Slashdot Mirror

NSA (not a joke). Here is an article from ZDnet about it. AND this is PRE-9/11. What do you think has happened since? http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-529826.html

what you even 'repeat' for a few seconds..
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5154219.html

TiVo said users had watched the skin-baring incident nearly three times more than any other moment during the Super Bowl broadcast, sparking headlines that dramatically publicized the power of the company's longstanding data-gathering practices.

Nothing... http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/index.php?p=84 2 They are completely avoiding the issue so they don't have to look like bad guys. You can bet that if BS gets away with it they will jump on the bandwagon.

As much as I hate responding to Trolls: Here you go.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-6005_22-5764187.html

By the way, that took two seconds on Google, less time than it took you to write your post.

No, this is just another point in making telecos look bad.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=842

Why are the cable companies not doing this? Simple; it allows them to crush the telecos.

In my area, we've got 2 cable companies, and 2 telecos. You sign up for DSL/phone service? 2-4 weeks install time, 1 year minimum contract, you often pay per-minute local long distance charges, you pay for your equipment, and your telephone bill is guaranteed to be ~10% high than what you expect. You need customer service? They'll charge you if the tech steps inside your house. They'll charge you if the tech finds nothing wrong outside your house. And it'll take the tech a minimum of 2 weeks to get there.

You sign up for Cable/phone service? 1 week install time, max. Often next day service. I believe they even have a "20$ off your first bill if we don't install in 3 days" policy. No contract. Free equipment. Telephone service? All you can eat. Internet service? All you can eat. Before they will allow you to agree to service, they say, "Your first bill will be $X. All bills after that will be $Y. This rate is guaranteed till 2008. Do you accept?". Guess what; your bill will be exactly that price.

Need tech support? 3 days at the latest. Generally same day, if you call in the morning. Most techs will give you their personal cell number, and one tech is assigned to your property; if you ever need service again, you'll get the same tech.

And charge you for repairs? Hahahaha. Doesn't matter if its inside, or outside. We we're having connection problems. What does the cable company do? Run a new wire from the pole (~100 feet). Bury it for us. Run it into the house. Replace all the in house wiring (yes, inside the walls, thank god for straight shots, so they could snake it round). How much did this cost us? 0. It took 4 contractors to get the job done, too. That was a _job well done_ that deserved a tip (one of the few times I've tipped someone not out of politeness, but out of, "Holy shit, that guy did an amazing job.")

If you watch TV in my area, you see commercial after commercial where the cable companies tear into the telecos. They make fun of contracts. They make fun of shoddy service. They make fun of all these crazy random fees. Soon they'll make fun of this QoS stuff.

Having been on both sides of the fence, I have to admit they are pretty much dead on.

Proof of concept exploit:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5189335.html?ta g=zdfd.newsfeed
Feh. It has the .app file extension. I am not amazed.

http://daringfireball.net/2004/04/crying_wolf

It's more sophisticated that you might think:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/google/
http://siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php /1488031

Notice:
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=nazi&btnG=Goog le-Suche&meta=
Ergebnisse 1 - 10 von ungefähr 28.300.000 für nazi. (0,03 Sekunden)
http://www.google.fr/search?hl=fr&ie=ISO-8859-1&q= nazi&btnG=Rechercher&meta=
Résultats 1 - 10 sur un total d'environ 28 300 000 pour nazi. (0,05 secondes)
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en- us&q=nazi&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Results 1 - 10 of about 29,900,000 for nazi [definition]. (0.04 seconds)

See the search count numbers? Don't blame it on language. Lets search for Nazi in ... Japan:
http://www.google.co.jp/search?q=Nazi&btnG=%CF%EE% E8%F1%EA+%E2+Google&lr=
Nazi 29,900,000 1 - 10 (0.05 )

Neat, huh?

Keep in mind, unless you specify google to focus on your language, the search results should be _exactly_ the same across local sites. Except if they tamper with the results, which both Google and Yahoo do for Germany and France.

