I think the main problem with you're ex's mom's computer was that she was running XP on only 128MB of RAM. That's the minimum required to just run the OS. I've installed XP on similar specs and the result was not pretty. A fresh install is fine, but once you put the anti-virus software on, the thing shuddered to a halt. A RAM upgrade solved this problem and the computer came back to life. The bloatware is a problem, but I'd be interested to see what kind of bloatware would actually run on Linux. Plus, there are more elegant solutions for Dell to give us the bloatware without actually installing it. Since installing software is so easy with Synaptic, all they have to do is just say "Click here for this great tool that you really really need (that's useless)!" Or even have a special home page in Synaptic for the "Featured Applications" of the month. They could constantly serve up new bloatware in real time! (I think I just threw up a little)
Yes you are correct, I am using ubuntu (most of the time) and it is patching everything from the kernel to my instant messenger. This certainly accounts for the frequency. However, my original point is not that Linux needs patching just as often as Windows. My point is that Linux is not some magical "patch-free" operating system as the original poster was trying to imply.
While many of the patches in Linux are just as you say, merely enhancements (many OSS apps seem to be a constant WIP), there are still plenty of patches that are bug fixes. I'm pretty sure that when Mozilla releases a patch for Firefox, they are not adding enhancements, or re-writing the code to be faster (unless the way they wrote it caused serious issues). Most Firefox patches are bug fixes. That's why they change my version from 2.0.0.2 to 2.0.0.3 and not to 2.5 or 3.0. That's why you also call it a patch, and not a full release. Patches are critical and done when absolutely necessary. Adding a spellchecker "cause it totally be cool" is not critical or absolutely necessary, and that's why that stuff is reserved for bigger releases.
Except for the fact that Linux also requires patching. Every other day I have a little star on my desktop notifying me of updates to various libraries, applications, and yes the kernel itself. Mac's have patches too. This is not necessarily a Windows vs. , this is about what the best way of releasing patches is. It's an Incremental vs. Bulk release debate. MS chose the bulk method. Is that a good decision? Maybe, maybe not. Regardless of the OS, patching is always required. No piece of software is bulletproof.
I say good riddance to these preview screenings. The preview screening for "Miracle" almost caused m y girlfriend to dump me. Funny story...
I was doing the long distance thing for a while with the girlfriend while in college. There was a preview screening of "Miracle" at the movie theater, and as avid hockey fans, my roommate and I had to go. I tell the girlfriend that I'm going to see "Miracle" tonight. A few days later she finds out that "Miracle" was not out in theaters yet. It took some explaining to convince her I was not out cheating her and was actually at a special advanced screening.
It's about time that Canada got tough on insecure girlfriends and did away with the "convenient excuse" that is the Preview Screening.
PS. Save you're breath on the "slashdotters don't have girlfriends" comments. We get it. We're socially inept nerds. ha ha
The big killer will be in a few years when cable providers have everyone on digital cable
My hope is that we can have some legislation in place that in the event a cable company decides to stop offering their analogue service, that they are forced to send the signal unencrypted, so that all that is necessary to watch the digital tv is a digital tuner. For most this still means a set-top box, but it will also open the door for "Digital Cable Ready" TV's. HD becomes the new digital with the encrypted feed. The original reason for digital cable being encrypted in the first place was to make sure that you couldn't watch digital tv without paying for the service. Since it comes down the pipe as long as you have an active connection, someone paying for analog service could watch digital tv if they went out and bought a digital tuner without paying for a digital subscription. They also get to "rent" you a set top box (grrr).
However, the way things are changing, I don't think it will even be necessary. Verizon is changing the way people think about TV and the Internet with their FiOS TV. What I really want is to pay Verizon (or some other ISP) for my fiber optic connection, and then subscribe separately to my othe r services like TV and Phone. Then the real competition begins between television content providers, and also VOIP providers have a fair chance.
You're comment on homosexuality being genetic is probably correct, but I think you're oversimplifying by assuming that if it can be proven that homosexuality is something you're born with is the same as being genetic. In a Biology class I took a year ago, the professor mentioned that there is a gland that is normally bigger in men than in women. However, in the cases of some homosexual males, this gland was smaller, indicating that it is more in line with a female. This could suggest that homosexuality is something you are born with. It does not, however, imply that it is genetic, as in something your parents pass down to you. This could be an environmental factor during pregnancy, or a random mutation, or a number of other things.
