Actually, everything I have read indicates that the industry is still pretty much split. Apparently, larger studios are leaning towards Blu-Ray because of larger disc capacity, and smaller studios are leaning towards HD-DVD due to it's lower cost. Those were the reports from this years Adult Entertainment Expo anyway. (uh, not that I follow porn industry news, my friend told me that... I mean, I just read the articles... I mean... nevermind...)
The big question is: Does it run on Lynx and Links?
Although the summary states that it is "completely cross-browser compliant", RoundCube's website lists it as having been tested with Firefox, Opera, Safari, and IE. Some people still do use Lynx and Links.
Anyway, I tried it with Lynx and Links and didn't have any trouble logging into the demo. However, it appears that the Compose, Reply, Forward, etc., commands are all represented as images without alt tags, because I was shown the folder list and a bunch of [IMG] tags.
So while it works with Lynx and Links, it's not yet very usable with them.
Not to mention, most BSD systems use a heavy amount of GPL code these days
Really? Care to show me where this "heavy amount" is at? What would your favorite BSD look like without any of it?
Well, this for one: http://www.openbsd.com/ What would Linux look like without non-GPL code? You'd have no OpenSSH, no Apache, no PostgreSQL, and no X.
...they're not willing to let the competition or some company to take their work, close source it, and sell it as something new and better to make bundles of cash.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard that argument before from the anti-BSD folks. Again, care to show me an example of where this actually happened?
Uh, maybe the author has a decent vocabulary? Contrary to what many would have you believe these days, people don't actually use phrases like "lolz!!1! @ da senate" and "dat law iz teh sux0r" when writing articles, etc.
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths.
on
Pepping Up Windows
·
· Score: 1
They just need a default package manager that everyone uses.
That would be nice. It'd be nice if Linux had standard package manager too. Instead, you have rpm, deb, and tgz (if you're on a Slackware based distro) and a giant pissing contest over which is best.
First, please explain how Sony products are more proprietary than Microsoft products? I didn't know there were different degrees of proprietary-ness.
I have owned quite a few Sony products (including an original frist gen PS that still runs like a champ) and haven't had any quality issues. What specific products have you owned that you had such bad problems with?
And you want to talk hype? I didn't see Sony unveiling the PS3 on MTV in a show where more camera time was given to the hosts and various bands than the console and it's games.
If not, anyone know why they mostly go for the uploaders and not the downloaders?
I believe the reasoning is that the ones uploading are the ones copying and distributing said movie, and in turn the ones violating the copyright notice. The copyright notice says something like you can't copy and distribute this material, and downloading a copy isn't really violating that so it's probably easier to win the case against the uploaders.
The closed source of M$ *IS* preventing us from actively defending.
Defending against what? Rootkits? Linux is good 'ol GPL Open Source and there are rootkits for Linux. If open source is the answer, then why is that? Open Source != no rootkits.
do you really consider 32 versus 28 to be all that big of a difference?
No, I don't. In fact, they are close enough in number, that the whole discussion becomes almost pointless (when basing security on number of vulnerabilities). Mostly, I was just trying point out why I thought Symantec's article was somewhat of a spin-job. Actually, I think basing security on number of vulnerabilities is stupid. I think patch time and severity also need to be considered, along with how proactive the programmers are in finding issues. No software is going to be bug free and exploit free.
As for your car analogy, I certainly see your point. However, I'm pretty good with cars and I would rather buy a car with 28 flaws knowing I could hunt them down and fix them myself, instead of buying one with 32 flaws and hoping the manufacturer finds them and fixes them before I get into an accident.
I DON'T CARE about IE, I only care that I use a secure browser.
Well, that's the point. According to that article, your browser isn't secure. Comparing them to each other is fine, but when it comes at the expense of reasonable discussion of REAL security issues, that's too much.
All I did was point out that Symantec seems to have left out an important piece of info when drawing conclusions. And if that info is taken into consideration, it contradicts the conclusion that was drawn. I don't see that as being unreasonable, I see it as pointing out a flaw in the discussion. I use Opera, so I don't really care about either browser. I just don't like it when someone tries to point out a flaw in an anti-OSS article, and people jump up and scream "fanboy".
