Search Results

Search found 182 results on 8 pages for 'mechanical snail'.

Page 1/8 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >

  • Friday Fun: Snail Bob 2

    - by Asian Angel
    Everyone’s favorite day of the week is here once again and that means it is time for some fun! In this week’s game your job is to help Snail Bob travel safely through a dangerous forest and reach his Grandpa’s house in one piece.What is a Histogram, and How Can I Use it to Improve My Photos?How To Easily Access Your Home Network From Anywhere With DDNSHow To Recover After Your Email Password Is Compromised

    Read the article

  • Is reliability reputation of mechanical keyboards overblown?

    - by Rarst
    A while back I worked up to finally buying mechanical keyboard (~$100 range, "black" switches) and was initially quite content with purchase. However just outside first year (read it - as soon as warranty expired) it started to develop repeat issues (press once, get chain of letter repeated) on multiple keys. It doesn't react to generic cleaning (up to compressed air) and searching Internet shows noticeable amount of people with similar-to-identical issues, spanning years. This makes me severely hesitant to buy another mechanical keyboard, considering: every other keyboard I ever owned, including ultra-cheap crap managed to last longer than that typing experience is nice, but not lifechanging-fan-forever nice for me my choice of mechanical keyboards is severely limited not many brands represented in local market and primarily crazy looking gamer models russian (not to mention russian and ukrainian if possible) layout excludes international ordering price tag for a meek year of use I got our of it is plain demoralizing It is obvious mechanical keyboards have their fans, but shopping around for "best fit" or getting into multiple hundreds price tags is probably not something I am highly interested in. Considering my constraints and bad experience with reliability, is it practical for me to sink more money into buying mechanical keyboard(s) again? In other words - manufacturers are beaming about how crazy reliable mechanical keyboards are. Are active long time users of such keyboards confidently of same opinion?

    Read the article

  • Differences between Cherry mechanical keyboard switches?

    - by TreyK
    I want a comfortable, responsive mechanical switch keyboard. My only concern about mechanical switch keyboards is the noise. Boards based off of the Cherry MX Blue seem to be the loudest, but apparently offer increased tactility. I don't mind a clicky noise (I would actually prefer a bit of noise), I just don't want anything overpowering. What are the different types of Cherry mechanical switches are out there, and what separates one from the other? Also, where would I be able to test one out?

    Read the article

  • Windows Server 2008 R2 running at a snail's pace

    - by Django Reinhardt
    Really weird problem here. Our main web server has started running at a snail's pace, for absolutely no reason we can discern. Even after restarting the machine, when there's no little or no ram usage and CPU usage is fluctuating between 0 and 30%, simple tasks, like opening Internet Explorer, or waiting for My Computer to open, take forever. There are no processes hogging system resources that we can see... the machine itself is just exhibiting extremely slow behaviour. I've never seen a machine do this. A lot of security updates had built up, so we decided to let Windows install them. When we looked through the history upon restarting, though, they had failed with error code 800706BA. I don't know if this could be related or not. Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. As mentioned in the title, we're running a Windows Server 2008 R2 machine. It's also running SQL Server and IIS. It has 16GB of RAM and a decent Quad Core processor. It's also been fine until now -- and we haven't changed a thing. Thanks for any help.

    Read the article

  • Design pattern for an automated mechanical test bench

    - by JJS
    Background I have a test fixture with a number of communication/data acquisition devices on it that is used as an end of line test for a product. Because of all the various sensors used in the bench and the need to run the test procedure in near real-time, I'm having a hard time structuring the program to be more friendly to modify later on. For example, a National Instruments USB data acquisition device is used to control an analog output (load) and monitor an analog input (current), a digital scale with a serial data interface measures position, an air pressure gauge with a different serial data interface, and the product is interfaced through a proprietary DLL that handles its own serial communication. The hard part The "real-time" aspect of the program is my biggest tripping point. For example, I need to time how long the product needs to go from position 0 to position 10,000 to the tenth of a second. While it's traveling, I need to ramp up an output of the NI DAQ when it reaches position 6,000 and ramp it down when it reaches position 8,000. This sort of control looks easy from browsing NI's LabVIEW docs but I'm stuck with C# for now. All external communication is done by polling which makes for lots of annoying loops. I've slapped together a loose Producer Consumer model where the Producer thread loops through reading the sensors and sets the outputs. The Consumer thread executes functions containing timed loops that poll the Producer for current data and execute movement commands as required. The UI thread polls both threads for updating some gauges indicating current test progress. Unsure where to start Is there a more appropriate pattern for this type of application? Are there any good resources for writing control loops in software (non-LabVIEW) that interface with external sensors and whatnot?

