 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Applications / Mac Applications / May 2008Top Ten Features You'd Like to See on Future Macs
Here are mine: 1. voice recognition 2. face recognition 3. talking computer 4. thin screens 5. flexible screens 6. (much) longer battery life 7. (much) more hard drive capacity 8. shock-proof 9. nintendo wii-remote 10. ubiquitous wireless access what are yours? > X-No-Archive: Yes > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > what are yours? 1. REALISTIC PRICES. I estimate they are 15% dearer in Australia than US, after allowing for exchange, taxes etc. 2. Quad core iMac. Then I might even ignore the ripoff pricing John In article <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: > 1. voice recognition that's already there, although not for dictation. > 3. talking computer it talks, and has since 1984. > 4. thin screens the macbook air isn't thin enough? and the macbook and macbook pro are 1" thick, among the thinnest laptops available. > 6. (much) longer battery life longer than 4-5 hours? > 7. (much) more hard drive capacity that's not up to apple. > 8. shock-proof there's a motion sensor in the laptops, and the macbook air is available with flash memory instead of a hard drive. > 10. ubiquitous wireless access they currently include 802.11a/b/g/n & bluetooth 2.1+edr. for data over the cell network, that's not for apple to provide since there are many different carriers worldwide, and apple can't realisitically offer all of them. just buy a card or tether it to a phone. Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue: A freakin' secondary-click button on the laptops!! > Here are mine: > > 1. voice recognition I have that on this Mac. It's called "MacSpeech Dictate." It's new, but good, and promises to get better. > 2. face recognition Ho, hum. > 3. talking computer Anyone whose computer "talks" in public ought to be shot. > 4. thin screens Ho, hum. > 5. flexible screens Ho, hum. > 6. (much) longer battery life Yes. Difficult to achieve. > 7. (much) more hard drive capacity Yes. That will come. > 8. shock-proof Ho, hum. > 9. nintendo wii-remote Ho, hum. > 10. ubiquitous wireless access I don't know what that means. Davoud  Signatureusenet *at* davidillig dawt com > > Here are mine: > > > > 1. voice recognition > I have that on this Mac. It's called "MacSpeech Dictate." It's new, but > good, and promises to get better. No you don't. You have a dictation application (an hopeful but incomplete one as yet). I suspect the OP is talking about fully integrated voice input where one's own voice has full command, using reasonable syntax, of all or most operations on the computer. True voice recognition, without having to wear a lot of hardware or have a proprietary microphone 2 inches from your mouth, is something I've been wanting since I bought my first 128k Mac. It would be so great to have a third, main input device to enhance the work cycle. Like right now, without moving my hands off the keyboard and what I'm typing, I'd like to be able to say, "Computer, open iTunes and play the Bach cello suites". My Mac responds, "The Yo Yo Ma or the Rostropovich?" >True voice recognition, without having to wear a lot of hardware or have >a proprietary microphone 2 inches from your mouth, is something I've [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >like to be able to say, "Computer, open iTunes and play the Bach cello >suites". My Mac responds, "The Yo Yo Ma or the Rostropovich?" The microphone would want to be connected up to the speakers not only to get rid of normal feedback - but to make sure the guy on your Mac podcast didn't start any commands! > >True voice recognition, without having to wear a lot of hardware or have > >a proprietary microphone 2 inches from your mouth, is something I've [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to get rid of normal feedback - but to make sure the guy on your Mac > podcast didn't start any commands! A microphone is used to input sound while speakers output sound. So I'm not sure what you mean about connecting the mic to the speakers. Like dictation software, system-based voice recognition systems would have to be smart enough to discriminate your voice commands from other sounds, obviously. >> The microphone would want to be connected up to the speakers not only >> to get rid of normal feedback - but to make sure the guy on your Mac [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >be smart enough to discriminate your voice commands from other sounds, >obviously. The microphone needs to not pick up commands that the computer created - even those created with your voice. > >> The microphone would want to be connected up to the speakers not only > >> to get rid of normal feedback - but to make sure the guy on your Mac [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > The microphone needs to not pick up commands that the computer created > - even those created with your voice. Obviously. But that does not mean it is "connected up to the speakers" as you indicated above. >> The microphone needs to not pick up commands that the computer created >> - even those created with your voice. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >But that does not mean it is "connected up to the speakers" as you >indicated above. I was thinking of a logical connection, not a physical (or wireless) connection - but I suppose the one requires some kind of the other (with the computer in the middle). In article <wyvern-8562F0.11240024042008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, > Like right now, without moving my hands off the keyboard and > what I'm typing, I'd like to be able to say, > "Computer, open iTunes and play the Bach cello suites". Correct, can't be done right now, but PC/Windows comes kind of close, but not close enough to do what you want. http://www.sonic-labs.net/en/products.html Quote from that site: "Enables dictation whilst other applications are in the foreground. (background dictation)" In other words, you could simultaneously type one document, _while_ your voice is creating another text document. You would effectively be creating _two_ text documents simultaneously! One by typing, another by using your voice. Certainly might be confusing to you though, because most people have a lot of difficulty trying to speak coherently while they are typing. > True voice recognition, without having to wear a lot > of hardware or have a proprietary microphone 2 inches > from your mouth, is something I've been wanting > since I bought my first 128k Mac. Again close with PC/Windows, but not native with Mac. (yet) With any luck, the new "MacSpeech Dictate" app' will change the death-grip that PC/Windows has on speech recognition, when MacSpeech creates updates, hopefully within a year. Freeing yourself from headsets, lugging around Macs, etc. ******************************************************** I have a Sony digital recorder ICD-MX20 which is so small that it "disappears" into my shirt pocket. It is therefore about 8 inches from my mouth. ($300 recorder) Lots of medical people prefer the high end Olympus line of digital recorders, such as the newest DS-5000iD which goes for a mere $600. <g> <http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1369&fl=2> (beware, only