pknz
Nov 11, 02:26 AM
Oh thats hilarious. And look so similar
Gasu E.
Mar 25, 09:20 AM
i bet they had people there with MBA's from good schools running financial what if's and telling management to avoid digital because they will make less money due to not selling the film or anything other than the camera
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
They did not avoid digital at all, in fact they were an early entrant to digital. The problem was that they were used to having a lucrative near-monopoly in film, a fat side business in film processing and a nice low-end camera business built around proprietary "connvenience" film packaging. They were now facing aggressive consumer electronics companies who were used to relently feature upgrades and short model lifecycles. Moreover, they could not rely on their film dominance to keep competitors at a disadvantage. In other words, they had to change their business model completely-- from near monopoly to completely competitive-- in order to success in the new business. Only a fraction of companies manage to do this successfully.
Keep in mind, also, due to the increased competition and lack of a film component, that the opportunity for Kodak in digital was much smaller than their film and related businesses. It's very hard to manage a shrinking company, and even harder if you are also trying to reinvent yourself.
motox25
Apr 19, 11:19 AM
I have an 06 Mac Pro that was in need of a video card upgrade. The unit came with a Nvidia 7300GT and I bought an ATI Radeon HD 2600XT to add to it. I have the ATI Radeon on lane 1 so it will get the full X16 and put the 7300GT on lane 4 to drive my second monitor so it will get x8 instead of x4 on another slot. My question is, the 7300GT sits with the heatsink nearly touching the hard drives above it, does this cause overheating issues with the card at all? If so should I move the card to another slot? This would either give me x4 on the 7300GT or I could configure the slots to give x8 each, but that wouldn't allow the 2600XT to run at x16 full performance. Another question, running 2 separate cards for each monitor would give me better performance if I use the better card for graphic intensive apps/games than driving both monitors off the 2600XT correct?
Thanatoast
Oct 16, 10:45 PM
Am I the only one who plugs my phone in at night? All this worry over the battery life seems kind of silly. As long as it lasts the day...
more...
matticus008
Nov 21, 07:58 PM
This works in just the opposite: In the cold air, there's a huge differential, so the fan is going full bore, annoying me and all my peace-and-quiet-loving neighbors. In the warm air, it slows to a crawl as the amount of electricity generated approaches the lower limit of sustaining power for the fan. Then it stops. Then my laptop heats up rapidly and the processor dies.
This isn't a replacement for fans to control temperature--it's simply an attempt to put 'waste' heat to use. Obviously the normal array of heatsinks and fans would still exist to manage the temperatures. There's no conceivable implementation in which your computer would be harmed by the application of this additional device. The fan would hardly be necessary in the cold air, given that the temperature gradient would already be optimized.
So, we haven't been able to simplify the problem at all, and instead are gaining the (very slight) power savings from not having to run this fan off our battery power (directly) in a mid-temp room.
Well, it's not that outrageous. If it adds minimal cost and extends battery life 10% (not unreasonable with some refinement), that could easily equate to 15 minutes with current batteries. The cooling system itself is not affected, and obviously the benefit is greatest with a heavy CPU load, which in turn would maximize its impact on intensive operations which shorten battery life. In other words, this could partially offset the battery time lost by intensive computing, making it a worthwhile investment for professionals on the move.
This isn't a replacement for fans to control temperature--it's simply an attempt to put 'waste' heat to use. Obviously the normal array of heatsinks and fans would still exist to manage the temperatures. There's no conceivable implementation in which your computer would be harmed by the application of this additional device. The fan would hardly be necessary in the cold air, given that the temperature gradient would already be optimized.
So, we haven't been able to simplify the problem at all, and instead are gaining the (very slight) power savings from not having to run this fan off our battery power (directly) in a mid-temp room.
Well, it's not that outrageous. If it adds minimal cost and extends battery life 10% (not unreasonable with some refinement), that could easily equate to 15 minutes with current batteries. The cooling system itself is not affected, and obviously the benefit is greatest with a heavy CPU load, which in turn would maximize its impact on intensive operations which shorten battery life. In other words, this could partially offset the battery time lost by intensive computing, making it a worthwhile investment for professionals on the move.
iGary
Sep 13, 07:47 AM
Thanks all.
I know I'm a whimp, but wanted to know how others made out.
Doesn't sound TOO bad. :rolleyes:
I know I'm a whimp, but wanted to know how others made out.
Doesn't sound TOO bad. :rolleyes:
more...
