Jabber servers are much like e-mail servers, address-wise. For example, if somebody subscribes to my Jabber ID (darren at winsper org uk), their Jabber server forwards the request to the Jabber server sat on winsper.org.uk.
Part of the reason Bluetooth is off by default is because it destroys the battery life of the phone. I doubt people are going to buy a phone they have to recharge every other day.
"Bullshit all around." Really? A loss leader is something you consistently sell at a loss. Both the Gamecube and the PS2 have been sold at either break even or a profit for the majority of the time they've been on the market. The Dreamcast was a loss-leader and look where that got Sega. The XBox is a loss leader because Microsoft are willing to throw as much money as it takes. They are clearly exceptions to the rule.
"The success of the GB's various revisions (both aesthetically and technologically) over the years means nothing?" Do you have figures on how many people are replacing functional Gameboys as opposed to buying new ones? In either case, all of the Gamebody revisions were completely cross compatible. They had the same capabilities. Thus, you're not fragmenting the market.
I find your quotes most interesting, especially the Spaceworld one. Let's take the full quote, shall we: 'In more general matters, Mr. Main admitted that the GameCube's pricing would not initially follow Nintendo's rule of turning a profit on every console sold. "We expect to incur a small loss on the GameCube hardware initially, and you're right that it hasn't been our habit in the past but we expect it to turn okay early next year."' Oh look, Nintendo's general rule is to make a profit on the console.
Back in 2004, the Gamecube was sold at a tiny loss at $99, but that was for a short amount of time. They were making a profit all the time before that.
"Consoles are loss leaders for the major manufacturers." Really? Nintendo never sold the Gamecube for a loss and Sony only take a loss in the first few shipments. Yup, sounds like a loss leader to me. Oh, wait...
"Consumers LIKE new hardware revs." No, they don't. At best they're apathetic, at worst they worry it'll make the revision they own obsolete. "How many folks bought that cute miniature PS2?" I'd say it's pretty certain that very few people who had a working PS2 bought the miniature PS2.
It's not that Microsoft is refusing to support OpenGL, it's that Microsoft is intentionally crippling OpenGL by forcing Windows Vista to be limited to the 1.4 specification with no support for extensions.
Maximising a window instead of closing it is not a big deal; simply try to hit the close button again. Closing the window instead of maximising it is far more destructive.
The amusing thing is that Netscape tried this with betas of Netscape 4. So many people had issues with it that they dropped it before the final release. So Microsoft are only 8 years behind the competition;)
At least the author is pretty open about his bias. The writer goes on and on about the usability of IE, but proves he knows jack-shit about usability with three simple sentences:
"When only one tab is open, the tab bar is visible. At the right of all tabs is a small tab that immediately opens a new tab. This would make more sense as a button immediately to the right of the X to close a tab."
Yeah, that's sensible, put the "open new" button right next to the "close" button, that'll make sense for 99% of the population who don't have perfectly precise mastery of the mouse pointer. He also talks about dropping non-IE browsers years ago because they were "unpolished" but then mentions he switched to CrazyBrowser, which is a cluttered mess in its default configuration! The entire article screams of unprofessionalism.
God of War had sex in it, yet it got an M rating. GTA: SA requires external modification to enable the sex code, whereas God of War did not. What do you say to that?
In GTA San Andreas, you can mow down innocent pedestrians one one side of the street whilst smashing up your stolen car. That's fine, that's an M rating for you. What? There's sex too?! Dear God man, pull it from the shelves!
Biology is a science. In science assignments you are expected to provide scientific evidence to support your assertions. I'd bet money neither of you provided any reasonable scientific evidence to support your "theories". That would be why you got bad grades.
ABH: jail time Rape: lots of jail time (in theory) Running somebody over accidentally whilst drunk: Probably jail time and a ban from driving 0wnz0ring j00: Death!
What arguments? He says binary packages are crap because...they just are. He claims Gentoo is inherently more configurable than binary package distros, yet there's nothing stopping somebody using source packages to create their own special build, if they *really* need that level of configuration.
sl3xd doesn't even acknowledge that the infinite configurability of Gentoo means you can't be certain your special configuration will even work, since they can't possibly have tested every combination.
As for understanding his views, how can I when he doesn't even explain them?
Re:Do they or do they not have the source legally?
on
Zeta Goes Gold
·
· Score: 1
Once, Daniel Glazman (the guy behind Nvu) asked someone to knock up a patch to support a particular CSS cursor in Gecko. Since I had a spare afternoon, I thought I'd give it a try, despite having never gone deeper than a few CSS and XUL files in Mozilla before. A few hours later, I had a working patch and much gratitude coming my way.
I think you'd be surprised how many people contribute the odd patch or two to even large open source projects. They definitely add up.
What's amazing is, despite going on for a good 8 paragraphs, you haven't actually given a single reason why portage is better than binary package systems.
Slashdot Mirror
You are aware that most of Mac OS X is still 32-bit only (including the kernel), aren't you?
How can you be good at allocating resources when you don't understand the very resources you're allocating?
Jabber servers are much like e-mail servers, address-wise. For example, if somebody subscribes to my Jabber ID (darren at winsper org uk), their Jabber server forwards the request to the Jabber server sat on winsper.org.uk.
