Oh, Linux lets you use a compiler now, instead of forcing you to compile everything by hand? Whew, that's certainly going to make things much easier!
Absolutely! I nearly got carpal tunnel syndrome from moving those magnets around, flipping bits on the disk. (Though it did help me with fine motor control.) And don't get me started on the piles of scratch paper I used to go through!
I have to wonder why they didn't just port Firefox themselves.
Well, Opera had previously ported the browser to the DS -- something made easier by their long experience developing for embedded devices. Presumably Nintendo liked what they got with that partnership, and decided to expand it.
Opera is already free. Why should people have to pay extra?
Because... it's a different program for a different architecture that runs on a different kind of device in a different market?
The PC and console versions of the same game are generally separate purchases, and not necessarily the same price. Here one of the prices is $0. That doesn't necessarily mean the other price will be $0 as well.
Heh. From your subject, I expected to find more./-style whining about "blog," "podcast," "AJAX" and "Web 2.0." Thanks for actually making a point about the article instead!
This has nothing at all to do with "keeping the fogies out", but rather letting them in. It has a name that none-techs understand, but is still "cool" (note the quotes). The tech behind it (RSS feeds pointing to MP3 files) should not matter to them. But it needs a standard. And a standard needs a name everyone understands.
And "podcast" is well suited, given how similar it sounds to "broadcast." That provides an instant association.
Didn't Apple basically ignore "podcasting" when it first started?
Pretty much, yeah. Though this almost makes Microsoft look smart for discouraging use of the term "podcast" on campus last year. (Almost.) According to that article, they were using the term "blogcast" internally.
Could be worse. Could be McAfee. You can run, configure, and update Norton Antivirus or even Norton Internet Security without loading a web browser. McAfee actually relies on IE --and IE specifically -- to handle parts of its interface, including the updater. In fact, some of the early IE7 betas actually broke the McAfee updater.
Yes, those posts are old, but a co-worker of mine just installed the latest version of McAfee on his computer last week, and it does still use IE internally.
I don't know about you, but I think relying on one of the most notoriously insecure pieces of software to handle updates for a security program doesn't sound like the greatest idea since sliced bread.
Admittedly, your comment adds a second component (source control), so it's better than some of the arguments I've seen, but...
Does anyone else appreciate the irony inherent in the fact that some Firefox users claim that Opera only appears more secure because fewer people use it, and therefore fewer users encounter problems and fewer attackers look for them?
It wasn't that long ago that IE users were making the same claim about Firefox. I seem to recall the argument wasn't terribly popular among this crowd.
Opera's bug reporting is really really obscure. They lock out the bug database and don't tell you if they fixed something, or even if it was a problem.
The way to deal with that, I've found, is to ask follow-up questions on the forums. If you keep track of the bug report numbers, it's even better.
I reported a couple of CSS bugs back during the betas for Opera 8. Nothing happened. So during the Opera 9 betas, I posted questions about them, asked about other bugs I encountered, and funny thing, every layout bug I asked about was fixed by the time Opera 9 final came out.
One advantage Opera has is that they manage to coordinate advisory releases and bug fixes. It's rare that someone announces a security vulnerability in Opera before the updated version is out.
This probably means that most vulnerabilities in Opera are found internally, or reported straight to Opera by researchers. At that point Opera works on a bug fix, then releases the update and the advisory together.
By contrast, many vulnerabilities for Microsoft and Mozilla products get posted to Bugtraq or otherwise announced to the world, sometimes even before MS/Moz is notified. Almost certainly, more people are looking for holes in IE and Firefox than in Opera. And Mozilla has the open-source philosophy which lends itself to people who lean toward full disclosure. With Microsoft, I'm sure there's a trust issue: people want to make sure they don't sit on it for a year, so they make it public.
From that, you can deduce that most researchers who find vulnerabilities in Opera trust them to fix the problem quickly.
So, it looks like, as with the music industry, the established players are scared/hesitating over using these new web tube things
And on top of that effect, DC has the disadvantage of being a subsidiary of Time Warner -- which means that even if DC thought it was a great idea, they'd have to convince their higher-ups to go for it.
Yesterday the Bad Astronomy site posted a great photo of Atlantis and the ISS silhouetted against the sun. The photo was taken last Sunday... from the ground! The post over there also links to photographer Thierry Legault's website, with a bunch more space photos.
If Californians think SUVs are harmful, then stop buying them you superficial idiots!
You seem to be laboring under the mistaken impression that all 30+ million Californians think and act alike.
The fact of the matter is that some Californians think SUVs are harmful, and some Californians buy them. Most people who think SUVs are harmful already don't buy them. (Not all -- there are people who think SUVs are harmful in aggregate, but decide that their own use is justified.) The challenge facing those who consider SUVs to be harmful is not to stop buying them -- most of them have already -- but to convince those who do buy SUVs to stop.
And yet for some reason, the suit includes Toyota, which pioneered the marketing of hybrid cars in the US, and Honda, which produces hybrid versions of some of their more popular models.
Speaking as a a Californian of the (at least by today's standards) liberal persuasion... this suit is insane.
If you can't convince the federal government that there's a significant causal connection between vehicle emissions and global warming, you're not likely to be able to convince a judge.
Besides, the state just passed a law to enforce stricter emissions standards. Given the size of the market and the state's car culture, that alone will have far more effect than this lawsuit.
