being able to move the mouse pointer between computers (assuming these are separate computers, not just multiple monitors); I assume this indicates some sort of network-transpart clipboard (and that the user is signed onto both computers). cool, that.
Well, specifically the article says in a very confusing way:
At one desk, users can move a wireless mouse's pointer from the screen of one computer to the screen of a laptop,
A multiheaded display, except that the video cards are in different computers. Ok, I don't have a problem with that, that's pretty simple and stratforward. That's a feature I'd like with X. Just set my notebook next to my 21' monitor, and it automatically becomes a part of my multiheaded display unit.
However, the rest of the quote is the problematic part:
with no wire or wireless connection between the computers themselves.
Ok, so I set my notebook down next to my monitor. Now according to Microsoft, I don't need to have a connection between the computers for that to work. Really cool, since I'm cheap and PC Card NIC's are pricy, whether they are wireless or ethernet. So what's the answer? How does Microsoft manage to share a mouse pointer and even move and copy data in between the files with no connection between them?
-Brent
Are these millionaires naive enough to think that a copy of their data will not be kept somewhere?
What difference does it make whether their data is kept somewhere or not? More to the point, wouldn't they want a copy of their dns on file somewhere?
Imagine if I had a medical emergency. I'm going to die. Someone needs to make a life or death decision fast. It could save me or kill me. What to do, what to do, what to do? But if I had my DNA on file somewhere, just look it up, and the decision is made.
I think that it should be mandatory for everyone to have their DNA on file. Imagine the benefit it would provide for not only medical emergencies, but even criminal investigations, and other things.
Ya know, something you can use on your computer without having to register or give up personal information.
What is wrong with requiring registration to read an article? Would you rather just pay for read it? They are giving you something that you want in exchange for something they want. What could you possibly have against that?
Is all you want a life full of freebies? Next you will be wanting "open source" pizzas, and "open source" clothing. It's a surprise you don't want "open source" housing.
Consider if someone (let's say RMS just for fun) used Microsoft's (OK, it doesn't have to be them...) proprietary code in an application he had developed, and then distributed it. If he put up his hands and admitted his mistake, would MS say "OK, good for you for complying with our requests to stop", or would they sue his ass off? I don't know if it would be the latter but I imagine it wouldn't be the former.
But wait, Microsoft themselves broke the law, were found guilty, and now are trying to get away by just "fixing" the problem. Shouldn't they have a punishment too? Or is it just anti-Microsoft crimes that should be punished?
Let's have some consistancy, ok? From now on, let's not ask from others more then what's required of Microsoft.
Well, when you put it that way, it makes me wonder why you'd use a GPL'ed web browser when you can just use Internet Explorer. You limit the sites that you can visit by picking anything else.
I tried installing Internet Explorer 6 and it wouldn't install. Can you tell me what the problem is? I have the latest version of Debian 3, and I did an apt-get dist-upgrade to make sure that everything was up-to-date.
AOL only lets AIM subscribers use official clients. And if they do it's their choice. For you to use an unlicensed client anyways is to steal from them.
-Brent
Re:And it provides what kinds of improvements?
on
Netscape 7.0 is Out
·
· Score: 2
Netscape 6 has been out for two years, and 6.2's been around for at least 10 months.
You do realize that 6.2 was a special chase, don't you? It was based on a development image, mostly to give a "preview" of what Netscape was working on. With the thousands of bug fixes and extra features, you are hard pressed to compare a development release with an optimised final release and call it cosmetic.
At least if nothing else you must havenoticed the speed-gains and the tabbed browsing.
So, you are saying that, in essence, the version number jump is a PR move, to distance themselves from the slack-ass job they did with Mozilla 0.9.4?
That's exactly what I am saying. And they didn't do a bad job with 0.9.4 either, they were just working with what they had to work with. They are done with that now, it's time for a new number.
I'm not saying that Netscape isn't making progress (okay, so I am), but is this really worth a whole version number?
How about the 100's of bugs fixed and and performance increases? Isn't that worth something?
Netscape 6 was really just something that was put out to show where Netscape was going. It had a lot of bugs yet, and wasn't optimised, so really couldn't be used productively. Netscape needs to distance themselves from that now and show that this one is ready for prime time. It really is off another completely different branch, instead of adding patches to 6.2.1, so I say it deserves a number increase.
-Brent
Re:And it provides what kinds of improvements?
on
Netscape 7.0 is Out
·
· Score: 2
These seem like the thinnest of thin cosmetic crud type changes.
Ah, Comparing Netscape's 7.0 release with their last release which was 4.8 2 weeks ago, you'd have to be pretty dense to only see cosmetic changes. Sure, the UI is redone, but Netscape 7 includes a completely rewritten renderer that supports all the latest standards.
Hopefully ISP's will bundle 7 with their software to allow their customers to experience these minor cosmetic improvements.
