I use IE6 to cruise the web. Given the all the security holes and patches, I'll be damned if I say yes to "Scripts are usually hamless. Ok to run?"
Maybe you should try using a browser that doesn't have so many security problems. I suppose if the lock on your door was easy to pick then you would get rid of your possessions rather then getting a better lock.
The scripts are not the problem. IE is the problem.
Are you implying that you believe Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com is a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag?
Even if Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com is a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag doesn't mean that Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com should be called a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag in a public forum.
If you think that Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com is a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag then you should do Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com the courtesy of calling him a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag to his face.
You're absolutely right. They make their money off the games but not because it's written for a specific console but because the profit margin is higher. Now wouldn't they jump at the chance to easily sell that game to someone using another console. Someone who wouldn't have bought it because they didn't have the hardware.
By the way, if you read the article you would have seen Sony listed as one of those contributing to the project. I may not own a console but I hear Sony has sold a few of them.
I bet this sort of licensing restriction is illegal. I'm sure that IBM and Unisys had similar lines in their EULA's 20 years ago with mainframe systems to force companies to purchase expensive green screen terminals. Today people routinely connect with IBM 3270 emulators without any legal hassles.
20 years ago 3270 emulators didn't exist and PC's were more expensive than 3270 terminals.
I am a non-unionized programmer/application architect at a major insurance company.
I do not have to pay union dues. I have excellent dental, vision, medical and prescription drug benefits. I get tuition assistance from the company although not 100%. I also get a discount on my mortgage and I have an excellent pension plan. I even have stock options.
As for my work environment, I have a nice office and I am expected to work only 40 hours a week although I occasionally work 45 or 50 when needed. The extra hours can be banked and taken off when the work slows down or cashed in. We also get a minimum 3 weeks of vacation although with seniority I have accumulated over 4 weeks.
It seems that most of the poorly treated employees appear to be in the pure tech companies and not so much those that work in the IT departments of non-tech companies.
The university I went to emphasized the concepts and the language used to illustrate it was secondary. I had an introductory course in FORTRAN, a structured programming course in Pascal, a file structures cource in COBOL and a numerical analysis course in C. When all was said and done I walked out with a good understanding of the concepts, exposure to 4 languages and a greater ability to pick up new languages.
Since then I have been able to pick up Smalltalk, Java, REXX, Perl and a few others without too much difficulty.
I do have my preferred languages but because of the exposure I got to other languages I am able to decide based on my experience. I think picking a single teaching langauge limits the learning opportunities and the depth of understanding that can be achieved.
They do have to be held to a higher standard because they own the operating system. Because of that they have an advantage that other software companies don't have.
When a company determines the retail price of a piece of software they base it on the cost and expected sales. If Microsoft writes it they should have the same cost but by bundling it into the operating system they are guaranteed to sell it to every Windows user.
Assume that the Windows market is 100 million computers and the number of people that will actually use the software is 10% of that. To recover the development costs, the software company has to charge 10 times as much as what Microsoft has to increase the cost of Windows. That also means that Microsoft has forced 90% of the users to buy something they won't use.
Since there is no way for a software company to compete with those economies of scale they go under. As this gets repeated over and over there are fewer and fewer software companies producing less and less software.
I hate to burst your bubble but Clarke in an interview recently put to rest the hidden IBM reference. He said that it was unintentional and had nothing to do with IBM.
Before I became a programmer I had a number of part time jobs in a number of fields and they all had stories of equal stupidity.
The truth is, we're all human and sometimes even the smartest of us does stupid things.
Even after I became a programmer I ran into things like this. Once I remember a major problem in one of our overnight batch runs that brought in all of our top people to resolve it. About 9 hours after the problem occured they discovered a segment of code that had a comment that read "REMOVE THIS CODE BY _______" (I can't remember the date). Everyone looked at the calendar and guess what day it was. The code was removed and the program worked fine.
The programming equivalent of drywalling over a server.
I have to disagree. If that were the case then how come with PC DOS 5.0 I had fewer compatibility problems than MS-DOS 5.0. It had to be more than MCA tweaks otherwise it shouldn't have made a difference on my ISA machine.