    Read the article

  • Mechanical mouse using USB-to-PS/2 Adapter freezes occasionally

    - by izn
    I am using an AOpen PS/2 mechanical mouse in Ubuntu 11.10 with a Staples USB-to-PS/2 Adapter with my Intel DP67DE motherboard. The mouse is more comfortable for my hand as it has a lower height than optical mouses. Occasionally the mouse cursor freezes and often I have to unplug it from the USB port and plug it back in to unfreeze it. This happens with all the USB ports. I've been using the adapter for a few weeks now and this seems to be happening more often recently. What might be happening and is there anything that can be done to fix this?

    Read the article

  • Performing mechanical movements using computer

    - by Vi
    How to make a computer (in particular, my laptop) to perform some mechanical movements without buying anything $5, soldering things inside computer or creating big sophisticated circuits? Traditionally CD-ROM tray is used to make computer do some movement IRL by, for example, SSH command, but in laptop tray is one-shot (unless manually reloaded) and also not very comfortable [mis]usage. Some assistance circuits can be in use too, but not complex. For example, there is a little motor that can work on USB power. Devices in my computer: DVD-ROM tray: one-time push. USB power: continuous power to the motor or LEDS or relay that turns on something powerful. Audio card. 3 outputs (modprobe alsa model=test can set Mic and Line-in as additional output). One controllable DC output (microphone) that can power up LED and some electronic (may be even mechanic?) relay. Also with sophisticated additional circuiting can control a lot of devices with a good precision. Both input and output support. Probably the most useful object in computer for radio ham. Modem. Don't know about this much, it doesn't work because of hsfmodem crashes kernel if memory is = 1GB. May be it's "pick up" and "hang up" can turn on and off power taken from USB port? Video card. VGA port? S-Video port? Will them be useful? Backlight. Tunable, but probably unuseful. CardBus (or some) slot. Nothing interesting for the task probably (is it?). AC adapter and battery. Probably nothing programmable here. /* My AC adapter already have additional jacks to connect extra devics */ Keyboard. No use. Touchpad. Good sensor (synclient -m 1), but no output. Various LEDs inside laptop. Probably too weak and requires soldering. Fans inside laptop. Poor control over them, requires soldering and dangerous to tinker. HDD (internal and external) that can be spin down and up (hdparm -Y, cat /dev/ubb). But connecting anything serially with it's power line makes HDD underpowered... And too complex. Is something are missed? Any ideas how to use described components? Any other ideas? May be there are easily available /* in developing countries */ cheap devices like "enhanced multimeters" that are controllable from computer and can provide configurable output and measure current and other things? Things to aid pushing many physical buttons with computer. Isn't this a simple idea and implementation and a lot of use in good hands?

    Read the article

  • iphone: mechanical drawing & layers

    - by d_CFO
    I need to do a bit of mechanical drawing. I can (1) display the part’s image, [self.view addSubview:thePartAsImageView]; (2) implement two sliders (one horizontal for part’s width and one vertical for part’s height), heightSlider.transform = CGAffineTransformRotate(heightSlider.transform, 270.0/180*M_PI); (3) display the corresponding values (dimensions) as the user moves the sliders, and even (4) draw the dimensioning lines with arrowheads: CGContextAddLineToPoint What I can’t do is (5) remove those lines after I’ve drawn them. What I want is “if userTouchedTheHorizontalControl then eraseTheLinesForTheVerticalControl.” If I understand correctly – first, that Quartz composites everything to a single layer, and second, that CALayer, GeekGameBoard and so on only work on Mac -- then I have to do something different. But isn’t there something I can do other than switch to Open GL?

    Read the article

  • Transitioning from a mechanical engineer to software developer. What path to take?

    - by Patrick
    Hi all, I am 24 years old and have a BS in mechanical engineering from Mizzou. I have been working as a mechanical engineer in a big corporation for about 2 years since graduation. In this time, I have decided that I'm just not that interested in mechanical engineering topics, and I'm much more excited about web technology, website design, etc. I do a very small amount of freelance web design just to get experience, but I have no formal training yet. Ultimately I could see myself being very excited about working for a small startup in web technology, or creating and selling my own programs in more of an entrepreneurial role. What path do you recommend for transitioning into this field? Go back to school and get a BS in CS? MS in CS? Tech school for classes? Self study? I'm feeling overwhelmed by the options available, but the one thing I know for sure is that I'm excited to make a change. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • The Faces in the Crowdsourcing

