Well... VSFTPd has had its share of problems, too, y'know. Speaking of... it's actually currently suffering from an exploitable "feature" (as the author insists on calling it) that allows attackers to very rapidly and without restraint mine legit usernames from the host running VSFTPd. I reported this, along with patch, in 2007. Hole not plugged yet - 'coz it's a "feature".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you thinking backwards here? According to this supposed trade compendium, which by OP's details account for logs UP UNTIL the 19th century, exactly how is this in the defense of the Chinese when the European "gunpoint trade" you mention took place DURING the 19th century - after the end of this compendium?
If anything, this seems to just strengthen and inadvertently prove the points of this compendium that OP wanted to bring forth, by appearing as consequential actions taken by Europeans as a result of suffering dishonesty in trade.
Overpriced junk? So if you bought the exact same components from your local shop and made a "normal PC" with them, as there already are a few billions of, it wouldn't be junk but magically "great hardware"? Something is very wrong with your logic.
Re:Wish Apple put some work on OSX
on
The Hackintosh Guide
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"From experience OS/X guzzle memory like no other OS I know. I use two boxes at work, a Linux HP PC with 4GB of RAM that never ever swaps, and a MBP laptop with 4GB of RAM that becomes slow as molasses after a week of use due to memory issues."
Complete bullshit. What you are describing is according to every person on the planet and their grandma the exact experience with Windows. First off, OS X (or "OS/X" as you refer to it as) doesn't shit itself up after a few days of uptime on 4GB. Not on 2GB either. Nor on 1GB. I right now have over 19 days of uptime on the very MacBook with 2GB of RAM that I'm typing this rant on, and, lo and behold, the swap file is currently at just 11MB. This machine is my work machine, on which I do a crapload more than just writing "word documents" and watching youtube clips on. Secondly, OS X doesn't "guzzle memory like no other OS"; it makes proper use of the memory YOU HAVE, instead of, like Windows, starting to hit the swap immediately after boot to "conserve valuable RAM for when it's needed" instead of putting it to proper use when it's at your disposal. You can successfully run even the hungrier OS X 10.5 on 512mb of RAM (I'm running it on a G4 iBook with that little memory), and, really, it's not like a snail on holiday even on that amount of RAM.
On top of your completely off statements, you referring to Mac OS X as "OS/X" kind of tells me you really don't have even the little experience of the OS you claim you do.
...when checking the one-liner review verdicts for the devices in this list:
"Engadget didn’t find it terribly satisfying."
"The Android Blog tried one and wasn’t exactly knocked out."
"UMPC Portal’s review says it’s not anywhere near as good as it looks."
"Engadget really didn’t care for it."
"Ubergizmo gave it a semi-positive review."
Does this sound anything like the reviews the iPad got?
Hopefully the situation will change quickly to bring competition to benefit us customers.
A bit more than 15 years ago I saw a documentary on Discovery Channel featuring identical work being made by a brittish scientist / computer programmer. His software spawned simple "lifeforms" made up by basic 2D and 3D geometrical objects - cubes, cylinders, flat triangles etc., - that were then trying to evolve methods of how to most efficiently move and travel in the simulated environment they were put in - sometimes an airy environment with ground underneath them, and gravity, and sometimes an "ocean" in which the "lifeforms" swam. Minute after minute the "lifeforms" jiggered and bounced around like broken machinery, but slowly developing a method for moving and navigating that was the most efficient for their particular shape. He spawned caterpillar-like animals made up from chains of cubes, that slowly learned how to wriggle and crawl just like catterpillars and snakes do. He spawned randomized "freaks" that learned that sometimes managed to learn how to walk with their disfiguring, and sometimes learning that the only way was to throw some bodypart around to pull themselves forward. He spawned biped animals that slowly learned how to jump to move forward, an triped animals that learned how to skip from one leg to the other, to the third. He spawned lifeforms in a watery environment that learned how to rhythmically oscillate their bodyparts to create propulsion in order to swim forward and turn around. To me, this was just as impressive, if not more, than the featured story. As a curious detail to it all, the programmer developed his software in BlitzBasic, running on a heavily accelerated Amiga 1200.
