Uh: Who could exploit the vulnerability? An attacker would require valid logon credentials to the server in order to exploit the vulnerability. However if a server had been purposely configured to allow users, either anonymous or authenticated, to upload web content such as.ASP pages to web sites, the server could be attacked by exploit this vulnerability."
How could an attacker exploit the vulnerability? An attacker could try to exploit the vulnerability by creating a specially crafted ASP file and uploading the file to an affected system. If IIS processed the file it could then cause the affected system to execute code.
Sure it's a problem, but really if you look a the details it's not such a big deal.
I mean if you allow users to upload arbitrary php to be executed by the webserver you're bound to have similar problems, and heh, just running php is a vulnerability IMO;).
I disagree, market share has a substantial impact on people bothering to target the platform in the first place.
When you want to install zombieware or spyware you might as well target the 90%.
The reason why lots of zombieware or spyware stuff get installed usually has to do with users running the stuff and maybe even entering passwords and jumping through other hoops in order to install the malware (remember the passworded zip one? It was amazing that it kept spreading). OSX won't protect those many brilliant folks who'd enter the necessary admin password to install stuff, nor would it protect people from just running stuff that only needs normal user privileges to do its nastiness (send spam, DoS websites, fetch new instructions).
If OSX ever got to a high enough marketshare AND a similar sort of users you'd start seeing people targeting it.
And it'll be a lot easier too - given that perl etc are probably installed by default on OSX. Imagine trojans in perl or some other powerful scripting language. Think eval "$payload", where $payload is innocuous at the start.
Perhaps an O/S should have a few simple to understand "privilege templates" for running software with restricted privileges. A "cool" applet should need no permanent storage at all, and very limited read access, and maybe no network access.
As for your www.us.army.mil example. Even if you run it on windows it shouldn't get exploited. The last IIS exploit was ages ago for IIS4 I think. I doubt a _real_ server admin would be using that machine to surf the web, download cool "screensavers" or "toolbars" and install them - no desktop usage. Once you firewall off everything but port 80 and 443, it's more a matter of whether your webserver and webapps are secure or not, not your O/S.
The thing I don't get is - why don't any of those "hot toolbar", "spyware" people end up in jail? Why aren't any Sony people charged for that rootkit fiasco? Why is it they are just trying to extradite some silly chap in UK looking for UFOs on a US.mil site? While people tampering with millions of machines get away with it? There was a recent one done with a banner ad on a popular site I think...
I hardly ever bother considering benchmarks that Intel picks. So far the apps used by most PC users seem to bench better on Core 2 than on the X2 - seems it even compiles stuff faster - odds are it runs perl and python faster too. I doubt Intel has bought everyone doing those benchmarks.
As for HPC system. I can't remember when the last time a company I worked in bought an 8 or 16 way HPC system. Not even sure if any of them bought a 4 way system - maybe by mistake or ignorance. IIRC even google was sticking to mainly dual CPU systems. Not sure what they do now given the new dual or multi core stuff.
Yes, no doubt there are applications where the K8 is still the better choice by far. But that argument sounds a bit like Itanic talk;). And I doubt that's where AMD wants to go.
I might still replace stuff with K8 instead of core 2, but it'll be because of price (and concerns that the core 2 and chipset might still be a bit "rough" at the edges).
Since you do stuff for AMD maybe you can answer this one. Do the new revisions of the X2 handle the TSC thingy differently? Any links/urls? The original X2s had significant TSC divergence so my current workaround is idle=poll on Linux (not sure if it is a problem on Windows). The TSC thing was not really such a big surprise when you think about it, but it is an inconvenience if you do want fast check time functions.
Well currently the X2 seems to lose most benchmarks to the Core 2 Duo (in all sorts of apps too). And this is for the same clock speeds.
Any significant new architecture lined up for AMD cpus in the near future? I don't see signs of any. Going quad core would be reducing the X2 advantage of higher memory performance per core. I don't think the volume market is going to snap up quad cores at prices that will make AMD happy.
Unless the X2 can clock WAY higher than the Core 2 Duo, it's going to be a slower CPU in comparison. And the Core 2 Duos sure look like they can be clocked pretty high...
So what is AMD's answer to the Core 2 Duo? Seems to me they can only cut prices and hope for the best...
If they have some top secret CPU, it better be really good!
