It's a friggin' file-based RDBMS - if you can even call it that - on an extremely compact piece of hardware. What do you expect? There is no service that runs and takes care of memory and performance issues, it loads the DB file when needed and pulls data directly from the file.
Frankly, I agree it isn't a great RDBMS for what you're probably used to, but it's great on a Pocket PC.
First, I'd like to see a new series. I've only seen a few original eps, so I went in with mostly a clean-slate. The mini-series was pretty good and, IMHO, warrants a new series (hopefully lasting longer than the orig).
Second, there's just way too much nit-picking going on here! Since when has a decent sci-fi movie not had technical or physical goofs or foibles? I mean, seriously? In the orig. Star Trek, the whole rocking from side to side thing would really happen anyway (at least, not to that degree) and they always leaned the wrong way! That's one of thousands of examples (it sticks in my mind because it's funny as hell!) in many different sci-fi series and movies.
So what if the new B.G. mini-series had a few foibles. The original had quite a few, too (and I only say a few eps), as well as every other one.
Face it, if a space movie was true to nature, it'd be pretty damn boring. No sounds (although too many are stupid), no contrails (and he, the missles weren't that visible without them!), no FTL without the use of bending space-time (and look where that got the Event Horizon!), and more. It's entertainment, no reality. If you want reality, watch Fox! grrrr...
Actually, are you sure the Cylons used EMP to wipe-out the new Colonial fighters? It actually seems more like they sent out a signal to disable the jets, probably thanks to #6 infiltrating the Colonial defense net a la Baltar.
Some, but not a lot. That has always annoyed me, too, but when the Mark IIs blew out of Galactica, there was dead silence. I really only heard sound when we were close to Cylon ships, or the occassional close-up of the various Colonial ships when their retro-rockets fired.
Anoter pet-pieve of mine was handled correctly, IMHO - the necessity to fire engines the entire time! In space, there's negligible resistence (like only a few particles per parsect) so engines don't need to be fired constantly. At least, I did see any of that jibberish during the movie.
HTA's have actually been around since IE4 (for many years). I'm not sure who's older, but HTAs are far more basic than XUL (as a previous reply pointed out) so there's definitely arguments the moz team could make - if necessary - to defend themselves and their technology.
This is why every manufacturer-brand computer I've ever boughten has gotten reformatted when I got it, and I put back on the programs that only I wanted and knew / trusted. Besides, in prevoius years companies like Compaq put on software that often conflicted or screwed up OS APIs like TAPI. Yeah, I know - that would NEVER happen on *nix, but that's not my point.
Good point, except that it won't last near as long...as someone previously said, the higher courts favor big business. (And it won't be as interesting - though just as rediculous - as the OJ trial!)
Anyone read Revelations from the Bible? It talks about such a thing as yet another sign of the end. I'm not going to run out and get myself a couple of boards with some shoulder straps and paint "THE END IS NEAR - REPENT" like the guy on Stephen King's "The Stand", but it is bad nonetheless. Leave it to our government to even consider it.
You mean the strategy to lower prices on black friday? Yeah, that's a new one. Not only should Best Buy attempt to copyright that (I mean, how else can they scare others with the DMCA), but they should seek a patent, too! That's a totally original idea and I agree with you whole-heartedly.
I'm against lockin, too, but DRM is still optional. If DRM is not enabled, a document should still open up (and has from what I've seen) in a previous version. Sure, some of the new features (based on their COM development model with the Office projects) might not be there but how many people always use those features anyway?
This "forward compatibility" is still something I haven't seen in various open source projects like OpenOffice. I've seen several people complain that 1.0 can't open 1.1 files at all! Various past versions of Word can open Word 2003 documents so long as DRM isn't enabled for that document.
I like choices, too, but I don't loath Microsoft. They have their problems, but what company that large doesn't? I'm not saying that justifies anything, but in some cases it's inevitable.
The point with DRM is that blame shouldn't be laid on Microsoft. They responded to industry needs (granted, very evil industries) like any other company would. If companies don't want to use DRM, they don't have to. They're not locked into getting Office 2003 if they don't want to deal with DRM. If a partner company they work with uses it, then they either need to upgrade, tell the partner to disable DRM, or drop the partner.
