text:
Hall-of-Famer Brown Sees Suh as All-Pro; Smith Sees the Next Reggie White
Randy York's N-sider
To "Respond to Randy" click on the link below and choose "Randy York's N-Sider" under "Area of Interest" on the new screen. Please include your name and city/town/state and share your thoughts on the opinions expressed by four Nebraska legends about Ndamukong Suh.
Talk to Nebraska's four highest-draft choices in modern NFL history before Ndamukong Suh reached that same status Thursday night, and you come to two quick conclusions: 1) the Detroit Lions, even though they drafted second instead of first in the 2010 NFL Draft, got the best player in the draft; and 2) Suh is destined to become an even better pro player than he was in college.
Bob Brown, a six-time Pro Bowler and three-time NFL Offensive Lineman of the Year, predicts that Suh will become a perennial all-pro selection. Not surprisingly, Irving Fryar and Dean Steinkuhler are in wholesale agreement with Brown's observation.
Neil Smith, the only one of NU's four highest draftees who played defense, goes one step better than those three. He insists that Suh can be the second coming of Reggie White, the most-honored defensive end in NFL history.
We can't blame anyone for relying on Mel Kiper's insights for a mock draft, but please, do not discount these four Husker legends for their ability to go beyond the hype and into the future. Yes, they are a bit prejudiced. But before you dismiss the validity of their bullish views on how Suh can take the league by storm when he joins a struggling team, consider this: Smith, Brown, Fryar and Steinkuhler played a combined 48 years in the NFL, and they were honored a total of 20 times as Pro Bowlers.
Fryar, of course, is the only modern-day Husker to be drafted first in the entire NFL Draft. Brown, the only modern-day Husker to be inducted into both the College Football Hall of Fame and the Pro Football Hall of Fame, was drafted as a second choice in the first round – just like Steinkuhler was in 1984, Smith in 1988 and Suh on Thursday night.
"Suh reminds me so much of Reggie White. I see Reggie all over him," Smith said, knowing perfectly well that it's high praise to mention an NFL rookie in the same sentence with a 13-time Pro Bowler who is only 1.5 sacks behind Bruce Smith, the all-time NFL sack leader. White's 198.5 career sacks are 94 more than Smith had.
"I've done enough studying of Reggie to base my opinion on this," Smith said. "I see the same kind of heart, the same kind of work ethic, the same kind of overall athleticism. Reggie was big, but he could play any position on the line of scrimmage. Suh has the same capabilities. I know putting a rookie up there alongside a legend right now is saying a lot, but Ndamukong can be that same type of impact player."
Two First-Round D-Linemen Just Shook Their Heads
Smith came to that rather elevated analysis while sitting in the stands with fellow first-round Husker defensive lineman Danny Noonan, a former Dallas Cowboy. They sat in awe while watching Suh throw Texas quarterback Colt McCoy around like a rag doll in the Big 12 Championship Game.
"I had the Reggie White comparison in my head before that game," Smith said, "but I thought that game was his true stepping stone – his crossroad to greatness. I saw it as the statement game for him. It was a big stage, and big players show up in big games."
White, a.k.a. "The Minister of Defense", played big in all kinds of big games. "Reggie was one of the greatest players I've ever seen, pound for pound," Smith said. "He was very big, but also very agile with great strength, athletic ability and intelligence. He put the fear of God in people. Every time he lined up, he kept people guessing.
"Suh can create the same kind of fear in people," Smith said. "He can take over a game. He can be one of those players who can have the kind of impact that made this league what it was and still is."
Smith envisions Suh reaching all-pro status by his third season, just like he did, because it takes that long for almost all NFL linemen to have a breakthrough season. "It's not really fair for me as a defensive player to ask the question," Smith said, "but you might ask some offensive players what they would think if they had to prepare to block Ndamukong Suh. Ask them this: 'Would they be scared?'"
Well, as a matter of fact, we did ask one of the greatest pro football linemen ever that question, and Bob Brown, who has never been scared of anyone, said he would be very, very leery of facing a man like Suh.
"I like the kid because he's absolutely tenacious," Brown said. "I think he's not only going to be a great player in the league, but become a perennial all-pro. As a Nebraska alumnus, I like the idea of a guy who will no doubt go into the College Football Hall of Fame and has all the potential in the world to become a Pro Football Hall-of-Famer as well. Will Shields will be our next guy in that group. I'd like to think that Suh will follow suit and attract more players to Nebraska just like him."
Smith, Brown, Fryar and Steinkuhler all understand the need St. Louis had for a quarterback in the draft, but if they'd been the Rams' general manager, none would have bypassed Suh to take Oklahoma's Sam Bradford.
"Everybody needs a quarterback, but you have to stop people, too, and this kid is a real stopper," Brown said. "I don't watch that much college football, but I like to watch Suh. He's very, very aggressive, and that's what I believe in – attack and attack all day long.
Suh Reminds Brown of the Defensive Version of Himself
"Suh just keeps coming after you all the time – at the point of attack, in the backfield, even downfield," Brown said. "This kid is great now, and he's going to be even greater in the NFL. He just reminds me of a … a … well, he reminds me of a defensive ME. In my 10 years in the NFL, I thought I was the most aggressive lineman in the league. I was a product of Nebraska, and therefore, my job was to be the most physical player on the field. That's the way Suh plays. I love to watch the kid. His motor never quits."
Forget about Suh joining a struggling team in the Detroit Lions. "He's going to elevate the play of everyone around him," Brown said. "I see him beating the timetable and making all-pro by his second season, especially if he goes to training camp with the same attack mode he showed in college. Please tell Mr. Suh that there was one year when I played with the Eagles that we won only one game and lost 13, and I was the NFL Lineman of the Year. When you come from Nebraska, you bring it every play, every game, no matter what."
Fryar also envisions all-pro honors in Suh's future, but he'll wait on a timetable. "I know one thing," Fryar said. "Barring injury, Mr. Suh is going to have a long, successful, flourishing career in the NFL. He can definitely be an even better pro than college player because he has all the physical tools and the head to go with it.
"Pro coaches are always looking for guys who report to camp and want to get better," Fryar said. "They have enough people who have peaked out in college and want to just reap the rewards. I don't see that happening at all with Mr. Suh. He's a big deal and the real deal. He won't be any first-round bust by any stretch of the imagination."
Fryar says he's confident in making that statement because Suh's aggression will be one of his biggest assets as a pro. "I played 17 years in the NFL (as long as any other Husker player in history), and I have a philosophy. My philosophy is you have to be the hammer and not the nail," Fryar said. "Every guy eventually is going to be the nail as their career winds down. But as long as you deliver more blows than you absorb and be the hammer more than you are the nail, you're going to play a long time in this league, stay healthy and make a difference."
To Fryar, there is no doubt that Suh will be the hammer. "Oh, man," he said. "He's a difference maker, and offenses are going to have to game plan for him. They'll have to account for him because he's going to show up every play. He's going to warrant double teams and a lot of other attention, and that's what his coaches want … a defensive player that frees up your other players, even your whole defense, so the offense is on its heels instead of the other way around … like I said, be the hammer, not the nail."
Fryar, Steinkuhler Made NFL History Together
Steinkuhler agrees with his former teammate. In 1984, Houston made Steinkuhler the No. 2 choice in the first round after New England drafted Fryar first, marking only the second time in NFL history – and the first time in 17 years – that the top two players were drafted from the same school.
"I think Ndamukong will be an all-pro by his second season," Steinkuhler said. "Getting drafted by the Lions, he is going to see a lot more double teams than he has in the past. I agree that teams will have to game plan to stop Ndamukong, but that's an honor. Some of his best efforts might not show up in the stat books, but when it takes two guys to block you – and it does with him – that really says something."
Steinkuhler has a keen sense of Suh because one of his sons, former Husker captain Ty Steinkuhler, started alongside Suh in 2008. Another son, Baker, understudied Suh last season and is considered by many to be the one who will succeed Suh this fall.
"Both Ty and Baker have a great deal of respect for Ndamukong and rightfully so," Steinkuhler said. "They've watched him grow and mature and become a great player. They know he's gifted, but they also know how hard he worked to get where he is. It did not come easy. Nothing ever does. I'm sure there were many days when Ndamukong could have just said: 'I've done enough for the day, and I'm ready to go home.' But that's not how he practiced or how he played. He's shown both of my boys how hard you have to work, no matter how good you are.
"Personally, I don't know how anyone could have been drafted ahead of him," Steinkuhler said. "With his athletic skills, mindset and proven performance, he's almost as sure a thing as you're ever going to get. If I learned one thing in the NFL, it's not really how gifted you are athletically, it's how smart you become. Ndamukong has both working for him. He's always been very blessed with the physical talent. What I think is more important than that is that he will come to work every day ready to learn and ready to get better. And in my opinion, that's why the sky is the limit for him."
Voices from Husker Nation
I loved Suh's response last week in New York when some reporter asked him what he would say to a recruit who was thinking about visiting Nebraska. Suh told the reporter that he would encourage the recruit to visit Nebraska and everywhere else he planned to visit. Then, when he got done with all his visits, he would know why Nebraska is better, and he wouldn't have to ask anyone. I think that's the best recruiting pitch I've ever heard from any former player. I can't wait to get back to the Texas game and see what that weight room looks like with Suh's name on it. That should create another successful pitch to every recruit who will visit Nebraska in the future. Ri Edwards, Yuba City, California
We all know that the program still isn't where Bo wants it to be, but guys like Suh and coaches like the Pelinis are getting us there faster than any of us thought possible. Congrats to Suh for redefining Nebraska football and for the generosity he's shown to his adopted state. That weight room meant everything to him and his teammates. It also means a lot to fans because we got used to watching Nebraska beat people physically, even if we didn't always win the game. Thanks Bob, Irving, Dean, Neil and Ndamukong. You are all the best of Nebraska football! Craig Harris, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
The thing that struck me most, among many things, was the common threads of toughness and aggressiveness. All the former all-pros I had the privilege to see play in person mentioned those two things as the "Nebraska Way". As I see it, those attributes are rightly emphasized by the current coaching staff! That is why NU is on its way back to the type of program that we were before. John C Thomason, Creighton, Nebraska
"I remember reading about Bill McCartney speaking in Lincoln a couple years ago and telling Coach Osborne that no one feared Nebraska anymore because we were no longer known for being a physical team. That didn't just sadden Coach Osborne and Coach McCartney. We all hated to lose our identity, but look at Nebraska now. We're a physical team again. Just ask Oklahoma, Texas and Arizona. William Carrell, Ft. Collins, Colorado
You can see the link between the way Bob Brown, Irving Fryar, Dean Steinkuhler and Neil Smith described Nebraska football in the past and the direction they see Nebraska heading in the future. They know that Suh has been a big reason why we've returned to our roots. His highly physical style seemed to set a tone that fellow seniors like Larry Asante. Phillip Dillard and Matt O'Hanlon followed. They all played like Nebraska seniors used to play – like their hair was on fire. What a legacy they left for all current and future Blackshirts. Gene Samuelson, Rapid City, South Dakota
Great piece. It must be a lot of fun talking with Husker legends about the most recent legend. I'm with the guys who said, while they understand St. Louis needs a QB, to turn down the closest thing to a sure thing in the last 10 years is stupid. It reminds me of Peyton Manning's great - "If you don't pick me, I'll beat you for the next 15 years." St. Louis is going to hate seeing Detroit for a long time, and I'm a Rams fan. But I've become an overnight Lions fan. In fact, if my DVR could be programmed far enough ahead, I'd be setting it up for Lions' games today. Should be fun. I haven't followed Detroit since Cory Schlesinger left. When I remember that name, all I can think is tough as nails. Jeff Smith, Marietta, Georgia
Isn't it something when all of our own legends unite to support the emergence of another legend? The thing I read behind their own words is their desire for Suh to be the best yet. To me, that's tradition - guys wanting someone to be the new standard, so he can help bring in more just like him. Only in Nebraska can you see that kind of impassioned support from the players themselves. Makes you proud to be a Husker, doesn't it? Brad Sanderson, San Anontio, Texas