a few digital recorders are supported by Dragon NaturallySpeaking software, check ahead of time for the recorder of your choice) I get 99% recognition accuracy with my "everyday" speech at a dictation rate of 200wpm with the Sony recorder. (much less speed with complex medical speech, down as slow as 80wpm due to the lengthy and specialized medical terms) Later at my convenience, I dump the recording into the Vista partition of my MacBook Pro, where the audio is quickly and automatically changed into text. Once changed to text, I move it over to my OS X partition, because I dislike working with Windows any more than absolutely necessary. I have not noticed any noticeable difference in dictation accuracy or speed when using the recorder, as compared to dictating directly into my MacBook Pro. Mark- In article <noneof-CCAE64.23495025042008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, > In article > <wyvern-8562F0.11240024042008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > though, because most people have a lot of difficulty trying to speak > coherently while they are typing. I really hate to pile on just because so many others here respond negatively to you. But, about all you've demonstrated here is another spectacular example of not seeing the forest for the trees and your peculiar habit of misperception. My general idea is one of efficiency and ergonomics--- not multitasking. I said, "...without moving my hands off the keyboard...", NOT "type and dictate at the same time". I'm already thinking that it would be nice to have some background music while I work (get it?) so instead of interrupting my work-flow using the KB or mouse to bring up a different app and screen (get it?), I simply ask the computer to accomplish that in the background (get it?) and then proceed with my work without further ado. Get it now? [...] In article <wyvern-939B0C.10592427042008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, Madwen <wyvern@nospam.invalid> wrote: > I'm already thinking that it would be nice > to have some background music while I work (get it?) so instead of > interrupting my work-flow using the KB or mouse to bring up a different > app and screen (get it?), I simply ask the computer to accomplish that > in the background (get it?) and then proceed with my work without > further ado. You can do that now, with some planning, using Speakable Items. You would create an AppleScript that would launch iTunes and play a specific playlist (Bach cello suites). Give a simple name "Play Bach" and launch it with a voice command. Ta-da! SignatureHelp improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups. http://improve-usenet.org/ In article <wyvern-939B0C.10592427042008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, > My general idea is one of efficiency > and ergonomics--- not multitasking. - - - and - - - > so instead of interrupting my work-flow using the KB or mouse > to bring up a different app and screen (get it?), I simply ask > the computer to accomplish that in the background (get it?) Got it! <g> You want to start your music app', but _only_ start it as a background app'. I believe the OS X terminal app' has a way of "starting" app's to run in the background. I know MacSpeech Dictate can open terminal. However, as of right now, due to the unfinished state of MacSpeech Dictate, there is no way to enter arcane terminal commands by voice. That will change when MacSpeech creates the necessary updates. As I commented in my previous post: "but not close enough to do what you want" ...from this segment of my previous post: > > Like right now, without moving my hands off the keyboard and > > what I'm typing, I'd like to be able to say, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "Enables dictation whilst other applications > are in the foreground. (background dictation)" Sorry you got the impression that I was ignoring your specific request altogether. I was merely trying to get across the idea that we might _all_ be able to do the kinds of things you want to do "right now", when MacSpeech finishes their 'unfinished symphony' named "MacSpeech Dictate". On a positive note, you brought up a very valuable concept of one important thing that speech recognition is "good for". Namely, _while_ you are doing a semi-automatic thing like typing, your voice can "multi-task" by telling your Mac to play music in-the-background. Very hard to do this by conventional means, without actually interrupting your typing, with the associated loss in productivity. People normally increase their productivity by talking, while they are doing other tasks. We should carry over this productivity gain to our Macs. Why sit in front of our Mac like a mute dummy, no sense in that at all. Jabber away, we might accidentally say something worth keeping in a permanent text record. I already lost several million-dollar ideas, by not recording my jabberings. Next time, I intend to pounce on said million dollar ideas - - - why should mankind (and womankind) suffer just because I am too derelict to record my thoughts. Mark- >> > Here are mine: >> > >> > 1. voice recognition >> I have that on this Mac. It's called "MacSpeech Dictate." It's new, but >> good, and promises to get better. > No you don't. You have a dictation application (an hopeful but > incomplete one as yet). > I suspect the OP is talking about fully integrated voice input where > one's own voice has full command, using reasonable syntax, of all or > most operations on the computer. You mean like Apple's OS has had since at least System 7? > True voice recognition, without having to wear a lot of hardware or have > a proprietary microphone 2 inches from your mouth, is something I've [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > like to be able to say, "Computer, open iTunes and play the Bach cello > suites". My Mac responds, "The Yo Yo Ma or the Rostropovich?" Well, you can certainly tell it to open iTunes and start playing. SignatureQ: Does anyone know how many LOCs were in the Space Shuttle' codebase? A: 45. It was written in perl (paraphrased Slashdot discussion) > >> > Here are mine: > >> > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > You mean like Apple's OS has had since at least System 7? Apple's OS has had very limited support (initially available only as a custom install for high-end machines) for recognizing discrete utterances that loses accuracy dramatically as the language model grows in size or complexity. It has improved substantially in the last 15 years (mostly because computing power has increased and raised the functional limit on model complexity) but still isn't particularly close to what the prior poster described. G Signature"Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?" - Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix In article <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: > X-No-Archive: Yes > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > what are yours? I cannot imagine why I personally would need voice recognition, but I can see a big benefit for that feature for the handicapped. As far as I know though, there are ways to get voice recognition on the Mac right now though. I don't see what face recognition would do for anyone. Please