Research on Similar experiences with china:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/china/

Sadly, you can't test the Chinese version from outside China. cyberlaw sometimes has a proxy running in China that will allow you to test it, but its currently down. A google filters those results based upon whether your IP block is Chinese or not.

Here's someone's test. You don't have to believe it, I guess:
http://www.dit-inc.us/report/google200409/google.h tm

Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_words_blocked _by_search_engines_in_Mainland_China

Interestingly enough, looks like our Congress criters may be trying to change this behavior:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6026733.html

Yep, Mac OS X can be hit with a Trojan not a big suprise there. Symantec has some info on this 'MP3Concept Trojan Horse', which is benign. It does use a neat trick to imbed the code in an MP3, but other than that it isn't that special. Tricking someone to run your program isn't really something that we will ever make impossible under every circumstances, but I will admidt that using filename extensions to identify file types is one very stupid thing that Mac OS X copied from Windows, and then hiding them by default only compounds the stupidity.

Exploit, infections from not known: http://www.macintouch.com/opener.html

But "opener" requires a previously comprimized system. A "rootkit" without a viable delivery mechinism isn't really a "virus" or "worm" or even a "trojan". Acording to McAfee: "This threat does not make use of an exploit, so to have the script run successfully on a system and make changes, the user account from which the script is run must have sufficient rights. If no superuser/root/admin access is available many of the subroutines will fail and generate errors." I don't know why McAfee classifies it as a virus/worm since it doesn't seem to have any propagation abilities.

In Wild exploit, known infections: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

True, the exploit mentioned is a tricky thing (potentially allowing code that was downloaded to be run as trusted), however I don't know if any was ever found in the wild - and even then it would still require an administrator's password to do system damage. The "hole" was supposedly patched by Apple's Security Update 2004-06-07 according to Unsanity who had released a little application to guard against the exploit.

If those are the only ones you've found, you haven't really shown any "exploit[s] for a Mac OS X vulnerability", although the MP3Concept Trojan I guess uses some "social hacking" types of tricks that would also work in Windows by hiding that it is an application rather than an mp3 file. Even if we accept a count of 3 (or ten or twenty), Mac OS X would still be comparitively malware-free.

Because most weren't critical vulnerabilities and there are no exploits. Show me an exploit for a Mac OS X vulnerability. Now, show me one in the wild. Can't? The only thing you have to do to wipe the smug look of a Mac users face is to release an exploit in to the wild.

I actually don't have to do anything that hasn't already been done...

Here is my 2 minute search for a response to your questions specifically.

Proof of concept exploit:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5189335.html?ta g=zdfd.newsfeed

Exploit, infections from not known:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39155837,00.htm

In Wild exploit, known infections:
http://www.macintouch.com/opener.html

I don't have time to do more research to help your denial, but I would suggest you actually do a bit of research yourself and see that OSX is no more perfect than any other OS. PERIOD.

Another thing to point out is their pension system. Just this week they announced they would be fucking over all the older employees by freezing the pension scheme in 2008.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4587204.stm
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT= 104&STORY=/www/story/01-06-2006/0004244179&EDATE=
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6020454.html
http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/all-editorial1ja n12,0,6085827.story?coll=all-newsopinion-hed

Yes, because it's impossible for an identical problem to exist in WINE, and therefore open source solves all problems.

It's not that this article is biased it's that this article is comparing two very different processors(obvious I know but trust me it gets better). These two processors are set for different release dates http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6018135.html(th anks for the link Glock) and so that means we're comparing brand new technology to technology that won't be out on the market for two or three more quarters. According to AMD's buisness plan they should be kicking the pants off this processor by the time they get to the third quarter of this year, which is when pentiums processor is set to release.

You mean when it actually ships? Intel's desktop lineup (such as the EE processor mentioned) is still Netburst architecture, just at 65 nm.

