I don't think that was a sealer. I remember it as a wick that came in a plastic tube, sort of like a lipstick or chap-stick tube, but with a slit down the side that exposed the wick. The chemical smelled of Acetic acid (think of the smell of Vinegar), and wasn't "sticky" at all, like you'd expect a "sealer" to be.
I was always under the impression that it was a "fixative" or "stop bath" type chemical, who's job was to halt the self-development process, NOT a "sealant" to seal out the elements... Here's a reference that also calls it a "fixative"
Having said that, I have many old family photo albums taken with our bellows-type Polaroid Model 95 camera that used the above technology, and in fact I still have the camera (although there is no way to get film for it). Those photos were taken in the 1950s and early 60s, and are as fresh and crisp-looking today as the day they were taken.
Or, do you mean "do things" like totally pwn your Windows box with some wayward ActiveX component (note that that was patched, but was only a few months ago, in February)?
"M$" is merely a convenient and well-understood ABBREVIATION, which is much less typing than the full name.
However, if you were older than 20 years old, you would remember how that abbreviation came about. Sit down for a history lesson, son. (I assume you are immature, by your use of the immature "hacker-speak" term "leet". The word is ELITE, idiot!).
That style of abbreviation originally started with an extremely popular online service called CompuServe in the late '70s and into the 80's, on its "CB" "chat rooms" (before most people knew of the internet). People would end up getting huge bills (several hundred dollars or more per month), by losing track of how much time they were spending in CompuServe's CB chat (there was no such thing as "unlimited" service back then). This caused people on those chat "channels" to start spelling CompuServe with a "$" for the "S", i.e. Compu$erve, and that naturally eventually got shortened to "C$" (very confusing to BASIC programmers, but I digress...)
So, I think now you can see that it was a natural progression for those in the know to start referring to MicroSoft as "Micro$oft", and then simply "M$", in a tip-of-the-hat to the nostalgic ol' Compu$erve days of yore.
Therefore, it is YOU that show your ignorance, by not understanding the underlying historical significance of the "M$" abbreviation, bucko.
I just looked down at my hands, and noted (for the first time) that my "ring finger" is significantly longer than my index finger on both hands. However:
1. I SUUUUUUCK at math (but am pretty good at LOGIC, and am an embedded hw/sw developer by trade).
And what's so impossible about Rife? Yeah, he got some stuff wrong; but medical researchers have known for years about the healing power of certain electrical currents, and have demonstrated same in many experiments.
It seems logical, then, that certain types of cells might find their growth enhanced, or retarded, by electrical stimuli that a different cell type might not be significantly affected by, either one way or another.
Once we have that type of a differentiation, and can do it repeatedly, that forms the very basis of a treatment modality.
Maybe if Rife was transported into "now", and had a present-day lab, with all sorts of fancy DSP-based signal synthesis equipment and analysis tools (like PET scans to track the tumor's advance/retreat), he himself might very well be the author of this study. Who's to know?
But the guy was obviously fairly close to a "legitimate" medical treatment.
Speaking of being paid to make shit up: Of COURSE Time Machine, which relies on OS X 10.5 (Leopard) isn't RELEASED yet; but it was DEMOED, fully-formed, at Apple's WWDC last summer.
Hence my "Reverse Engineering" comment in my original post.
You're right. Snapshots shouldn't be patentable. Apple's Time Machine GUI SHOULD, however. It was the "non-obvious" icing on an old, moldy cake.
But don't ever breathe the term "System Restore" and "Time Machine" in the same post again. Comparing those two concepts as if they were equals is like comparing the Space Shuttle to a Model-T Ford: Yes, they are both "mechanized transportation", but...
I believe that they may use ZFS for OS X Server first, but it will be another filesystem supported in addition to HFS+.
As for me being a troll: When does debate end and trolling begin?
I was simply pointing out that this "smelled" much like Time Machine, albeit a clumsy, wholly unintuitive version of the underlying technology.
I know that Apple didn't invent the idea of file versioning. What they invented (as is their trademark), was the way to make that technology USEFUL and ACCESSIBLE.
And I guess this just hopped out of Apple's womb fully-formed at WWDC last year?
If the Ext3[Tu]cow (even the name has Apple roots!) project was started in 2003, and it debuted in mid-2007, then by that same development timetable, Apple should have started their project in 2002, right?
