Slashdot Mirror

No matter what your tastes are..you must have an AWESOME POSTER

The Wii was popular because of certain promised games which are still yet to be Wiileased.

Here I present this.
My full worked description.
No extra water!

...until your cat chews through it.

That's nothing; try rabbits. I've seen photos of what happens when a rabbit gets to play in a server room; it's not pretty. (The rabbit won.)

so.. why do I have it right now? http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/6682/ff3gb5.png it's mine the real 3?

It's already in use...

It appears as though alpha values of 255 and 254 are used. GIMP time! Decompose, threshold. Link

configuration dialogs and file-opening dialogs, both of which are extremely useful to the task at hand, and don't "jump in your way".

Going too far to either extreme is bad UI design

Thunderbird 3 Alpha 1 Screenshot on some forum. Here is a Thunderbird 3 Alpha 1 Screenshot direct link.

Imigration Officer: What's your name, sir?
Passenger: Batman...
Imigration Officer: Come again? Your last name, sir?
Passenger: Suparman ...
Imigration Officer: Funny guy ahn? Take him down, boys...

While the other officers beat the crap out of the poor fella, the Imigration officer checks his passport out

Right now I'm writing this from an IBM Thinkpad A21m Using Ubuntu 8.04. Right in Live CD mode, Ubuntu configured all of my hardware, even Wifi, the mic, infrared can detect an old phone, No Wonder why Ubuntu have been chosen.

It's a dual boot, having the choice of Win 2K pro, Now I'm planing to install Wolvix in there, I have not so much problem with the speed in Ubuntu .. 256Mb should be enough for everyone (I know I need 512Mb but believe me it runs fine).

BTW I'm using Firefox 3no beta, no RC.. Updated just an hour ago! Why I haven't seen an article on this here? http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/6682/ff3gb5.png

Your signature is broken.

OK, that is one brave Anonymous Coward.
Balls, hard to come by these days.

Anyone else willing to comment?

FYI - I had no intention to be trollish about it.
I am guessing that I was simply combining the memory of the photo above with this one.
Had the photo been say... shades of blue or green, it would probably not register that way.

Anyone else reminded of concentration camps by these photos?

Nice reply, thanks. AVI seems to be a weird choice across the board. Its ancient, so maybe the excuse is its compatible with the majority of installed platforms...

But, again, I'm not aware of any platform that can't handle mp4 wrappers.

And I suppose the avi files I'm whining about are mostly XviD or DivX, these can't be incompatible with mp4 wrappers, can they?

I thought XviD was an mp4 standard, capable of 264 and other compression schema.

• DivX and XviD are in MPEG-4, Part 2 (they use the "MPEG-4 ASP" compression method in their respective codecs).
  
• AAC Audio is Part 3 (it's also Part 7 of MPEG-2).
  
• H264 is Part 10 (and also known as "MPEG-4 AVC")
  
• The MP4 container format (MP4) is Part 14.
  

Sure, but when you're opening a new tab, you're more than likely going to be typing in an address, so you're hands would already be on the keyboard. Your handing may differ, but for me it's my palm on Ctrl and my index/middle finger on T, so it's more like one keypress. Also (considering Fitts's Law) it's probably easier to do that than move the mouse to a 30ish pixel^2 button.

But then again I know that it's hard to change interfaces when you're used to the older one. In fact I used to have that button too. But I also extremely dislike the new "awesomebar".

Here's my skin/layout just for info. It's a custom Stylish stylesheet (smoother than image shows), but if you're interested I can send it.

I dunno if it's your IP or what, but I still see this for the "accepted solution" (and all others)

http://img261.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshotof8.png

Yep, same here (FF3rc2 looking like FF2 wooo).. thought the address box search is really ugly when I already know the url and like 15 unrelated URLs are covering my screen while I type.

This is why.

Hack the Planet!

Showing my age

I wonder where he would rate his Teen Beat photo spread?

Reference One
Reference Two

I wonder where he would rate his Teen Beat photo spread?