    - by Applications User Experience
    By Jeff Sauro, Principal Usability Engineer, Oracle Imagine having access to a global workforce of hundreds of thousands of people who can perform tasks or provide feedback on a design quickly and almost immediately. Distributing simple tasks not easily done by computers to the masses is called "crowdsourcing" and until recently was an interesting concept, but due to practical constraints wasn't used often. Enter Amazon.com. For five years, Amazon has hosted a service called Mechanical Turk, which provides an easy interface to the crowds. The service has almost half a million registered, global users performing a quarter of a million human intelligence tasks (HITs). HITs are submitted by individuals and companies in the U.S. and pay from $.01 for simple tasks (such as determining if a picture is offensive) to several dollars (for tasks like transcribing audio). What do we know about the people who toil away in this digital crowd? Can we rely on the work done in this anonymous marketplace? A rendering of the actual Mechanical Turk (from Wikipedia) Knowing who is behind Amazon's Mechanical Turk is fitting, considering the history of the actual Mechanical Turk. In the late 1800's, a mechanical chess-playing machine awed crowds as it beat master chess players in what was thought to be a mechanical miracle. It turned out that the creator, Wolfgang von Kempelen, had a small person (also a chess master) hiding inside the machine operating the arms to provide the illusion of automation. The field of human computer interaction (HCI) is quite familiar with gathering user input and incorporating it into all stages of the design process. It makes sense then that Mechanical Turk was a popular discussion topic at the recent Computer Human Interaction usability conference sponsored by the Association for Computing Machinery in Atlanta. It is already being used as a source for input on Web sites (for example, Feedbackarmy.com) and behavioral research studies. Two papers shed some light on the faces in this crowd. One paper tells us about the shifting demographics from mostly stay-at-home moms to young men in India. The second paper discusses the reliability and quality of work from the workers. Just who exactly would spend time doing tasks for pennies? In "Who are the crowdworkers?" University of California researchers Ross, Silberman, Zaldivar and Tomlinson conducted a survey of Mechanical Turk worker demographics and compared it to a similar survey done two years before. The initial survey reported workers consisting largely of young, well-educated women living in the U.S. with annual household incomes above $40,000. The more recent survey reveals a shift in demographics largely driven by an influx of workers from India. Indian workers went from 5% to over 30% of the crowd, and this block is largely male (two-thirds) with a higher average education than U.S. workers, and 64% report an annual income of less than $10,000 (keeping in mind $1 has a lot more purchasing power in India). This shifting demographic certainly has implications as language and culture can play critical roles in the outcome of HITs. Of course, the demographic data came from paying Turkers $.10 to fill out a survey, so there is some question about both a self-selection bias (characteristics which cause Turks to take this survey may be unrepresentative of the larger population), not to mention whether we can really trust the data we get from the crowd. Crowds can perform tasks or provide feedback on a design quickly and almost immediately for usability testing. (Photo attributed to victoriapeckham Flikr While having immediate access to a global workforce is nice, one major problem with Mechanical Turk is the incentive structure. Individuals and companies that deploy HITs want quality responses for a low price. Workers, on the other hand, want to complete the task and get paid as quickly as possible, so that they can get on to the next task. Since many HITs on Mechanical Turk are surveys, how valid and reliable are these results? How do we know whether workers are just rushing through the multiple-choice responses haphazardly answering? In "Are your participants gaming the system?" researchers at Carnegie Mellon (Downs, Holbrook, Sheng and Cranor) set up an experiment to find out what percentage of their workers were just in it for the money. The authors set up a 30-minute HIT (one of the more lengthy ones for Mechanical Turk) and offered a very high $4 to those who qualified and $.20 to those who did not. As part of the HIT, workers were asked to read an email and respond to two questions that determined whether workers were likely rushing through the HIT and not answering conscientiously. One question was simple and took little effort, while the second question required a bit more work to find the answer. Workers were led to believe other factors than these two questions were the qualifying aspect of the HIT. Of the 2000 participants, roughly 1200 (or 61%) answered both questions correctly. Eighty-eight percent answered the easy question correctly, and 64% answered the difficult question correctly. In other words, about 12% of the crowd were gaming the system, not paying enough attention to the question or making careless errors. Up to about 40% won't put in more than a modest effort to get paid for a HIT. Young men and those that considered themselves in the financial industry tended to be the most likely to try to game the system. There wasn't a breakdown by country, but given the demographic information from the first article, we could infer that many of these young men come from India, which makes language and other cultural differences a factor. These articles raise questions about the role of crowdsourcing as a means for getting quick user input at low cost. While compensating users for their time is nothing new, the incentive structure and anonymity of Mechanical Turk raises some interesting questions. How complex of a task can we ask of the crowd, and how much should these workers be paid? Can we rely on the information we get from these professional users, and if so, how can we best incorporate it into designing more usable products? Traditional usability testing will still play a central role in enterprise software. Crowdsourcing doesn't replace testing; instead, it makes certain parts of gathering user feedback easier. One can turn to the crowd for simple tasks that don't require specialized skills and get a lot of data fast. As more studies are conducted on Mechanical Turk, I suspect we will see crowdsourcing playing an increasing role in human computer interaction and enterprise computing. References: Downs, J. S., Holbrook, M. B., Sheng, S., and Cranor, L. F. 2010. Are your participants gaming the system?: screening mechanical turk workers. In Proceedings of the 28th international Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Atlanta, Georgia, USA, April 10 - 15, 2010). CHI '10. ACM, New York, NY, 2399-2402. Link: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1753326.1753688 Ross, J., Irani, L., Silberman, M. S., Zaldivar, A., and Tomlinson, B. 2010. Who are the crowdworkers?: shifting demographics in mechanical turk. In Proceedings of the 28th of the international Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Atlanta, Georgia, USA, April 10 - 15, 2010). CHI EA '10. ACM, New York, NY, 2863-2872. Link: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1753846.1753873

