Dang I came here for this, I got beaten again.
Being a denizen of the interwebs, I have seen quite a few people take 13 inches...
Don't tell Kim Dotcom, he'll order one for the backyard.
No way in hell! $2400 is 5Dmkii money. I do not see the purpose of this camera. It's features make it sound like it is aimed at the high-end point and shoot crowd, but at professional level DSLR prices I just don't see how it will sell. I would rather have a Canon G1x at 1/3 the price with better responsiveness and control.
This is not good. Many of those who have not upgraded are not hold outs because of how much they love IE6, they are businesses who can not upgrade do to older equipment, interfaces, and software systems.
I work IT in a medium sized (400 bed) hospital. We have multiple systems that will not run on anything higher than IE6. It is not by choice that we do not upgrade, it is because the vendors have not rewritten their software to support it. Many pieces of critical equipment simply will not work with anything higher. Most of this is for equipment that is critical for patient care, which is why it has not been upgraded, it takes an extremely long time for life safety equipment and software to be certified. These are radiology systems by GE, ventilators and patient monitoring systems by Phillips, cardiac monitors, surgical and anaesthesia equipment, specialized lab equipment, and the like. Before anyone panics, it is not generally the hardware itself which requires IE6, it is the interfaces and the software which communicates with other systems.
For some equipment there is newer software but it will require complete equipment replacement, and we just do not have the money to replace multiple MRI machines and CT scanners at the same time. It is not as easy as some people here are saying to just replace all of our equipment. If we were to replace all of the equipment that would be required to upgrade to newer software versions (if they are even available, many are not) it would be in the multiple 10's of millions of dollars just for the equipment. This is not even considering the labor dollars it will cost to install all of this new equipment, write the code so that the new software will interface with our existing applications, troubleshoot problems, and train users.
If this comes to fruition, it will be nothing short of disastrous for us, and tight though it is, we do have a relatively large IT budget. For smaller hospitals and clinics, already overburdened by IT purchases and upgrades required by the federal government under "Meaningful Use" and ICD-10 requirements, this may well be enough to cause them to permanently close their doors altogether.
I work IT in a medium sized (400 bed) hospital. We have multiple systems that will not run on anything higher than IE6. It is not by choice that we do not upgrade, it is because the vendors have not rewritten their software to support it. Many pieces of critical equipment simply will not work with anything higher. Most of this is for equipment that is critical for patient care, which is why it has not been upgraded, it takes an extremely long time for life safety equipment and software to be certified. These are radiology systems by GE, ventilators and patient monitoring systems by Phillips, cardiac monitors, surgical and anaesthesia equipment, specialized lab equipment, and the like. Before anyone panics, it is not generally the hardware itself which requires IE6, it is the interfaces and the software which communicates with other systems.
For some equipment there is newer software but it will require complete equipment replacement, and we just do not have the money to replace multiple MRI machines and CT scanners at the same time. It is not as easy as some people here are saying to just replace all of our equipment. If we were to replace all of the equipment that would be required to upgrade to newer software versions (if they are even available, many are not) it would be in the multiple 10's of millions of dollars just for the equipment. This is not even considering the labor dollars it will cost to install all of this new equipment, write the code so that the new software will interface with our existing applications, troubleshoot problems, and train users.
If this comes to fruition, it will be nothing short of disastrous for us, and tight though it is, we do have a relatively large IT budget. For smaller hospitals and clinics, already overburdened by IT purchases and upgrades required by the federal government under "Meaningful Use" and ICD-10 requirements, this may well be enough to cause them to permanently close their doors altogether.
Granted, I don't think the really bad guys would have trouble finding it, but why make it any easier for them?
Hey, here's a cool idea, why not advertise which building makes us most vulnerable.
"No matter how tall a traditional wind turbine is built it can't reach the stronger, steadier winds that blow a quarter mile above the ground."
Wellllll, if you built it 1/4 mile high, it seems to me it could reach the winds that are 1/4 mile high. It seems that it does matter how tall you build it.
Wellllll, if you built it 1/4 mile high, it seems to me it could reach the winds that are 1/4 mile high. It seems that it does matter how tall you build it.
SON OF A B17CH!! I just ordered the standard Fastpack 350 4 days ago and had to compromise since it didn't have a tripod mount. It is due to be delivered Wed. or Thur., I'll have to see if there is time to return it and get one of these now. Thanks a whole frakkin lot Lowepro.
What makes you so sure they don't?
No existing helmets are designed to withstand more than one impact. Even though they may appear fine, there can be unseen compressions or cracks in the polystyrene which would negate the effectiveness of the helmet in subsequent impacts. If your helmet takes a significant hit, replace it.
Windows
OK, fine, she can get a shot off in less than 2 seconds, but it is not an aimed shot. Firing from the hip as she is in these videos is stupid, dangerous, and inaccurate; especially if she is in a real emergent situation and she is trying to draw quickly. This is not even considering the fact that she has a round chambered and the safety off. Unless her opponent is less than 3 feet away, she would likely only shoot herself or an innocent bystander in a real situation. Marketing this as something for a woman who "doesn't have any experience totin' guns" is highly dangerous and irresponsible.
What is really sad is that you see it as a benefit that the CD was at a "bargain" price. The CD is what costs the money, the digital version should be far less expensive since there is no physical media that needs to be produced, packaged, shipped, stocked, and sold. The music companies are ripping you off by charging as much as they do. They are mired in 19th-20th century technology and business models, until they start to change the way they do business, they will continue to hemorrhage money.
Thee moors are fine, just watch out for the Moops.
What a hoser.
Fuck you, I would if I could.
Not really a new craze. I have been crashing cars into walls for years, as my insurance agent can attest.
So what they're essentially saying is that they are selling Rube Goldberg devices in a box. For me, at least, it takes all the fun out of Goldbergian applications if you are not inventing them yourself.