text:
Hello and welcome to Delaware Valley Labradoodles! We are a small, in-home breeder of multi-generation Australian Labradoodles. Seven years ago we started our program with Ruby and Chloe. It has been an amazing educational journey, and a true labor of love. We are located in rural Southeastern Pennsylvania just minutes from I95, making us convenient to Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and Virginia.
What an incredible breed! We are head over heels in love with these extraordinary dogs. The Australian Labradoodle originated down-under where a few kennels set out to produce hypo-allergenic guide and therapy dogs. The result was the ultimate family pet. These dogs are highly intelligent, athletic, affectionate, low to non-shedding, and low odor…what more could you need?!
Our promise to you, should you decide to adopt a puppy from us, is that we will never forget what a huge event this is in your life. We publish weekly pictures and send frequent emails from the time your puppy is born until you take them to your home. And we will be available to answer all of your questions. We stand behind our puppies and promise you a lifetime of support.
Our goal is to produce healthy Australian Labradoodles with wonderful temperaments. Our breeding girls and boys must pass a plethora of genetic health testing to give all of our puppies the best shot at a long healthy life (see our health warranty). All of our dogs live in loving guardian homes (their forever home) where they receive the affection and attention that all dogs deserve.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. Good luck in your search and let us know if we can be of any assistance.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
This picture embodies serenity and calm. Books to take me away and stimulate my mind. A soft bed of grass to lay down on in hazy light and breezes to play with my hair. Silence, wind, birds...the sound of nature moving around me as I fade away. This is tranquility.
— Jennifer of Bits of Beauty
(the photograph chosen by Jennifer is by Samantha Lamb)


text: BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (AP) Investigators are trying to determine a motive after multiple men in masks stormed a Central California apartment and opened fire, killing three men and wounding another.Kern County Sheriff's officials say the suspects fled on foot after Wednesday night's shooting in Bakersfield, and they remain at large. There also were children inside the apartment, but they were not hurt.The wounded man was listed in serious but stable condition.Sheriff's spokesman Ray Pruitt says investigators are still working to identify the suspects and determine what, if any, relationship they had with the victims.He identified the three men who were slain as 29-year-old Zephaniah Lee Matthews, 23-year-old Junior Alfonzo Contreras and 22-year-old Daniel Turrel Watkins. All three were pronounced dead at Kern Medical Center.


text:
This video tutorial illustrates the use of various Wardriving tools in Windows and Linux (NetStumbler, Kismet and Airsnort) as well as a brief explanation of warchalking. Its in Shockwave Flash format so make sure you have the view plugin installed. Please feel free to mirror it if you wish. Big thanks to the guys at Knoppix STD for making the great Linux boot CD I used for part of this tutorial. I'm just a beginner with Flash so please cut me some slack about the videos crudeness, Im learning. If you have any suggestions on how to make this tutorial better please email/ add your comments to this thread.
Click below to view:


text:
DCI Agent Testifies at Boe Attempted Murder Trial
PIERRE, S.D. (AP) - A state Division of Criminal Investigation agent testifying at the trial of a Fort Pierre man charged with attempted murder says that while a shotgun may not have been pointed directly at the victim, it was pointed near her.
KCCR radio reports that Chad Mosteller was one of several law enforcement agents to testify Wednesday during the first day of the trial for Derek Boe of Fort Pierre. Boe is accused of shooting out the window of a vehicle occupied by a 24-year-old Pierre woman on a Hughes County road in January, narrowly missing the woman with the shotgun blast.
Mosteller said investigators believe Boe and victim were the only two people at the scene when the shotgun was fired.
The trial is expected to last the rest of the week.
Copyright 2012 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. Material may not be redistributed.


text:
Play Pai Gow Tiles for Real Money or Free
House Way:
Loading, please wait . . .
Home › play for fun › Play Pai Gow Tiles for Real Money or Free
Last Updated: April 23, 2019
Copyright © 1998-2019 Wizard of Odds Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy.
Wizard of Odds uses cookies, this enables us to provide you with a personalised experience.More Info
Enter your email address below to subscribe to our weekly newsletter along with other special announcements from The Wizard of Odds!
Don't show this again


text:
The beloved and already meme-worthy iPhone 4S feature, Siri, is experiencing its first glitch. Twitter and the rest of the blogosphere are lighting up with reports that the voice control application is inaccessible, responding to requests by saying "Sorry, I am having trouble connecting to the network."
Siri works by connecting to Apple's servers to grab the information you need, and is a core feature of the iPhone 4S. In fact, the minimal refresh was nearly overshadowed by the virtual assistant technology that is integrated into the latest model alone. A Siri-less iPhone 4S is essentially an iPhone 4 with a better camera.
It's the first significant hiccup for the Siri technology, but it's come so soon after its release that users are likely anxious that they shelled out for an upgrade with core technology that has serious connectivity issues. The outages and spotty service began being reported nationwide around 11 a.m. PST this morning.
Apple has said that restarting your Wi-Fi connection and then your phone might do the trick, but hasn't promised that this isn't a network failure problem.
We experienced minor connection problems with Siri, asking the service to search the Web. The first time, we were told there were network errors. But other requests, and then a second go at Web searching were successful. That is, until we tried another iPhone 4S and were unable to connect (see screenshot at right).


text:
Here is the promised tutorial to make this cardigan in your size, with your yarn choice using knitware software to generate the pattern. A free demo is available to download here. The demo is fully functioning and will allow you to make the cardigan with any yarn, in any size but will not allow the pattern to be saved. The best way to save the pattern is to select all, copy and then paste into Word. I really like this program (no affiliation!) and I have purchased the full version (there are a few extra functions not available on the demo version) – I think it is worth every penny!
I will be using UK terminology in this pattern. If you are used to US terminology you will need to make the following substitutions
Double Crochet (UK) = Single Crochet (US)
Treble Crochet (UK) = Double Crochet (US)
Yarn requirements
I used approximately 300g of a DK weight Teo Handspun 100% alpaca yarn for a woman's size 36″ garment.
Hook size
When you have chosen your yarn, experiment with different hook sizes until you get a fabric with a nice drape – you will probably need a hook about 2mm larger than the recommended size for your yarn weight. I used a 6mm hook with DK weight yarn for my cardigan
Stitch Patterns (Important! – see notes above about terminology)
Main Stitch Pattern Row 1 : Double Crochet, Row 2: Treble Crochet
Eyelet Stitch Pattern: Two Treble Crochet in same stitch, Skip next stitch. Repeat to end of row
Tension/ Gauge
Crochet a Tension (Gauge) square about 6 x 6 inches in main stitch pattern using hook size to give desired drape. Measure number of stitches and rows over 4 inches. My gauge was 12 stitches x 10 rows.
Creating your pattern using Knitware
Open the program and select Pattern Design. You will need to use the following options
Choose desired size. I used Sex: Female, Name: Standard Women's 36
Select crochet for Working Method
Input your gauge in the Test Swatch Gauge
For style options select:
- Ease: Moderate
- Construction: Circular Top Down
- Body Style: Cardigan
- Body Shape: Straight
- Body Length: Waist
- Body Hem: No Hem
- Shouder Style: Round Yoke
- Sleeve Style: Modified Lantern
- Sleeve Length: Half
- Sleeve Hem: No Hem
- Collar Style: No Collar
You can also fill in information about your yarn type, and start and finish dates, but these are all optional.
Check the Finished Dimensions data and adjust if necessary. I wanted a slightly wider neckline so I increased the neckline slightly from 7.8 iches to 9 inches.
Click the pattern tab and your pattern will be generated. There is an option to estimate the yarn required, but I have found that this usually overestimates.
Once your pattern is generated you will need to make a few changes.
- The number in the starting chain doesn't include the skipped chains at the start of the row, so as I was using Double crochet, I added one extra chain to get the correct number of stitches
- For the yoke increases the pattern terminology is M1 – this means two stitches in the same stitch
- Add the Eyelet yoke stitch pattern about half way down the yoke instead of Row 2 of the main stitch pattern. My yoke had 22 rows and I added the Eyelet Yoke stitch pattern on row 14.
- When working the sleeves, instead of Chaining for the underarms, you can just work into the Chain stithes you made when separating the yoke.
- Ignore the finishing instructions! For my cardigan instead of fastening off when I finished the body, I worked double crochet in the round along front bands, neckline and hem for 3 rows. I made a button hole about half way down the yoke adjacent to the eyelet yoke stitch pattern row, by chaining 2 on the second row and then crocheting into the chain on the third row.
- If using full version you can save and print your pattern. The demo doesn't allow you to save the pattern, but you can copy and paste into Word if you want to save the pattern after printing
This pattern can be easily modified by using different stitch patterns, sleeve and body lengths etc.. A nice variation would be to put a few more openwork rows into the yoke – there are endless possibilities. Once you have divided the yoke, you can (and should) try the cardigan on to make sure you are happy with the fit.
Please let me know if there are any problems with this tutorial by leaving a comment, I will try to answer any questions as soon as possible.


