Pics are looking good (amazing what a subtle difference can makes in terms of feel) but I have to say what still stands out in all those pics--bad fonts!
I really wish the default font situation would be better in the world of X and nix/bsd distros. Switching back and forth between Macs and PC's (windows), it's amazing how much better the mac fonts look and feel than windows. Likewise, Windows looks as much again better than the typical gnome/kde setup I have seen.
Misinterpretation, I didn't say they didn't give anyway anything, I said they didn't give anything that wasn't somehow directly related to one of their products (i.e. IE inreversibly built-in to Windows 98 and up) and their control over what must be present on a Windows box. Look at DRM, how about WMP? If I was a monopoly and wanted to control the user I'd give stuff like this too then I'd mix in some Palladium to ensure only stuff I support can run on my OS -- paradise for a monopoly!
Ok, well ignoring media player (mac also),.net framework, internet explorer (runs on mac!), rotor framework (freebsd, etc!), etc, how could microsoft give _anything_ away that isn't somehow related to one of their existingp roducts? They're a software company, everything they make is going to be related.
I am referring to the new Longhorn network and graphics (Avalon) interfaces as patches, we don't even know if they are free yet, and if Longhorn will cost $800 (Assuming from the rising prices of new MS OSes -- a continual rise) how can we assume those patches (network and graphics) will be free for XP and 2003, MS wants to make more money yearly and free upgrades to new OS has never been in their past so how can it be in their future? Perhaps it will be like Windows XP Upgrade -- a reduced amount but I am certain they will charge something to convince people to buy Longhorn instead of a simple upgrade.
Ok, if Longhorn consumer edition costs $800 I'll shoot myself in the face. I think you're on crack that you would even guess Longhorn is that expensive. How can we assume patches will be free? Because MS has never charged for patches, and you've offered no evidence, YET AGAIN, to the contrary. Windows XP upgrades--FREE.
So you don't get confused, Avalon and the network interface for Longhorn that will be available for Windows XP and 2003 will not be "absolutely free" just like Windows XP Upgrade isn't.
Once again I say, you're on crack--XP upgrades ARE free.
Wow, they give it away so freely -- built right into the OS so you can never fully remove it. I think you mean maintain control over your computer -- not giving full control to the user (The whole point of a PC, but not according to MS). You certainly don't have your facts there and/or are ignorant of the truth. Why do you think the EU is trying to sue MS? Maybe you never heard about it...
Ok fine, even if I accepted everything you say here at face value (which I don't) MICROSOFT IS GIVING THINGS AWAY. That is all I was saying after you said they never gave anything away. Having proved that they give things away you can't just say, oh, well, that's not what I meant by give away (and I'll add Windows media player,.Net framework, ROTOR framework, etc). I'd love to hear what facts I don't have straight as I've listed examples, and you've ranted.
Did you try it on every PC in the world? Guess not, so in essence, your saying if I polled 200 people about their views on a particular subject then I can automatically assume that the majority among them is true among everyone in the world?! Ignorance...
No, but you know, in my book if I upgrade 20 computers two service packs flawlessly, and I've never heard of anyone's computer dieing from either one first hand, that's good enough for me. I don't know what other standard one must be held.
Actually I was stating fact, you were the one that made it into a competition. I hope you enjoyed making a fool out of yourself by turning it into a "competition". Unlike you, I'd rather stick with the facts. My whole statement has to do with commercial selling of the patches not XP SP breaks this -- that's a side point but you'd rather use that to satisfy your desire for "competition".
Moridineas, perhaps I offended you in a previous life, why else would you try to tell me I was making something into a competition when it was secretly you?
I still don't understand your points--WHAT commercial selling of patches? MS makes every patch available for free! That's my point!
Again, I'm sorry if you're a non-native speaker, as I think we're missing some vital element of communication--let me remind you of your quote that made it into what i humorously described as a competition--you said " you probably don't deal with as many XP users as I do"...thus my competition remark.
I'm afraid I STILL don't know what you're trying to communicate to me.