    Read the article

  • HTG Reviews the CODE Keyboard: Old School Construction Meets Modern Amenities

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    There’s nothing quite as satisfying as the smooth and crisp action of a well built keyboard. If you’re tired of  mushy keys and cheap feeling keyboards, a well-constructed mechanical keyboard is a welcome respite from the $10 keyboard that came with your computer. Read on as we put the CODE mechanical keyboard through the paces. What is the CODE Keyboard? The CODE keyboard is a collaboration between manufacturer WASD Keyboards and Jeff Atwood of Coding Horror (the guy behind the Stack Exchange network and Discourse forum software). Atwood’s focus was incorporating the best of traditional mechanical keyboards and the best of modern keyboard usability improvements. In his own words: The world is awash in terrible, crappy, no name how-cheap-can-we-make-it keyboards. There are a few dozen better mechanical keyboard options out there. I’ve owned and used at least six different expensive mechanical keyboards, but I wasn’t satisfied with any of them, either: they didn’t have backlighting, were ugly, had terrible design, or were missing basic functions like media keys. That’s why I originally contacted Weyman Kwong of WASD Keyboards way back in early 2012. I told him that the state of keyboards was unacceptable to me as a geek, and I proposed a partnership wherein I was willing to work with him to do whatever it takes to produce a truly great mechanical keyboard. Even the ardent skeptic who questions whether Atwood has indeed created a truly great mechanical keyboard certainly can’t argue with the position he starts from: there are so many agonizingly crappy keyboards out there. Even worse, in our opinion, is that unless you’re a typist of a certain vintage there’s a good chance you’ve never actually typed on a really nice keyboard. Those that didn’t start using computers until the mid-to-late 1990s most likely have always typed on modern mushy-key keyboards and never known the joy of typing on a really responsive and crisp mechanical keyboard. Is our preference for and love of mechanical keyboards shining through here? Good. We’re not even going to try and hide it. So where does the CODE keyboard stack up in pantheon of keyboards? Read on as we walk you through the simple setup and our experience using the CODE. Setting Up the CODE Keyboard Although the setup of the CODE keyboard is essentially plug and play, there are two distinct setup steps that you likely haven’t had to perform on a previous keyboard. Both highlight the degree of care put into the keyboard and the amount of customization available. Inside the box you’ll find the keyboard, a micro USB cable, a USB-to-PS2 adapter, and a tool which you may be unfamiliar with: a key puller. We’ll return to the key puller in a moment. Unlike the majority of keyboards on the market, the cord isn’t permanently affixed to the keyboard. What does this mean for you? Aside from the obvious need to plug it in yourself, it makes it dead simple to repair your own keyboard cord if it gets attacked by a pet, mangled in a mechanism on your desk, or otherwise damaged. It also makes it easy to take advantage of the cable routing channels in on the underside of the keyboard to  route your cable exactly where you want it. While we’re staring at the underside of the keyboard, check out those beefy rubber feet. By peripherals standards they’re huge (and there is six instead of the usual four). Once you plunk the keyboard down where you want it, it might as well be glued down the rubber feet work so well. After you’ve secured the cable and adjusted it to your liking, there is one more task  before plug the keyboard into the computer. On the bottom left-hand side of the keyboard, you’ll find a small recess in the plastic with some dip switches inside: The dip switches are there to switch hardware functions for various operating systems, keyboard layouts, and to enable/disable function keys. By toggling the dip switches you can change the keyboard from QWERTY mode to Dvorak mode and Colemak mode, the two most popular alternative keyboard configurations. You can also use the switches to enable Mac-functionality (for Command/Option keys). One of our favorite little toggles is the SW3 dip switch: you can disable the Caps Lock key; goodbye accidentally pressing Caps when you mean to press Shift. You can review the entire dip switch configuration chart here. The quick-start for Windows users is simple: double check that all the switches are in the off position (as seen in the photo above) and then simply toggle SW6 on to enable the media and backlighting function keys (this turns the menu key on the keyboard into a function key as typically found on laptop keyboards). After adjusting the dip switches to your liking, plug the keyboard into an open USB port on your computer (or into your PS/2 port using the included adapter). Design, Layout, and