Use a non-broken mail client (and yes, Thunderbird is horribly broken in this regard). Oddly enough, Apple Mail and Microsoft Outlook both support specifying outgoing mail servers on a per-account basis.
In what way does Thunderbird not handle this? I have several accounts, each with its own SMTP server, and I've never seen a problem where TBird picks the wrong one.
Near Detroit there's Marvin's Marvelous Mechanical Museum in Farmington Hills. He has a ton of mostly mechanical arcade games dating back a hundred years. It's a fabulous place to take a roll of quarters (and dimes, nickels, and pennies for the older games!) and lose an afternoon in.
I don't recall any games that had magnets drawing the ball towards a drain. There was Williams' MagnaSave, which drew the ball towards a scoring lane towards a flipper, though.
A few had magnets under the playfield that would pulse unpredictably. The game which put this to best effect was Addam's Family. The magnets could pull even a fast-moving ball sharply to one side, and fairly often towards the drain. Although they also saved me once or twice on a ball that I'd have otherwise lost. Normally this sort of randomness would bug me in pinball, but it was used sparingly and fit the Addam's Family theme very well.
Other games had gimmicks like big shaker motors that would shake the entire table, or spinning disks embedded flush with the table that would similarly randomize the direction of the ball.
A friend was watching me play some game which had a post down between the flippers. He saw me pretty much take my hands of the buttons and just let the ball sail down and hit the post without interfering with it at all. It bounced straight back up and into play. "Damn!" he said. "You've got nerves of steel!" No, just enough experience that I could see the ball was going to hit the post squarely, and that if I'd flipped or jostled the machine at all I'd likely screw it up.
It makes me wonder if there could be a way to make competitive pinball -- a double-ended table made more like a hill than a single slope.
Or cooperative pinball with multiple sets of flippers and catchers, where you had to cooperate to fire the balls simultaneously or pass balls to eachother. =)
The competitive version has definitely been done. I've seen a football-themed game (two versions, for American football and for that other game that the rest of the world likes to call 'football') which was double-ended with flippers at either end and bumpers and other obstacles scattered around the field. It never sold well. One reason was that you had to have two players. It could be played single-player if you really wanted to -- the opposite end's flippers had little contacts on them so they'd spastically fire when the ball hit them. But it just wasn't any fun that way.
I'm not sure if a co-op game's ever been made, though any game can be played co-op by having one person control each flipper. That's best after you've both already had a few beers, though.:-)
I think the reason Pinball is dying out is purely the cost of fixing them.
Amen, brother. I worked for Capcom's pinball division during the big crash around 1995, when all the major manufacturers packed it in. Maintenance cost was one of the driving factors. A pinball machine is a complex piece of equipment, full of finicky parts with tight tolerances. It takes constant tweaking by someone who knows what they're doing to keep it in good shape. A video game? Any high-school dropout can wipe down the screen and empty the cash box once a week.
Plus, when a video game gets old you can swap in a new board, give the cabinet a new coat of paint and a new marquee, and you have a brand new profitable machine. You can't really rehab an old pinball machine. Well, you can, but it costs as much as buying a new one. Williams tried to make an upgradable cabinet with their video/pinball hybrid games, but I doubt they ever sold many conversion kits.
Ah, well. At least I got to work in the industry for a while. The summary is right, it really was a dream job. I had my own office with a pinball machine which I could play any time I wanted. The only catch was I had to make it work first. And get this -- they paid me! Ah, those were the days...
That is not even a question. Premier/Diebold is playing the most common trick there is: we can do better job but we need more money. Pony up some more so we can actually deliver what we promised to.
Ah, but if only they'd reveal their source code and engineering drawings they'd get a few thousand people doing a thorough security audit gratis. But no, that would give away vital "trade secrets".
I'm not even talking GPL here. Or any license to use the designs or code for anything other than auditing them. Diebold could keep all rights to the design, could have the whole thing patented, copyrighted, and trademarked out the wazoo. All they have to do is let us see the design, and reap the benefits of thousands of interested parties who just want to see fair elections.
Now, IMHO this stuff shouldn't be owned by any one company. The design of a voting system should be public property, and any manufacturer should be able to bid for a contract to build them. But I'm willing to let that slide as long as the company which does own it is transparent about their design and process. Diebold is about as transparent as an inch-thick steel window.
On the one hand, I want to say that this sounds reasonable, despite it being suggested by Microsoft.
