There are several widgets on the address bar, none of which change in layout or behavior depending on which tab you're on, and only one of which changes its contents... and they're ALL "part of the tab"? Give mea break.
If you want to put your tabs somewhere weird, be my guest, but not giving me an option to put it back is a complete deal-killer for me. It drives me crazy. I quit using Opera when they started doing that, and I'm not going to bother even looking at Chrome until they fix it.
Let me correct what, in retrospect, is probably going to prove to be unfortunate wording.
I predict that some slashtard is going to read "once I've downloaded a file, just effing open it" to mean that I want to turn on the stupid "open safe files" without a dialog. I should have written "once I've downloaded a file, just let me effing open it without whining at me". That clear?
I hope the slashtards bother to read this reply before posting. I suspect some won't.
Apple used to steer clear of throwing up unnecessary warning dialogs, but since they screwed up Safari's security with "open safe files after downloading" they don't seem to have figured out that they don't NEED to keep bugging people with warnings. They've turned "open safe files" off by default. They don't need to keep quarantining downloaded files any more.
CoreTypes
CVE-ID: CVE-2009-1727
Available for: Mac OS X v10.5 through v10.5.7, Mac OS X Server v10.5 through v10.5.7
Impact: Users are not warned before opening certain potentially unsafe content types
Description: This update extends the system's list of content types that will be flagged as potentially unsafe under certain circumstances, such as when they are downloaded from a web page. While these content types are not automatically launched, if manually opened they could lead to the execution of a malicious JavaScript payload. This update improves the system's ability to notify users before handling content types used by Safari. Credit to Brian Mastenbrook, and Clint Ruoho of Laconic Security for reporting this issue.
For a while you could override the system's list of potentially unsafe content types and say "once I've downloaded a file, just effing open it", but that seems to have been broken. As a workaround I've got a folder action that goes through Downloads and removes the comp.apple.quarantine attribute when it finds it, but Finder steals focus from the running application when it triggers so it's a pain in the neck.
Where's the "I'm a bleeding adult, Apple, and I don't want to be part of your Pavlovian experiment in training people to click 'infect me now'" button?
I think 3 years between releases of the desktop OS allows for a major revision number
Took them three years to paper over enough of the screw-ups in Vista to make a new release, but they still didn't increase the major revision number in the kernel.
Don't argue with me, argue with Microsoft. Tell them to release Windows Seven as NT 7.0 instead of NT 6.1.
Why does a document suite need a mail program? It's not like there's not forty zillion perfectly good mail programs out there, so why should they waste resources creating another one?
You might as well complain that it doesn't include a flight simulator.
I don't care if you call it a toolbar or a ribbon or a wakalix, so long as you leave the goddam menu alone. The menu bar isn't perfect, god knows, I'd rather have it show up on a right click on the title bar or something instead of taking up space all the bloody time, but replacing it with something that takes up more space and is less discoverable and explorable is just effing goofy.
So long as the toolbar/ribbon/mugwump is optional, go ahead and ape Orifice's new thingobar instead of their old thingobar. Just don't pretend it's a replacement for the main window menus.
Win7 x64 RTM, unlike Vista, won't annoy you right out of the box.
What differences are there in Seven that will make it less annoying than Vista?
The only UI changes I've seen described are the larger task bar and the elimination of the classic menu, both of which will annoy me.
So what makes it less annoying?
It's ironic that Apple has been reducing the garish carp in the user interface for the last four or five years. Leopard's UI reminds me more of the late '90s, with dull gray Platinum/Windows 9x colors.
Windows 9x was a completely different development line. Microsoft's version numbering for NT tells the real story... Windows XP is "Windows 2000 R2", and Windows 7 is "Windows Vista R2".
Windows NT 3.1 Windows NT 3.5 Windows NT 3.51 Windows NT 4.0 Windows 2000, or Windows Server 2000, is NT 5.0 Windows XP is NT 5.1 Windows XP 64-bit, or Windows Server 2003, is NT 5.2 Windows Vista, or Windows Server 2008, is NT 6.0 Windows 7, or Windows Server 2008 R2, is NT 6.1
No, if it was "quite a lot like XP" it would be faster than Vista in all benchmarks, it wouldn't have tilt switches and encrypted communication between drivers and all the other MPAA/RIAA fetishware lagging the kernel, and it would run well in less than half a gig of RAM.