Backlighting The CODE keyboard comes in two flavors, a traditional 87-key layout (no number pad) and a traditional 104-key layout (number pad on the right hand side). We identify the layout as traditional because, despite some modern trapping and sneaky shortcuts, the actual form factor of the keyboard from the shape of the keys to the spacing and position is as classic as it comes. You won’t have to learn a new keyboard layout and spend weeks conditioning yourself to a smaller than normal backspace key or a PgUp/PgDn pair in an unconventional location. Just because the keyboard is very conventional in layout, however, doesn’t mean you’ll be missing modern amenities like media-control keys. The following additional functions are hidden in the F11, F12, Pause button, and the 2×6 grid formed by the Insert and Delete rows: keyboard illumination brightness, keyboard illumination on/off, mute, and then the typical play/pause, forward/backward, stop, and volume +/- in Insert and Delete rows, respectively. While we weren’t sure what we’d think of the function-key system at first (especially after retiring a Microsoft Sidewinder keyboard with a huge and easily accessible volume knob on it), it took less than a day for us to adapt to using the Fn key, located next to the right Ctrl key, to adjust our media playback on the fly. Keyboard backlighting is a largely hit-or-miss undertaking but the CODE keyboard nails it. Not only does it have pleasant and easily adjustable through-the-keys lighting but the key switches the keys themselves are attached to are mounted to a steel plate with white paint. Enough of the light reflects off the interior cavity of the keys and then diffuses across the white plate to provide nice even illumination in between the keys. Highlighting the steel plate beneath the keys brings us to the actual construction of the keyboard. It’s rock solid. The 87-key model, the one we tested, is 2.0 pounds. The 104-key is nearly a half pound heavier at 2.42 pounds. Between the steel plate, the extra-thick PCB board beneath the steel plate, and the thick ABS plastic housing, the keyboard has very solid feel to it. Combine that heft with the previously mentioned thick rubber feet and you have a tank-like keyboard that won’t budge a millimeter during normal use. Examining The Keys This is the section of the review the hardcore typists and keyboard ninjas have been waiting for. We’ve looked at the layout of the keyboard, we’ve looked at the general construction of it, but what about the actual keys? There are a wide variety of keyboard construction techniques but the vast majority of modern keyboards use a rubber-dome construction. The key is floated in a plastic frame over a rubber membrane that has a little rubber dome for each key. The press of the physical key compresses the rubber dome downwards and a little bit of conductive material on the inside of the dome’s apex connects with the circuit board. Despite the near ubiquity of the design, many people dislike it. The principal complaint is that dome keyboards require a complete compression to register a keystroke; keyboard designers and enthusiasts refer to this as “bottoming out”. In other words, the register the “b” key, you need to completely press that key down. As such it slows you down and requires additional pressure and movement that, over the course of tens of thousands of keystrokes, adds up to a whole lot of wasted time and fatigue. The CODE keyboard features key switches manufactured by Cherry, a company that has manufactured key switches since the 1960s. Specifically the CODE features Cherry MX Clear switches. These switches feature the same classic design of the other Cherry switches (such as the MX Blue and Brown switch lineups) but they are significantly quieter (yes this is a mechanical keyboard, but no, your neighbors won’t think you’re firing off a machine gun) as they lack the audible click found in most Cherry switches. This isn’t to say that they keyboard doesn’t have a nice audible key press sound when the key is fully depressed, but that the key mechanism isn’t doesn’t create a loud click sound when triggered. One of the great features of the Cherry MX clear is a tactile “bump” that indicates the key has been compressed enough to register the stroke. For touch typists the very subtle tactile feedback is a great indicator that you can move on to the next stroke and provides a welcome speed boost. Even if you’re not trying to break any word-per-minute records, that little bump when pressing the key is satisfying. The Cherry key switches, in addition to providing a much more pleasant typing experience, are also significantly more durable than dome-style key switch. Rubber dome switch membrane keyboards are typically rated for 5-10 million contacts whereas the Cherry mechanical switches are rated for 50 million contacts. You’d have to write the next War and Peace  and follow that up with A Tale of Two Cities: Zombie Edition, and then turn around and transcribe