What more can I say? This has been requested and brought up for *years*. I really don't get why it's so hard to do, especially considering something that there's already indentation and structure support for lists. I'm not an OOO hacker, but this doesn't seem like something that has a huge technical hurdle preventing it from being done.
Maybe I missed it - there was no mention in the articles listed.
Wow - my vaio developed keyboard problems after 2.5 years and this is probably why. Specifically, the problem I have is that the numeric keypad values suddenly become the default, so instead of getting "o" when I hit the "o" key, I get "6", and so on. Holding the blue 'fn' key and hitting 'o' gets me 'o', but that sucks. I'd forgotten why I quit using that laptop until I pulled it out the other day to use for testing.
Yes, it's like that. However, I find that it's *horribly* slow, and I wanted an option to turn it back to just scale text. If they can't get it right (read: fast) there's no point, because it now makes a useful feature - making small text bigger - near useless because it slows everything *way* down. I don't think it's "zooming" so much as "resizing". Can't quite explain the difference, but I think there's a distinction to be made there.
PHP is a language, ASP.NET is a framework (you can use different languages inside of it).
The question to ask is "Have any PHP frameworks introduced or adopted concepts like 'Master Pages'?".
Short answer is that I don't know. However, you'd need to look at things like symfony, codeigniter, cakephp, zendframework, and others. My guess is that no, those frameworks don't have any concepts like 'Master Pages', but I'm not an expert in those frameworks.
This is not to say that this will hold for every author--public service broadcasters can't be expected to employ every content creator--but DA is a fine example of exactly how you can make money by giving stuff away for free.
Where exactly was the 'free' in this? The BBC is gov't run, funded by taxes. Maybe not a direct radio license in this case, but it collects money from people, hired a guy to write something, then gave the original people something back in return: the work it commissioned and paid for with the money it collected from the original population. I'm not sure I see anything 'free' here.
Imagine if patents worked that way and Edison decided to rest on he laurels after the phonograph. There would be no motion picture camera, no light bulb, and no electric grid.
Do you really think what motivated Edison's creations was solely a profit motive? That had there been a stronger patent system in place he'd just have said 'screw it, I'll just collect money on this until I die!'? Most of the people we take potshots in these discussions - the big household names of invention and creation - are doing it because it's what they're driven to do. Usually that drive causes practice/study which leads to continued successes in their field of creation/invention. Most of these people would have been writing books/songs, creating inventions and what not regardless of copyright and patent laws.
There's a tape of early Beatles (well, Quarrymen) - second public performance, IIRC - with "Baby let's play house" and "Puttin' on the style". I've heard this somewhere before, but the sound quality is quite horrible. Perhaps this same technique could be used to restore it to something more listenable? What was odd is that, when listening, even though it was quite hissy and hard to hear all the words, Lennon's voice was still recognizable and distinct. Not all the time, but certain sections really jumped out as his voice.
This is the Bob Molyneux tape I'm talking about, and it appears part of it is on youtube now - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ourclBYzuS0. My memory wasn't as good as I thought - there's more crowd noise than anything else. Not sure how easy it would be to remove this and keep the original music and singing.
If you're at all interested in Groovy or Grails, see Scott in person. His writing is good, but his speaking is better (obviously imo). He exudes an enthusiasm for and mastery of the subject which is lacking in many speakers in the tech circuit these days.
If Christianity is *all* about the teachings of Jesus, why bother having the Old Testament in a book used by pretty much ever Christian church on the planet? Christianity bases its teaching on the entire Bible, as replete with contradictions as those teachings may end up being.
Leviticus 20 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=3&chapter=20&version=31 - lot of death penalties in there for things we would not kill someone for today. It's Old Testament, so we don't have to follow it, right? New order after Jesus' death, yadda yadda, right? Then why preach the "Ten Commandments" as a cornerstone of Christianity? They are OT as well. What parts of the OT do we follow, and why?
Numbers 15 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=4&chapter=15&version=31 - some guy working on the Sabbath - gathering sticks (presumably for fire for his family?). He must be stoned to death. So the group did. GOD'S WORD said that anyone working on the Sabbath must be stoned to death. But we don't do that today. Many Jews don't work on the Sabbath because of this commandment, but don't stone each other if the rule is broken.