Or are Linux devs inherently slower than OS X devs? **ducks**
Unless you work for Apple as an OS dev, you have zero idea how long this has been in the oven at Apple.
As for the "why bother?" point: It is rude to steal, period. And if Apple has been able to patent any of this (yes, I know, software patents suck. I'm right there with you, but...), this may just have to be ripped right back out of the Linux kernel. Then what? As I replied to another post: It's IP theft, direct or indirect; but IP theft just the same.
Or is Linux now reduced to following Apple's taillights, just like MacroSuck(tm)? Which was kinda my point, anyway...
On another note: Pardon my gaffe regarding VMS vs. Unix. I did not know that versioning was a VMS feature. I had learned it was a Unix-y thing.
It isn't bad enough that MacroSuck(tm) has to copy Apple at each and every turn, now LINUX Devs have to do it, too?
I mean, REALLY? Given that Unix has had the concept of file "versioning" since I don't know when (but a long-azz time!), and Linux has had what, like fifteen years to come up with something like this, I find the timing of this "revelation" highly suspicious.
This is a reverse-engineering of Apple's Time Machine, through and through.
I never thought I'd see the Penguin stoop to MacroSuck(tm)'s "R&D" tactics. Bleh!
Mod me "troll" if you must; but you KNOW I'm right...
In fact, there were even "DRM" (before we knew that acronym!) schemes that depended on some of the "illegal" operations in the 6502. Actually, I believe the original NMOS Synertek SY6502 had some of these, because IIRC, the Apple II never used a Rockwell R65C02A (maybe in the Apple IIc), and it was in the context of Apple II games that I first heard of the undocumented opcode hacks. In fact, IIRC, the games that used those wouldn't load once people replaced their SY6502 CPUs with the Rockwell R65C02, because they "fixed" the "opcode leak" "error".
Oh, and the 6510 was the Commodore (who bought Synertek's foundry) variant of the 6502, that went into the Commodore 64. I do believe that Rockwell had a chip called the R6510; but it wasn't the same thing.
If you want a windows PC, buy a windows PC. Don't lobotomise a Mac.
Windows` strength is the diversity of third-party support, both hardware and software.
Why give half of that up and run only on mac hardware?
To answer your question, it's no different from only buying Dell or Brand X or whatever. It's just as wrong.
You obviously have never tried to maintain more than a few computers at a time.
The main reason IT departments tend to be "monoculture" when it comes to hardware is the sanity of their IT staff.
You will note that they did NOT create (another) OS "monoculture". The users now have the choice between the two top-selling OSes, and the University gets to buy less hardware.
Oh, and since they are Macs, they can, through Parallels, even designate some or all of the machines to run nearly any other OS on the planet.
No other hardware vendor can offer that (at least not legally).
You don't HAVE to purchase your music through the iTunes Store. You don't HAVE to purchase your music through the iTunes Store. You don't HAVE to purchase your music through the iTunes Store....
Sheesh!
Consumers vote with their feet. And the vast MAJORITY of Consumers have voted -- iTunes!
Damn! Does EVERYTHING have to have Government Intervention???
if books are ever going to return to mainstream, they need to replace all those words with pictures.
...And your arrogant, flip little comment, reflecting the general attitude of the Computer Priesthood(tm), is EXACTLY why Linux will NEVER be ready for the desktop.
The (in your terms) Luser must never, ever, ever HAVE to experience a config file, nor HAVE to type in some INCANTATION into a CLI. Period.
I suppose you'd find it acceptable to have to write an XML file to record a program on your DVR, too?
Oh wait! I forgot! The MUST HAVE Linux DVD PLAYER, MPlayer, *still* runs from the Command Line by default, doesn't it?
Heck, the MPlayer GUI isn't even in the BUILD by default!
From the MPlayer Docs: "MPlayer comes with a GUI that is not build by default. The GUI section of the documentation explains how to enable it. Several external MPlayer frontends provide alternative GUIs."
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm.
My 2 year old G5 PowerMac boots offa SATA just fine, thank you!
Of course, it uses Open Firmware, which, IMHO, is vastly superior to BIOS. Whether its vastly superior or not to EFI...
That's inexcusable, now that there are software apps for around $1k that do that. Not everyone needs that fancy Eventide Clockworks "Dump" box.