What's the problem here? Users just need to simply install something else. XP SP2 also added a control that allows users to easily select non-Microsoft software to run on the system (so long as it installs into the registry correctly).
Last time I installed RealPlayer / RealOne (and this is the last time I install it) it took over all my file associations by default because I forgot to select the "advanced" options like I usually do. So, when users install RealPlayer or QT, they don't have to worry about it anyway!
But I now I suppose you're going to tell me that MS should include RealPlayer or QT or Winamp or something else in Windows! Get a friggin' life! Does your company bundle your competition's software with its product?!
This all comes down to people who need a government to tell them that they have options - they can't figure it out for themselves. Sure, IE is embedded in the shell (to make development easier and the L&F consistent) and it comes with WMP and Movie Maker and all that jazz, but Microsoft has NEVER stopped people from installing other alternatives on Windows. I have Mozilla, QuickTime, and RealPlayer installed right now and use them from time to time with no problems! I can even use that new control panel applet to switch to an almost completely non-Microsoft setup using said software. Sure, IE (mshtml actually) is still used for the shell, but did you ever hear of component development? Gecko doesn't implement the right interfaces to make that possible because they didn't want to license MS COM. Even an extensible, modular system has limits - it has to know what it's talking to in a standard manner.
The point is that people do have options despite what comes bundled. They shouldn't need a government to enforce that by stripping things out of Windows. Sure, some people may settle for what comes "in the box", but most these days don't. And for those that do settle for what they're given, they probably don't even care or know enough to download and install an alternative - so at least they're given something!
What the hell are you talking about? Don't you anti-MS bigots get it yet? DRM is not forced on you when you save a file - only when you enable it for a file and you or your corporate network has to set up several things to even have the chance to enable it!
Besides, ever here of a thing called "copyrights"? The original author of a work does have rights to determine its usage. DRM simply enforces that on the electronic level. Not every company is gung-ho on the open-source model. Could that be because it doesn't actually make a lot of money? Hmm...could be. Imagine that.
One cool thing to see - but would surely require more horsepower - is to take the underlying windows' z-indices into account, adjusting the alpha blending / spread accordingly. Sure, I know this is probably just a waste of computing, but (in some regard) what eyecandy isn't?
For the original poster, this technology couldn't be patented because prior art exists. I wrote a popup blocker while the current mozilla codebase was in its infancy for IE. All one has to do is create and register a BHO that sinks to the DWebBrowserEvents2::NewWindow connection point and passes VARIANT_TRUE as the output parameter. It's not rocket science. Microsoft need only add the code before such an event is raised since they can modify the original source.
Besides, just because it's Microsoft Internet Explorer, you want to burden the users with popup windows? And let's not forget about all the other commercial (including free) popup blockers that do just what I mentioned. Patenting this wouldn't be hurting Microsoft even close the amount it would be hurting the users.
I agree with NanoGator, but I have to add that "Merv" was a power-monging machine who's underlying purpose - it seems - was to dispell hope. People with power also make sure they keep their power and will do or say anything to sustain that goal. I, for one, took everything he said with a grain of salt. I mean, most people don't trust rich, powerful people in the real world (our time) - why should they be trusted in the Matrix - especially when it is a world created to sustain the self-aware machines. They practically destroyed humanity to sustain themselves.
I'm not so sure this is a problem. The patent mentions that data has to be encrypted when transmitted (presumably with SSL) and that the data has to be stored in a relational database.
MS primarily keeps data in config files (.inf, etc.). The old Windows update just used data out of these files with the ActiveSetup control to update components. I actually haven't checked into the "new" one (the one that was released with XP).
Of course, if they broaden the scope of "relational database" to start covering filesystems and loosely-related sectioned files like INF files, then, yes, I suppose they're screwed...
...except prior art exists. Then again, when has that stopped the USPTO from being utter morons with a bad business model?
Hello? Anybody in there? He said 'Ghost of Christmas Present' of sorts. Ever seen Dicken's classic, "A Christmas Carol"? The Ghost of Christmas Present showed Scruge what the world around him was like, things that he normally wouldn't know because he didn't know or didn't understand, just like the Children didn't understand that they're "hurting" the poor, poor cry-babies...er, musicians.