When you "opt-out", your browser receives a cookie (isn't that nice) that tells them that you don't want the search page. It will still use their broken DNS server's non-NX response, but it will show a 'Domain Not Found' mock-up page that they (I surmise) tailor to your browser-agent string....is just ****ing unacceptable. That's not ****ing opting out.
As glasses these will cost a bomb, and won't be covered by insurance for years.
As a lens slipped inside the glasses, they could be made more cheaply and sold OTC at Walgreens... and almost certainly end up making far more money by selling to a much larger market. And I'm sure they've got the patents locked up so nobody's going to be undercutting them with slip-ons.
Encrypting the drive... in software, mind, not in the drive's firmware... is like locking the front door. It's simple, safe, works for all doors, and is unlikely to break down and kill someone accidentally.
Putting a password on the drive is like leaving the door unlocked and booby-trapped.
Intel says the data corruption problem occurs only if a user sets up a BIOS password on the 34-nanometer SSD, then disables or changes the password and reboots the computer.
What does this mean? The flash drive has a password lockout? If so:
(1) a password lockout on a drive is daft, you want to encrypt the drive or not worry about it.
(2) flash drives trashing themselves irretreivably when you reboot after enabling passwords? I've seen that before, on "secure" thumb drives. I won't have anything to do wit that kind of hardwarelockout or encryption after that.
Slashdot Mirror
You got a spare stylus? I lost the stylus for my Newt in a move.
Try reading it outside in bright, direct sunlight (ie the beach).
Works fine, it's got a transflective display like just about every color PDA since around 2000.
It's a Sony Clie SJ22.
Yes, I know it's like six years old.
Yes, I know it's only 320x320.
Don't care. It works better as an eBook reader than anything bigger could, because it's small enough I can take it anywhere.
Plus it plays Alchemy and Bejeweled and Collapse and Seven Seas, and holds all my names and addresses and magic numbers.
And I can use it as an IR remote to freak people out in bars by surreptitiously turning the TV off and on.
Do that on your Kindle.
You can't understand that some people might see things differently than you?
Sure. That's why the position of the tabs should be an option.
As I already pointed out.
I just did this test on Bing, and the first page was all howtos. The first few hits were identical for Bing and Google.
You know, if Microsoft is all about making Bing's results match Google's, why not just use Google and avoid the middleman?
Example of Google doing this?
There are several widgets on the address bar, none of which change in layout or behavior depending on which tab you're on, and only one of which changes its contents... and they're ALL "part of the tab"? Give mea break.
If you want to put your tabs somewhere weird, be my guest, but not giving me an option to put it back is a complete deal-killer for me. It drives me crazy. I quit using Opera when they started doing that, and I'm not going to bother even looking at Chrome until they fix it.
How do you define "wrong"?
Tabs go above the content that is part of the tab.
The address bar is not part of the tab.
Fewer blogs linking to Fox News can only be good for the Internet.
Let me correct what, in retrospect, is probably going to prove to be unfortunate wording.
I predict that some slashtard is going to read "once I've downloaded a file, just effing open it" to mean that I want to turn on the stupid "open safe files" without a dialog. I should have written "once I've downloaded a file, just let me effing open it without whining at me". That clear?
I hope the slashtards bother to read this reply before posting. I suspect some won't.
Apple used to steer clear of throwing up unnecessary warning dialogs, but since they screwed up Safari's security with "open safe files after downloading" they don't seem to have figured out that they don't NEED to keep bugging people with warnings. They've turned "open safe files" off by default. They don't need to keep quarantining downloaded files any more.
For a while you could override the system's list of potentially unsafe content types and say "once I've downloaded a file, just effing open it", but that seems to have been broken. As a workaround I've got a folder action that goes through Downloads and removes the comp.apple.quarantine attribute when it finds it, but Finder steals focus from the running application when it triggers so it's a pain in the neck.
