Remember that IE isn't an app as much as a COM object. If you use Yahoo Messenger, AOL, or explorer, etc., you use IE.
Re:Microsoft says: Don't click URLs anymore...
on
Another Serious MSIE Hole
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This coming from the same company that broke the attachment mechanism because of pathetically stupid design decisions and instead of fixing their bad design blamed the users for actually doing what attachments were designed for, yes I do believe this.
I can click attachments without fear in Mozilla, or pretty much any UNIX mailer. Attachments weren't broken until OutLook broke them.
I highly doubt Miller, Bud, etc make the highest quality beers out there;). AAAAAAIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEE now I'm gonna have nightmares!!! The Czech beer called Budweiser in the Czech Republic (called Czechvar elsewhere) is actually pretty good though.
at a beer brewers conference, the representatives for Anheiser Busch, Cerveceria Modelo, and Guinness got together at a bar. They all step up to the bar, and the bartender asks what they wanted. Bartender: so what do you guys want? Busch Guy: Give me the king of beers, give me a Budweiser. Modelo Guy: I want la cerveza mas fina, give me a Corona. Guinness guy looks at them both.. Guinness Guy: I'll have a water please. Both of the other guys look at him, wondering... Busch Guy: Why didn't you get a Guinness? Guinness Guy: Well, if you guy's weren't having beer, I'm not gonna be the only one.
Re:What kind of crack are they smoking?
on
FreeBSD 5.2 Review
·
· Score: 1
The real question shouldn't be "how many are command line applications" but does "is there an app that pretty much does what i need". If it's command line stuff, then the above statement (if true) can be read as a good thing. If you assume "desktop" to mean gui apps (valid for most people, but not for me actually) you should ask does FreeBSD offer the Office Apps that you need. That answer also is yes. GNOME, OpenOffice, Mozilla, and various mailers are in ports. If you mean email to mean 100% Outlook/Exchange compatibility, then that I don't know. The only thing I know of to support Exchange protocol (and I think specifically Exchange 2003) is Ximian Evolution 2, which is not in ports yet.
95% of my "desktop applications" are Outlook (corporate mandate, but I like Outlook 2003), Mozilla, cugwin bash and cygwin nedit. If I were to run freeBSD I could install 2 ports (nedit, Mozilla) and have a very usable desktop.
Re:It's official: New Hampshire voters confirm:
on
FreeBSD 5.2 Review
·
· Score: 1
Classic... there should be a "yeah it's a troll, but it made me laugh" Mod.
Okay, so my question is, if Linux is such a superior desktop, why doesn't it have a greater marketshare? This is a faulty argument. Quality does not have a 100% correlate to marketshare, and often marketshare has a very small correlation to quality. A 100% correlation assumes a market with zero friction everywhere. That market does not, and can not, exist. The current OS landscape (partly technical reasons, partly others) is very very far away from a zero friction marketplace.
The Blaster work exploited a hole in the kernel proper. Some previous fun things like having default shares enabled in the default install, now fixed) showed that Windows has issues with fundamentals. If you decide to do something for the marketing droids like embed a web broswer into the OS and make it's pieces part of the shell, then in my opinion any errors in your browser become OS errors, and msHTML component has been littered with them. As far as spyware goes, some spyware gets installed through holes in the browser. I love when I try to get to a site in Mozilla and I see some moron try to auto-install something into "my IE". Most viruses are run as.vbs files, which were run by MS script host, which is part of the OS.
As far as installing the OS from a clean install, I remember one post where a guy installed Windows clean and he was rooted (Administrator'ed?) before he could get to windowsupdate. This is unverified by me of course, but I'm not suprised.
Neither the core of Windows nor the core of (classic) UNIX was designed to be used in a hostile network. OpenBSD, and other various Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc., various hardening projects has done a large contribution to retrofit some of this to the UNIXes. UNIX wins the viral fight not so much because of core kernel design, but because they don't make as many pathetically stupid decsions regarding the userland stuff.
Funny joke, but I thought in the movie he was an eastern tribe? The kid tried to give him a teepee (plains indian, probably more sioux than apache) but then was told to give him tools to make an eastern style longhouse. Iroquois?
Yes, anyone who argues abnout your joke is a pedantic geek, thank you. =)
For anyone interested in GPLv3. It was supposed to be ready for early 2003, I heard they're waiting for the HURD to hit 1.0 so it can be the first piece of software licenced with GPLv3, but that was just the underpants GNOMEs talking, or the underpants KDesktop talking.. or....