I am still waiting to hear one good reason to run Netscape 7 instead of Mozilla!:-)
I'm sure that the world isn't about to end due to you not running Netscape 7. Me personally, I'm running Opera 6 (Registered, BTW), Mozilla 1.1, and Netscape 7. Also, I install Netscape 7 on Windows boxes because the people who use them know what Netscape is, and want it.
I was speaking of the reverse engineering of IBM's BIOS which resulted in the PC clone market. [...] Its the same thing with Trillian.
I have no problem with Trillian reverse engineering AOL protocol. I would even like to see a protocol compatible server that I could use on my internal network as a private instant messaging service. This is analogious to reverse engineering the IBM bios.
However, as soon as Trillian connects to AOL's servers without AOL's approval, it is stealing AOL's server. It has gone much beyond just reverse engineering.
I was under the understanding that the best defense is to assume that the other guy is ALWAYS out to get you. This, like many other things, is something that should be left to the user to decide, not forced upon them by fiat. You can't have it both ways.
I was under the understanding that the best defense was that if you don't trust someone, don't have anything to do with them. In other words, don't use Java if you can't trust Sun. I'm trying to make a point that people think they seem to deserve anything and everything and that they deserve it their way. Well, I'm sorry, that doesn't happen. Sun isn't forcing anything on you. If you don't like it, you don't use it. I don't like Microsoft's EULA, so I don't use it. I don't cry that Microsoft is forcing me to use their software.
Besides, the agreement explicitly gives Sun the right to affect your machine without prior notification. That, in and of itself, is alarming, regardless of the end result. There is no way of knowing whether or not Sun includes malware in the download since you are not allowed to examine it first.
No, as others pointed out, this agreement seems to have to do with Java Web Start. And if you understand how JWS works, it syncs against a central download server so that it always runs the latest codebase. It doesn't bother to tell you that there's a new jEdit out, it just assumes that you want to run the latest version, so it downloads it. The only thing you notice is a little longer start time.
How about just not using software that you don't want to? Isn't that good enough? People feel like they deserve everything their way. Well, it's not true. If you don't like it, then don't use it.
I wish Debian would automatically update also. Apt-get dist-upgrade is simply too much work.
Anyways, I think it leaves too much to fate to have to watch every vendor for security problems. Why, Once you've checked Microsoft, Sun, RedHat, and many others daily, you've burned up a lot of time. It's so much better that applications can keep themselves up to date.
I'm all for Sun doing this. Java has a security model, so you don't have to worry about Sun doing funky stuff to your box. Unlike Microsft, who I wouldn't let touch my box. They have so many problems with security that they'd probably ruin my box. Or at least re-allow Viruses to destroy it.
How is this suppose to work, its not like decoding mp3's is some big mystery.
That's the whole idea of patenting something. Patenting involves disclosing how something works. Then the government protects your right to use it without competition for X years.
I'm already seeing a ton of songs in.wma format. On P2P systems and from friends. [...] If mp3s die out I highly doubt.ogg has a good chance to take it's place.
I don't know. My brother encodes in WMA too, because he just sticks the cd in his drive and XP automatically does it for him. He has no clue. On the other hand, another friend of mine who does audio recording work on XP encodes his in MP3 using lame.
People who use WMA now I don't think make a choice. Those people won't change if mp3 goes away. But I don't know one person who chooses WMA. If someone choose, they always choose mp3. And whehey need to make another choice they'll do their research and realize that they have to use OGG.
I think that the bigger thing to watch is car, portable cd, and stereo players. Right now they offer WMA *with* mp3 if the offer wma at all. But if mp3 goes away, will they replace it with ogg, or will they say, "Well, we have wma still, at least that's not going anywhere." Because if consumer devices only support wma, we're sunk.
It isn't that money wouldn't go to the Jedi, it is that it would.
No I don't think that the resprentative was saying that. The Australian government wouldn't be duped into giving the "Jedis" money just because they filled in a write in slot on the census form. The representative was that if there were 140,000 in "Religion X" that was recognised, but 70,000 of those people said that they were "Jedi" on a lark, then the "Religion X" would only get ~1/2 of the resources they should have. Since Jedi wasn't a recognised religion, the other 1/2 of the resources would then go to the other legitimate competing religions.
And I said in reply, that those marking "Jedi" probably weren't part of any organised religion to begin with. So nothing's lost as they would have filled in none, and not changed the resource allocation at all. However, if they did belong the a recognised religion, then all I can say is that the get what they deserve.
"If, for example, people of a particular religious affiliation do not provide the correct information, certain facilities might not be built that otherwise would be."
I presume that people who write Jedi on their census form are most agnostics and other non-religious people who would have otherwise not answered at all on the census. So the Australian religious budget would not go to them to begin with. Why not have a little fun? It doesn't hurt anything, except for a few hours for the census department to remove the figures from there total.
