Slashdot Mirror

Heaven forbid that the Internet be anything that Al Gore and Bill Gates did not invent.

Perhaps then, if it still seems ok, you should do a little reading instead of trying to apply uninformed logic to the question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTP_vandalism
http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2006/02/help _save_the_endangered_time.html
http://www.pool.ntp.org/

Stratum 1 is to be only used by stratum 2. Joe Blow worldwide is not stratum 2. Clear violation of access policies here.

Wikis embody many of the core concepts in Web 2.0, that is: collaboration, user-contribution, and 'radical trust'--as Tim O'Reilly puts it. 'Collaboration' certainly isn't a new concept, neither is 'user-contribution'. But it's only now that we're seeing these concepts becoming a consistent trend in a new wave of successful, mainstream web applications.

Wikipedia, Flickr, Del.ico.us, etc. all rely on user-contributed content. These web services provide a framework for users to create this content in, but it's still the users who are creating the actual content that drives the sites. The idea of 'trust' is demonstrated through Wikipedia's policy of letting pretty much anyone edit the content. In other sites, tagging replaces conventional taxonomy of site content, thus entrusting the control of content organization to the users.

It might be helpful if you read Tim O'Reilly's explaination of what Web 2.0 is.

It's called tsearch2. It has come bundled with PostgreSQL for a while now.

O'Reilly was talking about it at a conference in 2004, but I forget when it was actally released. Version 7.3 or something I think.

If you want to see something really cool in PostgreSQL, check out PostgreSQL's GIST support.

... we all know how wonderfully mantainable that is...

Of course, because we all know that the true mark of maintainability is when a programming neophyte can maintain a serious, important program.

Reminds me of an article by Derek Silvers (creator of CD Baby).

"To me, ideas are worth nothing unless executed. They are just a multiplier. Execution is worth millions."

Apparently, the talk Linda Stone did at ETech and that was the basis of this article is one she's done at several conferences. An episode of O'Reilly's Podcast has eight minutes of edited highlights.

Apparently, the talk Linda Stone did at ETech and that was the basis of this article is one she's done at several conferences. An episode of O'Reilly's Podcast has eight minutes of edited highlights.

As long as the executives at Microsoft are capable of maintaining their OEM agreements with the popular brand name manufacturers, Windows will always be relevant.

And this may be on the decline.
http://www.silicon.com/software/os/0,39024651,3911 7247,00.htm
http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2004/10/will _att_ditch_windows.html
http://news.softpedia.com/news/South-Korea-Could-D itch-Windows-11302.shtml
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184234,00.html

Yes, it is faster. And it has had quite a bit of complexity analysis:
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-09. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-1
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-09. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-2
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-09. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-3
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-10. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-4
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-10. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-5
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-10. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-6
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-10. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-7
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-10. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-8
http://primates.ximian.com/~federico/news-2005-11. html#gtkfilechooser-profile-9

In fact, someone wrote up about it at O'Reilly, in an article entitled all hail the speed demons.

For a full history of NT, Interix and SFU, see Should that not be GNU/Microsoft SFU?

Many Microsoft users will be running a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it.

Well, some people have expressed concern about the privacy implications of using such a service from Google. The same worries surfaced in the actual bug report too. Snippet from the first link (I'm not sure if this is limited to just the standalone extension, though): "1) Every request is transmitted to Google over HTTP, i.e. in clear-text."

Start wetting:

http://www.bootdisk.info/articles.php?action=cat&i d=7
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/liveusb.xml
http://frontier05.blogspot.com/2006/01/installing- ubuntu-to-external-usb.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/digitalmedia/blog/2004/1 0/utility_to_make_usb_flash_driv.html
http://rz-obrian.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de/knoppix-usb/


And, you can even buy a pre-loaded, live-USB stick:

http://damnsmalllinux.org/usb.html

These are all bootable OSs on removable drives... or did you mean bootable *Microsoft* OSs on removable drives? ... then, you're probably SOL.

• Services, not packaged software, with cost-effective scalability

• Control over unique, hard-to-recreate data sources that get richer as more people use them

• Trusting users as co-developers

• Harnessing collective intelligence

• Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service

• Software above the level of a single device

• Lightweight user interfaces, development models, AND business models

Your IT Company's Biggest Enemy by Christopher Diggins
Most companies just dont read any of the stuff you send them. And then there is the annoying practice of cutting and pasting ascii text from a well formatted resume just so that the recruiter can ensure that the company reverts back to him for the phone numbers and contact addresses. I would like to see recrutiters banned banned banned banned banned... I like PDFs and other stuff for protecting resumes just for this purpose.

