While Safari is much better than Firefox on OSX, Firefox is much better than IE on Windows. I am not sure whether this is because Firefox is actually worse on OSX, or just that Safari is worlds ahead of windows IE. I suspect a bit of both.
The right/left spectrum is entirely relative. The US Democrats are seen by many in the US as "Left Wing", however they are more right wing than the "Right Wing" parties of Australia and Canada. The "Left Wing" parties of Australia and Canada are generally more conservative than the "Right Wing" parties of North Western Europe. A few years ago, a dutch politician with extremest anti-immigration policies was assasinated because of his right wing political views. In an interview shortly before he was murdered he said he thought Australia's bi-partisan policy of putting all assylum seekers into detention centres was too extreme.
England is only considered "Socialist" when compared to extremely conservative countries such as the US. Compared to many countries in Europe, the UK's high level of privatization, and their poor welfare and public health care put it on the "right".
Finally, the Left/Right spectrum is arguably circular. Extremests on each side end up looking very similar.
> They had no hope of competing with Firefox and IE, despite the merits of their browser, so long as they charged for it while the other two were free.
I guess that is why nobody uses Windows or OSX because linux and the 'BSDs are free. Or why nobody uses Microsoft office, because Open office is free. Or why nobody uses Photoshop because the GIMP is free.
Netscape wasn't free at that stage. Microsoft gave away their browser initially because it so far behind netscape. Netscape still remained ahead in the browser wars until IE4 which was somewhat superior to NN4. At that stage, Netscape had to give away their browser.
For policy reasons, election systems in recent times have been designed to obscure who an individual voted for. It is still possible to verify a count of all of the votes however. Many elections (or at least electoral districts) are re-counted to verify the results. I believe some areas have policies to automatically recount an election if the final result is within a certain margin. In theory, an electronic voting system should not require any recounting. The danger is someone might be able to change the results in such a way that it would be impossible to independently verify the outcome.
Let me get this straight: you don't use macs because there are many mac zealots? That is like being against abortions because China enforces its one child policy through abortions.
After reading this, it is not difficult to understand why Open Source is not treated seriously. That ESR was offered a job at Microsoft is inherently interesting and amusing; his (public) reply makes him sound like a 14 year old boy trying to impress his friends with false stories of sexual prowess.
I really want an iPod nano, but I can't justify buying one until my current 3rd gen breaks. I've tried everything to break it. I've gone swimming with it, I've kicked it off the second floor onto concrete, I've even had a friend step on the screen with cowboy boots. It still runs fine.
Its the age old question of Mean or Median. With a few earning millions, it will drag the mean up, but not the median.
The median is generally accepted as being the more appropriate method to determine average income, but sometimes people use the mean to skew the figures for one reason or another.
There are so many things wrong with taxing the internet it is hard to find somewhere to start.
1. How do you assess payment? Should it be a flat fee where my grandmother who just uses the internet to check her email pays as much as someone who downloads 100GB/month of movies and music? Should it be a variable fee, so someone is charged for downloading a 2.5GB linux distribution is charged more than someone who downloads 1GB of mp3s? Not to mention a GB of MP3s gives you a lot more music than a GB of AVIs gives you video. Will you have to pay extra if you choose to purchase music from an online store like the TMBG music store? It is pretty clear that you can't just look at what kind of data is being transferred as people will just use technologies that obscure the data being transmitted. 2. How do you determine who gets paid? Should it just go to the Industry Associations? Should it go to the artists? How about unsigned artists who have some music on their website, or groups like Starship Exeter? 3. How do you apportion the money? 8 years ago, virtually nobody was swapping video, now it is as common as music. What will people be exchanging next?
It seems a lot more complicated, and potentially a lot less fair than a DRM system where people pay for what they wish to buy.
What is this guy/girl's obsessiveness with german quotes? What is wrong with the good old or tags? It is especially confusing as (s)he gets them around the wrong way, and quotes about half of the things (s)he says, leading to confusion as to what (s)he actulaly wants to be highlighted.
Are you for real? The boxing day tsunami was orders of magnitude more devastating than this. On boxing day, 310,000 people died, with no warning. Compare that to just a few thousand people dead after plenty of warning. The level of support that the US sent to that was small compared to what other countries sent. Australia, with an economy a twentieth the size of the US sent three times as much.
Other countries have send money in support. As far as other support, how would suggest countries send in fresh water? fly it over from europe? ship it from Japan?
