What we should do is to strongarm Microsoft into making a "Block all Pop-ups" in Internet Explorer.
I don't believe that every IE user will see this and use it, but a good number of people will. This might not be important to the regular/. readers (where many don't use Microsoft products anyway), but it will help many other users' lives.
Seriously, this is something IE needs. If people who are computer / internet / tech people ask Microsoft to implement this feature, it might do the Web a lot of long-term good.
I see a lot of people here making one big mistake: Comparing this to Apt. Apt relies on files that tell it where to look for a program, then gets this program and installs it. (Along with any dependencies).
This program takes an _already downloaded_ RPM (that's right, just _one file_, at least at once), and then installs it. It doesn't search a centralized ftp for the RPM and then install it.
The real complaint (which wouldn't have had anywhere near the same oomph) should have been:
"Why did they choose RPM over dpkg?"
(Which is only natural because very few people download a.deb and then install it with dpkg)!
"Due to strong customer preference for the Windows platform, there will be no further releases of Freedom for Linux."
This sounds like it's been planned. First, they look like a great company when their product has Linux support. The catch is that it doesn't work (if what's said here is true), and then they blame it on the users (who can't "support" a product that doesn't work). That way, they don't have to do any work on the Linux version after all.
They're obviously not as scared as they should be about getting sued. If the notice says "don't sue us, or else" then they have a problem. That can be exploited.
If nobody does, and opts for the money right away, then doing web business will instantly get a lot tougher.
Besides, if you sign this paper, is there a guarantee that they'll give you any money?
Actually, the real image bank can be found here. It's got a lot of image series neatly lined up. The link in the story only shows the last (Horsehead Nebula) series.
I haven't tried what you say, but having a HotMail account, I can tell you this:
I believe there are a lot of people who let their computer generate (almost) every conceivable
email-adress@hotmail.com, and then spam all these addresses. I've recieved quite a few spam-mails where the "To:" field listed some hilarious addresses which resemble mine, then mine, then some more.
These addresses do not exist, AFAIK (even tried to email one of these other addresses that I found in the "To:" field, just got a mailer-daemon error message), and that tells me that someone has generated all the addresses they could and just sent an enormous number of emails to make sure they reach someone.
Therefore, getting spammed doesn't really prove Micro$oft's guilt or, for that matter, anything else than the fact that you're being spammed!
A local newspaper reported that in one area, drivers would not be checked for driving under the influence because the nearby brewery was emitting alcoholic fumes!
The voters vote for parties, just like in the US. The real power is not in the hands of a President, but rather a parliament. This is almost the same as the congress, except that there are more parties, anywhere from five to ten is usual.
The party with the majority of the votes then forms the government, the executive branch of the parliament. If the largest party does not achieve a majority, it can either try to run things with a minority (relying on support from other parties from case to case) or form a coalition with another party. The voters have no influence on this, except in cases where parties announce before the elections that they are forming a coalition.
In theory, the government then has to have support from the parliament in each matter, but this is usually not the situation, both because this takes too much time, or sometimes the government makes deals with the opposition, or the matter isn't worth taking down the government.
This system allows for a much wider range of parties. One of the downsides is that it isn't as stable as you could want, and sometimes unpredictable as well.
I live outside the US and therefore have a few outsider's thoughts about the political system.
I have noticed that many candidates (I've mostly seen parts of presidential campaigns) flame each other. They might show pictures of how bad a certain area looked when Clinton was governor, or they might take a small part of an opponent's program out of proportion and use it to show how extreme that candidate is in a certain way.
How does the/. community think the Internet will affect this?
And what about candidate and party representation? With the US having a two-party political system for all practical purposes, does anyone have a feeling that the net as a new political channel will make it easier for other parties and candidates than the "major" ones to get measureable representation?
I think mr. Pike has a good point when it comes to many aspects of software. Linux isn't something new per se, but many new features and developments have been added recently that have made it into something completely different than what it was in 1990. This has both led to and happened because of a boom in user interest in Linux.
However, there is a fundamental point that I think he's missing. Linux is constantly innovated, not in major leaps as Microsoft has done things (and they have mostly copied others), but through the kernel. Each new kernel version brings new features to this already great system. So I think he's talking about a way of innovating that happened some years ago.
Besides, isn't Open Source something that shifts the balance here?
Someone must have read this book. Is there anyone of you who'd actually care to make a comment about the book itself here? All I see is spam and offtopic...
I started writing an argument in reply to this post, there is no point. The man's just right, period. We don't need faster chips, or at least the need isn't justified until everyone on the planet has what they need to live peaceful and productive lives with enough food and water.
Not that I believe Intel and the rest will make a change in their policies...
The massive marketing of Windows 98 as something fundamentally different from Win 95 serves as the best example of how suits can harm development. They felt they had to come up with something that was not only new, but also a major improvement over Win 95. 98 wasn't such a big improvement, but they claimed it was, and got tons of hype over it. The average Windows user just needs to be told that something is better to believe it.
I'm not saying that this is what would happen if you gave a non-coder control over parts of software development. I just want to show that some companies use marketing tricks that could make the software seem less important.