The quote says he did the first work on the opensource kernel [known as Linux], not he did the first work on opensource. If anything, UCB did, and the derivatives of their work still exist, including in Linux and OpenUNIX/UnixWare/Whatever they're calling it now. RMS has had many contributions to the FreSource/OpenSource movement/whatever you're calling it these days, but he isn't the only/first person to do it unless you essentially follow his definition of "OpenSource is what I say it is".
I think you are misunderstanding why Dell is putting this on the machine. The point of FreeDOS is to be the most useless OS they can put on.
Dell can't ship a bare bones machine for MS site licensed, or Linux/BSD/Plan 9/whatever users. They need to put an OS on the machine, to avoid the MS tax. I love the fact that MS essentially says "if you don't have an OS on it, you MUST be pirating MS Windows, like what else would you put there?" yet then says they don't have a monopoly. Anyway, they have to put something on, but does not want to incurr support costs on this OS, so they make it the simplest OS that will actually boot, the one least likely for people to find useful (though it does have its uses) and most likely just to be a placefiller until someone wipes it clean. If they put something useful on it, say FreeBSD or Linux, they'd incurr support costs, have to deal with driver issues, whatever. They might even be violating some licensing issue with MS, we don't know. By including FreeDOS they're essentially saying "I'm wiping my hands of the OS issue as cleanly as my agreement with MS will allow".
GM X-Body you mean, and it really was just the 1980 models that were trash. I actually was unlucky enough to have an Olds Omega, yeesh. I called it the Lawnmower, because it was a bitch to push.
Anyone else besides me find it ironic to talk about GNU/{K}FreeBSD when RMS hated the (old) BSD license because of the "obnoxious advertising clause?"
"Yeah, I hated that old obnoxious advertising clause, made binaries clunky" I wrote in an email on my Apache/mod_perl/PostgreSQL/CyrusIMAPD/XFree86/GNOM E/glibc/GNU/KFreeBSD machine....
Like the way FreeBSD is actually shipping an OS, whereas the HURD....
To be honest, I've always seen the whole GNU/*BSD thing as more of an ego stroke, stick it to those evil Linux guys thing than anything. It seems to want to show that the tools are more important than the kernel, and even more subtle that Linux somehow stole the thunder from GNU and left the FSF in the dust, at least as far as mindshare goes. Seems petty, a waste. The HURD is way cool, and the radical architecture change actually solves a lot of problems. But Usability is always the deciding factor, and the much simpler, less flexible, but much more usable Linux is more used. Deal with it and don't get into petty flame wars over it.
The HURD code to access disks uses mmap() calls, so is currently limited on 32 bit architecture to 2GB disks. Every partition has to be less than 2GB, which is a pain in the ass for todays >100GB drives.
I like the tagline on the magazine.. "the battle for software supremacy". So that means SCO UNIX is actually better than osmehting, woohoo!! Show me the nice shiny 8 processor machine I can run SCO UNIX on, or the Itanium port...
Yes (we had SuSE on our p690), but before it just ran PowerPC linux in 32 bit mode. This runs it in full 64 bit POWER crunches Itanium to dust mode. This is a new enhancement.
This is running on real POWER chips, full 64 bit, multiple core on one die chips. This is not the (scaled down, subset of POWER) PowerPC chips. I don't think POWER Linux would not run on a PowerPC (article doesn't say), though it has a small chance of being possible; the G5 is closer to POWER architecture than any previous incarnation of PowerPC, but I still doubt it.
That said, PowerPC Linux would run just fine. In fact PowerPC Linux already runs on the p6xx series, just as a 32 bit Linux, not full 64 bit. You can already run PowerPC linux on that blade/XServe. The situation gets better, IBMs SOI technology allowed a huge power cut going for their G5s moving to 90mm. Run faster, less electricity and cooler than previous chips. Life is good again.
Anyone remember that they released obfuscated code? That their obfuscation technique (using symbol font) was laughable, but effort had to be done to read the slides and convert to Courier or whatever. Anyone who'd assume that "released" means "released in a form that could be easily read and analyzed" could call that a misstatement as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember that IE isn't an app as much as a COM object. If you use Yahoo Messenger, AOL, or explorer, etc., you use IE.
This coming from the same company that broke the attachment mechanism because of pathetically stupid design decisions and instead of fixing their bad design blamed the users for actually doing what attachments were designed for, yes I do believe this.