explain. The Mac already talks. Its a feature you can enable if you want. Thin screens are no doubt on the way, but the cost is too high at this point, same with flexible screens. I for one would love to see increased battery life. This would be my top feature for Mac portables. Apple already offers as high a drive capacity as the industry allows. As far as I know, portable Macs are already shock proof. Why in the world would anyone need a Nintendo style wii remote on a Mac? I don't even use the remote that came with my Mac, but that's just me. I don't understand your last item. I would add one item to your list, the ability to bind specific printers to specific document types. For example, I would love to have all my Photoshop documents bound to my Epson R1800 printer and all my Word documents automatically bound to my HP all-in-one printer. > In article > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > Photoshop documents bound to my Epson R1800 printer and all my Word > documents automatically bound to my HP all-in-one printer. Number one for me would be a tablet screen function, a la ModBook. Invaluable for classroom lecturing, and we have to try to use Windoze right now. It's a disaster. William Clark > In article > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > know though, there are ways to get voice recognition on the Mac right > now though. I'm not quite sure, what he means here by 'voice recognition', but. - if he means 'voice recognition' to turn ON/OFF or put to sleep or wake from sleep, Apple had this with Os 9.x and it did not work too good, so they dropped it again. But if he means 'voice recognition' - e.g. that the computer can/will react on any voice command - 'Speech Recognition' (SR) this has been standard with any Mac system since System 7.5.0 and as a commercial add-on from system 6.0.1 through 7.1.3. - it's called 'Speech Recognition'. And if he means that a Mac can be used for vocal inputs like just talking to a textprocessor to 'convert' speech to text, - this has also been available right since system 6.0.1 through 'Text-To-Speech' (TTS) And by the use of fx. the IBM ViaVoice, it is even possible to use both TTS and SR for fully operating the computer, - making docs, wondering through folders and documents, printing - anything. Here in Denmark we had a woman in one of the gouvernment offices, who has no arms, but she was one of the top leaders at that office. She used a Mac - a Pismo 500mhz with Os 9.2.2 + viaVoice for everyting and after the Pismo an iBook 800, 'cause ViaVoice requires Os 9.x. She has now retired due to reaching the age of 70! > I don't see what face recognition would do for anyone. Please explain. The only thing I could be thinking of is 'security', but here either fingerprint or iris scanner recognition will be quite a lot safer. > The Mac already talks. Its a feature you can enable if you want. Yes - SR+TTS... > Thin screens are no doubt on the way, but the cost is too high at this > point, same with flexible screens. I don't think the cost is the problem here. Look instead of the stability in the screen frame. - the thinner, the weaker it'll be... > I for one would love to see increased battery life. This would be my top > feature for Mac portables. Are you differing between 'battery time' and 'battery life'? - if so I'd say a loud and clear 'AGRREED!' to the last. - Duration of 4-5 hours of constant working is very very high, most portable Windows only based machines are as low as 3-4 hours on the same type of battery and by near the same type of hardware. LiION batteries aren't as strong as NiMH in lifetime and duration of working hours, but they are quite a lot cheaper to produce, and they are more enviremental friendly. - So you have to make some compromises somewhere... > Apple already offers as high a drive capacity as the industry allows. Yes, but we could here think of fx. a 500gb static mass-storage to the price near a normal 500gb harddrive.:-) > As far as I know, portable Macs are already shock proof. > > Why in the world would anyone need a Nintendo style wii remote on a Mac? > I don't even use the remote that came with my Mac, but that's just me. I hate remotes..-) - you wanna turn down the speakers on the TV and instead you start the CD player.:-)) > I don't understand your last item. I too am not sure, what he means, but if he fx. means that a (portable) Mac should be able to connect to _any_ kind of wireless system _anywhere_, I can follow him... > I would add one item to your list, the ability to bind specific printers > to specific document types. For example, I would love to have all my > Photoshop documents bound to my Epson R1800 printer and all my Word > documents automatically bound to my HP all-in-one printer. - Or like me - using the Brother laser for normal document prining and the Brother all-in-one for picts and scanning? - Hm, right now this sort of works in Leopard 10.5.2... When I use MarinerWrite or NisusWriter and select 'print', it always shows the laser as the printer, - and when I select 'Print' in Photoshop, the 3-in-1 is shown as default. - And in fx. the new Aua version of OpenOffice, you can define which printer to use for which job - directly in the prefs settings for each type of document - textprocessor, drawing, table, spreadsheet etc.... - I've set Openoffice always to use the Brother HL-2070N laser for any printing job... - But whether this is because both are network models, I'm not sure... cheers, Erik Richard Signature~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rgds. Grüße, Mvh. Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC <mac-man_NOSP@M_stofanet.dk> <http://www.nisus.com> NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Textprocessing ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > LiION batteries aren't as strong as NiMH in lifetime and duration of > working hours, but they are quite a lot cheaper to produce, and they are > more enviremental friendly. - So you have to make some compromises > somewhere... that's reversed. lithium batteries have more power than nimh per weight and are more expensive to produce. >> LiION batteries aren't as strong as NiMH in lifetime and duration of >> working hours, but they are quite a lot cheaper to produce, and they are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that's reversed. lithium batteries have more power than nimh per weight > and are more expensive to produce. That depends on how you measure 'power'. - If you're thinking on that a LiION battery here and now can deliever (thought example) 3000mAh over a time of 5 minutes before beginning to fall, yes, you're right. But if you define it on how long time a LiION battery will last for duration use measured in hours during a day, it is not correct. I can give you a lot of examples on this... #1, I have two types of batteries for my Olympus digicam - a 3000mAh LiION and a 2200mAh NiMH. The NiMH battery can take apprx. 300 shots before it needs to be recharged, where the LiION only can take apprx. 270 shots. #2. Non-rechargable 2CR5 NiMH batteries for my Canon EOs 5n MkII can take 50 rolls of 35mm pictures (50x 36 pictures), where a similoar LiION 2CR5 type only can take 35 rolls of film! #3. My big Metz 45CL-5 flash uses 6x1,5v batteries. I use here now 6x 2500mAh rechargable AA sized NiMH batteries. The flash can shoot +1000 shots in MD mode - up to 5 picts per./sec. on the EOs 5, and +2500 shots in full TTL mode. With 6x 2500mAh LiION the same counts are apprx. 