Note: I am not a Biologist/Doctor. I only took one college Biology class because it was required course to graduate. Some of my facts might be slightly incorrect, but the concept should be right. If you are an expert in genetics, homosexuality or any other topic relating to my post, please comment with corrections and or additions as I would be very interested.
In regards to Bank of America, they didn't get hit as bad as the summary implies. If you look at the description for the Bank of America "botnet", you'll find that it wasn't exactly a botnet. One machine popped up spewing some spam and it was shut down pretty quickly. Another server popped up about a week later and that one was shut down in a few hours. I wouldn't exactly call that pwnage. Even still, it is scary that anything like that is happening at a bank. Fortunately, it seems the admins over at BoA are more or less on top of things.
This is great news for Linux on the Laptop. Because laptops have now become the most popular form factor, especially among college students, a lot of people who have tried Linux, tried it on their laptops. Unfortunately, when they couldn't get wireless working or their touch-pad acts funny, they give up and go back to Windows. Those of us who take the time to get our laptops running perfectly under Linux are out there proving it can be done, but the numbers are still small. With Dell shipping with Ubuntu, all hardware will work out of the box, thus further proving that Linux is a viable option. The more people with fulling functioning Linux laptops out there, the more people will see that they too can run Linux without fear.
You're post left me a little confused for a variety of reasons. I'll start with your economic situation. First off, buying a middle performing Dell, is cheaper than building it yourself, especially if you want to install Windows on it (not that I would recommend it). If you walked into a retail chain and asked for a quote on a Dell, they would say, "Sorry, we don't sell Dells." As stated in the article, you can only buy a Dell over the phone, internet, or through a mall kiosk. Now if you go onto the Dell website, you can configure a middle performing desktop with a flat panel monitor for about $500. So instead of just buying a motherboard, CPU and RAM, you can buy a whole new computer including that monitor you were going to wait a year to buy.
In regards to why you hate Dell because it is a large OEM, you should really be kissing their asses. The reason you can even afford a computer at $500 is because of Dell and only Dell. When Dell hit the market, they began selling computers well below what HP, IBM, Compaq, etc. were offering. In fact, it was below what they could even afford to offer because Dell changed the way computers were sold. By selling only direct, they cut out the overhead costs of having their own stores and the re-sale markups associated with chains. They didn't stop there though. Dell used their new found clout to make the parts manufacturers bend over backwards for Dell. Dell insists on their suppliers to have plants and or warehouses no more than several miles from Dell's assembly facility. There's more, and the story is a standard case study for anyone in business school. But what this did to the PC industry as a whole, is change the computer from a high margin luxury item, to a very low margin commodity. Dell's margins, and now every PC maker's margins, are razor thin. This is why you can afford a computer. Remember when your average PC costs upwards of $3k?
In regards to the article, I don't think distribution is where Dell is failing. Demand has been slumping in the past couple years as their reputation has also slumped. Their designs don't scream "BUY ME!" and their bargain models are crap. They need to up the quality in their lower-end machines. The price differences should be based on performance and features, not quality.
If laptops are not fitting into their just-in-time inventory and distribution scheme, then they need to redesign the laptop. They need to design their laptops in a way that their assembly workers can easily put one together based on a customer's exact specifications in the same way they do with a desktop. While their at it, they need to redesign the look and pay attention to quality.
And the best part of the deal? All those shitty downloadable Windows "games" can't be installed!
The thing is though, Linux has plenty of productivity sucking games. The kdegames package is just loaded with addicting little puzzle games. When I switched my girlfriend over to Linux, she was only upset about the fact that she couldn't play The Sims anymore. I was thrilled, because she couldn't play The Sims anymore. Except now she spends all of her time playing Atlantik and Klickety and a bunch of other weird sounding games with a "k" in front of it.
However, I'm assuming you are talking about all of the "games" that are really just viruses and spyware that will now muck up your precious corporate network. I say good riddance to that crap.
