It wasn't free until they released a stripped-down version that would basically do an overlay-type install in Windows. (Although it was actually hackable to install it for real.) IIRC, BeOS R5 ran about $50 in the box.
Read it again. He didn't use the cable on a "production server", he used it on his workstation. And I suppose no sysadmin ever f'ed their partition table?
User Agent Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1) App Name Microsoft Internet Explorer App Version 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1) Platform Win32
Firefox, with User Agent Switcher:
User Agent Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1) App Name App Version Platform
Only difference is in what it omits. The Agent String is virtually identical.
I have Firefox at work & at home, with the User Agent Switcher extension on it. I have it set to identify itself as IE on XP, so that my company's web-based email will allow me to send email. (Yup, it errors out if you use anything the ID's itself as something other than IE - even though the app itself supports Mozilla (just not by default...).
So, I account for at least 2. Oh, and I set up one of the people at work this way too, so she wouldn't have to remember to switch all the time - so that's 3...
I disagree - I think that, because of the hooks & the deep integration into the OS, IE is flawed in such a basic fashion that only a rewrite would fix it.
I described it to a colleague recently as being similar to building your roof with chicken wire, and then running around with a caulking gun trying to stop the leaks. Sure, given enough time & caulk you might fix the effect, but that doesn't change the fact that the basic design is just wrong. Why should a web browser have that kind of power to affect the entire system??
By the way - most other modern browsers 'just work' 99.9% of the time too - and if they don't, I'd bet dollars to donuts that it's due to poor web design than a flaw in the browser.
Re:basic... very basic.
on
You've Got PC
·
· Score: 1
I was referring to the deal, not the specs. However, feel free to snap up one of those cheap powerhouses to do all your quantum physics work. When you get that Nobel Prize maybe you can spring for a RAM bump.
sheesh yourself...
Re:Looks Like Open Office Is The Default Office Su
on
You've Got PC
·
· Score: 1
Infancy!?! StarOffice was available about 6 years ago! And, I'd hardly put Office 97 above it today.
Re:basic... very basic.
on
You've Got PC
·
· Score: 1
Er, but...the main reason someone would buy a PC like this is to get on the web. So whether they pay the $ to AOL, Earthlink, Bellsouth, Comcast, etc. is really irrelevant to the total cost.
I was thinking of my former company, which sells single-purpose Windows computers as parts of a system. We have at least 250 computers in the field, running a single application - with no users.
That's exactly right. There was a case regarding a Boy Scout troop a few years ago, who thought it would be nice to deliver Christmas cards for people - and they got into some serious hot water for using peoples' mailboxes, which are considered part of the federal postal system. I believe that the USPS backed off eventually to be nice about it, but they made it clear in no uncertain terms that putting stuff in the mailboxes was their turf.
And I don't think that's neccessarily a bad thing. You wouldn't get into trouble for sticking your Xmas cards in your friends' boxes - it's not worth the trouble to them to prosecute you - but as I pointed out before, it does keep businesses from putting anything they want in there.
Say you have someone putting out XXX material; USPS regulations say that it has to be covered up to go in the mail, but someone wants to bypass that; So, they hire guys to go stuff mailboxes with explicit sex pics.
If this were possible, then I could not send my 7-year-old daughter out to the mailbox to get the day's mail. Thankfully, I can - but I have to totally control her email account, because she gets porn pictures, loan offers, medication offers, etc. etc. all sent to her account.
No mistake. Constantly & repeatedly calling your house offering you things which you have no interest in, when you have made an honest effort to communicate that fact, would certainly constitute harrassment. It's not allowed in telemarketing, nor should it be allowed with email.
Screw the can-spam act - it's just so much BS, as are many laws passed because of their popularity component. But, that is no reason to simply accept spam as a fact of life & throw up your hands, either.
Let's take another look at the letterbox analogy: yes, you get junk mail simply by having a mailbox. But, someone has to pay to send it to you, and they have to adhere to the rules of the postal system. If a company sends people out into your neighborhood to stuff things into your box, bypassing the USPS, then that's a federal crime. I suspect that these parameters have a lot to do with people not getting tons of junk mail selling penis enlargement creams and V1@gra.
Email is all or nothing. You either accept that by having an email account you will receive everyting that is sent that address or you don't have one.
I notice that you've altered your email address. Is that the All or Nothing approach?
The fact is, you do have legal recourse if the calls are harrassing, and if machines are used to auto-dial phones at random - practices which have analogues in spamming. And ultimately, the other end of the wire is identifiable - if not by caller ID, then by law enforcement if neccessary. Spoofing return addresses & server IPs prevents that, which serves to alter the context in which those communications are made, IMO.
Yes, you have to live with the fact that people will try - but that does not mean that there can be no parameters guiding attempts at such communications
Personally, I hate the idea. When carrying out a conversation via email, I'd rather the reply be at the top, rather than have to scroll past all the stuff I've already read to get to the next statement. If an email client I've used did this (some do), then I change it to top-posting.
Slashdot Mirror
What Does a Spreading Worm Look Like? With pictures?
Sounds like worm pr0n to me...
This is the common argument, but it misses the point that Windows is an EASIER target because of the way it's built.