I can click attachments without fear in Mozilla, or pretty much any UNIX mailer. Attachments weren't broken until OutLook broke them.
I highly doubt Miller, Bud, etc make the highest quality beers out there ;) .
AAAAAAIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEE now I'm gonna have nightmares!!! The Czech beer called Budweiser in the Czech Republic (called Czechvar elsewhere) is actually pretty good though.
at a beer brewers conference, the representatives for Anheiser Busch, Cerveceria Modelo, and Guinness got together at a bar. They all step up to the bar, and the bartender asks what they wanted.
Bartender: so what do you guys want?
Busch Guy: Give me the king of beers, give me a Budweiser.
Modelo Guy: I want la cerveza mas fina, give me a Corona.
Guinness guy looks at them both..
Guinness Guy: I'll have a water please.
Both of the other guys look at him, wondering...
Busch Guy: Why didn't you get a Guinness?
Guinness Guy: Well, if you guy's weren't having beer, I'm not gonna be the only one.
The real question shouldn't be "how many are command line applications" but does "is there an app that pretty much does what i need". If it's command line stuff, then the above statement (if true) can be read as a good thing. If you assume "desktop" to mean gui apps (valid for most people, but not for me actually) you should ask does FreeBSD offer the Office Apps that you need. That answer also is yes. GNOME, OpenOffice, Mozilla, and various mailers are in ports. If you mean email to mean 100% Outlook/Exchange compatibility, then that I don't know. The only thing I know of to support Exchange protocol (and I think specifically Exchange 2003) is Ximian Evolution 2, which is not in ports yet.
95% of my "desktop applications" are Outlook (corporate mandate, but I like Outlook 2003), Mozilla, cugwin bash and cygwin nedit. If I were to run freeBSD I could install 2 ports (nedit, Mozilla) and have a very usable desktop.
Classic... there should be a "yeah it's a troll, but it made me laugh" Mod.
Okay, so my question is, if Linux is such a superior desktop, why doesn't it have a greater marketshare?
This is a faulty argument. Quality does not have a 100% correlate to marketshare, and often marketshare has a very small correlation to quality. A 100% correlation assumes a market with zero friction everywhere. That market does not, and can not, exist. The current OS landscape (partly technical reasons, partly others) is very very far away from a zero friction marketplace.
The Blaster work exploited a hole in the kernel proper. Some previous fun things like having default shares enabled in the default install, now fixed) showed that Windows has issues with fundamentals. If you decide to do something for the marketing droids like embed a web broswer into the OS and make it's pieces part of the shell, then in my opinion any errors in your browser become OS errors, and msHTML component has been littered with them. As far as spyware goes, some spyware gets installed through holes in the browser. I love when I try to get to a site in Mozilla and I see some moron try to auto-install something into "my IE". Most viruses are run as .vbs files, which were run by MS script host, which is part of the OS.
As far as installing the OS from a clean install, I remember one post where a guy installed Windows clean and he was rooted (Administrator'ed?) before he could get to windowsupdate. This is unverified by me of course, but I'm not suprised.
Neither the core of Windows nor the core of (classic) UNIX was designed to be used in a hostile network. OpenBSD, and other various Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc., various hardening projects has done a large contribution to retrofit some of this to the UNIXes. UNIX wins the viral fight not so much because of core kernel design, but because they don't make as many pathetically stupid decsions regarding the userland stuff.
Funny joke, but I thought in the movie he was an eastern tribe? The kid tried to give him a teepee (plains indian, probably more sioux than apache) but then was told to give him tools to make an eastern style longhouse. Iroquois?
Yes, anyone who argues abnout your joke is a pedantic geek, thank you. =)
For anyone interested in GPLv3. It was supposed to be ready for early 2003,
I heard they're waiting for the HURD to hit 1.0 so it can be the first piece of software licenced with GPLv3, but that was just the underpants GNOMEs talking, or the underpants KDesktop talking.. or....
Shouldn't this be a semi-colon? Am I the only one that wanted to type about:people into Mozilla?
The quote says he did the first work on the opensource kernel [known as Linux], not he did the first work on opensource. If anything, UCB did, and the derivatives of their work still exist, including in Linux and OpenUNIX/UnixWare/Whatever they're calling it now. RMS has had many contributions to the FreSource/OpenSource movement/whatever you're calling it these days, but he isn't the only/first person to do it unless you essentially follow his definition of "OpenSource is what I say it is".
