 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / March 2008Video of the California 4 bypass
Hi Viatologists, The Worldwide Highway Library proudly shares its third video of the day... Quite frankly, we saved the best video for last... It's the recently opened California 4 "bypass"! http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com/tmp/0903-3 The video's footage takes place from the Laurel Road interchange. So, this route has important economic benefits for the cities of Brentwood and Antioch. As a modified dual-carriageway with freeway characteristics, Future Calfornia 4 helps funnel traffic from eastern Contra Costa County towards Concord, Walnut Creek and into the industrial districts of the SF East Bay. Today, the route is colloquially known as the "Route 4 Bypass". The bypass now hosts a partial-interchange w/ Routes 4 and 160 in eastern Antioch. This interchange was previously known to Contra Costites as the 90-degree curve between Route 4 and the Antioch Bridge. Previously and solely in existence between Lone Tree Way and Balfour Road, the bypass will ultimately stretch from today's interchange at Route 160 to the Byron Highway. At that time, the bypass will officially become part of Route 4. Enjoy! Cheers, Carl Rogers "Adding human experience to transportology" ******** Calrog.com, Worldwide Highway Library: http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ An integrated media arm in International Transportation Research. Has served your home country and ninety-nine of its worldwide neighbours since 2000, through Internet downstream and published works. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ******** Standing on the hard shoulders of freeways again, eh? Isn't there a prohibition against pedestrians on freeways? I should forward that vid to the CHP. http://mryamamoto.topcities.com/temp/fut-ca-4.wmv for those who want the laugh without enriching CalQaeda.  SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com > Hi Viatologists, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com/tmp/0903-3 Hi again, Over the past hour, I've noticed a few Mac users who could access this page but *not* the video! Quick note to those awesome folk: all our videos are presented in WMV (Windows Media Video) format. This technology keeps the videos small and fast for you to download. So, check out these free downloads. They'll get you hooked up in no time, assuming you've a broadband Internet connection! :-) http://www.flip4mac.com http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/mac/default.aspx Cheers, Carl >> Hi Viatologists, >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Carl O Reilly? What about Linux users? SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com On Mar 9, 4:23 pm, Carl Rogers <carl-...@calrog.com> wrote: > Hi Viatologists, > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com/tmp/0903-3 Hi again, Over the past hour, I've noticed a few Mac users who could access this page but *not* the video! Quick note to those awesome folk: all our videos are presented in WMV (Windows Media Video) format. This technology keeps the videos small and fast for you to download. So, check out these free downloads. They'll get you hooked up in no time, assuming you've a broadband Internet connection! :-) http://www.flip4mac.com http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/mac/default.aspx Your site still resizes browser windows for no apparent reason, other than youj like to make it frustration to use. You said you were going fix that, but I guessyou've said a lot of things that you don't mean. Like you're leaving and never coming back. Why should Mac users have to jump through special hoops for your pathetic web site when they don't for others? Especially since your site isn't worth the effort it takes to click on a couple of links to get there. SignatureDon't forget to have your troll spayed or neutered > On Mar 9, 4:23 pm, Carl Rogers <carl-...@calrog.com> wrote: >> Hi Viatologists, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> >> http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com/tmp/0903-3 <Also from Calrog> > Hi again, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > http://www.flip4mac.com > http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/mac/default.aspx <LY's stuff> > Your site still resizes browser windows for no apparent reason, other than > youj like to make it frustration to use. You said you were going fix that, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > web site when they don't for others? Especially since your site isn't worth > the effort it takes to click on a couple of links to get there. You complain when he doesn't solve problems with his website. You complain when he does solve problems with it. You can't have it both ways. The fact that you think his website sucks has little bearing on the matter. Signature--Andy >> On Mar 9, 4:23 pm, Carl Rogers <carl-...@calrog.com> wrote: >>> Hi Viatologists, [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > ways. The fact that you think his website sucks has little bearing on the > matter. Well, he didn't fix much of anything if his solution is for the someone to use different software, now, did he? Most web designers would agree that web sites presented for the general populace that don't work with common software have a serious flaw. And in the case of the browser resizing he claimed it was fixed but his site continues to do that. So that isn't fixed either. SignatureDon't forget to have your troll spayed or neutered >>> On Mar 9, 4:23 pm, Carl Rogers <carl-...