AMD should still have a great story to tell when it hits 65 nm. and supports newer memory architectures.

Intel still doesn't have an integrated memory controller, or an answer to Coherent Hypertransport. Even in its upcoming new architecture.

Competition is a great thing, and Intel has a long way to go before it stops losing marketshare to AMD.

Here's an idea: Apple, do everything you need to do to create the next "impossibly small" version of one of your products. Then don't do it. Keep it the same size, and fill the available space with a BATTERY so we actually use and enjoy all of those cool features.

A video iPod that can barely display two hours of video? Please.

F-Secure said in its company blog that it has tested the patch and it appears to coexist with the Guilfanov fix.

Now on ZDNet as well:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=146

If this guy is there, I would say the "odds" are well represented.

If this wasn't South Park, nobody would care.
Yes, hence why it's on Slashdot... us nerds like the show and like to hear stuff about it. It's called entertainment, but if you'd prefer boring, humorless technology reports 24/7 might I recommend this site.

"And C++ programming languages, we own those, have licensed them out multiple times, obviously. We have a lot of royalties coming to us from C++."

http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/mai n/0,14179,2877578,00.html

You know where to send your royalty checks.

Thanks
Darl McBride

Next month, starting with Yonah and likely following with Merom (64-bit notebooks) and Conroe (post-P4 desktops).

According to the article I linked to (and other articles), Intel will emphasize Yonah's platform (Centrino-like bundle of CPU/chipset/wireless) and refer to the CPU component as "Core Duo" and "Core Solo."

Sorry, I forgot the link. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5845409.html

slashdot is really only 50% misunderstanding and name calling. if you want 100%, go to zdnet where any article on microsoft or 'linux' is a source of constant flaming.

I'm interested in seeing how objective Digital Universe will be, considering Firmage's strong beliefs in alien intervention and that major innovations in microprocessor designs were actually gifts from intelligent and benign extraterrestrials.

I haven't submitted this story to Slashdot on Dec. 11 because I thought I didn't offer enough added value to the IsraCast article, except for different pictures and a few different references. But at least, I wrote the introduction myself, the one that Izeickl has completely duplicated --stolen??. Check for yourself by reading my my short version (on my blog) and my long version (for ZDNet.com) of "The nanoarmor of the future." Izeickl, what about sticking to laptop reviews? And if you move outside your domain, why don't you quote the sources you're using?

"Say I'm a hacker, right? And I notice a bug in some open-source code and I notice a bug in MS' new version of IE.

Okaaay.

"Now I'm a good person, but I don't have access to the IE code."

So, why don't you just *report* it to them?

"So I can fix the open-source code, but all I can do about IE (or any other MS product) is tell them and hope they'll fix it but many don't since MS doesn't see them as a problem.

So quit bitching and just tell them about it. If they sit on it, release a POC on the net after 45 days or so. This is a rather flawed argument anyway because it is based on the presumption that A) and open source project would WANT your fix, and B) Open source dev teams never downplay vulnerabilities, abd C) Big coporations allways downplay vulnerabilites. The same ego that leads big corporations like Microsoft and Oracle to downplay vulnerabilities leads OS developers to do the same thing. The Mozilla dev team has done it multiple times since the release of Firefox 1.0.

"The only way to get them to fix it would be to prove to them that it IS a problem. "

The like I said, be nice and report it. If they ignore you force them to act by releasing a POC on the net.

"Why?" [would linux become a target if everyone used it on the desktop]

Because Malware authors today are in it for the money. There is a ton of money to made on owned machines, and peoples' idientities. Weather the dominant platform has a Window a Penquin or an Apple for a mascot means nothing to the people who are out to make money.

"Do you really think that if "a bunch of ignorant people used Linux" we nerds would switch over to something else, just because the average user is now using Linux?

Perhaps. If everyone's grandma started using Linux, it would become a haven for malware, and thus not as appealing as other good free OSs like FreeBSD or Solaris.

