Mozilla's my favourite browser, and I think it's the best thing since sliced breead. What I like even more about it is that it's my own little secret. 90% of the masses will keep using IE, blissfully unaware of Mozilla's ability to block annoying pop-up ads.
The more popular Mozilla becomes, the more people will start blocking pop-up ads. The more people start blocking pop-ups, the more site with advertising get annoyed. This means they'll find another ways of innondating me with advertising that get around Mozilla's features.
What's even worse is that if Mozilla starts denting M$'s share of the browser market, M$ WILL start programming Windows to become incompatible with the browser. Since I use Windows 90% of the time (mostly because of work), that would really mess me up.
Andreessen: Yeah, I think so. When they originally did the acquisition, the big motivation around it was to be able to have a bargaining chip... to get better terms. They could say, 'We own Netscape, and we're willing to use Internet Explorer, but if you don't give us distribution through the Windows desktop we're going to use Netscape and we're going to double its market share overnight and cause you guys lots of problems.' There's no internal goal at AOL, or at l! east when I was there, to go get browser market share.
This would have never occurred to me, but it makes so much sense...
AOL hasn't been promoting Netscape the way they could have been, and they certainly seemed to have gone out of their way NOT to switch.
They should have the RIAA next to the definition of "petty" in the dictionary. This is the worst kind of penny-pinching mentality there is.
This is the same kind of mentality Microsoft has employed in the EULA's and their bullying of eBay to stop selling old copied of Windows.
The RIAA is trying to get blood out of a stone. Why in God's name would a profit-concious CD retailer go out of his way to line the RIAA's pockets for transactions on which they should have no right to get money on.
If I buy a CD, don't I theoretically own the right to listen the music until I should choose to sell it to somebody else? Why should they get a cut out of every transaction? That's like Ford charging me if I decide to get a cut out of me should I decide to sell my fomerly new car to a used car store. This starts down a really slippery slope. What if I decide to sell old furniture, an old computer, dishes, clothes, hell, what if I decide to donate my old clothes to the Salvation Army? Should the Gap get a cut of that too?
The RIAA should just stop being so damn greedy and understand that their business model is based largely on giving away music so that they won't make an optimal profit the way other businesses do. They shouldn't be trying to squeeze money out of places they have no right to.
... not just for Mozilla and its team, but for OpenSource, the internet itself, as well as the spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship.
This is not just a web browser: it is a platform of its own. When Netscape first came out, Microsoft feared that it would become a platform of its own that would quickly make Windows irrelevant. Mozilla is a proof-of-concept of Microsoft's fear. Its interface is almost identical across operating systems: the browser will look and mostly act the same across Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Mac, Solaris, etc. This means that a developer can design a web application or site that he can be almost 100% confident will run the same across many different operating systems without having to perform extensive operating-system specific testing. This gives alternative operating systems like Linux a huge advantage, because the developpers of a web application need not explicitly support that operating system.
Mozilla is, IMO, the best web browser out there, even better than IE. The tabbed interface allows me to browse several pages at once in the same Window, a real time saver both as a surfer and a developer. The automatic fill-in of usernames, passwords and form data is a real time-saver. Also, it looks better than any other browser out there: a real eye-pleaser.
Another thing that I hope will happen and that probably won't is a renewal of the browser wars. Microsoft has been getting complascent by not making significant updates or changes to IE other than to impair user functionality (no more native plug-ins or Java included). I would really like Microsoft to have to face browser competition again so that the company once again has to stay on its toes. The end users can only benefit from that.
He really seems to think that the cost of Windows is trivial, and that complaints about its price are just bad press.
I think the only way that Windows can be considered a "cheap" operating system is in relation to all the proprietary unices out there: Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, etc. However, we're talking about the server-side, not the desktop.
The only way I can see Gates justifying this point of view is to argue that Windows is so wonderful that if Microsoft wasn't so kind, it could have charged that much more for it based on its "excellence". Somehow, we're supposed to believe that their doing us a favour by selling it so cheaply. Ha!
Unfortunately, Steve Jobs won't make a version of OS X (from what I hear, it's finally gotten the bugs out, and is substantially superior to both Windows and Linux) for Intel and Linux still isn't quite ready to be a desktop operating system for the average computer user (though it's getting much closer, especially with the release of KDE 3).