@calrog.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Viatologists, [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > web sites presented for the general populace that don't work with common > software have a serious flaw. Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather that you don't use the Adobe PDF viewer add-on or the Flash add-on software either (or any of the numerous other add-ons). > And in the case of the browser resizing he claimed it was fixed but his site > continues to do that. So that isn't fixed either. It seems to be fixed for me (apparently done during the top-level access upgrade). Maybe you need to update your software to current versions. Signature--Andy > Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as > the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather > that you don't use the Adobe PDF viewer add-on or the Flash add-on > software either (or any of the numerous other add-ons). Not if you're not using Windows. >> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as >> the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather >> that you don't use the Adobe PDF viewer add-on or the Flash add-on >> software either (or any of the numerous other add-ons). > > Not if you're not using Windows. Thus, the reason Carl provided the link to the Mac version for WMP. The fact that 10-20% of desktop and laptop computers out there don't use Windows doesn't reduce the prevalence with which the WMV format is used. Signature--Andy >>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as >>> the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > fact that 10-20% of desktop and laptop computers out there don't use > Windows doesn't reduce the prevalence with which the WMV format is used. But since he touts his site as being worldwide someone who happens upon his site that did not come through these NG would not see that post or link. So, de facto, he's admitting he's trolling for site hits from these NG and ignoring the cyber world as a whole. So then all his blathering about using terms like US Federal Route and spelling words in a non-USA manner and claiming it's for the world is yet more manure. SignatureDon't forget to have your troll spayed or neutered >>>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as >>>> the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > But since he touts his site as being worldwide someone who happens upon his > site that did not come through these NG would not see that post or link. Granted, it would be better if he also put this on a 'Requirements' page on his website. > So, de facto, he's admitting he's trolling for site hits from these NG and > ignoring the cyber world as a whole. So then all his blathering about using > terms like US Federal Route and spelling words in a non-USA manner and > claiming it's for the world is yet more manure. Irrelevant to the discussion. Signature--Andy >>> Thus, the reason Carl provided the link to the Mac version for WMP. The >>> fact that 10-20% of desktop and laptop computers out there don't use [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Irrelevant to the discussion. I disagree. I feel they are linked. But it's not worth it to belabor the point. SignatureDon't forget to have your troll spayed or neutered >>>> Thus, the reason Carl provided the link to the Mac version for WMP. The >>>> fact that 10-20% of desktop and laptop computers out there don't use [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I disagree. I feel they are linked. But it's not worth it to belabor the > point. The discussion was about one of many perceived problems with his website. You complain when he doesn't fix problems. You complain when he does fix problems. You complained about this particular fix (a perfectly acceptable fix used by many webmasters). I'm just saying that a lot of your complaints have a more stupid basis than what Carl does. I'm not condoning what Carl does, but, sometimes, what you do makes even less sense. Signature--Andy >> I disagree. I feel they are linked. But it's not worth it to belabor >> the point. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > than what Carl does. I'm not condoning what Carl does, but, sometimes, > what you do makes even less sense. But he didn't post a fix on his web site. Only NG. So only NG would know about the fix. How many webmasters would post a fix for their site problems on a select few NG? SignatureDon't forget to have your troll spayed or neutered >>> I disagree. I feel they are linked. But it's not worth it to belabor >>> the point. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > about the fix. How many webmasters would post a fix for their site problems > on a select few NG? I already granted you this one previously. It doesn't change my opinion of the quality of some of the complaints here concerning Carl's website. Signature--Andy >>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as >>> the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > fact that 10-20% of desktop and laptop computers [in the United States] don't use > Windows doesn't reduce the prevalence with which the WMV format is used. Fixed your post, which given his "worldwide" nonsense is pretty ironic. SignatureJon Morse Herndon, VA >>>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as >>>> the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Fixed your post, which