text:
Jayan Kandathil has posted a really useful troubleshooting protocol for PDF Generator ES2 at the LiveCycle Product Blog. Here are the questions that Jayan suggests you consider while troubleshooting PDFG issues:
- Is the operating system Windows?
- Is the hardware sufficient?
- Is the memory sufficient?
- Is Microsoft Office installed (Windows only)?
- Did you start Microsoft Office applications after the install and dismiss all dialogs?
- Is Adobe Acrobat Professional 9 installed (Windows only)?
- Is OpenOffice.org installed (Linux or Solaris only)?
- Is the 'Print Spooler' service running?
- Is the 'Adobe PDF' printer set as the default printer?
- Did you start Acrobat Professional after the install and dismiss all dialogs?
- Which Windows user's credentials is PDF Generator running with?
- Does the PDFGen.api file exist in the \Acrobat\plug_ins\ folder?
- Is the System Readiness Tool happy?
For the complete blog post, visit this URL.


text:
Vision Our vision of "being the first in exploring new techniques and serving next generation applications of micro and nano fabrication technologies" enables our customers to successfully commercialize their new product-ideas. This ensures continuous effective development and economic stability.
Our philosophy is invent – innovate – implement
invent - There are no limits; only limiting thoughts. Always one step ahead, we push the limits and are at the forefront of setting new standards. We open new paths to the visions of tomorrow. With our equipment and processes, we constantly bring to market emerging applications and develop new technologies in partnership with our customers.
innovate - Innovation is dedication and superior competence. Faster than others, we develop new technologies and processes through constant innovation and continuous improvement.Achieving the shortest time lapse between R&D and small-scale production is among our targets. We support our customers in reducing the time it takes to get their products to market. Our creativity and decades of experience enable us not only to meet, but also to outperform the most complex challenges of our customers.
implement - Reliability is the demand. Consistently high, trustworthy performance is our response. Our equipment is designed for high volume industrial production. We implement cost efficient large-scale manufacturing technologies for new value-added products to supply our customers' industries.
As a reliable partner with a high degree of application know-how, we guarantee a high level of security through the optimized system performance of our qualified process solutions. We counter the cost factors of uptime and throughput through our proactive approach, while ensuring the highest levels of performance and quality.
EV Group Partners with NSI to Enable First Wafer-Level Heterogeneous Integration of GaAs on Silicon for RF Front-End Module Manufacturing
more news ..
Imec Technology Forum 2019
more events ..
Technical Papers
Solutions for R&D
Product Range Brochure
EV Group Corporate Video


text:
Bacterial vaginosis
is a mild infection of the
of "good" bacteria and some "bad" bacteria in the vagina. The good types help
control the growth of the bad types. In women with bacterial vaginosis, the
balance is upset. There are not enough good bacteria and too many bad
Bacterial vaginosis is usually a mild problem that may
go away on its own in a few days. But it can lead to more serious problems. So
it's a good idea to see your doctor and get treatment.
Experts are not
sure what causes the bacteria in the vagina to get out of balance. But certain
things make it more likely to happen. Your risk of getting bacterial vaginosis
is higher if you:
You may be able to avoid bacterial vaginosis if you limit
your number of sex partners and don't douche or smoke.
vaginosis is more common in women who are sexually active. But it can occur if you are not sexually active as well.
The most common symptom is
a smelly vaginal discharge. It may look grayish white or yellow. A sign of
bacterial vaginosis can be a "fishy" smell, which may be worse after sex. About
half of women who have bacterial vaginosis do not notice any symptoms.
Many things can cause abnormal vaginal discharge, including some sexually
transmitted infections (STIs). See your doctor so you can be tested and get the
right treatment.
diagnose bacterial vaginosis by asking about the symptoms, doing a
pelvic exam, and taking a sample of the vaginal
discharge. The sample can be tested to find out if you have bacterial
Bacterial vaginosis usually does not cause other health problems. But in some cases it
can lead to serious problems.
Doctors usually prescribe an
antibiotic to treat bacterial vaginosis. They come as pills you swallow or
as a cream or capsules (called ovules) that you put in your vagina. If you are
pregnant, you will need to take pills.
Bacterial vaginosis
usually clears up in 2 or 3 days with antibiotics, but treatment goes on for 7
days. Do not stop using your medicine just because your symptoms are better. Be sure to take the full course of antibiotics.
Antibiotics usually work well and have few side effects.
But taking them can lead to a
vaginal yeast infection. A yeast infection can cause
itching, redness, and a lumpy, white discharge. If you have these symptoms,
talk to your doctor about what to do.
Learning about bacterial vaginosis:
Being diagnosed:
Getting treatment:
Bacterial vaginosis is caused by an imbalance of the organisms (flora) that
naturally exist in the
vagina. Normally, about 95% of vaginal flora are
lactobacillus bacteria. (These types are unique to humans, different from the
lactobacillus in yogurt.) These lactobacilli help keep the vaginal
pH level low and prevent overgrowth of other types of
organisms. Women with bacterial vaginosis have fewer lactobacillus organisms
than normal and more of other types of bacteria. Experts do not yet understand what causes this imbalance.
Although the
specific cause isn't known, a number of health and lifestyle factors have been
linked to bacterial vaginosis. For more information, see What Increases
Your Risk.
Many women with bacterial vaginosis do not have any symptoms. Bacterial vaginosis does not typically cause itching. But it
does cause:
Other conditions with similar symptoms include some
sexually transmitted infections (especially
trichomoniasis, chlamydia, and gonorrhea)
vaginal yeast infection.
Bacterial vaginosis often clears up on its own. But in
some women it doesn't go away on its own. And for many women it comes back
after it has cleared up. Antibiotic treatment works for some women but not
Your risk of complications from
bacterial vaginosis is higher:
Things that increase your
risk of getting
bacterial vaginosis include:
Although bacterial vaginosis can be triggered by or get
worse from sexual activity, it does not appear to be an infection that is
passed from man to woman. So experts do not consider bacterial
vaginosis to be a male-female sexually transmitted infection. Bacterial vaginosis may be passed from woman to woman during sexual contact.
Bacterial vaginosis can be hard to distinguish from other types of vaginal
infection. Consider the following if you have any signs of vaginal
Call your doctor immediately if
Call your doctor for an appointment within 1 week if
If you have not been diagnosed with bacterial vaginosis but
you have symptoms that concern you, see:
It's generally recommended that you contact or
see your doctor about unusual vaginal symptoms.
If your
symptoms are due to a
sexually transmitted infection (STI) and not bacterial
vaginosis, you may infect a sex partner if you delay treatment. You may also
develop more serious complications of STIs such as
pelvic inflammatory disease (PID).
Doctors who can diagnose and treat bacterial vaginosis
To prepare for your appointment, see the topic Making the Most of Your Appointment.
Your doctor may test you for
bacterial vaginosis if you:
Your doctor can diagnose bacterial vaginosis based on your
history of symptoms, a
vaginal exam, and a sample of the vaginal
Laboratory tests to detect signs of bacterial vaginosis may include:
The presence of clue cells, an increased vaginal pH,
and a positive whiff test are enough evidence to treat for bacterial vaginosis.
Bacterial vaginosis may be found during a pelvic exam.
Treatment for
bacterial vaginosis includes antibiotic medicine (oral or vaginal). Antibiotics kill the problem bacteria causing bacterial vaginosis symptoms. But symptoms often come back after antibiotic treatment.
For some women, bacterial vaginosis goes away without
treatment. But when it does not go away even with treatment, bacterial
vaginosis is frustrating and troublesome. Bacterial vaginosis makes the reproductive tract vulnerable
to infection or inflammation. So your doctor will test and treat you with antibiotics for
bacterial vaginosis if you are:
Talk to your doctor about whether testing is right for
If your
doctor finds other problems during the exam, such as a possible sexually transmitted infection (STI), appropriate
treatment will be recommended.
To help prevent
bacterial vaginosis:
Bacterial vaginosis may be passed between women during
sexual contact. If you have a female sex partner, you may benefit from using
protection and carefully washing shared sex toys.
Bacterial vaginosis is generally not considered a
sexually transmitted infection (STI). But if you are
exposed to an STI while you have bacterial vaginosis, you are more likely to get that infection.
It is always
important to
practice safer sex to prevent sexually transmitted infections, whether or not you have bacterial vaginosis. Preventing an STI is easier than treating an infection after it occurs.
Some women have used
Lactobacillus acidophilus in yogurt or supplements to
bacterial vaginosis. But dairy lactobacillus does not
work for bacterial vaginosis. This is because dairy lactobacillus is not the
kind of bacteria that normally live in the vagina.
More research is needed to find out if the types of lactobacillus normally found in a healthy vagina may work to treat bacterial vaginosis.
antibiotics metronidazole (such as Flagyl and MetroGel),
clindamycin (such as Cleocin and Clindesse), and tinidazole (such as Tindamax) are used to
bacterial vaginosis. Depending on the antibiotic you
are prescribed, you may take it by mouth or use it vaginally.
During pregnancy, women are usually prescribed oral medicine.
When considering
treatment for bacterial vaginosis, ask your doctor whether you should:
The oil in clindamycin cream and ovules can weaken latex. This means condoms and diaphragms may break, and you may not be protected from STIs or pregnancy.
Other Works ConsultedAbramowicz M (2010). Drugs for sexually transmitted infections. Treatment Guidelines From The Medical Letter, 8(95): 53-60. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2006, reaffirmed 2011). Vaginitis. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 72. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 107(5): 1195-1206.Bornstein J (2013). Benign disorders of the vulva and vagina. In AH DeCherney et al., eds., Current Diagnosis and Treatment Obstetrics and Gynecology, 11th ed., pp. 620-645. New York: McGraw-Hill. Eckert LO, Lentz GM (2012). Infections of the lower and upper genital tracts: Vulva, vagina, cervix, toxic shock syndromes, endometriosis, and salpingitis. In GM Lentz et al., eds., Comprehensive Gynecology, 6th ed., pp. 519-559. Philadelphia: Mosby.Mackay G (2013). Sexually transmitted diseases and pelvic infections. In AH DeCherney et al., eds., Current Diagnosis and Treatment Obstetrics and Gynecology, 11th ed., pp. 701-731. New York: McGraw-Hill.Marrazzo J, Sobel J (2010). Vaginal infections. In SA Morse et al., eds., Atlas of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and AIDS, 4th ed., pp. 76-85. Philadelphia: Saunders.Soper DE (2012). Genitourinary infections and sexually transmitted diseases. In JS Berek, ed., Berek and Novak's Gynecology, 15th ed., pp. 557-573. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
ByHealthwise StaffPrimary Medical ReviewerSarah Marshall, MD - Family MedicineKathleen Romito, MD - Family MedicineSpecialist Medical ReviewerDevika Singh, MD, MPH - Infectious Disease
Current as ofOctober 13, 2016
Next Section:
Previous Section:
Current as of:
October 13, 2016
Healthwise Staff
Medical Review:
Sarah Marshall, MD - Family Medicine & Kathleen Romito, MD - Family Medicine & Devika Singh, MD, MPH - Infectious Disease
This information does not replace the advice of a doctor. Healthwise, Incorporated, disclaims any warranty or liability for your use of this information. Your use of this information means that you agree to the Terms of Use. Learn how we develop our content.
To learn more about Healthwise, visit Healthwise.org.
© 1995-2017 Healthwise, Incorporated. Healthwise, Healthwise for every health decision, and the Healthwise logo are trademarks of Healthwise, Incorporated.
Last modified on: 8 September 2017