Did you miss this part of the article? There is one caveat: Symantec counts only those security flaws that have been confirmed by the vendor. According to security monitoring company Secunia, there are 19 security issues that Microsoft still has to deal with for Internet Explorer, while there are only three for Firefox.
Taking that into consideration, Mozilla browsers seem a bit more secure than IE, do they not? IMHO it appears Symantec is trying to be biased, because if you count those security issues found by Secunia, IE has more vulnerabilities than Mozilla browsers (32 for IE, 28 for Mozilla). Yet the article boldly states that Mozilla browers are more vulnerable than IE. Sure, Symantec only takes into account verndor-confirmed issues, however, just because it's not confirmed by the vendor doesn't mean it's not there.
Presumably opera removes those buttons once the tab-density gets beyond a certain level?
Yes, that is correct. Or you can have them always off by unchecking a box in the preferences.
I thought it did, but I double-checked before posting this reply because I don't really have too many tabs open at once. However, in the process, I noticed one other thing I like about Opera. The "New Tab" button. I know hitting Ctrl-T isn't hard, but I like having the button there. I would think new users would also find it easier to click "New Tab" than to go to File->New Tab or hunt down the key shortcut. Again, my 2 cents...
Actually, what I like alot is the way Opera handles this. They put the 'X' on the tab itself. IMHO, it makes for less mouse movement and just seems easier when closing a tab.
There arn't many distributions of BSD, no there are multiple completely rewritten operating systems from the core up. Free, Net and Open BSDs don't just rely on different package managers, they have completely different kernels and core libraries.
And that's worse than having 300+ Linux distros? Theo de Raadt is a BSD developer, not a Linux developer. Need I say more?
Yes, you do need to say more. He leads the development of one of the most secure OSes around. The man has a reputation for expressing his opinion, so what? How is he any different from RMS or ESR? Linux has never had a major divergent fork.
The kernel hasn't, no. But like I said above, there are 300+ distros. How is that better? Why should I use Ubuntu over Debian? Why should I use Fedora over Mandriva? I can certainly tell you that I'd use NetBSD for older obscure hardware, OpenBSD for a firewall, and FreeBSD for a desktop though. The goals of each are clear-cut. Even though you can use any of them for any purpose, there are situations where one might be more suited than the rest. I think that most of the major BSDs are great operating systems that work very nicely. It's just that the developers are not just arrogant, stubborn and counterproductive (like the Linux devs), they are smug about pretending they are not.
After reading your your last 2 posts, I wonder a) how much have you actually used any of the "major BSDs" and b) how many conversations have you had with the Linux and BSD devs?
That's right, just a single-pass overwrite with zeros will do.
Correct me if I'm wrong (because I very well might be), but I thought even after being written over with zeros (or ones or some other pattern) data on a HD could still be recovered. Granted it may take a little more work, but isn't it still doable? Isn't that why tools like Eraser (see GP) write over the data multiple times with different patterns each time?
I need all sorts of pointless geeky wizzy crap that need the latest version of the latest browser and a broadband internet connection to even get started with!
I like websites with obscene amounts of Flash too!
Maybe I am old fashined, but anything that gets made in huge vats by machines and then packaged in plastic may be something that keeps me alive, but it DEFINETLY is not cooked.
Yeah, I was turned off by Oscar Mayer bologna (a division of Kraft) when I actually turned over the package one day and read the ingredients. "Mechanically separated animal parts" just aren't very apatizing.
I still think the Weinermobile(TM) is pretty cool though.
Slashdot Mirror
ok, so the joke has flown over your head so many times it's starting to earn frequent flyer miles.
Actually, everything I have read indicates that the industry is still pretty much split. Apparently, larger studios are leaning towards Blu-Ray because of larger disc capacity, and smaller studios are leaning towards HD-DVD due to it's lower cost. Those were the reports from this years Adult Entertainment Expo anyway. (uh, not that I follow porn industry news, my friend told me that... I mean, I just read the articles... I mean... nevermind...)