given his "worldwide" nonsense is pretty ironic. Thanks. Worldwide that number would be 8.42% as of last month (Mac being a little more 90% of that). Signature--Andy >>>>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of >>>>> software as [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Thanks. Worldwide that number would be 8.42% as of last month (Mac > being a little more 90% of that). Given his clear Euro-centrism and Windows' Asian dominance, I think you're just being mendacious. SignatureJon Morse Herndon, VA >>>>>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of >>>>>> software as [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Given his clear Euro-centrism and Windows' Asian dominance, I think > you're just being mendacious. http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=8 Other sites show similar marketshare numbers of 88-92% Windows of all varieties (W98 to Vista) worldwide. Signature--Andy >>>>>>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of >>>>>>> software as [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Other sites show similar marketshare numbers of 88-92% Windows of all > varieties (W98 to Vista) worldwide. I note your response doesn't address the subtle point I was making -- on top of which you sent me to a site which I can't use to either back up or refute my own point without coughing up money. Lemme be direct, then: I'm fairly sure Mac and/or Linux usage is much higher in Europe than elsewhere. Additionally, we don't have any way of knowing to what extent Windows' market penetration is driven by corporate use; my former employer allowed you to request a Mac if you wanted one, but you GOT a Windows box whether you wanted one or not. Obviously, we should be disregarding corporate penetration, since we all know we shouldn't be looking at CalQ's web site at work, right? :p SignatureJon Morse Herndon, VA >>>>>>>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of >>>>>>>> software as [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > top of which you sent me to a site which I can't use to either back up > or refute my own point without coughing up money. Then find your own site to make your point. Try this one (page 5) which shows the European numbers, as of the end of 2005, to be Windows-94.5%, other-5.5%: http://www.carnet.hr/CUC/cuc2005/program/presentations/f4_oreski.pdf Or this one which shows numbers, as of today, to be Windows-93.8%, other-6.2%: http://www.webhits.de/ (select 'web barometer' from the top grouping and go to the second set of graphs on that page) > Lemme be direct, then: I'm fairly sure Mac and/or Linux usage is much > higher in Europe than elsewhere. Then show it. > Additionally, we don't have any way of > knowing to what extent Windows' market penetration is driven by > corporate use; my former employer allowed you to request a Mac if you > wanted one, but you GOT a Windows box whether you wanted one or not. At my last place of work, we each had a Windows box and a Unix workstation. Which one was used for web browsing? The Windows box. The Unix box was for software development. > Obviously, we should be disregarding corporate penetration, since we all > know we shouldn't be looking at CalQ's web site at work, right? :p Even on break time or off time? The major restriction that I have seen is that viewed material not be obscene (YMMV, depending on company). Despite what is said in these groups, Carl's stuff hasn't reached that point yet. Signature--Andy >> I note your response doesn't address the subtle point I was making -- >> on top of which you sent me to a site which I can't use to either back >> up or refute my own point without coughing up money. > > Then find your own site to make your point. Again, obliviousness; I made a clear reference to regional usage and you threw a link back at me at which a non-registered, non-paying visitor can only see overall global usage. But that's okay, you've come up with something now. > Try this one (page 5) which shows the European numbers, as of the end of > 2005, to be Windows-94.5%, other-5.5%: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Then show it. Okay, maybe not -- but the numbers you just provided show that non-Windows usage has shown an almost 10% growth rate over the last three years. Isn't that in and of itself enough of a reason for people not to stick their f.cking noses in the air and insist that people use Windows? (As a total aside, I admit that I'm somewhat on the rampage about this particular issue this month, insofar as I just got a new laptop -- a pre-installed Windows unit, no less -- that was giving me the black-screen-of-death frequently despite not actually having installed any non-Microsoft software yet! Piece of sh.t OS.) (End digression.) Add to that, and I have no way of demonstrating this but I suspect it's true and it really makes intuitive sense if you think about it, I'd bet that the non-Windows numbers are additionally higher for people who inhabit Usenet (which, of course, is relevant since CalQ advertises his site on Usenet). Call me crazy, but the majority of us are crotchety ol' rebels against the establishment. >> Additionally, we don't have any way of knowing to what extent Windows' >> market penetration is driven by corporate use; my former employer [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Despite what is said in these groups, Carl's stuff hasn't reached that > point yet. Personally, I'm one of those people who thinks that if you sit on