It is common knowledge...
that a wiz'(z)ar's staff has a knob on the end !
349 posts • joined 15 Jun 2009
that a wiz'(z)ar's staff has a knob on the end !
I played something called 'Dragonworld' in what I remember as 1984, but IIRC it was on the Commodore 64. It had quite decent 320 graphics - on colour! - and I seem to remember the parser was quite good, although this might just be a fond memory now surrounded by the mists of time.
I think I'll start looking around for some emulators and dig up all those old classics.
Did you know the original Hawaii 5-0 and Mannix shows are now available on DVD ? I was amazed to discover they were actually in colour too !
I've had a Buffalo BAs sitting on a shelf somewhere for over 2 years. It was bought in a pinh by a colleague in Japan and brought over on a project.
The power supply failed at some point. I have emailed and phoned with Buffalo in three continents, and with their main suppliers an dealers all around, AND I've even posted on their forum, asking to send me a replacement power supply. I have offered to pay for it and the shipping.
I have been given the run around from japan to the US to Europe, and ultimately I've been sent packing. They can not provide me with a replacement PS.
So before you part with your hard earned, take into consideration that there's some things that are never tested in a product review.
If I understand this correctly, Apple has placed an app of sorts on their iStore. A man is complaining that the stuff is HIS IP, but Apple won't remove it because is can not determine if the man is the IP owner.
It therefor follows that Apple can not determine if the person or persons that placed the content in the store are the IP owners either.
So Apple has put stuff in their store but they can not determine where it came from, and refuses to remove it for this very same reason.
Is it me or do they have it ass bakwards ? Does this now mean I can use any of Apples IP as long as I don't know it's their IP ? For instance, as long as I don't know Apple owns a patent for rectangular slab with rounded corners I can sell as many as I want, Ignorance is now an acceptable defene ?
And I'm not even trying to take the piss here. I'm dumbfounded.
chez Apple ?
It would possibly be a horrendously expensive undertaking to develop a new architecture chip that :
1. outperforms the Intel latest generation
2. delivers comparable performance at a comparable price point
3. does not infringe on AMD or Intel IP (at least not getting away with it)
4. produce it at anysignificant quantities
5. produce the relevant industrial strength compilers and cross platform the software at the time of release.
6. Alternatively, develop new software from scratch. This would truly be a can of worms, migrating to completely new hard- and software from the ground floor ?
I only have to refer to AMD who, although they make exellent products, and were even the originators of the 64 bit instruction sets as we know it, have never been able to make a sizeable dent in the Intel armour, not even when they had superior hardware (I'm conveniently ignoring the Opterons, which had a good run...for a bit). And et's not forget that even Big Blue did not have the stomach to go up against Intel at the time of the PowerPC's
I imagine that as soon as someone adds up the numbers at Fruity Towers the whole idea will be quickly relegated to 'bargaining chip' status.
But, admittedly stranger things have happened.
When I bought my iPad over a year ago it was really no contest between the available 'droids and the iPad. If I would have to make the same choice today I'm not so sure the iPad would ome out on top. the 'droid tablets have come a long way in a year, for sure.
I'm all for freedom of speech...but which idiot downvoted me for this LOL
It's not an 'A'elta, it's a 'D'elta, and my guess is it's a DC motor controller. For a fan, f'rinctance.
This is a brilliant idea, It could even keep the US patent system alive with only minor changes.
You can file anything you want, but when you want to start an infringment suit you have to pass a 'validaton check' first.
You could wait until the actual infringement suit starts, or you could decide to have any filing validated at the time of filing, or you could systematically validate your filings 'on the quiet' when you seem fit.
What would be the legal hurles ?
I'd upvote you 50 if I could.
I would have to agree with you if the comparison is based on 'application benchmarks', i.e. does it offer me the same performance or better on the application I use at a price I am prepared to pay (this could be word processing or number crunching, but also 3D, or games).
However, if a product is marketed as a 'flagship' item, i.e. 'look what we're capable of' I think such comparison can indeed be made.
If I wanted to build a system and bragging rights were important to me, I would indeed wish to know if I had the fastest component installed, even if it was 3.5 times the price of the runner up. Well, for a week at least.
It's just information. What you do with it us up to you. But I would agree that the right to laugh at the slower unit should be reserved to the people who actually fork out the 700$.
I don't think it would be advisable to cut loose Symbian in the current IP climate. Let's just imagine some IP litigation outfit gets to examine the source and claims all matter of copyright infringement.
Nokia has enough trouble right now. They don't need to expose themselves to infringement cases.
Mr. Bond is a Gentleman, and gentlemen do NOT drive Mustangs. And if , for reasons beyond their control, it IS necessery for them to drive one, the less it is mentioned and the sooner it is forgotten the better.
