Huh? Of couse full Linux houses aren't interested in something like this, and nobody is claiming that.
Who it's obviously aimed at are the Windows folks that are looking at migrating into Linux, but are held back by the fact that their whole existing organization is running Exchange. Companies can't afford (or even want to) to be fanatical about anything, paying Microsoft isn't any more of a no-no than paying anyone else. In a situation with otherwise equal "TCO", if they can run one exchange server and bazillion linux clients (even with client license) cheaper than one exchange server and bazillion windows clients, they'll go for it.
Heck, from a number of gripes about this very thing I'd say that it's the second major roadblock along with rest of the Office.
* Firefox. FOSS. Good at blocking popups. Can accept cookies only from the website issuing a page (good for thwarting DoubleClick and friends). Can allow only session cookies.
Adblock. FOSS. Another superset of Mozilla functionality (optional regexes, can block flash and other embed/object tagged nuisances), without being overkill Privoxy is in most cases. Also much better integrated into the browser.
About one billion people estimated on the net for 2004, so that would be 2000 times as much.
However, those surveys are usually counting anyone that uses the internet once in a week or so, I would except much lower numbers for everyday users.
500k is about a daily average the four "big" networks (IRCnet, EFnet, Undernet and QuakeNet), bit over double wouldn't probably be too far fetched if you count all the small ones in.
So, the newcomers are blown out of the water (except by 5950 which, like 9800 XT, is insanely expensive), not that this is a surprise to anyone, but... What's surprising that the old-topliners are just as cheap relatively as the mid-range cards.
Exactly. I though RedHat was the way, and as soon as I validated the software I needed (Matlab, Maple, others) I moved my boxes to RedHat 9.0. A couple of months later they announced this end of life
Sorry, but that's false. Either you're lying, or you didn't bother to check.
The end of life for RedHat 9.0 was announced at the same time it was released, or, well, actually they announced the shift away from home desktop at the time of RH 8.0! You didn't check the facts before moving your boxes and now you're paying for it.
This stupid move by RedHat helps to splinter the OSS movement a bit
Huh? If RHL being replaced with Fedora is "splintering OSS movement" then every other new distro is doing similar "splintering", those are released what, every few weeks or so?
but some would argue that RH was becoming the MS of Linux.
Some would argue lot of other stupid things, doesn't make them true. RH continues to employ the top kernel, desktop and compiler folks, OSS movement owns them a lot, stupid "arguing" of few trolls don't change that.
I think he's talking about Matthew Szulik's comments, not about yapping from random distro zealots.
Yes, but it was the random distro zealots who twisted his words so it sounded he was talking about any desktop, not only consumer.
* Please don't go flaming me -- my digital camera works fine under Gentoo, with gphoto and the Konqueror kioslave.
You probably made sure that it works in Linux before purchasing that camera, though. Average Joe would've just picked a camera from the shelf and might or might not be lucky.
The thing that distresses me about this decision (and deception) on RedHat's part is that previously they committed to being 100% free, back when they finally replaced Netscape with Mozilla.
Not true. RedHat has committed, and will continue to do so, to remain free on the home user front. Right now, that means only Fedora.
The case has always been different for their business targeted distributions, RedHat Enterprise Linux, for example has always had Java, it would be nothing short of insane not to. This is a business distro, and thus does not count as a "change in policy".
The captive is not the vanilla kernel ntfs driver, it's a method of using wine to emulate necessary parts of winnt kernel, allowing use of the original ntfs.sys drivers to enable full read/write. Obviously this requires you to have windows, but then again if you don't, ntfs is probably not a problem.
Not unlike the original hacks to enable viewing of windows media, quicktime and realvideo/audio using the win32 dll's.
If someone steals a car, lets say a Ford. Then if it turns out there was a design fault on the car brakes and the thief runs over someone because of this. Then Ford would *NOT* get of the hook just because the car was stolen.
That's not quite it either, the analogy of patches is missing.
Let's redefine it a bit: Someone steals a car, somewhat later it's noticed that there's a design fault in that models brakes and Ford promises to fix everyones car for free. The thief obviously can't bring up the stolen car into service because he would be caught, a month later the fault finally manifests and he runs over someone.
Should Ford still take the blame? I don't think so.
Yes they are, since they have same expiration times as other patents, yet software area moves a lot quicker.
By the time a regular patent expires, the idea(s) in it may still be perfectly usable for others to use, but by the time software patent expires, the technique has probably long since been obsolote, granting a monopoly on it for it's whole lifetime. An absolute maximum of five years from filing date might be a reasonable time for software patent, decades? Insane.
Patenting things like that (software that is a part of a bigger whole) would've been possible in the version that the European Parliament approved.
However, the newly bastardized version by Irish traitors ripped all that out and the current proposal allows patenting of basically everything, including "pure" software.