On the other hand I want to say... WTF?!? Why does a markup language need all that crap anyway? Persistent local storage? What does that have to do with page markup?
I'm not saying that these other things are bad or unnecessary. Just that they shouldn't be part of the HTML spec. Just like CSS and JavaScript are both widely used with HTML, but are defined in their own separate complementary specs.
I suppose the real reason for the kitchen sink approach is pragmatic. As explained in TFA, no one has volunteered to take over individual parts. But if nobody cares enough to commit to that, maybe nobody really cares about the result either and those other parts are unnecessary? I say keep HTML as a markup language, add hooks for other things, and let those other things be specified if and when someone actually cares enough to do it.
He does bring up a good point regarding the Wii, though. The Wii remote has a built-in camera; why don't we have the same paranoid response to it that we do to the suggestion of a camera in the set-top box? Okay, I trust Nintendo slightly more than Comcast, but only slightly.
That's it, no more spankin' it to Zelda porn on the Wii browser!
The only problem I've had with the TiVo Desktop included with Roxio Toast is that it won't let me transfer the recent Knight Rider TV movie in HD to my computer. Neither airing. After little more than a dozen megabytes it just stops.
That's just the computer protecting the network from the spread of that show. Think of it as the computer's major intestine, in a desperate attempt to save humanity, leaping straight up through its neck and throttling its brain. It's doing you a favor. Really.
That's exactly what I was going to point out. Sure, there may be a lot of people who think that the government is being "secretive". But a lot of those people seem to think it's the right thing to do. I know enough people who take the stance of "anything to make us safer" that I can easily believe Time's conclusion that Americans as a whole just don't give a damn.
But if you could (for example) build a character you would RP the exact same way you'd play your paladin as a fighter/cleric or something much, much tougher (and you could), why wouldn't you?
Because I'm not a power gamer. Because I think a flawed character can be more interesting.
Two of the most interesting (and fun!) characters I've played have had serious problems. Without getting into a whole "No shit, there I was..." thread -- One was a Gnome Illusionist/Fighter. He had a high INT, but a low-average STR. Unfortunately, he didn't want to be an Illusionist, he wanted to be a Fighter. So he had the biggest sword and heaviest armor he could use, and was completely incapable of casting spells dressed like that. The other character was a Jester, a class I wrote for a Dragon Magazine April Fools issue back in the mid-80s. I rolled okay for INT, low (<10) for everything else. I rolled a miserable 5 for STR. He couldn't lift a sword, much less swing one. The DM declared the character hopeless and told me to roll a new one. But I decided to play him as-is. On the whole he was detrimental to the party, but we all had a lot of fun in that campaign.
In both these cases I intentionally played characters much less powerful than they could have been. Why? Because sometimes you get tired of playing Generic Badass #13, min-maxing your abilities to within an inch of the rules. Sometimes you get an interesting character concept and just want to run with it.
In the past month, I received several spams for Cloverfield. It was the only advertising I saw regarding the film, and it almost made me skip seeing it. (Get that, studio? The ads you paid for nearly cost you a customer!)
"Nearly" cost them a customer. But it didn't. So, the advertising made you aware of the movie, and curious enough that when it was mentioned by a friend you went to see it. See? The advertising worked!
Personally, I never heard of the thing until I started to see news items about the hype machine surrounding the movie. (Said news items being part of said hype machine, no doubt.) I actually considered seeing it, until I heard about the shaky-cam. I absolutely loathe shaky-cam! It doesn't make me ill, it just triggers the "this is freakin' stupid" gut response. Especially when CGI has been shaky-cammed. I know it's supposed to be more "realistic", but IMHO it draws attention to the cinematography and away from the story, totally wrecking the suspension of disbelief.
Oh well, the movie is more of a marketing experiment than anything else, and I'm not in their target demographic.
Lego now has far too many custom parts, it's a bit more like building some flat pack furniture that a chance to be creative.
You know, I had the same thought... My son, now 10yo, has been into Bionicle from pretty much the time they were introduced. Yeah, he essentially went from Duplo straight to Bionicle. In his mind, Bionicle is what LEGO is all about, though he does sometimes break out some of the other sets. And he has my whole collection of bricks from the '70s too, so it's not like he has a lack of standard bricks to play with. He prefers the Bionicle parts.