Why should people get to play fast and loose with the Bible - GOD'S HOLY WORD? Either follow it or don't.
Defining Christianity as "following beliefs and teachings as laid out by Jesus Christ" is intellectually dishonest considering the existence and continued following of the Old Testament.
Why single out one specific 'religion'? I saw the Tom Cruise interview video last week - it really didn't seem all that fundamentally different from listening to an evangelical Christian. Different terms were used, but the mindset was mostly the same. Watch Jesus Camp if you haven't already. Not much difference between the main camp director's mindset and Tom Cruise's.
I'm planning on trying it out in the next week. Visit http://www.kimsal.com/ to read a review if/when I get to it.
Also, I agree, it may not take market share away, at least for now, but if the underpinning is good, it may be a good base to build similar BD/P functionality on top of.
While it doesn't seem fossology is addressing exactly the same problem space, I can see a project like this taking some marketshare away from commercial products like BlackDuck's protexIP and Palamida ipAmplifier. I work in a field where this would be a very useful tool, and have been wanting to build something like this ourselves and release as an open source project. The issue has always been determining a cost-effective way of keeping the indexes up to date. But rather than scanning code and looking for direct violations, this approach turns that on its head a bit and scans for licenses. This is more a forensic tool than something which can detect all types of violations - if I just took part of a GPL file and placed it in a BSD project (or my own project, for example), it doesn't seem fossology would be able to make that determination. At least, I didn't see that from the video I watched. In any event though, this is a welcome tool for people looking to quickly get a handle on what's in their code. Glad to see it out there.
I've noticed a love affair with voice controlled phone systems recently, with some companies getting rid of the 'press 1, press 2' and moving totally to 'Please tell us what you're calling about'. Tellme.com is mostly to blame for this proliferation I think, but someone else makes the final call to get rid of the numbers altogether. Not a good move, imo.
Anyway, this gets me to privacy stuff. As computers try to understand us more, we'll need to interact in a more 'human' fashion - talking more, or doing things that would attract the attention of other humans (and also the computers). It's late, and I'm rambling here a bit, but remember how voice-controlled computers were going to take over a few years back? Everyone was just going to be talking to their computers to get stuff done. In reality, that would be a complete disaster in office environments, as there's generally too much noise already. Replacing all the typing you hear with voices. Ugh...
So, if I need to talk to a computer, but do it quietly, it can just read my lips, right? Or can I just mouth the words and have it understand that? I've found that when I try to 'mouth' words silently to someone across a room, I tend to exaggerate my mouth's movements, so perhaps that would be a better thing for the computers to be able to 'parse'.???
I see real application for this technology in niche areas, but am not sure it'll become 'mainstream' any time soon (like, 5-10 years). We'll need to rethink our physical world - offices, cars, and such - before these sorts of new HCI systems can really be integrated in to our day to day lives productively.
They mentioned they wanted to keep data secure, but there was no mention from anyone interviewed (anonymously), that MS was demanding a security audit of the companies' systems. That would be an interesting approach to take. You can access our data for $x/user/year, but we'll waive the fee if you submit to an audit to prove that you'll be handling the data in a secure manner. I still wouldn't agree with the practice, but it would have been a more PR-savvy move to take. "We're protecting this customer data, but still allowing the user to take their data with them, etc". During their audit, they might just happen to find that Oracle, DB2, PostgreSQL and MySQL aren't as 'secure' as MSSQL, and 'suggest' that companies use MSSQL in the mix as well for user data, but that's just a conspiracy theorist mindset at that point.:)
And now they're getting into retail, something that we laughed at Gateway for
I don't think people laughed at Gateway for 'getting into retail', it was 'getting into retail' without allowing people to actually walk in to a store and buy something. The Gateway stores were just showcases and catalog ordering centers. You looked at the models, then ordered, and they'd ship the PC (either to the store or to the customer's house - can't recall), and that was it. So in a real big sense, Gateway wasn't in 'retail', at least 'retail' as most people think of the term. All the overhead of traditional retail space, yet competing with mail-order pricing - *THAT'S* what people laughed at Gateway for.