Sure. Stick to nonimportant stuff that don't involve usernames and passwords, and avoid anything that you might ever regret if _everyone_ knew you did whatever it was.
Complaint forms? Well I suppose these cops have got to be better than the Florida ones.
Do a search for: florida police complaint forms
Try not to get shot while you're at it.
Cops in my country are crap too.
Sometimes I'm thinking one might as well just pay "insurance" to some organized criminal organization. Maybe better chance of getting your stuff back.
I've heard a few "success stories": car gets stolen, guy calls his "uncle", "uncle" calls "some people" he knows. Car ends up back in the same spot where it was stolen from.
Definitely a lot less paperwork;).
Trouble is, if the cops keep not enforcing rule of law, after a while people might start to take things into their own hands.
Any Government good or bad has to maintain its monopoly on violence in order to survive. If the cops don't do their jobs, things can turn bad pretty fast.
I thought the US laws only apply to "protected computer systems".
The definition of "protected computer" includes government computers, financial institution computers, and any computer "which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or communications."
Well I suppose with a good enough lawyer and a judge on your side you might be able to get away with internet=communications.
quote: "The only debate you should be worried about is debating how you are going to mind your own buisness and stay the hell out of other people's eating habits"
And you call me a Food Nazi and authoritarian busy body from what I posted?
From what you and I say, you're probably far more a "Debate Nazi" than I'm a "Food Nazi".
Show me where I'm forcing people to not eat stuff or to eat stuff.
Hey I'm fine with the US people consuming crap. They are free to do that- it's a free country there I hear;). If they all decide to eat rat poison, starting from the top, I'd recommend against it, but if they insist that's fine with me.
Keep in mind, it's the US that tends to force OTHER COUNTRIES to follow US regulations etc, whether we like it or not. So the laws and policies the US citizens condone, often end up affecting us. Some of it good, some of it bad. So it's often a good idea to try to influence things at the start given the US citizens are the sort of people who'd end up getting G W Bush _twice_ and Diebold election systems, believe that Iraq was involved in 9/11, and so many other US-isms.
Maybe it's not the food, it's the kool-aid in their drinking water...
If you don't regularly get contaminated food you shouldn't have to use stuff like this at all.
If it is pretty rare that dangerous bacteria get into your food, why should it be good practice to have viruses added to certain "foods" 100% of the time? Think about it.
This is just like the other stupid idiocy (salmonella etc) which the food industry seems to get away with. Go read this: http://www.cspinet.org/reports/polt.html
Excerpt: "Despite increasing rates of food poisoning from Salmonella and Campylobacter during the 1980s, and continuing high levels today, the poultry industry has maintained processing practices that actually increase the percent of contaminated products. Instead of minimizing the contamination in processing plants, the poultry industry relies on consumers to cook the problem away."
The real problem is not bacteria in food. The real problem is the food industry treating food just like any other "fuel" - if it meets regulations XYZ then it's fit to be consumed. AND the FDA etc allowing them to do so.
With attitudes like that you get practices like feeding feathers to cows - which was stopped because, brilliantly, they feed leftover cows to chickens too, so with the BSE scare, the risk of leftover cows ending up being swept off the floor with the feathers and re-fed to cows was a bit too high to be politically/economically viable.
And then the USA complains when the Japanese refuse their beef or their rice or whatever.
This is just like going to a restaurant and getting crap served to you, but FDA approved crap, with FDA approved viruses squirted on it so that all the dangerous bacteria has been killed, following industry "best practices".
Even if it is legally edible and meets all the regulations, it still leaves a bad taste in your mouth one way or another.
Instead of debating whether the viruses are potentially harmful or not, we should consider whether what's happening in the food industry is harmful or not.
What next? You guys are going to continue eating such industrial output, like it and think it's "wonderful new technology", "Approved by the glorious FDA"? Now that's what I call disgusting. Believe me, what is disgusting is not the viruses or the bacteria, and I'm the sort who eats and likes all sorts of stuff (some of it apparently has appeared on Fear Factor).
Is this the cause or effect of the Intel-Apple deal? Or totally unrelated?
Could it have been Dell trying to use AMD to haggle for lower prices from Intel and taking it a bit too far, and Apple seizing the opportunity to strike a deal with Intel?