But you know, it's amazing what he comes up with with those "limited" custom parts. When he gets a new Bionicle set he first builds it according to the directions, and plays with it for half an hour or so. Then he rips it apart, adds it to the rest of the parts, and starts building new things. I don't think all the custom parts are hampering his creativity in any way. No, it's not the same as when we were kids, but it's still LEGO and it's still fun for kids to build new things.
(BTW, I was entering high school when the Space series was released, and I disdained it even then because it had way too many custom parts compared with the regular sets. So, all you young punks who think the Space series was the pinnacle of LEGO... Get off my lawn!)
To the contrary, I think everyone should write a ray-tracer in Perl. Or, more generally, every programmer should take his or her favorite language and use it for something it's spectacularly bad at. Like ray-tracing in Perl.
Part of the reason is to show that yes, you can use just about any language for just about any task. But that doesn't mean you should. Using a language unsuited to a project gets you familiar with the bounds of the language, so you have a pretty good idea before you start whether or not the language is a good fit for a given task. And it can often teach you a lot about the language, because you'll have to explore the little nooks and crannies to figure out how to get it to do what you want.
The other part of the reason is that everyone needs a little humbling. This is especially true for anyone who says, "I used to use {language_x} until I discovered {language_y} and realized that {x} is TEH SUCK!" That usually just means that {y} is more suited to what you're doing now. Go code something non-trivial that {y} is unsuited for, and see if you don't end up cursing your new favorite just as much as you curse your old favorite.
(I was a Perl guy for 15 years, used to love it, now Perl and Ruby both look like line noise that's been encrypted -- compared to my new girlfriend, Python.)
I've been a fan of Perl ever since the 3.x era. A couple years ago I got a job at a place where the scripting language of choice is Python. My take on it is that Python is that cute, quirky goth chick you met at the bar. She's fun for a while, but once you get to know her you realize that she's got some pretty deep emotional issues that drive you absolutely nuts. And she's really, really obsessive about her appearance.
No, I'm more than happy to stick with Perl. She may be a little older and not quite as attractive, but she has a wonderful personality. Plus, there's more than one way to do her.
Those are the best free web games out there? Damn, I'd sure hate to see what the crap games are like! Even Kitten Cannon has more to redeem it than these things.
I still love my Clie NX70 as an ebook reader. For software I really like iSilo. It only reads its own format (and plain vanilla Palm DOC format) on the device, but the PC-side converter software does an amazingly good job with HTML and CSS. I pull down a number of websites and RSS feeds to read when I'm offline, and I have a large collection of fiction in electronic format (mostly from Baen Books). The converter software comes in GUI flavors for Windows and Mac, and command-line flavors for Windows, Mac, FreeBSD, Linux, and Solaris.
No PDF support, unfortunately, which is probably a killer for a lot of people.
I'm hoping that Santa will be good to me and put a Nokia n810 in my stocking. One of my co-workers has one and it looks like it'd make a double-plus good ebook reader. It's almost exactly the same size as my Clie (the n810 is just a hair shorter), which works well for something to carry with me all the time.
Corporations are now and have always been able to take someone to court who publishes - like in this case - their trade secrets.
I was under the impression that trade secrets, unlike patents, have no protection under the law. That's the trade-off a company makes when it decides whether something will be patented or be a trade secret -- If you patent, you get exclusive use of the invention for 20 years, but the patent becomes public knowledge and after it expires anyone can use it. A trade secret, on the other hand, is not published and no one else can use it, assuming you manage to keep the secret to yourself. Let the cat out of the bag, though, and it's game over.
The only protection for trade secrets is any non-disclosure agreements you've had people sign. If someone who is not under a non-disclosure agreement finds out the secret and publishes, there's pretty much nothing the company can do except whine at him. They can sue whoever broke the non-disclosure, but the guy who publishes is in the clear. Of course, the company can always threaten a long, drawn-out court case which they have no hope of winning, but which will break the guy financially trying to defend himself.
IANAL, but this is how corporate lawyers have explained it to me in the past.
Because I really don't think Seagate didn't know this. There is enough Linux and Macs out there this was done with some deliberation.
I don't think there was any intended malice here. Product managers tend to get very narrowly focused. This is obviously a product intended for the Windows market; you can tell because of the NTFS format. So if an engineer had reported that this doesn't work with Mac or Linux, the PM probably shot him down with "That's not our market. If you can fix it in your spare time, fine, but we're not going to miss the ship date for it."