I'm not sure the entire issue was that it wasn't released day 1 with Leopard, but that there wasn't any information on it. Had Apple said "we will release a Java6 Q1 2008", people who *do* write Java software would have a target date for when their businesses could do what they needed to. And had Apple said "we will never support Java6 on Leopard or in the future versions of OS X", people could also have made appropriate changes. Instead, Apple had preview releases of Java6, then removed all mention of them and made no mention of Java at all when Leopard was released. When asked about Java plans, Apple has not responded.
It's the not knowing which is causing *most* of the frustration, not the fact that it's not here right now. Sure, some people might be playing the 'taking my toys home' attitude, but I think the issue is bigger than that. People have staked their careers on Java and on Macs, and now there's a disconnect. When your livelihood is at stake, you might get a bit bitchy. When it's being caused by Apple, a company people get very passionate about, you might get a bit more bitchy.
I couldn't get the wifi working by clicking around in Exalt's GUI; it recognized our home network, but wouldn't connect to it via DHCP. I decided that since my previous successful experience had been with Gnome, I would install Gnome and see if I could get the card working with Gnome Network Manager.
Then later
To be fair, I ended up finding out that there had been a regression in wifi support for RT2500 in recent versions of Ubuntu, so it wasn't exactly smooth sailing on the new system.
Why do people insist on thinking that changing the desktop environment will change anything about the experience. I've run in to endless wifi problems with my old ubuntus, and it's nothing to do with the desktop environment. Yet, I would still sometimes get people writing back saying "kubuntu sucks, go install ubuntu, everything just works!".
Linux is basically Linux, and if hardware doesn't work under KDE it's not going to work under GNOME, or IceWM or anything else. Why do people insist on this sort of thinking? Can someone point me to a situation where *hardware* recognition or functionality didn't work under Gnome but worked under KDE (or the reverse, or anything similar)? Especially something like a wifi card?
I almost bought a mini, but two of the guys in the store *and* 3 other customers in the store all counseled against it because the specs on the machine were 'so weak'. "You can't do anything with it", "it's slow", were the types of comments we got from those people. And these were Apple loyalists.
My wife got a stock emac in nov 2003. 6 months later, when it was beach-balling every 5 minutes, I complained about it to some friends with Apple machines. "OMG, you can't run anything on that. *EVERYONE KNOWS* those low end emacs are horrible and slow as crap" and similar comments were what I received. This was with a machine that was less than a year old running up to date software.
If Apple cared about the user experience that much, they wouldn't sell any machines without the maximum amount of RAM possible. Buying a machine then being told you need to buy more stuff to make it 'run better' is the epitome of a 'bad user experience'. You can chalk it up to 'user choice' and all that, but not everyone buying a mac is an already-uber-tech-hipper-than-thou-mac-genius. Selling low end machines gives people a bad user experience regardless of the manufacturer.
It's a pretty darn easy song (many popular songs are) so I'm not surprised to find that it's very 'close to the original'. If they had proper permission to include a 'cover' of it, what did they expect? I love the song, and am a sucker for bubblegum/powerpop type stuff, so perhaps that's why I can't see the problem with the cover here. Won't it potentially drive some more sales for their other stuff from people who learn about them through the game? Or perhaps it's because it's so close people won't bother going to buy the original or other Romantics tunes?
"This means that your 1998 softphone that uses exclusive open() on/dev/dsp will function".
Maybe my 2007 Skype client might work with PulseAudio? Cause it uses/dev/dsp directly as well, AFAICT, and it was just built a couple months ago. Stop assuming only ancient programs use this technique - modern ones do too.
From what I've read, users of other recent distros have similar problems, and I'd say it's more likely something with the 2.6.22 kernel, rather than something specific to ubuntu. It didn't work for me in gutsy (beta release, but only about a week before final release) and doesn't work in mandriva 2008 either.
Slashdot Mirror
What more can I say? This has been requested and brought up for *years*. I really don't get why it's so hard to do, especially considering something that there's already indentation and structure support for lists. I'm not an OOO hacker, but this doesn't seem like something that has a huge technical hurdle preventing it from being done.
Maybe I missed it - there was no mention in the articles listed.