It's technically a "Flat Eight" or a "Boxer" since the chips and their many cores are all arranged on the same plane. If it was a V8, then the chips and their cores would be stacked on the mother board and tilted at a 45 degree angle.
Although if they can arrange the sockets just so and make the heatsinks look like pistons, I might be willing to accept the V8 name.
Yes Exchange does have a web client. In fact I'm using it right now. But there are some problems with it. The web client only works similar to Outlook when you use Internet Explorer. By this I mean real time updates and alerts when you receive new messages, meeting reminders, etc. If you access the web client via Firefox or Safari (never tried Safari, but I have on Konquerer, close enough) you get a very very dumbed down version. You have to manually refresh to pick up new messages, there are no alerts for meetings or new messages and it is a much "flatter" and less dynamic experience. Now let's come back to the iPhone, running OSX, which means Safari or Firefox. In order to get an Exchange sync-ish experience, that means leaving the browser open 24-7 and hitting the refresh button every couple minutes and not getting any meeting reminders, etc.
I agree, companies don't always do what's easier, or even what makes sense, but in this case, it's a matter of staying with the status quo, which is still pretty easy and seemless, or switching to an iPhone and using duct tape and chicken wire to do what you could do before, just not as well. I don't think businesses will go for it.
f businesses let employees pick their phones (and this is a choice)
Unfortunately, if these businesses use MS Exchange or run a Blackberry server, the this is NOT a choice. As cool as the iPhone sounds on the surface, no Exchange sync or Blackberry service means no the iPhone is pretty much doomed to be a niche consumer product, not a true business device. While I won't go around endorsing Exchange, the fact of the matter is that it is extremely widespread and the exchange sync is the biggest reason why businesses use them.
Agreed...
Kevin Mitnick, as we all know is one of the more famous hackers, yet many argue that it was not his technical skills that made him so famous. It was his social engineering skills. He knew how to extract the right information from the right people so that he could then exploit the system.
Interestingly, they did make a movie about him, Takedown. While no Oscar winner, I felt is was one of the better hacking movies Hollywood has put out. As opposed to movies like "Hackers" or even "Swordfish", this movie's dialogue actually made sense to those who know the definitions of all of the acronyms (cause it's a true story), and the computers showed on-screen, actually looked like something people actually use.
But getting back on topic, it's the social engineers that we should all be afraid of. These guys may not be really hackers (at least not in traditional sense), they're really just con artists. You don't need a computer to get pwned.
In regards to the iPhone taking off, there is another thing holding in back in the smartphone market. It does not integrate with Exchange. If you look at who is carrying around Blackberry's and similar products, it's the people who need to stay connected to work on the go. As someone who works in consulting, a lot of the higher-ups are constantly bouncing around to different client sites all over the country/world. Even during normal business hours, they don't have an opportunity to check e-mail in the traditional way. Almost all of these types of people carry some kind of smart phone with Exchange integration. It is the only way for them to do their jobs. The iPhone is not for these people because it will not sync with Exchange. I don't know about other enterprise mail servers, though, so maybe the Lotus Notes folks are in the clear.
This feature may be in the works in the future, just like I'm pretty sure Cingular won't be the only provider in the long run. But I feel that this is the main thing holding it back.
Fortunately, there is a clear way of defining that line. We have the right to free speech with only two exceptions: Libel and Slander. They are both the same idea, but just pertain to how the statement was disseminated. If you say or write anything that is false about another person, it qualifies as libel/slander. If you say something really really mean, as long as it's the truth, you're in the clear. Calling someone a bitch is not libel/slander as long as you can show that they have at some point or another acted in a manner fitting of the term "bitch".
Now I'm not a lawyer, and if there are any lawyers reading feel free to clarify. But the line is whether the statement is true or false. Sometimes that can't be clearly defined. In which case, it's opinion. But even still, this opinion has to be based on something.
It's the annoying ads that people install adblock for. And the article admits this fact. Unfortunaly, they failed to refer the readers to another extension that would solve this problem: flashblocker. This blocks all flash, and thus all flash ads, which are really the annoying ones. I installed this one out of necessity on my Linux desktop because on some pages, where the flash ads would scroll out onto the page obstructing the view, would break in the Linux Firefox and just block the page with grey box. Now how am I suppose to read the article when there is a big grey box blocking all of the text!? Flashblocker did the trick.