A good piece of software doesn't need to be hindered by suits. As long as they are good, and realize that the development has to come first, suits are not (necessarily!) a bad thing.
Re:21" iMac not found...
on
Rack An iMac
·
· Score: 1
Thanks! I searched (a bit) on the MacAddict site without finding it, so you're a big help here. It really mattered a lot to me to be able to see this mac-in-a-box for myself...
Slashdot Mirror
I don't believe that every IE user will see this and use it, but a good number of people will. This might not be important to the regular /. readers (where many don't use Microsoft products anyway), but it will help many other users' lives.
Seriously, this is something IE needs. If people who are computer / internet / tech people ask Microsoft to implement this feature, it might do the Web a lot of long-term good.
Now who's with me?
This program takes an _already downloaded_ RPM (that's right, just _one file_, at least at once), and then installs it. It doesn't search a centralized ftp for the RPM and then install it.
The real complaint (which wouldn't have had anywhere near the same oomph) should have been:
"Why did they choose RPM over dpkg?"
(Which is only natural because very few people download a .deb and then install it with dpkg)!
www.sgi.com/linux/ and
www.sgi.com/developers/technology/linux/.
Certainly doesn't look like it's over yet...
The BBC has some good info on the practical aspects of the operation.
Low-tech, but still nice.
This sounds like it's been planned. First, they look like a great company when their product has Linux support. The catch is that it doesn't work (if what's said here is true), and then they blame it on the users (who can't "support" a product that doesn't work). That way, they don't have to do any work on the Linux version after all.
Marketing strategy?
The Platinum sponsors of this project are WebSphere, XML, and Linux.
Glad to see that XML and Linux are finally starting to understand marketing...
What will you need if you want to try Windows out? A Beowulf of Crays?
If nobody does, and opts for the money right away, then doing web business will instantly get a lot tougher.
Besides, if you sign this paper, is there a guarantee that they'll give you any money?
Actually, the real image bank can be found here. It's got a lot of image series neatly lined up. The link in the story only shows the last (Horsehead Nebula) series.
I believe there are a lot of people who let their computer generate (almost) every conceivable email-adress@hotmail.com, and then spam all these addresses. I've recieved quite a few spam-mails where the "To:" field listed some hilarious addresses which resemble mine, then mine, then some more.
These addresses do not exist, AFAIK (even tried to email one of these other addresses that I found in the "To:" field, just got a mailer-daemon error message), and that tells me that someone has generated all the addresses they could and just sent an enormous number of emails to make sure they reach someone.
Therefore, getting spammed doesn't really prove Micro$oft's guilt or, for that matter, anything else than the fact that you're being spammed!
Anyone know what this is? I tried pointing my browser to www.hardhat.com and got some quite unexpected results...
These days his neurons of choice are taken from leeches [...]
"Bill is our spiritual leader," says Georgia Tech neuroengineer and collaborator [...]
Who ARE these guys anyway?
The party with the majority of the votes then forms the government, the executive branch of the parliament. If the largest party does not achieve a majority, it can either try to run things with a minority (relying on support from other parties from case to case) or form a coalition with another party. The voters have no influence on this, except in cases where parties announce before the elections that they are forming a coalition.
In theory, the government then has to have support from the parliament in each matter, but this is usually not the situation, both because this takes too much time, or sometimes the government makes deals with the opposition, or the matter isn't worth taking down the government.
This system allows for a much wider range of parties. One of the downsides is that it isn't as stable as you could want, and sometimes unpredictable as well.
I have noticed that many candidates (I've mostly seen parts of presidential campaigns) flame each other. They might show pictures of how bad a certain area looked when Clinton was governor, or they might take a small part of an opponent's program out of proportion and use it to show how extreme that candidate is in a certain way.
How does the /. community think the Internet will affect this?
And what about candidate and party representation? With the US having a two-party political system for all practical purposes, does anyone have a feeling that the net as a new political channel will make it easier for other parties and candidates than the "major" ones to get measureable representation?
I hope for some interesting answers...
However, there is a fundamental point that I think he's missing. Linux is constantly innovated, not in major leaps as Microsoft has done things (and they have mostly copied others), but through the kernel. Each new kernel version brings new features to this already great system. So I think he's talking about a way of innovating that happened some years ago.
Besides, isn't Open Source something that shifts the balance here?
Someone must have read this book. Is there anyone of you who'd actually care to make a comment about the book itself here? All I see is spam and offtopic...
Not that I believe Intel and the rest will make a change in their policies...
Sorry if this is something I ought to know, but I don't. What's a DDOS, and how do you create one?
How many non-geeks do you think are aware of this choice at all, let alone what it means?
I'm not saying that this is what would happen if you gave a non-coder control over parts of software development. I just want to show that some companies use marketing tricks that could make the software seem less important.
A good piece of software doesn't need to be hindered by suits. As long as they are good, and realize that the development has to come first, suits are not (necessarily!) a bad thing.
Thanks! I searched (a bit) on the MacAddict site without finding it, so you're a big help here. It really mattered a lot to me to be able to see this mac-in-a-box for myself...