And next thing you know, Apple gets a Dell-style deal from Intel, and Dell ends up with "humpty dumpty" on its face.
IBM and HP might now be having a moment of schadenfreude...
As for AMD's quad cores saving them, I don't see any significant core changes. No core changes = just the usual scaling = not going to beat Core 2 Duo or Woodcrest - which are now better per GHz and faster overall.
Maybe AMD stuff will win for 8 way servers (4 socket x 2 cores, or 8 socket), but the market for 8 way is pretty small at the moment.
As for 2 socket x 4 cores, AFAIK quad core means the 4 cores will share the socket's memory, so I don't see how that is going to be much better than Intel.
Most people don't have to read a page to notice that the content has changed.
Heck, I often don't even need to read a page to spot typos and errors, sometimes spot them in less than a second (I've declined in recent years - too much typo-ridden slashdot I guess). I think there are other slashdotters who can actually read content very fast.
Well doc, I'm telling you it's annoying, even if it's "only" 200ms. 200ms is very perceptible - it's LAGGY. If a UI expert doesn't think 200ms of latency is an issue, I don't think much of that UI expert.
200msec is "dial up modem" grade UI. HPB territory. Sure it's usable, but it still sucks to be using it.
'I hardly view more closely approximating reality as "artificial"'
If UI designers keep trying to approximate reality rather than improve it, no wonder UIs suck!
Sheesh. Have we run out of people like Douglas Englebart and the other bunch who invented the scrollbar?
"The most disorienting example, I believe, is when you search for text in a document, and it scrolls horizontally and vertically as part of that search. You have absolutely no idea where you are after that happens"
No idea? Uh see the scrollbar on the right? That tells you where you are and you can use it to control where you are.
The scrollbar's a brilliant invention, wish they'd come up with more stuff as good as that, rather than silly animations or wobbly windows (what the?! 1960s got us NLS, multimedia teleconferencing, the mouse, lots of other stuff, and in 2000 we get wobbly windows? Crap!).
The part I don't like about many (not all) search dialogs is it's hard to quickly go back to the previous search- "hey, wait a minute let's go back to the prev item found". Firefox allows you, but IE doesn't. And IE is terrible - it seems to lose the position of the search easily - if you click on the content it starts the search from the TOP! Not from the cursor, not from the previous search, the top!
As for animations being fast, to me if they delay the onset of the action, they're not fast enough. Let them run in parallel if you want, but to delay the execution of something just to show me some animation is annoying to me. Unless you're playing some game, and it's to simulate something.
alt+tab isn't good enough for me. I often need to switch amongst 3 or more windows at once. So it'll be good to have the feature I linked to.
e.g. alt+1 = ssh to A (tail of logfile?) alt+2 = ssh to B (cmd?) alt+3 = man page alt+4 = RFC alt+5 = text editor?
Then when I want to switch to another set of tasks, I just click their respective buttons in the taskbar and then press alt+0 and the past 9 tasks/windows should get renumbered (1 = most recently selected), and I can rapidly switch amongst the new tasks.
alt+1 = spreadsheet alt+2 = email from boss alt+3 = some documentation alt+4 = browser with google search results alt+5 = browser with slashdot;)
I suppose I'm only one of the very few who'd find this feature useful?
Anyway, I don't really need "reveal desktop", on windows machines I typically have my start menu set up something similar to this:
Folders/items in base of start menu: 1 Explore 2 Tools 3 email (item not folder) 4 cmd (item not folder) 5 ssh
Then each of those start menu folders have items: "1 Explore" has 1 Explore Desktop A Explore A C Explore C... "2 Tools" has Calculator Notepad and so on
This way I can press winkey,1,1 and I'd be exploring the desktop - and I can sort it by "last modified" or other order. winkey,2,C = opens the calculator winkey,5,A = ssh to machine A winkey,5,B = ssh to machine B
Of course if speed is the essence then repeated numbers should be avoided, pressing two different keys one after the other can usually be done faster than repeated presses of the same key.
Haven't got around to doing this sort of thing on KDE (seems a bit harder).
My taskbar is "always on top", I don't like waiting for it to appear when I need it.
Uh but the visual feedback would be the display of the page itself and the change in the displayed logical page number.
If for some reason it takes too long to display the page, then maybe the user should get that notorious hour-glass/clock/spinning thing popping up (after 1-2 seconds?). That way you know you did click on the page button.
