I've tried and tried in the past to write some small programs in perl. Each time it was a hassle to get aquinted with the stupid syntaxis
So, what you're saying is, that you couldn't write a script without learning the language, and thus you don't like it?
Well, so what? I don't like C. So I don't write C. Big deal. I don't go on about the way I think managed code (decent garbage collection for example) is nice, and that C forces you to cover your own memory space, and if I make a tiny mistake it'll leak and eventually slow/crash my machine.. instead I use something I do like.
I know this is/., and looking for a constructive comment is like searching for the one piece of hay in a big stack of needles.. but please.. live and let live..
To access data stored in this fashion, you need a computer with the proper hardware and software. At this time, this presents no problem; few computers today come without CD-ROM drives, and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone with absolutely no access to one. But that may not be the case tomorrow
Oh for goodness sake. Do you honestly believe that one day we'll be able to read CDs, and the next we won't? Rubbish. Technology evolves. And during that evolution the data can be migrated from the old storage to the new. Problem solved.
This has got to be good ammunition which the DOJ and the state Attorney Generals can use.
Actually, no. It just shows that in a free world a business can modify its product as it sees fit. MS haven't modified English (well, American actually.. but lets not go there), they've modified a set of bytes that makes up the 'dictionary' included in their Office product. They haven't made it illegal to use these words. Don't be so melodramatic.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be..
on
Ultima Revived
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I think what appeals to me about these updates is the reduction in associated stress. These chaps wouldn't be half as popular if they tried to recreate the 'fun' of loading from tape, LensLock security, broken keyboard membranes/joysticks, etc etc?
A disgruntled Spectrum user. Bring back YS. And Crash.
That depends on the business you're in. Apple thought they were in the hardware business, so releasing specs would have been plain daft. Would Ferrari do better if they released the exact building specs of their cars? No. There'd be cheaper, identical machines. Had Apple realised they were actually in the software business, and had released the specs, then things would be very different. Not necessarily better tho'. (Apple vs PC would have been a hard fought war.. likely PC would have won.. Apples are nice due to the closed source GUI stuff, closed source compiler tools and so on..)
Integration: I can drag and drop a spreadsheet into Frontpage. (Well, I can.. but can != do).
Feature Completeness: I can load a spreadsheet into my web browser.. Is this a good thing?
Support: Everyone seems to want to 'help' with windows.
Documentation: Press F1 in any MS app..
Stability: Neither my Win2k servers, nor my Linux/Unix servers have crashed for me in months.. suppose I must be just a decent admin or something..
Ease of instalation: Windows.. my mother did install it.
Hardware Support: Yet to find anything that doesn't work in windows. Not that I've tried..
Availability of s/w: QuarkXPress is available on Windows. As is Apache, IIS, Xitami, Tomcat etc etc.
TCO: A well admin'd network of NT or Unix costs about the same. The cost of a good admin.
Example. Counter-example. Counter-counter-example. Ad infinitum. Pointless, but fun. Shouting 'My OS is better than your OS ner ner ner' is a waste of energy. Just realise that you ought to be using the right tool for the job. Sometimes thats a *nix flavour. Sometimes it isn't. Shouting down Windows because you happen to disagree with Microsofts business practises/closed source ethic/CTOs style of glasses is plain moronic. Evaluate each option and make an informed decision. That doesn't mean 'Linux is best'. Far from it.
Not quite what I meant. HTML 'standard' is set by the W3C, but it evolves. Its currently at 4.3 (I think). So does the Moz team work toward that? After all, by the time they're done it might be at 4.7. This is the trap into which NS and IE fell. They tried to code for a standard that they hoped would be *the* standard by the time they shipped. Both missed the target. But had they written for what was at the time the current standard they'd have been releasing browser that, while stable and complient, would have been miles behind the competition in terms of features. Which is why writing a standards complient browser should be undertaken by someone who isn't trying to make money. Delibrately being behind your competition would be suicidal.
As for the content of web sites, I'm still a 'content is king' web master. As are many of us. But when we probably aren't the web surfing majority. People want flashy gimmicks and toys on sites. And more and more web 'designers' are all too willing to give it to them.