Besides the fact that there is next to nothing massive in space to cause resistence, Warp is closer to surfing where the starship doesn't actually move relative to space/time (at least from what I gather a long time about when I read the "manual"). It's like catching a major wave and riding it.
Yeah, that managed code that has proven to be quite stable and that will make up almost the entire OS is really going to suck. Get a life and get off the bandwagon.
/. et. al. is always complaining about Windows' instability and now that it just might be stable you bitch about that. C'mon! Where does it end. Just admit that you have a one track mind and are not open and move on.
Prior art? Since when has prior art been checked by the USPTO? British Telecom with their hyperlinking, AltaVista with the search engine, and many other patents that have been granted all have very strong prior art. Even the recent EOLAs problem has prior art. The problem is that the USPTO doesn't 1) care and/or 2) has no idea what to look for. The judges and jurors in patent infringment cases are two stupid to know a bit from a byte so the patent holder usually wins because they have the patent that shouldn't have been granted in the first place.
It's not free. It takes more intelligent people - who typically ask for more in salaray / wages - than what most Windows server require. Yes, truth be told, far to many trade schools educate certified IT people that don't really love computers - just the money it brings. These people are available in greater quantities and can run a Windows network decently enough (arguably).
Cost is not always the cost of software and hardware, but the cost to maintain and run them.
Wait, they're going to commercial the 'net (or at least want to)? I thought it already was commercialized!
I still remember the days of gopher and the early web (and I know many people remember long before that). Back then, most of the gov't didn't want much to do with this "new fangled thing". Boy, have things changed. Commerce is alive and well on the 'net and it gets more-so all the time. Most of the original inhabitants are still around but are getting brutalized by the various.coms that file patents based on what the.edus developed!
Slashdot Mirror
It's a friggin' file-based RDBMS - if you can even call it that - on an extremely compact piece of hardware. What do you expect? There is no service that runs and takes care of memory and performance issues, it loads the DB file when needed and pulls data directly from the file.
Frankly, I agree it isn't a great RDBMS for what you're probably used to, but it's great on a Pocket PC.
First, I'd like to see a new series. I've only seen a few original eps, so I went in with mostly a clean-slate. The mini-series was pretty good and, IMHO, warrants a new series (hopefully lasting longer than the orig).
Second, there's just way too much nit-picking going on here! Since when has a decent sci-fi movie not had technical or physical goofs or foibles? I mean, seriously? In the orig. Star Trek, the whole rocking from side to side thing would really happen anyway (at least, not to that degree) and they always leaned the wrong way! That's one of thousands of examples (it sticks in my mind because it's funny as hell!) in many different sci-fi series and movies.
So what if the new B.G. mini-series had a few foibles. The original had quite a few, too (and I only say a few eps), as well as every other one.
Face it, if a space movie was true to nature, it'd be pretty damn boring. No sounds (although too many are stupid), no contrails (and he, the missles weren't that visible without them!), no FTL without the use of bending space-time (and look where that got the Event Horizon!), and more. It's entertainment, no reality. If you want reality, watch Fox! grrrr...
Actually, are you sure the Cylons used EMP to wipe-out the new Colonial fighters? It actually seems more like they sent out a signal to disable the jets, probably thanks to #6 infiltrating the Colonial defense net a la Baltar.
Some, but not a lot. That has always annoyed me, too, but when the Mark IIs blew out of Galactica, there was dead silence. I really only heard sound when we were close to Cylon ships, or the occassional close-up of the various Colonial ships when their retro-rockets fired.
Anoter pet-pieve of mine was handled correctly, IMHO - the necessity to fire engines the entire time! In space, there's negligible resistence (like only a few particles per parsect) so engines don't need to be fired constantly. At least, I did see any of that jibberish during the movie.
HTA's have actually been around since IE4 (for many years). I'm not sure who's older, but HTAs are far more basic than XUL (as a previous reply pointed out) so there's definitely arguments the moz team could make - if necessary - to defend themselves and their technology.