You're right I don't get it--apologies if you're not a native English speaker, but your sentences just don't parse properly. I'll break it down..
I have no idea how you missed what I was saying; however, care to let me explain. I am not saying anything about SP1 for XP costing money, I'm simply making a comparison where XP SP1 broke machines which also makes it likely for these upgrades that allow XP to function like Longhorn.
I don't get this..I'd GUESS you're saying that since a previous pgrade (according to you) broke some machines, these other upgrades offered before Longhorn could break some machines? That's stupid if that's what you mean.
As I said in the first sentence, MS is not a company that gives things away for free -- unless it profits their products (i.e. "free" developer tools for overpriced dev products -- wow so "free"). Why would they willing allow XP to be upgraded to Avalon, etc. without cost to consumer? They want to sell Longhorn not simply allow people to upgrade for free (i.e. Is Office 2000 free to Office '97 users?!). Think it through man -- I did. MS has a whole history it's not like they didn't burn people with this stuff before...
Again, this just doesn't make sense. Microsoft has repeatedly given things away to advance their products--every service pack ever as I showed in my last email. Internet Explorer! etc etc. No, their main product upgrades to a new cardinal version costs money, yes. Is this any different from any other company that sells any software? no. It's quite obvious and not complicated why they are giving out parts of Longhorn for free--so developers will use it, so users will use it, and people will get excited about Longhorn.
You haven't heard of SP1 break machines? I have -- legit copies too, you probably don't deal with as many XP users as I do and those who have broken their Windows machines probably moved to Linux so you don't hear their compliants -- or they just live without SP1 after a rebuild (that's what you do, MS won't reimburse you so complaining doesn't fix anything)...
Well as I said, I've upgraded about 20 XP boxes to SP1 and SP2 (and those are of course legit--I don't pirate), and haven't had a single application or box break. I hope that satisfies your dick measuring competition.
Ok, I don't know anything about a ISO image from MSDN so I could be wrong there--the version that has been publically available for several weeks off microsoft's website is 266mb and patches all versions. I don't know what else is included on the ISO, but the servicepack (and all previous updates) for all versions of XP is not that big.
Except, AFAIK (and I believe I've tried in the past) Corporate keys don't work on Pro--meaning there IS a difference that needs to be detected and patched accordingly.
Yes, the FBI has to have limits because there is no way they can investigate every crime across the whole US. Thankfully we have other police etc to do that!
Yes, of course prosecutors have discretion--there's no sense prosecuting a case that can't possibly be won, and yes, if going easy on one criminal can net 10 more, I don't see the problem there either--what's your point? I'll tell you what the point is--when people are CLEARLY guilty, easy to catch, and easy to stop, the DOJ/FBI/whoever you want is going to act every time, and that's what they did here.
Ashcroft--haven't I heard about a trillion times people complaining on slashdot about how Ashcroft himself is violating all of our civil rights in his mad hunt for terrorists? Now you're complaining that he's not doing enough? THat's quite odd!
Re:I'm sorry, were you expecting better?
on
XP2 Spotted In The Wild
·
· Score: 2, Informative
What a moron.
First of all, the update was NOT anywhere near 400mb.
Secondly, it contains every update, every fix, etc since XP was released.
Thirdly, it contains these fixes for every version of XP--home, corporate, pro.
Quite frankly, your analogy of warez kiddies and "the persecuted" is ridiculous, and imho shows what a useless and effete society we have become. When people get worked up to this kind of hysterical frenzy because people illegaly trading movies and mp3s are busted, something is seriously wrong.
Right--that's why I said his "on-show conversion." Keiller himself is unabashedly leftist, and has raised some complaints from conservative fans in the past because of his bashings (the majority of NPR listeners are conservative).
This DOES seem to fit the stereotypical view of conservatives as cold, uncaring, rational, and liberals as passionate and empathetic.