I'm strange but I prefer that the page should just be displayed immediately.
Rapid menu unrolling? I personally find that very annoying - as bad as interstitial ads. I want the menu to be drawn immediately. Same for the pause of hundreds of milliseconds before displaying submenus. On many windows machines I have renamed folders or items in the start-menu to start with numbers (e.g. a folder "2 Tools" containing "Calculator" ), so that you can do stuff like press winkey,1,C to explore the C drive; winkey 2,C opens the calculator; winkey,4 = cmd; and so on (like ssh to various machines). If the menu unrolling gets in the way of that, I'd be pretty annoyed.
I think users should be allowed to choose a low latency, no time wasting option/theme. I'd rather waste my time on things I chosen to waste time on (e.g. Slashdot) rather than what some UI designer thinks is cool/neat.
Well I suppose a reasonable compromise would be to display the content/change/page immediately AND have some sort of unobtrusive animation at the same time, rather than have the animation delay the desired action/change (in which case IMO it counts as obtrusive and intrusive).
I'd rather my multi-GHz CPU computer be slowed down for good reasons rather than for artificial reasons... If there's going to be any procrastination, it should always be done by the user/human and not the computer.
Then again, I'm the sort of person who regularly thinks that communications at near light speed just isn't fast enough- 200 msec to cross the Pacific Ocean twice? What a terrible lag!;)
How'd a completely blind person cope with that one? Say they want 2 minutes, if they spin it faster than normal they might get 3 minutes instead.
I think same angle = same time would be better for blind people.
Natural talent is still a limiter
on
The Expert Mind
·
· Score: 1
It's obvious that natural talent is a significant limiter.
Chimps reach the limits of their expertise in chess playing pretty soon, way before the magical "10 years" they talk about.
Another thing, assuming they are right and most humans might be able to be trained to play chess very well, far better than the current average chess player.
BUT, only the top 10 or 20 chess players would be rewarded well for that. So it is a waste of resources (society, you, your trainers), you might as well be an expert in some other field (unless you really like chess). Think of it in comparative advantage terms (economics).
So given their argument that you can train people to become an expert in anything (expert being better than average), I suggest that we focus on training children from infancy to reach "expert levels" in being loving, honest, nice, kind and patient, having integrity etc.
Even if they don't end up being the top 10 kindest people in the world, I think society would benefit a lot more from such a project than say an intensive chess/golf/music project.
After all what's the big deal about meeting the #2000 golf player in the world? Whereas the #2000 kindest person in the world would still be kind to you:).
Uh just curious, why do you need a 0.5 second animation for page turning?
If I'm reading a book, I'm more interested in the content I'm reading rather than the animations of page turning.
It's like those TV/interstitial ads. The good ones might be cool the first time you see them, but after a few times, don't you want to be able to skip them and get on with whatever you were doing?
1-3 yeah. I usually have everything maximized - but some people seem to like to have stuff paned. I'd rather have shortcut keys that allow me to rapidly switch amongst the past N "windows"[1]
But 4? I prefer jumpiness. When I want something to happen, I want the computer to do it NOW, not do some silly animation before it does it.
If I want a smooth scroll, I'd be holding down the scrollbar (great invention that one) and dragging it. But if I want a "page down", I want it to go a page down NOW! If I want to switch to a window, I want to see that window _immediately_ not wait for some stupid animation. If people don't like interstitial ads/cutscenes getting in the way of what they want/are doing, what makes UI designers think that people would like those animations after the 5th time of seeing them? As a compromise, have those animations by default- but allow a "low latency" setting to turn ALL of them off.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh: .ASP pages to web sites, the server could be attacked by exploit this vulnerability."
;).
Who could exploit the vulnerability?
An attacker would require valid logon credentials to the server in order to exploit the vulnerability. However if a server had been purposely configured to allow users, either anonymous or authenticated, to upload web content such as
How could an attacker exploit the vulnerability?
An attacker could try to exploit the vulnerability by creating a specially crafted ASP file and uploading the file to an affected system. If IIS processed the file it could then cause the affected system to execute code.
Sure it's a problem, but really if you look a the details it's not such a big deal.
I mean if you allow users to upload arbitrary php to be executed by the webserver you're bound to have similar problems, and heh, just running php is a vulnerability IMO
How is it being open source relevant? There are plenty of open source software out there with holes like swiss cheese.