There in lies a bit of an issue. The standards aren't done yet. Nor will they be. Standards are an evolving thing. The big issue of the Netscape/IE wars in the late 90s was that both parties tried to predict where the standards were going, and tried to go straight to the final standard without waiting for them to be ratified.
And they both failed.
We had 'non-complient' browsers, different object models, different CSS models, IE and NS specific tags.. it was a right old mess. Trying to be 'most standards complient' implies an attempt to out-do the other browsers, which is precisely where NS particularly, and to a degree IE, fell down. It gave everyone a right old headache.
The problems arise when the web designers find a new feature they happen to like a bit (CSS colour control of scroll bars being a current example), that doesn't work in all browsers, and theres a great big shift toward the browser that does the 'coolest' things.
Yes, be standards complient. Be 100% standards complient hopefully. But just remember that it has nothing to do with how complient the others are.
So you don't like it. Fine. Play something else. But whats the point in banging on for ages about how its not good enough for the 'hardcore elite'? These people make up maybe 2% of the sales of the game, probably less. The rest of us buy a game to HAVE SOME FUN! For goodness sake, does a Formula 1 driver whine that a Ford Focus isn't 'hardcore' enough to do 200MPH? No. He realises that maybe its not what hes after and he finds something that is.
Frankly, I'll wager you lose most of the Quake games you play and you're just looking for an excuse. And Carmack is an obvious target. Grow up.
So its wrong, bad, anti-freedom etc to stop MP3.com streaming these tracks.. but when it happens to Universal its a Good Thing. Its one up on them. FFS. At least be slightly consistant, please.
Hmm.. a hash of POST and GET variables.. that'll be exactly what PHP does then.. does cookies too..
Anyway, its a bit more complicated than 'Just use POST whenever'.. what if you want to send a URL that includes variables to someone (a search engine link, slashdot comment, ecard etc etc).. Theres a good reason for having both.
Microsoft will never fix the problem without making sure people have to pay a monthly subscription
I could have sworn both the Code Red and Nimda (multiple) exploits were patched in October *last year*.
Yes its the fault of the users not keeping their machines up-to-date, but please, don't blame this on MS when they released, and advertised, a patch promptly. Heck, it'd be like some idiot running an old version of Sendmail blaming the sendmail author(s) on his box getting hacked. If you're on the net, its you responibility to stay safe.
Riight.. ok. Just because you can't prove its a hoax you should assume its real eh? So, by this, you presumably believe that David Copperfield can fly, David Blaine can levitate, and that Paul Daniels has chopped Debbie McGee into several small pieces. After all, going be experience (that of having seen such stunts) I must surely to believe that they're real.
Bollocks.
Develop a healthy sense of paranoia. People will try to rip you off. They will try to make you believe the unbelievable. And in your case, they'll succeed it seems. Assuming someone is telling the truth is a hideously niave and downright crazy attitude. Going by your own experience works. I haven't been to the moon. Whats easier to believe, that someone faked it in a movie studio, or that a huge team of people worked for years to propel a very heavy object all the way to our major satellitte, take a few photos, and then come back again.
My post was a joke. So, you humourless idiot, sod off.
Bundle it up with revamped versions of Horace in the Caves and Horace and the Spiders and you've got my money.
Re:Red Cross Needs Tech Help
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 2
Microsoft supporters are either stock-holders (directly or through mutual funds) or "the average joe" who knows nothing about the situation and simply distrusts the government.
Or people such as myself who believe that you should use the right tool for the job. And sometimes MS software is the right tool. Their desktop is much easier to use than any WM I've tried, their Office software is preferable, and IE is certainly my choice of browser.
Agreed that some of their stuff is nothing short of awful (last client who asked me for a VB app got laughed at), but thats not the whole picture. I'd prefer to consider all options. And just because MSs business practises suck doesn't immediately mean their software does too.
B'nai Brith, ignoring their name sounding like a Star Trek baddie, are approaching this in the wrong way.
There would be nothing stopping Osama Bin Laden using a server located in a country friendly to their cause, one that considers them 'right'. One mans murdering &$%#wit terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Short of modifying DNS tables for your country or running a statewide filter proxy there'd be little or no way to halt this internet activity.
What they ought to concentrate on is teaching people that joining up with a band of weirdo rebels is simply stupid. Regulations are a good idea if they keep the more impressionable safer, but they only work on something you can actually control.
