When speaking of absinthe, people are often shocked by the price of a 750ml bottle – generally around $65 USD. Compared with a standard bottle of wine running at $15 or so, this understandably sounds expensive at first… but is it really? Let’s do some math.
Here, we are comparing a standard size bottle of absinthe with a standard size bottle of wine – 750ml.
750ml bottle = ~25oz
Next we take a look at at how many ounces constitutes a normal glass of each. Note that absinthe is traditionally prepared with ice cold water added in a ratio of 1:3, 1:4, or 1:5. For this example, we’ll use 1:4 since it is the median.
1 glass of wine = 5oz 1 glass of absinthe = 1oz
We then calculate, based upon this, how many glasses (or servings) each bottle will hold.
5 glasses of wine 25 glasses of absinthe
Again, these are the prices we are basing the next calculation upon. Wine prices vary wildly – so use your favorite bottle for a more personal calculation. I’m using $15 as a good, all purpose wine.
1 good bottle of wine = $15 1 good bottle of absinthe = $65
Dividing the price of each bottle by the number of expected servings will yield the price per serving for each.
1 standard glass of wine: 15/5 = $3.00 1 1:4 glass of absinthe: 65/25 = $2.60
So, as you can see… absinthe is not necessarily any more expensive than wine. In fact, using these calculations – it actually comes out quite a bit less expensive. Cheers!
Want to learn more about absinthe? I recently did a quick talk for Ignite Denver 12 that provides a good overview of the spirit:
[okay… not really – the new compiler is just really picky]
This is another rant – but like most of my rants… there is useful information to be had! This one came about as I needed to employ some UI assets created in Flash Professional and published as a SWC for use in an AS3 project in Flash Builder. I haven’t re-published the SWC for weeks… yet when I compiled my project in Flash Builder, I received a SWF that was just borked out of any human understanding. In fact, it looks exactly like this:
Understand, it isn’t supposed to look like the UI mess you see above. So what is the deal? No errors are thrown. Does Flash Builder simply hate SWC files now? Nah. There is something that needs to be done though… for whatever reason… Adobe has, by default, removed a good amount of control as to how AS3 projects are compiled – yet there is a solution!
We must locate the project .actionScriptProperties file [found in the project root – outside of Flash Builder itself] to perform some manual edits. Open this file up in Notepad or whatever and locate the flag useFlashSDK which, by default, is set to true. This is what instructs Flash Builder 4.7 as to which SDK should be used when compiling projects; the embedded AIR 3.4 SDK and the new compiler… or an SDK of your choosing with choice of either the new compiler or legacy compiler.
When set to useFlashSDK=”true” – your project properties panel will appear as such. Not a lot of choice here…This is the default and forces the new compiler for AS3 projects. It also will publish with a Flash Player target of 11.4. This is problematic for many situations – especially when we need to target an older version of the Flash Player (which we often do). This setting also totally borked all of my SWC content – which is what led to all of this in the first place.
Setting the useFlashSDK=”false” and then accessing the project properties panel will result in a more familiar scenario. Select your managed SDK and elect to use the legacy compiler, if desired. I’m targeting Flash Player 10.2 because we need to support Macs with old PowerPC processors. Sad, right? No way around it.
You’ll want to be sure and restart Flash Builder after adjusting the .actionScriptProperties file for any new settings to take effect. Voila!
So it appears that Adobe changed /flashservices/gateway* = cfusion to /flashservices/gateway/* = cfusion in uriworkermap.properties for ColdFusion 10.
Why is this a problem? Well, I have a lot of legacy content that makes AMF calls to CFCs in a system that is being upgraded to ColdFusion 10 from ColdFusion 9. And with this little change – everything is broken. I spent an entire day of work troubleshooting this and dropping mad F-bombs at CF and IIS for no good reason. I’m sure this must be buried in documentation somewhere… but I’ll offer this up publicly – since I found nothing in my search through 100,000 Google search results (most dating from 2007).
I saw this poorly researched atrocity when it was first published the other day and immediately wrote CNN asking that they correct the numerous factual errors in the article. I have yet to hear back.
Unfortunately, tech reporters can get away with all sorts of lies and inaccuracies without doing any actual journalism. Honestly, reporters; we are experts, we are out here, we don’t bite, and we are happy to talk to you about our passion. Do some real reporting and stop writing whatever will get you the most traffic.
Here follows my response…
“Wallaby” is a tool for advertisers familiar with animating banner ads in Flash Professional, to be able to continue using that tool to produce ads compatible with iOS. Adobe is also working on other advanced tooling for HTML but this in no way is “caving” to anything. They have always built tools for HTML and continue to do so in innovative ways. Flash vs. Apple is simply a good way for tech authors to generate traffic because it presents opposition and drama.
I have been on the “Wallaby” prerelease for months and while the author presents the tool as being able to convert any Flash content to HTML, this is simply not true. It can convert the simplest of animation and that is all. You cannot use it to convert interactive elements, games, or full applications to HTML. It is not designed for that.
Adobe and Apple are not on the same page regarding Flash on iOS, but engineers from the Flash and Safari teams do work together on improving how everything works together, and the Flash Platform can be used to compile applications for iOS (just not apps that run in the web browser). The two companies have certainly not been at odds since the 1980s. That is ridiculous.
As for video serving companies like YouTube and Hulu; both have come out with statements to the effect that while they are experimenting with HTML native video, that they continue to use Flash to deliver video for the forseeable future because of the many benefits it offers. Many browser makers, such as Google and Opera, have joined the Open Screen Project and Google even bakes the Flash runtime into Chrome. The just released IE9 contains specific hooks for integrated GPU acceleration for the Flash Player runtime. While the tech reporters enjoy painting a picture of dying technology- the facts speak otherwise.
As far as Apple holding the largest portion of the smartphone market; this has recently shifted with Android being the dominating smartphone platform worldwide. It’s unfortunate that reporters cannot seem to do their research any longer before writing tech articles.