Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

42 comments

Apple really sucks (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25362819)

Although I really like Apple and the proprietary software, I think that we have to accept the crushing truth.

In these times it really doesn't matter if is launched KDE 35.0 or Mac OS Iguana, because while both products (and others with less weight like Mac G4 Cube) were trying to impress with "cool" stuff, Apple was consolidating its position as the leader in the field of systems with DRM and privation of liberty, first with the iTunes (that have approximately 90% of the market on the US) and later with its advanced successor, the recently iPhone, that doesn't let the client to install applications written in Java, using Cingular network problems as a excuse.

The reality is that Apple has little to offer to the intelligent user. The same intelligent that is seen disconcerted by the impossibility to do a simple mp3 transfer from the iTunes to music player different to the iPhone. If you don't believe me, go out and ask to the people how they transfer a mp3 file to a player no supported by Apple: burning the file on to a CD, and then ripping this file to a free format, like OGG. THAT IS A SMART THING TO DO!

Then what we suggest to this user is that he needs to buy the last iPod version (spending a fortune) , which he will change every year to be cool (because of Steve Jobs recommendation), which he can't use with a free firmware, like RockBox, because of DRM.
How many people get to do it? Only Derek Zoolander is so faithful to the brand. We persist in THAT is the normal thing... nothing more far from reality.

Explain him why his black color MacBook is 200 bucks more expensive than the same white laptop, why he gets Windows support (thanks to Bootcamp) but he can't use Linux, why Mac OS X is still stealing from 6 years ago using Exposé like a killer feature, why he needs to pay 130 bucks for each segurity patch (although they call it "new version", it is just a patch), etc.

And the developers? Obviously they'll return to Linus, because no one will tolerate the pain of develop in a platform that threat us with stupid patents like the "spring folders", that were deleted from GNOME. By each Mac OS X application we have 5000 that run on Linux, becuase they are free as a in speech.

The proof of the Apple failure is seen also in the Windows world, either in areas like P2P and cracking (because there is not applications), computer sells (1500 bucks for a computer that doesn't run games? fuck you Apple), etc.

if Mac OS X is so cool, why it doesn't work on computers different from a shitty Mac? It cannot be that if I want to run Mac OS X in a PC I have to download from the eMule a patched version made by a juacker with a nick like moo, cow, or whatever. Who will install that with entirely confidence? And, furthermore, once it get installed, the 50% of the hardware doesn't work (unless the hardware are things with "cool" neon lights approved by Apple).

The battle for the most stupid user is lost for Linux, because Apple users are to far away in that race, even it seems like they train for that matter.

They make fun of Linux users because we go to listen to Stallman, but they go to a Keynote to listen to Steve Jobs, who sell them products, and they fight between each other just for a three button mouse (a funny thing, because they got a shitty experience because of the one button mouse that they bought from Apple itself).

You keep defending the apple. You keep defending Safari as something unique while you read the impressed newspaper because you can't even read the BBC. You keep thinking that the people look at you with envy because of the iPods but the reality is that they think that you are just stupids. You keep insulting Windows and then you go as fast as you can to buy Bootcamp plus a Windows license. You keep insulting Intel and praising IBM and then you get owned. You keep attacking the free software while Apple search on Google where to get free software under permissive licenses. Keep just like that.

And You? Where do you want to go today?

And You? What have you bought on Itunes today?

Re:Apple really sucks (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#25362847)

And You? Where do you want to go today?
It's almost 5, I want to go home.

Re:Apple really sucks (1)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 5 years ago | (#25362991)

You really need to get out more.

Yeah, but . . . (1)

StefanJ (88986) | more than 5 years ago | (#25362849)

. . . will we get to see Garriot continue on to Planet X to get a blessing from Father Antos?

Nice! (3, Funny)

DJ DeFi (1344863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25362973)

This page is used to test the proper operation of the Apache HTTP server after it has been installed. If you can read this page, it means that the web server installed at this site is working properly, but has not yet been configured.

Re:Nice! (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363059)

If you are a member of the general public:

The fact that you are seeing this page indicates that the website you just visited is either experiencing problems, or is undergoing routine maintenance.

If you would like to let the administrators of this website know that you've seen this page instead of the page you expected, you should send them e-mail. In general, mail sent to the name "webmaster" and directed to the website's domain should reach the appropriate person.

For example, if you experienced problems while visiting www.example.com, you should send e-mail to "webmaster@example.com".

For information on Fedora, please visit the Fedora Project website.