And I'm not sure about the E-type either
The first Esprits weren't turbo's, and the 750 they started filming with was such a steaming pile of excrement that BMW snuck in a 740 8 cylinder for the rest of the recording. Although the 8 cylinder Beamers are just an ever so slightly less steaming pile of excrement, at least they kept going.
This is what happens when people do not invest in the company and their product, but only in the hope that an idiot will pay more for their share than they paid for it.
There's simply nothing solid to hang a share value onto. No product. Just some bits flying about with a perceived dispersion measured in clicks. The whole predictability of the business model is based on vapor.
The sheer stupidity of these 'investors' and 'market analysts' is nothing short of baffling.
First they leave their country and come to ours, and when they are here they want us to start doing things the same way they do in the place they farked off from.
It is very disorienting, not to mention bloody annoying.
Am still waiting for H3 on the PC.
It may be within the purview of the US to demand extradition. No country has the right to determine what US law should be.
It is, however, equally within the purview of the NZ law to refuse extradition on the basis of whatever NZ lawmakers decide reasons for refusal are.
We've already started tu turn Mars into a garbage dump too. The efficiency with which humans can srew up their environment boggles the mind !
Anyone who is prepared to have 3500$ billed to their CC without any inkling on what they're getting or when they will get it deserves anything they finally do get...or not.
'OLD 'ON Guvna !
DID he perform the actus reus ?
1. He sent an email. In itself not an offence.
2. Said email was a bit burnt. In itself not an offence
3. His intent was to send it to his girlfriend. Unless SHE was offended, nuffink to see 'ere, move along !
He, at the time, was UNAWARE he sent the mail to everyone else. Not only did he not intend to (so no guilty mind), but, acording to his defense, he did not execute a deliberate action.
He can therefore only be acused of not RTFM'ming, but if we're going to start putting people away for that we're going to need more real estate in the 'Her Majesty's Pleasure' department.
So IF there was no crime (as there was no awareness nor intent on wrongdoing), the could try and 'do' him for intending the offence, but I think we've established there was no intent.
So acording to you Apple never had a new aplliance lock up on stage ? Hmm.
Has Mr. Chen formulated a detailed flan of attack on how the Chinese eonomy is going to support 2.5 billion inhabitants with a reasonable standar of living ? I'm quite interested.
But here in Europe they're just a bunch of parasitic scam artists.
And if they would like to sue me for saying that, the Reg is free to fork over my email adress if it is subpoena'd.
If you'd been REALLY smart you'd hav bought a cheap winbox and invested the remainder in Apple stock. Now THAT would've been serious money by now.
Yes. I have a better idea.
So does the US library of congress. Check it out. There's even a whitepaper ! You'll be amazed. They have discovered something called an 'optical disc'. But keep it quiet, or Apple will call it the iArchive and charge us for using it.
Point of my remark being, though : WHY would you replace a technology KNOWN to give you headaches every 15 years by the SAME technology.
If the bloody tapes are so good, do a deal with IBM allowing you to fabricate the drives yourself if and when you need them. I'm sure India has sufficient know-how to produce a tape drive if they put their minds to it.
They're going to spool some old tapes onto new tapes, which will to all intents and purposes be equally out of date in 10 years or so ?
Who's the asshat that thought of this then ?
Ah, the reversal of argument ploy ! And not deserving of 5 downvotes, might I add. But it's a politicians argument.
The 'choice' of selling bodyparts for money is NOT, as stated in the argument, a question of self determination. I put it to you that people, given the 'true' free choice (i.e. not influenced by any other factor than their own philosophical or moral standpoint) will NEVER sell organs because of the 'constitutional right to make money'.
You can never protect people from their own stupidity. They will always find new and lever ways to be stupid.
But their is no argument to be made for the selling of organs on a moral or philosophical basis. It should, therefor, not be allowed.
If people need to sell their organs in order to survive, there are surely different measures necessary than allowing them to sell body parts.
Let's for a moment forget he is 17. Laws on 'self-determination' differ across the globe, for all kinds of reasons.
If you discount age, what is left is 'the right to be stupid'. The argument is that if someone wants to sell an organ (this includes musical instruments) they should have the right to do so.
There's TWO things wrong with it. Firstly, it is a choice which will be made by poor people. I can virtually guarantee you no one with a fat wallet will ever consider it out of principle. EVER. They may do it for free for a number of reasons, but just because they can make a few bucks out of it ? To quote Lenny Henry : 'I - don't - think - so'.
Which brings us to number two. Let's say there are complications. Or, in the extreme case, the kid needs a new kidney himself in 20 years.
He will then apply to his health insurance, public or private, will be consulting doctors and hospitals (in the case of China paid for by the taxpayer) and using medication at least partially refunded by health in-sewer-ants, paid for by people not exercising their right to be stupid.
So he privatised the bonus, but cleverly deferred the malus to society. I find this somewhat unacceptable.