800 and 2000 shots! #4. My one Sony-ericsson mobile phone uses a 850mAh LiION, which should last for more than 300 hours in stand-by time. It only did so for the 3-4 first weeks, then it dropped to apprx. 225-240 hous of stand-by time, - and now after apprx. two and a half year, stand-by time is down to under 24 hours. 5. OK, this one example is about the most remarkable. My old Siemens S45 mobile phone with satellite unit used a 1200mAh LiION battery as standard. Standby time with this battery was only 70 hours and talking time only 30 mins.!! - I replaced this with a 1500mAh NiMH. Stand-by time rose to 135 hours and talking time to 70 mins....!! I can give lots and lots of other examples... And it isn't correct that LiION batteries are more expensive to produce, but some manfacturers like to tell us that. The problems are that it is harder to make a LiION battery that can deliever a constant effect over a longer time. No doubt the LiION batteries are better over a shorter time of use. - And LiION batteries are quite a lot leighter in weight - apprx. a 1/3 of a NiMH with same capacity. cheers, Erik Richard Signature~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rgds. Grüße, Mvh. Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC <mac-man_NOSP@M_stofanet.dk> <http://www.nisus.com> NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Textprocessing ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > that's reversed. lithium batteries have more power than nimh per weight > > and are more expensive to produce. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > you define it on how long time a LiION battery will last for duration > use measured in hours during a day, it is not correct. one measures the capacity of a battery in milliamp hours. > I can give you a lot of examples on this... your examples have more to do with the internal resistance of the battery, not its capacity. lithium ion batteries aren't necessarily the best choice for very high load applications. > #4. My one Sony-ericsson mobile phone uses a 850mAh LiION, which should > last for more than 300 hours in stand-by time. It only did so for the > 3-4 first weeks, then it dropped to apprx. 225-240 hous of stand-by > time, - and now after apprx. two and a half year, stand-by time is down > to under 24 hours. lithium ion batteries deteriorate over time. > And it isn't correct that LiION batteries are more expensive to produce, > but some manfacturers like to tell us that. so they just make it up? why wouldn't one manufacturer undercut their competitor if the price is artificially high? > The problems are that it is > harder to make a LiION battery that can deliever a constant effect over > a longer time. No doubt the LiION batteries are better over a shorter > time of use. - actually, lithium ion batteries are better over a longer time because nickel metal hydride self-discharges more quickly. non-rechargable lithium cells have a ridiculously long shelf life and useful life. > And LiION batteries are quite a lot leighter in weight - > apprx. a 1/3 of a NiMH with same capacity. right, that's what i said initially. >>> that's reversed. lithium batteries have more power than nimh per weight >>> and are more expensive to produce. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > one measures the capacity of a battery in milliamp hours. Sure, but that's not always the same as how _long_time_ measured in working hours. - It simply depends on how fast the voltage-falling is over a given time. The flatter the graphical curve is, the better the battery is... >> I can give you a lot of examples on this... > > your examples have more to do with the internal resistance of the > battery, not its capacity. lithium ion batteries aren't necessarily > the best choice for very high load applications. Strange then, - it's on all equipment the differences between LiION and NiMH are showing... >> #4. My one Sony-ericsson mobile phone uses a 850mAh LiION, which should >> last for more than 300 hours in stand-by time. It only did so for the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > lithium ion batteries deteriorate over time. All battery types do that, some slower than others... >> And it isn't correct that LiION batteries are more expensive to produce, >> but some manfacturers like to tell us that. > > so they just make it up? why wouldn't one manufacturer undercut their > competitor if the price is artificially high? Again - a matter of marketing and profit as well as tax handling in each country. - Nearly all EU contries now have an enviremental tax on most types of batteries - including LiION and NiMH. And 'cause of the tax rate is reversed proportional to enviremental cost - and only depends on production and retail pricing, a LiION battery of fx. 3000mAh will be apprx. 405 more expensive than a similar 3000mAh NiMH, though the NiMH is less good for the enviremental sorroundings... >> The problems are that it is >> harder to make a LiION battery that can deliever a constant effect over [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > nickel metal hydride self-discharges more quickly. non-rechargable > lithium cells have a ridiculously long shelf life and useful life. This certainly depends on the quality of the components in the battery! - and not on, if it's LiION, NiMH, silver or whatever type you use. - fx. have I a Sony microphone (ECM-929LT), which uses a small 1,2v silver battery. - I haven't used this mic for quite a long time now - infact 5 years, but the battery still has apprx. 60% capacity left! - Earlier I used LiION batteries for that mic, but life was so short that I always had to have one or two extra batteries with me, if I was out working with it for a whole day... >> And LiION batteries are quite a lot leighter in weight - >> apprx. a 1/3 of a NiMH with same capacity. > > right, that's what i said initially. OK, my last sentense here can be misunderstood, - 'cause a couple of words are missing... The sentense should of course be "...same capacity and duration in working hours". It is so 'moden' today that everything should be as light-weighted as possible, - but if a battery weight is 200 grams or 225 grams doesn't matter for most people, - or a battery for a mobile phone weighs 15 grams instead of 12 grams... - That's peanuts to me... I certainly prefer a battery that fx. has a stand-by time of 300+ hours instead of a leighter one with only 250 stand-by hours... cheers, Erik Richard Signature~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rgds. Grüße, Mvh. Erik Richard Sørensen, Member of ADC <mac-man_NOSP@M_stofanet.dk> <http://www.nisus.com> NisusWriter - The Future In Multilingual Textprocessing ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In article <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: > Here are mine: > > 1. voice recognition > > ...