text:
Your list is empty.
Save musicians, entertainers, speakers, and services, and they'll appear here.
Party Buses Near You
Want to celebrate with your bridal party as you go from your wedding venue to the rockin' reception? Do you and your crew want to party it up as you travel from point A to point B? Here's the answer: Party Bus! Let the venue know that the party has arrived as soon as your bus rolls up to the door!
Where do you need a Party Bus?
About booking Party Buses
Compare and rent a Party Bus to be the transportation for wedding, party or special event on GigSalad, the event planner's resource.
A party bus is the perfect answer if you have a large group of people that a limousine can't accommodate. A party bus also gives you and your fellow party-goers the opportunity to stand up and mingle or even dance a bit while en route. Many party bus companies will offer extra amenities like champagne bottle service, freedom of music, TVs, and more.
Party Buses around Ashburn, VA:
Royal Express(0)
Party Bus
Washington, DC
Our mission is to provide the finest transportation service available, without compromise. Each and every one…
Best Ride Limousine(0)
Party Bus
Laurel, MD
Best Ride Limousine is one of most reliable and respected named in luxury ground transposition in Washington…
Party Buses for hire across the U.S. and Canada:
United States:
- Alabama
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- District Of Columbia
- Florida
- Georgia
- Illinois
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New York
- North Carolina
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- Wyoming
You might also like:
Want more Party Bus gigs?
If you provide Party Bus services in the United States or Canada, get more gigs by joining GigSalad.