NASA currently has two robots wandering around on Mars. They have been wildly successful, instead of working for 90 days like they were expected to, they are still going after more than 500 days. On the other hand, they have only travelled about 2 or 3 km. What has taken each of the robots a year and a half to do, could arguably be done by one person in a morning (with a break for morning tea.)
Re:Proof that first to market doesn't equal succes
on
Rio Brand Closes Doors
·
· Score: 1
Wow, you really disproved the parent's point. Rio clearly closed their doors because they couldn't compete with the already establisehd MP3man.
If you read the parent post more carefully, you will realise that the parent is referring to recording 320kbps MP3 *on the device*. This is even more retarded than recording 320kbps from a CD as the microphone on that device is unlikely to be very high quality, and even if it was, the background noise of even the HDD spinning would destroy the value of those extra bits. Even ignoring the microphone aspect of it, 320kbps is designed for full stereo. There is no chance that a device that small could record meaningful stereo without external microphones. Any decent lossless encoder would encode to smaller than 320kbps on mono 44.1kHz audio.
The main difference between laptop and desktop CPUs is laptops CPUs need to use little power, whereas desktops don't have this restriction. If a low power laptop chip that is as fast as the desktop chips, then there is no reason to not put that into a desktop. In many ways IBM did this with the G3. It was very fast, and also very low power. Essentially the same CPU could be put into both the laptops of the day and the desktops (I seem to remember that first g3 machine shipped was actually a laptop, but only by a week or so.) It seems like with the Pentium M, and these subsequent CPUs, Intel has chips that are both fast and low power. If Intel can make these low power consumption chips run as fast as the high power consumption chips then there is no reason not to put them into desktops.
I have no idea why people think that having a 50GB Bluray will have any benefit over 9 GB DVD for games. Warcraft 3 was released on one CD including movies. Doom 3 for all its faults, has a very impressive graphics is only 1.5GB. I am not a hardcore gamer, but I am unaware of any game that takes up more than 1 DVD, and I cannot imagine game content needing more than that in the next five years (Quake 3 was released about 6 years ago, and was about 500MB, Doom 3 was released this year (or so) and is three times the disk space. The only benefit to bluray is if a game developer wants to release extensive HD video content, but even if they are doing 720p, the 7GB (left on a regular DVD after the game content is stored) would be enough for 40mins of carefully encoded H264 video... and if the game requires you to sit through more than 40 minutes of video, then something is wrong.
When has Apple been frivolous with their IP? They have already sued people for distributing Tiger over BitTorrent, and that was for an OS that would only run on hardware that they had sold.
and I'll say it again: people go and install OSX on a cheap machine, realise how great it is, and then when they want a new machine, they get another cheap machine, and install OSX on that one. I can't see any reason why someone would pirate it the first time, then go out and spend extra to get an Apple machine, when can get (or build) a similar (albeit stylistically challenged) machine cheaper.
Your argument might be valid if the final intel version of OSX wasn't (as easily) hackable, so people wouldn't be able to run the final version on non-apple machines.
There were certain tags and technologies that (arguably) needed to be made or developed that netscape had to do, but there were also W3C standards that Netscape blatantly ignored. For example the CSS standard was made prior to Netscape 4, but Netscape had notoriously poor support for it, while IE had CSS support (albeit very limited) back in version 3.
While IE6's poor standards support is a limitation now, it is nothing compared to the pains that Netscape 4 put people through.
You can spin things however you want, but Apple's case against Microsoft wasn't thrown out because the court didn't acknowledge "look and feel", but rather because a contract between Apple and Microsoft essentially granted Microsoft rights to various aspects of the interface. http://home.earthlink.net/~mjohnsen/Technology/Law suits/appvsms.html Many people don't understand the concept of "look and feel" and focus purely on the appearance of the interface. If you read the article, you would have noticed the point that the Alto's interface was very difficult to use, whereas the Lisa team made usability the primary focus for their interface. While they might have looked similar (overlapping windows and desktop metaphor aside) they had a very different feel. By contrast, Microsoft took much of the "feel" from the Lisa and Macintosh ftp://ftp.cs.umd.edu/pub/hcil/Reports-Abstracts-Bi bliography/93-12html/93-12.ps
The week the last book came out, an Australian comedy newspaper ran the headline "Sirius Black Dies!" With a sub-headline "Newspaper ruins book for thousands of children"
Slashdot Mirror
That is exactly the argument that hitler would have used.