Reference One
Reference Two

Nod32 detected a trojan...
?
http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/273/winetrojananyonehd5.jpg
False positive or where do I report?

I made up a 3D image of the landing leg by combining two of the published pictures. You can clearly see a mount that formed that makes it look like the lander slid as it touched down. The first version is 3D if you cross your eyes, the second version requires red-blue 3D glasses:
http://img294.imageshack.us/my.php?image=phoenixlegstereoug5.jpg
http://i27.tinypic.com/24yyfix.jpg

Did you try unchecking the option in the QuickTime control panel?

I dont think you can compare a 13" notebook to a 15" notebook. You pay more for it being compact, but don't worry, cos here's a better comparison: Macbook Vs Dell XPS M1330

I picked the midrange macbook, cos the Dell XPS m1330 doesn't come with a 2.1ghz processor, it goes straight from 2.0 to 2.4, and we all know the macbabies will have a big WahWah if the Dell has even a single spec lower than the macbook, no matter how many the Dell has higher, and has a DVD writer as standard so can't compare to the base macbook model.

the Dell has a bigger hard drive and a gig more memory as standard, the only way I could make the specs identical is to upgrade them both to 4gig of ram, but I know all hte mac fans would squeal, so I left the mac at 2gig.

There's a few differences like the Dell has HDMI and Mac has Mini DVI, but they are both work the same with an adapter, the dell has a finger print reader, PCI Express slot, and a remote which was $19 extra with the Mac, and the Dell has 1gig more memory and a bigger hard drive, the only feature the mac has that the dell doesn't is S-Video/Composite out via an adapter.

Everything else is the same, camera, LCD size, graphics, processor, firewire, 2 USB ports, slot loading DVD writer,

and with all the advantages here to mac, no expensive memory upgrades to bring it into line with the Dell, nor the $100 extra for the HDD, not even the $19 for the remote that is included with the Dell.

Dell
$1154
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/9949/dellsn6.jpg

Mac
$1299
http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/617/macob3.jpg

$145 less for the Dell with better specs!

Now if i were to upgrade the mac and dell to have 4gig memory and the same hard drives, the dell goes up by $50 and the mac goes up by $300 and an extra $19 if you want to include that remote, which brings the difference to $314. But we know macbabies will cry cos the apple memory upgrade is so expensive.

Now the fun part is now, lets see what extras we can get for the Dell with the $145 we saved:

we could get an LED backlit screen, for $150 extra, but that puts us $5 over, as does Wireless broadband.
We could get Wireless USB for $40, or 4 gig of RAM for another $40, a real bargin compared to the $200 with the mac.
And we could add the best upgrade, a real graphics card, an Nvidia 8400m, pretty good for a 13" notebook, for just $100


Ok, i'll admit, I'm just gloating now, the Mac got slapped, shall we leave it at that?


P.S. In anticipation of the Apple fanbois crying about OSX, and service, Dell XPS come with 1 year on site premium support, plus, with apple, 3 year support is $199, with dell you get 4 years for that much. And as for OSX, you can run OSX on a 1330. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNnGquERlEY

I dont think you can compare a 13" notebook to a 15" notebook. You pay more for it being compact, but don't worry, cos here's a better comparison: Macbook Vs Dell XPS M1330

I picked the midrange macbook, cos the Dell XPS m1330 doesn't come with a 2.1ghz processor, it goes straight from 2.0 to 2.4, and we all know the macbabies will have a big WahWah if the Dell has even a single spec lower than the macbook, no matter how many the Dell has higher, and has a DVD writer as standard so can't compare to the base macbook model.

the Dell has a bigger hard drive and a gig more memory as standard, the only way I could make the specs identical is to upgrade them both to 4gig of ram, but I know all hte mac fans would squeal, so I left the mac at 2gig.