Check your spelling. It's called "The Last Mimzy". I've seen some previews for it. The notable star is Rain Wilson (Dwight from "The Office") and looks like it is geared mostly towards kids (The E.T. audience?).
I'm with you that it should be easier for the average user to find the software they are looking for, but I have a slightly different approach. I'm a big fan of Synaptic. The first thing I usually do when I open up Synaptic is click the search option and enter a keyword. This keyword is usually a word that describes the function I want the software to perform. For instance, if I was looking for a photo editor, I would type in "photo editor". This brings up a list of packages, sometimes a pretty long one depending on what I've typed in. Then I have the task of scanning through the description column looking for that key word again. The search has brought up packages that all relate to photo editing in some way, but which one is the the actually editor. I want to find the Gimp, not the printer plugin for the Gimp, or just an underly library for it and I certainly don't want just a photo viewer. If my search could then be broken down into categories, this would save me that step. These categories would be decided based on what the function of the package is, whether it is the main package (as in The Gimp) or is it a library, plugin, etc. So my search results now look like this...
The preset categories already available when Synaptic (and others like Yumex) starts up are far too broad and require me to either sift through a long list within the category, or even continue drilling down. Worse, I sometimes don't know what category I'm looking for. Is it if I'm editing photos for the fun of it, would that be "Productivity" or "Entertainment"? Moving towards a more search oriented approach is the way to go. That's the way our desktops are now being organized thanks to tools like Google Desktop, Vistas desktop search, and Beagle. My proposed method would help make the search more meaningful. For most of us, we just want the main app, especially the beginners. So we can ignore the thousands of libraries that that app may use. However, for those that might be looking for a specific library, or want to see all of the plugins available for said, app, the list is there to be expanded.
You are right in that Jobs could refuse to sell DRM'd music. However, he tried to do this from the beginning. Unfortunately, Jobs does not control the rights to sell the music, the record companies do. The record companies allow Jobs to sell through iTunes as long as he adheres to some conditions. The record companies did not allow Jobs to sell DRM free music. Jobs resisted as much as he could, and iTunes users ended up with one of the least restrictive of the DRM policies, but nevertheless, it's still DRM'd. If Jobs really wants to stop selling DRM'd music, it is not up to him. It is up to the record companies. This is why he is issuing this statement. He is hoping that the record companies will see it his way and allow him to stop with the DRM.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the main problem with you're ex's mom's computer was that she was running XP on only 128MB of RAM. That's the minimum required to just run the OS. I've installed XP on similar specs and the result was not pretty. A fresh install is fine, but once you put the anti-virus software on, the thing shuddered to a halt. A RAM upgrade solved this problem and the computer came back to life. The bloatware is a problem, but I'd be interested to see what kind of bloatware would actually run on Linux. Plus, there are more elegant solutions for Dell to give us the bloatware without actually installing it. Since installing software is so easy with Synaptic, all they have to do is just say "Click here for this great tool that you really really need (that's useless)!" Or even have a special home page in Synaptic for the "Featured Applications" of the month. They could constantly serve up new bloatware in real time! (I think I just threw up a little)
Thanks for ruining the movie for those who haven't seen it yet, you insensitive clods!
Yes you are correct, I am using ubuntu (most of the time) and it is patching everything from the kernel to my instant messenger. This certainly accounts for the frequency. However, my original point is not that Linux needs patching just as often as Windows. My point is that Linux is not some magical "patch-free" operating system as the original poster was trying to imply.
While many of the patches in Linux are just as you say, merely enhancements (many OSS apps seem to be a constant WIP), there are still plenty of patches that are bug fixes. I'm pretty sure that when Mozilla releases a patch for Firefox, they are not adding enhancements, or re-writing the code to be faster (unless the way they wrote it caused serious issues). Most Firefox patches are bug fixes. That's why they change my version from 2.0.0.2 to 2.0.0.3 and not to 2.5 or 3.0. That's why you also call it a patch, and not a full release. Patches are critical and done when absolutely necessary. Adding a spellchecker "cause it totally be cool" is not critical or absolutely necessary, and that's why that stuff is reserved for bigger releases.
