Dangit. I read your title as "How will the new license servers affect naked pictures." I read your whole post and didn't see any references to naked pictures. DAmn yoU!
I must respectfully disagree. I think Jon is much funnier than Craig. Craig did make a mistake tho by leaving the show. Does anyone watch his show after Letterman? I'd rather watch Conan if I was up that late.
I do miss the old correspondents. A. Whitney Brown and Brian Ungar were hilarious.
Henry Rollins would be pretty good as batman. He would kick some ass. And Glenn Danzig could be the villain and there would be a massive fight to the finish. Then Danzig would finally kill Rollins with his enourmous belt buckle.
Nope, Metal Blade is on the list too. That really sucks because they have lots of cool bands, if you're into metal (Cannibal Corpse, Gwar, Six Feet Under...)
Actually, Fat Wreck Chords and Epitaph are members of the RIAA. Go look at the list. That gets rid of a lot of cool bands right there. However, there is still Dischord (Fugazi... hell yeah).
In iCab for the macintosh you can filter images by size and by server. If an ad gets through, just right-click on it and tell iCab to filter images of that size or from that server or both. It is VERY handy. All web browsers should have that feature.
What you forget is that this mouse was designed for Macs and Macs are designed for 1-button. You don't NEED more than one button in MacOS and lots of Mac zeal^H^H^H^H enthusiasts LIKE one button.
Personally, I use a logitech 3-button mouse because I do things that require the use of a 3-button mouse and find it to be a bit faster for certain tasks. However, if they didn't exist, I'd get along fine.
iCab does support some javascript. Its not quite up to par yet. I usually browse with javascript off anyways.
The thing thats great about iCab is how small it is. Sure, maybe Mozilla can do all those things but when run in MacOS it needs 20MB memory and is dog slow.
iCab also has great cookie and image filtering. I never have to wait for ads (well, actually, the only ad that EVER gets through is the one for Gateway here on slashdot. Not sure how.)
My original point was that Mozilla is *way* too bloated. Mozilla can support CSS, DOM, XML but it doesn't have to be so slow and such a memory hog. We need efficieny! Sure, I have 196MB RAM but i don't want 35MB of it to be Mozilla.
Can it really be that hard to write a browser?! Why do they have to put in all that extra cruft, the mail/news reader, editor? Why is the footprint so bloody huge and why does it take so long to start up?
On my Mac (I also have a Sparc and a K6 so I'm not some idiot Mac zealot) I started running iCab. It is great. The binary is less than 2MB, it can run happily in 5MB ram, its fast, doesn't crash as often as Netscape and NEVER takes down the whole computer. It supports java and its java script support is improving. It is quite usable and standards compliant.
Why can the company making iCab release a stable, fast, *usable* web browser and Netscape, with all its power can't?
At my old job they had IE for Solaris running on UltraSparc 60's and it was slower than hell. I can't imagine how it would run on my poor little K6-2.
If they want to port it thats fine with me as long as it runs at comparable speeds to the windows version or at least faster/more reliable/less memory than Netscape. I doubt it will ever happen.
Actually sir, you are mistaken. YDL does run on the ibook. Both linuxppc and YDL use the same kernel sources so they both support the same hardware.
I ran NetBSD on a beige G3 last year. the thing I hated most was that the Xserver at the time could not go higher than 640x480 8-bit color. I don't know if that has been resolved.
I'd also like to state that I am not linux biased. I have a Mac IIsi running netbsd and a K6 running FreeBSD.
I've run YellowDog linux and LinuxPPC on my B&W G3. The only difference really is the installer. Personally, I prefer yellowdog because after install there were less things that needed to be fixed.
SUSE is still in beta. i tried to install it from the harddrive but it wouldn't go and when i tried to install debian it said my hardware wasn't supported. So i'm stuck w/the RedHat clones.
I'm running NetBSD 1.4.1 on a MacIIsi w/250MB hd and 5MB ram. hehe. it works..... sort of slow but thats to be expected. I have it set up in my living room and use it to work on shell scripts while i'm watching tv. I can't run X for some reason....its too slow to bother trying tho. Its fun to play with but to actually work on it sucks. hehe
The rant is on topic because originally at the top of the linked article there was a statement from the author saying that he was pissed because his submission got rejected by Slashdot. I just checked and now that comment is gone.
Slashdot Mirror
I must disagree. The last good version of Word was 5.1 on the macintosh.
However, the best text editor is in fact BBedit followed closely by vi.
Dangit. I read your title as "How will the new license servers affect naked pictures." I read your whole post and didn't see any references to naked pictures. DAmn yoU!