Just because people can look at the source doesn't mean:
1) They will.
2) They will understand it.
3) They will spot what is wrong with it.
4) They will try to get it fixed.
I disagree, market share has a substantial impact on people bothering to target the platform in the first place.
.mil site? While people tampering with millions of machines get away with it? There was a recent one done with a banner ad on a popular site I think...
When you want to install zombieware or spyware you might as well target the 90%.
The reason why lots of zombieware or spyware stuff get installed usually has to do with users running the stuff and maybe even entering passwords and jumping through other hoops in order to install the malware (remember the passworded zip one? It was amazing that it kept spreading). OSX won't protect those many brilliant folks who'd enter the necessary admin password to install stuff, nor would it protect people from just running stuff that only needs normal user privileges to do its nastiness (send spam, DoS websites, fetch new instructions).
If OSX ever got to a high enough marketshare AND a similar sort of users you'd start seeing people targeting it.
And it'll be a lot easier too - given that perl etc are probably installed by default on OSX. Imagine trojans in perl or some other powerful scripting language. Think eval "$payload", where $payload is innocuous at the start.
Perhaps an O/S should have a few simple to understand "privilege templates" for running software with restricted privileges. A "cool" applet should need no permanent storage at all, and very limited read access, and maybe no network access.
As for your www.us.army.mil example. Even if you run it on windows it shouldn't get exploited. The last IIS exploit was ages ago for IIS4 I think. I doubt a _real_ server admin would be using that machine to surf the web, download cool "screensavers" or "toolbars" and install them - no desktop usage. Once you firewall off everything but port 80 and 443, it's more a matter of whether your webserver and webapps are secure or not, not your O/S.
The thing I don't get is - why don't any of those "hot toolbar", "spyware" people end up in jail? Why aren't any Sony people charged for that rootkit fiasco? Why is it they are just trying to extradite some silly chap in UK looking for UFOs on a US
I hardly ever bother considering benchmarks that Intel picks. So far the apps used by most PC users seem to bench better on Core 2 than on the X2 - seems it even compiles stuff faster - odds are it runs perl and python faster too. I doubt Intel has bought everyone doing those benchmarks.
;). And I doubt that's where AMD wants to go.
As for HPC system. I can't remember when the last time a company I worked in bought an 8 or 16 way HPC system. Not even sure if any of them bought a 4 way system - maybe by mistake or ignorance. IIRC even google was sticking to mainly dual CPU systems. Not sure what they do now given the new dual or multi core stuff.
Yes, no doubt there are applications where the K8 is still the better choice by far. But that argument sounds a bit like Itanic talk
I might still replace stuff with K8 instead of core 2, but it'll be because of price (and concerns that the core 2 and chipset might still be a bit "rough" at the edges).
Since you do stuff for AMD maybe you can answer this one. Do the new revisions of the X2 handle the TSC thingy differently? Any links/urls? The original X2s had significant TSC divergence so my current workaround is idle=poll on Linux (not sure if it is a problem on Windows). The TSC thing was not really such a big surprise when you think about it, but it is an inconvenience if you do want fast check time functions.
Well currently the X2 seems to lose most benchmarks to the Core 2 Duo (in all sorts of apps too). And this is for the same clock speeds.
Any significant new architecture lined up for AMD cpus in the near future? I don't see signs of any. Going quad core would be reducing the X2 advantage of higher memory performance per core. I don't think the volume market is going to snap up quad cores at prices that will make AMD happy.
Unless the X2 can clock WAY higher than the Core 2 Duo, it's going to be a slower CPU in comparison. And the Core 2 Duos sure look like they can be clocked pretty high...
So what is AMD's answer to the Core 2 Duo? Seems to me they can only cut prices and hope for the best...
If they have some top secret CPU, it better be really good!
I've had problems playing certain videos with a 1GHz Duron - some of the "project offset" videos for example.
Looks like soon would be a good time to replace that machine...
The Core 2 is a better performing CPU than the X2, but I'm not too confident about the chipset or the first release yet...
Sure. Stick to nonimportant stuff that don't involve usernames and passwords, and avoid anything that you might ever regret if _everyone_ knew you did whatever it was.
Even if MS gets burnt by them doesn't make them good.
