does anyone honestly think that the government is going to allow flying cars in metropolitan areas?
I don't think this is a Democrat or Republican issue, I think it's a safety issue. Can you imagine a truck-sized flying car loaded with fuel flying into or even exploding next to a skyscraper? Legislators on both sides of the aisle are going to take a dim view of flying cars.
They definitely won't be allowed in DC until there is a way to bring them down with minimal damage to government structures.
The technology may be less than ten years away, but the legalization of them is probably 25 or 50 years away.
but what about the overall quality of the video? If I understand what he's saying, then a lot of the image quality is degraded on elements that don't make up the visual priorty. Just knowing that, many people are going to be watching the video just looking to see how badly degraded the non-priority items are. And secondly, I'd have to wonder how distracting it is because your eyes might still perceive that you aren't seeing a complete image.
I like reading Cringely, but doesn't it seem like most of the cool tech he talks up never sees the light of day?
Desktop operating systems probably turn a nice profit for MS, but there's much bigger money that could have been made in the embedded market if they could get a foothold. I think that that's why they designed Windows CE and Windows Media Player. However, it looks like Linux is just going to devestate them in the embedded market. When it comes to licensing costs, "free" is tough to beat.
That doesn't quite translate to success on the desktop, but it does get a lot more Linux devices out there. And the more popular Linux is, the more developers it'll have, and the more potential polished, commercial applications that will be available. That's what draws the desktop market, and what keeps Gates and Ballmer up at night.
As soon as they get done with their viral marketing campaign.
Right now, GMail accounts are in high demand, so Google is cleverly using the Invites function to slowly roll it out and generate more positive buzz about the service. It's the cool email service to have and everybody wants one, so if they make it hard to get one they can ramp up demand.
OTOH, if Google has just announced one day, "Ok, we have free email now!" it probably would have garnered a collective yawn from most of us. "Gee, another free email service. Woot."
NBC made a major push a few years ago to push this kind of technology, where almost every word in an article was linked to something or other. I don't remember what they called it, but it must have done the big belly flop.
what kind of bullshit is that, anyway. "mine mine miiine..it sounds like my name, give it to me"
If the site were about anything BUT Jerry Falwell, I'm sure the courts would have given the guy a pass. However, since the content of the site IS about Jerry Falwell, the domain name is obviously an attempt to hijack hapless users who misspell his name, the ruling is correct.
People have lost domain names for a lot less than this. A guy named Don Henley had to surrender donhenley.com, even though the page was about himself. A Catholic hospital had to surrender madonna.com.
I wonder if they are going to drop Toast, their CD burning software. Granted, CD-burning capabilities are built-in to OS X and Win XP, but the options there are pretty limited. I always use Toast when possible.
But you know what? aside from this relatively small group of techno-elites, 99.999% of the general population isn't going to care. The only reason the WP ran the story was that they're going to be squeezed out on stories that come off the newswires.
There may be some room for the WP and other papers to claim monopolistic practices, however, since MSN is the default home page of the default browser of the operating system on 94% of desktops.
This is really interesting... Electronic Gaming Monthly is reporting that Peter Jackson has EVEN MORE footage that he wants to add to the trilogy, no doubt issuing the double-extended versions.
As long as he's not adding in a CG Jabba, I'm cool with that...
From what I've seen with e-books, it seems like the publishers and authors (like Stephen King) are trying to lead the way with fiction. IMO, this is probably the toughest segment of the market to crack. People who are avid fiction readers like the smell of a new book, the tactile feel of the rough paper, the sense of accomplishment as they flip page after page after page. There's a whole sensory experience that e-books will never fill for them.
No, the best way for e-books to grow in popularity is to emphasize reference works. O'Reilly is good about offering electronic versions of their books, but I don't see a lot of other publishers following suit. But the ability to do a boolean search on a tech book is a staggeringly great feature. The two problems with doing this for computer books is that 1) you are likely already sitting at your computer while looking up PHP or Python info, so you won't be using a handheld reader, and 2) the internet provides a tremendous source of reference material so you are just as likely to use your favorite website as a tech manual.