Wait - the first article linked to this page:
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/buglist.cgi?Submit+query=Submit+query&issue_type=DEFECT&issue_type=ENHANCEMENT&issue_type=FEATURE&issue_type=PATCH&resolution=FIXED&target_milestone=OOo+3.0&email1=&emailtype1=exact&emailassigned_to1=1&email2=&emailtype2=exact&emailreporter2=1&issueidtype=include&issue_id=&changedin=&votes=0&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=&chfieldvalue=&short_desc=&short_desc_type=allwords&long_desc=&long_desc_type=allwords&issue_file_loc=&issue_file_loc_type=fulltext&status_whiteboard=&status_whiteboard_type=fulltext&keywords=&keywords_type=anytokens&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time
which mentioned an outline mode. Maybe it's coming after all?
Wow - my vaio developed keyboard problems after 2.5 years and this is probably why. Specifically, the problem I have is that the numeric keypad values suddenly become the default, so instead of getting "o" when I hit the "o" key, I get "6", and so on. Holding the blue 'fn' key and hitting 'o' gets me 'o', but that sucks. I'd forgotten why I quit using that laptop until I pulled it out the other day to use for testing.
Yes, it's like that. However, I find that it's *horribly* slow, and I wanted an option to turn it back to just scale text. If they can't get it right (read: fast) there's no point, because it now makes a useful feature - making small text bigger - near useless because it slows everything *way* down. I don't think it's "zooming" so much as "resizing". Can't quite explain the difference, but I think there's a distinction to be made there.
PHP is a language, ASP.NET is a framework (you can use different languages inside of it).
The question to ask is "Have any PHP frameworks introduced or adopted concepts like 'Master Pages'?".
Short answer is that I don't know. However, you'd need to look at things like symfony, codeigniter, cakephp, zendframework, and others. My guess is that no, those frameworks don't have any concepts like 'Master Pages', but I'm not an expert in those frameworks.
This is not to say that this will hold for every author--public service broadcasters can't be expected to employ every content creator--but DA is a fine example of exactly how you can make money by giving stuff away for free.
Where exactly was the 'free' in this? The BBC is gov't run, funded by taxes. Maybe not a direct radio license in this case, but it collects money from people, hired a guy to write something, then gave the original people something back in return: the work it commissioned and paid for with the money it collected from the original population. I'm not sure I see anything 'free' here.
Imagine if patents worked that way and Edison decided to rest on he laurels after the phonograph. There would be no motion picture camera, no light bulb, and no electric grid.
Do you really think what motivated Edison's creations was solely a profit motive? That had there been a stronger patent system in place he'd just have said 'screw it, I'll just collect money on this until I die!'? Most of the people we take potshots in these discussions - the big household names of invention and creation - are doing it because it's what they're driven to do. Usually that drive causes practice/study which leads to continued successes in their field of creation/invention. Most of these people would have been writing books/songs, creating inventions and what not regardless of copyright and patent laws.
Crap - didn't preview enough - should be Beatles', right? :)
There's a tape of early Beatles (well, Quarrymen) - second public performance, IIRC - with "Baby let's play house" and "Puttin' on the style". I've heard this somewhere before, but the sound quality is quite horrible. Perhaps this same technique could be used to restore it to something more listenable? What was odd is that, when listening, even though it was quite hissy and hard to hear all the words, Lennon's voice was still recognizable and distinct. Not all the time, but certain sections really jumped out as his voice.
This is the Bob Molyneux tape I'm talking about, and it appears part of it is on youtube now - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ourclBYzuS0. My memory wasn't as good as I thought - there's more crowd noise than anything else. Not sure how easy it would be to remove this and keep the original music and singing.
using the 2.6.22.15-laptop-1.uc1mdv Mandriva-supplied kernel.
No. If you read the post, you'll see that the poster was saying the KDE team was telling him to upgrade to see if it's still a bug.
"the bug is fixed - upgrade" is wholly different from "upgrade, then tell us if it's still a bug".
If you're at all interested in Groovy or Grails, see Scott in person. His writing is good, but his speaking is better (obviously imo). He exudes an enthusiasm for and mastery of the subject which is lacking in many speakers in the tech circuit these days.
What will this do for sites that spring up around pop culture memes, breaking news and other immediate items?
If Christianity is *all* about the teachings of Jesus, why bother having the Old Testament in a book used by pretty much ever Christian church on the planet? Christianity bases its teaching on the entire Bible, as replete with contradictions as those teachings may end up being.
