>> But I really appreciate the irresponsibility of being able to use my >> browser without being reminded that I have 45 emails stacked up >> demanding my attention.
>AFAIK that can be done with Mozilla by not enabling "Check email server >every x many minutes for mail". Then it should only show anything when >you deliberately open mail and after clicking "Get Msgs".
>I usually like that feature though, especially when waiting for feedback >from a client after I sent them a schematic. It's just a small blue >message blurb, no sound (I disabled these) and not in the browser window.
> Although, come to think of it, the TIFF viewer (AlternaTIFF) for the > USPTO site started acting flaky even with IE.
> Jim Thompson
The last time I had to use for some crappy file Quicktime change attributes to itself for any file it can open, without asking permission during installation. I had to manually change everything back the way I wanted, and I dumped QT.
> > Although, come to think of it, the TIFF viewer (AlternaTIFF) for the > > USPTO site started acting flaky even with IE.
> > Jim Thompson
> The last time I had to use for some crappy file Quicktime change > attributes to itself for any file it can open, without asking permission > during installation. I had to manually change everything back the way I > wanted, and I dumped QT.
You know, that's just like the WMP install, I deselect .wav files and then it goes ahead and re-associates them anyway. Yeah, like I want to load a 8MB plus player for a 32k sound file! I re-associate these with sndrec32 and if some S.O.B. has turned on the 'protect' function for a file they don't own, well that's just fodder for the trash can.
> I got the Quicktime "courtesy" of the iTunes installation when I got > myself an iPOD along with the ones I bought for the grandkids (and one > daughter) at Christmas.
Now I start to feel old. Everybody seems to have an iPod these days. Even our president does. I just can't bring myself to wearing some gizmo that plays music. Never had a walkman or discman either.
However, we have a piano that sounds just like the ones in the old saloons and is about as old, then a guitar and a Hammond organ. None of these can read MP3...
> Why is it that anyone would even want an "integrated" tool? Sounds > like jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none ;-)
Creature comfort I guess. Probably for the same reason that people buy cars such as pickups and Burbans. Hauls the family, hauls lots of stuff, hauls the firewood, pretty much everything.
My expectations with respect to software are modest. It doesn't need to be master. Integration allows Wiki storage. Everytime I tried that with separate SW for read and write I either couldn't do both at the same time or the PC would hang if I accessed the same file, which you have to with a Wiki.
With CAD it's similar. I love Cadsoft Eagle. If you find that something doesn't pan out too well in the layout or could pose an EMI issue you can change it right then. No need to edit and run a new netlist. It'll keep schematic and layout in sync at all times.
>> I got the Quicktime "courtesy" of the iTunes installation when I got >> myself an iPOD along with the ones I bought for the grandkids (and one >> daughter) at Christmas.
>Now I start to feel old. Everybody seems to have an iPod these days. >Even our president does. I just can't bring myself to wearing some gizmo >that plays music. Never had a walkman or discman either.
I got the iPOD for myself, to listen to books. When I'm flying it's virtually impossible to get enough knee room to do any work on the PC... unless I'm Europe-bound, then I fly Business Class. So I listen to books... "da Vinci Code" right now... but I don't use those damned little button ear pieces... I use active noise canceling earphones that cover my ears ;-)
If I want to listen to music I go fire up the 300-CD "juke box" ;-)
>However, we have a piano that sounds just like the ones in the old >saloons and is about as old, then a guitar and a Hammond organ. None of >these can read MP3...
>> Why is it that anyone would even want an "integrated" tool? Sounds >> like jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none ;-)
>Creature comfort I guess. Probably for the same reason that people buy >cars such as pickups and Burbans. Hauls the family, hauls lots of stuff, >hauls the firewood, pretty much everything.
I have a peek-up truck for hauling, and a Q45 for driving ;-)
>My expectations with respect to software are modest. It doesn't need to >be master. Integration allows Wiki storage. Everytime I tried that with >separate SW for read and write I either couldn't do both at the same >time or the PC would hang if I accessed the same file, which you have to >with a Wiki.
What's a "Wiki"?
>With CAD it's similar. I love Cadsoft Eagle. If you find that something >doesn't pan out too well in the layout or could pose an EMI issue you >can change it right then. No need to edit and run a new netlist. It'll >keep schematic and layout in sync at all times.
> I have a peek-up truck for hauling, and a Q45 for driving ;-)
Country folk out here often do with just one vehicle. Either a crew cab full size truck with dual tires, Cummins turbo, illuminated running boards and the whole works, or just a "Texas Cadillac". It used to be the El Camino but that doesn't really work for people with lots of kids.
> What's a "Wiki"?