text:
Military technology, range of weapons, equipment, structures, and vehicles used specifically for the purpose of warfare. It includes the knowledge required to construct such technology, to employ it in combat, and to repair and replenish it.
The technology of war may be divided into five categories. Offensive arms harm the enemy, while defensive weapons ward off offensive blows. Transportation technology moves soldiers and weaponry; communications coordinate the movements of armed forces; and sensors detect forces and guide weaponry.
From the earliest times, a critical relationship has existed between military technology, the tactics of its employment, and the psychological factors that bind its users into units. Success in combat, the sine qua non of military organizations and the ultimate purpose of military technology, depends on the ability of the combatant group to coordinate the actions of its members in a tactically effective manner. This coordination is a function of the strength of the forces that bind the unit together, inducing its members to set aside their individual interests—even life itself—for the welfare of the group. These forces, in turn, are directly affected both by tactics and by technology.
The influence of technology can be either positive or negative. The experience of the ancient Greek hoplite infantrymen is one example of positive influence. Their arms and armour were most effective for fighting in close formation, which led in turn to marching in step, which further augmented cohesion and made the phalanx a tactically formidable formation. The late medieval knight offers an example of the negative influence of technology. To wield his sword and lance effectively, he and his charger needed considerable space, yet his closed helmet made communication with his fellows extremely difficult. It is not surprising, then, that knights of the late Middle Ages tended to fight as individuals and were often defeated by cohesive units of less well-equipped opponents.
This article traces the development of military technology by historical period, from prehistory to the 18th century. For a discussion of modern military technology, see small arm, artillery, rocket and missile system, nuclear weapon, chemical warfare, biological warfare, fortification, tank, naval ship, submarine, military aircraft, warning system, and military communication.
A general treatment of the actual waging of war is found in war, with more specific discussions appearing in such articles as strategy, tactics, and logistics. The social sciences of war, such as economics, law, and the theory of its origins, are also covered in that article. For a military history of World Wars I and II, see World War I and World War II.
Warfare requires the use of technologies that also have nonmilitary applications. For descriptions of the propulsion systems used in military vehicles, ships, aircraft, and missiles, see energy conversion; for the manufacture of explosives, see explosives. The principles of radar, and its military applications, are covered in radar. For the principles of aircraft flight, see airplane.
General considerations
In the remote past, the diffusion of military technology was gradual and uneven. There were several reasons for this. First, transport was slow and its capacity small. Second, the technology of agriculture was no more advanced than that of war, so that, with most of their energy devoted to feeding themselves and with little economic surplus, people had few resources available for specialized military technology. Low economic development meant that even the benefits of conquest would not pay off a heavy investment in weaponry. Third, and most important, the absolute level of technological development was low. A heavy dependence on human muscle was the principal cause and a major effect of this low level of development. With human ingenuity bound by the constraints of the human body, both technology and tactics were heavily shaped by geography, climate, and topography.
The importance of geographic and topographic factors, along with limited means of communication and transportation, meant that separate geographic regions tended to develop unique military technologies. Such areas are called military ecospheres. The boundaries of a military ecosphere might be physical barriers, such as oceans or mountain ranges; they might also be changes in the military topography, that combination of terrain, vegetation, and man-made features that could render a particular technology or tactic effective or ineffective.
Until the late 15th century ce, when advances in transportation technology broke down the barriers between them, the world contained a number of military ecospheres. The most clearly defined of these were based in Mesoamerica, Japan, India–Southeast Asia, China, and Europe. (In this context, Europe includes all of the Mediterranean basin and the watershed of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.) With the appearance of the horse archer in late antiquity, the Eurasian Steppe became a well-defined military ecosphere as well.
Those ecospheres with the most enduring impact on the technology of war were the European and Chinese. Though Japan possessed a distinctive, coherent, and effective military technology, it had little influence on developments elsewhere. India–Southeast Asia and Mesoamerica developed technologies that were well adapted to local conditions, but they were not particularly advanced. The Eurasian Steppe was a special case: usually serving as an avenue for a limited exchange of knowledge between Europe and China, in the late classical and medieval eras of Europe it developed an indigenous military technology based on the horse and composite recurved bow that challenged Europe and ultimately conquered China.
Improved methods of transportation and warfare led to the eventual disappearance of the regional ecospheres and their absorption into the European ecosphere. This process began in the 12th century with the Mongol conquest of China and invasions of Europe, and it quickened and assumed a more pronounced European flavour in the 15th and 16th centuries with the development of oceangoing ships armed with gunpowder weapons.
Because European methods of warfare ultimately dominated the world, and because the technology of war, with few exceptions, advanced first and fastest in Europe, this article devotes most of its attention to the European military ecosphere. It traces the technology of land war in that ecosphere from Stone Age weapons to the early guns. For reasons of continuity, warships from before the gunpowder era are discussed with modern naval ships and craft in the article naval ship.
The earliest military weapons
The earliest evidence for a specialized technology of war dates from the period before knowledge of metalworking had been acquired. The stone walls of Jericho, which date from about 8000 bce, represent the first technology that can be ascribed unequivocally to purely military purposes. These walls, at least 13 feet (4 metres) in height and backed by a watchtower or redoubt some 28 feet tall, were clearly intended to protect the settlement and its water supply from human intruders.
When the defenses of Jericho were built, humans already had been using the weapons of the hunt for millennia; the earliest stone tools are hundreds of thousands of years old, and the first arrowheads date to more than 60,000 years ago. Hunting tools—the spear-thrower (atlatl), the simple bow, the javelin, and the sling—had serious military potential, but the first known implements designed purposely as offensive weapons were maces dating from the Chalcolithic Period or early Bronze Age. The mace was a simple rock, shaped for the hand and intended to smash bone and flesh, to which a handle had been added to increase the velocity and force of the blow.
It is evident that the technical problems of hafting a stone onto a handle were not easily solved. Well-made maces were for a long time few in number and were, by and large, wielded only by champions and rulers. The earliest known inscription identifying a historical personage by name is on the palette of King Narmer, a small, low-relief slate sculpture dating from about 3100 bce. The palette depicts Menes, the first pharaoh of a unified Egypt, ritually smashing the forehead of an enemy with a mace.
The advent of the mace as a purposely designed offensive weapon opened the door to the conscious innovation of specialized military technology. By the middle of the 3rd millennium bce, mace heads were being cast of copper, first in Mesopotamia and then in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. The copper mace head, yielding higher density and greater crushing power, represents one of the earliest significant uses of metal for other than ornamental purposes.
From precious metals to base metals
The dividing line between the utilitarian and the symbolic in warfare has never been clear and unequivocal, and this line is particularly difficult to find in the design and construction of early weaponry. The engineering principles that dictated functional effectiveness were not understood in any systematic fashion, yet the psychological reality of victory or defeat was starkly evident. The result was an "unscientific" approach to warfare and technology, in which materials appear to have been applied to military purposes as much for their presumed mystical or magical properties as for their functional worth.
This overlapping of symbolism and usefulness is most evident in the smith's choice of materials. Ornaments and ceremonial artifacts aside, metalworking was applied to the production of weaponry as early as, or earlier than, any other economically significant pursuit. Precious metals, with their low melting points and great malleability, were worked first; next came copper—at first pure, then alloyed with arsenic or tin to produce bronze—and then iron. A remarkable phenomenon was the persistence of weaponry made of the soft, rare metals, such as gold, silver, and electrum (a naturally occurring alloy of gold and silver), long after mechanically superior materials had become available. Although they were functionally inferior to bronze or copper, precious metals were widely valued for their mystical or symbolic importance, and smiths continued to make weapons of them long after they had mastered the working of functionally superior base metals. Some of these weapons were plainly ceremonial, but in other cases they appear to have been functional. For example, helmets and body armour of electrum, which were probably intended for actual use, have been found in Egyptian and Mesopotamian burials dating from the 2nd and 3rd millennia bce.
Antiquity and the classical age, c. 1000 bce–400 ce
From the appearance of iron weaponry in quantity during late antiquity until the fall of Rome, the means with which war was waged and the manner in which it was conducted displayed many enduring characteristics that gave the period surprising unity. Prominent features of that unity were a continuity in the design of individual weaponry, a relative lack of change in transportation technology, and an enduring tactical dominance of heavy infantry.
Perhaps the strongest underlying technological feature of the period was the heavy reliance on human muscle, which retained a tactical primacy that contrasted starkly with medieval times, when the application of horse power became a prime ingredient of victory. (There were two major, if partial, exceptions to this prevailing feature: the success of horse archers in the great Eurasian Steppe during late classical times and the decisive use in the 4th century bce of shock cavalry by the armies of Philip II of Macedon and his son Alexander the Great. However, the defeat of Roman legions by Parthian horse archers at Carrhae in western Mesopotamia in 53 bce marked merely a shifting of boundaries between ecospheres on topographical grounds rather than any fundamental change within the core of the European ecosphere itself. Also, the shock cavalry of Philip and Alexander was an exception so rare as to prove the rule; moreover, their decisiveness was made possible by the power of the Macedonian infantry phalanx.) Heavy infantry remained the dominant European military institution until it was overthrown in the 4th century ce by a system of war in which shock cavalry played the central role.
Classical technologists never developed an efficient means of applying animal traction to haulage on land, no doubt because agricultural resources in even the most advanced areas were incapable of supporting meaningful numbers of horses powerful enough to make the effort worthwhile. Carts were heavy and easily broken, and the throat-and-girth harness for horses, mules, and donkeys put pressure on the animals' windpipes and neck veins, severely restricting the amount they could pull. The yoke-and-pole harness for oxen was relatively efficient and oxen could pull heavy loads, but they were extremely slow. A human porter, on the other hand, was just as efficient as a pack horse in weight carried per unit of food consumed. The best recipe for mobility, therefore, was to restrict pack animals to the minimum needed for carrying bulky items such as essential rations, tents, and firewood, to use carts only for items such as siege engines that could be carried in no other way, and to require soldiers to carry all their personal equipment and some of their food.
On the other hand, mastery of wood and bronze for military purposes reached a level during this period that was seldom, if ever, attained afterward. Surviving patterns for the Roman military boot, the caliga, suggest equally high standards of craftsmanship in leatherworking, and the standards of carpentry displayed on classical ships were almost impossibly high when measured against those of later eras.
Defensive weaponry
The design and production of individual defensive equipment was restricted by the shape of the human form that it had to protect; at the same time, it placed heavy demands on the smith's skills. The large areas to be protected, restrictions on the weight that a combatant could carry, the difficulty of forging metal into the complex contours required, and cost all conspired to force constant change.
The technology of defensive weapons was rarely static. Evidence exists of an ancient contest between offensive and defensive weaponry, with defensive weaponry at first leading the way. By 3000 bce Mesopotamian smiths had learned to craft helmets of copper-and-arsenic bronze, which, no doubt worn with a well-padded leather lining, largely neutralized the offensive advantages of the mace. By 2500 bce the Sumerians were making helmets of bronze, along with bronze spearheads and ax blades. The weapon smiths' initial response to the helmet was to augment the crushing power of the mace by casting the head in an ellipsoidal form that concentrated more force at the point of impact. Then, as technical competence increased, the ellipsoidal head became a cutting edge, and by this process the mace evolved into the ax. The contest between mace and helmet initiated a contest between offensive and defensive technology that continued throughout history.
The helmet, though arguably the earliest focus of the armourer's craft, was one of the most demanding challenges. Forging an integral, one-piece dome of metal capable of covering the entire head was extremely difficult. The Corinthian Greek helmet, a deep bowl-shaped helmet of carefully graduated thickness forged from a single piece of bronze, probably represented the functional as well as aesthetic apex of the bronze worker's art. Many classical Greek helmets of bronze were joined by a seam down the crown.
Iron helmets followed the evolution of iron mail, itself a sophisticated and relatively late development. The legionnaire of the early Roman Republic wore a helmet of bronze, while his successor in the Empire of the 1st century ce wore one of iron.
Shields were used for hunting long before they were used for warfare, partly for defense and partly for concealment in stalking game, and it is likely that the military shield evolved from that of the hunter and herdsman. The size and composition of shields varied greatly, depending on the tactical demands of the user. In general, the more effective the protection afforded by body armour, the smaller the shield; similarly, the longer the reach of the soldier's weapon, the smaller his shield. The Greek hoplite, a heavy infantryman who fought in closely packed formation, acquired his name from the hoplon, a convex circular shield, approximately 3 feet (90 cm) in diameter, made of composite wood and bronze. It was carried on the left arm by means of a bronze strap that passed across the forearm and a rope looped around the inner rim with sufficient slack to be gripped in the fist. In the 4th century bce the soldier of the Roman Republic, who fought primarily with the spear, carried an oval shield, while the later imperial legionnaire, who closed in with a short sword, protected himself with the scutum, a large cylindrical shield of leather-clad wood that covered most of his body.
Body armour
Padded garments, and perhaps armour of hardened leather, preceded edged metal weapons. It was then a logical, if expensive, step to cast or forge small metal plates and sew them onto a protective garment. These provided real protection against arrow, spear, or mace, and the small scales, perforated for attachment, were a far less demanding technical challenge than even the simplest helmet. Armour of overlapping scales of bronze, laced together or sewn onto a backing of padded fabric, is well represented in pictorial evidence and burial items from Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Egypt from about 1500 bce, though its use was probably restricted to a small elite.
By classical times, breastplates of bronze, at first beaten and then cast to the warrior's individual shape, had become commonplace among heavy infantry and elite cavalry. Greaves, defenses for the lower leg, closely followed the breastplate. At first these were forged of bronze plates; some classical Greek examples were cast to such fine tolerances that they sprang open and could be snapped onto the calf. Defenses for more remote portions of the body, such as vambraces for the forearm and defenses for the ankle resembling spats, were included in Greek temple dedications, but they were probably not common in field service.
Bronze was the most common metal for body defenses well into the Iron Age, a consequence of the fact that it could be worked in large pieces without extended hand forging and careful tempering, while iron had to be forged from relatively small billets.
The first practical body armour of iron was mail, which made its appearance in Hellenistic times but became common only during the Roman Imperial period. (Bronze mail was impractical because of the insufficient strength of the alloy.) Mail, or chain mail, was made of small rings of iron, typically of one-half-inch diameter or less, linked into a protective fabric. The rings were fastened together in patterns of varying complexity depending on the degree of protection desired; in general, smaller, lighter rings fastened in dense, overlapping patterns meant lighter, better protection. The fabrication of mail was extremely labour-intensive. The earliest mail was made of hand-forged links, each individual link riveted together. Later, armourers used punches of hardened iron to cut rings from sheets: this reduced the labour involved and, hence, the cost.
The earliest evidence of mail is depicted on Greek sculpture and friezes dating from the 3rd century bce, though this kind of protection might be considerably older (there is some evidence that it might be of Celtic origin). Little else is known about the use of mail by the Greeks, but the Roman legionnaire was equipped with a lorica hamata, a mail shirt, from a very early date. Mail was extremely flexible and provided good protection against cutting and piercing weapons. Its main disadvantage was its weight, which tended to hang from the shoulders and waist. In addition, strips of mail tended to curl at the edges; the Romans solved this problem by lacing mail shoulder defenses to leather plates. In the 1st century ce the legionnaire's mail shirt gave way to a segmented iron torso defense, the lorica segmentata.
Plate-iron armour
While some early forged bronze armour was technically plate, the introduction of the lorica segmentata heralded the production of practical plate armour on a large scale. In general, the term plate would imply a uniform thickness of metal, and only iron could provide reasonably effective protection with uniform thickness without excessive weight.
While the Republican legionnaire's lorica hamata hung to the midthigh, his imperial successor's lorica segmentata covered only the shoulders and torso. On the whole, classical plate armour probably provided better protection against smashing and heavy piercing blows, while a shirt of well-made mail covered more of the body and, hence, afforded better protection against slashing blows and missiles.
Offensive weaponry
Development of the offensive technology of war was not as constrained by technological and economic limitations as was defensive weaponry. Every significant offensive weapon was widely available, while defensive equipment of high quality was almost always confined to the elite. Perhaps as a consequence, a wide variety of individual offensive weapons appeared in antiquity. One of the most striking facets of ancient military technology is the early date by which individual weapons attained their form and the longevity of early offensive weapons concepts. Some of the weapons of antiquity disappeared as practical military implements in classical and medieval times, and all underwent modification, but, with the exception of the halberd and crossbow, virtually every significant pre-gunpowder weapon was known in antiquity.
The ax
Limitations on the strength of bronze and difficulties in casting and hafting restricted the ax at first to a relatively broad blade mortised into a handle at three points and secured with bindings or rivets. The hafting problem became acute as improvements in armour dictated longer, narrower blades designed primarily for piercing rather than cutting. This led to the development of socketed axes, in which the handle passed through a tubular hole cast in the ax head; both hole and head were tapered from front to rear to prevent the head from flying off. This far stronger hafting technique must have been accompanied by a significant improvement in the quality of the metal itself. The pace and timing of these developments varied enormously from place to place, depending on the local level of technology. Sumerian smiths were casting socketed ax heads with narrow piercing blades by 2500 bce, while simple mortise-and-tenon hafting was still being used in Egypt 1,000 years later.
The spear
Though early man probably employed spears of fire-hardened wood, spearheads of knapped stone were used long before the emergence of any distinction between hunting and military weapons. Bronze spearheads closely followed the development of alloys hard enough to keep a cutting edge and represented, with the piercing ax, the earliest significant military application of bronze. Spearheads were also among the earliest militarily significant applications of iron, no doubt because existing patterns could be directly extrapolated from bronze to iron. Though the hafting is quite different, bronze Sumerian spearheads of the 3rd millennium bce differ only marginally in shape from the leaf-shaped spearheads of classical Greece.
The spears of antiquity were relatively short, commonly less than the height of the warrior, and typically were wielded with one hand. As defensive armour and other weapons of shock combat (notably the sword) improved, spear shafts were made longer and the use of the spear became more specialized. The Greek hoplite's spear was about 9 feet (2.7 metres) long; the Macedonian sarissa was twice that length in the period of Alexander's conquests, and it grew to some 21 feet (more than 6 metres) in Hellenistic times.
The javelin
Javelins, or throwing spears, were shorter and lighter than spears designed for shock combat and had smaller heads. The distinction between javelin and spear was slow to develop, but by classical times the heavy spear was clearly distinguished from the javelin, and specialized javelin troops were commonly used for skirmishing. A throwing string was sometimes looped around the shaft and tied to the thrower's finger to impart spin to the javelin on release. This improved the weapon's accuracy and probably increased the range and penetrating power by permitting a harder cast.
A significant refinement of the javelin was the Roman pilum. The pilum was relatively short, about five feet long, and had a heavy head of soft iron that made up nearly one-third of the weapon's total length. The weight of this weapon restricted its range but gave it greater impact. Its head of soft iron was intended to bend on impact, preventing an enemy from throwing it back.
Like the spear, the javelin was relatively unaffected by the appearance of iron and retained its characteristic form until it was finally abandoned as a serious weapon in the 16th century.
The sling
The sling was the simplest of the missile weapons of antiquity in principle and the most difficult in practice. It consisted of two cords or thongs fastened to a pouch. A small stone was placed in the pouch, and the slinger whirled the whole affair around to build up velocity before letting go of one of the cord ends to release the projectile. While considerable velocity could be imparted to a projectile in this way, the geometry of the scheme dictated that the release be timed with uncanny precision to achieve even rudimentary accuracy. Almost always wielded by tribal or regionally recruited specialists who acquired their skills in youth, the sling featured prominently in warfare in antiquity and classical times. It outranged the javelin and even—at least at some times and places—the bow (a point confirmed in the 4th century bce by the Greek historian Xenophon). By classical times, lead bullets, often with slogans or epigrams cast into them—"A nasty present!"—were used as projectiles.
The sling vanished as a weapon of war in the Old World by the end of the classical period, owing mainly to the disappearance of the tribal cultures in which it originated. (In the New World, on the other hand, both the Aztecs and the Incas used the sling with great effect against Spanish conquistadores in the 16th century.)
The sword
The advantages of a long sharp blade had to await advanced smelting and casting technology before they could be realized. By about 1500 bce the cutting ax had evolved into the sickle sword, a bronze sword with a curved concave blade and a straight thickened handle. Bronze swords with straight blades more than three feet (one metre) long have been found in Greek grave sites. However, because this length exceeded the structural capabilities of bronze, these swords were not practical weapons. As a serious military implement, the sword had to await the development of iron forging, and the first true swords date from about 1200 bce.
Swords in antiquity and classical times tended to be relatively short, at first because they were made of bronze and later because they were rarely called upon to penetrate iron armour. The blade of the classic Roman stabbing sword, the gladius, was only some two feet long, though in the twilight years of the empire the gladius gave way to the spatha, the long slashing sword of the barbarians.
The bow
The bow was simple in concept, yet it represented an extremely sophisticated technology. In its most basic form, the bow consisted of a stave of wood slightly bent by the tension of a bowstring connecting its two ends. The bow stored the force of the archer's draw as potential energy, then transferred it to the bowstring as kinetic energy, imparting velocity and killing power to the arrow. The bow could store no more energy than the archer was capable of producing in a single movement of the muscles of his back and arms, but it released the stored energy at a higher velocity, thus overcoming the arm's inherent limitations.
Though not as evident, the sophistication of arrow technology matched that of the bow. The effectiveness of the bow depended on the arrow's efficiency in retaining kinetic energy throughout its trajectory and then transforming it into killing power on impact. This was not a simple problem, as it depended on the mass, aerodynamic drag, and stability of the arrow and on the hardness and shape of the head. These factors were related to one another and to the characteristics of the bow in a complex calculus. The most important variables in this calculus were arrow weight and the length and stiffness of the bow.
Assuming the same length of draw and available force, the total amount of potential energy that an archer could store in a bow was a function of the bow's length; that is, the longer the arms of the bow, the more energy stored per unit of work expended in the draw and, therefore, the more kinetic energy imparted to the string and arrow. The disadvantage of a long bow was that the stored energy had to serve not only to drive the string and arrow but also to accelerate the mass of the bow itself. Because the longer bow's more massive arms accelerated more slowly, a longer bow imparted kinetic energy to the string and arrow at a lower velocity. A shorter bow, on the other hand, stored less energy for the same amount of work expended in the draw, but it compensated for this through its ability to transmit the energy to the arrow at a higher velocity. In sum, the shorter bow imparted less total energy to the arrow, but it did so at a higher velocity. Therefore, in practice maximum range was attained by a short, stiff bow shooting a very light arrow, and maximum killing power at medium ranges was attained by a long bow driving a relatively heavy arrow.
The early bow
The simple bow, made from a single piece of wood, was known to Neolithic hunters; it is clearly depicted in cave paintings of 30,000 bc and earlier. The first improvement was the reflex bow, a bow that was curved forward, or reflexively, near its centre so that the string lay close against the grip before the bow was drawn. This increased the effective length of the draw since it began farther forward, close to the archer's left hand.
The composite recurved bow
The next major improvement, one that was to remain preeminent among missile weapons until well into the modern era, was the composite recurved bow. This development overcame the inherent limitations of wood in stiffness and tensile strength. The composite bow's resistance to bending was increased by reinforcing the rear, or belly, of the bow with horn; its speed and power in recoil were increased by overlaying the front of the bow with sinew, usually applied under tension. The wooden structure of this composite thus consisted of little more than thin wooden strips supporting the horn and sinew. The more powerful composite bows, being very highly stressed, reversed their curvature when unstrung. They acquired the name recurved since the outer arms of the bow curved away from the archer when the bow was strung, which imparted a mechanical advantage at the end of the draw. Monumental and artistic evidence suggests that the principle of the composite recurved bow was known as early as 3000 bce.
A prime advantage of the composite bow was that it could be engineered to essentially any desired strength. By following the elaborate but empirically understood trade-off between length and stiffness referred to above, the bowyer could produce a short bow capable of propelling light arrows to long ranges, a long, heavy bow designed to maximize penetrative power at relatively short ranges, or any desired compromise between.
Arrow design was probably the first area of military technology in which production considerations assumed overriding importance. As a semi-expendable munition that was used in quantity, arrows could not be evaluated solely by their technological effectiveness; production costs had to be considered as well. As a consequence, the materials used for arrowheads tended to be a step behind those used for other offensive technologies. Arrowheads of flint and obsidian, knapped to remarkably uniform standards, survived well into the Bronze Age, and bronze arrowheads were used long after the adoption of iron for virtually every other military cutting or piercing implement.
Arrow shafts were made of relatively inexpensive wood and reed throughout history, though considerable labour was involved in shaping them. Remarkably refined techniques for fastening arrowheads of flint and obsidian to shafts were well in hand long before recorded history. (The importance of arrow manufacturing techniques is reflected in the survival in modern English of the given name Fletcher, the title of a specialist in attaching feathers to the arrow shaft.)
Mechanical artillery
In contrast to individual weaponry, there was little continuity from classical to medieval times in mechanical artillery. The only exception—and it may have been a case of independent reinvention—was the similarity of the Roman onager to the medieval catapult.
Mechanical artillery of classical times was of two types: tension and torsion. In the first, energy to drive the projectile was provided by the tension of a drawn bow; in the other, it was provided by torsional energy stored in bundles of twisted fibres.
The invention of mechanical artillery was ascribed traditionally to the initiative of Dionysius I, tyrant of Syracuse, in Sicily, who in 399 bce directed his engineers to construct military engines in preparation for war with Carthage. Dionysius's engineers surely drew on existing practice. The earliest of the Greek engines was the gastrophetes, or "belly shooter." In effect a large crossbow, it received its name because the user braced the stock against his belly to draw the weapon. Though Greek texts did not go into detail on construction of the bow, it was based on a composite bow of wood, horn, and sinew. The potential of such engines was apparent, and the demand for greater power and range quickly exceeded the capabilities of tension. By the middle of the 3rd century bce, the bow had been replaced by rigid wooden arms constrained in a wooden box and drawn against the force of tightly twisted bundles of hair or sinew. The overall concept was similar to the gastrophetes, but the substitution of torsion for tension permitted larger and more powerful engines to be made. Such catapults (from Greek kata, "to pierce," and pelte, "shield"; a "shield piercer") could throw a javelin as far as 800 yards (700 metres). The same basic principle was applied to large stone-throwing engines. The Jewish historian Josephus referred to Roman catapults used in the siege of Jerusalem in 70 ce that could throw a stone weighing 1 talent (about 55 pounds, or 25 kilograms) 2 stadia (400 yards, or 366 metres) or more.
The terminology of mechanical artillery is confusing. Catapult is the general term for mechanical artillery; however, the term also narrowly applies to a particular type of torsion engine with a single arm rotating in a vertical plane. Torsion engines with two horizontally opposed arms rotating in the horizontal plane, such as that described above, are called ballistae. There is no evidence that catapults in the narrow sense were used by the Greeks; the Romans called their catapults onagers, or wild asses, for the way in which their rears kicked upward under the recoil force. The Romans used large ballistae and onagers effectively in siege operations, and a complement of carroballistae, small wheel-mounted torsion engines, was a regular part of the legion. The onager and the medieval catapult were identical in concept, but ballistae were not used after the classical era.
Fortress design
Fortifications in antiquity were designed primarily to defeat attempts at escalade, though cover was provided for archers and javelin throwers along the ramparts and for enfilade fire from flanking towers. By classical Greek times, fortress architecture had attained a high level of sophistication; both the profile and the trace (that is, the height above ground level and the outline of the walls) of fortifications were designed to achieve overlapping fields of fire from ballistae mounted along the ramparts and in supporting towers. Roman fortresses of the 2nd century ce, largely designed for logistic and administrative convenience, tended to have square or rectangular outlines, and were situated along major communication routes. By the late 3rd century, their walls had become thicker and had flanking towers strengthened to support mechanical artillery. The number of gates was reduced, and the ditches were dug wider. By the late 4th and 5th centuries, Roman fortresses were being built on easily defensible ground with irregular outlines that conformed to the topography; clearly, passive defense had become the dominant design consideration.
In general, the quality of masonry that went into permanent defensive works of the classical period was very high by later standards. Fortifications were almost exclusively of dressed stone, though by Roman times concrete mortar was used on occasion.
Field fortification
The main purpose of early field fortifications, particularly among the Greeks, was to secure an advantage by standing on higher ground so that the enemy was forced to attack uphill. The Romans were especially adept at field fortifications, preparing fortified camps at the close of each day's march. The troops usually required three to four hours to dig a ditch around the periphery, erect a rampart or palisade from timbers carried by each man, lay out streets, and pitch tents. During extended campaigns the Romans strengthened the camps with towers and outlying redoubts, or small forts, and used the camps as bases for offensive forays into the surrounding territory.
Siege towers
For breaching fortified positions, military engineers of the classical age designed assault towers that remain a wonder to modern engineers. So large was one siege tower used by Macedonians in an attack on Rhodes that 3,400 men were required to move it up to the city walls. Another 1,000 men were needed to wield a battering ram 180 feet (55 metres) long. The Romans constructed huge siege towers, one of which Caesar mentions as being 150 feet high. The lower stories housed the battering ram, which had either a pointed head for breaching or a ramlike head for battering. Archers in the upper stories shot arrows to drive the defenders from their ramparts. From the top of the tower, a hinged bridge might be lowered to serve a storming party. To guard the attackers against enemy missiles, the Romans used great wicker or wooden shields, called mantelets, which were sometimes mounted on wheels. In some cases the attackers might approach the fortress under the protection of wooden galleries.
Land transportation
In antiquity and classical times the transportation technology of land warfare largely amounted to man's own powers of locomotion. This was due in part to limitations in the size, strength, and stamina of horses and in part to deficiencies in crucial supporting technologies, notably the inefficiency of harnesses for horses and nonpivoting front axles for wagons. A more basic underlying factor was the generally low level of economic development. The horse was an economically inefficient animal, consuming large quantities of food. Of more importance, keeping horses—let alone selectively breeding them for size, strength, and power—was a highly labour-intensive and capital-intensive enterprise for which the classical world was not organized. An efficient pulling harness for horses was unknown, and mules and donkeys fitted with carrying baskets, or panniers, balanced in pairs across the back, were the most common pack or dray animals. The ox, the heavy-duty dray animal of the Mediterranean world, was used for military purposes when heavy loads were involved and speed was not critical.
The horse
Because it was not possible to maintain a breed of war-horses sufficiently powerful to sustain mounted shock action, the horse was restricted to a subsidiary role in warfare from the eclipse of the chariot in the middle of the 2nd millennium bce until the rise of the horse archer in the 4th century ce. Evidence as to the size of horses in classical times is equivocal. Greek vase paintings from the 7th century bce depict Scythians riding apparently powerful tall horses with long slender legs, implying speed; however, this breed evidently collapsed and disappeared. Later Mongolian steppe ponies, though tough and tractable, were probably considerably smaller.
Horses were rarely if ever used for drayage. This was partly because their rarity and expense restricted them to combat roles, and partly because of the lack of a suitable harness. The prevalent harness consisted of a pole-and-yoke assembly, attached to the animal by neck and chest harness. This was developed for use with oxen, where the primary load was absorbed by the thrust of the animal's hump against the yoke. With a horse, most of the pulling load was borne by the neck strap, which tended to strangle the horse and constrict blood flow.
The elephant
The war elephant was first used in India and was known to the Persians by the 4th century bce. Though they accomplished little subsequently, their presence in Hannibal's army during its transit of the Alps into Italy in 218 bce underscored their perceived utility. The elephant's tactical importance apparently stemmed in large part from its willingness to charge both men and horses and from the panic that it inspired in horses.
The chariot
The chariot was the earliest means of transportation in combat other than a soldier's own powers of locomotion. The earliest known chariots, shown in Sumerian depictions from about 2500 bce, were not true chariots but four-wheeled carts with solid wooden wheels drawn by a team of four donkeys or wild asses. They were no doubt heavy and cumbersome; lacking a pivoting front axle, they would have skidded through turns.
Around 1600 bce, Iranian tribes introduced the war-horse into Mesopotamia from the north, along with the light two-wheeled chariot. The Hyksos apparently introduced the chariot into Egypt shortly thereafter, by which time it was a mature technology. By the middle of the 2nd millennium bce, Egyptian, Hittite, and Palestinian chariots had become extraordinarily light and flexible vehicles, the wheels and tires in particular exhibiting great sophistication in design and fabrication. Light war chariots were drawn by either two or three horses, which were harnessed by means of chest girths secured by one or two poles and a yoke.
That horses were long used for pulling chariots rather than for riding is probably attributable to the horse's inadequate strength and incomplete domestication. The chariot was subject to mechanical failure and, more importantly, was immobilized when any one of its horses was incapacitated. Moreover, the art of riding astride in cavalry fashion had been mastered long before the chariot's eclipse as a tactically dominant weapon. The decline of the chariot by the end of the 2nd millennium bce was probably related to the spread of iron weaponry, but it was surely related also to the breeding of horses with sufficient strength and stamina to carry an armed man. Chariots lingered in areas of slower technological advance, but in the classical world they were retained mainly for ceremonial functions.
Learn More in these related Britannica articles:
small arm
Small arm, any handheld firearm. Since the introduction of the flintlock musket in the 17th century, military small arms have gone through a series of significant changes. By employing different projectiles and successively improved chemical propellants, the dual goal of most arms designers has been the creation…
20th-century international relations: Science and technology in wartimeOf the many wartime innovations, those in macroeconomics and management techniques were among the most important, for the rapid increase achieved in labour productivity would make possible the economic miracles of many nations after the war as well. U.S. merchant…
ancient Greek civilization: Military technologyMilitary technology remained surprisingly static in the 5th century. The 7th century, by contrast, had witnessed rapid innovations, such as the introduction of the hoplite and the trireme, which still were the basic instruments of war in the 5th. The 4th century was…
World War II: Technology of war, 1918–39When World War I ended, the experience of it seemed to vindicate the power of the defensive over the offensive. It was widely believed that a superiority in numbers of at least three to one was required for a successful offensive.…
history of technology: Military technologyOne area of technology was not dramatically influenced by the application of steam or electricity by the end of the 19th century: military technology. Although the size of armies increased between 1750 and 1900, there were few major innovations in techniques, except at…
More About Military technology20 references found in Britannica articles
Assorted References
- ancient Greece
- computer simulation training
- contribution by Krupp
- In Alfred Krupp
- fuel cells
- guerrilla warfare
- history of technology
- horses
- logistics
- military science