your a.s in front of a computer all day for work, when you take a "break" you should, I dunno, get the hell away from the computer. ;) Look, the *ultimate* problem here is two-fold. Regardless of Windows' dominance in the marketplace, the non-Windows community is substantial. I mean, how many computers IS 8% of the world marketplace? Tens of millions, at least. One should not summarily ignore that marketplace. Further, one should not "force" people into a format which really does depend on either using a specific OS (and its built-in memory hog viewing application which uses way too many resources on crap you don't need), paying for a decent substitute viewing application, or settling for really crappy freeware which doesn't always handle it properly. I mean, you've probably noticed that Google's Street View works pretty much everywhere with no additional download required... SignatureJon Morse Herndon, VA >>> I note your response doesn't address the subtle point I was making -- >>> on top of which you sent me to a site which I can't use to either [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > can only see overall global usage. But that's okay, you've come up with > something now. I continue to give hard numbers and you continue to come up with opinion with nothing to back it up. I don't want to know what you think. I want you to refute numbers that I present with data. If you don't like the sites that I give you, then present your own sites. >> Try this one (page 5) which shows the European numbers, as of the end >> of 2005, to be Windows-94.5%, other-5.5%: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > not to stick their f.cking noses in the air and insist that people use > Windows? Standard dodge; change the parameters of the discussion. In answer to your question: from .055 to .062? Hardly. Most of that can probably be accounted for by their current court-enforced situation in Europe. > (As a total aside, I admit that I'm somewhat on the rampage about this > particular issue this month, insofar as I just got a new laptop -- a > pre-installed Windows unit, no less -- that was giving me the > black-screen-of-death frequently despite not actually having installed > any non-Microsoft software yet! Piece of sh.t OS.) Interesting. I bought a new Windows desktop last November. Haven't had a single problem with it and certainly no BSOD. And I've already got a lot of non-MS stuff on mine. > (End digression.) > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > inhabit Usenet (which, of course, is relevant since CalQ advertises his > site on Usenet). I have no idea how you are coming up with this being intuitive at all. > Call me crazy, but the majority of us are crotchety > ol' rebels against the establishment. As long as it does what I need it to do, I don't complain about it whether it be establishment or not. That's why you haven't seen me complain a whole lot about MS and probably won't for some time. Many people complain about MS on principle alone. The best actual complaint that I've heard about MS is ECHM's; the Linux stuff is cheaper than the MS stuff and not loaded down with all the unneeded bells and whistles. >>> Additionally, we don't have any way of knowing to what extent >>> Windows' market penetration is driven by corporate use; my former [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > a.s in front of a computer all day for work, when you take a "break" you > should, I dunno, get the hell away from the computer. ;) I do that when I need to discuss something with a co-worker (which happens several times a day). Get up and go see them rather than using the phone or email. > Look, the *ultimate* problem here is two-fold. Regardless of Windows' > dominance in the marketplace, the non-Windows community is substantial. > I mean, how many computers IS 8% of the world marketplace? Tens of > millions, at least. One should not summarily ignore that marketplace. As opposed to how many computers is 92%. Go for the biggest bang for your work. That means go for Windows users first, then Mac (with 6%). The niche markets are going to be lucky to see anything that they don't make for themselves. Note: I am not necessarily advocating this; it's just the way things work. > Further, one should not "force" people into a format which really does > depend on either using a specific OS (and its built-in memory hog > viewing application which uses way too many resources on crap you don't > need), paying for a decent substitute viewing application, or settling > for really crappy freeware which doesn't always handle it properly. So, you're saying that, if I put up a website, it should be compatible with all platforms, despite the incompatibilities between all of them? I'm having enough trouble getting my stripchart website to work on both IE and Mozilla stuff (which would allow most non-Windows platforms to view the stripchart pages) from one set of pages. And I'm not about to put up 2 complete sets of pages to satisfy that. > I > mean, you've probably noticed that Google's Street View works pretty > much everywhere with no additional download required... You're comparing calrog.com (one person working off a webhosting service) with google.com (thousands of people working on a dedicated set of probably thousands of servers)? :-) Signature--Andy >> Okay, maybe not -- but the numbers you just provided show that >> non-Windows usage has shown an almost 10% growth rate over the last [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > can probably be accounted for by their current court-enforced situation > in Europe. 