Part of the reason Bluetooth is off by default is because it destroys the battery life of the phone. I doubt people are going to buy a phone they have to recharge every other day.
"Bullshit all around."
. html
Really? A loss leader is something you consistently sell at a loss. Both the Gamecube and the PS2 have been sold at either break even or a profit for the majority of the time they've been on the market. The Dreamcast was a loss-leader and look where that got Sega. The XBox is a loss leader because Microsoft are willing to throw as much money as it takes. They are clearly exceptions to the rule.
"The success of the GB's various revisions (both aesthetically and technologically) over the years means nothing?"
Do you have figures on how many people are replacing functional Gameboys as opposed to buying new ones? In either case, all of the Gamebody revisions were completely cross compatible. They had the same capabilities. Thus, you're not fragmenting the market.
I find your quotes most interesting, especially the Spaceworld one. Let's take the full quote, shall we:
'In more general matters, Mr. Main admitted that the GameCube's pricing would not initially follow Nintendo's rule of turning a profit on every console sold. "We expect to incur a small loss on the GameCube hardware initially, and you're right that it hasn't been our habit in the past but we expect it to turn okay early next year."'
Oh look, Nintendo's general rule is to make a profit on the console.
Back in 2004, the Gamecube was sold at a tiny loss at $99, but that was for a short amount of time. They were making a profit all the time before that.
Here's a handy link for you:
http://www.actsofgord.com/Proclamations/chapter02
Games *already* come with compressed data.
"Consoles are loss leaders for the major manufacturers."
Really? Nintendo never sold the Gamecube for a loss and Sony only take a loss in the first few shipments. Yup, sounds like a loss leader to me. Oh, wait...
"Consumers LIKE new hardware revs."
No, they don't. At best they're apathetic, at worst they worry it'll make the revision they own obsolete.
"How many folks bought that cute miniature PS2?"
I'd say it's pretty certain that very few people who had a working PS2 bought the miniature PS2.
Does this mean we're going to see Bill Gates in a bizarre spandex outfit combating spammers around the world? I smell a Ben Affleck film!
Yeah, because the guy from 3DLabs would just make this all up. He's confirmed there is a problem and the only way to fix it is with Microsoft's help.
It's not that Microsoft is refusing to support OpenGL, it's that Microsoft is intentionally crippling OpenGL by forcing Windows Vista to be limited to the 1.4 specification with no support for extensions.
If your website is an example of your work, then I doubt you've got enough users for anyone to care about your opinions.
Actually, I like the "empty tab" idea a lot. It's one of the few things I think IE7 has got right.
Maximising a window instead of closing it is not a big deal; simply try to hit the close button again. Closing the window instead of maximising it is far more destructive.
The amusing thing is that Netscape tried this with betas of Netscape 4. So many people had issues with it that they dropped it before the final release. So Microsoft are only 8 years behind the competition ;)
At least the author is pretty open about his bias. The writer goes on and on about the usability of IE, but proves he knows jack-shit about usability with three simple sentences:
"When only one tab is open, the tab bar is visible. At the right of all tabs is a small tab that immediately opens a new tab. This would make more sense as a button immediately to the right of the X to close a tab."
Yeah, that's sensible, put the "open new" button right next to the "close" button, that'll make sense for 99% of the population who don't have perfectly precise mastery of the mouse pointer. He also talks about dropping non-IE browsers years ago because they were "unpolished" but then mentions he switched to CrazyBrowser, which is a cluttered mess in its default configuration! The entire article screams of unprofessionalism.
Err...my father had a StrongARM PC in 1996...
God of War had sex in it, yet it got an M rating. GTA: SA requires external modification to enable the sex code, whereas God of War did not. What do you say to that?
In GTA San Andreas, you can mow down innocent pedestrians one one side of the street whilst smashing up your stolen car. That's fine, that's an M rating for you. What? There's sex too?! Dear God man, pull it from the shelves!
Society depresses me.
Biology is a science. In science assignments you are expected to provide scientific evidence to support your assertions. I'd bet money neither of you provided any reasonable scientific evidence to support your "theories". That would be why you got bad grades.
ABH: jail time
Rape: lots of jail time (in theory)
Running somebody over accidentally whilst drunk: Probably jail time and a ban from driving
0wnz0ring j00: Death!
Hmm...can we get a sense of proportion here?
Silly puppy. The US software industry was established and going strong well before software patents came to be.
What arguments? He says binary packages are crap because...they just are. He claims Gentoo is inherently more configurable than binary package distros, yet there's nothing stopping somebody using source packages to create their own special build, if they *really* need that level of configuration.
sl3xd doesn't even acknowledge that the infinite configurability of Gentoo means you can't be certain your special configuration will even work, since they can't possibly have tested every combination.
As for understanding his views, how can I when he doesn't even explain them?
It's all because Gentoo is for Ricers. :)
Once, Daniel Glazman (the guy behind Nvu) asked someone to knock up a patch to support a particular CSS cursor in Gecko. Since I had a spare afternoon, I thought I'd give it a try, despite having never gone deeper than a few CSS and XUL files in Mozilla before. A few hours later, I had a working patch and much gratitude coming my way.
I think you'd be surprised how many people contribute the odd patch or two to even large open source projects. They definitely add up.
What's amazing is, despite going on for a good 8 paragraphs, you haven't actually given a single reason why portage is better than binary package systems.