The big question is: Does it run on Lynx and Links?
Although the summary states that it is "completely cross-browser compliant", RoundCube's website lists it as having been tested with Firefox, Opera, Safari, and IE. Some people still do use Lynx and Links.
Anyway, I tried it with Lynx and Links and didn't have any trouble logging into the demo. However, it appears that the Compose, Reply, Forward, etc., commands are all represented as images without alt tags, because I was shown the folder list and a bunch of [IMG] tags.
So while it works with Lynx and Links, it's not yet very usable with them.
Not to mention, most BSD systems use a heavy amount of GPL code these days
Really? Care to show me where this "heavy amount" is at?
What would your favorite BSD look like without any of it?
Well, this for one: http://www.openbsd.com/
What would Linux look like without non-GPL code? You'd have no OpenSSH, no Apache, no PostgreSQL, and no X.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard that argument before from the anti-BSD folks. Again, care to show me an example of where this actually happened?
Uh, maybe the author has a decent vocabulary? Contrary to what many would have you believe these days, people don't actually use phrases like "lolz!!1! @ da senate" and "dat law iz teh sux0r" when writing articles, etc.
They just need a default package manager that everyone uses.
That would be nice. It'd be nice if Linux had standard package manager too. Instead, you have rpm, deb, and tgz (if you're on a Slackware based distro) and a giant pissing contest over which is best.
First, please explain how Sony products are more proprietary than Microsoft products? I didn't know there were different degrees of proprietary-ness.
I have owned quite a few Sony products (including an original frist gen PS that still runs like a champ) and haven't had any quality issues. What specific products have you owned that you had such bad problems with?
And you want to talk hype? I didn't see Sony unveiling the PS3 on MTV in a show where more camera time was given to the hosts and various bands than the console and it's games.
If not, anyone know why they mostly go for the uploaders and not the downloaders?
I believe the reasoning is that the ones uploading are the ones copying and distributing said movie, and in turn the ones violating the copyright notice. The copyright notice says something like you can't copy and distribute this material, and downloading a copy isn't really violating that so it's probably easier to win the case against the uploaders.
The closed source of M$ *IS* preventing us from actively defending.
Defending against what? Rootkits? Linux is good 'ol GPL Open Source and there are rootkits for Linux. If open source is the answer, then why is that? Open Source != no rootkits.
SCO OpenServer ships with:
-MySQL
-PostgreSQL
-Apache
-Tomcat
-Mozilla
-KDE
Should we not trust any of those projects anymore?
I'm annoyed by people who bitch about Google articles... Don't like 'em? Don't read 'em.
do you really consider 32 versus 28 to be all that big of a difference?
No, I don't. In fact, they are close enough in number, that the whole discussion becomes almost pointless (when basing security on number of vulnerabilities). Mostly, I was just trying point out why I thought Symantec's article was somewhat of a spin-job. Actually, I think basing security on number of vulnerabilities is stupid. I think patch time and severity also need to be considered, along with how proactive the programmers are in finding issues. No software is going to be bug free and exploit free.
As for your car analogy, I certainly see your point. However, I'm pretty good with cars and I would rather buy a car with 28 flaws knowing I could hunt them down and fix them myself, instead of buying one with 32 flaws and hoping the manufacturer finds them and fixes them before I get into an accident.
I DON'T CARE about IE, I only care that I use a secure browser.
Well, that's the point. According to that article, your browser isn't secure.
Comparing them to each other is fine, but when it comes at the expense of reasonable discussion of REAL security issues, that's too much.
All I did was point out that Symantec seems to have left out an important piece of info when drawing conclusions. And if that info is taken into consideration, it contradicts the conclusion that was drawn. I don't see that as being unreasonable, I see it as pointing out a flaw in the discussion. I use Opera, so I don't really care about either browser. I just don't like it when someone tries to point out a flaw in an anti-OSS article, and people jump up and scream "fanboy".
Yes. Ebay.
Did you miss this part of the article?