What's really sad is that once rival operating systems catch up, Microsoft will pretty much own every national government in the English-speaking world, the way it nows owns the US, British and Canadian governments. By then, it won't make a difference if there's an OS that's 10 times better than Windows. They'll lobby for laws that will keep those OS's out of the market.
If he needs techies' support, then that means the CBTPA is not guaranteed passage in Congress. Furthermore, it means that after having pursued ALL OTHER special interests in the US, he's STILL come up short of the support he needs for passage, and that he's gone to techies as a very last resort.
I've been considering the move since GWB got elected.
Apparently, Alec Baldwin swore he would leave the States if Bush got elected, but he still hasn't come over. Some Republican handed him a one way bus ticket to Montreal during a speech he made recently.
Personally, I'd rather give money to RedHat (or maybe SuSe). They seem to be working hard to get Linux accepted in business. Mandrake is very desktop focused, and that is probably the weakest area to forge a business model.. (IMHO)
I think it's EXTREMELY import for the future of desktop computing to have a strong desktop/workstation Linux distro. If for nothing else, this should provide the average desktop user with an actual choice over Windows. I haven't tried SuSE, but Mandrake seems to be the most user-friendly Linux distro that actually has a chance of gaining converts from Windows who are just normal desktop users. Without Mandrake, I think the rate of new Linux Windows converts would drop by almost a half.
Also, there are many businesses that need a good client-side development platform. For instance, Microcell, a Montreal-based cellular service provider, has Mandrake installed on all its development machines, especially for its Java developers. Any business that wants to develop software in a cross-platform environment would find such a distro to be extremely useful.
I, for one, prefer to develop in Linux, because of the rich command-line tools and environment, as well as the greater control over configuration files and settings. Windows is a poor platform for doing any command-line processing, even with cygwin. However, I also need a rich, user-friendly desktop environment with GUI configuration tools, should I require them. Mandrake, despite being somewhat bloated, comes with all these tools pre-configured and ready-to-use right out of the box. AFAIK, RedHat and other distros require quite a bit of initial configuration to get everything running just right.
I actually use Slackware at home, but that's because I can afford to play around with it. When I'm developing at work, I need something that will pretty much run out of the box, without being Windows. Mandrake is the distro I would use at work, were I not in a M$ environment (SourceSafe, Exchange Email Server, MCSE Network Admin) like I am now.
Before I learned Java, I was a virgin. As soon as I got my first Java programming job, I got laid for the first time.
I almost got another woman afterwards, but then I got laid off from my Java job, and my sex life dried up. As soon as I found out my job search was over after 3 months (a Java programming position) I picked up again. I got laid again within a couple of weeks of starting my new job.
I had varying degrees of success over the course of that job, but when I got my new Java job, my rate of success got even higher. Now I'm in a situation where I'm getting some on a consistent basis.
...he's brought up a very interesting point, one that I'd like to expand upon.
Increasingly draconian copyright laws such as the DMCA will destroy innovation in the United States. Before the DMCA, it was possible to come up with an innovative idea without being sued for it. Now, for merely cracking a simplistic incription scheme AND for entering the US, a Russian programmer has been sent to jail. Alan Cox, who works for an American company (RedHat), lives in Wales and REFUSES to enter the United States.
How many of you think that these are not isolated incidents, but instead reflective of a growing trend among software developers? Mozilla (among other projects) has proven that you can successfully run an OpenSource project with your developers scattered all over the world, using only the internet as a means of communicating and submitting/checking out code. This means you can manage a successful OpenSource project without a single one of your developers setting foot on US soil.
What, then, is the incentive for top-notch developers to live and work in the States? ZERO! As a lesser developer:), I have already dismissed the possibility of taking a job in the US, no matter how much money I'm offered. I imagine many others have already either either taken the decision I have, or are seriously considering it.
I must congratulate the RIAA and other DMCA lobbiests. They've effectively shot themselves in the foot. Because of their greed and unwillingness to share any of "their" innovations with software developers, they've guaranteed that the flow of innovation to them in their country will dry up.
Because if they believe this garbage, it must be pretty low. It's their own damn fault that, as another Slashdot poster pointed out, they installed Outlook as the default email client, which is pretty much a virus magnet. All these bozos would have to do would be to ban Outlook and Outlook Express instead of making their employees pay for upper management's stupidity.