<other 9 choices clipped>... "Voice recognition" is often taken as meaning the recognition of any _particular_ person's voice, versus all other voices, which at the present time the technology does not support. (other than for simple words like "yes", "no", etc., as in the telephone company understanding almost everyone, when they utter those simple words) "Speech recognition" is commonly used to mean understanding a particular persons voice, AFTER the computer is "trained" to recognize that particular persons voice. By "understanding", I mean just enough to be able to convert the person's speech to text. For example, I can train my Mac to recognize MY voice, but when my friends try to speak into my Mac, the Mac does a miserable job of recognizing THEIR voice. Common expected accuracy at the present time is about 99%. Common expected speed at the present is about 200wpm for simple everyday speech, and about 90wpm for complex speech like that used by engineers, doctors, and other "professional" people with complex specialized vocabularies. For example, right now my MacBook Pro has no trouble recognizing: Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis ...and converting it accurately to text. (a medical affliction caused by breathing the silica dust from volcano emissions) Presently the high price I am forced to pay for that accuracy is to use PC/Windows software called "Dragon NaturallySpeaking", the "Pro" medical version 9.5 which cost me $1,200 (present price $1,400 on some websites) I run it on a Boot Camp created Vista partition on my MacBook, then transfer the completed text files over to my OS X partition as soon as I can. After about a year, the all-Mac "MacSpeech Dictate" should be updated enough to allow me to permanently ditch the PC/Windows overpriced crap. After roughly a year from now, the product named: "MacSpeech Dictate" should come very close to what you want. At the present time, it does a "fair" job, but essentially it is an incomplete beta version of what it should be, in roughly a year from now when it has several updates under its belt. Mark- On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:12:19 -0700 (PDT), "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: >X-No-Archive: Yes > >Here are mine: > >1. voice recognition >2. face recognition These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with keychain. Our current password system needs to be replaced by something better, and this could be a first step. >3. talking computer >4. thin screens >5. flexible screens Why? >6. (much) longer battery life >7. (much) more hard drive capacity >8. shock-proof >9. nintendo wii-remote >10. ubiquitous wireless access These are for portable computers - and I don't have a portable computer. Without having such experience, I would like to see easier integration to allow a portable computer to synchronize with the desktop. My other features I'd like to see are: 1. A better Mighty Mouse. 2. A keyboard that works better for long-time touch typers such as myself. With feel. Part of my problem here is that I need to put on my reading glasses to read the function keys on my aluminum keyboard (Count out to F6), but I just make too many mistakes on it that I don't on old-fashioned keyboards. 3. The option to use display fonts (Windows style), instead of print fonts on the display. My fogey eyes get more tired on my Mac. 4. The ability to resize Remote Desktop. 5. Various software that I wish for (not really Apple's job, but they can make porting easier). 6. Make it easier to pick a remote camera instead of the built in iSight camera for all applications. 7. Make user friendly software to tell people what safety features or convenience features they need in setting up router settings and wireless settings for appropriate security everywhere but easy connecting away from home. #0) Apple get out of its new and autocratic mode of writing apps (iPhoto, iTunes) that want to grab all your files and put them where the _app_ wants to put them, not where _you_ might want to put them. Hey, these are essentially _cataloging_ apps. So, let users put their files where they want, and have your apps just a good job of cataloging them (and following them) wherever they are. > #0) Apple get out of its new and autocratic mode of writing apps > (iPhoto, iTunes) that want to grab all your files and put them where the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > files where they want, and have your apps just a good job of cataloging > them (and following them) wherever they are. iphoto (since version 6) and itunes don't care where the files are. just turn off the preference that copies them. > On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:12:19 -0700 (PDT), "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" > <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > keychain. Our current password system needs to be replaced by > something better, and this could be a first step. Although Mythbusters managed to beat a current-gen fingerprint reader pretty easily :) >> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:12:19 -0700 (PDT), "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" >> <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> keychain. Our current password system needs to be replaced by >> something better, and this could be a first step. > Although Mythbusters managed to beat a current-gen fingerprint reader > pretty easily :) I have beat them with a bit of sellotape and saliva. SignatureOnce upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nurse it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake." >> These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a >> fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Although Mythbusters managed to beat a current-gen fingerprint reader >pretty easily :) In real life, passwords as used today are beaten much more often. Bio-metrics will have to be part of the solution to the great big password problem. Note I said "this could be a first step". Certainly fingerprint readers will get better if there's a market for them. > On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 00:12:19 -0700 (PDT), "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" > <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: >>X-No-Archive: Yes >> >>Here are mine: >> >>1. voice recognition >>2. face recognition > These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a > fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with > keychain. Our current password system needs to be replaced by > something better, and this could be a first step. That would be silly. Fingerprint scanners are to security what twist ties are to locks. That is, they are completely worthless and can be circumvented in seconds. Why anyone would waste time on them is a mystery to me. Perhaps they 'feel' secure? SignatureKickboxing. Sport of the future. >> These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a >> fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >circumvented in seconds. Why anyone would waste time on them is a >mystery to me. Perhaps they 'feel' secure? If you were in charge of your company's security would you feel good about how they use passwords on the Internet? Hardly any effort is being done to improve security with bio-metrics - mainly because the readers are so rare. The current system of trusting users to not behave like people does not work. >>> These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a >>> fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>circumvented in seconds. Why anyone would waste time on them is a >>mystery to me. Perhaps they 'feel' secure? > If you were in charge of your company's security would you feel good > about how they use passwords on the Internet? Hardly any effort is > being done to improve security with bio-metrics - mainly because the > readers are so rare. And the readers are so rare because they are expensive pieces of crap that can be circumvented with nearly no effort. They are a total waste of money and anyone using them in the interest f 'security' is a moron. > The current system of trusting users to not behave like people does > not work. It works at least as well as fingerprint scanners. Better, I think. Not that it works well, granted. SignatureIt's Tchaikovsky's 'Another One Bites the Dust'," said Crowley, closing his eyes as they went through Slough. > >>> These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a > >>> fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > that can be circumvented with nearly no effort. They are a total waste > of money and anyone using them in the interest of 'security' is a moron. So what are the problems with the readers? And can you defeat the circumvention? Are there different qualities of readers? > So what are the problems with the readers? And can you defeat the > circumvention? Are there different qualities of readers? I had a tablet PC with a built-in fingerprint reader. By the end of that tablet's life, I had disabled the Omnipass software as it caused huge delays during system power on. The severity of the problem would lock up the operating system 30% of the time at log on and sometimes at log off. I liked the idea of the device. I wasn't thrilled with it's software's deteriorating performance. The lack of maintenance releases to keep it in stride with operating system changes was discouraging - especially for a product linked to security. Not sure what you mean by defeating the circumvention. Disabling the software meant that passwords were entered manually. If someone had your tablet in their hands, bypassing plain old password protection is a piece of cake with Windows systems. Different qualities of readers? Probably but I wasn't impressed enough by the one I had to seek out another for other systems. The one that I had was one of the earlier fingerprint devices built-in for a Motion 1400 circa 2004. SignatureSharon F > > These two might be useful for security - but I'd rather have a > > fingerprint detector on the keyboards - standard. Integrated with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > circumvented in seconds. Why anyone would waste time on them is a > mystery to me. Perhaps they 'feel' secure? i know someone who bought a usb stick that had a fingerprint scanner. it did require a fingerprint to work, but it didn't mater *whose* fingerprint, as long as it was a finger. absolutely useless. >> That would be silly. Fingerprint scanners are to security what twist >> ties are to locks. That is, they are completely worthless and can be [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >it did require a fingerprint to work, but it didn't mater *whose* >fingerprint, as long as it was a finger. absolutely useless. That is useless - but any tool which is not implemented can be useless. I would expect if Apple made a fingerprint reader standard, it would do a better job of making it useful. >>> That would be silly. Fingerprint scanners are to security what twist >>> ties are to locks. That is, they are completely worthless and can be [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I would expect if Apple made a fingerprint reader standard, it would >do a better job of making it useful. I saw an interesting demo a while ago involving spoofing a fingerprint reader by transferring a valid print to a gummi bear... >>I would expect if Apple made a fingerprint reader standard, it would >>do a better job of making it useful. > >I saw an interesting demo a while ago involving spoofing a >fingerprint reader by transferring a valid print to a gummi bear... Therefore this fingerprint assisted passwords never be better than our current password system, as the hardware and hardware are used in that spoof are as good as they can possibly be. My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and multiple user accounts. Example 1: Log into user account A. Record some live audio (through built-in input, USB, etc). Switch to account B for a half hour. Switch back to account A. Stop recording. Play back recording. Notice that there is a half hour if silence in the recording, that corresponds to the time that user account B was in the foreround. I lost a 2-hour radio program recording that way. Example 2: In Panther, audio playing in one user account would still play when switching to another. This was useful to hear incoming Skype calls in one account while being logged in to another. Since Tiger, Apple mutes all audio coming from accounts not in the foreground, meaning missed Skype calls. I can understand how audio playing through would irritate many users, but I see no reason why this cannot be a user settable preference. SignatureK. Lang may your lum reek. > My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I can understand how audio playing through would irritate many users, > but I see no reason why this cannot be a user settable preference. I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable desktop you could take around with you but would need to plug in. I would buy it. Maire Black >> My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and >> multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable > desktop you could take around with you but would need to plug in. That's called 'iMac' with screen, and 'Mac mini' without. > I would buy it. Go for it. Signatureemail to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com. > >> My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > >> multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Go for it. I've got a new iMac. I meant something much smaller, lighter, and more portable - and closable I suppose so I don't have to worry about it if I want to carry it around. I really mean a macbook without a battery. My husband has an old macbook, but he always plugs it in anyway, so why have the extra weight and cost of the battery? Maire Black > > >> My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > > >> multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Maire Black Because it's a built in UPS? SignatureWhat is done in the heat of battle is (normatively) judged by different standards than what is leisurely planned in comfortable conference rooms. > I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a > battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable > desktop you could take around with you but would need to plug in. Pretty sure I've seen these advertised --- drawing power from USB port > > I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a > > battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable > > desktop you could take around with you but would need to plug in. > > Pretty sure I've seen these advertised --- drawing power from USB port The OP wasn't