Plus "product activation" must have been reinvented a million times or something.
That said MS deserves to get smacked if they try to mess about with the courts.
Since they are often checking out earth on Earth ;).
It's not such a big deal. There are plenty of worse names esp in the computer related fields - names that make it hard to do decent keyword searches.
That said, the silly chap could have just done a search on google or some other search engine. A search for pluton on google turns up 3 million hits.
Complaint forms? Well I suppose these cops have got to be better than the Florida ones.
;).
Do a search for: florida police complaint forms
Try not to get shot while you're at it.
Cops in my country are crap too.
Sometimes I'm thinking one might as well just pay "insurance" to some organized criminal organization. Maybe better chance of getting your stuff back.
I've heard a few "success stories": car gets stolen, guy calls his "uncle", "uncle" calls "some people" he knows. Car ends up back in the same spot where it was stolen from.
Definitely a lot less paperwork
Trouble is, if the cops keep not enforcing rule of law, after a while people might start to take things into their own hands.
Any Government good or bad has to maintain its monopoly on violence in order to survive. If the cops don't do their jobs, things can turn bad pretty fast.
I thought the US laws only apply to "protected computer systems".
The definition of "protected computer" includes government computers, financial institution computers, and any computer "which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or communications."
Well I suppose with a good enough lawyer and a judge on your side you might be able to get away with internet=communications.
Wow, you two sound like those pro-wrestling commentators/fans.
Supporting one side or the other, but always supporting the WWE.
Just brilliant. Really.
quote: "The only debate you should be worried about is debating how you are going to mind your own buisness and stay the hell out of other people's eating habits"
;). If they all decide to eat rat poison, starting from the top, I'd recommend against it, but if they insist that's fine with me.
And you call me a Food Nazi and authoritarian busy body from what I posted?
From what you and I say, you're probably far more a "Debate Nazi" than I'm a "Food Nazi".
Show me where I'm forcing people to not eat stuff or to eat stuff.
Hey I'm fine with the US people consuming crap. They are free to do that- it's a free country there I hear
Keep in mind, it's the US that tends to force OTHER COUNTRIES to follow US regulations etc, whether we like it or not. So the laws and policies the US citizens condone, often end up affecting us. Some of it good, some of it bad. So it's often a good idea to try to influence things at the start given the US citizens are the sort of people who'd end up getting G W Bush _twice_ and Diebold election systems, believe that Iraq was involved in 9/11, and so many other US-isms.
Maybe it's not the food, it's the kool-aid in their drinking water...
If you don't regularly get contaminated food you shouldn't have to use stuff like this at all.
If it is pretty rare that dangerous bacteria get into your food, why should it be good practice to have viruses added to certain "foods" 100% of the time? Think about it.
This is just like the other stupid idiocy (salmonella etc) which the food industry seems to get away with. Go read this: http://www.cspinet.org/reports/polt.html
Excerpt: "Despite increasing rates of food poisoning from Salmonella and Campylobacter during the 1980s, and continuing high levels today, the poultry industry has maintained processing practices that actually increase the percent of contaminated products. Instead of minimizing the contamination in processing plants, the poultry industry relies on consumers to cook the problem away."
The real problem is not bacteria in food. The real problem is the food industry treating food just like any other "fuel" - if it meets regulations XYZ then it's fit to be consumed. AND the FDA etc allowing them to do so.
With attitudes like that you get practices like feeding feathers to cows - which was stopped because, brilliantly, they feed leftover cows to chickens too, so with the BSE scare, the risk of leftover cows ending up being swept off the floor with the feathers and re-fed to cows was a bit too high to be politically/economically viable.
And then the USA complains when the Japanese refuse their beef or their rice or whatever.
This is just like going to a restaurant and getting crap served to you, but FDA approved crap, with FDA approved viruses squirted on it so that all the dangerous bacteria has been killed, following industry "best practices".
Even if it is legally edible and meets all the regulations, it still leaves a bad taste in your mouth one way or another.
Instead of debating whether the viruses are potentially harmful or not, we should consider whether what's happening in the food industry is harmful or not.
What next? You guys are going to continue eating such industrial output, like it and think it's "wonderful new technology", "Approved by the glorious FDA"? Now that's what I call disgusting. Believe me, what is disgusting is not the viruses or the bacteria, and I'm the sort who eats and likes all sorts of stuff (some of it apparently has appeared on Fear Factor).