"There'd still be the same number (if not more) of contributors to Linux, so we'd still get problems fixed at the same speed or faster."

The speed at which problems get fixed is irrelevant when you throw ignorant users into the mix. Look at some weblogs, and you'll notice that a large percentage of firefox users are still using version 1.05 or earlier, a version for which remote code execution exploit code was released a few days ago. What do you think would happen if 70-90% of web users used Firefox? Do you think adware distributors who are out to make money on ad revenue not target firefox users because it's an open source app? There are remote code execution exploits for earlier versions of firefox too, and many users are still using 1.0. Firefox users are supposedly 'savy' web users yet they continue to click around the net using exteremely vulberable versions. The fact is, many people don't update their software like they should because they simply don't know any better. A recent linux worm is still out in the wild despite the fact that it exploits a couple of fairly old vulnerabilities and the worm itself is over a month old. I run awstats on one of my webservers and updated it at least a month before the worm came out, but it's pretty obvious that many other people didn't.

"And Windows is "in the crosshairs" (so to speak) because of its gaping security holes."

What "gaping security holes" are you speaking of? Do you mean the two months patched vulnerability that the newest windows worm exploits? How exactly are worms like this for linux any different? Windows is in the crosshairs because that's where the money is at.

"Say I'm a hacker, right? And I notice a bug in some open-source code and I notice a bug in MS' new version of IE.

Okaaay.

"Now I'm a good person, but I don't have access to the IE code."

So, why don't you just *report* it to them?

"So I can fix the open-source code, but all I can do about IE (or any other MS product) is tell them and hope they'll fix it but many don't since MS doesn't see them as a problem.

So quit bitching and just tell them about it. If they sit on it, release a POC on the net after 45 days or so. This is a rather flawed argument anyway because it is based on the presumption that A) and open source project would WANT your fix, and B) Open source dev teams never downplay vulnerabilities, abd C) Big coporations allways downplay vulnerabilites. The same ego that leads big corporations like Microsoft and Oracle to downplay vulnerabilities leads OS developers to do the same thing. The Mozilla dev team has done it multiple times since the release of Firefox 1.0.

"The only way to get them to fix it would be to prove to them that it IS a problem. "

The like I said, be nice and report it. If they ignore you force them to act by releasing a POC on the net.

"Why?" [would linux become a target if everyone used it on the desktop]

Because Malware authors today are in it for the money. There is a ton of money to made on owned machines, and peoples' idientities. Weather the dominant platform has a Window a Penquin or an Apple for a mascot means nothing to the people who are out to make money.

"Do you really think that if "a bunch of ignorant people used Linux" we nerds would switch over to something else, just because the average user is now using Linux?

Perhaps. If everyone's grandma started using Linux, it would become a haven for malware, and thus not as appealing as other good free OSs like FreeBSD or Solaris.

"There'd still be the same number (if not more) of contributors to Linux, so we'd still get problems fixed at the same speed or faster."

The speed at which problems get fixed is irrelevant when you throw ignorant users into the mix. Look at some weblogs, and you'll notice that a large percentage of firefox users are still using version 1.05 or earlier, a version for which remote code execution exploit code was released a few days ago. What do you think would happen if 70-90% of web users used Firefox? Do you think adware distributors who are out to make money on ad revenue not target firefox users because it's an open source app? There are remote code execution exploits for earlier versions of firefox too, and many users are still using 1.0. Firefox users are supposedly 'savy' web users yet they continue to click around the net using exteremely vulberable versions. The fact is, many people don't update their software like they should because they simply don't know any better. A recent linux worm is still out in the wild despite the fact that it exploits a couple of fairly old vulnerabilities and the worm itself is over a month old. I run awstats on one of my webservers and updated it at least a month before the worm came out, but it's pretty obvious that many other people didn't.

"And Windows is "in the crosshairs" (so to speak) because of its gaping security holes."