Now if a person from a legitimate religion answered Jedi, and therefore has caused less dollars to go to his religious organization, I say he gets what he deserves.
I thought 1.0 meant an API freeze for Mozilla. Even if new features were added, the old ones should stay the way they are.
You hit that right on the head. However, This story isn't talking about the 1.0 brnahc, but the 1.1 branch. If you want the 1.0 branch with the frozen API, you want to download 1.0.1rc instead. I believe the link is right there on the 1.0 start page.
Why doesn't Mozilla.org publicise the 1.01 release candidates anywhere?
Woah boy!!! You just said that Mozilla publised the 1.01 release candidate on their 1.0 start page, and the second sentence afterward ask why they didn't publise it? Please try to do something to increase your attention span. Thanks:)
Anyways, the only people interested in 1.01 anymore are those using 1.0. So the only place that Mozilla need to publicise it would by on the 1.0 start page. For everyone there's 1.1 now.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, specifically the article says in a very confusing way:
A multiheaded display, except that the video cards are in different computers. Ok, I don't have a problem with that, that's pretty simple and stratforward. That's a feature I'd like with X. Just set my notebook next to my 21' monitor, and it automatically becomes a part of my multiheaded display unit.However, the rest of the quote is the problematic part:
Ok, so I set my notebook down next to my monitor. Now according to Microsoft, I don't need to have a connection between the computers for that to work. Really cool, since I'm cheap and PC Card NIC's are pricy, whether they are wireless or ethernet. So what's the answer? How does Microsoft manage to share a mouse pointer and even move and copy data in between the files with no connection between them? -BrentHe said Rendezvous, not DNS. Rendezvous is based on the DNS protocol, to create an unmanaged DNS solution.
-BrentWhat difference does it make whether their data is kept somewhere or not? More to the point, wouldn't they want a copy of their dns on file somewhere?
Imagine if I had a medical emergency. I'm going to die. Someone needs to make a life or death decision fast. It could save me or kill me. What to do, what to do, what to do? But if I had my DNA on file somewhere, just look it up, and the decision is made.
I think that it should be mandatory for everyone to have their DNA on file. Imagine the benefit it would provide for not only medical emergencies, but even criminal investigations, and other things.
-BrentWhat is wrong with requiring registration to read an article? Would you rather just pay for read it? They are giving you something that you want in exchange for something they want. What could you possibly have against that?
Is all you want a life full of freebies? Next you will be wanting "open source" pizzas, and "open source" clothing. It's a surprise you don't want "open source" housing.
-BrentWindows would help too, although I'm not too concerned about that. Oh, and I need to be able to sync it with my Zaurus. Can iCal do this?
But wait, Microsoft themselves broke the law, were found guilty, and now are trying to get away by just "fixing" the problem. Shouldn't they have a punishment too? Or is it just anti-Microsoft crimes that should be punished?
Let's have some consistancy, ok? From now on, let's not ask from others more then what's required of Microsoft.
-BrentI tried installing Internet Explorer 6 and it wouldn't install. Can you tell me what the problem is? I have the latest version of Debian 3, and I did an apt-get dist-upgrade to make sure that everything was up-to-date.
-BrentAOL only lets AIM subscribers use official clients. And if they do it's their choice. For you to use an unlicensed client anyways is to steal from them.
-BrentYou do realize that 6.2 was a special chase, don't you? It was based on a development image, mostly to give a "preview" of what Netscape was working on. With the thousands of bug fixes and extra features, you are hard pressed to compare a development release with an optimised final release and call it cosmetic.
At least if nothing else you must havenoticed the speed-gains and the tabbed browsing.
-BrentThat's exactly what I am saying. And they didn't do a bad job with 0.9.4 either, they were just working with what they had to work with. They are done with that now, it's time for a new number.
-BrentHow about the 100's of bugs fixed and and performance increases? Isn't that worth something?
Netscape 6 was really just something that was put out to show where Netscape was going. It had a lot of bugs yet, and wasn't optimised, so really couldn't be used productively. Netscape needs to distance themselves from that now and show that this one is ready for prime time. It really is off another completely different branch, instead of adding patches to 6.2.1, so I say it deserves a number increase.
-BrentAh, Comparing Netscape's 7.0 release with their last release which was 4.8 2 weeks ago, you'd have to be pretty dense to only see cosmetic changes. Sure, the UI is redone, but Netscape 7 includes a completely rewritten renderer that supports all the latest standards.
Hopefully ISP's will bundle 7 with their software to allow their customers to experience these minor cosmetic improvements.
-BrentI'm sure that the world isn't about to end due to you not running Netscape 7. Me personally, I'm running Opera 6 (Registered, BTW), Mozilla 1.1, and Netscape 7. Also, I install Netscape 7 on Windows boxes because the people who use them know what Netscape is, and want it.