I love the way "Wipe and Reload" is still the best you idiots can do to troubleshoot a Borked Winblows installation...
I was always under the impression that it was a "fixative" or "stop bath" type chemical, who's job was to halt the self-development process, NOT a "sealant" to seal out the elements... Here's a reference that also calls it a "fixative"
Having said that, I have many old family photo albums taken with our bellows-type Polaroid Model 95 camera that used the above technology, and in fact I still have the camera (although there is no way to get film for it). Those photos were taken in the 1950s and early 60s, and are as fresh and crisp-looking today as the day they were taken.
Let's see which browser passed the ACID2 test first, shall we?
Or, do you mean "do things" like totally pwn your Windows box with some wayward ActiveX component (note that that was patched, but was only a few months ago, in February)?
I guess I'll just have to be content with my plain ol' Standards Compliant browser, then.
Pity me. Mwuhahahahahahaaaaaa!
But we knew that.
However, if you were older than 20 years old, you would remember how that abbreviation came about. Sit down for a history lesson, son. (I assume you are immature, by your use of the immature "hacker-speak" term "leet". The word is ELITE, idiot!).
That style of abbreviation originally started with an extremely popular online service called CompuServe in the late '70s and into the 80's, on its "CB" "chat rooms" (before most people knew of the internet). People would end up getting huge bills (several hundred dollars or more per month), by losing track of how much time they were spending in CompuServe's CB chat (there was no such thing as "unlimited" service back then). This caused people on those chat "channels" to start spelling CompuServe with a "$" for the "S", i.e. Compu$erve, and that naturally eventually got shortened to "C$" (very confusing to BASIC programmers, but I digress...)
So, I think now you can see that it was a natural progression for those in the know to start referring to MicroSoft as "Micro$oft", and then simply "M$", in a tip-of-the-hat to the nostalgic ol' Compu$erve days of yore.
Therefore, it is YOU that show your ignorance, by not understanding the underlying historical significance of the "M$" abbreviation, bucko.
1. I SUUUUUUCK at math (but am pretty good at LOGIC, and am an embedded hw/sw developer by trade).
2. I have a slightly (and I do emphasize "slightly"!) less than average Johnson (the average is a litte over 5 inches , actually).
3. My verbal and communications skills have always been above average.
So now what?
It seems logical, then, that certain types of cells might find their growth enhanced, or retarded, by electrical stimuli that a different cell type might not be significantly affected by, either one way or another.
Once we have that type of a differentiation, and can do it repeatedly, that forms the very basis of a treatment modality.
Maybe if Rife was transported into "now", and had a present-day lab, with all sorts of fancy DSP-based signal synthesis equipment and analysis tools (like PET scans to track the tumor's advance/retreat), he himself might very well be the author of this study. Who's to know?
But the guy was obviously fairly close to a "legitimate" medical treatment.
Nice "positive" comment, Fucktard.
I guess your "rules" don't apply to you, do they?
Halo was demonstrated by Bungie's Jason Jones as an under-development OS X-only game before Bungie was purchased by MacroSuck(tm).
I remember seeing the Keynote at which Halo was demo'ed at MacWorld Expo NY in 1999.
Here is a page full of links to videos regarding the Halo introduction (caution: The videos themselves seem to load slowly, be patient) :
Halo wasn't released for the XBox until how many years later?
FOAD, Windows Fucktard.
As I said, when does debate end and trolling begin?
I've been using Macs since they were called Lisas.
Next. Idiot.
And my original post acknowledged that file versioning isn't a new idea. Learn to read.
Speaking of being paid to make shit up: Of COURSE Time Machine, which relies on OS X 10.5 (Leopard) isn't RELEASED yet; but it was DEMOED, fully-formed, at Apple's WWDC last summer.
Hence my "Reverse Engineering" comment in my original post.
So what was your point, again?
You're right. Snapshots shouldn't be patentable. Apple's Time Machine GUI SHOULD, however. It was the "non-obvious" icing on an old, moldy cake.
But don't ever breathe the term "System Restore" and "Time Machine" in the same post again. Comparing those two concepts as if they were equals is like comparing the Space Shuttle to a Model-T Ford: Yes, they are both "mechanized transportation", but...
I believe that they may use ZFS for OS X Server first, but it will be another filesystem supported in addition to HFS+.
As for me being a troll: When does debate end and trolling begin?