Where's the "I'm a bleeding adult, Apple, and I don't want to be part of your Pavlovian experiment in training people to click 'infect me now'" button?
Or are they still putting them in the wrong place?
I think 3 years between releases of the desktop OS allows for a major revision number
Took them three years to paper over enough of the screw-ups in Vista to make a new release, but they still didn't increase the major revision number in the kernel.
Don't argue with me, argue with Microsoft. Tell them to release Windows Seven as NT 7.0 instead of NT 6.1.
You win an Easter Egg.
Why does a document suite need a mail program? It's not like there's not forty zillion perfectly good mail programs out there, so why should they waste resources creating another one?
You might as well complain that it doesn't include a flight simulator.
I don't care if you call it a toolbar or a ribbon or a wakalix, so long as you leave the goddam menu alone. The menu bar isn't perfect, god knows, I'd rather have it show up on a right click on the title bar or something instead of taking up space all the bloody time, but replacing it with something that takes up more space and is less discoverable and explorable is just effing goofy.
So long as the toolbar/ribbon/mugwump is optional, go ahead and ape Orifice's new thingobar instead of their old thingobar. Just don't pretend it's a replacement for the main window menus.
Win7 x64 RTM, unlike Vista, won't annoy you right out of the box.
What differences are there in Seven that will make it less annoying than Vista?
The only UI changes I've seen described are the larger task bar and the elimination of the classic menu, both of which will annoy me.
So what makes it less annoying?
It's ironic that Apple has been reducing the garish carp in the user interface for the last four or five years. Leopard's UI reminds me more of the late '90s, with dull gray Platinum/Windows 9x colors.
Windows 9x was a completely different development line. Microsoft's version numbering for NT tells the real story... Windows XP is "Windows 2000 R2", and Windows 7 is "Windows Vista R2".
Windows NT 3.1
Windows NT 3.5
Windows NT 3.51
Windows NT 4.0
Windows 2000, or Windows Server 2000, is NT 5.0
Windows XP is NT 5.1
Windows XP 64-bit, or Windows Server 2003, is NT 5.2
Windows Vista, or Windows Server 2008, is NT 6.0
Windows 7, or Windows Server 2008 R2, is NT 6.1
It's slower than XP for everything but the critical "shut down" benchmark.
No, I'm not making this up. That's straight from the article.
Windows 7 is Vista R2.
The server version even makes that explicit. Vista's server version is Windows 2008. Seven's server version is Windows 2008 R2.
No, if it was "quite a lot like XP" it would be faster than Vista in all benchmarks, it wouldn't have tilt switches and encrypted communication between drivers and all the other MPAA/RIAA fetishware lagging the kernel, and it would run well in less than half a gig of RAM.
After the Japanese word Karoshi.
This...
When you "opt-out", your browser receives a cookie (isn't that nice) that tells them that you don't want the search page. It will still use their broken DNS server's non-NX response, but it will show a 'Domain Not Found' mock-up page that they (I surmise) tailor to your browser-agent string. ...is just ****ing unacceptable. That's not ****ing opting out.
As glasses these will cost a bomb, and won't be covered by insurance for years.
As a lens slipped inside the glasses, they could be made more cheaply and sold OTC at Walgreens... and almost certainly end up making far more money by selling to a much larger market. And I'm sure they've got the patents locked up so nobody's going to be undercutting them with slip-ons.
You have things backwards.
Encrypting the drive ... in software, mind, not in the drive's firmware ... is like locking the front door. It's simple, safe, works for all doors, and is unlikely to break down and kill someone accidentally.
Putting a password on the drive is like leaving the door unlocked and booby-trapped.
Intel says the data corruption problem occurs only if a user sets up a BIOS password on the 34-nanometer SSD, then disables or changes the password and reboots the computer.
What does this mean? The flash drive has a password lockout? If so:
(1) a password lockout on a drive is daft, you want to encrypt the drive or not worry about it.
(2) flash drives trashing themselves irretreivably when you reboot after enabling passwords? I've seen that before, on "secure" thumb drives. I won't have anything to do wit that kind of hardwarelockout or encryption after that.