talking about a light for your laptop, but rather a light weight laptop. SignatureTom Stiller PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3 7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF >>> I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a >>> battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The OP wasn't talking about a light for your laptop, but rather a light > weight laptop. I've got a MacBook Pro with two USB2 ports. I'd like to see two more USB2 ports built in, for a total of four. > >>> I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a > >>> battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I've got a MacBook Pro with two USB2 ports. I'd like to see two more > USB2 ports built in, for a total of four. Real video cards for the mini and MacBooks, and Firewire 800. SignatureWhat is done in the heat of battle is (normatively) judged by different standards than what is leisurely planned in comfortable conference rooms. >>>> I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a >>>> battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> The OP wasn't talking about a light for your laptop, but rather a light >> weight laptop. > I've got a MacBook Pro with two USB2 ports. I'd like to see two more > USB2 ports built in, for a total of four. Most people only need ONE usb port. If you need more, buy a hub, they are dirt cheap. Remember, each port adds 500ma to the power requirements of the computer. More ports means more weight for a larger battery. SignatureThe hippo of recollection stirred in the muddy waters of the mind. > >>>> I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a > >>>> battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Most people only need ONE usb port. If you need more, buy a hub, they > are dirt cheap. Bad timing. Just today there's discussion at MacInTouch about some hardware that doesn't work through a hub. Signature"Harry?" Ron's voice was a mere whisper. "Do you smell something ... burning?" - Harry Potter and the Odor of the Phoenix >>>>>> I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a >>>>>> battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Bad timing. Just today there's discussion at MacInTouch about some > hardware that doesn't work through a hub. There's quite a bit of hardware that doesn't work properly through a hub. One of them is my HP DVD burner, which works properly through a hub on a PC, but not on a macbook pro. Weird, eh? > >>>> I would like to see a laptop type (light and portable) but without a > >>>> battery, making it even lighter and cheaper. Like a very portable [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Most people only need ONE usb port. If you need more, buy a hub, they > are dirt cheap. They're also a pain in the a.s to carry around with your laptop everywhere. > Remember, each port adds 500ma to the power requirements of the computer. > More ports means more weight for a larger battery. Well, up to 500ma. It's not like every device draws that much. I suspect my mouse uses a whole lot less. And it's not like the ports draw that current when nothing's plugged into them. SignatureTom "Tom" Harrington Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002 http://www.atomicbird.com/ Király a écrit: > My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the time that user account B was in the foreround. I lost a 2-hour > radio program recording that way. On the other hand, I expect a "suspended" account to stop recordings and "live from the outside" operations. > Example 2: In Panther, audio playing in one user account would still > play when switching to another. This was useful to hear incoming Skype > calls in one account while being logged in to another. Since Tiger, > Apple mutes all audio coming from accounts not in the foreground, > meaning missed Skype calls. When you receive a call in Skype, have you enough time to go to the other session before it ends? > I can understand how audio playing through would irritate many users, > but I see no reason why this cannot be a user settable preference. Agreed. There are many preferences not settable and that's a shame. > My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I can understand how audio playing through would irritate many users, > but I see no reason why this cannot be a user settable preference. There could be security implications here. For example user A leaves a recording session going to eavesdrop on user B. Also since voice recognition is being discussed in other threads, there is the danger that this could be somehow utiltized by user A to issue commands to user B's session. Was this the real reason that Apple changed the behaviour with Tiger? SignaturePaul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html > > My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > > multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Was this the real reason that Apple changed the behaviour with Tiger? Don't know whether that was the reason or whether it had something to do with user complaints about the background user's audio interfering with the foreground user's audio (or something else). However, I have found less reason to switch between accounts since the advent of Spaces. If your situation is similar to mine, you might consider setting up separate spaces for the different activities. SignatureSpenser > > > My #1 wish is for better user control with audio input/output and > > > multiple user accounts. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > do with user complaints about the background user's audio interfering > with the foreground user's audio (or something else). You could well be correct there. > However, I have found less reason to switch between accounts since the > advent of Spaces. If your situation is similar to mine, you might > consider setting up separate spaces for the different activities. I haven't managed to move to Leopard yet (need a new system), but Spaces is something I anticipate using when I do, SignaturePaul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html I'd like to reboot from a disk without having to hold down C. Maybe this is already possible? Bill SignatureGarden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA In article <b2forewagner-BC8628.14354525042008@sn-indi.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, > I'd like to reboot from a disk without having to hold down C. > > Maybe this is already possible? go to system preferences, pick the startup disk preference panel, and pick whatever volume from which you wish to boot. you can also hold down option key at boot time to choose. 11. A single-plug "mini-dock" connector for all the connections or peripherals on a laptop: power, external monitor, USB, FireWire. Maybe a 3" to 4" long rectangular "stick" with all the standard plugs spaced one side that runs along one side of the laptop, can be plugged in with one motion, and has a single cable to a larger junction box (aka multi-function hub) that has multiple jacks. But primary objective is to be able to unplug just *one* single connection, and you can pick up your laptop and go. 12. A cigarette-pack-size, laptop-powered mini-projector that projects a two-foot sized daylight-viewable image on a wall or mini-screen, for use in small-group situations. [These _are_ on the way . . . ] In article <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: > X-No-Archive: Yes > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > what are yours? 