This is why every manufacturer-brand computer I've ever boughten has gotten reformatted when I got it, and I put back on the programs that only I wanted and knew / trusted. Besides, in prevoius years companies like Compaq put on software that often conflicted or screwed up OS APIs like TAPI. Yeah, I know - that would NEVER happen on *nix, but that's not my point.
Good point, except that it won't last near as long...as someone previously said, the higher courts favor big business. (And it won't be as interesting - though just as rediculous - as the OJ trial!)
Anyone read Revelations from the Bible? It talks about such a thing as yet another sign of the end. I'm not going to run out and get myself a couple of boards with some shoulder straps and paint "THE END IS NEAR - REPENT" like the guy on Stephen King's "The Stand", but it is bad nonetheless. Leave it to our government to even consider it.
You mean the strategy to lower prices on black friday? Yeah, that's a new one. Not only should Best Buy attempt to copyright that (I mean, how else can they scare others with the DMCA), but they should seek a patent, too! That's a totally original idea and I agree with you whole-heartedly.
I'm against lockin, too, but DRM is still optional. If DRM is not enabled, a document should still open up (and has from what I've seen) in a previous version. Sure, some of the new features (based on their COM development model with the Office projects) might not be there but how many people always use those features anyway?
This "forward compatibility" is still something I haven't seen in various open source projects like OpenOffice. I've seen several people complain that 1.0 can't open 1.1 files at all! Various past versions of Word can open Word 2003 documents so long as DRM isn't enabled for that document.
I like choices, too, but I don't loath Microsoft. They have their problems, but what company that large doesn't? I'm not saying that justifies anything, but in some cases it's inevitable.
The point with DRM is that blame shouldn't be laid on Microsoft. They responded to industry needs (granted, very evil industries) like any other company would. If companies don't want to use DRM, they don't have to. They're not locked into getting Office 2003 if they don't want to deal with DRM. If a partner company they work with uses it, then they either need to upgrade, tell the partner to disable DRM, or drop the partner.
What's the problem here? Users just need to simply install something else. XP SP2 also added a control that allows users to easily select non-Microsoft software to run on the system (so long as it installs into the registry correctly).
Last time I installed RealPlayer / RealOne (and this is the last time I install it) it took over all my file associations by default because I forgot to select the "advanced" options like I usually do. So, when users install RealPlayer or QT, they don't have to worry about it anyway!
But I now I suppose you're going to tell me that MS should include RealPlayer or QT or Winamp or something else in Windows! Get a friggin' life! Does your company bundle your competition's software with its product?!
This all comes down to people who need a government to tell them that they have options - they can't figure it out for themselves. Sure, IE is embedded in the shell (to make development easier and the L&F consistent) and it comes with WMP and Movie Maker and all that jazz, but Microsoft has NEVER stopped people from installing other alternatives on Windows. I have Mozilla, QuickTime, and RealPlayer installed right now and use them from time to time with no problems! I can even use that new control panel applet to switch to an almost completely non-Microsoft setup using said software. Sure, IE (mshtml actually) is still used for the shell, but did you ever hear of component development? Gecko doesn't implement the right interfaces to make that possible because they didn't want to license MS COM. Even an extensible, modular system has limits - it has to know what it's talking to in a standard manner.
The point is that people do have options despite what comes bundled. They shouldn't need a government to enforce that by stripping things out of Windows. Sure, some people may settle for what comes "in the box", but most these days don't. And for those that do settle for what they're given, they probably don't even care or know enough to download and install an alternative - so at least they're given something!
What the hell are you talking about? Don't you anti-MS bigots get it yet? DRM is not forced on you when you save a file - only when you enable it for a file and you or your corporate network has to set up several things to even have the chance to enable it!
Besides, ever here of a thing called "copyrights"? The original author of a work does have rights to determine its usage. DRM simply enforces that on the electronic level. Not every company is gung-ho on the open-source model. Could that be because it doesn't actually make a lot of money? Hmm...could be. Imagine that.
One cool thing to see - but would surely require more horsepower - is to take the underlying windows' z-indices into account, adjusting the alpha blending / spread accordingly. Sure, I know this is probably just a waste of computing, but (in some regard) what eyecandy isn't?