Perhaps a sympton: things like Politically Correctness are commonly derided by conservatives. Perhaps it's just nonsense:)
I will say that overall it does seem to me that liberal simply care more about politics and issues. They may not be on the average be better informed than a conservative counterpart, but the issues are much more central to their being. I view this as part of the reason why hatred and loathing of Bush is so strong--you hear more people call bush a baby-killing liar than was ever said about Clinton who lied under oath (please, someone correct me) and also bombed decidely innocent targets for which we have had to pay reparations. I'm not trying to make this a partisan post, but in general I think political identity means more to liberals than to conservatives, in an emotional and personal manner.
One thing I've never understood about neuro-sciences (and it is truthfully because of my ignorance) is how exactly do we determine causality in the brain?
How do we know that emotional people don't have a more active amygdala because they don't control their emotions as much? How do we know that people who have a less active amygdala aren't simply controlling their emotions better?
are chemical imbalances a sympton of depression, or a cause?
it seems like a lot of brain stuff is chicken and egg like that, but this is probably a very stupid post:-p
Reminds me of an episode I heard several months ago... Garrison Keillor was discussing his recent on-show conversion to become a Republican. (roughly paraphrased he said) "Back when I was a democrat and would say something political, I would get letters from Republicans telling me exactly how I was wrong and exactly what they thought of me. Now that I've switched parties, I now get 'hurt' letters from Democrats who are 'hurt' and 'saddened' by my new points of view. I can deal with 'hurt' letters!"
(apologies for without a doubt mangling his hilarious speech)
Slashdot Mirror
Pics are looking good (amazing what a subtle difference can makes in terms of feel) but I have to say what still stands out in all those pics--bad fonts!
I really wish the default font situation would be better in the world of X and nix/bsd distros. Switching back and forth between Macs and PC's (windows), it's amazing how much better the mac fonts look and feel than windows. Likewise, Windows looks as much again better than the typical gnome/kde setup I have seen.
UT2K4 runs pretty choppuily on a friend's pb17, though I haven't tried it on my pb15.
Or you should be running FreeBSD!
/usr/ports/databases/mysql41-server
cd
make install
Done!
Wow, the jokes on me..I just thought you didn't know english very well, but I see now I've been trolled! Congrats for a good trawl ;)
Misinterpretation, I didn't say they didn't give anyway anything, I said they didn't give anything that wasn't somehow directly related to one of their products (i.e. IE inreversibly built-in to Windows 98 and up) and their control over what must be present on a Windows box. Look at DRM, how about WMP? If I was a monopoly and wanted to control the user I'd give stuff like this too then I'd mix in some Palladium to ensure only stuff I support can run on my OS -- paradise for a monopoly!
Ok, well ignoring media player (mac also), .net framework, internet explorer (runs on mac!), rotor framework (freebsd, etc!), etc, how could microsoft give _anything_ away that isn't somehow related to one of their existingp roducts? They're a software company, everything they make is going to be related.
I am referring to the new Longhorn network and graphics (Avalon) interfaces as patches, we don't even know if they are free yet, and if Longhorn will cost $800 (Assuming from the rising prices of new MS OSes -- a continual rise) how can we assume those patches (network and graphics) will be free for XP and 2003, MS wants to make more money yearly and free upgrades to new OS has never been in their past so how can it be in their future? Perhaps it will be like Windows XP Upgrade -- a reduced amount but I am certain they will charge something to convince people to buy Longhorn instead of a simple upgrade.
Ok, if Longhorn consumer edition costs $800 I'll shoot myself in the face. I think you're on crack that you would even guess Longhorn is that expensive. How can we assume patches will be free? Because MS has never charged for patches, and you've offered no evidence, YET AGAIN, to the contrary. Windows XP upgrades--FREE.
So you don't get confused, Avalon and the network interface for Longhorn that will be available for Windows XP and 2003 will not be "absolutely free" just like Windows XP Upgrade isn't.
Once again I say, you're on crack--XP upgrades ARE free.
Wow, they give it away so freely -- built right into the OS so you can never fully remove it. I think you mean maintain control over your computer -- not giving full control to the user (The whole point of a PC, but not according to MS). You certainly don't have your facts there and/or are ignorant of the truth. Why do you think the EU is trying to sue MS? Maybe you never heard about it...