Re:Red Cross Needs Tech Help
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 2
Microsoft *donates* licenses for their programs. Often they give out ONE CD and the "right to use it", this $.50 of plastic and metal, they write off for $250/seat on their taxes.
So what if MS didn't give these licenses away? The charities would suddenly all take time off of the charitable stuff and learn Linux? No. They'd have to pay for the Windows license, or pay for someone to sort out their computer systems. Can charities do this? No. They don't have the cash.
Sure, the taxation laws for big companies suck from the perspective of use mortals, but they're there to promote this kind of giving. If it weren't for the tax break MS wouldn't give this stuff away, and the charities would be worse off.
As for your statements about MS being hated.. I disagree. MS are disliked amoung the slashdot community, and a few places outside, but in general the average, not-so-clued-up user enjoys their computing experience because MS software is childishly easy to operate. And lots of happy, MS IE using, Outlook emailing, web surfing people is extremely good for anyone who works in the internet industry.
Perhaps rather than spouting lots of silly banter about how bad MS is you ought to be advocating how good Linux/OSS is.
People do lots of things for reasons other than money. A personal challenge, a project that isn't financially viable but is worthy and helpful, simple fame and glory.
All these things are fantastic for open source software, and in the main they keep the projects going. BUT.. they'll only keep the project going while the creative people have enthuiasm for the thing they're doing. If that motivation ever disappears then the project disappears with it.
This, in my opinion, is why the GPL is ultimately bad for free and open source software. The GPL forces software derived from other open projects to remain open. While this doesn't stop people making a decent living supporting and maintaining their work, it does stop the 'traditional' business model of selling your software. This elminates the source of motivation that keeps many projects going long after the original excitement has run out. In the long term, I feel this will stop many talented developers taking projects to their maximum. Truely free software is not restricted in any way. If people want to close the source and sell their work they ought to be allowed to.
Why do slashdotters always immediately assume the negative? Using a UID it'd be much easier to stop spam, and much easier for government/police to trace who sent you what, and whether it was unsolicited. While you're right that it'd make spambombing easier, it'd also make stopping spam easier.
Slashdot Mirror
I've tried and tried in the past to write some small programs in perl. Each time it was a hassle to get aquinted with the stupid syntaxis
/., and looking for a constructive comment is like searching for the one piece of hay in a big stack of needles.. but please.. live and let live..
So, what you're saying is, that you couldn't write a script without learning the language, and thus you don't like it?
Well, so what? I don't like C. So I don't write C. Big deal. I don't go on about the way I think managed code (decent garbage collection for example) is nice, and that C forces you to cover your own memory space, and if I make a tiny mistake it'll leak and eventually slow/crash my machine.. instead I use something I do like.
I know this is
To access data stored in this fashion, you need a computer with the proper hardware and software. At this time, this presents no problem; few computers today come without CD-ROM drives, and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone with absolutely no access to one. But that may not be the case tomorrow
Oh for goodness sake. Do you honestly believe that one day we'll be able to read CDs, and the next we won't? Rubbish. Technology evolves. And during that evolution the data can be migrated from the old storage to the new. Problem solved.
This has got to be good ammunition which the DOJ and the state Attorney Generals can use.
Actually, no. It just shows that in a free world a business can modify its product as it sees fit. MS haven't modified English (well, American actually.. but lets not go there), they've modified a set of bytes that makes up the 'dictionary' included in their Office product. They haven't made it illegal to use these words. Don't be so melodramatic.
I think what appeals to me about these updates is the reduction in associated stress. These chaps wouldn't be half as popular if they tried to recreate the 'fun' of loading from tape, LensLock security, broken keyboard membranes/joysticks, etc etc?
A disgruntled Spectrum user. Bring back YS. And Crash.
an elliptical, or looping, orbit
All stable orbits are looping. Elliptical just means that it isn't always a uniform distance from the origin of the orbit, in this case, Mars.
Open standards always win
That depends on the business you're in. Apple thought they were in the hardware business, so releasing specs would have been plain daft. Would Ferrari do better if they released the exact building specs of their cars? No. There'd be cheaper, identical machines. Had Apple realised they were actually in the software business, and had released the specs, then things would be very different. Not necessarily better tho'. (Apple vs PC would have been a hard fought war.. likely PC would have won.. Apples are nice due to the closed source GUI stuff, closed source compiler tools and so on..)