...a lot about the usability of the iPhone OS - obviously it offers something fundamentally different in online experience and usability than the other smartphone environments. To simply claim that this huge difference in statistics has everything to do with the utterly lame idea that is the "typical Apple #%@&! user" is complete, narrowminded idiocy.
The general concensus was/is actually the color tone of Kodachrome versus Ektachrome versus Fujichrome etc., and their specific abilities in saturating their specific set of colors at specific temperatures. The simple guideline was always "Fujichrome for colder colors, Kodachrome for warmer colors" - these two films' color coding on the packaging was the classic guide for inexperienced photographers.
Yes the exactly what I meant when I started off with mentioning that I develop my own film - someone who just bought a camera once and got no real experience. Actually, no, that wasn't what I meant at all, you second-guessing cabbage head. I really did mean "as a photographer", as one who does it for a living and as a personal interest since many years back. I know very well of the K14/M process and its earlier methods; in fact, in the 80s I worked as a copyist at a processing lab, and so, I have actual hands-on with manual developing (not all labs had automated baths back then) of probably every positive and slide film you can think of.
As a photographer I process all B/W film myself (t-max/tri-x etc. - the few times I shoot with real film, that is), but there are still professional labs around my corner of the world for developing all negative and positive color ("slide") film, and I'm guessing there will be for a little while to come, but chemicals and paper is getting harder to come by, though.
I found this shoot'em up to be very crude. It was jerky and not particularly well-made; anything but a good showcase (but with that said, no slandering of the author's effort).
It's a US-only problem, because your operators wanted it that way. It's also why your data/voice rates are notably higher and your utilities and freedoms are notably worse, than those of the European operators.
Also worth to point out is that, contrary to popular belief, it's (at least in Sweden) not against the law to unlock the phone yourself using readily available software on the net. If I'm not entirely mistaken, it IS illegal as a US customers to unlock one's own cellphone after purchase while still in the subscription term, as it constitutes "tampering" with something labelled as the property of someone else (the operator).
You are - no offense - too busy up the ass of "political correctness on the web" to realize what this showcase is about. It's a showcase for HTML5, meant to look good, to show what HTML5 is capable of. Why ever would they want HTML5 to look bad by having these demos run on one of the other browsers that so far haven't caught up the point Safari/WebKit has with implementing HTML5? How would this work in favor of the HTML5 cause? Not one bit in these demos use vendor-specific hacks. It's all parts of what the W3C has specified for HTML5.
No, you stupid cow, it's proof of them being __very concerned__ about HTML5 "looking good" rather than "looking shit" by having these demos being viewed on one of the other browsers that so far hasn't reached to Safari's point of implementing HTML5 portions. If you'd be even an ounce investigative or knowledgeable in HTML, CSS and JS, you would've checked the source code of these demos and quickly noticed that no vendor-specific CSS magic or alike is used in any of these demos - every piece of them use "web standard" parts as per the current HTML5 draft from the W3C. Don't blame Apple for the fact that the others so far haven't caught up with HTML5 specifications to the same level.
Yes, it did. Many of them also work in Opera. You're just - no offense - too stupid to change your browser's User Agent string so that it identifies itself as Safari, which is the only thing these demos check for.
The iPhone/OS has *always* tethered. It has always been a case of each operator either allowing it or, as in the case of all US operators, just not allowing it at all. I've had tethering via my Swedish operator since day 1 (and I was gifted my iPhone at the day of its Swedish release in mid-2008), and as a related side note, all Swedish operators have always allowed tethering - because we are not suffering an infrastructure problem here, and the Swedish operators, unlike their American counterparts, realize that more traffic used by customer = more money. If I'm not mistaken, this stance is also taken by pretty much all European operators. The "tethering doesn't "work"" problem appears by all accounts to be isolated to the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Well... VSFTPd has had its share of problems, too, y'know. Speaking of... it's actually currently suffering from an exploitable "feature" (as the author insists on calling it) that allows attackers to very rapidly and without restraint mine legit usernames from the host running VSFTPd. I reported this, along with patch, in 2007. Hole not plugged yet - 'coz it's a "feature".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you thinking backwards here? According to this supposed trade compendium, which by OP's details account for logs UP UNTIL the 19th century, exactly how is this in the defense of the Chinese when the European "gunpoint trade" you mention took place DURING the 19th century - after the end of this compendium?
If anything, this seems to just strengthen and inadvertently prove the points of this compendium that OP wanted to bring forth, by appearing as consequential actions taken by Europeans as a result of suffering dishonesty in trade.
Does anyone know if Monstanto's defunct, wretched, genetically modified seeds are in there as well?
I believe indeed he was - about 50 years earlier.
...will surely make it more attractive and suitable for consumption. Good one, Adobe.
Overpriced junk? So if you bought the exact same components from your local shop and made a "normal PC" with them, as there already are a few billions of, it wouldn't be junk but magically "great hardware"? Something is very wrong with your logic.
"From experience OS/X guzzle memory like no other OS I know. I use two boxes at work, a Linux HP PC with 4GB of RAM that never ever swaps, and a MBP laptop with 4GB of RAM that becomes slow as molasses after a week of use due to memory issues." Complete bullshit. What you are describing is according to every person on the planet and their grandma the exact experience with Windows. First off, OS X (or "OS/X" as you refer to it as) doesn't shit itself up after a few days of uptime on 4GB. Not on 2GB either. Nor on 1GB. I right now have over 19 days of uptime on the very MacBook with 2GB of RAM that I'm typing this rant on, and, lo and behold, the swap file is currently at just 11MB. This machine is my work machine, on which I do a crapload more than just writing "word documents" and watching youtube clips on. Secondly, OS X doesn't "guzzle memory like no other OS"; it makes proper use of the memory YOU HAVE, instead of, like Windows, starting to hit the swap immediately after boot to "conserve valuable RAM for when it's needed" instead of putting it to proper use when it's at your disposal. You can successfully run even the hungrier OS X 10.5 on 512mb of RAM (I'm running it on a G4 iBook with that little memory), and, really, it's not like a snail on holiday even on that amount of RAM.
On top of your completely off statements, you referring to Mac OS X as "OS/X" kind of tells me you really don't have even the little experience of the OS you claim you do.
...this whole "Operator Jail Hell" part of the problem (hello, AT&T) is restricted to the American customers. Things are nothing like this in Europe.
...when checking the one-liner review verdicts for the devices in this list:
"Engadget didn’t find it terribly satisfying."
"The Android Blog tried one and wasn’t exactly knocked out."
"UMPC Portal’s review says it’s not anywhere near as good as it looks."
"Engadget really didn’t care for it."
"Ubergizmo gave it a semi-positive review."
Does this sound anything like the reviews the iPad got? Hopefully the situation will change quickly to bring competition to benefit us customers.
A bit more than 15 years ago I saw a documentary on Discovery Channel featuring identical work being made by a brittish scientist / computer programmer. His software spawned simple "lifeforms" made up by basic 2D and 3D geometrical objects - cubes, cylinders, flat triangles etc., - that were then trying to evolve methods of how to most efficiently move and travel in the simulated environment they were put in - sometimes an airy environment with ground underneath them, and gravity, and sometimes an "ocean" in which the "lifeforms" swam. Minute after minute the "lifeforms" jiggered and bounced around like broken machinery, but slowly developing a method for moving and navigating that was the most efficient for their particular shape. He spawned caterpillar-like animals made up from chains of cubes, that slowly learned how to wriggle and crawl just like catterpillars and snakes do. He spawned randomized "freaks" that learned that sometimes managed to learn how to walk with their disfiguring, and sometimes learning that the only way was to throw some bodypart around to pull themselves forward. He spawned biped animals that slowly learned how to jump to move forward, an triped animals that learned how to skip from one leg to the other, to the third. He spawned lifeforms in a watery environment that learned how to rhythmically oscillate their bodyparts to create propulsion in order to swim forward and turn around. To me, this was just as impressive, if not more, than the featured story. As a curious detail to it all, the programmer developed his software in BlitzBasic, running on a heavily accelerated Amiga 1200.