What "gaping security holes" are you speaking of? Do you mean the two months patched vulnerability that the newest windows worm exploits? How exactly are worms like this for linux any different? Windows is in the crosshairs because that's where the money is at.

"The [LUA Buglight] tool is primarily meant for IT professionals who need to fix bugs in corporate or third-party applications, the Microsoft representative said. However, it can also be used by developers to hunt for LUA bugs in their own applications, the representative said." It is currently not available, as of right now, and the release date is unknown.

From

Now another story suggesting that Wikipedia is out of control emerges. Some months ago, OfficialWire published an article about untrue postings on Wikipedia, by Christian Wirth also known as RaDMan. Shortly after the devastating earthquake and tsunamis on December 26, 2004 in the Indian Ocean, Wirth took upon himself to wage a war against QuakeAID Foundation, Inc. Wirth's arsenal consisted of untrue, libelous writings that he and Wikipedia published as fact. All attempts, by QuakeAID's founder, to correct the untrue comments were re-edited, blocked or labelled as 'untrue' by a group of volunteers, who hold themselves untouchable and above the law.

QuakeAID has written once again to Jimbo Wales, demanding the untrue and libelous information be removed from Wikipedia, while a group of interested parties have joined together and plan to initiate legal proceedings against Wales and Wikipedia Foundation, Inc., and numerous others--the so-called anonymous 'volunteers'--who they believe should be held responsible for the content they publish.

None of the qualifiers matter to the average user. The point is that this was a bug, or rather a complaint about OOo, and not acknowledged in the parent post.

Further, this complaint has been referenced in earlier Slashdot postings. However, a quick google of "openoffice load times" returned this (admittedly a ZD reference) http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=119

I'm a big fan of OOo, and have used it since the dark ages of Stardivision, including under Linux emulation on FreeBSD. However, I would say that if it cannot deal with M$ office formats in an efficient and fast manner, then it has failed as a credible replacment for the M$ beast, if only because it makes my life as a computer support person hell.

Brown is obviously far from unbiased; he seems to base much of his points on a ZDnet blog post by George Ou and bashes its' detractors, while it's patently obvious that Ou's "performance comparison" is a shoddy and misleading piece of work (for instance, witness this comment thread).

Brown is obviously far from unbiased; he seems to base much of his points on a ZDnet blog post by George Ou and bashes its' detractors, while it's patently obvious that Ou's "performance comparison" is a shoddy and misleading piece of work (for instance, witness this comment thread).

It's not the complete take-down of the USA's electronic infrastructure that should worry you. After all, that would hurt everyone. This is what's more realistic:

Titan Rain was covered on slashdot before, but the linked Time article has since gone premium. A quick google search brings up this and this, though I'm not sure how reliable they are since they're random Google search results.

Ah, here's a ZDnet article. Might not all be FUD.

building in indemnification for something that is still, essentially, theoretical. Isn't that like taking out insurance against alien attack?

All insurance is based on something that's theoretical - it just depends on how theoretical.

Up until last December, a tsunami that could kill a quarter of a million people was only theoretical. Up until last August, a hurricane that would force the evacuation of New Orleans was only theoretical. And up until September 11, 2001, terrorists flying jets into New York skyscrapers was only theoretical.

Personally, I feel that the chance of a patent lawsuit against open source isn't quite as remote as being attacked by aliens - especially when you have a company that has said it will do just that.

Why would Christian extremist groups be against it? They want to eventually mandate that all questionable content (determined by the U.S. government, maybe the FCC) is forced in to some sort of adult domain, and require ISPs to provide optional filtering of these TLDs. The adult webmasters are the ones against this, and are actually donating big dollars to their lobbying group to fight it. The Internet porn market is already saturated. You aren't going to get a larger percentage of the net viewers to start looking at porn, but these TLDs will require re-registering your domain name again to protect your namespace. For example a site like sex.com is pretty much forced to purchse sex.xxx to keep from losing it's marketshare, and at what price? According to this chairman of the ICM Registry in this article, about $75 a pop. It's a porn tax, an easy money grab at the net's most profitable industry.