Ok fine, even if I accepted everything you say here at face value (which I don't) MICROSOFT IS GIVING THINGS AWAY. That is all I was saying after you said they never gave anything away. Having proved that they give things away you can't just say, oh, well, that's not what I meant by give away (and I'll add Windows media player, .Net framework, ROTOR framework, etc). I'd love to hear what facts I don't have straight as I've listed examples, and you've ranted.
Did you try it on every PC in the world? Guess not, so in essence, your saying if I polled 200 people about their views on a particular subject then I can automatically assume that the majority among them is true among everyone in the world?! Ignorance...
No, but you know, in my book if I upgrade 20 computers two service packs flawlessly, and I've never heard of anyone's computer dieing from either one first hand, that's good enough for me. I don't know what other standard one must be held.
Actually I was stating fact, you were the one that made it into a competition. I hope you enjoyed making a fool out of yourself by turning it into a "competition". Unlike you, I'd rather stick with the facts. My whole statement has to do with commercial selling of the patches not XP SP breaks this -- that's a side point but you'd rather use that to satisfy your desire for "competition".
Moridineas, perhaps I offended you in a previous life, why else would you try to tell me I was making something into a competition when it was secretly you?
I still don't understand your points--WHAT commercial selling of patches? MS makes every patch available for free! That's my point!
Again, I'm sorry if you're a non-native speaker, as I think we're missing some vital element of communication--let me remind you of your quote that made it into what i humorously described as a competition--you said " you probably don't deal with as many XP users as I do"...thus my competition remark.
I'm afraid I STILL don't know what you're trying to communicate to me.
You're right I don't get it--apologies if you're not a native English speaker, but your sentences just don't parse properly. I'll break it down..
I have no idea how you missed what I was saying; however, care to let me explain. I am not saying anything about SP1 for XP costing money, I'm simply making a comparison where XP SP1 broke machines which also makes it likely for these upgrades that allow XP to function like Longhorn.
I don't get this..I'd GUESS you're saying that since a previous pgrade (according to you) broke some machines, these other upgrades offered before Longhorn could break some machines? That's stupid if that's what you mean.
As I said in the first sentence, MS is not a company that gives things away for free -- unless it profits their products (i.e. "free" developer tools for overpriced dev products -- wow so "free"). Why would they willing allow XP to be upgraded to Avalon, etc. without cost to consumer? They want to sell Longhorn not simply allow people to upgrade for free (i.e. Is Office 2000 free to Office '97 users?!). Think it through man -- I did. MS has a whole history it's not like they didn't burn people with this stuff before...
Again, this just doesn't make sense. Microsoft has repeatedly given things away to advance their products--every service pack ever as I showed in my last email. Internet Explorer! etc etc. No, their main product upgrades to a new cardinal version costs money, yes. Is this any different from any other company that sells any software? no. It's quite obvious and not complicated why they are giving out parts of Longhorn for free--so developers will use it, so users will use it, and people will get excited about Longhorn.
You haven't heard of SP1 break machines? I have -- legit copies too, you probably don't deal with as many XP users as I do and those who have broken their Windows machines probably moved to Linux so you don't hear their compliants -- or they just live without SP1 after a rebuild (that's what you do, MS won't reimburse you so complaining doesn't fix anything)...
Well as I said, I've upgraded about 20 XP boxes to SP1 and SP2 (and those are of course legit--I don't pirate), and haven't had a single application or box break. I hope that satisfies your dick measuring competition.
What are you attempting to say? That XP SP1 and SP2 cost money? That W2K sp1-4 cost money? That NT4 SP1-6 cost money? I don't get what you're saying.
;)
And SP1 broke XP machines? I've never heard of that, and I've upgraded around 20 AND read slashdot regularly
Jeez, if I had mod points I would mod you "unintelligible"
Nice to hear! I've been eying them covetously ;)
Dual G4 at the office is loud as hell.