For server-based products, I'm sure Seagate tests with Unix flavors. But consumer-targetted desktop products? Come on, that additional 1% of the market isn't even worth the time it would take to write up a decent bug report.
All I want to know is, where did this guy get a copy of Tiger that Just Works? Because the one I'm using on this here MacBook Pro sure tends to get mighty confused at times! Just this week I had to spend half a day recovering from corruption in the disk image I keep mounted for when I need a case-sensitive file system. This is supposed to be a journaled file system; it's not supposed to puke all over itself if it doesn't get unmounted cleanly! Though it wouldn't have been a problem if the whole machine hadn't hung, forcing me to do a hard power-down.
Slashdot Mirror
In what way does Thunderbird not handle this? I have several accounts, each with its own SMTP server, and I've never seen a problem where TBird picks the wrong one.
Him right fine.
Fixed that for you. HTH.
Near Detroit there's Marvin's Marvelous Mechanical Museum in Farmington Hills. He has a ton of mostly mechanical arcade games dating back a hundred years. It's a fabulous place to take a roll of quarters (and dimes, nickels, and pennies for the older games!) and lose an afternoon in.
A few had magnets under the playfield that would pulse unpredictably. The game which put this to best effect was Addam's Family. The magnets could pull even a fast-moving ball sharply to one side, and fairly often towards the drain. Although they also saved me once or twice on a ball that I'd have otherwise lost. Normally this sort of randomness would bug me in pinball, but it was used sparingly and fit the Addam's Family theme very well.
Other games had gimmicks like big shaker motors that would shake the entire table, or spinning disks embedded flush with the table that would similarly randomize the direction of the ball.
A friend was watching me play some game which had a post down between the flippers. He saw me pretty much take my hands of the buttons and just let the ball sail down and hit the post without interfering with it at all. It bounced straight back up and into play. "Damn!" he said. "You've got nerves of steel!" No, just enough experience that I could see the ball was going to hit the post squarely, and that if I'd flipped or jostled the machine at all I'd likely screw it up.
The competitive version has definitely been done. I've seen a football-themed game (two versions, for American football and for that other game that the rest of the world likes to call 'football') which was double-ended with flippers at either end and bumpers and other obstacles scattered around the field. It never sold well. One reason was that you had to have two players. It could be played single-player if you really wanted to -- the opposite end's flippers had little contacts on them so they'd spastically fire when the ball hit them. But it just wasn't any fun that way.
I'm not sure if a co-op game's ever been made, though any game can be played co-op by having one person control each flipper. That's best after you've both already had a few beers, though. :-)
Amen, brother. I worked for Capcom's pinball division during the big crash around 1995, when all the major manufacturers packed it in. Maintenance cost was one of the driving factors. A pinball machine is a complex piece of equipment, full of finicky parts with tight tolerances. It takes constant tweaking by someone who knows what they're doing to keep it in good shape. A video game? Any high-school dropout can wipe down the screen and empty the cash box once a week.
Plus, when a video game gets old you can swap in a new board, give the cabinet a new coat of paint and a new marquee, and you have a brand new profitable machine. You can't really rehab an old pinball machine. Well, you can, but it costs as much as buying a new one. Williams tried to make an upgradable cabinet with their video/pinball hybrid games, but I doubt they ever sold many conversion kits.
Ah, well. At least I got to work in the industry for a while. The summary is right, it really was a dream job. I had my own office with a pinball machine which I could play any time I wanted. The only catch was I had to make it work first. And get this -- they paid me! Ah, those were the days...
Ah, but if only they'd reveal their source code and engineering drawings they'd get a few thousand people doing a thorough security audit gratis. But no, that would give away vital "trade secrets".
I'm not even talking GPL here. Or any license to use the designs or code for anything other than auditing them. Diebold could keep all rights to the design, could have the whole thing patented, copyrighted, and trademarked out the wazoo. All they have to do is let us see the design, and reap the benefits of thousands of interested parties who just want to see fair elections.
Now, IMHO this stuff shouldn't be owned by any one company. The design of a voting system should be public property, and any manufacturer should be able to bid for a contract to build them. But I'm willing to let that slide as long as the company which does own it is transparent about their design and process. Diebold is about as transparent as an inch-thick steel window.
On the one hand, I want to say that this sounds reasonable, despite it being suggested by Microsoft.
On the other hand I want to say... WTF?!? Why does a markup language need all that crap anyway? Persistent local storage? What does that have to do with page markup?