There's a few differences like the Dell has HDMI and Mac has Mini DVI, but they are both work the same with an adapter, the dell has a finger print reader, PCI Express slot, and a remote which was $19 extra with the Mac, and the Dell has 1gig more memory and a bigger hard drive, the only feature the mac has that the dell doesn't is S-Video/Composite out via an adapter.

Everything else is the same, camera, LCD size, graphics, processor, firewire, 2 USB ports, slot loading DVD writer,

and with all the advantages here to mac, no expensive memory upgrades to bring it into line with the Dell, nor the $100 extra for the HDD, not even the $19 for the remote that is included with the Dell.

Dell
$1154
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/9949/dellsn6.jpg

Mac
$1299
http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/617/macob3.jpg

$145 less for the Dell with better specs!

Now if i were to upgrade the mac and dell to have 4gig memory and the same hard drives, the dell goes up by $50 and the mac goes up by $300 and an extra $19 if you want to include that remote, which brings the difference to $314. But we know macbabies will cry cos the apple memory upgrade is so expensive.

Now the fun part is now, lets see what extras we can get for the Dell with the $145 we saved:

we could get an LED backlit screen, for $150 extra, but that puts us $5 over, as does Wireless broadband.
We could get Wireless USB for $40, or 4 gig of RAM for another $40, a real bargin compared to the $200 with the mac.
And we could add the best upgrade, a real graphics card, an Nvidia 8400m, pretty good for a 13" notebook, for just $100


Ok, i'll admit, I'm just gloating now, the Mac got slapped, shall we leave it at that?


P.S. In anticipation of the Apple fanbois crying about OSX, and service, Dell XPS come with 1 year on site premium support, plus, with apple, 3 year support is $199, with dell you get 4 years for that much. And as for OSX, you can run OSX on a 1330. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNnGquERlEY

But photoshopping ice cream cones where cocks used to be is still OK, right?

here's a cropped lower-quality 93K version on imageshack

One more time. Fileshack and filebox. That's what the preview button is for.

Nice edge case you have there. How many peoople buy $4000+ machines? And what about mid level budget machines like this?

According to Internet Law, it's ok to ban someone from the Internet if you send him a cute cat macro

http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/1005/1210433134594su8.jpg

Do not know the distance we are talking about, but sounds like there won't be anything prohibitive on line of sight.

Closest neighbour who can have a fast connection, arrange with them to setup a WiFi, but not with regular uni-directional antennae, use directional, big one.

More precise you can align the antennaes, the further you can reach with better bandwidth. To avoid the bad looks, you could hook it up in a tree too.

If you are DIY type, there's lots of DIY tutorials to make one yourself on the cheap, which is just as good or better than some which costs insane high bucks. Just google "DIY WiFi Directional Antenna" :) Here's one: http://demi0urgos.livejournal.com/5924.html
Picture: http://img237.imageshack.us/my.php?image=smalllabattstilt2nr.jpg
Used: Beer can, some copper wiring, and some household items.

You actually can get quite damn good distances with this kind of setup, alternatively, you guys might want to ask if you could use signal boosters to amplify the strength of signal, but beware, there's very good reasons why by default the output is weak, but that's mostly directed towards to areas where there is other users.

Also, get the best hardware you can find on sane prices, using some cheap D-Link crap or something like that, is plain shooting yourself on the foot, they don't even work for 10 feets, nevermind 10miles no matter what kind of antenna you use.

Also, by nature WiFi is not very reliable, but setup well, it should work fine most of the time.

link here: doom4 screenshot.

heres a screenshot!

http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/609/image2jl5.png

or

http://i27.tinypic.com/34xf094.png

It needs Verdana from MS TrueType core fonts, so it doesn't work across multiple platforms. The link is slashdotted anyway. Here's a version that's still available: http://www.romancortes.com/blog/homer-css/

Here's how i see it: http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/9183/homeraz4.png

Leopard requires a G4 1GHz+ from system requirements I belive, so no, Leopard don't support those machines. It do support PPC, which would be very bad if they didn't considering they are just like 1.5 year old or something.