Is this the cause or effect of the Intel-Apple deal? Or totally unrelated?
Could it have been Dell trying to use AMD to haggle for lower prices from Intel and taking it a bit too far, and Apple seizing the opportunity to strike a deal with Intel?
And next thing you know, Apple gets a Dell-style deal from Intel, and Dell ends up with "humpty dumpty" on its face.
IBM and HP might now be having a moment of schadenfreude...
As for AMD's quad cores saving them, I don't see any significant core changes. No core changes = just the usual scaling = not going to beat Core 2 Duo or Woodcrest - which are now better per GHz and faster overall.
Maybe AMD stuff will win for 8 way servers (4 socket x 2 cores, or 8 socket), but the market for 8 way is pretty small at the moment.
As for 2 socket x 4 cores, AFAIK quad core means the 4 cores will share the socket's memory, so I don't see how that is going to be much better than Intel.
Most people don't have to read a page to notice that the content has changed.
Heck, I often don't even need to read a page to spot typos and errors, sometimes spot them in less than a second (I've declined in recent years - too much typo-ridden slashdot I guess). I think there are other slashdotters who can actually read content very fast.
Well doc, I'm telling you it's annoying, even if it's "only" 200ms. 200ms is very perceptible - it's LAGGY. If a UI expert doesn't think 200ms of latency is an issue, I don't think much of that UI expert.
200msec is "dial up modem" grade UI. HPB territory. Sure it's usable, but it still sucks to be using it.
'I hardly view more closely approximating reality as "artificial"'
If UI designers keep trying to approximate reality rather than improve it, no wonder UIs suck!
Sheesh. Have we run out of people like Douglas Englebart and the other bunch who invented the scrollbar?
You've never won anything at the casinos?
"The most disorienting example, I believe, is when you search for text in a document, and it scrolls horizontally and vertically as part of that search. You have absolutely no idea where you are after that happens"
No idea? Uh see the scrollbar on the right? That tells you where you are and you can use it to control where you are.
The scrollbar's a brilliant invention, wish they'd come up with more stuff as good as that, rather than silly animations or wobbly windows (what the?! 1960s got us NLS, multimedia teleconferencing, the mouse, lots of other stuff, and in 2000 we get wobbly windows? Crap!).
The part I don't like about many (not all) search dialogs is it's hard to quickly go back to the previous search- "hey, wait a minute let's go back to the prev item found". Firefox allows you, but IE doesn't. And IE is terrible - it seems to lose the position of the search easily - if you click on the content it starts the search from the TOP! Not from the cursor, not from the previous search, the top!
As for animations being fast, to me if they delay the onset of the action, they're not fast enough. Let them run in parallel if you want, but to delay the execution of something just to show me some animation is annoying to me. Unless you're playing some game, and it's to simulate something.
Corporations exist to make their shareholders happy.
;) ).
Which sometimes diverges from making money (actually nowadays seems to be _often_
alt+tab isn't good enough for me. I often need to switch amongst 3 or more windows at once. So it'll be good to have the feature I linked to.
;)
...
e.g.
alt+1 = ssh to A (tail of logfile?)
alt+2 = ssh to B (cmd?)
alt+3 = man page
alt+4 = RFC
alt+5 = text editor?
Then when I want to switch to another set of tasks, I just click their respective buttons in the taskbar and then press alt+0 and the past 9 tasks/windows should get renumbered (1 = most recently selected), and I can rapidly switch amongst the new tasks.
alt+1 = spreadsheet
alt+2 = email from boss
alt+3 = some documentation
alt+4 = browser with google search results
alt+5 = browser with slashdot
I suppose I'm only one of the very few who'd find this feature useful?
Anyway, I don't really need "reveal desktop", on windows machines I typically have my start menu set up something similar to this:
Folders/items in base of start menu:
1 Explore
2 Tools
3 email (item not folder)
4 cmd (item not folder)
5 ssh
Then each of those start menu folders have items:
"1 Explore" has
1 Explore Desktop
A Explore A
C Explore C
"2 Tools" has
Calculator
Notepad
and so on
This way I can press winkey,1,1 and I'd be exploring the desktop - and I can sort it by "last modified" or other order.
winkey,2,C = opens the calculator
winkey,5,A = ssh to machine A
winkey,5,B = ssh to machine B
Of course if speed is the essence then repeated numbers should be avoided, pressing two different keys one after the other can usually be done faster than repeated presses of the same key.