You may excersise your right to be stupid all you want. But you carry the consequences yourself. Don't ask society to foot the bill if the excrement hits the forced air circulator.
Why Apple is not targetting google. Well, I do, because Google also sits on a large pile of cash (or whas that a large cache of piles ?) and they're a US outfit, which would give the presiding judge an identity crisis. But that's beside the point.
I'm in engineering. If I licence a technology from - say - Company K., and buid a plant for a client, an subsequently Company L opines that their patent has been infriged upon, thay would first have to prove this in court in CL vs. CK.
IF they are succesful in defending their claim a licensing deal would have to be brokered between CL and the client, possibly involving damages from CK to CL.
I would have to show I did not infringe knowingly (i.e. defraud) and the client would simply wave it's arms in the air claiming they know nothing and are from Barcelona (if such were the case).
So could someone explain the workings of this claim ?
I was forcibly removed from the theatre at the W95 presentation, because after the 'you can start me up' tune I yelled 'you make a grown man cry'.
The MS people didn't like it.
If you buy something from a reteiler, and there is something wrong with it, you take it up witht he retailer.
These app stores trade internationally. When something goes awry, they wave their hands in the air and say 'we're just the distributor. Take it up witht he publisher'. Who promptly points you to the developer.
Additionally, outfits like Valve and EA refuse to trade according to the laws of the country they trade in.
Thirdly, if you do not take being brushed off lightly and kick up a stink, they cut off your account and you loose all your software. And since they trade from abroad you do not have the protection of the law in your own country.
The idea behind it is great. Unfortunately the people running these software stores are a bunch of rip-off artists. To most of us, anyway.
I bought a Ford with Microsoft Sync. After 20miles the MS badge fell off. I'll have nothing to do with W8. Too risky and computer stuff is expensive.
Those pesky Chinese communists are asking all matter of minimum wages, days off and health plans these days.
Doing business in the Peoples Republic is proving to be a bigger hassle than it's worth.
How is a business man supposed to make an honest buck these days without everyone wanting a slice of it for free ?
A bad joke, but a joke nonetheless...
...but they will deny it for months if not years and won't give a sh*t.
We've now spent a gazillion (insert preferred currency here) and have finally achieved a level of certainty that warrants a further multigazillion investment !
Even at current pump prices it seems some Greeks still have money to burn !
Untill it turns out it's Beta software not supported outside of the US, and a group of Far East or Eastern Block rip off artists find clever ways of fiddling some not-quite-so-tech-savvy old age pensioners out of their har earnd.
Oh yeah, it'll be the talk of the town.
IIRC Cook spoke about something going on for Mac PRo users late next year. I do not believe he mentioned the iMac
That's 2299 Euro to us. Or about 2750$ . For that you get a 5400 rpm HD and a 2.3 GHz cpu. The 2.6 is a staggering 2900+ Euro (or 3500$ +). Complete and utter madness.
Imagine how much the 17 would have cost. No wonder they axed it !
Meybe he decided he was best serving the constitution by flogging the documents ? After all, if I -being a stupid foreigner not even deemed fit for a US invasion - understand the vaunted ducument correctly - it is the right - nay, the solemn duty - of every US citizen to remove any government leader that threatens said constitution.
There's an explanation for everything. You just have to choose to accept it. Or not.
1. More world
2. Fewer people
Everything else is codswollop. So take your pick.
...what was the outcome of the proceedings of eBizz vs. Apple ? You seem to have overlooked that small part.
Unfortunately, my own country (Belgium) can be held responsible as the birthplace of this behemoth (Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxemburg concoted a Customs and Excise union in 1944 while our cowardly gouvernments were nursing their sorry backsides from being kicked by das Reich). We've been an 'economic union' since 58.
Only today, this early insight has led to the EU hitting us with a possible 100 million Euro for allegedly 'discriminating' between domestic and foreign financial products (I shit you not) and we're still not clear on that 708 million Euro fine that's been hovering abouve our collective heads since december because our budget was allegedly not up to EU 'standards'.
I'm sure other member countries are doing equally well, but right now I'm to depressed to research it. OTOH, right about now 1000 UKP will buy you a sizeable chunk of Greece, so it ain't all bad !
The EU is starting to show what they are all about : a collection of money grabbing self serving criminals who make up all sorts of dodgy legislation so they can haul eveyones ass in front of an equally dodgy court so they can slap millions of Euro's of fines on evey country in the world.
Now before you start shouting 'it's always been like this', no it hasn't. They've indeed alwas been meddling criminals, and they've even made life difficult for private enterprise under the clever 'anti-trust' moniker, but apparently these large corporations are too difficult to extort money from. So now they're turning to the tax payer !
Question being : how do we get rid of them ? Anyone any ideas ?
A rectangular device with a flat screen to display moving pitchers ? I'm sure many IP lawsuits will ensue !