Except for the fact that Linux also requires patching. Every other day I have a little star on my desktop notifying me of updates to various libraries, applications, and yes the kernel itself. Mac's have patches too. This is not necessarily a Windows vs. , this is about what the best way of releasing patches is. It's an Incremental vs. Bulk release debate. MS chose the bulk method. Is that a good decision? Maybe, maybe not. Regardless of the OS, patching is always required. No piece of software is bulletproof.
I say good riddance to these preview screenings. The preview screening for "Miracle" almost caused m y girlfriend to dump me. Funny story...
I was doing the long distance thing for a while with the girlfriend while in college. There was a preview screening of "Miracle" at the movie theater, and as avid hockey fans, my roommate and I had to go. I tell the girlfriend that I'm going to see "Miracle" tonight. A few days later she finds out that "Miracle" was not out in theaters yet. It took some explaining to convince her I was not out cheating her and was actually at a special advanced screening.
It's about time that Canada got tough on insecure girlfriends and did away with the "convenient excuse" that is the Preview Screening.
PS. Save you're breath on the "slashdotters don't have girlfriends" comments. We get it. We're socially inept nerds. ha ha
However, the way things are changing, I don't think it will even be necessary. Verizon is changing the way people think about TV and the Internet with their FiOS TV. What I really want is to pay Verizon (or some other ISP) for my fiber optic connection, and then subscribe separately to my othe r services like TV and Phone. Then the real competition begins between television content providers, and also VOIP providers have a fair chance.
You're comment on homosexuality being genetic is probably correct, but I think you're oversimplifying by assuming that if it can be proven that homosexuality is something you're born with is the same as being genetic. In a Biology class I took a year ago, the professor mentioned that there is a gland that is normally bigger in men than in women. However, in the cases of some homosexual males, this gland was smaller, indicating that it is more in line with a female. This could suggest that homosexuality is something you are born with. It does not, however, imply that it is genetic, as in something your parents pass down to you. This could be an environmental factor during pregnancy, or a random mutation, or a number of other things.
Note: I am not a Biologist/Doctor. I only took one college Biology class because it was required course to graduate. Some of my facts might be slightly incorrect, but the concept should be right. If you are an expert in genetics, homosexuality or any other topic relating to my post, please comment with corrections and or additions as I would be very interested.
In regards to Bank of America, they didn't get hit as bad as the summary implies. If you look at the description for the Bank of America "botnet", you'll find that it wasn't exactly a botnet. One machine popped up spewing some spam and it was shut down pretty quickly. Another server popped up about a week later and that one was shut down in a few hours. I wouldn't exactly call that pwnage. Even still, it is scary that anything like that is happening at a bank. Fortunately, it seems the admins over at BoA are more or less on top of things.
This is great news for Linux on the Laptop. Because laptops have now become the most popular form factor, especially among college students, a lot of people who have tried Linux, tried it on their laptops. Unfortunately, when they couldn't get wireless working or their touch-pad acts funny, they give up and go back to Windows. Those of us who take the time to get our laptops running perfectly under Linux are out there proving it can be done, but the numbers are still small. With Dell shipping with Ubuntu, all hardware will work out of the box, thus further proving that Linux is a viable option. The more people with fulling functioning Linux laptops out there, the more people will see that they too can run Linux without fear.
You're post left me a little confused for a variety of reasons. I'll start with your economic situation. First off, buying a middle performing Dell, is cheaper than building it yourself, especially if you want to install Windows on it (not that I would recommend it). If you walked into a retail chain and asked for a quote on a Dell, they would say, "Sorry, we don't sell Dells." As stated in the article, you can only buy a Dell over the phone, internet, or through a mall kiosk. Now if you go onto the Dell website, you can configure a middle performing desktop with a flat panel monitor for about $500. So instead of just buying a motherboard, CPU and RAM, you can buy a whole new computer including that monitor you were going to wait a year to buy.