As for reasons, I think we need look no further than the fact that we have an election coming up in less than two months.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely! I nearly got carpal tunnel syndrome from moving those magnets around, flipping bits on the disk. (Though it did help me with fine motor control.) And don't get me started on the piles of scratch paper I used to go through!
Well, Opera had previously ported the browser to the DS -- something made easier by their long experience developing for embedded devices. Presumably Nintendo liked what they got with that partnership, and decided to expand it.
So wii've been told.
That's kind of like saying that using Linux requires you to compile everything by hand. It may have been true once, but the info is out of date.
Because... it's a different program for a different architecture that runs on a different kind of device in a different market?
The PC and console versions of the same game are generally separate purchases, and not necessarily the same price. Here one of the prices is $0. That doesn't necessarily mean the other price will be $0 as well.
Heh. From your subject, I expected to find more ./-style whining about "blog," "podcast," "AJAX" and "Web 2.0." Thanks for actually making a point about the article instead!
And "podcast" is well suited, given how similar it sounds to "broadcast." That provides an instant association.
A sedan is a particular kind of automobile. A truck is also a particular kind of automobile. Same with pick-up trucks, SUVs, etc.
But I suppose we should get rid of all those terms because "automobile" will do the job adequately.
Yes, verbing weirds language.
Pretty much, yeah. Though this almost makes Microsoft look smart for discouraging use of the term "podcast" on campus last year. (Almost.) According to that article, they were using the term "blogcast" internally.
Could be worse. Could be McAfee. You can run, configure, and update Norton Antivirus or even Norton Internet Security without loading a web browser. McAfee actually relies on IE --and IE specifically -- to handle parts of its interface, including the updater. In fact, some of the early IE7 betas actually broke the McAfee updater.
Yes, those posts are old, but a co-worker of mine just installed the latest version of McAfee on his computer last week, and it does still use IE internally.
I don't know about you, but I think relying on one of the most notoriously insecure pieces of software to handle updates for a security program doesn't sound like the greatest idea since sliced bread.
Admittedly, your comment adds a second component (source control), so it's better than some of the arguments I've seen, but...
Does anyone else appreciate the irony inherent in the fact that some Firefox users claim that Opera only appears more secure because fewer people use it, and therefore fewer users encounter problems and fewer attackers look for them?
It wasn't that long ago that IE users were making the same claim about Firefox. I seem to recall the argument wasn't terribly popular among this crowd.
The way to deal with that, I've found, is to ask follow-up questions on the forums. If you keep track of the bug report numbers, it's even better.
I reported a couple of CSS bugs back during the betas for Opera 8. Nothing happened. So during the Opera 9 betas, I posted questions about them, asked about other bugs I encountered, and funny thing, every layout bug I asked about was fixed by the time Opera 9 final came out.
One advantage Opera has is that they manage to coordinate advisory releases and bug fixes. It's rare that someone announces a security vulnerability in Opera before the updated version is out.
This probably means that most vulnerabilities in Opera are found internally, or reported straight to Opera by researchers. At that point Opera works on a bug fix, then releases the update and the advisory together.
By contrast, many vulnerabilities for Microsoft and Mozilla products get posted to Bugtraq or otherwise announced to the world, sometimes even before MS/Moz is notified. Almost certainly, more people are looking for holes in IE and Firefox than in Opera. And Mozilla has the open-source philosophy which lends itself to people who lean toward full disclosure. With Microsoft, I'm sure there's a trust issue: people want to make sure they don't sit on it for a year, so they make it public.
From that, you can deduce that most researchers who find vulnerabilities in Opera trust them to fix the problem quickly.
"Junk Science!
How come you taste so good?"
...of those cartoons where Bugs Bunny or someone is sitting in a sailboat, pulls out a fan, aims it at the sail... ...and the boat moves?
Just yesterday I read an announcement about a new service called Drive Thru Comics. Like the interview, they're describing it in terms of iTMS.
Not surprisingly, it's mostly small-press, but there are at least some names I recognize.
And on top of that effect, DC has the disadvantage of being a subsidiary of Time Warner -- which means that even if DC thought it was a great idea, they'd have to convince their higher-ups to go for it.
At least it wasn't more of that Ori trash. ;)
It probably won't be accessible by a great glass elevator, but they may want to watch out for Vermicious Knids, just the same.
Yesterday the Bad Astronomy site posted a great photo of Atlantis and the ISS silhouetted against the sun. The photo was taken last Sunday... from the ground! The post over there also links to photographer Thierry Legault's website, with a bunch more space photos.
You seem to be laboring under the mistaken impression that all 30+ million Californians think and act alike.
The fact of the matter is that some Californians think SUVs are harmful, and some Californians buy them. Most people who think SUVs are harmful already don't buy them. (Not all -- there are people who think SUVs are harmful in aggregate, but decide that their own use is justified.) The challenge facing those who consider SUVs to be harmful is not to stop buying them -- most of them have already -- but to convince those who do buy SUVs to stop.
And yet for some reason, the suit includes Toyota, which pioneered the marketing of hybrid cars in the US, and Honda, which produces hybrid versions of some of their more popular models.
Speaking as a a Californian of the (at least by today's standards) liberal persuasion... this suit is insane.
If you can't convince the federal government that there's a significant causal connection between vehicle emissions and global warming, you're not likely to be able to convince a judge.
Besides, the state just passed a law to enforce stricter emissions standards. Given the size of the market and the state's car culture, that alone will have far more effect than this lawsuit.
As for reasons, I think we need look no further than the fact that we have an election coming up in less than two months.
Either that or Tony the Tiger.