11. Free magic pony. I keep asking, but they've yet to include it. SignatureTom "Tom" Harrington Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002 http://www.atomicbird.com/ > In article > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > I keep asking, but they've yet to include it. I'd go with the magic pony. That would be way cool. Would it be expandable? SignatureHelp improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups. http://improve-usenet.org/ > > In article > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > I'd go with the magic pony. That would be way cool. Would it be > expandable? Dude, it's a *magic* pony. It can do *anything*. I do kind of wonder how you'd want to expand it though. More legs? Wings? SignatureTom "Tom" Harrington Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002 http://www.atomicbird.com/ >> 11. Free magic pony. >> >> I keep asking, but they've yet to include it. > >I'd go with the magic pony. That would be way cool. Would it be >expandable? Reading the literature, wishing for something like a magic pony often ends up with the wisher wiser but not poorer. >>I'd go with the magic pony. That would be way cool. Would it be >>expandable? > >Reading the literature, wishing for something like a magic pony often >ends up with the wisher wiser but not poorer. Wiser but poorer. (Typo) > In article > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > I keep asking, but they've yet to include it. 12. Hover car. They *promised* me a hover car. (Well, not Apple, but "them"!) > > In article > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > They *promised* me a hover car. (Well, not Apple, but "them"!) 13. Food pills! Where are my food pills? SignatureHelp improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups. http://improve-usenet.org/ > > > In article > > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > 13. Food pills! Where are my food pills? Seriously, though, I wish Purina would make People Chow. Little tasty nuggets full of healthy stuff that we need to survice, that we could munch on when we want to snack. Or in place of a meal. Signature8^)~ Sue (remove the x to email) ~~~~ http://wacvet.blogspot.com/ http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=wacvet http://www.myspace.com/wacvet22 http://www.suzanne-eckhardt.com/ http://www.intergnat.com/malebashing/ http://www.intergnat.com/pussygames/ > > > > In article > > > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > tasty nuggets full of healthy stuff that we need to survice, that > we could munch on when we want to snack. Or in place of a meal. See <http://www.clodhoppers.tv/> SignatureHelp improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups. http://improve-usenet.org/ > > > > > In article > > > > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > See <http://www.clodhoppers.tv/> She said "full of healthy stuff" - one look at the fat, cholesterol, and sodium in those things says it all - not very healthy! ; ) SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR > > > > > > In article > > > > > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > She said "full of healthy stuff" - one look at the fat, cholesterol, and > sodium in those things says it all - not very healthy! ; ) Prove it! SignatureHelp improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups. http://improve-usenet.org/ > > > > Seriously, though, I wish Purina would make People Chow. Little > > > > tasty nuggets full of healthy stuff that we need to survice, that [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Prove it! The first step to curing your addiction is is admitting you are addicted! SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR >The first step to curing your addiction is is admitting you are addicted! I'm addicted to eating and breathing. What's the second step? > > > > > In article > > > > > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > See <http://www.clodhoppers.tv/> You must have missed the word "healty." Signature8^)~ Sue (remove the x to email) ~~~~ http://wacvet.blogspot.com/ http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=wacvet http://www.myspace.com/wacvet22 http://www.suzanne-eckhardt.com/ http://www.intergnat.com/malebashing/ http://www.intergnat.com/pussygames/ >> Seriously, though, I wish Purina would make People Chow. Little >> tasty nuggets full of healthy stuff that we need to survice, that >> we could munch on when we want to snack. Or in place of a meal. > See <http://www.clodhoppers.tv/> No no, the point of People CHow (though I prefer "Bachelor Chow") is that it provides all the needed nutrition. That is, a person could each just Bachelor Chow for all meals. SignatureDo not meddle in the affairs of Dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup >No no, the point of People CHow (though I prefer "Bachelor Chow") is >that it provides all the needed nutrition. That is, a person could >each just Bachelor Chow for all meals. If one is interested in minimum requirements only, we don't need Macs, nor even computers at all. We don't need two room domiciles, entertainment nor any beverage other than water. Some people eat - but others dine. In article <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, "Jared \"J.P.\" Perdue" <jaredperdue@trashmail.net> wrote: > X-No-Archive: Yes > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > what are yours? I'm afraid something bad will happen to my LCD monitor. I'd like to have a removable piece of plexiglass or something like that to place over the screen. (For some reason, my cat likes to scratch the screen.) Signature8^)~ Sue (remove the x to email) ~~~~ http://wacvet.blogspot.com/ http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=wacvet http://www.myspace.com/wacvet22 http://www.suzanne-eckhardt.com/ http://www.intergnat.com/malebashing/ http://www.intergnat.com/pussygames/ > In article > <764bbdad-75fd-471b-b876-c98f7c6c11fa@l28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > like that to place over the screen. (For some reason, my cat > likes to scratch the screen.) I'd like Apple to completely enclose their LCD displays in scratch-resistant plastic or glass, so the entire front surface of the computer is flat and seam-free. Of course, they'd have to do it in such a way that the display remains easily legible. : ) SignaturePlease send all responses to the relevant news group. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. I do not read posts from Google Groups. Use a real news reader if you want me to see your posts. JR > I'd like Apple to completely enclose their LCD displays in > scratch-resistant plastic or glass, so the entire front surface of the > computer is flat and seam-free. Of course, they'd have to do it in such > a way that the display remains easily legible. : ) Isn't that, protecting the screen with a glass cover, exactly what Apple has done with the latest model iMacs? SignatureJames Leo Ryan ..... Austin, Texas ..... taliesinsoft@mac.com |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message