In regards to why you hate Dell because it is a large OEM, you should really be kissing their asses. The reason you can even afford a computer at $500 is because of Dell and only Dell. When Dell hit the market, they began selling computers well below what HP, IBM, Compaq, etc. were offering. In fact, it was below what they could even afford to offer because Dell changed the way computers were sold. By selling only direct, they cut out the overhead costs of having their own stores and the re-sale markups associated with chains. They didn't stop there though. Dell used their new found clout to make the parts manufacturers bend over backwards for Dell. Dell insists on their suppliers to have plants and or warehouses no more than several miles from Dell's assembly facility. There's more, and the story is a standard case study for anyone in business school. But what this did to the PC industry as a whole, is change the computer from a high margin luxury item, to a very low margin commodity. Dell's margins, and now every PC maker's margins, are razor thin. This is why you can afford a computer. Remember when your average PC costs upwards of $3k?
In regards to the article, I don't think distribution is where Dell is failing. Demand has been slumping in the past couple years as their reputation has also slumped. Their designs don't scream "BUY ME!" and their bargain models are crap. They need to up the quality in their lower-end machines. The price differences should be based on performance and features, not quality.
If laptops are not fitting into their just-in-time inventory and distribution scheme, then they need to redesign the laptop. They need to design their laptops in a way that their assembly workers can easily put one together based on a customer's exact specifications in the same way they do with a desktop. While their at it, they need to redesign the look and pay attention to quality.
However, I'm assuming you are talking about all of the "games" that are really just viruses and spyware that will now muck up your precious corporate network. I say good riddance to that crap.
No.
It's technically a "Flat Eight" or a "Boxer" since the chips and their many cores are all arranged on the same plane. If it was a V8, then the chips and their cores would be stacked on the mother board and tilted at a 45 degree angle.
Although if they can arrange the sockets just so and make the heatsinks look like pistons, I might be willing to accept the V8 name.
Yes Exchange does have a web client. In fact I'm using it right now. But there are some problems with it. The web client only works similar to Outlook when you use Internet Explorer. By this I mean real time updates and alerts when you receive new messages, meeting reminders, etc. If you access the web client via Firefox or Safari (never tried Safari, but I have on Konquerer, close enough) you get a very very dumbed down version. You have to manually refresh to pick up new messages, there are no alerts for meetings or new messages and it is a much "flatter" and less dynamic experience. Now let's come back to the iPhone, running OSX, which means Safari or Firefox. In order to get an Exchange sync-ish experience, that means leaving the browser open 24-7 and hitting the refresh button every couple minutes and not getting any meeting reminders, etc.
I agree, companies don't always do what's easier, or even what makes sense, but in this case, it's a matter of staying with the status quo, which is still pretty easy and seemless, or switching to an iPhone and using duct tape and chicken wire to do what you could do before, just not as well. I don't think businesses will go for it.
Probably better to not post the link. From what has been described, I doubt the site could withstand a slashdotting.
Agreed... Kevin Mitnick, as we all know is one of the more famous hackers, yet many argue that it was not his technical skills that made him so famous. It was his social engineering skills. He knew how to extract the right information from the right people so that he could then exploit the system.
Interestingly, they did make a movie about him, Takedown. While no Oscar winner, I felt is was one of the better hacking movies Hollywood has put out. As opposed to movies like "Hackers" or even "Swordfish", this movie's dialogue actually made sense to those who know the definitions of all of the acronyms (cause it's a true story), and the computers showed on-screen, actually looked like something people actually use.
But getting back on topic, it's the social engineers that we should all be afraid of. These guys may not be really hackers (at least not in traditional sense), they're really just con artists. You don't need a computer to get pwned.
In regards to the iPhone taking off, there is another thing holding in back in the smartphone market. It does not integrate with Exchange. If you look at who is carrying around Blackberry's and similar products, it's the people who need to stay connected to work on the go. As someone who works in consulting, a lot of the higher-ups are constantly bouncing around to different client sites all over the country/world. Even during normal business hours, they don't have an opportunity to check e-mail in the traditional way. Almost all of these types of people carry some kind of smart phone with Exchange integration. It is the only way for them to do their jobs. The iPhone is not for these people because it will not sync with Exchange. I don't know about other enterprise mail servers, though, so maybe the Lotus Notes folks are in the clear.
This feature may be in the works in the future, just like I'm pretty sure Cingular won't be the only provider in the long run. But I feel that this is the main thing holding it back.
Fortunately, there is a clear way of defining that line. We have the right to free speech with only two exceptions: Libel and Slander. They are both the same idea, but just pertain to how the statement was disseminated. If you say or write anything that is false about another person, it qualifies as libel/slander. If you say something really really mean, as long as it's the truth, you're in the clear. Calling someone a bitch is not libel/slander as long as you can show that they have at some point or another acted in a manner fitting of the term "bitch". Now I'm not a lawyer, and if there are any lawyers reading feel free to clarify. But the line is whether the statement is true or false. Sometimes that can't be clearly defined. In which case, it's opinion. But even still, this opinion has to be based on something.
It's the annoying ads that people install adblock for. And the article admits this fact. Unfortunaly, they failed to refer the readers to another extension that would solve this problem: flashblocker. This blocks all flash, and thus all flash ads, which are really the annoying ones. I installed this one out of necessity on my Linux desktop because on some pages, where the flash ads would scroll out onto the page obstructing the view, would break in the Linux Firefox and just block the page with grey box. Now how am I suppose to read the article when there is a big grey box blocking all of the text!? Flashblocker did the trick.
Check your spelling. It's called "The Last Mimzy". I've seen some previews for it. The notable star is Rain Wilson (Dwight from "The Office") and looks like it is geared mostly towards kids (The E.T. audience?).
I'm with you that it should be easier for the average user to find the software they are looking for, but I have a slightly different approach. I'm a big fan of Synaptic. The first thing I usually do when I open up Synaptic is click the search option and enter a keyword. This keyword is usually a word that describes the function I want the software to perform. For instance, if I was looking for a photo editor, I would type in "photo editor". This brings up a list of packages, sometimes a pretty long one depending on what I've typed in. Then I have the task of scanning through the description column looking for that key word again. The search has brought up packages that all relate to photo editing in some way, but which one is the the actually editor. I want to find the Gimp, not the printer plugin for the Gimp, or just an underly library for it and I certainly don't want just a photo viewer. If my search could then be broken down into categories, this would save me that step. These categories would be decided based on what the function of the package is, whether it is the main package (as in The Gimp) or is it a library, plugin, etc. So my search results now look like this...
Search: "photo editor"
Photo Editors
- GIMP
+Plugins...
+Libraries...
- [other editor]
+Plugins...
+Libraries...
Image Viewers
- ImageMagik
+Plugins...
+Libraries...
- gThumb
+Plugins...
+Libraries...
- kphoto
+Plugins...
+Libraries...
- [other viewer]
+Plugins...
+Libraries...
The preset categories already available when Synaptic (and others like Yumex) starts up are far too broad and require me to either sift through a long list within the category, or even continue drilling down. Worse, I sometimes don't know what category I'm looking for. Is it if I'm editing photos for the fun of it, would that be "Productivity" or "Entertainment"? Moving towards a more search oriented approach is the way to go. That's the way our desktops are now being organized thanks to tools like Google Desktop, Vistas desktop search, and Beagle. My proposed method would help make the search more meaningful. For most of us, we just want the main app, especially the beginners. So we can ignore the thousands of libraries that that app may use. However, for those that might be looking for a specific library, or want to see all of the plugins available for said, app, the list is there to be expanded.
You are both right and wrong...but mostly wrong.
You are right in that Jobs could refuse to sell DRM'd music. However, he tried to do this from the beginning. Unfortunately, Jobs does not control the rights to sell the music, the record companies do. The record companies allow Jobs to sell through iTunes as long as he adheres to some conditions. The record companies did not allow Jobs to sell DRM free music. Jobs resisted as much as he could, and iTunes users ended up with one of the least restrictive of the DRM policies, but nevertheless, it's still DRM'd. If Jobs really wants to stop selling DRM'd music, it is not up to him. It is up to the record companies. This is why he is issuing this statement. He is hoping that the record companies will see it his way and allow him to stop with the DRM.