-BrentI have no problem with Trillian reverse engineering AOL protocol. I would even like to see a protocol compatible server that I could use on my internal network as a private instant messaging service. This is analogious to reverse engineering the IBM bios.
However, as soon as Trillian connects to AOL's servers without AOL's approval, it is stealing AOL's server. It has gone much beyond just reverse engineering.
-BrentI was under the understanding that the best defense was that if you don't trust someone, don't have anything to do with them. In other words, don't use Java if you can't trust Sun. I'm trying to make a point that people think they seem to deserve anything and everything and that they deserve it their way. Well, I'm sorry, that doesn't happen. Sun isn't forcing anything on you. If you don't like it, you don't use it. I don't like Microsoft's EULA, so I don't use it. I don't cry that Microsoft is forcing me to use their software.
Besides, the agreement explicitly gives Sun the right to affect your machine without prior notification. That, in and of itself, is alarming, regardless of the end result. There is no way of knowing whether or not Sun includes malware in the download since you are not allowed to examine it first.No, as others pointed out, this agreement seems to have to do with Java Web Start. And if you understand how JWS works, it syncs against a central download server so that it always runs the latest codebase. It doesn't bother to tell you that there's a new jEdit out, it just assumes that you want to run the latest version, so it downloads it. The only thing you notice is a little longer start time.
-BrentHow about just not using software that you don't want to? Isn't that good enough? People feel like they deserve everything their way. Well, it's not true. If you don't like it, then don't use it.
-BrentBecause Sun isn't doing this to prevent you from listening to the music that you purchased.
-BrentAnyways, I think it leaves too much to fate to have to watch every vendor for security problems. Why, Once you've checked Microsoft, Sun, RedHat, and many others daily, you've burned up a lot of time. It's so much better that applications can keep themselves up to date.
I'm all for Sun doing this. Java has a security model, so you don't have to worry about Sun doing funky stuff to your box. Unlike Microsft, who I wouldn't let touch my box. They have so many problems with security that they'd probably ruin my box. Or at least re-allow Viruses to destroy it.
-BrentThat's the whole idea of patenting something. Patenting involves disclosing how something works. Then the government protects your right to use it without competition for X years.
-BrentI don't know. My brother encodes in WMA too, because he just sticks the cd in his drive and XP automatically does it for him. He has no clue. On the other hand, another friend of mine who does audio recording work on XP encodes his in MP3 using lame.
People who use WMA now I don't think make a choice. Those people won't change if mp3 goes away. But I don't know one person who chooses WMA. If someone choose, they always choose mp3. And whehey need to make another choice they'll do their research and realize that they have to use OGG.
I think that the bigger thing to watch is car, portable cd, and stereo players. Right now they offer WMA *with* mp3 if the offer wma at all. But if mp3 goes away, will they replace it with ogg, or will they say, "Well, we have wma still, at least that's not going anywhere." Because if consumer devices only support wma, we're sunk.
-BrentNo I don't think that the resprentative was saying that. The Australian government wouldn't be duped into giving the "Jedis" money just because they filled in a write in slot on the census form. The representative was that if there were 140,000 in "Religion X" that was recognised, but 70,000 of those people said that they were "Jedi" on a lark, then the "Religion X" would only get ~1/2 of the resources they should have. Since Jedi wasn't a recognised religion, the other 1/2 of the resources would then go to the other legitimate competing religions.
And I said in reply, that those marking "Jedi" probably weren't part of any organised religion to begin with. So nothing's lost as they would have filled in none, and not changed the resource allocation at all. However, if they did belong the a recognised religion, then all I can say is that the get what they deserve.
-BrentI presume that people who write Jedi on their census form are most agnostics and other non-religious people who would have otherwise not answered at all on the census. So the Australian religious budget would not go to them to begin with. Why not have a little fun? It doesn't hurt anything, except for a few hours for the census department to remove the figures from there total.
Now if a person from a legitimate religion answered Jedi, and therefore has caused less dollars to go to his religious organization, I say he gets what he deserves.
-BrentWhat's new.
Can we upgrade from 1.0 to 1.1 or should we wait for 1.01 ?Yes, you can definately upgrade to 1.1 from 1.0.
-BrentYou hit that right on the head. However, This story isn't talking about the 1.0 brnahc, but the 1.1 branch. If you want the 1.0 branch with the frozen API, you want to download 1.0.1rc instead. I believe the link is right there on the 1.0 start page.
-BrentWoah boy!!! You just said that Mozilla publised the 1.01 release candidate on their 1.0 start page, and the second sentence afterward ask why they didn't publise it? Please try to do something to increase your attention span. Thanks :)
Anyways, the only people interested in 1.01 anymore are those using 1.0. So the only place that Mozilla need to publicise it would by on the 1.0 start page. For everyone there's 1.1 now.
-Brent