I wonder what those new watercooled G5's sound like...
Ok, I don't know anything about a ISO image from MSDN so I could be wrong there--the version that has been publically available for several weeks off microsoft's website is 266mb and patches all versions. I don't know what else is included on the ISO, but the servicepack (and all previous updates) for all versions of XP is not that big.
Except, AFAIK (and I believe I've tried in the past) Corporate keys don't work on Pro--meaning there IS a difference that needs to be detected and patched accordingly.
google if you don't believe me.
And I forgot to list the media center, tablet, and 64-bit editions of XP.
How on earth did you post get insightful?
Yes, the FBI has to have limits because there is no way they can investigate every crime across the whole US. Thankfully we have other police etc to do that!
Yes, of course prosecutors have discretion--there's no sense prosecuting a case that can't possibly be won, and yes, if going easy on one criminal can net 10 more, I don't see the problem there either--what's your point? I'll tell you what the point is--when people are CLEARLY guilty, easy to catch, and easy to stop, the DOJ/FBI/whoever you want is going to act every time, and that's what they did here.
Ashcroft--haven't I heard about a trillion times people complaining on slashdot about how Ashcroft himself is violating all of our civil rights in his mad hunt for terrorists? Now you're complaining that he's not doing enough? THat's quite odd!
What a moron.
First of all, the update was NOT anywhere near 400mb.
Secondly, it contains every update, every fix, etc since XP was released.
Thirdly, it contains these fixes for every version of XP--home, corporate, pro.
thanks for playing!
Quite frankly, your analogy of warez kiddies and "the persecuted" is ridiculous, and imho shows what a useless and effete society we have become. When people get worked up to this kind of hysterical frenzy because people illegaly trading movies and mp3s are busted, something is seriously wrong.
Unfortunately the DOJ doesn't have the option of picking and choosing which laws to enforce--and especially not according to YOUR whims.
If I had mod points I would mod you up every time you post! thanks for spreading real information!
Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
p.s. I refer to YOUR ignorance.
Right--that's why I said his "on-show conversion." Keiller himself is unabashedly leftist, and has raised some complaints from conservative fans in the past because of his bashings (the majority of NPR listeners are conservative).
Thanks for the references, I'll definitely check them out--it's a very interesting topic!
Hey, I _completely_ agree with you, but I think you accidentally posted your message as reply rather than a parent post.
This DOES seem to fit the stereotypical view of conservatives as cold, uncaring, rational, and liberals as passionate and empathetic.
:)
Perhaps a sympton: things like Politically Correctness are commonly derided by conservatives. Perhaps it's just nonsense
I will say that overall it does seem to me that liberal simply care more about politics and issues. They may not be on the average be better informed than a conservative counterpart, but the issues are much more central to their being. I view this as part of the reason why hatred and loathing of Bush is so strong--you hear more people call bush a baby-killing liar than was ever said about Clinton who lied under oath (please, someone correct me) and also bombed decidely innocent targets for which we have had to pay reparations. I'm not trying to make this a partisan post, but in general I think political identity means more to liberals than to conservatives, in an emotional and personal manner.
One thing I've never understood about neuro-sciences (and it is truthfully because of my ignorance) is how exactly do we determine causality in the brain?
:-p
How do we know that emotional people don't have a more active amygdala because they don't control their emotions as much? How do we know that people who have a less active amygdala aren't simply controlling their emotions better?
are chemical imbalances a sympton of depression, or a cause?
it seems like a lot of brain stuff is chicken and egg like that, but this is probably a very stupid post
Reminds me of an episode I heard several months ago... Garrison Keillor was discussing his recent on-show conversion to become a Republican. (roughly paraphrased he said) "Back when I was a democrat and would say something political, I would get letters from Republicans telling me exactly how I was wrong and exactly what they thought of me. Now that I've switched parties, I now get 'hurt' letters from Democrats who are 'hurt' and 'saddened' by my new points of view. I can deal with 'hurt' letters!"
(apologies for without a doubt mangling his hilarious speech)