Nothing will fix this until some kind of RFC standard is made (probably based on XML). It would be nice, but it is not for real.
Although not an RFC standard, there is already an XML format for storing bookmarks called XBEL (XML Bookmark Exchange Language). You can find more about it here.
Tim O'Reilly played a integral part in getting the Amazon Web Services off the ground:
Jeff was intrigued, and told me a day or two later that he'd discovered that his skunkworks team already had a web services API in the works. But he says that without my presentation he "might have done something stupid like shutting the project down.
Why does Amazon Web Services use both SOAP and XML over HTTP?
We wanted to provide a platform that would both address the different needs of different people and provide an opportunity to further the debate between two popular Web services standards. Some developers like working with pure XML; others prefer SOAP. We didn't want to force people to use a protocol they weren't comfortable using.
I have an original red Photon MicroLight on my keychain and am very happy with it. I choose red as it preserves my night vision when using it in the dark.
You can find the advantages and disadvantages of all the different coloured LEDs here.
It may sound funny, but if AOL started sending out CD's like this I might just start keeping them around.
That's just stupid. AOL would never in their right mind send out CDR-ROMs. The recordable part of the CD does nothing to promote their service. Their CDs currently make it easy for people to sign up for their service. Distributing recordable CDs won't get any more people to sign up for AOL. Come on, you aren't going to sign up with them all of a sudden because their freebies suddenly became useful to you.
Yep, I often do use Google to search the MS KB when Microsoft's search tool does not cut the mustard. Unfortunately Bugzilla (well Mozilla's Bugzilla at least) doesn't allow indexing by search engines.
Although the MS Knowledge base is good a resolving lots of questions/bugs I wish it were more like Bugzilla....
Why do you wish it was more like Bugzilla? The KB is, well, a knowledge base, not a bug tracking system. I also find the MS KB far easier to search and than Bugzilla. Nonetheless searching the MS KB can still be frustrating.
Fair enough, I didn't reread the title when I viewed the article - would have helped if the full title, "Why CGI is Evil (in the context of embedded systems)" was given in the/. posting.
I know nothing about programming embedded systems, but surely you could devise and use a very basic/simple templating system in embedded devices. Could anyone out there with experience in programming embedded devices fill me in?
The first difficulty encountered when programming CGI applications is the practice of "web programming by printf."
and claims either the server-side programmer needs expertise in HTML, or blocks of HTML produced by a designed need to be copy and pasted into the C code.
Has the author never had never heard of templating systems? The issue here lies with the architecture and design of the application itself, and not the use of CGI. You surely don't write your Java servlets using out.println(), do you?
It's more than discouraging. It's prohibiting. Big difference.
No, it's not prohibiting. The license allows a maximum of ten devices to connect to a XP Pro box, more than enough connections for development and testing of a site served by IIS. If you plan to make the site accessible on the internet, then moving it to one of Microsofts server operating systems seems reasonable to me.
Note that license does not restrict the use of services that did not come with the product. It makes no restriction whatsoever on the number of devices connecting to, say, an Apache service on the machine.
"You may permit a maximum of ten (10) computers or other electronic devices (each a "Device") to connect to the Workstation Computer to utilize the services of the Product solely for File and Print services, Internet Information Services, and remote access (including connection sharing and telephony services). The ten connection maximum includes any indirect connections made through "multiplexing" or other software or hardware which pools or aggregates connections."
And the circumstances the author has in mind that is a breach of the license:
"A workstation connected to (a) an FTP server, (b) an SMB server, (c) a mail server, (d) four web servers, (e) a Palm Pilot, (f) streaming Windows Media radio, (g) a NetMeeting conference, (h) another workstation via Internet Connection Sharing, and (i) the Windows XP Activation server *grin*."
There is no issue here. The license refers to *incoming* connections from other devices to the workstation running XP Pro, not *outgoing* connections to other devices from the workstation, as the author describes.
Microsoft obviously want to discourage people from running servers from the XP Pro operating system (which is designed for workstation use) to encourage the purchase of more costlier Windows Server and Advanced Server operating systems.