Alvi
Feb 18, 10:25 AM
He doesn't look as sick as in that Tabloid, his hair looks pretty normal, although he is a bit skinny though, on the last keynote people said that he look really well
jefhatfield
Jun 11, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by markjs
I am a confirmed PC user, you might call me a PC biggot because I will defend my PC preference to the death. Primarily I like the PC because of it's gaming ability, combined with internet access, and the fact I could afford it and am able to build and upgrade it myself cheaply while still buying high quality parts. My PC is a modest:
Athlon XP 1700+
ECS K7S5A Mainboard
512MB PC2100
SB Live Value
Onboard Lan
ATI Radeon 8500LE 64MB
Realtek PCI NIC
Western Digital 40GB and 20GB 7200RPM ATA 100 hard disks
Running Windows XP Professional Service pack 1
What I am getting at by this post, is why are Mac people so biggoted against the PC. Another guy made a post somewhere else about how maybe one in fifteen PC users is anti Mac, but more like one in two Mac users is anti PC. What can a Mac user do that I can't? I do audio and video editing on my PC, I can't think of anything a Mac can do my computer can't (and I'll wager I'll do anything cheaper, and being poor that's a serious consideration to me), and what is the big draw to the Mac. I realize this isn't the best forum for a two sided debate, but I am thowing it out there anyway.
Note: I really don't want to hear how Windows sucks, because the newest version is very easily useable and quite stable and I personally know at least one person who likes Windows XP as much as OSX and uses both regularly. Granted Win 98 was a steaming pile o' dog doo and so was ME, but since 2K Windows has been very viable. Another thing to consider is that Windows is written to work on hundreds....even thousands of hardware configurations, when Mac OS needs to work on maybe 10.....That itself aquits even Windows 95 rather nicely. Besides I can run Linux or other flavors of Unix on my PC should I choose. My inquiry is about the hardware....why do you love it so much it makes you hate PC's
PS I know two people who have switched from Mac personally, so it goes both ways.
it really comes down to preference and today, the computer user has a choice between two stable operating systems...os x and windows xp
on the mac side, os 9 had its issues of not being able to recover from a crash of an application while windows 2000 had a weak hardware compatibility list and was not always friendly with graphics related/game related software
there seems to be very little difference between pc hardware and apple hardware...the big issue of why people like macs are in the overall experience of how the mac os interfaces with the user
in the dark days of windows me and of some versions of windows 95, the mac people really had a point when they said their macs were easier to use
ps - i will admit that macs are much prettier to look at, but alien pcs and some sony gear comes close to being just as cool as a mac
still, the pc world doesn't have something quite as sleek and cool as the lcd imac or the cube
as for laptops, i think macs and pcs are basically the same in looks since the mobile macs are basically either silver or white and very square looking...fujitsu makes some laptops which look very much like the current ibook...but the fujitsu laptops came out before the ibook, *dual usb icebook design that apple now uses
i do love my old style clamshell ibook and i miss the fact that apple does not seem to have a playful laptop like that in their line
i would like to see apple make at least one laptop line and one desktop line with colored plastic again
I am a confirmed PC user, you might call me a PC biggot because I will defend my PC preference to the death. Primarily I like the PC because of it's gaming ability, combined with internet access, and the fact I could afford it and am able to build and upgrade it myself cheaply while still buying high quality parts. My PC is a modest:
Athlon XP 1700+
ECS K7S5A Mainboard
512MB PC2100
SB Live Value
Onboard Lan
ATI Radeon 8500LE 64MB
Realtek PCI NIC
Western Digital 40GB and 20GB 7200RPM ATA 100 hard disks
Running Windows XP Professional Service pack 1
What I am getting at by this post, is why are Mac people so biggoted against the PC. Another guy made a post somewhere else about how maybe one in fifteen PC users is anti Mac, but more like one in two Mac users is anti PC. What can a Mac user do that I can't? I do audio and video editing on my PC, I can't think of anything a Mac can do my computer can't (and I'll wager I'll do anything cheaper, and being poor that's a serious consideration to me), and what is the big draw to the Mac. I realize this isn't the best forum for a two sided debate, but I am thowing it out there anyway.
