15 years.
According to how much the debt increased lately if you wrote values from $0 to $10,000 around the frame of your fan, you'd need to make the fan run at about 1,300 - 1,500 rpm to represent the rate at which the debt is increasing.
Be careful though, on some days it can hit an average of 6,900 rpm (like on the 30th of October). That would suck if the public debt made your fan fly apart!
Probably would help considered there would probably be less noise on the line. That would be great if it could be used to replace entirely the land telephone network.
*We* can. Those of *us* who choose to do it join communities such as the Amish. It's only up to you to choose that lifestyle. And technology doesn't cause stress, having a job does. That's why I don't have one, ahem I mean, I'm self employed.
Oh, I assumed it was just another Bayer grid and that therefore it should be 4x rather than 16x.
By the way, if it's anything vaguely like a Bayer grid, except a 4x4 one, shouldn't it allow us to obtain a better resolution than the 1.64m by using the same sort of technique as used to turn RAW digital images into the full resolution RGB pictures we see?
Oh, my bad, I seemed to remember that both shared the same filters. The WAC was turned on during the first flyby though, allowing to make this false colour mosaic, which means they're still sitting on a real colour picture of the planet.
If you would take the pain to read the fucking caption that came with the picture you would know that the colour channels in that picture are "remapped", qualifying as a "false colour" picture. That doesn't tell you what colour Mercury is.
Basically a line in an image has frequency components perpendicular to the line that are evenly spread over the spectrum. If you line is 10 cm wide and that you have a resolution of 50 cm/pixel then the brightest parts of the line will be 5 times dimmer (with respect to the darker background) than the colour of the paint. So you'll still see the line, it'll just be greyer, blending in the surrounding greyness.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not because you do it that it's better. I know I can't work for long if I don't have any distractions to change my mind every once in a while during my work.
I eagerly await how you're going to explain how regular video sites like YouTube or Google Video don't care about that sort of excuse. No seriously, that was a poor explanation.
Yeah, because that's the answer and excuse to anything.
I just think you're way overestimating the capabilities of such devices, regardless of their power, battery life, applications or inputs. Of course people will do lots with them, but I doubt they'd abandon their regular PC for these. I could turn on to be wrong, but that would defy common sense. Keep in mind that the biggest issues are controls and the screen, not any of the other technical aspects you mentioned. These are the real inherent bottlenecks.
WTF is wrong with Hulu, Fox, YouTube and the likes? Why obstinately limit themselves to the American market when it comes to online broadcasting? Why fight over the same fucking market when the European market (or as a matter of fact any other) is still waiting for a single decent offer. Why the hell won't they understand that the web can be treated like TV, if only they took the pain to provide the same kind of content! I mean, it's like they just don't see any potential there, or the little they see isn't enough for them to bother with foreign Web markets.
I'm not sure what you mean regarding the comment about Google but Google has anywhere to go but up. It's one of these companies that start with a huge momentum because they have a tremendous edge over the concurrence, but at some point (about now), they're just another big company with a huge power and market share but little momentum because, as I like to think of it, they reached their orbit, i.e. they did anything they could hope doing in the domain they started in, now the challenge for them is to keep the competition to a safe distance and try to thrive on less familiar grounds.
I disagree with your comment about mobile devices. Of course over the years as UMPCs and later mobile phones catch up in usability with desktop PCs (you can argue that it's already just mission accomplished for UMPCs considered they can run Ubuntu with Gnome), you'll realise that while you can do a lot on such devices you still need a desktop computer. I strongly doubt that the small screen issue will be resolved within that time frame, even with stabilised embedded micro projectors (I mean, you still need a suitable surface to project to), and neither will the controls issue. I'm talking to you by comfortably typing with both my hands on a large keyboard. You'll never get that comfort with a handheld device, and never within the foreseeable future will you be able to get things done as comfortably and fast as with a desktop/laptop computer. As for downloading apps and such, it's very hard to predict because things move pretty fast in that area, but even today a lot can be done in a web-based fashion, so I assume things will get better in that area, to the point all you'll feel you need will be a web browser to do anything.
But that's all off-topic anyways, it's silly to think that mobile devices will actually replace desktop machines, be it at home or even more at work.
Where are you going to people who will a) accept being deprived of the computer 'perks' they take for granted and b) qualified to work without a GUI? Also, what sort of business could run with just that nowadays?