A G3 _IS_ outdated, OS X is the most heavy OS I've ever used, Windows XP would live very happy on this 2.2GHz C2D, 2GB ram MBP. I don't say there is anything weird or wrong with G3 being outdated, 1GHz P3s is aswell. It's just the "omg macs live forever"-bs which is wrong. And even more so "omg Windows is like teh lol, it's so heavy on my machinery, OS X are like a canary bird on a football field!"

But I don't hate OS X either, and I accept that it's heavy, it's just all the bullshit I can't handle. And I would prefer to be able to do simple stuff as browsing the web on a new computer! But maybe that is impossible nowadays considering the fucking bloat the web have become.

XP SP2 was very stable for me, I don't remember if I ran it on my Athlon64 aswell but I think I did, I for sure did on my Athlon-XP. But I had new BIOS and the latest drivers for everything, maybe that helped, I have no idea.

I would want to call this integrate-stuff BS aswell because I know that:
1) I sort of know noone who has problems with XP SP2.
2) Hacks run OS X more or less just as good as real macs.
But I won't because I know some people over here on Slashdot use to say that drivers cause most of the crashes, and maybe they are correct and I'm wrong. So maybe it's a benefit, not as huge one as people say thought.

My browser and whole computer experience get absurb once I run out of free RAM, I have no idea why, maybe it's because the machine have to start swapping around some virtual memory as soon as I want to do something, using my 5400rpm 2.5" 160GB HDD. And honestly I don't care, I just know what happens. Maybe I should just live with it, but if most stuff are caches I would prefer the OS not to cache so much and spare more free RAM so it doesn't have to swap around virtual memory as much.

I would assume the memory you are speaking about which aren't really needed would count under VSIZE? And even if real memory column in activity monitor lists shared ram multiple times (of which I have no idea), the system free memory should be correct, right?

Currently my Safari have been running for 7 hours, I know I run plenty of tabs, and Pithelmet doesn't work with latest Safari, but currently it says:
CPU: 55%, real memory: 965MB, VSIZE: 1.85GB.
System free: 58.78MB, Resident: 236MB, Active: 1.13GB, Inactive: 589MB.

I guess the inactive is that my machine should be able to use for other stuff? So in reality I should have like 640MB of RAM which are usable for loading "active" memory? That seems more ok but the swapping would kill me way before that. Maybe I just need a deskop with a much faster drive instead ... I will get 4GB of RAM aswell but I wanted to complain on Apple because my case have losen up a little around the button you use to open the lid and I have something which looks like a scratch/dent in the backlightning of the LCD (if you move your head the brighter "dent" will move around beneath the pixels.)
I waited to RMA it because I wanted the new models to be released just in case ... And now I'm to lazy because I don't want to live without my computer for like a month and have to backup my harddrive. And if I had changed harddrive I would eventuelly lose my warranty and if I had bought new RAM I would still have to keep the old ones if I wanted to send the machine back I guess.

Anyway here are my other thread with memory allocations:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=542426&cid=23286992

And here is how it looks right now:
http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/5764/bild89nh6.png

I guess those SSD drives may help a lot with handling swap? Since it's probably lots of small areas which need to be read/written. But a better start are probably to max the RAM first.

Yeah Mr Bigshot, please tell me what I'm doing wrong.

Here you have a screenshot from my MBP 16:25 today, I had my browser running and had run Google Earth, quit it and I got this kind of graphics glitches, the stuff to the right is spotlight. The machine was very slow as soon as there was a line switch in a text area and in the end it halted completely so I cold rebooted.
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8727/bild82ch6.png

I quit firefox at 18.34, it used 841 MB of ram:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/5503/bild86ia5.png

That is probably when I started to use Safari, 00.50 now, current screenshots:
CPU - http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4718/bild87jm1.png
RAM - http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7607/bild88qy5.png

I do understand that some of the allocated RAM probably are file caches or something, that doesn't mean Safari doesn't run as shit as soon as I have no free RAM left.