As a web developper, I must have constant and unrestricted access to the Web in order to do research, download new development tools and API's. I must be able to post questions to bulletin boards if I run into a problem or have a question that must urgently be answered. I need to subscribe to industry mailing lists. Most importantly, I must do the research I need to upgrade my skills and stay current with the goings-on in the industry and trends that are relevant to the methodologies or tools we will be using at work, or even to keep up with the relevance of Java as a development platform vis-a-vis.NET or another competitor.
Also, it's important to give one's employees a chance to take a breather once in a while. It's impossible to work 8 straight hours a day. Anyone will tell you that the average human being is only capable of performing a maximum of four straight hours of work a day of concentrated labour. The rest of the time must be allowed for pseudo-work such as meetings, talking shop with coworkers, and even casual surfing, which I tend to do sometimes.
However, leave it up to upper management to feel the need to stick their nozes in what is clearly none of their business: micromanagement. Instead of relying upon deadlines, assignments, milestones and other project-related objectives to motivate their employees to do their jobs, employers feel they must constantly be in our faces as the only way to get us to do anything, which to be polite, is excessive. This is highly unproductive and will only serve to lower productivity, not increase it.
I can't understand what these Republicans are smoking. They base their entire telecommunications policy on a simplistic and flawed theory: Monopolies are essential to encouraging investment in infrastructure.
Not only is this a fallacy, but it's so incredibly backwards, about 100 years backwards to be exact.
These are the kinds of policies that were favoured to encourage the building of railroads and phone lines. What resulted from this were robber barrons for which the very first antitrust laws were written. So much for lawmakers learning from history.
Promising the Baby Bells and Cable Companies extravagant monopoly profits in order to get them to build broadband infrastructure is like using a streamroller to crush an anthill. It's totally unnecessary by a factor of 100. There are enough subscribers out there for the incumbents AND competitors. Look at the North American long-distance market for instance. Once the market was opened up, several competitors emerged (Sprint and MCI, for instance) who invested in their own long-distance infrastructure simply to save them the money they were paying the Baby Bells to rent their lines.
The problem is that large telcos around the world tend to be very tight-fisted. Bell Canada, for example, is refusing to invest any more money into its DSL infrastructure. This is despite the fact that its subscriber base is growing expenentially and that it's putting its competitors out of business with indefinite pricing promotions (essentially, predatory pricing). Given their present behaviour, how will granting them a monopoly serve their customers?
I guess the only conclusion to draw from all this is that lawmakers no longer take into consideration the needs of the electorate that they supposedly serve, and are instead beholden to the interests of those who made the largest campaign contributions.
Slackware is an excellent distro, but I had to do some fiddling to get everything working right.
I agree, but that's what makes Slackware so COOL:)
The fact that it forces you to fix things allows you to learn more, and have more control over your system. For instance, in the week I've been running Slackware, I've fixed my lilo, fstab, my sound card, my CD-Writer, and rp-pppoe. I had to dig around a bit to figure it all out, but that's what makes it so fun.
Mandrake had those things automatically set up for me, so I could never figure out how they worked. What's worse, a lot of those things were broken.
Now I can build the system I want, with the applications I want, compliled the way that I want, instead of having everything already done for me, a-la Windows.
Still, I agree that Slackware is not a newbie distro. I started off using Mandrake, and it was great at the time. Once I started to figure out Linux, I needed a distro that offered more of a challenge.
My MP3's are on my harddrive, and they're probably going to stay there aside from me backing them up.
I mainly use CD-R's to either burn Linux/FreeBSD distributions, or to back up my data (admittedly sometimes MP3's). Still, 90% of my CD-R usage involves no burning of audio or video content whatsoever.
I don't feel I should have to pay these outrageous fees simply to burn legitimate and legal non-audio or video content.
If they pass this, they no longer have any justification for passing the DMCA or SSSCA in Canada, since they would be compensated (media fees) for crimes that will no longer be committed.
If the Canadian government passes this, a DMCA AND an SSSCA-like law, then we know the Liberals have totally sold out to the recording industry, and have taken the Canadian electorate completely for granted (no credible government in waiting).
- Keyboard operation. Open a new tab (Ctrl-T), type your URL, switch back to what you were reading (Ctrl-PageUp) and wait for the new tab to stop spinning. Switch back (Ctrl-PageDown), read it and close it (Ctrl-W). I know you can control IE with the keyboard as well, but to switch windows you have to use Ctrl-Tab, which is an incredible pain if you've got a bunch of windows open.
