161–170 of 379 posts
Moon landing 1969: 4 KB RAM for the guidance computer is enough. Moon landing 2026: Two instances of MS Outlook sort of started themselves on the guidance computer and we have no idea why.
2026: lol we just realized there's a few million lines of extra code running but we can't figure out why
The poor technicians having to RDP with (what I imagine must be) a horrible latency. Although still might be better than some corporate environments lol
The poor technicians having to RDP with (what I imagine must be) a horrible latency. Once or twice a month, I have to RDP (now "Microsoft Windows App!") into a Windows XP machine on the other side of the continent through a jump box and a dialup connection. Latency is bad, but not as terrible as you might think. The worst part is moving files between localhost and remote.
I think most of those tricks have been disabled in modern windows for better security (you don't want some guest user able to feed your not-so-robust awfully complex rendering code some malicious inputs...)
This talk about off-the-shelf hardware in space makes me wonder, given the clear line of sight, if it would be possible to detect their Wi-Fi access points' beacons from Earth. I'm not a "radio guy" and don't know if this would be impossible, simply on the basis of physics, due to the presumably low radiated power from the APs and the limitations of the size of typical antennas on the ground. (Obviously it's possible…
Probably not possible. Their Wi-Fi access point is inside the capsule, the capsule is made from metal and probably shielding the signal somewhat. Maybe even quite a lot if it's intended to provide some radiation shielding. Also it's low power as it only needs to work inside the capsule, at the given distances signal attenuation will make it almost impossible to pick up anything.
But yeah, this is basically it. We could detect the signal, but they simply aren't emitting a signal in the right direction for us to detect.
Wasn’t it Bill Gates’ dream that every coffee machine should run Windows? I guess he’s got his wish. Also, redundancy: Imagine going into space and then have no email! Can’t let that happen.
Moon landing 1969: 4 KB RAM for the guidance computer is enough. Moon landing 2026: Two instances of MS Outlook sort of started themselves on the guidance computer and we have no idea why.
1969: Every line of assembly code has been coded according to rigorous standards and vetted and reviewed by a panel of experts. 2026: lol we just realized there's a few million lines of extra code running but we can't figure out why
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents back and forth. To me that's probably much more interesting. We assume they have all this fancy NASA tech, probably some special communication protocols, but nope, email is fine. Still not sure why they'd use Outlook, but I guess it's easier than retraining astronauts on Alpine or Mutt. How long did the US military rely on mIRC... decades, maybe t…
I'd ask the opposite question. Why would they not use Outlook and instead use something like Alpine or Mutt? This is 2026, you know.
Everyone likes to point and laugh, sure, I'm getting a chuckle as well. However, on more practical level, what are other options? Outlook, the desktop application works really well with local copies, is pretty low bandwidth and very familiar to end users. IMAP with Thunderbird is probably only other option that would satisfy the requirements. EDIT: Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents…
I don't know why people are surprised by this. Using suitable off-the-shelf solutions for non-mission-critical purposes seems like a very reasonable thing to do. I'm recalling this from my memory of "The Space Above Us" podcast: There were various bespoke teleprinters sent up on early shuttle flights that had exciting failure modes (if I remember correctly one of them started smoking) and in at least a couple of case…
Everyone likes to point and laugh, sure, I'm getting a chuckle as well. However, on more practical level, what are other options? Outlook, the desktop application works really well with local copies, is pretty low bandwidth and very familiar to end users. IMAP with Thunderbird is probably only other option that would satisfy the requirements. EDIT: Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents…
I quit Outlook and went to Thunderbird when I upgraded my CPU and Microsoft told me I had to re-purchase Outlook when I had paid for a "lifetime license". That was the last straw for me. I installed Linux and Thunderbird and have not looked back at Windows.
I don't have Linux but you guys make it hard to like it.
Moon landing 1969: 4 KB RAM for the guidance computer is enough. Moon landing 2026: Two instances of MS Outlook sort of started themselves on the guidance computer and we have no idea why.
1969: Every line of assembly code has been coded according to rigorous standards and vetted and reviewed by a panel of experts. 2026: lol we just realized there's a few million lines of extra code running but we can't figure out why
2026: We filled up our 2 TB flash. How do we get another?
Everyone likes to point and laugh, sure, I'm getting a chuckle as well. However, on more practical level, what are other options? Outlook, the desktop application works really well with local copies, is pretty low bandwidth and very familiar to end users. IMAP with Thunderbird is probably only other option that would satisfy the requirements. EDIT: Yes they need to get email in space. It's easy way to send documents…