6% (and growing at a 4-5% annual rate) is not a "niche". I almost hate to point this out, but according to your logic, "American citizens not of European, African, or Hispanic ancestry" are a "niche market", yet every grocery store I go into has a full aisle of Indian and Chinese food. 6% of all computers worldwide is a substantial market. >> (As a total aside, I admit that I'm somewhat on the rampage about this >> particular issue this month, insofar as I just got a new laptop -- a [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > I have no idea how you are coming up with this being intuitive at all. Because, you know, Usenet's origins as a place where *NIX geeks interacted isn't relevant or anything when pondering the subject. C'mon. You know perfectly well Usenet has a much higher percentage of Serious Tech Geeks than, say, World of Warcraft. It only follows that the percentage of Usenet users who aren't using Windows would be higher than the overall non-Windows user base. Sure, maybe it's still under 15%; but then I've already argued that even 6% isn't a niche market. >> Look, the *ultimate* problem here is two-fold. Regardless of Windows' >> dominance in the marketplace, the non-Windows community is [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > make for themselves. Note: I am not necessarily advocating this; it's > just the way things work. Then someone needs to get on the horn with all the tech companies who are going whole-hog into the concept of full open-source, OS- and browser-neutral development and tell them they're Doing It All Wrong. >> Further, one should not "force" people into a format which really does >> depend on either using a specific OS (and its built-in memory hog [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > view the stripchart pages) from one set of pages. And I'm not about to > put up 2 complete sets of pages to satisfy that. "All"? No. Primarily because "all" includes "crappy sh.t that doesn't follow standards" anyway. Windows, Mac, Linux; IE, Firefox, Safari. Now, see... your strip chart stuff... I've been out of the community for a couple-three years, but I recall seeing some really cool XML strip chart stuff back before I got distracted with life. Were those yours? If not, my following argument is still relevant anyway, just not directly applicable to you personally. (And if they were, hey, those were really awesome.) The two things are quite a bit different; the different browsers approached XML strangely and are just starting to get back into sync, and the XML strip charts I recall couldn't have been done another way (at least not sensibly). It was worth jumping through some hoops, *as a user*, to check them out for that reason. (And ironically, Mac users had fewer hoops to jump through; in fact, at first I HAD to use my Mac to check them out.) BIG difference between that and deciding whether to use WMV or some other non-annoying, non-proprietary movie format; no relevant browser has any problem displaying an AVI file for example, and the only difference in the code for the webmaster is the filename. In short, you're comparing trying to bake a delicious homemade lasagna with cooking a frozen pizza. If those were your charts, and someone else compared the two situations, I'd backhand them for insulting you. >> I mean, you've probably noticed that Google's Street View works pretty >> much everywhere with no additional download required... > > You're comparing calrog.com (one person working off a webhosting > service) with google.com (thousands of people working on a dedicated set > of probably thousands of servers)? :-) No, I'm comparing a decision to use a format with a decision to use a format. He's just as capable of making an avi as he is a wmv, after all. SignatureJon Morse Herndon, VA >>> Further, one should not "force" people into a format which really >>> does depend on either using a specific OS (and its built-in memory [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > directly applicable to you personally. (And if they were, hey, those > were really awesome.) From the sounds of it, those were mine. They are still available at http://home.comcast.net/~andytom/Highways/index.html Coverage is now 8 states: WA, OR, CA, ME, NH, VT, MA and RI. > The two things are quite a bit different; the different browsers > approached XML strangely and are just starting to get back into sync, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > had fewer hoops to jump through; in fact, at first I HAD to use my Mac > to check them out.) Do you remember any of the details for viewing on Mac? I'd like to put them on the requirements page. > BIG difference between that and deciding whether to > use WMV or some other non-annoying, non-proprietary movie format; no > relevant browser has any problem displaying an AVI file for example, and > the only difference in the code for the webmaster is the filename. He also produces the videos. Are you certain that he has the capability to produce in AVI? Have you asked? Non-confrontationally? Signature--Andy >>>> Further, one should not "force" people into a format which really >>>> does depend on either using a specific OS (and its built-in memory [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > He also produces the videos. Are you certain that he has the capability > to produce in AVI? Have you asked? Non-confrontationally? There are any number