them both into a dozen different languages to even begin putting a tiny dent in the lifecycle of this keyboard. So what do the switches look like under the classicly styled keys? You can take a look yourself with the included key puller. Slide the loop between the keys and then gently beneath the key you wish to remove: Wiggle the key puller gently back and forth while exerting a gentle upward pressure to pop the key off; You can repeat the process for every key, if you ever find yourself needing to extract piles of cat hair, Cheeto dust, or other foreign objects from your keyboard. There it is, the naked switch, the source of that wonderful crisp action with the tactile bump on each keystroke. The last feature worthy of a mention is the N-key rollover functionality of the keyboard. This is a feature you simply won’t find on non-mechanical keyboards and even gaming keyboards typically only have any sort of key roller on the high-frequency keys like WASD. So what is N-key rollover and why do you care? On a typical mass-produced rubber-dome keyboard you cannot simultaneously press more than two keys as the third one doesn’t register. PS/2 keyboards allow for unlimited rollover (in other words you can’t out type the keyboard as all of your keystrokes, no matter how fast, will register); if you use the CODE keyboard with the PS/2 adapter you gain this ability. If you don’t use the PS/2 adapter and use the native USB, you still get 6-key rollover (and the CTRL, ALT, and SHIFT don’t count towards the 6) so realistically you still won’t be able to out type the computer as even the more finger twisting keyboard combos and high speed typing will still fall well within the 6-key rollover. The rollover absolutely doesn’t matter if you’re a slow hunt-and-peck typist, but if you’ve read this far into a keyboard review there’s a good chance that you’re a serious typist and that kind of quality construction and high-number key rollover is a fantastic feature.  The Good, The Bad, and the Verdict We’ve put the CODE keyboard through the paces, we’ve played games with it, typed articles with it, left lengthy comments on Reddit, and otherwise used and abused it like we would any other keyboard. The Good: The construction is rock solid. In an emergency, we’re confident we could use the keyboard as a blunt weapon (and then resume using it later in the day with no ill effect on the keyboard). The Cherry switches are an absolute pleasure to type on; the Clear variety found in the CODE keyboard offer a really nice middle-ground between the gun-shot clack of a louder mechanical switch and the quietness of a lesser-quality dome keyboard without sacrificing quality. Touch typists will love the subtle tactile bump feedback. Dip switch system makes it very easy for users on different systems and with different keyboard layout needs to switch between operating system and keyboard layouts. If you’re investing a chunk of change in a keyboard it’s nice to know you can take it with you to a different operating system or “upgrade” it to a new layout if you decide to take up Dvorak-style typing. The backlighting is perfect. You can adjust it from a barely-visible glow to a blazing light-up-the-room brightness. Whatever your intesity preference, the white-coated steel backplate does a great job diffusing the light between the keys. You can easily remove the keys for cleaning (or to rearrange the letters to support a new keyboard layout). The weight of the unit combined with the extra thick rubber feet keep it planted exactly where you place it on the desk. The Bad: While you’re getting your money’s worth, the $150 price tag is a shock when compared to the $20-60 price tags you find on lower-end keyboards. People used to large dedicated media keys independent of the traditional key layout (such as the large buttons and volume controls found on many modern keyboards) might be off put by the Fn-key style media controls on the CODE. The Verdict: The keyboard is clearly and heavily influenced by the needs of serious typists. Whether you’re a programmer, transcriptionist, or just somebody that wants to leave the lengthiest article comments the Internet has ever seen, the CODE keyboard offers a rock solid typing experience. Yes, $150 isn’t pocket change, but the quality of the CODE keyboard is so high and the typing experience is so enjoyable, you’re easily getting ten times the value you’d get out of purchasing a lesser keyboard. Even compared to other mechanical keyboards on the market, like the Das Keyboard, you’re still getting more for your money as other mechanical keyboards don’t come with the lovely-to-type-on Cherry MX Clear switches, back lighting, and hardware-based operating system keyboard layout switching. If it’s in your budget to upgrade your keyboard (especially if you’ve been slogging along with a low-end rubber-dome keyboard) there’s no good reason to not pickup a CODE keyboard. Key animation courtesy of Geekhack.org user Lethal Squirrel.       