Leviticus 20 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=3&chapter=20&version=31 - lot of death penalties in there for things we would not kill someone for today. It's Old Testament, so we don't have to follow it, right? New order after Jesus' death, yadda yadda, right? Then why preach the "Ten Commandments" as a cornerstone of Christianity? They are OT as well. What parts of the OT do we follow, and why?
Numbers 15 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=4&chapter=15&version=31 - some guy working on the Sabbath - gathering sticks (presumably for fire for his family?). He must be stoned to death. So the group did. GOD'S WORD said that anyone working on the Sabbath must be stoned to death. But we don't do that today. Many Jews don't work on the Sabbath because of this commandment, but don't stone each other if the rule is broken.
Why should people get to play fast and loose with the Bible - GOD'S HOLY WORD? Either follow it or don't.
Defining Christianity as "following beliefs and teachings as laid out by Jesus Christ" is intellectually dishonest considering the existence and continued following of the Old Testament.
Why single out one specific 'religion'? I saw the Tom Cruise interview video last week - it really didn't seem all that fundamentally different from listening to an evangelical Christian. Different terms were used, but the mindset was mostly the same. Watch Jesus Camp if you haven't already. Not much difference between the main camp director's mindset and Tom Cruise's.
I'm planning on trying it out in the next week. Visit http://www.kimsal.com/ to read a review if/when I get to it.
Also, I agree, it may not take market share away, at least for now, but if the underpinning is good, it may be a good base to build similar BD/P functionality on top of.
While it doesn't seem fossology is addressing exactly the same problem space, I can see a project like this taking some marketshare away from commercial products like BlackDuck's protexIP and Palamida ipAmplifier. I work in a field where this would be a very useful tool, and have been wanting to build something like this ourselves and release as an open source project. The issue has always been determining a cost-effective way of keeping the indexes up to date. But rather than scanning code and looking for direct violations, this approach turns that on its head a bit and scans for licenses. This is more a forensic tool than something which can detect all types of violations - if I just took part of a GPL file and placed it in a BSD project (or my own project, for example), it doesn't seem fossology would be able to make that determination. At least, I didn't see that from the video I watched. In any event though, this is a welcome tool for people looking to quickly get a handle on what's in their code. Glad to see it out there.
I've noticed a love affair with voice controlled phone systems recently, with some companies getting rid of the 'press 1, press 2' and moving totally to 'Please tell us what you're calling about'. Tellme.com is mostly to blame for this proliferation I think, but someone else makes the final call to get rid of the numbers altogether. Not a good move, imo.
Anyway, this gets me to privacy stuff. As computers try to understand us more, we'll need to interact in a more 'human' fashion - talking more, or doing things that would attract the attention of other humans (and also the computers). It's late, and I'm rambling here a bit, but remember how voice-controlled computers were going to take over a few years back? Everyone was just going to be talking to their computers to get stuff done. In reality, that would be a complete disaster in office environments, as there's generally too much noise already. Replacing all the typing you hear with voices. Ugh...
So, if I need to talk to a computer, but do it quietly, it can just read my lips, right? Or can I just mouth the words and have it understand that? I've found that when I try to 'mouth' words silently to someone across a room, I tend to exaggerate my mouth's movements, so perhaps that would be a better thing for the computers to be able to 'parse'.???
I see real application for this technology in niche areas, but am not sure it'll become 'mainstream' any time soon (like, 5-10 years). We'll need to rethink our physical world - offices, cars, and such - before these sorts of new HCI systems can really be integrated in to our day to day lives productively.
They mentioned they wanted to keep data secure, but there was no mention from anyone interviewed (anonymously), that MS was demanding a security audit of the companies' systems. That would be an interesting approach to take. You can access our data for $x/user/year, but we'll waive the fee if you submit to an audit to prove that you'll be handling the data in a secure manner. I still wouldn't agree with the practice, but it would have been a more PR-savvy move to take. "We're protecting this customer data, but still allowing the user to take their data with them, etc". During their audit, they might just happen to find that Oracle, DB2, PostgreSQL and MySQL aren't as 'secure' as MSSQL, and 'suggest' that companies use MSSQL in the mix as well for user data, but that's just a conspiracy theorist mindset at that point. :)
And now they're getting into retail, something that we laughed at Gateway for
I don't think people laughed at Gateway for 'getting into retail', it was 'getting into retail' without allowing people to actually walk in to a store and buy something. The Gateway stores were just showcases and catalog ordering centers. You looked at the models, then ordered, and they'd ship the PC (either to the store or to the customer's house - can't recall), and that was it. So in a real big sense, Gateway wasn't in 'retail', at least 'retail' as most people think of the term. All the overhead of traditional retail space, yet competing with mail-order pricing - *THAT'S* what people laughed at Gateway for.