While Safari is much better than Firefox on OSX, Firefox is much better than IE on Windows. I am not sure whether this is because Firefox is actually worse on OSX, or just that Safari is worlds ahead of windows IE.
I suspect a bit of both.
A search for Web Browser" brings Mozilla at #1
I think people would be more familiar with the "web browser" term than the less accurate "internet browser" term.
The right/left spectrum is entirely relative. The US Democrats are seen by many in the US as "Left Wing", however they are more right wing than the "Right Wing" parties of Australia and Canada. The "Left Wing" parties of Australia and Canada are generally more conservative than the "Right Wing" parties of North Western Europe.
A few years ago, a dutch politician with extremest anti-immigration policies was assasinated because of his right wing political views. In an interview shortly before he was murdered he said he thought Australia's bi-partisan policy of putting all assylum seekers into detention centres was too extreme.
England is only considered "Socialist" when compared to extremely conservative countries such as the US. Compared to many countries in Europe, the UK's high level of privatization, and their poor welfare and public health care put it on the "right".
Finally, the Left/Right spectrum is arguably circular. Extremests on each side end up looking very similar.
> They had no hope of competing with Firefox and IE, despite the merits of their browser, so long as they charged for it while the other two were free.
I guess that is why nobody uses Windows or OSX because linux and the 'BSDs are free. Or why nobody uses Microsoft office, because Open office is free. Or why nobody uses Photoshop because the GIMP is free.
Netscape wasn't free at that stage. Microsoft gave away their browser initially because it so far behind netscape. Netscape still remained ahead in the browser wars until IE4 which was somewhat superior to NN4. At that stage, Netscape had to give away their browser.
For policy reasons, election systems in recent times have been designed to obscure who an individual voted for. It is still possible to verify a count of all of the votes however. Many elections (or at least electoral districts) are re-counted to verify the results. I believe some areas have policies to automatically recount an election if the final result is within a certain margin.
In theory, an electronic voting system should not require any recounting. The danger is someone might be able to change the results in such a way that it would be impossible to independently verify the outcome.
Let me get this straight: you don't use macs because there are many mac zealots? That is like being against abortions because China enforces its one child policy through abortions.
I think it is clear that the only one who takes ESR seriously is ESR.
Seriously, "I've in fact been something pretty close to your company's worst nightmare since about 1997"? Who does he think he is, google?
After reading this, it is not difficult to understand why Open Source is not treated seriously. That ESR was offered a job at Microsoft is inherently interesting and amusing; his (public) reply makes him sound like a 14 year old boy trying to impress his friends with false stories of sexual prowess.
I really want an iPod nano, but I can't justify buying one until my current 3rd gen breaks. I've tried everything to break it. I've gone swimming with it, I've kicked it off the second floor onto concrete, I've even had a friend step on the screen with cowboy boots. It still runs fine.
Its the age old question of Mean or Median. With a few earning millions, it will drag the mean up, but not the median.
The median is generally accepted as being the more appropriate method to determine average income, but sometimes people use the mean to skew the figures for one reason or another.
There are so many things wrong with taxing the internet it is hard to find somewhere to start.
1. How do you assess payment? Should it be a flat fee where my grandmother who just uses the internet to check her email pays as much as someone who downloads 100GB/month of movies and music? Should it be a variable fee, so someone is charged for downloading a 2.5GB linux distribution is charged more than someone who downloads 1GB of mp3s? Not to mention a GB of MP3s gives you a lot more music than a GB of AVIs gives you video. Will you have to pay extra if you choose to purchase music from an online store like the TMBG music store? It is pretty clear that you can't just look at what kind of data is being transferred as people will just use technologies that obscure the data being transmitted.
2. How do you determine who gets paid? Should it just go to the Industry Associations? Should it go to the artists? How about unsigned artists who have some music on their website, or groups like Starship Exeter?
3. How do you apportion the money? 8 years ago, virtually nobody was swapping video, now it is as common as music. What will people be exchanging next?
It seems a lot more complicated, and potentially a lot less fair than a DRM system where people pay for what they wish to buy.
What is this guy/girl's obsessiveness with german quotes? What is wrong with the good old or tags? It is especially confusing as (s)he gets them around the wrong way, and quotes about half of the things (s)he says, leading to confusion as to what (s)he actulaly wants to be highlighted.
Are you for real? The boxing day tsunami was orders of magnitude more devastating than this. On boxing day, 310,000 people died, with no warning. Compare that to just a few thousand people dead after plenty of warning.