    Read the article

  • Convert graph in to data points using Mechanical Turk?

    - by user224303
    I looked around but did not see anyone using Mechanical Turk for this. I've heard of the service, but never used it before. I need to take the following graph and digitize it so I get a list of data points for each line (noting that there are two Y-axes, and thus depends on which line we are talking about). This is pretty time consuming for me, and I saw other posts on StackOverflow about digitizing software doing a poor job at this. Would Mechanical Turk be well suited to my task? Here is the graph for reference: http://www.yourpicturehost.com/dyno_hbspeed.jpg

    Read the article

  • Knowing the selections made on a 'multichooser' box in a mechanical turk hit (using Command Line Too

    - by gveda
    Hi All, I am new to Amazon Mechanical Turk, and wanted to create a hit with a qualification task. I am using the command line tools interface. One of the questions in my qualification task involves users selecting a number of options. I use a 'multichooser' selection type. Now I want to grade the responses based on the selections, where each selection has a different score. So for example, s1 has a score of 5, s2 of 10, s3 of 6, and so on. If the user selects s1 and s3, he/she gets a score of 11. Unfortunately, doing something like the following does not work: <AnswerOption> <SelectionIdentifier>s1</SelectionIdentifier> <AnswerScore>5</AnswerScore> </AnswerOption> <AnswerOption> <SelectionIdentifier>s2</SelectionIdentifier> <AnswerScore>10</AnswerScore> </AnswerOption> <AnswerOption> <SelectionIdentifier>s3</SelectionIdentifier> <AnswerScore>6</AnswerScore> </AnswerOption> If I do this, when I select multiple things, I get a score of 0. If I select only one option, say s1, then I get the appropriate score. Can you please help me on how to go about this? I could ask the same question 5 times with the same options, but then users might choose the same answer multiple times - something I wish to avoid. Thanks! Gaurav

    Read the article

  • 6 Things You Shouldn’t Do With Solid-State Drives

    - by Chris Hoffman
    Solid-state drives are different from the mechanical, magnetic hard drives in wide use. Many of the things you’ve done with typical mechanical hard drives shouldn’t be done with newer solid-state drives. Solid-state drives are presented by the operating system the same way mechanical drives are, but they work differently. If you’re a geek, knowing what you shouldn’t do is important.    

    Read the article

  • How full is too full for mechanical hard drives?

    - by Sunny Molini
    I have heard many claim that it doesn't matter how full a drive is until it starts cutting into temp and virtual memory space. This doesn't make sense to me, given the nature of how the data is transacted on a hard drive. The inside of the platter presents less data per revolution than the outside of the drive does, by significant factors. The inside 40% of the radius of full size hard drive is used for the spindle, so only the outside 60% is used for data storage, but that still means that the inside track of a hard drive presents data 60% slower than the outside track. By my calculation, a Hard drive that is only 10% full should perform about 2.25 times faster than a hard drive that is 90% full, assuming that the flow is constrained by other factors. Am I wildly off base here? For all the drives I know, even the top speeds of the first 1% of the drive would be well within the bandwidth provided by a SATA 2 connection.

    Read the article

  • Is there a significant mechanical difference between these faux simulations of default parameters?

    - by ccomet
    C#4.0 introduced a very fancy and useful thing by allowing default parameters in methods. But C#3.0 doesn't. So if I want to simulate "default parameters", I have to create two of that method, one with those arguments and one without those arguments. There are two ways I could do this. Version A - Call the other method public string CutBetween(string str, string left, string right, bool inclusive) { return str.CutAfter(left, inclusive).CutBefore(right, inclusive); } public string CutBetween(string str, string left, string right) { return CutBetween(str, left, right, false); } Version B - Copy the method body public string CutBetween(string str, string left, string right, bool inclusive) { return str.CutAfter(left, inclusive).CutBefore(right, inclusive); } public string CutBetween(string str, string left, string right) { return str.CutAfter(left, false).CutBefore(right, false); } Is there any real difference between these? This isn't a question about optimization or resource usage or anything (though part of it is my general goal of remaining consistent), I don't even think there is any significant effect in picking one method or the other, but I find it wiser to ask about these things than perchance faultily assume.