I think you are misunderstanding why Dell is putting this on the machine. The point of FreeDOS is to be the most useless OS they can put on.
Dell can't ship a bare bones machine for MS site licensed, or Linux/BSD/Plan 9/whatever users. They need to put an OS on the machine, to avoid the MS tax. I love the fact that MS essentially says "if you don't have an OS on it, you MUST be pirating MS Windows, like what else would you put there?" yet then says they don't have a monopoly. Anyway, they have to put something on, but does not want to incurr support costs on this OS, so they make it the simplest OS that will actually boot, the one least likely for people to find useful (though it does have its uses) and most likely just to be a placefiller until someone wipes it clean. If they put something useful on it, say FreeBSD or Linux, they'd incurr support costs, have to deal with driver issues, whatever. They might even be violating some licensing issue with MS, we don't know. By including FreeDOS they're essentially saying "I'm wiping my hands of the OS issue as cleanly as my agreement with MS will allow".
GM X-Body you mean, and it really was just the 1980 models that were trash. I actually was unlucky enough to have an Olds Omega, yeesh. I called it the Lawnmower, because it was a bitch to push.
Thanks, but notice I said old BSD license.
Me: Well, I used to have a lot, I mean I used to LOVE Armani Exchange, but now I'm moving more towards the Kenneth Cole thing.
From guy who thinks AIX every time he sees an Armani logo on a T-Shirt.
Anyone else besides me find it ironic to talk about GNU/{K}FreeBSD when RMS hated the (old) BSD license because of the "obnoxious advertising clause?"
M E/glibc/GNU/KFreeBSD machine....
"Yeah, I hated that old obnoxious advertising clause, made binaries clunky" I wrote in an email on my Apache/mod_perl/PostgreSQL/CyrusIMAPD/XFree86/GNO
Like the way GNU/Hurd is a hurd-based GNU OS
Like the way FreeBSD is actually shipping an OS, whereas the HURD....
To be honest, I've always seen the whole GNU/*BSD thing as more of an ego stroke, stick it to those evil Linux guys thing than anything. It seems to want to show that the tools are more important than the kernel, and even more subtle that Linux somehow stole the thunder from GNU and left the FSF in the dust, at least as far as mindshare goes. Seems petty, a waste. The HURD is way cool, and the radical architecture change actually solves a lot of problems. But Usability is always the deciding factor, and the much simpler, less flexible, but much more usable Linux is more used. Deal with it and don't get into petty flame wars over it.
SCO: hey, whre are you guys goin? You know I've just got this rusted out AMC Gremlin... can you give me some gas money please? GUYS!!!
seven U.S. Supreme Court justices who believe that 'the motive of profit is the engine that ensures the progress of science,'"
Last I checked, there were 9. Is he being stupid, or is there some Supreme Court decision he's talking about where the justices ruled 7-2?
The HURD code to access disks uses mmap() calls, so is currently limited on 32 bit architecture to 2GB disks. Every partition has to be less than 2GB, which is a pain in the ass for todays >100GB drives.
Boies did win against Microsoft. New president, bends over backwards to kiss business ass, cuts Boies off at the knees.
I like the tagline on the magazine.. "the battle for software supremacy". So that means SCO UNIX is actually better than osmehting, woohoo!! Show me the nice shiny 8 processor machine I can run SCO UNIX on, or the Itanium port...
Yes (we had SuSE on our p690), but before it just ran PowerPC linux in 32 bit mode. This runs it in full 64 bit POWER crunches Itanium to dust mode. This is a new enhancement.
This is running on real POWER chips, full 64 bit, multiple core on one die chips. This is not the (scaled down, subset of POWER) PowerPC chips. I don't think POWER Linux would not run on a PowerPC (article doesn't say), though it has a small chance of being possible; the G5 is closer to POWER architecture than any previous incarnation of PowerPC, but I still doubt it.
That said, PowerPC Linux would run just fine. In fact PowerPC Linux already runs on the p6xx series, just as a 32 bit Linux, not full 64 bit. You can already run PowerPC linux on that blade/XServe. The situation gets better, IBMs SOI technology allowed a huge power cut going for their G5s moving to 90mm. Run faster, less electricity and cooler than previous chips. Life is good again.
Anyone remember that they released obfuscated code? That their obfuscation technique (using symbol font) was laughable, but effort had to be done to read the slides and convert to Courier or whatever. Anyone who'd assume that "released" means "released in a form that could be easily read and analyzed" could call that a misstatement as well.