I'm not saying that these other things are bad or unnecessary. Just that they shouldn't be part of the HTML spec. Just like CSS and JavaScript are both widely used with HTML, but are defined in their own separate complementary specs.
I suppose the real reason for the kitchen sink approach is pragmatic. As explained in TFA, no one has volunteered to take over individual parts. But if nobody cares enough to commit to that, maybe nobody really cares about the result either and those other parts are unnecessary? I say keep HTML as a markup language, add hooks for other things, and let those other things be specified if and when someone actually cares enough to do it.
He does bring up a good point regarding the Wii, though. The Wii remote has a built-in camera; why don't we have the same paranoid response to it that we do to the suggestion of a camera in the set-top box? Okay, I trust Nintendo slightly more than Comcast, but only slightly.
That's it, no more spankin' it to Zelda porn on the Wii browser!
That's just the computer protecting the network from the spread of that show. Think of it as the computer's major intestine, in a desperate attempt to save humanity, leaping straight up through its neck and throttling its brain. It's doing you a favor. Really.
That's exactly what I was going to point out. Sure, there may be a lot of people who think that the government is being "secretive". But a lot of those people seem to think it's the right thing to do. I know enough people who take the stance of "anything to make us safer" that I can easily believe Time's conclusion that Americans as a whole just don't give a damn.
Because I'm not a power gamer. Because I think a flawed character can be more interesting.
Two of the most interesting (and fun!) characters I've played have had serious problems. Without getting into a whole "No shit, there I was..." thread -- One was a Gnome Illusionist/Fighter. He had a high INT, but a low-average STR. Unfortunately, he didn't want to be an Illusionist, he wanted to be a Fighter. So he had the biggest sword and heaviest armor he could use, and was completely incapable of casting spells dressed like that. The other character was a Jester, a class I wrote for a Dragon Magazine April Fools issue back in the mid-80s. I rolled okay for INT, low (<10) for everything else. I rolled a miserable 5 for STR. He couldn't lift a sword, much less swing one. The DM declared the character hopeless and told me to roll a new one. But I decided to play him as-is. On the whole he was detrimental to the party, but we all had a lot of fun in that campaign.
In both these cases I intentionally played characters much less powerful than they could have been. Why? Because sometimes you get tired of playing Generic Badass #13, min-maxing your abilities to within an inch of the rules. Sometimes you get an interesting character concept and just want to run with it.
"Nearly" cost them a customer. But it didn't. So, the advertising made you aware of the movie, and curious enough that when it was mentioned by a friend you went to see it. See? The advertising worked!
Personally, I never heard of the thing until I started to see news items about the hype machine surrounding the movie. (Said news items being part of said hype machine, no doubt.) I actually considered seeing it, until I heard about the shaky-cam. I absolutely loathe shaky-cam! It doesn't make me ill, it just triggers the "this is freakin' stupid" gut response. Especially when CGI has been shaky-cammed. I know it's supposed to be more "realistic", but IMHO it draws attention to the cinematography and away from the story, totally wrecking the suspension of disbelief.
Oh well, the movie is more of a marketing experiment than anything else, and I'm not in their target demographic.
Swordfish had Halle Berry topless. HALLE BERRY. TOPLESS. And I still walked out of the theatre wanting those two hours of my life back.
You know, I had the same thought... My son, now 10yo, has been into Bionicle from pretty much the time they were introduced. Yeah, he essentially went from Duplo straight to Bionicle. In his mind, Bionicle is what LEGO is all about, though he does sometimes break out some of the other sets. And he has my whole collection of bricks from the '70s too, so it's not like he has a lack of standard bricks to play with. He prefers the Bionicle parts.
But you know, it's amazing what he comes up with with those "limited" custom parts. When he gets a new Bionicle set he first builds it according to the directions, and plays with it for half an hour or so. Then he rips it apart, adds it to the rest of the parts, and starts building new things. I don't think all the custom parts are hampering his creativity in any way. No, it's not the same as when we were kids, but it's still LEGO and it's still fun for kids to build new things.
(BTW, I was entering high school when the Space series was released, and I disdained it even then because it had way too many custom parts compared with the regular sets. So, all you young punks who think the Space series was the pinnacle of LEGO... Get off my lawn!)