With the new, incompatible architecture, porting existing projects to the 360 will likely take quite a bit more effort. I understand your concerns, however IBM has opened the source to some Cell libraries. IBM has also a site devoted to the cell processor that includes kernel patches for the cell processor. We also don't know enough about the security on the 360--it may be that mods will have to be specific to each unit, making said mods more costly and possibly more dangerous (easier to screw up the installation). We also didn't know about the security of the original xbox, however look how far we were able to get with that. :)

'nuff said.

Uh, I don't like the sound of it, because
Linux is for terrorists

Excuse me for not going to Google. Search on:

walmart linux pc

Here's the first hit: WalMart Offers a New Linux PC. And another one: Wal-Mart Expands Linux Offerring.

MS clearly doesn't get it because game systems made by major consumer electronics companies never have power issues. /sarcasm

Listen, I'm not excusing it if MS used shoddy power supplies to cut costs but power is usually the biggest problem to face consumer electronics, regardless of manufacturer. Are some companies better? Sure, but that doesn't mean they're immune to these problems (ala Sony and the PS2 power problem).

Of *course* these things are going to take a lot of power and dissipate a lot of heat. There is very little you can do about it besides make sure there is adequate ventilation. Efficiency gets you only so far annd adding fans/heatsinks won't make a lick of difference if there is no where for the air to go. If people are going to stuff it on shelves and suffocate the box, how on earth do you "design it for that use"?

is a man with big big balls... ask m$

Personally I think that what the open-source community needs in general terms is more marketing. The closed-source guys get it -- they get it because they didn't win market share by writing a better product (not even better than the other closed-source guy). The closed-source companys won market share by MARKETING.
Plain and simple.
And now that they face a new competitor (open source) they respond in a time-tested manner: marketing.
It should be plain and obvious by now that the steady stream of "articles" (c|net, zdnet etc) are just part of a marketing campaign; hidden under the umbrella of 'news'.

From the ZDNet Article:
Software Choice, (on the other hand), will try to convince legislators that open standards and open source don't necessarily go together. "It is important that government policy recognize that open standards--which are available to any software developers--are not synonymous with, and do not require, open source software either for their adoption or utility," Software Choice stated.
Also, their own policy:
Voluntary, industry-led standard setting is the most effective way to develop platform-neutral and market-based standards. When these standards are open and available to all through reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing they help developers to create products that can interoperate with each other.
Sorry to state the obvious, but they can't possibly seem to have a problem with Open (document) Standards; an yet somehow they do. God help the "value" economy!

Here is more information on the Initiative for Software Choice. That who article reads like a clever troll, such lines as the one quoted in the summary
"It reflects the currently fashionable idea that confiscatory government policy must be used to even the score (whatever that means), thrusting highly demanded, privately risked IP out of the hands of legitimate property owners and into the hands of other, favored actors to further "develop" it.
Man, wowweee, what a line.
'Whatever that means' nicely derogative in reference to 'even the score', by it's nature an inflamatory phrase, which as far as I can tell was applied to this by the Initiative for Software Choice. Nice trick: imply that your opposition is Evil/mean/cruel/selfish/etc by restating their position with inflamatory language, then attack their position based on that language that you used to restate it.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5254291.html

Ex-MislTech

Drawing by kids are ok, office is just like any other modern office but what I wanna see some pics of data center .. This is what I know so far, photo:the early days of Google's data center http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=1709

But for me, I will love Google even more if its efforts are steered towords making Microsoft and its procucts irrelevant in this internet age.

I am looking atat especially this:

• Online video: Sites like http://www.zdnet.com/ insist on Realplayer and Windows Media on the WIndows platform only.

One solution would be adopting Fuendo's java technology to stream video.

Internet Explorer monopoly?