Note: I really don't want to hear how Windows sucks, because the newest version is very easily useable and quite stable and I personally know at least one person who likes Windows XP as much as OSX and uses both regularly. Granted Win 98 was a steaming pile o' dog doo and so was ME, but since 2K Windows has been very viable. Another thing to consider is that Windows is written to work on hundreds....even thousands of hardware configurations, when Mac OS needs to work on maybe 10.....That itself aquits even Windows 95 rather nicely. Besides I can run Linux or other flavors of Unix on my PC should I choose. My inquiry is about the hardware....why do you love it so much it makes you hate PC's
PS I know two people who have switched from Mac personally, so it goes both ways.
it really comes down to preference and today, the computer user has a choice between two stable operating systems...os x and windows xp
on the mac side, os 9 had its issues of not being able to recover from a crash of an application while windows 2000 had a weak hardware compatibility list and was not always friendly with graphics related/game related software
there seems to be very little difference between pc hardware and apple hardware...the big issue of why people like macs are in the overall experience of how the mac os interfaces with the user
in the dark days of windows me and of some versions of windows 95, the mac people really had a point when they said their macs were easier to use
ps - i will admit that macs are much prettier to look at, but alien pcs and some sony gear comes close to being just as cool as a mac
still, the pc world doesn't have something quite as sleek and cool as the lcd imac or the cube
as for laptops, i think macs and pcs are basically the same in looks since the mobile macs are basically either silver or white and very square looking...fujitsu makes some laptops which look very much like the current ibook...but the fujitsu laptops came out before the ibook, *dual usb icebook design that apple now uses
i do love my old style clamshell ibook and i miss the fact that apple does not seem to have a playful laptop like that in their line
i would like to see apple make at least one laptop line and one desktop line with colored plastic again
more...
BC2009
Mar 25, 11:00 AM
Before all you Apple fannies disagree with this; just remember Apple is trying to sue everyone else too.
It's all ridiculous.
"Apple fannies" -- I like that.
Seriously, the amusing part of this is that patent trolls are usually companies who never produce anything based on those patents. Sadly, Kodak is a company that once produced decent stuff, but is now essentially acting like a patent troll because they don't really produce squat anymore. Considering that Kodak is busy liquidating entire manufacturing sites, it would be amazing if this company ever made comeback (even if they won $1B from Apple).
It's all ridiculous.
"Apple fannies" -- I like that.
Seriously, the amusing part of this is that patent trolls are usually companies who never produce anything based on those patents. Sadly, Kodak is a company that once produced decent stuff, but is now essentially acting like a patent troll because they don't really produce squat anymore. Considering that Kodak is busy liquidating entire manufacturing sites, it would be amazing if this company ever made comeback (even if they won $1B from Apple).
iMav
May 2, 05:16 AM
Just played my first game with the Mac client.. Very nice!
more...
houdinize
Mar 13, 10:28 AM
No 's'
flopticalcube
Apr 27, 11:07 PM
Previously on "Trump, the Strip":
I love Bloom County! I'll have to go back and read some Fundamentally Oral Bill now...
I love Bloom County! I'll have to go back and read some Fundamentally Oral Bill now...
more...
Natesac
Mar 10, 11:23 PM
My buddy Ryan and I are going to be at willow bend around 9am.
TroyBoy30
Jun 11, 12:18 PM
I got a Nexus One on T-Mobile. My bill with 500 minutes (free nights and weekends) unlimited text, data plus taxes and fees comes to $65. Compare this to an AT&T plan and you pay more for just phone (less minutes). I would switch to the iPhone as soon I as can have it on my plan.
Steffen
depends on who you are. my bill with 500 more minutes and rollover, 1500 text and unlimited data is only $7 more than yours. of course I have had my voice plan for almost 8 years
and tmobile is simply awful
Steffen
depends on who you are. my bill with 500 more minutes and rollover, 1500 text and unlimited data is only $7 more than yours. of course I have had my voice plan for almost 8 years
and tmobile is simply awful
more...
call-151
Apr 13, 10:17 AM
That is helpful for syncing with itunes - but what about ical/outlook? Can I get outlook to sync with my 7 different calendars on ical?
That's what Sync Services does:
http://mac2.microsoft.com/help/office/14/en-us/outlook/item/748ea995-465e-4c40-88d2-7669c7f37a0d
That's what Sync Services does:
http://mac2.microsoft.com/help/office/14/en-us/outlook/item/748ea995-465e-4c40-88d2-7669c7f37a0d
iNeko
Mar 23, 06:39 PM
There seems to be a lot of DRAMAZ� on the Amazon UK 3DS discussions page about them not being shipped yet... I can understand if it was this time tomorrow and they hadn't shipped, but it doesn't come out until Friday, there's still time! :rolleyes: if it comes to it, HMV and Play.com both have the consoles in stock.