To the contrary, I think everyone should write a ray-tracer in Perl. Or, more generally, every programmer should take his or her favorite language and use it for something it's spectacularly bad at. Like ray-tracing in Perl.
Part of the reason is to show that yes, you can use just about any language for just about any task. But that doesn't mean you should. Using a language unsuited to a project gets you familiar with the bounds of the language, so you have a pretty good idea before you start whether or not the language is a good fit for a given task. And it can often teach you a lot about the language, because you'll have to explore the little nooks and crannies to figure out how to get it to do what you want.
The other part of the reason is that everyone needs a little humbling. This is especially true for anyone who says, "I used to use {language_x} until I discovered {language_y} and realized that {x} is TEH SUCK!" That usually just means that {y} is more suited to what you're doing now. Go code something non-trivial that {y} is unsuited for, and see if you don't end up cursing your new favorite just as much as you curse your old favorite.
I've been a fan of Perl ever since the 3.x era. A couple years ago I got a job at a place where the scripting language of choice is Python. My take on it is that Python is that cute, quirky goth chick you met at the bar. She's fun for a while, but once you get to know her you realize that she's got some pretty deep emotional issues that drive you absolutely nuts. And she's really, really obsessive about her appearance.
No, I'm more than happy to stick with Perl. She may be a little older and not quite as attractive, but she has a wonderful personality. Plus, there's more than one way to do her.
Does anyone else have a problem with the word "smashing" to describe the contact of two bits of not-quite-vacuum passing through each other?
Those are the best free web games out there? Damn, I'd sure hate to see what the crap games are like! Even Kitten Cannon has more to redeem it than these things.
"Oh, dear God, let it hit so we can finally get off this 24-and-a-half hour day!"
I still love my Clie NX70 as an ebook reader. For software I really like iSilo. It only reads its own format (and plain vanilla Palm DOC format) on the device, but the PC-side converter software does an amazingly good job with HTML and CSS. I pull down a number of websites and RSS feeds to read when I'm offline, and I have a large collection of fiction in electronic format (mostly from Baen Books). The converter software comes in GUI flavors for Windows and Mac, and command-line flavors for Windows, Mac, FreeBSD, Linux, and Solaris.
No PDF support, unfortunately, which is probably a killer for a lot of people.
I'm hoping that Santa will be good to me and put a Nokia n810 in my stocking. One of my co-workers has one and it looks like it'd make a double-plus good ebook reader. It's almost exactly the same size as my Clie (the n810 is just a hair shorter), which works well for something to carry with me all the time.
Kucinich gets my support simply because of the FLILF factor.
I was under the impression that trade secrets, unlike patents, have no protection under the law. That's the trade-off a company makes when it decides whether something will be patented or be a trade secret -- If you patent, you get exclusive use of the invention for 20 years, but the patent becomes public knowledge and after it expires anyone can use it. A trade secret, on the other hand, is not published and no one else can use it, assuming you manage to keep the secret to yourself. Let the cat out of the bag, though, and it's game over.
The only protection for trade secrets is any non-disclosure agreements you've had people sign. If someone who is not under a non-disclosure agreement finds out the secret and publishes, there's pretty much nothing the company can do except whine at him. They can sue whoever broke the non-disclosure, but the guy who publishes is in the clear. Of course, the company can always threaten a long, drawn-out court case which they have no hope of winning, but which will break the guy financially trying to defend himself.
IANAL, but this is how corporate lawyers have explained it to me in the past.
I don't think there was any intended malice here. Product managers tend to get very narrowly focused. This is obviously a product intended for the Windows market; you can tell because of the NTFS format. So if an engineer had reported that this doesn't work with Mac or Linux, the PM probably shot him down with "That's not our market. If you can fix it in your spare time, fine, but we're not going to miss the ship date for it."
For server-based products, I'm sure Seagate tests with Unix flavors. But consumer-targetted desktop products? Come on, that additional 1% of the market isn't even worth the time it would take to write up a decent bug report.
All I want to know is, where did this guy get a copy of Tiger that Just Works? Because the one I'm using on this here MacBook Pro sure tends to get mighty confused at times! Just this week I had to spend half a day recovering from corruption in the disk image I keep mounted for when I need a case-sensitive file system. This is supposed to be a journaled file system; it's not supposed to puke all over itself if it doesn't get unmounted cleanly! Though it wouldn't have been a problem if the whole machine hadn't hung, forcing me to do a hard power-down.
Just Works. Right. Pull the other one!