But I know mac fanatics always tell how their crap machines run the latest and greatest Apple software with no issues at all ...

Maybe I just haven't catched up with all the magic yet.

Yeah Mr Bigshot, please tell me what I'm doing wrong.

Here you have a screenshot from my MBP 16:25 today, I had my browser running and had run Google Earth, quit it and I got this kind of graphics glitches, the stuff to the right is spotlight. The machine was very slow as soon as there was a line switch in a text area and in the end it halted completely so I cold rebooted.
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8727/bild82ch6.png

I quit firefox at 18.34, it used 841 MB of ram:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/5503/bild86ia5.png

That is probably when I started to use Safari, 00.50 now, current screenshots:
CPU - http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4718/bild87jm1.png
RAM - http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7607/bild88qy5.png

I do understand that some of the allocated RAM probably are file caches or something, that doesn't mean Safari doesn't run as shit as soon as I have no free RAM left.

But I know mac fanatics always tell how their crap machines run the latest and greatest Apple software with no issues at all ...

Maybe I just haven't catched up with all the magic yet.

Yeah Mr Bigshot, please tell me what I'm doing wrong.

Here you have a screenshot from my MBP 16:25 today, I had my browser running and had run Google Earth, quit it and I got this kind of graphics glitches, the stuff to the right is spotlight. The machine was very slow as soon as there was a line switch in a text area and in the end it halted completely so I cold rebooted.
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8727/bild82ch6.png

I quit firefox at 18.34, it used 841 MB of ram:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/5503/bild86ia5.png

That is probably when I started to use Safari, 00.50 now, current screenshots:
CPU - http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4718/bild87jm1.png
RAM - http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7607/bild88qy5.png

I do understand that some of the allocated RAM probably are file caches or something, that doesn't mean Safari doesn't run as shit as soon as I have no free RAM left.

But I know mac fanatics always tell how their crap machines run the latest and greatest Apple software with no issues at all ...

Maybe I just haven't catched up with all the magic yet.

Yeah Mr Bigshot, please tell me what I'm doing wrong.

Here you have a screenshot from my MBP 16:25 today, I had my browser running and had run Google Earth, quit it and I got this kind of graphics glitches, the stuff to the right is spotlight. The machine was very slow as soon as there was a line switch in a text area and in the end it halted completely so I cold rebooted.
http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8727/bild82ch6.png

I quit firefox at 18.34, it used 841 MB of ram:
http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/5503/bild86ia5.png

That is probably when I started to use Safari, 00.50 now, current screenshots:
CPU - http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/4718/bild87jm1.png
RAM - http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7607/bild88qy5.png

I do understand that some of the allocated RAM probably are file caches or something, that doesn't mean Safari doesn't run as shit as soon as I have no free RAM left.

But I know mac fanatics always tell how their crap machines run the latest and greatest Apple software with no issues at all ...

Maybe I just haven't catched up with all the magic yet.

If you have a few minutes, could you please take a look at my 3.5 desktop and check if it's possible to configure 4.x this way now? I'm using my desktop configuration for a few years now and I'm quite used to it, but last I checked it was impossible to get it on 4.0, especially the top panel.

No, it wouldn't have. For Windows Vista I just checked the Display Settings control panel, the window is 477x480; this is small enough to fit on a 640x480 screen even when the bare minimum resolution that the Windows desktop supports is 800x600. I'm fairly sure the Windows XP Display Settings window is even smaller, not that XP supports a resolution below 640x480 anyhow.

I can make certs all day long on my own cert server and Safari will eat them up! Because the cert isn't issued from a ROOT CERTIFICATE PROVIDER, but rather issued by me, the cert is INVALID as far as confirming the identity of the host!

I can make certs all day long on my own cert server and Safari will eat them up! Because the cert isn't issued from a ROOT CERTIFICATE PROVIDER, but rather issued by me, the cert is INVALID as far as confirming the identity of the host!