Of course, as How PostgreSQL Rose to Fame documents, PostgreSQL lay dormant for about two years and was picked up by a mostly-new set of developers. And it seems to be doing pretty well; no doubt MySQL could survive in a similar fashion.

Of course, my druthers would be for PostgreSQL to take over for MySQL, but that's just because I consider it a better database. It's conceivable that someday MySQL will be better. Although, quite frankly, I doubt it.

> I bet you could easily hire aware the developers of that project.

Right, that comes up occasionally: the "what if someone hires Tom Lane" (*) question. It's a legitimate concern. But it'd be hard to hire all the PG core developers since they don't all work for one company.

Also, what's the chance of a core guy taking a job that requires him to stop working on PG? On a much smaller scale, I wouldn't take a job that required me to stop working on PMD; there are lots of other jobs out there. Don't want to damage my book sales, either!

(*) Tom Lane is a PostgreSQL uber-guru

Excellent. Now maybe I can figure out how to get Beagle and Dashboard working.
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/5729?wlg=yes

I'm feeling lucky

Version 5 of IP was assigned to an experimental protocol called ST2 (Internet Stream Protocol, version 2), which is described in RFC 1819 and, AFAIK, was IPv4 with QoS for voice and data over multicast or somesuch.

HTH

O'Reilly has a useful summary of the patents in question (http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/8782?wlg=yes).

Excerpt of description of NTP's patents from Judgement in 2004 from the Richmond Federal Appeal court : "A message originating in an electronic mail system may be transmitted not only by wireline but also via RF, in which case it is received by the user and stored on his or her mobile RF receiver. The user can view the message on the RF receiver and, at some later point, connect the RF receiver to a fixed destination processor, i.e., his or her personal desktop computer, and transfer the stored message. Id. at col. 18, ll. 39-66. Intermediate transmission to the RF receiver is advantageous because it "eliminat[es] the requirement that the destination processor [be] turned on and carried with the user" to receive messages. Id. at col. 18, ll. 44-46. Instead, a user can access his or her email stored on the RF receiver and "review . . . its content without interaction with the destination processor,""

Applets, Flash, ActiveX, XUL and others are heavy load, platform dependent, bloated components that crippled the user experience. For an instance, flash or java wouldn't let one use the simple "back" button of his browser. Those technologies are much more of a glue then a real solution. AJAX is practically free from dependecies, really light and transparent. AJAX is the reason of success of all modern websites, like flickr and gmail. By the way, most people I know migrated to GMail for it's 1GB, but sticked to it for it's features and light interface.

Web 2.0 may be a little vague but is getting clearer every day. Check this out.

ClamXav? Worth a look, but http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/user/view/cs_msg/7191 6 not protecting Classic. More info here http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/ 24449 and don't forget to update the http://www.markallan.co.uk/clamXav/clamavEngineIns taller_0.88.zip engine. Disinfectant saved a lot of computers! (having worked as a tech, and being paid to clean out infected macs :-))

Some people have played around with them and Steve has been quoted as saying 'about the same as current powerbooks'. See here

Nobody questions that Firefox is so far ahead of IE on security that the difference can be measured in red-shift

Nobody ?

That was the biggest load of incomprehensible bolox I've seen today. There will always be spin doctors and idiots who listen to them, why waste time and effort complaining about them. There is more to Web 2.0 than AJAX and XML, read http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2 005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=1 and stop complaining about how you liked XML before it became fashionable.

One of the things I loved about the G4 powerbook I briefly had was that it could do useful work for 5 hours on a routine basis. My wintel laptop knocks out after about 3-4 hours (and if I'm running my favorite Free OS where power management isn't a priority, I'm lucky to get half that much).

Going from the low power G4 with circa 6 hours of battery life to a dual core Intel, regardless of all the good reviews of the Duo, makes me nervous. Apple has also been consistently mum about battery life on these units.

Battery life is listed right on the front page of the powerbook page in the apple store - up to 5.5 hours. The MacBook page says nothing about battery life - nor does any other page I can find on apple's website.

I would probably spring for one of these guys if I knew battery life was comparable to the lowly G4 laptops apple sells - hell even if they told me it would only get 3-4 hours of battery life. But the fact that they omit battery life after raving so much about performance per watt leaves me wondering if folks who are ordering these puppies are going to be severely disappointed when they find their shiny new toy conks out after playing a full length movie.

Can someone with one of these beasts tell us how long the thing runs unplugged?

What are you talking about?

"And Apple has been trying hard to keep me from copying any of those songs my friends purchase from iTunes."