    Read the article

  • Build .deb package from source, without installing it

    - by Mechanical snail
    Suppose I have an installer program or source tarball for some program I want to install. (There is no Debian package available.) First I want to create a .deb package out of it, in order to be able to cleanly remove the installed program in the future (see Uninstalling application built from source, If I build a package from source how can I uninstall or remove completely?). Also, installing using a package prevents it from clobbering files from other packages, which cannot be guaranteed if you run the installer or sudo make install. Checkinstall From reading the answers there and elsewhere, I gather the usual solution is to use checkinstall to build the package. Unfortunately, it seems checkinstall does not prevent make install from clobbering system files from other packages. For example, according to Reverting problems caused by checkinstall with gcc build: I created a Debian package from the install using sudo checkinstall -D make install. [...] I removed it using Synaptic Package Manager. As it turns out, [removing] the package checkinstall created from make install tried to remove every single file the installation process touched, including shared gcc libraries like /lib64/libgcc_s.so. I then tried to tell checkinstall to build the package without installing it, in the hope of bypassing the issue. I created a dummy Makefile: install: echo "Bogus" > /bin/qwertyuiop and ran sudo checkinstall --install=no. The file /bin/qwertyuiop was created, even though the package was not installed. In my case, I do not trust the installer / make install to not overwrite system files, so this use of checkinstall is ruled out. How can I build the package, without installing it or letting it touch system files? Is it possible to run Checkinstall in a fakechrooted debootstrap environment to achieve this? Preferably the build should be done as a normal user rather than root, which would prevent the process from overwriting system files if it goes wrong.

    Read the article

  • Why using the word "mechanism" in CS?

    - by Nick Rosencrantz
    I'm not sure about the usage of the word "mechanism" when in fact most of the time what is meant is an algorithm. For instance there's talk about Java's "thread-scheduling mechanism" - why not call it an algorithm and why borrow a term from mechanics where relations sometimes are the opposites than of computer science? I'm aware that an algorithm is considered a "mechanical solution" but is this really the case in fact when a lot of algorithm don't have mechanical representations for instance a file-sharing network that gets quicker and faster as the usage grows, that would be the reverse of a mechanical structure that would go slower when usage grows.

    Read the article

  • How do I convert my matrix from OpenGL to Marmalade?

    - by King Snail
    I am using a third party rendering API, Marmalade, on top of OpenGL code and I cannot get my matrices correct. One of the API's authors states this: We're right handed by default, and we treat y as up by convention. Since IwGx's coordinate system has (0,0) as the top left, you typically need a 180 degree rotation around Z in your view matrix. I think the viewer does this by default. In my OpenGL app I have access to the view and projection matrices separately. How can I convert them to fit the criteria used by my third party rendering API? I don't understand what they mean to rotate 180 degrees around Z, is that in the view matrix itself or something in the camera before making the view matrix. Any code would be helpful, thanks.

    Read the article

  • View matrix question (rotate by 180 degrees)

    - by King Snail
    I am using a third party rendering API on top of OpenGL code and I cannot get my matrices correct. The API states this: We're right handed by default, and we treat y as up by convention. Since IwGx's coordinate system has (0,0) as the top left, you typically need a 180 degree rotation around Z in your view matrix. I think the viewer does this by default. In my OpenGL app I have access to the view and projection matrices separately. How can I convert them to fit the criteria used by my third party rendering API? I don't understand what they mean to rotate 180 degrees around Z, is that in the view matrix itself or something in the camera before making the view matrix. Any code would be helpful, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Still about SSD potentials...write and read speed

    - by Macroideal
    I have been working on SSD (solid state disk) for several months..Problems and Questions hit my head unexpectedly..Coz i am a virgin in ssd... Especially these days I was testing the write-read speed of ssd, which I was always caring.... however result turned out not good as I expected, or even worse Three kinds of read-write were implemented in my test read and write directly from and into ssd, with openning ssd as a whole device. in windows: _open("\\:g", ***).. It can be very tricky and hairy that you'd write a data with size of folds of 512, at the disk position of folds of 512bytes... So, If you wanto write just a byte or 4 bytes, you'v to write at least a whole sector one time. Read and write data from and into files located in SSD... Read and Write data from and into files in mechanical Disk I compared the pratices below...I found ssd sucks...the ssd performs worse than mechanical disk... so i am wondering where i can get the potential performance of ssd, since ssd is said to a substitute for mechanical disk in the future.. Nevertheless, I test ssd with a pro-hard-disk tools..ssd is like twice speedier than mechanical disk. So, why?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >