It's amazing that the number came out to exactly 95%. Real numbers rarely come out so nicely. Wait, did you just pull that number out of your ass, because it sounds more authoritative to say "95%" in place of "I think that for most most"?:)
The two do share a lot of code, and Apple does release the changes they've made, but there has been lots of discussion recently about how they're not exactly releasing the changes in handy patch format - it's more in spaghetti code than anything.
I've been trying to get our pixel-perfect graphics people to do our web sites as PDFs for years. You cna link to other pages, use forms, and now there's even some JavaScript support. PDFs are even more widely viewable than flash, and you can embed whatever font you want.
For some reason, they're still trying to do the same thing in HTML.
Wait, I'm confused. Is the most important part of your site(s) the content, or the presentation? If your content is impossibly tied to the presentation, then you either 1) designed your site poorly or 2) should be working in print, not HTML. Possibly both.
BTW, I dislike the big chunk of white space between your fixed-width columns, and the dark background on hover'd links is jarring. Your site is now enjoying some user-applied CSS when I view it, which is similar to what I would've done with Greasemonkey.
Though, if they fixed the holes as part of one of the upgrades, we might know that there are holes present, but we wouldn't neccesarily know what they were or what the fix was. The fine folks at Apple have really mangled the code, so it's rather difficult to tell what's changed.
I particularly like their use of "strike" rather than something like "press" on a page that's clearly directed at the slowest of the slow. If they don't know that "any key" refers to any of the keys on the keyboard, how are they to know that "strike" doesn't mean to actually forcefully hit the key(s)?
That, and I work for a web development firm, and since flash is sometimes the best way to get multimedia content (for education, not as a "click here to enter" page), I've gotta be able to see if it works...
Just as soon as they fix that irritating thing where it doesn't send the host header when I type a short domain name, I'll like Konq. Internally, I have a server called "devel" and a server called "wiki". Both are set up to use wiki and wiki.my.domain as name-based virtual hosts, and just typing wiki into any browser (except konq) will take me to the wiki, while typing devel will take me to the devel area. Since wiki is a CNAME for devel, konqueror seems to want to look up the IP, and then get the site at that IP. If I type in http://wiki/, it works, but just wiki does not - even though typing just wiki results in http://wiki/ being shown in the URL bar (while the browser is actually displaying http://devel/).
Man that's irritating, and the main reason I don't use Konq all the time. The flash plugin not working right is the other, but that's my fault.:)
Because it's impossible for Apple to miss a security problem. What, there were security problems in other apps that Apple bundles, several of which were fixed buy the original authors, not apple? Oh, Ok.
I guess there aren't any remaining holes in Apache, Samba, or Cups, because the all powerful Apple is bundling them with OS X.
A couple of weeks ago, I took 2 identical machines and a Mac and set up new operating systems on them. I started with Windows 2000. While I was waiting for the installer to boot, I fired up an Ubuntu install disk in the other PC. When windows was finished detecting hardware and asking inane questions (just the first of many, peppered all over the install process), I partitioned the disk (I always make a separate partition for a page file) and told it to install, formatting the 50G partition as NTFS. While waiting for it to format (not even install), I popped an OS X installer into the Mac, selected the appropriate options (including partitioning and formatting), and let it go. Then I went back to Ubuntu and did the same thing - partition, format, install.
OS X was done first, but doesn't come with a lot of applications. Ubuntu was done second, but still was done pretty quickly. The installer's nice, since it just asks you the questions at the beginning and goes. OS X was installed before Windows even finished formatting, and Ubuntu was done with the base install and was in the second stage where it downloads some packages - also before Win2K was done formatting. This was on about 1.8GHz Athlon XP machines with 512MB RAM.
It took a couple of hours to install the drivers and updates, which requires a few reboots in between, and probably another hour or so to get apps installed. OS X also took about an hour or so to install the Adobe/Macromedia graphics apps. Ubuntu was up and ready to go when the installer was done - in less than an hour. It only took about 10-15 minutes of my time to answer the initial questions, and it was done.
I used to use images on the windows machines, to reduce this time. But I support a relatively small office where we buy new machines when we need them, and the hardware's different enough that it'd be a bigger hassle to set up an install image that supported them all. Setting up a kickstart file to automate Linux installs is really easy, but we don't use Linux on most owrkstations and I don't have to reinstall on the servers all the time, so that'd also be a waste of time.
I'm definitely looking into nLite, though, that looks damned handy...