Do your friends not have CD burners? Heck, 'copying' wise, do you not have ethernet? The raw files you can copy as many times as you want. The music, however, requires you to burn to a CD first before you can give them to friends.

"And now OSX will only run on Apple x86 hardware, even though it may have drivers for another PC and be able to run just find on it."

Now, only? OS X has ALWAYS only ran on Apple hardware.

"Some people might even be willing to pay the $130 retail price to be able to use it. But that's not for me."

Because you're cheap and stingy?

"I'd love to see Microsoft or Apple compete with that. But I know they won't. They can't. Capitalism won't let them. Not until its too late."

How about this?"
Which of course means this is possible.
Or the fact that Apple has generously donated time to these.

You see, the same reason YOU like Open Source is why Apple uses Open Source.

The difference is that Apple believes there are some things better for Apple to remain closed; which is why they don't release the source to everything. You can feel free to disagree with Apple, of course, but imagine what would happen if the GPL were enforced via technology, instead of just via licenses?

So that people who distributed modified binaries without source to their customers would find their software would automatically stop working; or perhaps by compilers automatically including source along with the binaries in compressed but human readable form.

See, even open source has licenses that LIMIT the way people use their software; sometimes the license is simple, attribution of copyright, and sometimes it isn't, like the release of full source code.

It is true that vendors are going more propietary - just see the article by this cowboy: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/5745

For Linux and Macintosh, there are ways you can get at least the proprietary Garmin GPS's to work. See http://lancej.blogspot.com/2005/10/using-garmin-et rex-vistac-with.html

I've had no problems using GPS with Linux, but I bet it'll get worse over time, as I believe the vendors will continue to try harder to lock customers into their own software packages.

from OreillyNet
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/06/22/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/08/17/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/11/02/myth-tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/12/07/myth-tv.html

http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/05/ 27/linux_media_pc.html
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/ 29/mythtv_hacks.html

from OreillyNet
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/06/22/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/08/17/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/11/02/myth-tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/12/07/myth-tv.html

http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/05/ 27/linux_media_pc.html
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/ 29/mythtv_hacks.html

from OreillyNet
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/06/22/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/08/17/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/11/02/myth-tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/12/07/myth-tv.html

http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/05/ 27/linux_media_pc.html
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/ 29/mythtv_hacks.html

from OreillyNet
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/06/22/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/08/17/myth_tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/11/02/myth-tv.html
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/digitalmed ia/2005/12/07/myth-tv.html

http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/05/ 27/linux_media_pc.html
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/ 29/mythtv_hacks.html

Digg is Slashdot's Death Knell reports O'Reilly!

Not only does he post outright lies about using a passive repeater in a really long wireless link, he didn't have the balls to admit that he was lying.

For cripe's sake, he even jumped on the Google bandwagon.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, take this gentleman's tech predictions with an extremely large grain of salt.

In a true overload system they key is to make information easy to scan and discard when junk. Witness WebRSS... a presentation style in the form of an rss reader. You have instant access to everything (in topic), it's quickly scannable & discardable, and you're left with the good stuff.

Most people don't use a feed reader or know what rss is so this kinda skips over trying to educate people about how to use it... just give it to them in that form.

And judging by the reaction you got from someone else you rattled a cage. Always a good sign. You are quite right, being on a leaf node as the bitch of some telco is hardly being part of a network. But sadly meshes are only practical in urban areas (under present technology and legislation). We have a growing mesh infrastructure in the UK which to all intents and purposes (on American scales) is one great urban sprawl. It's far more in the spirit of a real internet. Each owner controls their node. End to end traffic is encrypted. Routing is a hilarious nightmare of a caper but in the end it works because the protocols work. Once you separate your transponder/router from your gateway it really does fly along, everyone gets exceptional bandwidth most of the time (and every now and then some improbable combination of collisions and dead nodes makes it all die for a while) If your outdegree is in the range 3-10 and you've friendly reciporacle terms with everyone else then its a dream. Problem is, getting ordinary folk to update their firmware in wireless routers everywhere aint easy. Then you have the problem of traffic between widely separated chunks of mesh (2 cities in the USA or Australia example) which need to collectively buy fiber or use an existing telco. If the internet fragments into a multi tier net as some predict it won't necessarily be along the lines of high and low bandwidth, it may well be it splits into more local chunks of mesh that don't even connect to the backbones.

Small cellular radio
  i) packet radio in 2m band
  ii) 2GHz omnidirectional wireless
Line of sight
  i) infra red
  ii) narrow beam microwave (cantenna)

read this: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wireless/2004/01/2 2/wirelessmesh.html

"It'd be pretty silly to be missing something like dlopen or LoadLibrary..." Just like missing checked exceptions? Yeah that would be silly.

I'm pretty sure dynamic class loading has been around longer than Java, or even unchecked exceptions. So I say it would be sillier to be missing a way to dynamically load classes.

Out of curiosity, how many "major" languages have checked exceptions? Java is the only one I can think of off the top of my head.

It's been a while since I worked with Java, and I'm far from an expert. But when I was dinking around with it, I found it extremely annoying that I had to label every function that could possibly throw an exception. The compiler needed to be smart enough to detect whether a function might throw an exception, in order to tell me that I had forgotten to label it... So if the compiler can tell this without me telling it so explicitly, that pretty much relegates the label to syntax-enforced documentation.

Not to mention people got so sick of being required to write pointless code to handle pointless exceptions, that they figured out a ways to hack around it, making the checking useless:
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/5559

All of that seems silly to me. But that's just MHO.

Or maybe it's not just mine. This guy, and many others, seem to agree that checked exceptions in general are kind of silly:
http://www.mindview.net/Etc/Discussions/CheckedExc eptions

Umm... that already exists in the form of Parrot's NCI, or Native Call Interface. It's been used to bind, among other things, SDL to Parrot.

Here's a review with screenshots as seen on a BlackBerry 7100g.

None of the successful collaborative OSS projects have let anyone and everyone submit code to them

Indeed! None of them do that ;-)

...but it's why I'm still on SP1 myself. Everything I have on my machine (including some graphics-intensive Win95/98 era stuff) runs beautifully. Many, many of the things I use often (like the old UnrealEd for Unreal1, UT99, and Deus Ex) refuse to work on any of the computers my friends have. On the other hand, Freespace always seems to work, but admittedly, that's due to a weird thing with the way-too-damn-many fonts installed on my machine. Also, doesn't SP2 refuse to allow more than 10 outgoing connection attempts at a time? I know Azureus mentions such in the settings.

Also, more seriously, XP SP2 broke the ability of my parents' virus scanner to keep an active monitor running. Which in turn quickly led to the near-total destruction of the computer before I came home for the holidays last year and fixed it (it arose again like a Phoenix, though key things in Windows are still missing . . . nothing important, actually, mainly stuff that was annoying and unable to be removed with any ease before, so in a way that's kindof a plus!)

Alot more stuff is broken, I just don't recall quite what. Hmm, maybe a quick google search will clarify:

Microsoft's own list of broken apps
Also,
SP2 removes the ability of users to send raw TCP segments
It also breaks Captive-NTFS
It can break the Group Policy Object Editor
And as mentioned above, it limits TCP to 10 outgoing attempts (link also includes methods of disabling this; more detailed information on the issue can be found here.
Here's a forum in which people describe a few of the more technical problems and their solutions for SP2

I could go on, but you get the idea. There are some serious drawbacks to SP2. I could go on about how the supposed security features don't exactly impress me (and honestly, all the third-party security programs on my computer have never had to do much, since I run it very securely anyways, and they could handle it even if I didn't), but again, you can probably elaborate on your own.

My point, really, is just that parent is being truthful! Hell, it doesn't even matter if you argue that SP2 doesn't break anything worth fretting about, the perception, with enough evidence to hold sway, still exists, so it's still a huge reason for lack of adoption. Maybe parent is flamebait as well, but sometimes truth == flamebait!

...but it's why I'm still on SP1 myself. Everything I have on my machine (including some graphics-intensive Win95/98 era stuff) runs beautifully. Many, many of the things I use often (like the old UnrealEd for Unreal1, UT99, and Deus Ex) refuse to work on any of the computers my friends have. On the other hand, Freespace always seems to work, but admittedly, that's due to a weird thing with the way-too-damn-many fonts installed on my machine. Also, doesn't SP2 refuse to allow more than 10 outgoing connection attempts at a time? I know Azureus mentions such in the settings.

Also, more seriously, XP SP2 broke the ability of my parents' virus scanner to keep an active monitor running. Which in turn quickly led to the near-total destruction of the computer before I came home for the holidays last year and fixed it (it arose again like a Phoenix, though key things in Windows are still missing . . . nothing important, actually, mainly stuff that was annoying and unable to be removed with any ease before, so in a way that's kindof a plus!)