In this case just an "internal web site" where information I come across is entered and browsed at the same time. Wiki is, I believe, Hawaiian for "quick" since it is pretty much the fastest way to collect technical information and have it available instantly. The term is often used on the web for sites where everyone can browse and contribute.
> That's why I'm sort of married to PSpice... comfort, and I don't have > to learn a new tool.
I would, too. Don't mess with a running system...
> If I can organize a BBQ here next Fall I'll show you what a REAL tool > can do (with some embellishments from me and my oldest son :-)
That sounds great.
Now I'll have to tend to the Weber over here. We'll have ribs tonight, rain or shine. Plus a Merlot and later a Spaten Optimator Bock.
>> I have a peek-up truck for hauling, and a Q45 for driving ;-)
>Country folk out here often do with just one vehicle. Either a crew cab >full size truck with dual tires, Cummins turbo, illuminated running >boards and the whole works, or just a "Texas Cadillac". It used to be >the El Camino but that doesn't really work for people with lots of kids.
>> What's a "Wiki"?
>In this case just an "internal web site" where information I come across >is entered and browsed at the same time. Wiki is, I believe, Hawaiian >for "quick" since it is pretty much the fastest way to collect technical >information and have it available instantly. The term is often used on >the web for sites where everyone can browse and contribute.
>> That's why I'm sort of married to PSpice... comfort, and I don't have >> to learn a new tool.
>I would, too. Don't mess with a running system...
>> If I can organize a BBQ here next Fall I'll show you what a REAL tool >> can do (with some embellishments from me and my oldest son :-)
>That sounds great.
>Now I'll have to tend to the Weber over here. We'll have ribs tonight, >rain or shine. Plus a Merlot and later a Spaten Optimator Bock.
>> I got the Quicktime "courtesy" of the iTunes installation when I got >> myself an iPOD along with the ones I bought for the grandkids (and one >> daughter) at Christmas.
> Now I start to feel old. Everybody seems to have an iPod these days. > Even our president does. I just can't bring myself to wearing some > gizmo that plays music. Never had a walkman or discman either.
> However, we have a piano that sounds just like the ones in the old > saloons and is about as old, then a guitar and a Hammond organ. None > of these can read MP3...
>> I got the Quicktime "courtesy" of the iTunes installation when I got >> myself an iPOD along with the ones I bought for the grandkids (and one >> daughter) at Christmas.
> Now I start to feel old. Everybody seems to have an iPod these days. > Even our president does. I just can't bring myself to wearing some gizmo > that plays music. Never had a walkman or discman either.
> However, we have a piano that sounds just like the ones in the old > saloons and is about as old, then a guitar and a Hammond organ. None of > these can read MP3...
Don't feel bad! You might actually be doing yourself a favor by not getting involved with mp3. There is more than a little scuttlebutt going around the medical circles about how mp3 is bad for your hearing. The reasoning is that mp3 gains its compression by deleting quieter sounds that are supposedly masked by louder sounds. This apparently messes with the ear's mechanism for protecting itself against damage from loud sounds, and damage is done.
Just because the quieter sounds (that are deleted) aren't consciously perceived doesn't mean that they aren't being heard.
I read in alt.binaries.schematics.electronic that Chuck Harris <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in <dKqdnZxZtZSJ_vHfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla Firefox', on Sun, 24 Apr 2005:
>There is more than a little scuttlebutt going around >the medical circles about how mp3 is bad for your hearing. The reasoning is >that mp3 gains its compression by deleting quieter sounds that are supposedly >masked by louder sounds. This apparently messes with the ear's mechanism for >protecting itself against damage from loud sounds, and damage is done.
Can you cite any papers or web articles, please? At first sight, and even at second, this sounds daft. The audio waveform has a **single** value at any instant and deleting a quieter sound 20 dB down just reduces the waveform amplitude by 10% = 1 dB. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. There are two sides to every question, except 'What is a Moebius strip?' http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message <news:emdl61d3ms7fu7bnrg90njmh8faf0qas2g@4ax.com>... > On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 20:28:17 GMT, Joerg > <notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
> >Hello Jim,
> >No problems with both Mozilla 1.6 and 1.7.3. It does show this stupid > >flash logo for about a second and then proceeds to the IRF home page. > >Going to app notes and other areas does not repeat the flash episode. I > >don't have flash since I consider that superficial glitz.
> >A while ago I tried the separate tools Firefox and Thunderbird. Wasn't > >happy and went back to the integrated browser. Much more stable. I have > >no idea why they started to leave the integrated approach, it just > >doesn't make any sense to me.
> I'm using Firefox and Tbird under XP/SP2 and they both work great. > Thunderbird does some cool stuff, like display mail by properties > (like: Has Attachment or Unread) and searches mail about 100x faster > than Netscape did.