...a lot about the usability of the iPhone OS - obviously it offers something fundamentally different in online experience and usability than the other smartphone environments. To simply claim that this huge difference in statistics has everything to do with the utterly lame idea that is the "typical Apple #%@&! user" is complete, narrowminded idiocy.
The general concensus was/is actually the color tone of Kodachrome versus Ektachrome versus Fujichrome etc., and their specific abilities in saturating their specific set of colors at specific temperatures. The simple guideline was always "Fujichrome for colder colors, Kodachrome for warmer colors" - these two films' color coding on the packaging was the classic guide for inexperienced photographers.
Yes the exactly what I meant when I started off with mentioning that I develop my own film - someone who just bought a camera once and got no real experience. Actually, no, that wasn't what I meant at all, you second-guessing cabbage head. I really did mean "as a photographer", as one who does it for a living and as a personal interest since many years back. I know very well of the K14/M process and its earlier methods; in fact, in the 80s I worked as a copyist at a processing lab, and so, I have actual hands-on with manual developing (not all labs had automated baths back then) of probably every positive and slide film you can think of.
As a photographer I process all B/W film myself (t-max/tri-x etc. - the few times I shoot with real film, that is), but there are still professional labs around my corner of the world for developing all negative and positive color ("slide") film, and I'm guessing there will be for a little while to come, but chemicals and paper is getting harder to come by, though.
You might want to use a browser that manages HTML5. The games are, after all, HTML5 games. They work just fine in FF3.6, Safari, Chrome, Opera.
I found this shoot'em up to be very crude. It was jerky and not particularly well-made; anything but a good showcase (but with that said, no slandering of the author's effort).
If you want to see some real nice examples of JavaScript/HTML5, check out http://www.kesiev.com/akihabara/
It's a US-only problem, because your operators wanted it that way. It's also why your data/voice rates are notably higher and your utilities and freedoms are notably worse, than those of the European operators.
Also worth to point out is that, contrary to popular belief, it's (at least in Sweden) not against the law to unlock the phone yourself using readily available software on the net. If I'm not entirely mistaken, it IS illegal as a US customers to unlock one's own cellphone after purchase while still in the subscription term, as it constitutes "tampering" with something labelled as the property of someone else (the operator).
Vertical-axis wind turbine.
You are - no offense - too busy up the ass of "political correctness on the web" to realize what this showcase is about. It's a showcase for HTML5, meant to look good, to show what HTML5 is capable of. Why ever would they want HTML5 to look bad by having these demos run on one of the other browsers that so far haven't caught up the point Safari/WebKit has with implementing HTML5? How would this work in favor of the HTML5 cause? Not one bit in these demos use vendor-specific hacks. It's all parts of what the W3C has specified for HTML5.
No, you stupid cow, it's proof of them being __very concerned__ about HTML5 "looking good" rather than "looking shit" by having these demos being viewed on one of the other browsers that so far hasn't reached to Safari's point of implementing HTML5 portions. If you'd be even an ounce investigative or knowledgeable in HTML, CSS and JS, you would've checked the source code of these demos and quickly noticed that no vendor-specific CSS magic or alike is used in any of these demos - every piece of them use "web standard" parts as per the current HTML5 draft from the W3C. Don't blame Apple for the fact that the others so far haven't caught up with HTML5 specifications to the same level.
Yes, it did. Many of them also work in Opera. You're just - no offense - too stupid to change your browser's User Agent string so that it identifies itself as Safari, which is the only thing these demos check for.
The iPhone/OS has *always* tethered. It has always been a case of each operator either allowing it or, as in the case of all US operators, just not allowing it at all. I've had tethering via my Swedish operator since day 1 (and I was gifted my iPhone at the day of its Swedish release in mid-2008), and as a related side note, all Swedish operators have always allowed tethering - because we are not suffering an infrastructure problem here, and the Swedish operators, unlike their American counterparts, realize that more traffic used by customer = more money. If I'm not mistaken, this stance is also taken by pretty much all European operators. The "tethering doesn't "work"" problem appears by all accounts to be isolated to the US.
...I'm sure enough people already know exactly what information of your doings the browser sends back to Google.
Come on... You gotta have a bigger view of the things around you than that.