Fertility drugs and the resulting "amazing" multi-child pregnancies are the devil. I don't know if I can take any more of those friggin' "medical incredible" shows that talk about the woman who had 6 kids, and then just breifly mention that she was taking fertility drugs at the time. Damn it, God/Nature/etc didn't want her to have kids, that's why she was infertile. Not everyone is supposed to reproduce...
Maybe they're waiting until there's a nice little plugin to Firefox that will let me click on a.torrent and download using bittorrent easily (or a vfs for KDE that allows the "copy to" functionality to work)...:)
The interlocks aren't there to keep cars from rolling away, they're present to stop you from starting the car in gear or accidentally engaging a drive gear while the engine's running.
It's very easy to slide an automatic car from park to reverse, esp if the gear selector lever is slightly misaligned. With a manual, you have to put the transmission in neutral *and* set the parking brake to leave a running vehicle - or park up against something. If the tranny does slip into gear, the brake or object you parked up against will most likely cause the car to stall quickly. An automatic, thanks to the torque convertor, will not stall. It may well begin to move under its own power, depending on the TQ's stall speed.
Also, an unpowered automatic will roll in any gear but park. An unattended manual will only roll in neutral.
Re:Never write off Microsoft...
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
"Firstly"? That's not "like first" - it *is* first...
And I ran it on a P133 MMX (yeah, there's 2 M's in there).
Given that the comment was posted anonymously and contains several errors, I can't possibly speculate why programs frequently crashed on the poster's machine. I'm sure it must have been the program, and not the user.
I liked IE's automatic reflowing when images loaded / the window was resized. But guess what, I have NS 4 and IE 4 on a web development test machine (a P233MMX), and there's not a significant performance difference between the two. NS4 crashes more often, but the underlying Windows OS - which includes IE - crashes just as often.
Slashdot Mirror
I see. That's reasonable enough. :)
It's amazing that the number came out to exactly 95%. Real numbers rarely come out so nicely. Wait, did you just pull that number out of your ass, because it sounds more authoritative to say "95%" in place of "I think that for most most"? :)
Partially. I'd prefer to see designs that don't rely on pixel-perfect positioning - the PDF thing is more of a straw man. :)
How about "Safari allows upload of arbitrary local files w/o user's knowledge or permission"?. 3/WebCore-125/file-security-fix.patch.txt
d ate20031205forjaguar.html
http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/10.3
Perhaps "update safari to prevent unauthorized access to a user's cookies"?
http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/securityup
The two do share a lot of code, and Apple does release the changes they've made, but there has been lots of discussion recently about how they're not exactly releasing the changes in handy patch format - it's more in spaghetti code than anything.
Ahhh! Misuse of irony in the article posting, and now someone who doesn't know the difference between bare (naked) and bear.
I've been trying to get our pixel-perfect graphics people to do our web sites as PDFs for years. You cna link to other pages, use forms, and now there's even some JavaScript support. PDFs are even more widely viewable than flash, and you can embed whatever font you want.
For some reason, they're still trying to do the same thing in HTML.
Wait, I'm confused. Is the most important part of your site(s) the content, or the presentation? If your content is impossibly tied to the presentation, then you either 1) designed your site poorly or 2) should be working in print, not HTML. Possibly both.
BTW, I dislike the big chunk of white space between your fixed-width columns, and the dark background on hover'd links is jarring. Your site is now enjoying some user-applied CSS when I view it, which is similar to what I would've done with Greasemonkey.
I dunno, that's more difficult to make fun of. :)
Though, if they fixed the holes as part of one of the upgrades, we might know that there are holes present, but we wouldn't neccesarily know what they were or what the fix was. The fine folks at Apple have really mangled the code, so it's rather difficult to tell what's changed.
I particularly like their use of "strike" rather than something like "press" on a page that's clearly directed at the slowest of the slow. If they don't know that "any key" refers to any of the keys on the keyboard, how are they to know that "strike" doesn't mean to actually forcefully hit the key(s)?
I can't watch StrongBad without Flash. :)
That, and I work for a web development firm, and since flash is sometimes the best way to get multimedia content (for education, not as a "click here to enter" page), I've gotta be able to see if it works...
Do you use Debian? :)
Yes, why do you insist on being so difficult? :)
Just as soon as they fix that irritating thing where it doesn't send the host header when I type a short domain name, I'll like Konq. Internally, I have a server called "devel" and a server called "wiki". Both are set up to use wiki and wiki.my.domain as name-based virtual hosts, and just typing wiki into any browser (except konq) will take me to the wiki, while typing devel will take me to the devel area. Since wiki is a CNAME for devel, konqueror seems to want to look up the IP, and then get the site at that IP. If I type in http://wiki/, it works, but just wiki does not - even though typing just wiki results in http://wiki/ being shown in the URL bar (while the browser is actually displaying http://devel/).