Market Share of IE in July 2005

Definition of "monopoly"

How does 87.2% of the market constitue an exclusive control?

No it doesn't, not any more. If you want to actually take any of that music with you, it'll cost you $12 a month. If you want to burn a CD, it'll cost you an extra 79 cents per song. And when they inevitably jack up the fees (and they will; $5 a month is a loss leader) and you switch to another subscription service, you'll have to recatalog and redownload all your music; what a hassle! You can have it.

The java tip is a good one since the java slowdown is apparently much larger in 2.0 as compared to earlier versions. In earlier versions, you'd get faster startup times by increasing the memory that OOo uses by default. You can do this in OOo 2.0 as well, and it will help with startup times also. Someone recently blogged about the tremendous amount of memory OOo is using. But the memory settings in the options menu are set conservatively. If you have the memory to spare, increasing the settings allowing OOo to use more memory will get you noticeably faster start times.

Tools -> options -> OO.org -> memory -> Graphics cache -> Use for OO.org (increase this one, try increasing 8 mb at a time, experiment, don't remember the default setting). - Graphics Cache -> Memory per object (try increasing this one also, it is set low, so try doubling, then adding 4-8 mb, first setting above should give better results).

Don't forget that once started and shut down, subsequent startup of OOo will be faster because some processes are still running or in memory. You'll need a reboot for windows, and for you GNU/Linux users, you'll either need a reboot or for you individuals that only reboot during blue moons, you'll need to wait a few hours or days depending on usage for most of OOo to clear out before you can reliably test startup times.

While OOo quickstart process running in the background allows OOo to startup faster, it also uses up resources, so I don't run it since I don't use OOo that much. If you are a regular office user and can spare the resources (not much but on some systems every bit counts), then by all means use the quickstarter.

It's a shame what Sun has done to OOo because they feel the need to push that pos java on us. That's the tradeoff to using a FOSS suite. Luckily Debian systems don't install java by default, and I haven't had luck in getting it to work on my server, so neither OOo nor the web browsers have java functionality (or its slowness) so it isn't a big issue. The only complaint I've had on the lack of java is the inability to do speed tests at third party sites when troubleshooting voip or connectivity issues.

OpenOffice memory/startup tips: here

and the blog about the memory hog that OOo is:

here

I just got some feedback from Spymom.

We are not suing SunBelt - SlashDot got it wrong!

From Sunbelt themselves:
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=167981&thr eshold=1&commentsort=5&tid=123&mode=thread&cid=140 09674

The original article:
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5944208.html

If you read the text on SlashDot linked to above you will see that we are not unreasonable, we just don't want our app that people have bought to be deleted without the owners permission or knowledge - as has happened with numerous "big" companies.

When contacting these "big" companies - including Symantec about the problem they simply refuse to reply - we initially tried to contact them all about 9 months ago in order to bring about some kind of cooperative agreement, with information about detecting out program as a commercial keylogger and about uninstalling our program safely (if the user decided to do so).

Our point is that commercial programs are different that trojans written by criminals. It is fair that they are pointed out by the anti-virus/trojan program, but not fair that they are automatically deleted. The user should be told that they are a commercial keylogger or similar and the default action should be to not delete. AVG by comparison deleted them without informing the user.

We are open about what ports are being used and we do not try to bypass firewalls or shutdown anti-virus programs. All are easily possible as you probably well know and we feel that comparing it to programs written by criminals is unfair.

We, as a company, are very easy to contact - if we had been contacted/replied to by the anti-virus companies (initially - before we had to put the download notice up) we would have told them how to safely uninstall the client program, and we would have also told them of a special flag - that if present would stop the client from installing again in the future. They would also have been given information that would have told the user WHO was attempting to spy on them! The condition would have been as above - that the user be informed that it was a commercial program and the default action would have been not to uninstall.

Sunbelt will soon be given this information in the hope that other companies will follow in the way they list the program (if detected).

Best regards,
  Anthony