Microsoft's "move" is to today replace Windows XP Service Pack 1 with a version without a JVM, and in June to also offer a version of the service pack with Sun's JVM. So far as I can tell, even in June, XP users who've already installed the service pack won't be able to get Sun's JVM from Microsoft, unless they re-install SP1 using the new version (if they're even able to do so).
Microsoft are not trying to make it difficult for users to get Sun's JVM. The article stated Service Pack 1 users will be able to get Sun's JVM as a recommended update through Windows Update. Sun's JVM would also be available in Service Pack 2.
Sure it's a nice idea, but what happens when you need to authenticate with someone else standing behind you?
They will be immediately be able to see where you clicked on the screen. Hiding the cursor as the clicking is done won't do any good either as you won't know where you are clicking!
This is why passwords are blanked out when you enter them, so somebody watching the screen won't find your password out.
We have one of these at work for biometric authentication to a portal system we develop.
I don't know how Siemens claim the the mouse has 'comfort and security', as the mouse is about as unergonomic as they come. These aren't going to take off until someone (Microsoft, Logitech...) actually starts producing a ergnomic and comfortable biometric mouse.
Get a secure camera on the system that will log the person sitting there, if it isn't you don't allow ANY login to succeed.
And why not take further advantage of the camera and lock the system if the person that is logged in moves away from the computer. When they come back to the computer it would be automatically unlocked. Of course an administrator could also sit in front of the computer and be identified in order to unlock the machine.
Sample Chapters
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Four sample chapters from the ten in the book are available in PDF format at the books website.
In order to send an e-mail to Congresswoman Tubbs-Jones, please complete this form using the Internet Explorer browser.
Why does it say 'in order to send e-mail'? If I cannot see the email address that I am sending my message to, and I am not using the program/site that I use to send and recieve email then I am clearly not sending email. Sure, it may be sent as an email message eventually from the server that receives the form submission, but this is totally hidden to me as a user.
It really should say 'In order to send a message to Congresswoman...'
If you're smart (and have the money) you wouldn't be asking Slashdot, you'd be hiring a removal firm to do it for you. They specialise in doing exactly this sort of thing.
You wouldn't ask your dentist what the best programming language is to implement your web app in, would you now?
For example, to get a more secure version of Internet Explorer, consumers must give up their freedom of speech. That's right. By clicking "I accept" you agree not to "disclose the results of any benchmark test of the.NET Framework component" unless you have written permission from Microsoft.
Huh? So? What's the issue here? Sure, clicking 'I accept' may be restricting freedom of speech, but is his girlfriend planning on running and publishing the results of benchmarking the.NET Framework? I thought this comparision of installers was from a consumers perspective
Then there is the fact that there is this infinitely better technology called paper out there. It's very high res, accepts many forms of input, can display just about anything and is cheap.
Sure, paper has its advantages, but when a medical practitioner has to fill out multiple copies of forms, using paper quickly beomes irritating and time consuming. The form has to be copied and then sent out to all the interested parties. Paper only allows the information contained on it to be physically available where the paper is located. Paper can also be easily lost. Using a computer allows processes to be simplified greatly and makes data available wherever a computer terminal is available. Doctors, nurses, administrators etc. can then spend more time on dealing on the more important part of their job - the health and wellbeing of their patients.
I agree. At work I help develop a medical applications portal, and recently have been porting the basic framework for use on an iPAQ. The screen resolution and subset of HTML supported has proved to be rather limiting, and the use of the iPAQ looks like it will only be useful for a limited range of applications in a medical environment.
Stationary computers are a much more practical solution. One of our company's clients extensively use stationary computers in their emergency department, as well as wireless equiped laptops that are moved about the department on special wheeled pedestal thingees. They find standard screen resolutions adequate for viewing X-rays, but have a few high res monitors about the place if finer detail is needed.
Slashdot Mirror
Read about the rest in Tim's weblog post.
You can find the advantages and disadvantages of all the different coloured LEDs here.
Why do you wish it was more like Bugzilla? The KB is, well, a knowledge base, not a bug tracking system. I also find the MS KB far easier to search and than Bugzilla. Nonetheless searching the MS KB can still be frustrating.