It wasn't free until they released a stripped-down version that would basically do an overlay-type install in Windows. (Although it was actually hackable to install it for real.) IIRC, BeOS R5 ran about $50 in the box.
Actually they ARE getting in to the condom business, in a matter of speaking - which is appropos, considering they perfected the Glory Hole.
Hey - better to be the Anal-Yzer then to get Anal-Yzed...
OH MY GOD! CALL OUT THE MILITIA!!
Read it again. He didn't use the cable on a "production server", he used it on his workstation. And I suppose no sysadmin ever f'ed their partition table?
Damn. Lighten up.
IE:
User Agent Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)
App Name Microsoft Internet Explorer
App Version 4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)
Platform Win32
Firefox, with User Agent Switcher:
User Agent Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)
App Name
App Version
Platform
Only difference is in what it omits. The Agent String is virtually identical.
I have Firefox at work & at home, with the User Agent Switcher extension on it. I have it set to identify itself as IE on XP, so that my company's web-based email will allow me to send email. (Yup, it errors out if you use anything the ID's itself as something other than IE - even though the app itself supports Mozilla (just not by default...).
So, I account for at least 2. Oh, and I set up one of the people at work this way too, so she wouldn't have to remember to switch all the time - so that's 3...
I disagree - I think that, because of the hooks & the deep integration into the OS, IE is flawed in such a basic fashion that only a rewrite would fix it.
I described it to a colleague recently as being similar to building your roof with chicken wire, and then running around with a caulking gun trying to stop the leaks. Sure, given enough time & caulk you might fix the effect, but that doesn't change the fact that the basic design is just wrong. Why should a web browser have that kind of power to affect the entire system??
By the way - most other modern browsers 'just work' 99.9% of the time too - and if they don't, I'd bet dollars to donuts that it's due to poor web design than a flaw in the browser.
I was referring to the deal, not the specs. However, feel free to snap up one of those cheap powerhouses to do all your quantum physics work. When you get that Nobel Prize maybe you can spring for a RAM bump.
sheesh yourself...
Infancy!?! StarOffice was available about 6 years ago! And, I'd hardly put Office 97 above it today.
Er, but...the main reason someone would buy a PC like this is to get on the web. So whether they pay the $ to AOL, Earthlink, Bellsouth, Comcast, etc. is really irrelevant to the total cost.
I was thinking of my former company, which sells single-purpose Windows computers as parts of a system. We have at least 250 computers in the field, running a single application - with no users.
So much for assimilation...
So having a stove in a straw house is not a good idea. Is it then stupid to have a stove, or stupid to live in a straw house?
That's exactly right. There was a case regarding a Boy Scout troop a few years ago, who thought it would be nice to deliver Christmas cards for people - and they got into some serious hot water for using peoples' mailboxes, which are considered part of the federal postal system. I believe that the USPS backed off eventually to be nice about it, but they made it clear in no uncertain terms that putting stuff in the mailboxes was their turf.
And I don't think that's neccessarily a bad thing. You wouldn't get into trouble for sticking your Xmas cards in your friends' boxes - it's not worth the trouble to them to prosecute you - but as I pointed out before, it does keep businesses from putting anything they want in there.
Say you have someone putting out XXX material; USPS regulations say that it has to be covered up to go in the mail, but someone wants to bypass that; So, they hire guys to go stuff mailboxes with explicit sex pics.
If this were possible, then I could not send my 7-year-old daughter out to the mailbox to get the day's mail. Thankfully, I can - but I have to totally control her email account, because she gets porn pictures, loan offers, medication offers, etc. etc. all sent to her account.
No mistake. Constantly & repeatedly calling your house offering you things which you have no interest in, when you have made an honest effort to communicate that fact, would certainly constitute harrassment. It's not allowed in telemarketing, nor should it be allowed with email.
Screw the can-spam act - it's just so much BS, as are many laws passed because of their popularity component. But, that is no reason to simply accept spam as a fact of life & throw up your hands, either.
Let's take another look at the letterbox analogy: yes, you get junk mail simply by having a mailbox. But, someone has to pay to send it to you, and they have to adhere to the rules of the postal system. If a company sends people out into your neighborhood to stuff things into your box, bypassing the USPS, then that's a federal crime. I suspect that these parameters have a lot to do with people not getting tons of junk mail selling penis enlargement creams and V1@gra.
By that logic you must accept every telemarketing call that comes your way, too. Sucks, but you put the phone in - right?
the first thing I thought of was IPX/SPX.
Personally, I hate the idea. When carrying out a conversation via email, I'd rather the reply be at the top, rather than have to scroll past all the stuff I've already read to get to the next statement. If an email client I've used did this (some do), then I change it to top-posting.
I don't know - but "Fuck SCO" got 10,800 hits. :)
I guess they were too busy not "fixing" their voting machines to worry about that little MS patch...
Oh, great - so now instead of worrying about how my MP3s will sound I have to worry about how they look too??
So do I - and truth be told, there's a lot of good music that get promoted on public radio (more so than what comes from McClear Channel...).
Modded to flamebait...because I advocated paying Mandrake some money for their efforts, which I support. Nice.