text:
I might've known that as soon as I committed to doing a weekly series on the blog, life would throw a few personal and work emergencies at me! Because of all that, this week's offering is going to be low on content, but high in pretty pictures.
William Holden and Audrey Hepburn fell in love while filming 1954's Sabrina. It didn't work out in the end, of course. He was married, albeit unhappily, and though he wanted to leave his wife for her Audrey broke off the relationship.
From Golden Boy: The Untold Story of William Holden by Bob Thomas:
Ernie Lehman [Sabrina's screenwriter] recognized what was happening when he dropped into Bill's dressing room one day. Lehman had been working so hard on rewrites of the Sabrina script that he had broken down in a weeping fit in a corner of the stage. "Go home and get some rest; you deserve it," [director Billy] Wilder said. Before leaving, Lehman wanted to say goodbye to Bill Holden.
He walked into Holden's dressing room unannounced. He found Bill and Audrey standing a foot apart facing each other, their eyes meeting. Lehman said his farewell and departed, realizing that something profound was happening between Bill Holden and Audrey Hepburn.
In these pictures from the set of Sabrina, it's pretty clear to us, too. They look so besotted with one another.
William Holden eventually divorced his wife and went on to have other relationships (including one with Stefanie Powers, a/k/a Jennifer Hart), but he called Audrey the love of his life. He was so wrecked by working with her again on Paris When it Sizzles ten years after Sabrina that he pretty much spent the whole time intoxicated.
A sad end to their relationship, but the chemistry between Holden and Hepburn in Sabrina is delightful. For me the most enjoyable parts of the movie are their scenes together, beginning when Sabrina returns home from Paris a sophisticated and elegant young lady.
We're supposed to root for Sabrina to get together with Humphrey Bogart's Linus Larrabee, but I'm afraid I'm always a little disappointed when she doesn't get together with Holden's David Larrabee. Even though I know he's a shallow playboy who would've probably broken Sabrina's heart, I still find him much more appealing with Hepburn than the miscast and slightly ancient Bogart.
More from Golden Boy:
One scene called for [Holden] to vault over a fence as he approached Audrey. He performed the leap with total ease on the first take. "That was good, Bill," said Wilder, "but a little too fast. Could you do it a little slower, please." To the astonishment of the director and everyone else, Holden repeated the leap and seemed almost to pause in the air before landing."
It's a great moment, and one of my favorites in the movie. Sabrina's dream must truly seem to her to finally be coming true, with this handsome man she's loved for years entranced by her and blithely leaping over a wall to take her in his arms. You can see it below, at about 4:40.
Oh, that dress by Hubert de Givenchy! It's the most divine gown ever made for the movies. Or maybe just the most divine gown ever made, period.
For a more detailed and insightful look at Sabrina, I recommend Jacqueline Lynch's two-part discussion of the film at Another Old Movie Blog. She captures the mid-century dreaminess of the movie so well. She says:
It is a time when dancing was a social accomplishment and seduction took time. We see it is a time of a single strand of pearls and strapless evening gowns with full skirts. Young people at this period did not want to be young, for to be young was to be gauche. Young people yearned for sophistication and experience, to emulate their elders, as Sabrina does when she spies the party from the branches of a tree on the estate.
Check it out, it's a lovely read about a lovely film. More Bill Holden next week, and something more substantial than pictures and quotes, I hope!