What would make a lot of sense evolutionarily is for the jaw to produce a replacement tooth if the predecessor is lost.
Consirering that mammalian body is obviously capable of producing more than one set of teeth, there must be some reason for the process to not be continuous instead of limited to two (except for rodent incisors, and aardvarks).
Probably they were just deemed unnecessary expense (and still are for everything except humans), for example lifetime of all but our most recent ancestors was so low that by the time second set of teeth was ruined you were just about ready for grave anyway, no point growing more, but now that we've tripled it things are different...
no worries about this ever becoming useful. there have been many teeth transplants in hospital settings, usually from impacted wisdom teeth being removed and put in a gap. the success rate is very low, under 1 % i believe.
1% might be true if we're talking about teeth from a different person (they're probably rejected, like all foreign tissues), but it's much better than that if they're your own. Otherwise no-one would even bother implanting teeth back.
My dentist told me, while implanting three teeth that made unfortunately made too close friends with asphalt, that possibility of any one of them going loose within few years was about 33%, so far (7 or 8 years, I think) they've all stayed.
Even this is probably because they're, strictly speaking, dead. In a case like the one described in article where a new teeth actually grows from a "bud" and promotes nerves and blood vessels to grow back, success rate should be very near 100%.
Teeth are made of neither bone (at all) or enamel (for the most part) as the incorrectly modded AC seems to think.
Part forming most of the human teeth is called dentine, somewhat harder and denser material than bone, and that bulk is coated with even hard outer layer of enamel.
You're right, once your teeth have matured, your nerves serve only one function - to tell the difference between hot and cold.
Yeah, sure they serve only a sensory function (since when did that become useless? are nerve endings on skin also useless because they're "only" sensory?) but there are few other of those sensory functions. They feel pressure somewhat, preventing you from biting too hard and crushing your teeth.
Nowadays, they also alert you about cavities, though that's an unexcepted side effect, evolution probably didn't estimate arrival of dentists...
I switched recently from Evo (on Linux, on Win32 I've been using TB for long time) to Thunderbird.
Some reasons: 1) It STILL has few "freeze" bugs where it just goes unreactive and can not be recovered without killing the damn thing and restarting it. Those have been there forever, and for a software that old, absolutely should not exist any more. Heck, thunderbird is much younger and nevertheless lot more stable.
2) (this might be related to the first, or the milder case of same disease) It's very unresponsive every now and then when doing something, especially the IMAP support.
3) No bayesian spam filtering without resorting to external applications - which seems to trigger no. 1 very ofter.
Of course evo has some very nice pluses of it's own (calendar, virtual folders, etc.), so it's all about what you need...
As for the error, sounds pretty weird. You might want to try manually enable throws with -fexceptions flag, though it should be done automatically for C++.
Did this happen on both Linux and Win32 or just the latter?
Just think about what *one* lab escaped 'pregnant' self replicating lifeform could do to our ecology.
Okay. How about you think about it. What would it do? Most probably, nothing at all, newsflash: world is already full of self replicating lifeforms! All of them very well adapted for their environment, random simple artificial $MICROBE would be outcompeted.
Just because a life form is artificial doesn't mean it can do any better than nature. Now, if we would specifically engineer something that lives in a so far unoccupied niche (though it's pretty hard to imagine what that niche would be), it might be able to stay, but being that it was indeed unoccupied it would be inconsequential for the rest of the ecology.
sorry creationists
You're trying to support evolution but make an inherently creationist like statement that because something is "created" (by us, in this case), it must be superior to something that has evolved.
Or would you like your tap to give you 'green scum' instead of water ?
You mean, like algae? I wouldn't be surprised if someones tap already does.
If morality would stem from something "beyond", it would be same for everyone, and unchanging.
Yet, it's not same but vastly different for different cultures, even single inviduals in one culture can have huge differences in their moral views, and is capable of changing quite fast, which it does all the time.
The most basic moral statements such as why you shouldn't strangle me can be easily explained by nothing but biology, it's obviously not very good for survival of the species if we run around strangling each others and thus that kind of traits tend to be weeded out, the rest that are not so critical for life are psychology, group of humans adapting somewhat similar rules to help them better live together.
One of my pet peeves with Firefox (and there aren't many) is that opening a new window, tab, etc, means starting with a clean history. Maybe nice for some, but I'd like a trail of what I did up to opening that window.
Monitors, on average nowadays, do around 1280x1024.
Fat lot of good that does if the DVD itself has much lower resolution (usually 720x576 PAL or 720x480 NTSC)
Televisions do something ridiculously low like 300xSomething.
It's much higher than that, though TV resolution is not very straighforward to map into pixel resolution, they're whole different beasts. PAL TV maxes around 768x576, NTSC has bit less.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? Of couse full Linux houses aren't interested in something like this, and nobody is claiming that.