For the original poster, this technology couldn't be patented because prior art exists. I wrote a popup blocker while the current mozilla codebase was in its infancy for IE. All one has to do is create and register a BHO that sinks to the DWebBrowserEvents2::NewWindow connection point and passes VARIANT_TRUE as the output parameter. It's not rocket science. Microsoft need only add the code before such an event is raised since they can modify the original source.
Besides, just because it's Microsoft Internet Explorer, you want to burden the users with popup windows? And let's not forget about all the other commercial (including free) popup blockers that do just what I mentioned. Patenting this wouldn't be hurting Microsoft even close the amount it would be hurting the users.
I agree with NanoGator, but I have to add that "Merv" was a power-monging machine who's underlying purpose - it seems - was to dispell hope. People with power also make sure they keep their power and will do or say anything to sustain that goal. I, for one, took everything he said with a grain of salt. I mean, most people don't trust rich, powerful people in the real world (our time) - why should they be trusted in the Matrix - especially when it is a world created to sustain the self-aware machines. They practically destroyed humanity to sustain themselves.
I'm not so sure this is a problem. The patent mentions that data has to be encrypted when transmitted (presumably with SSL) and that the data has to be stored in a relational database.
MS primarily keeps data in config files (.inf, etc.). The old Windows update just used data out of these files with the ActiveSetup control to update components. I actually haven't checked into the "new" one (the one that was released with XP).
Of course, if they broaden the scope of "relational database" to start covering filesystems and loosely-related sectioned files like INF files, then, yes, I suppose they're screwed...
...except prior art exists. Then again, when has that stopped the USPTO from being utter morons with a bad business model?
Hello? Anybody in there? He said 'Ghost of Christmas Present' of sorts. Ever seen Dicken's classic, "A Christmas Carol"? The Ghost of Christmas Present showed Scruge what the world around him was like, things that he normally wouldn't know because he didn't know or didn't understand, just like the Children didn't understand that they're "hurting" the poor, poor cry-babies...er, musicians.
No, see...I didn't waste any time explaining it! They wasted time, not me! :P
The point is that they tested something that does not even matter. They said mach was analogous to warp. This is simply not true.
Besides the fact that there is next to nothing massive in space to cause resistence, Warp is closer to surfing where the starship doesn't actually move relative to space/time (at least from what I gather a long time about when I read the "manual"). It's like catching a major wave and riding it.
What a waste of time.
Yeah, that managed code that has proven to be quite stable and that will make up almost the entire OS is really going to suck. Get a life and get off the bandwagon.
/. et. al. is always complaining about Windows' instability and now that it just might be stable you bitch about that. C'mon! Where does it end. Just admit that you have a one track mind and are not open and move on.
I did hear from a reliable source that they already have rewritten the ol' mshtml in managed code and it works/looks great, according to the source.
Prior art? Since when has prior art been checked by the USPTO? British Telecom with their hyperlinking, AltaVista with the search engine, and many other patents that have been granted all have very strong prior art. Even the recent EOLAs problem has prior art. The problem is that the USPTO doesn't 1) care and/or 2) has no idea what to look for. The judges and jurors in patent infringment cases are two stupid to know a bit from a byte so the patent holder usually wins because they have the patent that shouldn't have been granted in the first place.
Prior art these days is a non-existent concept.
It's not free. It takes more intelligent people - who typically ask for more in salaray / wages - than what most Windows server require. Yes, truth be told, far to many trade schools educate certified IT people that don't really love computers - just the money it brings. These people are available in greater quantities and can run a Windows network decently enough (arguably).
Cost is not always the cost of software and hardware, but the cost to maintain and run them.
Wait, they're going to commercial the 'net (or at least want to)? I thought it already was commercialized!
I still remember the days of gopher and the early web (and I know many people remember long before that). Back then, most of the gov't didn't want much to do with this "new fangled thing". Boy, have things changed. Commerce is alive and well on the 'net and it gets more-so all the time. Most of the original inhabitants are still around but are getting brutalized by the various .coms that file patents based on what the .edus developed!
I'm feeling betta! I think I'll go for a walk... THUMP!