Re:Nice! (2, Informative)

sharkman67 (548107) | more than 5 years ago | (#25366299)

That's because the url in the article is wrong. AMSAT is http://www.amsat.org/ [amsat.org]

Windows on Earth? (3, Funny)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363093)

Windows on Earth? I thought the Microsoft license forbade such a large use. Well, it will be interesting to see what breaks.

Re:Windows on Earth? (4, Funny)

nog_lorp (896553) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363647)

Get your BSOD shelters ready...

I have a question... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25363101)

What would happen if a non-Governmental body - something like, say Wikipedia, only with money, or maybe a slightly eccentric billionaire - were to put ultra high resolution imagers into orbit, with the same capabilities as secret spy satellites and permitted anybody to look at anywhere on Earth - anywhere , at anytime, and pay nothing, or perhaps a token fee? Would the birds be shot down? Would the government (any government) pass legislation forbidding the use of the high-res imagery except by "approved" organisations?

Yeah, I know, not a particularly realistic scenario, but I am interested in any answers.

Re:I have a question... (2, Informative)

dlgeek (1065796) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363275)

There are already regulations prohibiting publishing images above a certain resolution. See the thread the other day on the new google (branded) satellite for more info.

RAFA? What's wrong with you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25363307)

I'm a Slashdotter, FFS. But thanks for the info. :)

Re:I have a question... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25364895)

Sure, American legislation, which doesn't apply to other countries or space. Wikipedia for instance doesn't really have a country of origin.

The most they could do is to shut down the DNS if its in America and/or block it from within America.

Like what happened with Wikileaks, which was just a domain name block and easily accessible using DNS names such as .be

I don't really understand what the problem is with hires sat images, they are already hires enough to see things like tanks, military base layouts and such.

Re:I have a question... (1)

dlgeek (1065796) | more than 5 years ago | (#25367001)

And where would you launch it?

I would think most places with the capabilities to launch a satellite like that would have laws restricting it's use.

Re:I have a question... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25363413)

What would happen if the satellite was launched secretly, or the info regarding the imager was witheld before launch, so that there was no chance for the government to prevent it being put into orbit? And what if the satellite was "Open Sourced"...that is, the owner/launcher relinquished control of it to nobody? SO you have this satellite with high res imager capable of seeing with the same resolution as a military/intelligence satellite, but nobody owns it, nobody is in charge of it, (no person or organisation which could be prosecuted, sued, or forced to shut it off), but which could be used by anybody with a web browser?

Re:I have a question... (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363537)

Then I'm pretty sure they'd have to answer to the FAA...

Re:I have a question... (1)

Golddess (1361003) | more than 5 years ago | (#25366873)

The US owns the world now? But a little more seriously, perhaps they'd quietly contract a hit out on the satellite to the Chinese. They've already shown an ability to blowup satellites in orbit.

Re:I have a question... (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#25364175)

They'd put the paparazzi out of businesses.

Re:I have a question... (2, Interesting)

guruevi (827432) | more than 5 years ago | (#25364335)

Actually, with Google shooting (or at least helping out) stuff in orbit that scenario seems to be quite realistic. Nowadays it's just too expensive and not very cost effective to shoot a hunk-a-junk with a camera into space and let everyone have access to it (especially since it would most likely bankrupt the companies that rely on reselling their imagery) but I think Google and the like might actually be able to pull it off, if not just for a marketing stunt. The images would most likely also have to be post-processed so live-viewing is not really an option there. But if a government can do it, so can a private organization (with loads of money) and as far as the law goes, go somewhere where the law doesn't have such a fascist grip on what a free man (or corporation) can do in free space (Outer Space Treaty)

Re:I have a question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25364753)

It won't happen. The cost and resources required to launch enough satellites into orbit to allow contant monitoring of the surface is huge. Not to mention the logistics of recieving those images back on earth. The reason the they can do it from the ISS is because it is because the ISS is in a much higher orbit than Remote Sensing Satellites, but this means that the possible resolution is greatly deminished.

This means you can't zoom in to see yourself waving at the satellite!!

Down down down (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363161)

That crashed pretty quick, only 8 comments and the site is already down.

I want pretty pictures damnit!!!

So.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25363211)

This 'Windows on Earth' thing..

What operating systems can it be used with?

145.800 megahertz (3, Informative)

atomicthumbs (824207) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363215)

... is the downlink frequency. Listen! Use MMSSTV [amateur-radio.ca] to decode. Sadly, I can barely hear it at 5:10 PM in California with my HT. I need a better antenna. :(

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

kd5zex (1030436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363309)

Last I heard SSTV was all but done for due to people transmitting pron. Whats your experience?

On a semi-side note, I wonder if anyone has transmitted goatse?