Who it's obviously aimed at are the Windows folks that are looking at migrating into Linux, but are held back by the fact that their whole existing organization is running Exchange. Companies can't afford (or even want to) to be fanatical about anything, paying Microsoft isn't any more of a no-no than paying anyone else. In a situation with otherwise equal "TCO", if they can run one exchange server and bazillion linux clients (even with client license) cheaper than one exchange server and bazillion windows clients, they'll go for it.
Heck, from a number of gripes about this very thing I'd say that it's the second major roadblock along with rest of the Office.
About one billion people estimated on the net for 2004, so that would be 2000 times as much.
However, those surveys are usually counting anyone that uses the internet once in a week or so, I would except much lower numbers for everyday users.
500k is about a daily average the four "big" networks (IRCnet, EFnet, Undernet and QuakeNet), bit over double wouldn't probably be too far fetched if you count all the small ones in.
Both 9800 Pro and 5900XT seem pretty nifty deals.
Exactly. I though RedHat was the way, and as soon as I validated the software I needed (Matlab, Maple, others) I moved my boxes to RedHat 9.0. A couple of months later they announced this end of life
Sorry, but that's false. Either you're lying, or you didn't bother to check.
The end of life for RedHat 9.0 was announced at the same time it was released, or, well, actually they announced the shift away from home desktop at the time of RH 8.0! You didn't check the facts before moving your boxes and now you're paying for it.
This stupid move by RedHat helps to splinter the OSS movement a bit
Huh? If RHL being replaced with Fedora is "splintering OSS movement" then every other new distro is doing similar "splintering", those are released what, every few weeks or so?
but some would argue that RH was becoming the MS of Linux.
Some would argue lot of other stupid things, doesn't make them true. RH continues to employ the top kernel, desktop and compiler folks, OSS movement owns them a lot, stupid "arguing" of few trolls don't change that.
I think he's talking about Matthew Szulik's comments, not about yapping from random distro zealots.
Yes, but it was the random distro zealots who twisted his words so it sounded he was talking about any desktop, not only consumer.
* Please don't go flaming me -- my digital camera works fine under Gentoo, with gphoto and the Konqueror kioslave.
You probably made sure that it works in Linux before purchasing that camera, though. Average Joe would've just picked a camera from the shelf and might or might not be lucky.
The thing that distresses me about this decision (and deception) on RedHat's part is that previously they committed to being 100% free, back when they finally replaced Netscape with Mozilla.
Not true. RedHat has committed, and will continue to do so, to remain free on the home user front. Right now, that means only Fedora.
The case has always been different for their business targeted distributions, RedHat Enterprise Linux, for example has always had Java, it would be nothing short of insane not to. This is a business distro, and thus does not count as a "change in policy".
The captive is not the vanilla kernel ntfs driver, it's a method of using wine to emulate necessary parts of winnt kernel, allowing use of the original ntfs.sys drivers to enable full read/write. Obviously this requires you to have windows, but then again if you don't, ntfs is probably not a problem.
Not unlike the original hacks to enable viewing of windows media, quicktime and realvideo/audio using the win32 dll's.
If someone steals a car, lets say a Ford. Then if it turns out there was a design fault on the car brakes and the thief runs over someone because of this. Then Ford would *NOT* get of the hook just because the car was stolen.
That's not quite it either, the analogy of patches is missing.
Let's redefine it a bit: Someone steals a car, somewhat later it's noticed that there's a design fault in that models brakes and Ford promises to fix everyones car for free. The thief obviously can't bring up the stolen car into service because he would be caught, a month later the fault finally manifests and he runs over someone.
Should Ford still take the blame? I don't think so.
They're no worse than patents in general...
Yes they are, since they have same expiration times as other patents, yet software area moves a lot quicker.
By the time a regular patent expires, the idea(s) in it may still be perfectly usable for others to use, but by the time software patent expires, the technique has probably long since been obsolote, granting a monopoly on it for it's whole lifetime. An absolute maximum of five years from filing date might be a reasonable time for software patent, decades? Insane.
Patenting things like that (software that is a part of a bigger whole) would've been possible in the version that the European Parliament approved.
However, the newly bastardized version by Irish traitors ripped all that out and the current proposal allows patenting of basically everything, including "pure" software.
What would make a lot of sense evolutionarily is for the jaw to produce a replacement tooth if the predecessor is lost.
Consirering that mammalian body is obviously capable of producing more than one set of teeth, there must be some reason for the process to not be continuous instead of limited to two (except for rodent incisors, and aardvarks).
Probably they were just deemed unnecessary expense (and still are for everything except humans), for example lifetime of all but our most recent ancestors was so low that by the time second set of teeth was ruined you were just about ready for grave anyway, no point growing more, but now that we've tripled it things are different...
no worries about this ever becoming useful. there have been many teeth transplants in hospital settings, usually from impacted wisdom teeth being removed and put in a gap. the success rate is very low, under 1 % i believe.