Haven't got around to doing this sort of thing on KDE (seems a bit harder).
My taskbar is "always on top", I don't like waiting for it to appear when I need it.
Scroll wheel to scroll...
Uh but the visual feedback would be the display of the page itself and the change in the displayed logical page number.
;)
If for some reason it takes too long to display the page, then maybe the user should get that notorious hour-glass/clock/spinning thing popping up (after 1-2 seconds?). That way you know you did click on the page button.
I'm strange but I prefer that the page should just be displayed immediately.
Rapid menu unrolling? I personally find that very annoying - as bad as interstitial ads. I want the menu to be drawn immediately. Same for the pause of hundreds of milliseconds before displaying submenus. On many windows machines I have renamed folders or items in the start-menu to start with numbers (e.g. a folder "2 Tools" containing "Calculator" ), so that you can do stuff like press winkey,1,C to explore the C drive; winkey 2,C opens the calculator; winkey,4 = cmd; and so on (like ssh to various machines). If the menu unrolling gets in the way of that, I'd be pretty annoyed.
I think users should be allowed to choose a low latency, no time wasting option/theme. I'd rather waste my time on things I chosen to waste time on (e.g. Slashdot) rather than what some UI designer thinks is cool/neat.
Well I suppose a reasonable compromise would be to display the content/change/page immediately AND have some sort of unobtrusive animation at the same time, rather than have the animation delay the desired action/change (in which case IMO it counts as obtrusive and intrusive).
I'd rather my multi-GHz CPU computer be slowed down for good reasons rather than for artificial reasons... If there's going to be any procrastination, it should always be done by the user/human and not the computer.
Then again, I'm the sort of person who regularly thinks that communications at near light speed just isn't fast enough- 200 msec to cross the Pacific Ocean twice? What a terrible lag!
"The wheel is speed and acceleration sensitive."
How'd a completely blind person cope with that one? Say they want 2 minutes, if they spin it faster than normal they might get 3 minutes instead.
I think same angle = same time would be better for blind people.
It's obvious that natural talent is a significant limiter.
:).
Chimps reach the limits of their expertise in chess playing pretty soon, way before the magical "10 years" they talk about.
Another thing, assuming they are right and most humans might be able to be trained to play chess very well, far better than the current average chess player.
BUT, only the top 10 or 20 chess players would be rewarded well for that. So it is a waste of resources (society, you, your trainers), you might as well be an expert in some other field (unless you really like chess). Think of it in comparative advantage terms (economics).
So given their argument that you can train people to become an expert in anything (expert being better than average), I suggest that we focus on training children from infancy to reach "expert levels" in being loving, honest, nice, kind and patient, having integrity etc.
Even if they don't end up being the top 10 kindest people in the world, I think society would benefit a lot more from such a project than say an intensive chess/golf/music project.
After all what's the big deal about meeting the #2000 golf player in the world? Whereas the #2000 kindest person in the world would still be kind to you
Uh just curious, why do you need a 0.5 second animation for page turning?
If I'm reading a book, I'm more interested in the content I'm reading rather than the animations of page turning.
It's like those TV/interstitial ads. The good ones might be cool the first time you see them, but after a few times, don't you want to be able to skip them and get on with whatever you were doing?
Well, I guess I must be the strange one around.
1-3 yeah. I usually have everything maximized - but some people seem to like to have stuff paned. I'd rather have shortcut keys that allow me to rapidly switch amongst the past N "windows"[1]
But 4? I prefer jumpiness. When I want something to happen, I want the computer to do it NOW, not do some silly animation before it does it.
If I want a smooth scroll, I'd be holding down the scrollbar (great invention that one) and dragging it. But if I want a "page down", I want it to go a page down NOW! If I want to switch to a window, I want to see that window _immediately_ not wait for some stupid animation. If people don't like interstitial ads/cutscenes getting in the way of what they want/are doing, what makes UI designers think that people would like those animations after the 5th time of seeing them? As a compromise, have those animations by default- but allow a "low latency" setting to turn ALL of them off.
[1] See: http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=121349