I know nothing about programming embedded systems, but surely you could devise and use a very basic/simple templating system in embedded devices. Could anyone out there with experience in programming embedded devices fill me in?
Has the author never had never heard of templating systems? The issue here lies with the architecture and design of the application itself, and not the use of CGI. You surely don't write your Java servlets using out.println(), do you?
No, it's not prohibiting. The license allows a maximum of ten devices to connect to a XP Pro box, more than enough connections for development and testing of a site served by IIS. If you plan to make the site accessible on the internet, then moving it to one of Microsofts server operating systems seems reasonable to me.
Note that license does not restrict the use of services that did not come with the product. It makes no restriction whatsoever on the number of devices connecting to, say, an Apache service on the machine.
And the circumstances the author has in mind that is a breach of the license:
There is no issue here. The license refers to *incoming* connections from other devices to the workstation running XP Pro, not *outgoing* connections to other devices from the workstation, as the author describes.
Microsoft obviously want to discourage people from running servers from the XP Pro operating system (which is designed for workstation use) to encourage the purchase of more costlier Windows Server and Advanced Server operating systems.
Microsoft are not trying to make it difficult for users to get Sun's JVM. The article stated Service Pack 1 users will be able to get Sun's JVM as a recommended update through Windows Update. Sun's JVM would also be available in Service Pack 2.
The announcement by Microsoft.
Sure it's a nice idea, but what happens when you need to authenticate with someone else standing behind you?
They will be immediately be able to see where you clicked on the screen. Hiding the cursor as the clicking is done won't do any good either as you won't know where you are clicking!
This is why passwords are blanked out when you enter them, so somebody watching the screen won't find your password out.
We have one of these at work for biometric authentication to a portal system we develop.
I don't know how Siemens claim the the mouse has 'comfort and security', as the mouse is about as unergonomic as they come. These aren't going to take off until someone (Microsoft, Logitech...) actually starts producing a ergnomic and comfortable biometric mouse.
Four sample chapters from the ten in the book are available in PDF format at the books website.
In order to send an e-mail to Congresswoman Tubbs-Jones, please complete this form using the Internet Explorer browser.
Why does it say 'in order to send e-mail'? If I cannot see the email address that I am sending my message to, and I am not using the program/site that I use to send and recieve email then I am clearly not sending email. Sure, it may be sent as an email message eventually from the server that receives the form submission, but this is totally hidden to me as a user.
It really should say 'In order to send a message to Congresswoman...'
If you're smart (and have the money) you wouldn't be asking Slashdot, you'd be hiring a removal firm to do it for you. They specialise in doing exactly this sort of thing.
You wouldn't ask your dentist what the best programming language is to implement your web app in, would you now?
For example, to get a more secure version of Internet Explorer, consumers must give up their freedom of speech. That's right. By clicking "I accept" you agree not to "disclose the results of any benchmark test of the .NET Framework component" unless you have written permission from Microsoft.
Huh? So? What's the issue here? Sure, clicking 'I accept' may be restricting freedom of speech, but is his girlfriend planning on running and publishing the results of benchmarking the .NET Framework? I thought this comparision of installers was from a consumers perspective
Sure, paper has its advantages, but when a medical practitioner has to fill out multiple copies of forms, using paper quickly beomes irritating and time consuming. The form has to be copied and then sent out to all the interested parties. Paper only allows the information contained on it to be physically available where the paper is located. Paper can also be easily lost. Using a computer allows processes to be simplified greatly and makes data available wherever a computer terminal is available. Doctors, nurses, administrators etc. can then spend more time on dealing on the more important part of their job - the health and wellbeing of their patients.
I agree. At work I help develop a medical applications portal, and recently have been porting the basic framework for use on an iPAQ. The screen resolution and subset of HTML supported has proved to be rather limiting, and the use of the iPAQ looks like it will only be useful for a limited range of applications in a medical environment.
Stationary computers are a much more practical solution. One of our company's clients extensively use stationary computers in their emergency department, as well as wireless equiped laptops that are moved about the department on special wheeled pedestal thingees. They find standard screen resolutions adequate for viewing X-rays, but have a few high res monitors about the place if finer detail is needed.