I was simply pointing out that this "smelled" much like Time Machine, albeit a clumsy, wholly unintuitive version of the underlying technology.
I know that Apple didn't invent the idea of file versioning. What they invented (as is their trademark), was the way to make that technology USEFUL and ACCESSIBLE.
And I guess this just hopped out of Apple's womb fully-formed at WWDC last year?
If the Ext3[Tu]cow (even the name has Apple roots!) project was started in 2003, and it debuted in mid-2007, then by that same development timetable, Apple should have started their project in 2002, right?
Or are Linux devs inherently slower than OS X devs? **ducks**
Unless you work for Apple as an OS dev, you have zero idea how long this has been in the oven at Apple.
As for the "why bother?" point: It is rude to steal, period. And if Apple has been able to patent any of this (yes, I know, software patents suck. I'm right there with you, but...), this may just have to be ripped right back out of the Linux kernel. Then what? As I replied to another post: It's IP theft, direct or indirect; but IP theft just the same.
Or is Linux now reduced to following Apple's taillights, just like MacroSuck(tm)? Which was kinda my point, anyway...
On another note: Pardon my gaffe regarding VMS vs. Unix. I did not know that versioning was a VMS feature. I had learned it was a Unix-y thing.
That is a semantic non-issue. Either way, it's IP theft.
It isn't bad enough that MacroSuck(tm) has to copy Apple at each and every turn, now LINUX Devs have to do it, too?
I mean, REALLY? Given that Unix has had the concept of file "versioning" since I don't know when (but a long-azz time!), and Linux has had what, like fifteen years to come up with something like this, I find the timing of this "revelation" highly suspicious.
This is a reverse-engineering of Apple's Time Machine, through and through.
I never thought I'd see the Penguin stoop to MacroSuck(tm)'s "R&D" tactics. Bleh!
Mod me "troll" if you must; but you KNOW I'm right...
Right!
;-)
Wow! I remember the xFF Jump Indirect thing for sure!
I swear, that's still my favorite instruction set for hand-coding in Assembler.
Or perhaps you prefer ARM assembler...
In fact, there were even "DRM" (before we knew that acronym!) schemes that depended on some of the "illegal" operations in the 6502. Actually, I believe the original NMOS Synertek SY6502 had some of these, because IIRC, the Apple II never used a Rockwell R65C02A (maybe in the Apple IIc), and it was in the context of Apple II games that I first heard of the undocumented opcode hacks. In fact, IIRC, the games that used those wouldn't load once people replaced their SY6502 CPUs with the Rockwell R65C02, because they "fixed" the "opcode leak" "error".
Oh, and the 6510 was the Commodore (who bought Synertek's foundry) variant of the 6502, that went into the Commodore 64. I do believe that Rockwell had a chip called the R6510; but it wasn't the same thing.
Oh, WAHHH! Like $30 is going to end your life.
I know, I know: Software wants to be free.
And Apple offers a LOT of Free Software. And contributes a LOT to the F/OSS community.
So now what?
You obviously have never tried to maintain more than a few computers at a time.
The main reason IT departments tend to be "monoculture" when it comes to hardware is the sanity of their IT staff.
You will note that they did NOT create (another) OS "monoculture". The users now have the choice between the two top-selling OSes, and the University gets to buy less hardware.
Oh, and since they are Macs , they can, through Parallels, even designate some or all of the machines to run nearly any other OS on the planet.
No other hardware vendor can offer that (at least not legally).
None. Period.
Sheesh!
Consumers vote with their feet. And the vast MAJORITY of Consumers have voted -- iTunes!
Damn! Does EVERYTHING have to have Government Intervention???
Also,
if books are ever going to return to mainstream, they need to replace all those words with pictures.
The (in your terms) Luser must never, ever, ever HAVE to experience a config file, nor HAVE to type in some INCANTATION into a CLI. Period.
I suppose you'd find it acceptable to have to write an XML file to record a program on your DVR, too?
Oh wait! I forgot! The MUST HAVE Linux DVD PLAYER, MPlayer, *still* runs from the Command Line by default, doesn't it?
Heck, the MPlayer GUI isn't even in the BUILD by default!
From the MPlayer Docs: "MPlayer comes with a GUI that is not build by default. The GUI section of the documentation explains how to enable it. Several external MPlayer frontends provide alternative GUIs."
I rest my case.