text: Jim Lux wrote: >----- Original Message ----- > > > >>As I have said privately to others, the GPL is not a business model. >>Moreover, the ivory tower concept of giving away the source to sell the >>consulting seems to work for very few groups, if any (I can think of >>one, mySQL AB). As it is unlikely that there will be millions of linux >>clusters out there, the MySQL model of leveraging the needs of a huge >>installed user base will not work here. >> >> > >Very true, I think. Fortunately, there are people who are willing to work >with stars in their eyes. > > Stars don't pay (my) bills. :( [...] >>> >>> >>The per use view presumes you are using a consumable resource in some >>sense, and then attaching a value to it. It reminds me of the >>innumerable requests for registration going on now, coupled with the >>"would you like to view this article? only 1.95$USD right now..." I see >>linked from various news sites. >> >> > >I would never maintain that the price someone is willing to pay for a >commodity is related to its intrinsic value. Something is worth what >someone is willing to pay for it. I pay (grumpily) $7 to watch a movie at >the theater. I don't imagine that the marginal cost to show the movie to me >is even close to $7. > > Value in this case != marginal cost. Value is that difficult to define aspect of something. The marginal cost of viewing the movie has to be quite low, far below the $7 you pay. The "value" in the case is "entertainment" (though I leave that to other threads) from the movie. That is, you make a judgment in your mind before parting with the money that the thing you are buying serves some need that you ascribe a "value" to. In the case of movie tickets, it is a simple binary system; either it has value or it does not (e.g. your need to be entertained). If you have a problem similar to Robert's storage issue, what is the value to you (not the marginal cost) of solving it? E.g. will other projects be delayed? Value includes opportunity cost, and many other softer calculcations/guesstimates. > > >>Of course, apart from electrical power, it is hard to understand what >>resource you are consuming when this occurs. I suspect that consumer >>backlash against this will likely halt this march. I do see a >>subscription model becoming far more likely, whereby for a fixed >>(continuous) fee, you get access to content (much like a magazine, but >>software content in this case). I think people generally would be more >>accepting of this model than a micropayment per click. >> >> > >But people are willing to pay "per click" for things like SMS messages and >phone calls. (There are various "bulk purchase" schemes for both...500 free > > I am subscribing to a service in such a way so as not to pay per minute. I don't SMS (I simply do not see the value in it, and would welcome someone explaining this to me (offline)). I am not talking about basic paging or blackberry stuff (the latter being quite cool). I don't mind this recurring cost. >minutes, etc., but I think those have more importance from a marketing >standpoint than from a revenue standpoint. Industries with "cost >reimbursement" models (most gov't contractors, gov't agencies, health care, >etc.) are very attracted to a "dollars per click" model, because it allows >easy allocation of costs to multiple accounts. > > > ok... I anthropomorphised. "There are more business models in the economy Joseph, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." I stand ... er ... sit... corrected. > > > >>Now do something interesting (which I have not seen done yet by MSFT, >>though I expect in in short order). Change the acquisition model to >>that of a subscription. So instead of paying $500 for an install with a >>free set of patches, pay $50 to acquire the base + $100/year of >>subscription. Roll the next "versions" out in phases, with >>inter-function dependencies rather than entire version dependencies. >>The software becomes the platform. >> >>Talk about lock-in. There will be no upgrade cycle to contend with. >>Changes can be made quite modular. New features better tested and >>rolled in in an evolutionary manner. Brand new functionality could be >>created into different subscription paths. Copying and "pirating" would >>be encouraged (you need that subscription after all) as each machine >>would require its own subscription to function. >> >>Rough guess, but I would bet on something much like this emerging. >> >> > >This IS really the .NET model... >Get away from software being "WinXX compatible" and to "generalized Windows >platform compatible", with a steady revenue stream, just like the gas >company. > > > > > Yup. I started looking at Mono to see if it made sense to start targetting commercial apps for it. Still not sure, but it is getting there. Not HPC apps, but user interfaces and other things. What I remember from a committee I sat on about a decade ago about how to handle cost distribution/sharing was "chargeback kills usage". Per usage fees were not appealing to most end users we spoke with (academe). This of course suggests adaptive business micro-models for software in specific market contexts (government, academe, industry). -- Joe