I'm not sure the entire issue was that it wasn't released day 1 with Leopard, but that there wasn't any information on it. Had Apple said "we will release a Java6 Q1 2008", people who *do* write Java software would have a target date for when their businesses could do what they needed to. And had Apple said "we will never support Java6 on Leopard or in the future versions of OS X", people could also have made appropriate changes. Instead, Apple had preview releases of Java6, then removed all mention of them and made no mention of Java at all when Leopard was released. When asked about Java plans, Apple has not responded.
It's the not knowing which is causing *most* of the frustration, not the fact that it's not here right now. Sure, some people might be playing the 'taking my toys home' attitude, but I think the issue is bigger than that. People have staked their careers on Java and on Macs, and now there's a disconnect. When your livelihood is at stake, you might get a bit bitchy. When it's being caused by Apple, a company people get very passionate about, you might get a bit more bitchy.
I couldn't get the wifi working by clicking around in Exalt's GUI; it recognized our home network, but wouldn't connect to it via DHCP. I decided that since my previous successful experience had been with Gnome, I would install Gnome and see if I could get the card working with Gnome Network Manager.
Then later
To be fair, I ended up finding out that there had been a regression in wifi support for RT2500 in recent versions of Ubuntu, so it wasn't exactly smooth sailing on the new system.
Why do people insist on thinking that changing the desktop environment will change anything about the experience. I've run in to endless wifi problems with my old ubuntus, and it's nothing to do with the desktop environment. Yet, I would still sometimes get people writing back saying "kubuntu sucks, go install ubuntu, everything just works!".
Linux is basically Linux, and if hardware doesn't work under KDE it's not going to work under GNOME, or IceWM or anything else. Why do people insist on this sort of thinking? Can someone point me to a situation where *hardware* recognition or functionality didn't work under Gnome but worked under KDE (or the reverse, or anything similar)? Especially something like a wifi card?
I almost bought a mini, but two of the guys in the store *and* 3 other customers in the store all counseled against it because the specs on the machine were 'so weak'. "You can't do anything with it", "it's slow", were the types of comments we got from those people. And these were Apple loyalists.
My wife got a stock emac in nov 2003. 6 months later, when it was beach-balling every 5 minutes, I complained about it to some friends with Apple machines. "OMG, you can't run anything on that. *EVERYONE KNOWS* those low end emacs are horrible and slow as crap" and similar comments were what I received. This was with a machine that was less than a year old running up to date software.
If Apple cared about the user experience that much, they wouldn't sell any machines without the maximum amount of RAM possible. Buying a machine then being told you need to buy more stuff to make it 'run better' is the epitome of a 'bad user experience'. You can chalk it up to 'user choice' and all that, but not everyone buying a mac is an already-uber-tech-hipper-than-thou-mac-genius. Selling low end machines gives people a bad user experience regardless of the manufacturer.
It's a pretty darn easy song (many popular songs are) so I'm not surprised to find that it's very 'close to the original'. If they had proper permission to include a 'cover' of it, what did they expect? I love the song, and am a sucker for bubblegum/powerpop type stuff, so perhaps that's why I can't see the problem with the cover here. Won't it potentially drive some more sales for their other stuff from people who learn about them through the game? Or perhaps it's because it's so close people won't bother going to buy the original or other Romantics tunes?
"This means that your 1998 softphone that uses exclusive open() on /dev/dsp will function".
/dev/dsp directly as well, AFAICT, and it was just built a couple months ago. Stop assuming only ancient programs use this technique - modern ones do too.
Maybe my 2007 Skype client might work with PulseAudio? Cause it uses
From what I've read, users of other recent distros have similar problems, and I'd say it's more likely something with the 2.6.22 kernel, rather than something specific to ubuntu. It didn't work for me in gutsy (beta release, but only about a week before final release) and doesn't work in mandriva 2008 either.