1% might be true if we're talking about teeth from a different person (they're probably rejected, like all foreign tissues), but it's much better than that if they're your own. Otherwise no-one would even bother implanting teeth back.
My dentist told me, while implanting three teeth that made unfortunately made too close friends with asphalt, that possibility of any one of them going loose within few years was about 33%, so far (7 or 8 years, I think) they've all stayed.
Even this is probably because they're, strictly speaking, dead. In a case like the one described in article where a new teeth actually grows from a "bud" and promotes nerves and blood vessels to grow back, success rate should be very near 100%.
According to the article, especially the better one, it really seems like this does grow the roots as well as stimulates jaw bone growth.
Teeth are made of neither bone (at all) or enamel (for the most part) as the incorrectly modded AC seems to think.
Part forming most of the human teeth is called dentine, somewhat harder and denser material than bone, and that bulk is coated with even hard outer layer of enamel.
You're right, once your teeth have matured, your nerves serve only one function - to tell the difference between hot and cold.
Yeah, sure they serve only a sensory function (since when did that become useless? are nerve endings on skin also useless because they're "only" sensory?) but there are few other of those sensory functions. They feel pressure somewhat, preventing you from biting too hard and crushing your teeth.
Nowadays, they also alert you about cavities, though that's an unexcepted side effect, evolution probably didn't estimate arrival of dentists...
If it's an IMAP box, the option you're probably looking for is in server settings, 'Clean up ("Expunge") Inbox on Exit'
I switched recently from Evo (on Linux, on Win32 I've been using TB for long time) to Thunderbird.
Some reasons:
1) It STILL has few "freeze" bugs where it just goes unreactive and can not be recovered without killing the damn thing and restarting it. Those have been there forever, and for a software that old, absolutely should not exist any more. Heck, thunderbird is much younger and nevertheless lot more stable.
2) (this might be related to the first, or the milder case of same disease) It's very unresponsive every now and then when doing something, especially the IMAP support.
3) No bayesian spam filtering without resorting to external applications - which seems to trigger no. 1 very ofter.
Of course evo has some very nice pluses of it's own (calendar, virtual folders, etc.), so it's all about what you need...
It's much older than that.
Apparently someone with a sense of humour put that up into door of real laser lab somewhere. Probably in many more places now that it's on the 'net.
I think 3.2 should be fine.
As for the error, sounds pretty weird. You might want to try manually enable throws with -fexceptions flag, though it should be done automatically for C++.
Did this happen on both Linux and Win32 or just the latter?
Just think about what *one* lab escaped 'pregnant' self replicating lifeform could do to our ecology.
Okay. How about you think about it. What would it do? Most probably, nothing at all, newsflash: world is already full of self replicating lifeforms! All of them very well adapted for their environment, random simple artificial $MICROBE would be outcompeted.
Just because a life form is artificial doesn't mean it can do any better than nature. Now, if we would specifically engineer something that lives in a so far unoccupied niche (though it's pretty hard to imagine what that niche would be), it might be able to stay, but being that it was indeed unoccupied it would be inconsequential for the rest of the ecology.
sorry creationists
You're trying to support evolution but make an inherently creationist like statement that because something is "created" (by us, in this case), it must be superior to something that has evolved.
Or would you like your tap to give you 'green scum' instead of water ?
You mean, like algae? I wouldn't be surprised if someones tap already does.
If morality would stem from something "beyond", it would be same for everyone, and unchanging.
Yet, it's not same but vastly different for different cultures, even single inviduals in one culture can have huge differences in their moral views, and is capable of changing quite fast, which it does all the time.
The most basic moral statements such as why you shouldn't strangle me can be easily explained by nothing but biology, it's obviously not very good for survival of the species if we run around strangling each others and thus that kind of traits tend to be weeded out, the rest that are not so critical for life are psychology, group of humans adapting somewhat similar rules to help them better live together.
One of my pet peeves with Firefox (and there aren't many) is that opening a new window, tab, etc, means starting with a clean history. Maybe nice for some, but I'd like a trail of what I did up to opening that window.
Perhaps this will help you?
Monitors, on average nowadays, do around 1280x1024.
Fat lot of good that does if the DVD itself has much lower resolution (usually 720x576 PAL or 720x480 NTSC)
Televisions do something ridiculously low like 300xSomething.
It's much higher than that, though TV resolution is not very straighforward to map into pixel resolution, they're whole different beasts. PAL TV maxes around 768x576, NTSC has bit less.
FFmpeg only plays WMV1/7 (and 2/8 with some problems), it can't play WMV9.
And perfectly legal in copyright sense doesn't mean there aren't any problems with patents.