:)
Man that's irritating, and the main reason I don't use Konq all the time. The flash plugin not working right is the other, but that's my fault.
Because it's impossible for Apple to miss a security problem. What, there were security problems in other apps that Apple bundles, several of which were fixed buy the original authors, not apple? Oh, Ok.
I guess there aren't any remaining holes in Apache, Samba, or Cups, because the all powerful Apple is bundling them with OS X.
A couple of weeks ago, I took 2 identical machines and a Mac and set up new operating systems on them. I started with Windows 2000. While I was waiting for the installer to boot, I fired up an Ubuntu install disk in the other PC. When windows was finished detecting hardware and asking inane questions (just the first of many, peppered all over the install process), I partitioned the disk (I always make a separate partition for a page file) and told it to install, formatting the 50G partition as NTFS. While waiting for it to format (not even install), I popped an OS X installer into the Mac, selected the appropriate options (including partitioning and formatting), and let it go. Then I went back to Ubuntu and did the same thing - partition, format, install.
OS X was done first, but doesn't come with a lot of applications. Ubuntu was done second, but still was done pretty quickly. The installer's nice, since it just asks you the questions at the beginning and goes. OS X was installed before Windows even finished formatting, and Ubuntu was done with the base install and was in the second stage where it downloads some packages - also before Win2K was done formatting. This was on about 1.8GHz Athlon XP machines with 512MB RAM.
It took a couple of hours to install the drivers and updates, which requires a few reboots in between, and probably another hour or so to get apps installed. OS X also took about an hour or so to install the Adobe/Macromedia graphics apps. Ubuntu was up and ready to go when the installer was done - in less than an hour. It only took about 10-15 minutes of my time to answer the initial questions, and it was done.
I used to use images on the windows machines, to reduce this time. But I support a relatively small office where we buy new machines when we need them, and the hardware's different enough that it'd be a bigger hassle to set up an install image that supported them all. Setting up a kickstart file to automate Linux installs is really easy, but we don't use Linux on most owrkstations and I don't have to reinstall on the servers all the time, so that'd also be a waste of time.
I'm definitely looking into nLite, though, that looks damned handy...
I haven't really looked for a GUI on top of bittorrent. I was hoping someone would mention one in a reply... :) Thanks.
Sorry, I can't read the article. There were too many buzzwords in the post.
Fertility drugs and the resulting "amazing" multi-child pregnancies are the devil. I don't know if I can take any more of those friggin' "medical incredible" shows that talk about the woman who had 6 kids, and then just breifly mention that she was taking fertility drugs at the time. Damn it, God/Nature/etc didn't want her to have kids, that's why she was infertile. Not everyone is supposed to reproduce...
Isn't serinity a syndicated show on the WB, probably involving some "young" people in incredibly mundane situations? That's what it *sounds* like...
I think you missed the joke.
You paid the new car price for one with 16K on it? Man, what a deal! Can you come with me next time I buy a used car? :)
Maybe they're waiting until there's a nice little plugin to Firefox that will let me click on a .torrent and download using bittorrent easily (or a vfs for KDE that allows the "copy to" functionality to work)... :)
The interlocks aren't there to keep cars from rolling away, they're present to stop you from starting the car in gear or accidentally engaging a drive gear while the engine's running.
It's very easy to slide an automatic car from park to reverse, esp if the gear selector lever is slightly misaligned. With a manual, you have to put the transmission in neutral *and* set the parking brake to leave a running vehicle - or park up against something. If the tranny does slip into gear, the brake or object you parked up against will most likely cause the car to stall quickly. An automatic, thanks to the torque convertor, will not stall. It may well begin to move under its own power, depending on the TQ's stall speed.
Also, an unpowered automatic will roll in any gear but park. An unattended manual will only roll in neutral.
"Firstly"? That's not "like first" - it *is* first...
And I ran it on a P133 MMX (yeah, there's 2 M's in there).
Given that the comment was posted anonymously and contains several errors, I can't possibly speculate why programs frequently crashed on the poster's machine. I'm sure it must have been the program, and not the user.
I liked IE's automatic reflowing when images loaded / the window was resized. But guess what, I have NS 4 and IE 4 on a web development test machine (a P233MMX), and there's not a significant performance difference between the two. NS4 crashes more often, but the underlying Windows OS - which includes IE - crashes just as often.
You could try installing the firefox binary build instead of building it on your machine...
:)
built from source:
www-client/mozilla-firefox
binary built by Mozilla folks:
www-client/mozilla-firefox-bin
With the binary, you also get the correct throbber icon...