Example. Counter-example. Counter-counter-example. Ad infinitum. Pointless, but fun. Shouting 'My OS is better than your OS ner ner ner' is a waste of energy. Just realise that you ought to be using the right tool for the job. Sometimes thats a *nix flavour. Sometimes it isn't. Shouting down Windows because you happen to disagree with Microsofts business practises/closed source ethic/CTOs style of glasses is plain moronic. Evaluate each option and make an informed decision. That doesn't mean 'Linux is best'. Far from it.
Apple Computers: www.apple.computer.uk.reg
Apple Software: www.apple.computer.uk.reg
Computerised Apple Sorting Ltd: www.apple.computer.uk.reg
Need I go on?
Not quite what I meant. HTML 'standard' is set by the W3C, but it evolves. Its currently at 4.3 (I think). So does the Moz team work toward that? After all, by the time they're done it might be at 4.7. This is the trap into which NS and IE fell. They tried to code for a standard that they hoped would be *the* standard by the time they shipped. Both missed the target. But had they written for what was at the time the current standard they'd have been releasing browser that, while stable and complient, would have been miles behind the competition in terms of features. Which is why writing a standards complient browser should be undertaken by someone who isn't trying to make money. Delibrately being behind your competition would be suicidal.
As for the content of web sites, I'm still a 'content is king' web master. As are many of us. But when we probably aren't the web surfing majority. People want flashy gimmicks and toys on sites. And more and more web 'designers' are all too willing to give it to them.
Better-than-any-competition standards compliance
There in lies a bit of an issue. The standards aren't done yet. Nor will they be. Standards are an evolving thing. The big issue of the Netscape/IE wars in the late 90s was that both parties tried to predict where the standards were going, and tried to go straight to the final standard without waiting for them to be ratified.
And they both failed.
We had 'non-complient' browsers, different object models, different CSS models, IE and NS specific tags.. it was a right old mess. Trying to be 'most standards complient' implies an attempt to out-do the other browsers, which is precisely where NS particularly, and to a degree IE, fell down. It gave everyone a right old headache.
The problems arise when the web designers find a new feature they happen to like a bit (CSS colour control of scroll bars being a current example), that doesn't work in all browsers, and theres a great big shift toward the browser that does the 'coolest' things.
Yes, be standards complient. Be 100% standards complient hopefully. But just remember that it has nothing to do with how complient the others are.
So you don't like it. Fine. Play something else. But whats the point in banging on for ages about how its not good enough for the 'hardcore elite'? These people make up maybe 2% of the sales of the game, probably less. The rest of us buy a game to HAVE SOME FUN! For goodness sake, does a Formula 1 driver whine that a Ford Focus isn't 'hardcore' enough to do 200MPH? No. He realises that maybe its not what hes after and he finds something that is.
Frankly, I'll wager you lose most of the Quake games you play and you're just looking for an excuse. And Carmack is an obvious target. Grow up.
Point 1: Bluetooth IS wireless connectivity.
Point 2: The new iPaq has bluetooth.
RTFA.
So its wrong, bad, anti-freedom etc to stop MP3.com streaming these tracks.. but when it happens to Universal its a Good Thing. Its one up on them. FFS. At least be slightly consistant, please.
Hmm.. a hash of POST and GET variables.. that'll be exactly what PHP does then.. does cookies too..
Anyway, its a bit more complicated than 'Just use POST whenever'.. what if you want to send a URL that includes variables to someone (a search engine link, slashdot comment, ecard etc etc).. Theres a good reason for having both.
Microsoft will never fix the problem without making sure people have to pay a monthly subscription
I could have sworn both the Code Red and Nimda (multiple) exploits were patched in October *last year*.
Yes its the fault of the users not keeping their machines up-to-date, but please, don't blame this on MS when they released, and advertised, a patch promptly. Heck, it'd be like some idiot running an old version of Sendmail blaming the sendmail author(s) on his box getting hacked. If you're on the net, its you responibility to stay safe.
Riight.. ok. Just because you can't prove its a hoax you should assume its real eh? So, by this, you presumably believe that David Copperfield can fly, David Blaine can levitate, and that Paul Daniels has chopped Debbie McGee into several small pieces. After all, going be experience (that of having seen such stunts) I must surely to believe that they're real.