of handy-dandy file conversion programmes out there for all platforms. SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com >> The two things are quite a bit different; the different browsers >> approached XML strangely and are just starting to get back into sync, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Do you remember any of the details for viewing on Mac? I'd like to put > them on the requirements page. Gah, this was at least two years ago, I think. IIRC, it was "open safari, go to link, profit!", meaning that version of Safari already had an XSLT translator (which really should be the only "requirement" as far as I can tell). At the time, it did not work for Firefox on a Windows machine, and I assiduously avoid using IE, although I would have attempted it had it not worked on the Mac. By the way, works fine now in Firefox 2.0.0.12 on Vista (with no plug-ins or add-ons), so Mozilla's obviously added translation as well. SignatureJon Morse Herndon, VA >>> The two things are quite a bit different; the different browsers >>> approached XML strangely and are just starting to get back into sync, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > By the way, works fine now in Firefox 2.0.0.12 on Vista (with no > plug-ins or add-ons), so Mozilla's obviously added translation as well. Thanks for the info. I think they all have had the translator available for quite some time. The problem has always been that all of them except IE required that the applicable mime type be sent also, which Comcast doesn't do (and for whatever reason, won't add to the list unless they recently have done so). Looks like things are changing. I need to make some adjustments (the shield doesn't come out right and the stripchart isn't centered in my Firefox display). Signature--Andy > The best actual complaint > that I've heard about MS is ECHM's; the Linux stuff is cheaper than the > MS stuff and not loaded down with all the unneeded bells and whistles. It's a bit more than that. Windows ships pretty barebones by itself(that doesn't include OEM bumdles); Linux in most distros provides a full word processor, graphics software, CD burning software, etc. You get a great deal for free. You can always get more if you need it-usually in packages tailored to your distribution; so you can use aptitude or similar programs to search for and specifically install the software you like. SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com >>> Windows Media Player seems to be a pretty standard piece of software as >>> the WMV format seems to be used pretty prevalently these days. I gather [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > fact that 10-20% of desktop and laptop computers out there don't use > Windows doesn't reduce the prevalence with which the WMV format is used. But the Mac version doesn't work if you're using Linux, or any other *nix. Flip for Mac costs money, incidentally. Now there are Linux WMV players; so that problem is pretty easy to fix. Quicktime is different matter. It barely runs under WINE if at all; so if you want to see a WHL 360, you're out of luck. His site interface is designed to require multiple clicks to get to an item of interest, etc. It's not just the level of suck, Carl presumes to decide what OS you should use. I don't want to use Windows or IE. I like what I have. I use Linux because I can't afford laying out huge deals of money for programs like Office, Photoshop or Illustrator, and I'm not too big on pirate software. SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com > Hi Viatologists, > > The Worldwide Highway Library proudly shares its third video of the > day... Quite frankly, we saved the best video for last... It's the > recently opened California 4 "bypass"! Let me guess, you are an audio engineer. > http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com/tmp/0903-3 > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ******** > Let me guess, you are an audio engineer. Piss-poor production values are a calrog trademark. Signature"Dave's not here, man!" - Tommy Chong By modified dual-carriageway with freeway characteristics, you mean "freeway". Because that's what it is there. Later on it becomes an "expressway". > By modified dual-carriageway with freeway characteristics, you mean > "freeway". Because that's what it is there. Later on it becomes an > "expressway". CalBog is trying to be all international on us again. In the UK and Europe, there are specifically legally designated motorway grids-'M' or 'A' roads. There are situations in which lesser classes of roads are built up to full freeway standard; but don't carry the official/legal definition of 'motorway'; and are not considered as such, even they may for all intents and purpose, be exactly the same. Michelin maps describe this condition as 'dual carriageway with motorway characteristics' and have a special symbol for it. Now in the US, there is a specific motorway grid: the Interstate system-But Interstates are not the only class of road that are legally allowed to be defined as a freeway like European Motorways are. *Any* road in this country can be a freeway, as you well know. The declaration is made by States or even municipalities, rather than nationally. So CalBog is trying to apply international terminology in a situation where it doesn't apply, because he thinks it makes him look worldly. Soo-prize! SignatureComrade Otto The Duke Of Yamamoto http://mryamamoto.50megs.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.