Actually I've been dealing with Microsoft since DOS 2.1. How about you?
I've never played Goldenaxe so I can't comment on it but I remember a lot of games stopped working after I upgraded from MS-DOS 3.3 to 5.0. I switched to IBM PC DOS 5.0 because it had better compatibility with previous versions of MS-DOS than MS-DOS itself.
I also remember that there was some pain upgrading from Windows 3.1 to 3.3. Hell, upgrading from Windows 3.3 to 3.33 broke some programs. Even Windows 95 couldn't run a lot of 16-bit apps properly which was one of it's supposed features.
I work for a large insurance company and the pain of upgrading from Windows 3.3 to 95 was so great that we're reluctant to go through it again until we have to. Now we have to. Microsoft forces us to pay to downgrade new PC's preloaded with 98 to 95. Also, Microsoft will be dropping official support for Windows 95 at year end.
Now I wouldn't suggest that compatibility for all previous incarnations of an operating system should be supported by the current release. That would be impractical and unnecessarily complicate the operating system. Although, compatibility with at least the last couple of releases would only seem fair to the consumer if the consumer even mattered to Microsoft beyond the contents of their wallets.
I won't even try to argue statistics because clearly IE has the largest percentage of usage. However, I would like to point out that Microsoft couldn't make a dent in Netscape's market share until they started forcing preloads of IE and blocking preloads of Netscape. I'm sure that if Microsoft did the reverse and forced preloading of Netscape and blocked the preloading of IE then Netscape's market share would soon be where IE's is now.
By whose count?? The world is not ruled by Microsoft, not should it be.
The second you develop a site to support only one browser you hand control of your site to one vendor.
You might as well bend over and kiss your freewill good-bye. This is the kind of blind goose-stepping that fascists love.
By the way, in six months when IE 6 comes out it will break everything in IE 5 because Microsoft doesn't give a rat's ass about compatibility. But you can go right ahead and bow to the God of consumer reaming.
If the webpage you are referring to is the National Geographic then you are correct. However, the Feed Mag article reads, "If he is successful, he will be the first human to break the sound barrier sans vehicle.", which is incorrect.
Re:People don't watch it because its good!
on
C.S.I.
·
· Score: 2
Actually CSI was originally on Friday nights. When it became successful enough it was moved to Thursday. It's not successful because it's on Thursdays, it's on Thursdays because it's successful.
I didn't start watching the show until a friend recommended it and I've been hooked ever since. It has believable characters which are lacking on a lot of today's TV shows. The best way to describe it is an updated "Quincy" (for those of us old enough to remember the 70's show starring Jack Klugman).
I don't want to suggest that it's the greatest thing on TV but it's a quality show that's worth checking out.
My "rant" was intentionally exaggerated to make my point as many rants are. If you've watched Dennis Miller you know what I'm talking about.
Of course you are free to do what you want. I was not telling anyone what to do. I was just making an observation.
To clarify the point I was making, if there is an program that does 90% of what you want you can do one of two things. Join the project and add the other 10% or rewrite the 90% and then add your 10%. Quite often we end up with the latter.
The unfortunate side effect is that you end up with a lot of programs that are almost the same except that they have a few features that are different. The only people that will want to use your program will be those people that have exactly the same requirements as you do.
If the effort to create these many versions were combined there would be fewer programs but with a lot more features. More features means the program would be useful to a greater audience. Isn't that what the open source movement is all about?
Just because you can do something doesn't mean it's a good idea. This is just the kind of thing that can be used to open a back door (or in this case maybe a front door) into someone's machine.
Besides, if you want to execute client side programs why not use Java applets which are portable, secure and already there today.
This is one of the problems with open source. Someone creates a variation of an existing technology/program because they don't like this or that about it.
Why not enhance the existing program rather than starting a whole new project. This is why we have 100 mediocre email programs for Linux instead of a half a dozen great ones. Everyone thinks they can do it better or is too egotistical to work as a member of a team.