However, if e-book manufacturers and publishers could attack niche markets (auto mechanics, aircraft mechanics), they could build their popularity slowly.
is that Apple controls the hardware (iPod) AND the software (iPod firmware and iTunes). Real is always just one update away from getting their compatibility knocked out. So Real may start playing a cat and mouse game where Apple keeps locking them out and Real keeps trying to break back in.
This could do more damage to the Real brand, by promoting a particular aspect of their software that is behaves inconsistently.
Companies and investment firms are usually horrified when the stock price explodes on the first day, it means that they left a hell of a lot money on the table when they offered the stock at what they assumed was a fair market price but turned out to be an incredible bargain. Generally the company sells the stock to the investment firm for a set price, and the firm offers the stock with an additional premium. Once the stock is sold, the companies don't make any more money from it.
By pricing the stock this high, Google is trying to prevent the huge run up of the price and maximize their take from the IPO.
The P/E ratio is flawed, as you say, because it is based on historical information, and it also may not reflect unusual financial activity for the quarter.
The Beta Coefficient is a better number to judge a stock by, because it compares the riskiness and expected return (or loss) of a particular stock to the rest of the market. Again, though, this is based on historical comparisons and may not reflect future performance.
Possibly. A company tailors its stock to appeal to different segments of the investment market. Just like for the longest time, Microsoft had a high rate of return without paying out any dividends, it was a good buy for wealthy investors who wanted capital gains but didn't want to pay taxes on the dividends.
Slashdot Mirror
does anyone honestly think that the government is going to allow flying cars in metropolitan areas?
I don't think this is a Democrat or Republican issue, I think it's a safety issue. Can you imagine a truck-sized flying car loaded with fuel flying into or even exploding next to a skyscraper? Legislators on both sides of the aisle are going to take a dim view of flying cars.
They definitely won't be allowed in DC until there is a way to bring them down with minimal damage to government structures.
The technology may be less than ten years away, but the legalization of them is probably 25 or 50 years away.
but what about the overall quality of the video? If I understand what he's saying, then a lot of the image quality is degraded on elements that don't make up the visual priorty. Just knowing that, many people are going to be watching the video just looking to see how badly degraded the non-priority items are. And secondly, I'd have to wonder how distracting it is because your eyes might still perceive that you aren't seeing a complete image.
I like reading Cringely, but doesn't it seem like most of the cool tech he talks up never sees the light of day?
10 x 0 = $2000
Wow, no wonder their software is so buggy!
Desktop operating systems probably turn a nice profit for MS, but there's much bigger money that could have been made in the embedded market if they could get a foothold. I think that that's why they designed Windows CE and Windows Media Player. However, it looks like Linux is just going to devestate them in the embedded market. When it comes to licensing costs, "free" is tough to beat.
That doesn't quite translate to success on the desktop, but it does get a lot more Linux devices out there. And the more popular Linux is, the more developers it'll have, and the more potential polished, commercial applications that will be available. That's what draws the desktop market, and what keeps Gates and Ballmer up at night.
"Nerdy computer-types drive the ladies WILD!"
I knew there was something about that college recruiter that didn't sit well with me...
As soon as they get done with their viral marketing campaign.
Right now, GMail accounts are in high demand, so Google is cleverly using the Invites function to slowly roll it out and generate more positive buzz about the service. It's the cool email service to have and everybody wants one, so if they make it hard to get one they can ramp up demand.
OTOH, if Google has just announced one day, "Ok, we have free email now!" it probably would have garnered a collective yawn from most of us. "Gee, another free email service. Woot."
Considering that this is "version 2," I assume that it's because they made a lot of money off the first one.
which singlehandedly offended the entire planet.
NBC made a major push a few years ago to push this kind of technology, where almost every word in an article was linked to something or other. I don't remember what they called it, but it must have done the big belly flop.
You know, this is so typical of the bullshit on /. that it's hardly worth commenting on, but I'll try anyway.
Somebody ALLEGES that the Republicans might do this or that, when they've done nothing of the sort, and the post gets modded up +4, Insightful.
