I think, but am not certain, that all the MFM were full height. I remember half-height floppies, though.

hawk

Actually, it already happened, with gnu moving first.

RMS *already* demanded that Linux be called "lignux", and changed the code of EMACS at one point to make that, rather than "linux", the target.

hawk

>I don't mind static image ads (although I hate it
>when I purchase something on Amazon and then
>get served Amazon ads for the thing I purchased).
>But if it is not static then I despise it.

It's not just ads; it's *anything* that blinks & runs around while I"m trying to read. In fact, I've never blocked *anything* just for being an ad, and I block much of what sites fancy to be "content."

Stay still, damnit, I'm trying to read!

hawk

the two drive bays were typically side by side in the era of MFM drives. And if they were stacked, and you managed to find a double height drive, you would have had no space for your 5.25" floppy.

And the drives I see listed are something like 41mm, or about a inch and a half--half-height or less..

Full height in this parlance is the old 3.5 or 4" tall, nearly the full height of the PC/XT case.

hawk

>. Likewise MS Office- they change the file formats
>with each release to prevent compatibility with older >versions and especially compatibility with freeware
>office suites.

Now *that* one did not originate with Microsoft. Wordstart and Word Perfect were doing that before MS Word was even released; each coul generally read/export the prior, but not current, version of the other.

Word & Excel (except mac) were distant thirds. Then MS leveraged the dos monopoly to install them on every machine for a minimal royalty at about the time of the 40M hard drive becoming standard, and instead of "$500 for Word Perfect or Word?" it became "Spend another $500 on Word Perfect?"

hawk

And that world has come full circle.

That's not a "double height"; today's bays are half- and third- height.

The last single/full height drive I remember seeing was a 1G scsi in about 96, although I'm certain they continued for at least a feww years after that.

hawk

This is hardly new . . .

I had the original G1, before they were tossing the word "android" around.

It interestingly sprouted a navigation system one day. I thought that was nice, until I tried to use it in general. The "upgrade" needed more cpu power and ram than that thing had.

Add features to use more powerful hardware, and they consume resources on the older phones, too.

The only exception seems to be OSX, which tends to have at least a moderate speed increase for older hardware with each major release.

hawk

>I saw those as a wrap-up, not necessarily a cash-in.

Perhaps more a monument to his ego, with the bizarre attempt to tie in everything he ever wrote.

>They are still good to read.

I forced myself through a couple, and just couldn't do it any more.

hawk

Gas lines need nonconductive sections to protect from becoming long ground loops.

It sounds like this transformer had its center tap grounded and was the path to ground on one side of a ground loop as the geomagnetic field moved under pressure from a CME, inducing a common-mode current in the long-distance power line. A gas pipeline in an area of poor ground conductivity in Russia was also destroyed, it is said, resulting in 500 deaths.

One can protect against this phenomenon by use of common-mode breakers and perhaps even overheat breakers. The system will not stay up but nor will it be destroyed. This is a high-current rather than high-voltage phenomenon and thus the various methods used to dissipate lightning currents might not be effective.

I guess you missed the "cash-in, conglomerate it all!" volumes of his lat career. Foundation XXIV, and so forth . . .

hawk

In March 1989 much of Quebec lost power for the same thing.

They lost power because the common-mode breakers tripped, not because their system was actually damaged.

This story was not accepted for publication by Slashdot, and I am submitting it to another venue for consideration. - Bruce

I think it's more likely that more people are becoming obese because of exactly one factor: age. They are living artificially prolonged lifetimes due to access to adequate food and to medicine. It's easier to get fat when you are 50 than when you are 30 because of the natural changes in your metabolism.