How come no one is blaming the consumer electrontics companies for reaming anyone who wants to buy an HDTV set. It's not that these companies aren't going to eventually sell a zillion of them.
It's in their best interest to make it affordable to switch over to HDTV. It might make someone who is 4 or 5 years away from buying a new TV decide to buy one now.
Instead of encouraging people to replace the TVs sooner they are actually pushing them to defer purchases due to high prices and all the FUD flying around.
I myself have an 11 year old TV and I would like to buy a new one but until the cost of an HDTV set drops to a resonable level I'll be putting it off indefinitely. At the rate things are going I may have a 20 year old TV by the time the prices are reasonable.
This is not to say that the FCC (or our Canadian equivalent, the CRTC), the broadcasters, the cable companies and everyone else involved aren't being total wankers as well. But lets make sure that Sony, RCA, Panasonic, et al get their fair share.
Slashdot Mirror
Secondly, just fyi, if you dont know it, you *aren't* getting screwed.
Just because you don't know you're getting screwed doesn't mean that you're not getting screwed.
Using your logic it's OK to commit a crime as long as no one knows you're commiting a crime.
I use IE6 to cruise the web. Given the all the security holes and patches, I'll be damned if I say yes to "Scripts are usually hamless. Ok to run?"
Maybe you should try using a browser that doesn't have so many security problems. I suppose if the lock on your door was easy to pick then you would get rid of your possessions rather then getting a better lock.
The scripts are not the problem. IE is the problem.
The quote was from the movie Animal House. You might want to rent it. If you can leave your mother's basement long enough.
Even if Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com is a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag doesn't mean that Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com should be called a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag in a public forum.
If you think that Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com is a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag then you should do Mr. Novak of Petswarehouse.com the courtesy of calling him a no-good, rat-bastard, slimy, underhanded, weaseling gutless scumbag to his face.
By the way, if you read the article you would have seen Sony listed as one of those contributing to the project. I may not own a console but I hear Sony has sold a few of them.
20 years ago 3270 emulators didn't exist and PC's were more expensive than 3270 terminals.
Given that intelligence must be collected (which is a fact)
Actually, knowledge is collected, intelligence is innate.
I do not have to pay union dues. I have excellent dental, vision, medical and prescription drug benefits. I get tuition assistance from the company although not 100%. I also get a discount on my mortgage and I have an excellent pension plan. I even have stock options.
As for my work environment, I have a nice office and I am expected to work only 40 hours a week although I occasionally work 45 or 50 when needed. The extra hours can be banked and taken off when the work slows down or cashed in. We also get a minimum 3 weeks of vacation although with seniority I have accumulated over 4 weeks.
It seems that most of the poorly treated employees appear to be in the pure tech companies and not so much those that work in the IT departments of non-tech companies.
Since then I have been able to pick up Smalltalk, Java, REXX, Perl and a few others without too much difficulty.
I do have my preferred languages but because of the exposure I got to other languages I am able to decide based on my experience. I think picking a single teaching langauge limits the learning opportunities and the depth of understanding that can be achieved.
When a company determines the retail price of a piece of software they base it on the cost and expected sales. If Microsoft writes it they should have the same cost but by bundling it into the operating system they are guaranteed to sell it to every Windows user.
Assume that the Windows market is 100 million computers and the number of people that will actually use the software is 10% of that. To recover the development costs, the software company has to charge 10 times as much as what Microsoft has to increase the cost of Windows. That also means that Microsoft has forced 90% of the users to buy something they won't use.
Since there is no way for a software company to compete with those economies of scale they go under. As this gets repeated over and over there are fewer and fewer software companies producing less and less software.
How could that be better for consumers???
Before I became a programmer I had a number of part time jobs in a number of fields and they all had stories of equal stupidity.
The truth is, we're all human and sometimes even the smartest of us does stupid things.
Even after I became a programmer I ran into things like this. Once I remember a major problem in one of our overnight batch runs that brought in all of our top people to resolve it. About 9 hours after the problem occured they discovered a segment of code that had a comment that read "REMOVE THIS CODE BY _______" (I can't remember the date). Everyone looked at the calendar and guess what day it was. The code was removed and the program worked fine.