Bollocks.
Develop a healthy sense of paranoia. People will try to rip you off. They will try to make you believe the unbelievable. And in your case, they'll succeed it seems. Assuming someone is telling the truth is a hideously niave and downright crazy attitude. Going by your own experience works. I haven't been to the moon. Whats easier to believe, that someone faked it in a movie studio, or that a huge team of people worked for years to propel a very heavy object all the way to our major satellitte, take a few photos, and then come back again.
My post was a joke. So, you humourless idiot, sod off.
Ok, conspiracy theories ahoy, but with modern cinematic techniques faking a film like this would be *really* easy. But I can believe it.
Apart from the bullet-time 360 of Neil Armstrong jumping over Agent Smith.
Yeah, but its going to be an RCE disc, and it isn't going to work on a region 0 multi-region player..
Bundle it up with revamped versions of Horace in the Caves and Horace and the Spiders and you've got my money.
Microsoft supporters are either stock-holders (directly or through mutual funds) or "the average joe" who knows nothing about the situation and simply distrusts the government.
Or people such as myself who believe that you should use the right tool for the job. And sometimes MS software is the right tool. Their desktop is much easier to use than any WM I've tried, their Office software is preferable, and IE is certainly my choice of browser.
Agreed that some of their stuff is nothing short of awful (last client who asked me for a VB app got laughed at), but thats not the whole picture. I'd prefer to consider all options. And just because MSs business practises suck doesn't immediately mean their software does too.
B'nai Brith, ignoring their name sounding like a Star Trek baddie, are approaching this in the wrong way.
There would be nothing stopping Osama Bin Laden using a server located in a country friendly to their cause, one that considers them 'right'. One mans murdering &$%#wit terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. Short of modifying DNS tables for your country or running a statewide filter proxy there'd be little or no way to halt this internet activity.
What they ought to concentrate on is teaching people that joining up with a band of weirdo rebels is simply stupid. Regulations are a good idea if they keep the more impressionable safer, but they only work on something you can actually control.
Microsoft *donates* licenses for their programs. Often they give out ONE CD and the "right to use it", this $.50 of plastic and metal, they write off for $250/seat on their taxes.
So what if MS didn't give these licenses away? The charities would suddenly all take time off of the charitable stuff and learn Linux? No. They'd have to pay for the Windows license, or pay for someone to sort out their computer systems. Can charities do this? No. They don't have the cash.
Sure, the taxation laws for big companies suck from the perspective of use mortals, but they're there to promote this kind of giving. If it weren't for the tax break MS wouldn't give this stuff away, and the charities would be worse off.
As for your statements about MS being hated.. I disagree. MS are disliked amoung the slashdot community, and a few places outside, but in general the average, not-so-clued-up user enjoys their computing experience because MS software is childishly easy to operate. And lots of happy, MS IE using, Outlook emailing, web surfing people is extremely good for anyone who works in the internet industry.
Perhaps rather than spouting lots of silly banter about how bad MS is you ought to be advocating how good Linux/OSS is.
Not if their work is derived from a GPL project they aren't.
People do lots of things for reasons other than money. A personal challenge, a project that isn't financially viable but is worthy and helpful, simple fame and glory.
All these things are fantastic for open source software, and in the main they keep the projects going. BUT.. they'll only keep the project going while the creative people have enthuiasm for the thing they're doing. If that motivation ever disappears then the project disappears with it.
This, in my opinion, is why the GPL is ultimately bad for free and open source software. The GPL forces software derived from other open projects to remain open. While this doesn't stop people making a decent living supporting and maintaining their work, it does stop the 'traditional' business model of selling your software. This elminates the source of motivation that keeps many projects going long after the original excitement has run out. In the long term, I feel this will stop many talented developers taking projects to their maximum. Truely free software is not restricted in any way. If people want to close the source and sell their work they ought to be allowed to.
Let the flaming begin..
Why do slashdotters always immediately assume the negative? Using a UID it'd be much easier to stop spam, and much easier for government/police to trace who sent you what, and whether it was unsolicited. While you're right that it'd make spambombing easier, it'd also make stopping spam easier.