I don't think there has been a better or more flexible design that the Pismo G3. Swappable drive/battery bays, easy access to nearly all the parts under the keyboard. I could have mine completely apart in 5 min. It even had a separate sound card and a replaceable processor board. Ahh the days when Apple designed pro hardware instead of gadget interfaces...

I was starting to reply to a bunch of comments, but figured I'd just start anew since the misunderstandings are widespread. It seems like very few here have experience with public sector RFPs and RFQs. Even if you worked for a company that has submitted responses I wouldn't be surprised if you got it wrong. We (school district) just canceled because all 10 vendors were non-responsive by not reading and answering the requirements.

You write up an RFP when you know your problem and you need a solution. Language often specifies a technology, but allows for equivalent substitutions. Protests often happen over debate of what qualifies as equivalent, but if the DOI was looking for a solution, they would write an RFP.

But they weren't looking for a solution, they were looking for a vendor, and already knew what solution they wanted. That's when you write an RFQ, specify exactly the technology you want and then let everyone submit pricing. The disadvantage is that you have to choose the low quotation. In an RFP, you do not have to take the low proposal, even in the public sector.

So it might feel wrong, but way before the RFQ was even written the DOI determined that they wanted the Microsoft solution and just wanted pricing. Google lost before it even started. Which is probably short sighted by the DOI, but well within the law. As a public sector person who deals with this, it's not easy to get what you know you need at a price you want. Most public entities aren't being corrupt, but like someone else mentioned, the spirit of the law has long been lost and both sides spend inordinate amounts of time and money just trying to game the system. Like the vendor who protested that his 7200rpm SATA drive SAN was equivalent to the 15k SAS version and that he won on price... ugh.

I think that if you wish to allow students to use appropriate technology, then it's acceptable to draw the line somewhere and your school may give some guidance on that. When I taught at UCSC only a simple scientific calculator was allowed for all lower division physics, engineering and math courses. Therefore, everyone owned one, and knew about it ahead of time. I don't advocate this, but it works. I like to allow students to use the most powerful appropriate technology.

My last semester of teaching at UCSC I noticed some suspicious behavior in the Calc 19A (first quarter, higher track, 250 students) final. I made a quick note of names, and when grading the tests found that there were duplicate wrong answers, answers with work that was going in a different direction, conspicuously absent steps and random work placement on the page, all which seem to confirm that they were cheating. Sent the formal letter requesting a meeting with the students and got back an admission of guilt from each. Cheating using wireless connectivity isn't any different than passing notes, sharing a calculator with answers not cleared off or peering over a shoulder. The students still look suspicious, and have bad work and answers that betray their dishonesty.

I completely agree with everything you are saying. It would work great if our schools were populated with slashdot type students. Unfortunately, reality is otherwise. I think if you spent some time in schools you would be shocked at how apathetic they are when we get 'em.

However, I do think there is a serious problem with the direction schools are going with the use and teaching of technology. The emphasis has been on acquiring more and more computer workstations. Tech education now consists of word, powerpoint, and internet searches. Somewhere we (educators) need to turn it around and start doing better than just training end users.

If you have this problem with technology then someone at your district and or county office is doing it wrong. For the purposes of E-Rate, EETT and other automatic and compulsory grants you must have a technology plan with a minimum outlook of 3 years and a maximum of 5. Only computers that are "current technology" count, defined as equipment purchased new in the last 5 years. Your 7 year old pentiums don't count, and my guess is that you are missing out on federal and state funding due to a lack of planning and management of technology resources. People don't like paying administrators, but a good one is important for these reasons.

Transparency isn't the problem. All budget matters are open to anyone who wants to sit through a school board meeting. How many have you attended? Unfortunately, no one cares or speaks up until it's too late.

Actually, no. There are bond oversight committees for any pubic project like this. Paying down the bond with bond money is not allowed. All money from the bond must be spent in a manner that is consistent with how the bond was written.

Again, not saying that it's right, but pubic funds and public funded projects are never as simple as people make them out to be. As a public school employee, nothing would make me happier than more local discretion over use of funds, but generally the public doesn't want that either. They just don't want anything spent.

Not Dr., but patient spopepro with the 5150 to prove it. It took a while to find the right meds, so I know the questions and indications of interest.

But not wanting to resort to anecdotes, how about the national library of medicine. Scroll down to where it says "Bupropion is a monocyclic antidepressant structurally related to amphetamine." There are other references there as well.

I'd normally dismiss issues around "addiction" that isn't, but rather strong habits, but I'm all for research. Did anything actually happen here? I can't tell because the article is so bad.

Did the medicated group play while getting treatment? Would a forced break from playing cause the same effect? Control group? 6 weeks is a really short time to get acclimated to a new antidepressant, how about a follow up?

Bupropion is rarely used for anti-anxiety. As a dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor it has the tendency to increase anxiety. Another side effect is an increase in libido (and not a small one). They're probably all out getting laid instead of playing.

Cocaine is an excellent anti-depressant. Prozac and similar are Selective Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitors... Cocaine is a Serotonin Re-uptake Inhibitor. Not selective, and damn powerful.

Cuing a computer as a conductor is creative work, while playing an instrument is drudgery? You are so far away from any sort of artistic reality it's difficult to think you are anything other than a troll. Chances are (supported by other comments here) that you haven't paid for any live performance of any kind in the last 10 years, which does devalue your thoughts somewhat.

The problem is: It's not repetitive. Time in a production is not kept strict. Actors botch things all the time. Now, if you were able to automate the actors, the stage manager, the run crew, the lighting and probably the audience as well, then the automated music will work perfectly.

There is a major difference. The big moment that happens at 93:27:34 in the movie will always happen at 93:27:34. There is no such dependability in live performance.

I've made a few paychecks as a pit musician and I can't imagine how the synths will be controlled. If it is a person at a keyboard with a super advanced tone module then you are really just replacing a few musicians with a single one, not exactly groundbreaking, and it's frequently done with a standard piano covering parts that can't be hired (your local production of Fiddler on the Roof likely has a piano covering the accordion part).

If this is a computer, like the one FTFA that is mentioned to keep crashing, well, I can't see this actually being ok for any real performance where people are paying money. Crashing is one thing, but even if the program works perfectly, now everything has to cue off the computer. What if someone is late on an entrance? What if there is a technical problem? What if an actor drops a couple lines? An entire verse? There is a very delicate interplay between the actors, the stage manager, the conductor and the musicians to make everything match up every time. It's why opera is, for my money, the most stressful job I have ever taken as a musician.