> The downloadable Firefox extensions are cool, too; many web annoyances > can be zapped. I don't have Flash installed, but they do have an > optional Flash manager, only shows a flash box if you open it.
> John
Firefox is worth it for it's control-F alone.
Combine that with a few control-Ts and it's easy to cross-refer documentation.
John Woodgate wrote: > I read in alt.binaries.schematics.electronic that Chuck Harris > <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in > <dKqdnZxZtZSJ_vHfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla > Firefox', on Sun, 24 Apr 2005:
>> There is more than a little scuttlebutt going around >> the medical circles about how mp3 is bad for your hearing. The >> reasoning is >> that mp3 gains its compression by deleting quieter sounds that are >> supposedly >> masked by louder sounds. This apparently messes with the ear's >> mechanism for >> protecting itself against damage from loud sounds, and damage is done.
> Can you cite any papers or web articles, please? At first sight, and > even at second, this sounds daft. The audio waveform has a **single** > value at any instant and deleting a quieter sound 20 dB down just > reduces the waveform amplitude by 10% = 1 dB.
I read in alt.binaries.schematics.electronic that Chuck Harris <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in <meKdnZhgh4E6b_HfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla Firefox', on Mon, 25 Apr 2005:
>Honestly John, have you ever heard of google?
>get onto google, and enter "MP3 Hearing damage"
Yes, but you said 'medical circles'. Stuff like that often isn't found by Google even if it's on the web at all. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. There are two sides to every question, except 'What is a Moebius strip?' http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
John Woodgate wrote: > I read in alt.binaries.schematics.electronic that Chuck Harris > <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in > <meKdnZhgh4E6b_HfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla > Firefox', on Mon, 25 Apr 2005:
>> Honestly John, have you ever heard of google?
>> get onto google, and enter "MP3 Hearing damage"
> Yes, but you said 'medical circles'. Stuff like that often isn't found > by Google even if it's on the web at all.
John, do the google. The first site you find will be from a german medical paper on the subject. I think your curiosity will be satisfied.
There are hundereds of hits to that simple search.
Not always. When I restored that old piano I had to rebuild some of the damping lever mechanisms using wood and deer leather. I'd consider these digital features: They muffle the strings instantly after a key is released, unless this function is "gated off" by pressing a pedal.
I read in sci.electronics.design that Chuck Harris <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in <mrqdncEOg6GEYvHfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla Firefox', on Mon, 25 Apr 2005:
>John, do the google. The first site you find will be from a german >medical paper on the subject. I think your curiosity will be >satisfied.
The first three are all the same rant from a kook. He even admits that he has no evidence of any effect, and then claims 'fatal consequences'. It destroys one's faith in freedom of speech.
>There are hundereds of hits to that simple search.
I didn't find any that presented any credible evidence. Most of them were only about MP3 alone or hearing damage alone. Several of the pages on hearing damage alone are shrill, alarmist and inaccurate; I can tell that the writer does not know the subject in depth.
This one is reliable, in fact the whole site is very good (and no, it isn't run by my brother):
> Joerg, Aren't you in the Nevada City/Grass Valley area?
Close: In Cameron Park, Highway 50 about 30 miles east of Sacramento. Drop me a line or call (530 672 1657) when you know your itinerary, at least we should be able to meet somewhere.
> _Potentially_ I will have a new Sacramento client in the next week or > so, so I might be up that way.
If this happens to be Gordon Moore's old company that would only be ten miles from here.
John Woodgate wrote: > I read in sci.electronics.design that Chuck Harris > <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in > <mrqdncEOg6GEYvHfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla > Firefox', on Mon, 25 Apr 2005:
>> John, do the google. The first site you find will be from a german >> medical paper on the subject. I think your curiosity will be satisfied.
> The first three are all the same rant from a kook. He even admits that > he has no evidence of any effect, and then claims 'fatal consequences'. > It destroys one's faith in freedom of speech.
On further reading, it appears to be nonsense. If the problem were as severe as he says it *may* be, there would be tens of thousands of people with very real hearing damage.
As you also found, all of the hits on the subject seem to be referencing this same guy's stuff.... I guess he got his 15 minutes of fame.
I read in alt.binaries.schematics.electronic that Chuck Harris <cf-NO-SPAM-har...@erols.com> wrote (in <mrqdncEOg6GEYvHfRVn...@rcn.net>) about 'OT: Problems with Mozilla Firefox', on Mon, 25 Apr 2005:
>John, do the google. The first site you find will be from a german >medical paper on the subject. I think your curiosity will be >satisfied.
Oh, I will, in fact I would have done by now if something else had not intervened. I just wanted to explain why I didn't do that originally. -- Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. There are two sides to every question, except 'What is a Moebius strip?' http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk
|