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

atomicthumbs (824207) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363361)

Never heard of anything like that. If that were the case, any mode allowing transmission of data would be dead. SSTV (from what I hear) is alive and well. KI6EFA

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

kd5zex (1030436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363477)

Could very well be, I have not so much as keyed mic in over a year. I probably read it in some old timers article (read: troll / flame) on eham.net or something. Not that I have anything against old timers, the incessant whining does get old however. "Back in my day there was no phone, if you could copy CW at 4000 WPM you recieved until you could..." ;) 73, kd5zex

if you are getting pr0n via SSTV... (1)

filthpickle (1199927) | more than 5 years ago | (#25368315)

you are doing it wrong.

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

kd5zex (1030436) | more than 5 years ago | (#25368643)

Here is an example of what I was thinking of SSTV, pr0n and you [squidzone.ca]

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

vonart (1033056) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363499)

Well, I know that the local SSTV net here is still somewhat active. I've caught a decent amount of it while traveling as well. I'd say it's not dead yet, even if it is in a bit of a decline. 73, K1PUP

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

vonart (1033056) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363525)

...whoops. I misread that. Preview would have been my friend. Let me add that I've not seen anything like that transmitted on SSTV, nor have even heard about that happening.

73 once more,
K1PUP

P.S. Wow, I sure hope nobody has transmitted /that/...

Re:145.800 megahertz (3, Informative)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 5 years ago | (#25366051)

Have a look for the WA5VJB "Cheap Yagi" articles. They are fairly easy to make, and give quite an improvement. I built a crossed 2m/70cm yagi - 3 ele on 2m, 5 ele on 70cm, with a diplexer - for LEO satellite work. It took about an hour, all told. I found that tuning up the 2m end was a bit tricky because the tuning is fairly "narrow", but if you're receiving that shouldn't be a biggie. If you can hear the ISS *at all* with an HT's rubber duck, then even a bad 3 element yagi will help!

You might also try angling the radio so that the rubber duck antenna is perpendicular to the satellite pass. Think about it - the antenna has a radiation pattern like a doughnut, so you want that to have its widest point looking at the satellite. Another thing to try is holding it above a car roof or bonnet (yes, really), so that it acts like a reflector. Experiment to find the best distance - you'll hear quite a sharp peak. This actually works best with UHF downlinks, but it should work with VHF too if your car is big enough ;-)

Re:145.800 megahertz (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 5 years ago | (#25382807)

Just to reply to myself - here's an SSTV image received with a simple J-pole antenna and a 20-year-old mobile transceiver!

http://www.gjcp.net/~gordonjcp/na1ss.jpg [gjcp.net]

Even with the ISS at 25 degrees elevation, it was a very very strong signal.

Source for non-slashdotted pix (5, Informative)

leighklotz (192300) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363219)

Their blog [blogspot.com] has a few of the test pictures received (of of Exp. 17 Commander) Sergei Volkov. These were received in Portugal and the US. Other images will doubtless show on their blogspot site one Garriot gets involted.

Re:Source for non-slashdotted pix (1)

MerlTurkin (598333) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363395)

Excellent images! Nice job! Ham radio RULES!

Hams RULE! (1)

MerlTurkin (598333) | more than 5 years ago | (#25363373)

SSTV is cool! I'm not set up for it now but I was for Mir. Have fun Hams! Got to get set up again! 73!

Wow! just wow! (1)

LVSlushdat (854194) | more than 5 years ago | (#25364057)

Wow! I never knew there was a live camera onboard the ISS.. Guess I gotta get back active again.. Haven't touched a mike or key in over 3 years, but just renewed the ticket..

73 K7DGF

TV, but not video (1)

Rastloser (1364593) | more than 5 years ago | (#25366569)

For all the non-hams reading this, it should be pointed out that SSTV transmits images based on the same technical principles as television, but that it's not video. The transmission of a single "frame" takes several dozen seconds. This has several advantages, however. The greatest is probably that the requirements for signal quality and receiving equipment are much lower than for TV, meaning that anyone interested will be able to pick up those images with relatively little tech on the ground.

Holy Linkage Batman! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25368077)

Am the only one [one.org] that thinks [wikipedia.org] there were way [americanweigh.com] too many links [isc.org] in that summary [summary.net] ?

More new pix from Oct 16 on the blogspot site (1)

leighklotz (192300) | more than 5 years ago | (#25406127)

There are more new pix, this time with the earth in them, from October 16 [blogspot.com]

Which link to click on? (1)

BeanBunny (936648) | more than 5 years ago | (#25419853)

With no fewer than six links in the summary, which one actually points to the photos being referenced?

I'd click them all, but I only have time to write this indignant comment.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...