I must respectfully disagree. I think Jon is much funnier than Craig. Craig did make a mistake tho by leaving the show. Does anyone watch his show after Letterman? I'd rather watch Conan if I was up that late.
I do miss the old correspondents. A. Whitney Brown and Brian Ungar were hilarious.
Henry Rollins would be pretty good as batman. He would kick some ass. And Glenn Danzig could be the villain and there would be a massive fight to the finish. Then Danzig would finally kill Rollins with his enourmous belt buckle.
Andrew
Nope, Metal Blade is on the list too. That really sucks because they have lots of cool bands, if you're into metal (Cannibal Corpse, Gwar, Six Feet Under...)
Andrew
Actually, Fat Wreck Chords and Epitaph are members of the RIAA. Go look at the list. That gets rid of a lot of cool bands right there. However, there is still Dischord (Fugazi... hell yeah).
Andrew
In iCab for the macintosh you can filter images by size and by server. If an ad gets through, just right-click on it and tell iCab to filter images of that size or from that server or both. It is VERY handy. All web browsers should have that feature.
What you forget is that this mouse was designed for Macs and Macs are designed for 1-button. You don't NEED more than one button in MacOS and lots of Mac zeal^H^H^H^H enthusiasts LIKE one button.
Personally, I use a logitech 3-button mouse because I do things that require the use of a 3-button mouse and find it to be a bit faster for certain tasks. However, if they didn't exist, I'd get along fine.
Andrew
iCab does support some javascript. Its not quite up to par yet. I usually browse with javascript off anyways.
The thing thats great about iCab is how small it is. Sure, maybe Mozilla can do all those things but when run in MacOS it needs 20MB memory and is dog slow.
iCab also has great cookie and image filtering. I never have to wait for ads (well, actually, the only ad that EVER gets through is the one for Gateway here on slashdot. Not sure how.)
My original point was that Mozilla is *way* too bloated. Mozilla can support CSS, DOM, XML but it doesn't have to be so slow and such a memory hog. We need efficieny! Sure, I have 196MB RAM but i don't want 35MB of it to be Mozilla.
Get rid of the unneeded crap!
Andrew
Can it really be that hard to write a browser?! Why do they have to put in all that extra cruft, the mail/news reader, editor? Why is the footprint so bloody huge and why does it take so long to start up?
On my Mac (I also have a Sparc and a K6 so I'm not some idiot Mac zealot) I started running iCab. It is great. The binary is less than 2MB, it can run happily in 5MB ram, its fast, doesn't crash as often as Netscape and NEVER takes down the whole computer. It supports java and its java script support is improving. It is quite usable and standards compliant.
Why can the company making iCab release a stable, fast, *usable* web browser and Netscape, with all its power can't?
Andrew
At my old job they had IE for Solaris running on UltraSparc 60's and it was slower than hell. I can't imagine how it would run on my poor little K6-2.
If they want to port it thats fine with me as long as it runs at comparable speeds to the windows version or at least faster/more reliable/less memory than Netscape. I doubt it will ever happen.
Andrew
Actually sir, you are mistaken. YDL does run on the ibook. Both linuxppc and YDL use the same kernel sources so they both support the same hardware.
I ran NetBSD on a beige G3 last year. the thing I hated most was that the Xserver at the time could not go higher than 640x480 8-bit color. I don't know if that has been resolved.
I'd also like to state that I am not linux biased. I have a Mac IIsi running netbsd and a K6 running FreeBSD.
Andrew
I've run YellowDog linux and LinuxPPC on my B&W G3. The only difference really is the installer. Personally, I prefer yellowdog because after install there were less things that needed to be fixed.
SUSE is still in beta. i tried to install it from the harddrive but it wouldn't go and when i tried to install debian it said my hardware wasn't supported. So i'm stuck w/the RedHat clones.
Andrew
I'm running NetBSD 1.4.1 on a MacIIsi w/250MB hd and 5MB ram. hehe. it works..... sort of slow but thats to be expected. I have it set up in my living room and use it to work on shell scripts while i'm watching tv. I can't run X for some reason....its too slow to bother trying tho. Its fun to play with but to actually work on it sucks.
hehe
Andrew
The rant is on topic because originally at the top of the linked article there was a statement from the author saying that he was pissed because his submission got rejected by Slashdot. I just checked and now that comment is gone.
Andrew
I think Stan Pruisner definately derserves a medal for discovering pr0n. What a wonderful discovery that has touched the lives of so many.
BloodyStupidJohnson