The programming equivalent of drywalling over a server.
I've never played Goldenaxe so I can't comment on it but I remember a lot of games stopped working after I upgraded from MS-DOS 3.3 to 5.0. I switched to IBM PC DOS 5.0 because it had better compatibility with previous versions of MS-DOS than MS-DOS itself.
I also remember that there was some pain upgrading from Windows 3.1 to 3.3. Hell, upgrading from Windows 3.3 to 3.33 broke some programs. Even Windows 95 couldn't run a lot of 16-bit apps properly which was one of it's supposed features.
I work for a large insurance company and the pain of upgrading from Windows 3.3 to 95 was so great that we're reluctant to go through it again until we have to. Now we have to. Microsoft forces us to pay to downgrade new PC's preloaded with 98 to 95. Also, Microsoft will be dropping official support for Windows 95 at year end.
Now I wouldn't suggest that compatibility for all previous incarnations of an operating system should be supported by the current release. That would be impractical and unnecessarily complicate the operating system. Although, compatibility with at least the last couple of releases would only seem fair to the consumer if the consumer even mattered to Microsoft beyond the contents of their wallets.
I won't even try to argue statistics because clearly IE has the largest percentage of usage. However, I would like to point out that Microsoft couldn't make a dent in Netscape's market share until they started forcing preloads of IE and blocking preloads of Netscape. I'm sure that if Microsoft did the reverse and forced preloading of Netscape and blocked the preloading of IE then Netscape's market share would soon be where IE's is now.
By whose count?? The world is not ruled by Microsoft, not should it be.
The second you develop a site to support only one browser you hand control of your site to one vendor.
You might as well bend over and kiss your freewill good-bye. This is the kind of blind goose-stepping that fascists love.
By the way, in six months when IE 6 comes out it will break everything in IE 5 because Microsoft doesn't give a rat's ass about compatibility. But you can go right ahead and bow to the God of consumer reaming.
I didn't start watching the show until a friend recommended it and I've been hooked ever since. It has believable characters which are lacking on a lot of today's TV shows. The best way to describe it is an updated "Quincy" (for those of us old enough to remember the 70's show starring Jack Klugman).
I don't want to suggest that it's the greatest thing on TV but it's a quality show that's worth checking out.
Of course you are free to do what you want. I was not telling anyone what to do. I was just making an observation.
To clarify the point I was making, if there is an program that does 90% of what you want you can do one of two things. Join the project and add the other 10% or rewrite the 90% and then add your 10%. Quite often we end up with the latter.
The unfortunate side effect is that you end up with a lot of programs that are almost the same except that they have a few features that are different. The only people that will want to use your program will be those people that have exactly the same requirements as you do.
If the effort to create these many versions were combined there would be fewer programs but with a lot more features. More features means the program would be useful to a greater audience. Isn't that what the open source movement is all about?
Besides, if you want to execute client side programs why not use Java applets which are portable, secure and already there today.
This is one of the problems with open source. Someone creates a variation of an existing technology/program because they don't like this or that about it.
Why not enhance the existing program rather than starting a whole new project. This is why we have 100 mediocre email programs for Linux instead of a half a dozen great ones. Everyone thinks they can do it better or is too egotistical to work as a member of a team.
End rant.
Whew, it's great to get that off my chest.
It's in their best interest to make it affordable to switch over to HDTV. It might make someone who is 4 or 5 years away from buying a new TV decide to buy one now.
Instead of encouraging people to replace the TVs sooner they are actually pushing them to defer purchases due to high prices and all the FUD flying around.
I myself have an 11 year old TV and I would like to buy a new one but until the cost of an HDTV set drops to a resonable level I'll be putting it off indefinitely. At the rate things are going I may have a 20 year old TV by the time the prices are reasonable.
This is not to say that the FCC (or our Canadian equivalent, the CRTC), the broadcasters, the cable companies and everyone else involved aren't being total wankers as well. But lets make sure that Sony, RCA, Panasonic, et al get their fair share.