The level of support that the US sent to that was small compared to what other countries sent. Australia, with an economy a twentieth the size of the US sent three times as much.
Other countries have send money in support. As far as other support, how would suggest countries send in fresh water? fly it over from europe? ship it from Japan?
NASA currently has two robots wandering around on Mars. They have been wildly successful, instead of working for 90 days like they were expected to, they are still going after more than 500 days. On the other hand, they have only travelled about 2 or 3 km. What has taken each of the robots a year and a half to do, could arguably be done by one person in a morning (with a break for morning tea.)
Wow, you really disproved the parent's point. Rio clearly closed their doors because they couldn't compete with the already establisehd MP3man.
If you read the parent post more carefully, you will realise that the parent is referring to recording 320kbps MP3 *on the device*. This is even more retarded than recording 320kbps from a CD as the microphone on that device is unlikely to be very high quality, and even if it was, the background noise of even the HDD spinning would destroy the value of those extra bits. Even ignoring the microphone aspect of it, 320kbps is designed for full stereo. There is no chance that a device that small could record meaningful stereo without external microphones. Any decent lossless encoder would encode to smaller than 320kbps on mono 44.1kHz audio.
The main difference between laptop and desktop CPUs is laptops CPUs need to use little power, whereas desktops don't have this restriction. If a low power laptop chip that is as fast as the desktop chips, then there is no reason to not put that into a desktop. In many ways IBM did this with the G3. It was very fast, and also very low power. Essentially the same CPU could be put into both the laptops of the day and the desktops (I seem to remember that first g3 machine shipped was actually a laptop, but only by a week or so.)
It seems like with the Pentium M, and these subsequent CPUs, Intel has chips that are both fast and low power. If Intel can make these low power consumption chips run as fast as the high power consumption chips then there is no reason not to put them into desktops.
I have no idea why people think that having a 50GB Bluray will have any benefit over 9 GB DVD for games. Warcraft 3 was released on one CD including movies. Doom 3 for all its faults, has a very impressive graphics is only 1.5GB. I am not a hardcore gamer, but I am unaware of any game that takes up more than 1 DVD, and I cannot imagine game content needing more than that in the next five years (Quake 3 was released about 6 years ago, and was about 500MB, Doom 3 was released this year (or so) and is three times the disk space.
The only benefit to bluray is if a game developer wants to release extensive HD video content, but even if they are doing 720p, the 7GB (left on a regular DVD after the game content is stored) would be enough for 40mins of carefully encoded H264 video... and if the game requires you to sit through more than 40 minutes of video, then something is wrong.
When has Apple been frivolous with their IP? They have already sued people for distributing Tiger over BitTorrent, and that was for an OS that would only run on hardware that they had sold.
and I'll say it again: people go and install OSX on a cheap machine, realise how great it is, and then when they want a new machine, they get another cheap machine, and install OSX on that one. I can't see any reason why someone would pirate it the first time, then go out and spend extra to get an Apple machine, when can get (or build) a similar (albeit stylistically challenged) machine cheaper.
Your argument might be valid if the final intel version of OSX wasn't (as easily) hackable, so people wouldn't be able to run the final version on non-apple machines.
There were certain tags and technologies that (arguably) needed to be made or developed that netscape had to do, but there were also W3C standards that Netscape blatantly ignored. For example the CSS standard was made prior to Netscape 4, but Netscape had notoriously poor support for it, while IE had CSS support (albeit very limited) back in version 3.
While IE6's poor standards support is a limitation now, it is nothing compared to the pains that Netscape 4 put people through.
You can spin things however you want, but Apple's case against Microsoft wasn't thrown out because the court didn't acknowledge "look and feel", but rather because a contract between Apple and Microsoft essentially granted Microsoft rights to various aspects of the interface. http://home.earthlink.net/~mjohnsen/Technology/Law suits/appvsms.htmli bliography/93-12html/93-12.ps
Many people don't understand the concept of "look and feel" and focus purely on the appearance of the interface. If you read the article, you would have noticed the point that the Alto's interface was very difficult to use, whereas the Lisa team made usability the primary focus for their interface. While they might have looked similar (overlapping windows and desktop metaphor aside) they had a very different feel. By contrast, Microsoft took much of the "feel" from the Lisa and Macintosh ftp://ftp.cs.umd.edu/pub/hcil/Reports-Abstracts-B
The week the last book came out, an Australian comedy newspaper ran the headline "Sirius Black Dies!" With a sub-headline "Newspaper ruins book for thousands of children"