Thing is, I have really bad anxiety and although I had a panicky day today, I'm more anticipating getting it than I am anxious about not getting the console on launch day... but I guess that's what the pills are for :D ;)
Thing is, I have really bad anxiety and although I had a panicky day today, I'm more anticipating getting it than I am anxious about not getting the console on launch day... but I guess that's what the pills are for :D ;)
more...
Lesser Evets
Apr 1, 09:05 AM
I pity the fools that watch any of those channels.
mrsir2009
Apr 24, 03:08 AM
This is for the 13" model as its the one I'm interested in:
1. Thunderbolt.
2. Backlit keyboard!
1. Thunderbolt.
2. Backlit keyboard!
tpjunkie
Sep 17, 09:35 AM
aaahhh, relationship with benefits :p :D
as her/him if she/he would like to rip your iPod. :D
er that one seems a little painful...
as her/him if she/he would like to rip your iPod. :D
er that one seems a little painful...
satcomer
May 6, 10:20 PM
Sonoco in Northern Virginia (on 05/06/11):
JDDavis
Mar 6, 06:44 AM
http://www.mattsepeta.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Sepeta-Photography-4.jpg
Used some off camera flash to create contrast between the falling snow and the rest of the scene. Totally forgot to CTO gel it but oh well! Even more contrast now!
Nice. My only complaint is the really bright street lamp. It keeps sucking me in. I like the bright lights in the background though. How does this shot look in black and white? I'm a sucker for snow shots in black and white. Don't know why.
Used some off camera flash to create contrast between the falling snow and the rest of the scene. Totally forgot to CTO gel it but oh well! Even more contrast now!
Nice. My only complaint is the really bright street lamp. It keeps sucking me in. I like the bright lights in the background though. How does this shot look in black and white? I'm a sucker for snow shots in black and white. Don't know why.
wrldwzrd89
Apr 3, 04:13 PM
I thought one of the nice thing was that its all in one place, you don't have to look for it... thats what I liked about Keynote. You can add fonts and colors items to the toolbar AFAIK.
The thing that I don't like about pages is very simple: No text background highlighting and no ruby support, and no vertical text.
I'm not too familiar with Ruby. What is it?
The thing that I don't like about pages is very simple: No text background highlighting and no ruby support, and no vertical text.
I'm not too familiar with Ruby. What is it?
ftaok
Apr 1, 02:01 PM
I'd gladly pay $5 per channel knowing those channels are supported and any funding is stripped from the others. That'd half my monthly bill, and $5 a channel is more than fair, right?Then perhaps you'd be one of the ones that would end up paying less. However, if you think the channels you keep would remain unchanged, I think you'd be disappointed. Get ready for sitcoms, reality shows, and political pundits 24/7.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
CanadaRAM
Nov 21, 05:03 PM
And the first rule of investing is, if a little company 'leaks' the 'fact' that they are 'in discussion' with a major market company, it means they have nothing.
If they were in serious discussions, there would be non-disclosures.
I could be in discussion with Universal about starring in their latest blockbuster movie. I sent them a letter, they sent a rejection form letter. Voila, discussion.
The issue with using such a device in a laptop or whatever, is that there must be a temperature gradient -- that is, there has to be a hot end and a cold end. The hot end is a given, a processor. But you still have to cool the other end of the device, so you still have to have fans/radiators/or whatever to draw heat away from the cold end for the effect to work. Doesn't change the fundamental problem of cooling a machine with limited space and power.
As mentioned earlier, if you want to ACTIVELY cool a CPU with these, it takes the application of a boatload of electricity to do it.
If they were in serious discussions, there would be non-disclosures.
I could be in discussion with Universal about starring in their latest blockbuster movie. I sent them a letter, they sent a rejection form letter. Voila, discussion.
The issue with using such a device in a laptop or whatever, is that there must be a temperature gradient -- that is, there has to be a hot end and a cold end. The hot end is a given, a processor. But you still have to cool the other end of the device, so you still have to have fans/radiators/or whatever to draw heat away from the cold end for the effect to work. Doesn't change the fundamental problem of cooling a machine with limited space and power.
As mentioned earlier, if you want to ACTIVELY cool a CPU with these, it takes the application of a boatload of electricity to do it.