Uh huh. The only reason why the Chinese let the "Communists" stay in power is because they deliver. I'm talking about 2-figure growth rates. Why else do you think China looks so hungry economically? China pays the price of its sky-rocketing economical success by letting these guys do their pseudo-Commie thing.
China isn't Tienanmen Square, if communism isn't worth it anymore it'll find the door, riot or no riot. But it's still worth it, and best believe it'll be worth it until it'll be bigger than USSR in its best days. If you were a broke farmer 10 years ago and that now you make 5-10 times more money you won't want to overthrow the guys in power who made that happen just because there's a few words you can't publicly say.
the computing demands of the casual user hasn't increased that much since the days of Windows 95
Right, just try watching YouTube on Firefox with a Pentium 133.
by giving everyone else thin clients, you'll give them less chance to screw up their system, thus giving them more uptime and more reliability, which users will appreciate.
Uh huh, you can solve the "chance to screw up their system" by keeping the thick client but virtualising the OS, and as for more uptime and reliability it will only be as reliable and uptimely as is your network/servers, which is in most contexts probably not any better, plus you have to deal with general downtimes, and this way people are going to end up with all their eggs in the same basket, which, although avoidably, could bring huge IT catastrophes. Relying entirely on a centralised network is absolute madness, a single network administrator's mistake, a lack of redundancy combined with a hardware failure, a bad decision or incompetence could paralyse an entire infrastructure. Centralising everything only looks nice on paper.
This isn't boxing, more like wrestling. So don't be surprised if you see VM "you trashed your OS here have this backup virtual image" ware jump up on the ring, headbutt in all directions and virtualise the shit out of your thick clients.
Am I the only one who believes that the future is not in thin clients but in desktop supervisors who make all your OSes run transparently virtualised? I'm talking about 10-15 years.
Yay! People rediscover the advantages of thin clients! How long until they rediscover the downsides...
Yes, 10010101011001010100000101110011110100001111 gives you a much better idea of how bad it is than just 10,266,382,646,543.
I'd love to see how you'd make the B look different from a 8 on that type of display ;).
Great idea for a DIY fan!
According to how much the debt increased lately if you wrote values from $0 to $10,000 around the frame of your fan, you'd need to make the fan run at about 1,300 - 1,500 rpm to represent the rate at which the debt is increasing.
Be careful though, on some days it can hit an average of 6,900 rpm (like on the 30th of October). That would suck if the public debt made your fan fly apart!
Good point.
Probably would help considered there would probably be less noise on the line. That would be great if it could be used to replace entirely the land telephone network.
*We* can. Those of *us* who choose to do it join communities such as the Amish. It's only up to you to choose that lifestyle. And technology doesn't cause stress, having a job does. That's why I don't have one, ahem I mean, I'm self employed.
All the media is liberal, and is of course accordingly biased, tremendously may I add, except Fox News, which is fair and balanced.
Oh, I assumed it was just another Bayer grid and that therefore it should be 4x rather than 16x.
By the way, if it's anything vaguely like a Bayer grid, except a 4x4 one, shouldn't it allow us to obtain a better resolution than the 1.64m by using the same sort of technique as used to turn RAW digital images into the full resolution RGB pictures we see?
Oh, my bad, I seemed to remember that both shared the same filters. The WAC was turned on during the first flyby though, allowing to make this false colour mosaic, which means they're still sitting on a real colour picture of the planet.
If you would take the pain to read the fucking caption that came with the picture you would know that the colour channels in that picture are "remapped", qualifying as a "false colour" picture. That doesn't tell you what colour Mercury is.
WTF... I must have gotten confused in my tabs the first time I checked the link because this is not the page I remember commenting about lol.
Is it me or does your campus look like a game of Tetris from space? Maybe I should lay off the booze some..
TFA says that when the satellite shoots in black and white it gets 16 times more pixels than in colour mode. I don't get it, how can it be?
Basically a line in an image has frequency components perpendicular to the line that are evenly spread over the spectrum. If you line is 10 cm wide and that you have a resolution of 50 cm/pixel then the brightest parts of the line will be 5 times dimmer (with respect to the darker background) than the colour of the paint. So you'll still see the line, it'll just be greyer, blending in the surrounding greyness.