There is one caveat: Symantec counts only those security flaws that have been confirmed by the vendor. According to security monitoring company Secunia, there are 19 security issues that Microsoft still has to deal with for Internet Explorer, while there are only three for Firefox.
Taking that into consideration, Mozilla browsers seem a bit more secure than IE, do they not? IMHO it appears Symantec is trying to be biased, because if you count those security issues found by Secunia, IE has more vulnerabilities than Mozilla browsers (32 for IE, 28 for Mozilla). Yet the article boldly states that Mozilla browers are more vulnerable than IE. Sure, Symantec only takes into account verndor-confirmed issues, however, just because it's not confirmed by the vendor doesn't mean it's not there.
Since you've already started...
:)
The only 3 commands any Emacs user needs to know:
Ctrl-x
Ctrl-c
vi
Let the flame wars begin!
(for the record, I use both Emacs and vi...)
Presumably opera removes those buttons once the tab-density gets beyond a certain level?
Yes, that is correct. Or you can have them always off by unchecking a box in the preferences.
I thought it did, but I double-checked before posting this reply because I don't really have too many tabs open at once. However, in the process, I noticed one other thing I like about Opera. The "New Tab" button. I know hitting Ctrl-T isn't hard, but I like having the button there. I would think new users would also find it easier to click "New Tab" than to go to File->New Tab or hunt down the key shortcut. Again, my 2 cents...
Actually, what I like alot is the way Opera handles this. They put the 'X' on the tab itself. IMHO, it makes for less mouse movement and just seems easier when closing a tab.
my 2 cents...
There arn't many distributions of BSD, no there are multiple completely rewritten operating systems from the core up. Free, Net and Open BSDs don't just rely on different package managers, they have completely different kernels and core libraries.
And that's worse than having 300+ Linux distros?
Theo de Raadt is a BSD developer, not a Linux developer. Need I say more?
Yes, you do need to say more. He leads the development of one of the most secure OSes around. The man has a reputation for expressing his opinion, so what? How is he any different from RMS or ESR?
Linux has never had a major divergent fork.
The kernel hasn't, no. But like I said above, there are 300+ distros. How is that better? Why should I use Ubuntu over Debian? Why should I use Fedora over Mandriva? I can certainly tell you that I'd use NetBSD for older obscure hardware, OpenBSD for a firewall, and FreeBSD for a desktop though. The goals of each are clear-cut. Even though you can use any of them for any purpose, there are situations where one might be more suited than the rest.
I think that most of the major BSDs are great operating systems that work very nicely. It's just that the developers are not just arrogant, stubborn and counterproductive (like the Linux devs), they are smug about pretending they are not.
After reading your your last 2 posts, I wonder a) how much have you actually used any of the "major BSDs" and b) how many conversations have you had with the Linux and BSD devs?
No way... The kid from The Last Starfighter is the man.
That's right, just a single-pass overwrite with zeros will do.
Correct me if I'm wrong (because I very well might be), but I thought even after being written over with zeros (or ones or some other pattern) data on a HD could still be recovered. Granted it may take a little more work, but isn't it still doable? Isn't that why tools like Eraser (see GP) write over the data multiple times with different patterns each time?
Amen, brother. I so do wish I had mod points for you.
I need all sorts of pointless geeky wizzy crap that need the latest version of the latest browser and a broadband internet connection to even get started with!
I like websites with obscene amounts of Flash too!
Yes, there is: SystemTap by Red Hat, IBM and Intel.
Perhaps you should read
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/message/
and
http://milek.blogspot.com/2005/08/linux-and-solar
Two discussions on some differences between SystemTap and Dtrace. (And yes, both links are in favor of Dtrace, and for good reason it appears.)
Maybe I am old fashined, but anything that gets made in huge vats by machines and then packaged in plastic may be something that keeps me alive, but it DEFINETLY is not cooked.
Yeah, I was turned off by Oscar Mayer bologna (a division of Kraft) when I actually turned over the package one day and read the ingredients. "Mechanically separated animal parts" just aren't very apatizing.
I still think the Weinermobile(TM) is pretty cool though.