Welcome to Slashdot, where you aren't judged on your ACTUAL RECORD, but on some bullshit we make up.
what kind of bullshit is that, anyway.
"mine mine miiine..it sounds like my name, give it to me"
If the site were about anything BUT Jerry Falwell, I'm sure the courts would have given the guy a pass. However, since the content of the site IS about Jerry Falwell, the domain name is obviously an attempt to hijack hapless users who misspell his name, the ruling is correct.
People have lost domain names for a lot less than this. A guy named Don Henley had to surrender donhenley.com, even though the page was about himself. A Catholic hospital had to surrender madonna.com.
www.fallwell.com
would be to get Apple together with Toast and Jam. Hopefully, Steve will gobble them up. It makes me hungry just thinking about the possibilities...
I think the atmosphere over there must be more like:
1) ???
2) ???
3) ???...
4) ???!
I wonder if they are going to drop Toast, their CD burning software. Granted, CD-burning capabilities are built-in to OS X and Win XP, but the options there are pretty limited. I always use Toast when possible.
And yet somehow, it's still a mystery as to why the Louisiana economy has been in the toilet for 20 years...
But you know what? aside from this relatively small group of techno-elites, 99.999% of the general population isn't going to care. The only reason the WP ran the story was that they're going to be squeezed out on stories that come off the newswires.
There may be some room for the WP and other papers to claim monopolistic practices, however, since MSN is the default home page of the default browser of the operating system on 94% of desktops.
Does it come with a little paper umbrella?
I think "Wang" would be a more appropriate name for them.
This is really interesting... Electronic Gaming Monthly is reporting that Peter Jackson has EVEN MORE footage that he wants to add to the trilogy, no doubt issuing the double-extended versions.
As long as he's not adding in a CG Jabba, I'm cool with that...
From what I've seen with e-books, it seems like the publishers and authors (like Stephen King) are trying to lead the way with fiction. IMO, this is probably the toughest segment of the market to crack. People who are avid fiction readers like the smell of a new book, the tactile feel of the rough paper, the sense of accomplishment as they flip page after page after page. There's a whole sensory experience that e-books will never fill for them.
No, the best way for e-books to grow in popularity is to emphasize reference works. O'Reilly is good about offering electronic versions of their books, but I don't see a lot of other publishers following suit. But the ability to do a boolean search on a tech book is a staggeringly great feature. The two problems with doing this for computer books is that 1) you are likely already sitting at your computer while looking up PHP or Python info, so you won't be using a handheld reader, and 2) the internet provides a tremendous source of reference material so you are just as likely to use your favorite website as a tech manual.
However, if e-book manufacturers and publishers could attack niche markets (auto mechanics, aircraft mechanics), they could build their popularity slowly.
is that Apple controls the hardware (iPod) AND the software (iPod firmware and iTunes). Real is always just one update away from getting their compatibility knocked out. So Real may start playing a cat and mouse game where Apple keeps locking them out and Real keeps trying to break back in.
This could do more damage to the Real brand, by promoting a particular aspect of their software that is behaves inconsistently.
Companies and investment firms are usually horrified when the stock price explodes on the first day, it means that they left a hell of a lot money on the table when they offered the stock at what they assumed was a fair market price but turned out to be an incredible bargain. Generally the company sells the stock to the investment firm for a set price, and the firm offers the stock with an additional premium. Once the stock is sold, the companies don't make any more money from it.
By pricing the stock this high, Google is trying to prevent the huge run up of the price and maximize their take from the IPO.
The P/E ratio is flawed, as you say, because it is based on historical information, and it also may not reflect unusual financial activity for the quarter.
The Beta Coefficient is a better number to judge a stock by, because it compares the riskiness and expected return (or loss) of a particular stock to the rest of the market. Again, though, this is based on historical comparisons and may not reflect future performance.
Possibly. A company tailors its stock to appeal to different segments of the investment market. Just like for the longest time, Microsoft had a high rate of return without paying out any dividends, it was a good buy for wealthy investors who wanted capital gains but didn't want to pay taxes on the dividends.