text:
Each month, San Diego State University lecturer and Zillow Blog contributor Leonard Baron answers two questions from readers regarding buying, selling and investing. Have a question? Send it to email@example.com
Continue Reading Below
Revocable trusts
Hi Professor — I keep hearing about trusts and that forming one can be a good idea to save money on taxes and maybe provide liability protection to my assets. What are the basics? Bob. N., Toledo, OH
Hi Bob--
It depends. Here are the basics on the most common trust, a revocable living trust (RLT). State laws differ, but an RLT is set up to allow the trustor (forming the trust) to skip probate court at death. The trustor would title all their real estate, bank accounts, etc., into the RLT, and when they pass away the assets are distributed via what the trustor detailed in the trust. This can also occur via a will, but a will is "probated" in state court, which takes a big chunk of fees for administering the estate. If you have an RLT, which costs about $2,500, the assets in the trust skip being probated, and your estate skips those probate fees — but talk to an estate attorney in your state for more information.
An RLT does not give any liability protection or save money on taxes during the life of the trustor. Other trusts — expensive ones starting at $20,000 and up — could save you money on taxes, hide or protect your assets, etc. But your estate would probably have to be several million dollars to consider these types of arrangements.
Wrap-around mortgages
Hi Leonard — My daughter is considering buying a property with a wrap-around mortgage because she can't get a regular bank loan. I'm concerned because isn't the seller violating their mortgage by selling the property and not paying off the mortgage? Any suggestions? Aaron S., Salt Lake City, UT
Hi Aaron-
You should be concerned. Yes, the seller could be violating their mortgage terms. There also could be insurance issues, higher transaction/legal costs and all kinds of other issues with a wrap-around loan.
Many times rent-to-own or wrap-around deals are purchased by people who don't have the financial wherewithal to do a traditional mortgage from a bank. They mistakenly think that buying "any" property is better than not buying at all — which it's not! Renting is not throwing away money; buying a bad real estate deal probably is throwing away money.
You should coach your daughter to get into financial shape to qualify for a traditional mortgage, shop all the available inventory in the area and buy when she finds a great property and is ready to become a homeowner.
Read More from Zillow:
- Mortgage Shopping: How to Compare Good Faith Estimates
- Tips for Preparing to Buy in 2013
- Offer Accepted: What Happens During Escrow?
Leonard Baron, MBA, is America's Real Estate Professor®. His unbiased, neutral and inexpensive "Real Estate Ownership, Investment and Due Diligence 101" textbook teaches real estate owners how to make smart and safe purchase decisions. He is a San Diego State University Lecturer, blogs at Zillow.com, and loves kicking the tires of a good piece of dirt! More at ProfessorBaron.com.