Alot more stuff is broken, I just don't recall quite what. Hmm, maybe a quick google search will clarify:

Microsoft's own list of broken apps
Also,
SP2 removes the ability of users to send raw TCP segments
It also breaks Captive-NTFS
It can break the Group Policy Object Editor
And as mentioned above, it limits TCP to 10 outgoing attempts (link also includes methods of disabling this; more detailed information on the issue can be found here.
Here's a forum in which people describe a few of the more technical problems and their solutions for SP2

I could go on, but you get the idea. There are some serious drawbacks to SP2. I could go on about how the supposed security features don't exactly impress me (and honestly, all the third-party security programs on my computer have never had to do much, since I run it very securely anyways, and they could handle it even if I didn't), but again, you can probably elaborate on your own.

My point, really, is just that parent is being truthful! Hell, it doesn't even matter if you argue that SP2 doesn't break anything worth fretting about, the perception, with enough evidence to hold sway, still exists, so it's still a huge reason for lack of adoption. Maybe parent is flamebait as well, but sometimes truth == flamebait!

NTP, the company that has so far successfully brought suit against RIM for its patents on "wireless messaging" (can you imagine a broader term?) bought an equity stake in Visto just days before this announcement. Sounds like a pretty lucrative business. More on my O'Reilly blog.

Using crappy, meaningless variable names is hardly Perl's fault. See my article The world's two worst variable names.

So, I guess we won't be using thep pringle-can macro lens to look at the server hosting the pringle-can macro lens site, unless we want to look at a charred, burned out hulk that used to be computer chassis...

Here is a pringle can antenna.
This is a pringle can pinhole camera.
Another pringles project, a pencil holder.
A bunch more uses for pringle cans are available here.

This article is essentially a rather complex troll - a peice of writing by someone who's read an HTML book and chatted to some professionals...

You must not get out much. See Edd Dumbill.

You may disagree with his p-o-v (a &Deity;-given right on /.), but to call the article a troll is a bit much.

As a developer using and its siblings frequently, the XHTML 2.0 system of calculated heriarchies sounds jolly useful as a replacement, though - if it ever happens.

Agreed.

And, BTW, since his "Part 1" (TFA) was mostly about the WHATWG's offerings, I'd venture that "Part 2" will likely deal more with XHTML 2 (and the W3C). That's just a guess of course, but since his XTech 2005 conference in Amsterdam featured a thoroughly entertaining and provocative HTML5/Webforms2 vs. XHTML2/Xforms "shootout", I'd hazard it's a decent one.

Once you find out, you'll realize it's just a bunch of "synergistic ideas."

Birds don't live for decades.

I don't know about a cyberterrorist, per se, but there sure are a lot of compromised machines out there. Anyone remember the article that quoted an estimated 200,000 zombies added every day?

Alan Cox said it best in this interview http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2005/09/12 /alan-cox.html:
"We are still in a world where an attack like the slammer worm combined with a PC BIOS eraser or disk locking tool could wipe out half the PCs exposed to the internet in a few hours."

Adobe GoLive started out life in 1996 as a Mac-only product called GoLive Pro made a German company called Gonet, predating Dreamweaver by about 18 months. I happened to be working for their UK distributor at the time I got my hands on an early copy. It had a rather quirky Tag mode where you could drop graphic tag icons into the page together with images, IIRC.

For me, the main selling point was that it was the first graphical HTML editor that didn't mess about seriously with your code if you tried to step outside the bounds of the stuff it already knew about. Remember this was at a time when the HTML standard was in considerable flux, with Netscape and Microsoft in particular introducing new tags with every revision of their browsers. For its time, it was an excellent piece of software, Version 2.0 in in the summer of 1997 brought a more extensible architecture; it was way ahead of the pack in terms of functionality, speed and minimal machine-generated HTML code bloat, particularly when you compared it to clunky behemoths like NetObjects Fusion that were its main competitors. Fusion, like so many other products that were around at the time, stored the site in a proprietary format file and merely published to HTML; as soon as you needed to tweak something, you were on your own and couldn't roll the changes back into the source file.

Macromedia didn't ship Dreamweaver 1.0 until December 1997 and IMHO it wasn't really until v1.2 that it became useful.

Adobe bought the product in 1999, took it over to Windows and made some changes, but Macromedia steadily improved Dreamweaver until version 3.0 was vastly superior. I gave up on GoLive around that point, especially as Dreamweaver worked so much better with my usual weapon of choice, hand-coding with BBEdit.

I can't really comment on GoLive as a 'ripoff of Dreamweaver' nowadays, I've not used it since version 5.0, but in some respects you could argue that it's the other way round. :)

There's a potted history of GoLive on the O'Reilly site: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/javascript/2002/04 /26/golive_history.html