Thanks, dude, I've been searching forever for those keyboard shortcuts:)
I downloaded the.mov from the site by searching the HTML source for the URL to the.mov file itself, pasting that in my browser, waiting for the movie to load again, and then doing a Page Save.
Once I saved it onto my computer, I tried to play the trailer from my harddrive, but it gave me a message telling me I need QuickTime 5.02. I did Help About and it told me I HAVE QuickTime 5.02.
Slashdot Mirror
Man, the first thing I'm going to do when I get home tonight is download the ISO, then burn a CD. Then I'm going to install it.
This is like a dream distro. KDE 3.0, Mozilla 1.0, Evolution, etc...
I still find it hard to believe that one guy essentially did this on his own.
Mozilla's my favourite browser, and I think it's the best thing since sliced breead. What I like even more about it is that it's my own little secret. 90% of the masses will keep using IE, blissfully unaware of Mozilla's ability to block annoying pop-up ads.
The more popular Mozilla becomes, the more people will start blocking pop-up ads. The more people start blocking pop-ups, the more site with advertising get annoyed. This means they'll find another ways of innondating me with advertising that get around Mozilla's features.
What's even worse is that if Mozilla starts denting M$'s share of the browser market, M$ WILL start programming Windows to become incompatible with the browser. Since I use Windows 90% of the time (mostly because of work), that would really mess me up.
This is an interesting except:
... to get better terms. They could say, 'We own Netscape, and we're willing to use Internet Explorer, but if you don't give us distribution through the Windows desktop we're going to use Netscape and we're going to double its market share overnight and cause you guys lots of problems.' There's no internal goal at AOL, or at l! east when I was there, to go get browser market share.
Andreessen: Yeah, I think so. When they originally did the acquisition, the big motivation around it was to be able to have a bargaining chip
This would have never occurred to me, but it makes so much sense...
AOL hasn't been promoting Netscape the way they could have been, and they certainly seemed to have gone out of their way NOT to switch.
Now I know why...
They should have the RIAA next to the definition of "petty" in the dictionary. This is the worst kind of penny-pinching mentality there is.
This is the same kind of mentality Microsoft has employed in the EULA's and their bullying of eBay to stop selling old copied of Windows.
The RIAA is trying to get blood out of a stone. Why in God's name would a profit-concious CD retailer go out of his way to line the RIAA's pockets for transactions on which they should have no right to get money on.
If I buy a CD, don't I theoretically own the right to listen the music until I should choose to sell it to somebody else? Why should they get a cut out of every transaction? That's like Ford charging me if I decide to get a cut out of me should I decide to sell my fomerly new car to a used car store. This starts down a really slippery slope. What if I decide to sell old furniture, an old computer, dishes, clothes, hell, what if I decide to donate my old clothes to the Salvation Army? Should the Gap get a cut of that too?
The RIAA should just stop being so damn greedy and understand that their business model is based largely on giving away music so that they won't make an optimal profit the way other businesses do. They shouldn't be trying to squeeze money out of places they have no right to.
... not just for Mozilla and its team, but for OpenSource, the internet itself, as well as the spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship.
This is not just a web browser: it is a platform of its own. When Netscape first came out, Microsoft feared that it would become a platform of its own that would quickly make Windows irrelevant. Mozilla is a proof-of-concept of Microsoft's fear. Its interface is almost identical across operating systems: the browser will look and mostly act the same across Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Mac, Solaris, etc. This means that a developer can design a web application or site that he can be almost 100% confident will run the same across many different operating systems without having to perform extensive operating-system specific testing. This gives alternative operating systems like Linux a huge advantage, because the developpers of a web application need not explicitly support that operating system.
Mozilla is, IMO, the best web browser out there, even better than IE. The tabbed interface allows me to browse several pages at once in the same Window, a real time saver both as a surfer and a developer. The automatic fill-in of usernames, passwords and form data is a real time-saver. Also, it looks better than any other browser out there: a real eye-pleaser.
Another thing that I hope will happen and that probably won't is a renewal of the browser wars. Microsoft has been getting complascent by not making significant updates or changes to IE other than to impair user functionality (no more native plug-ins or Java included). I would really like Microsoft to have to face browser competition again so that the company once again has to stay on its toes. The end users can only benefit from that.
Hey, there's no party in Montreal! What gives? I don't want to have to go all the way to Toronto.
He really seems to think that the cost of Windows is trivial, and that complaints about its price are just bad press.
I think the only way that Windows can be considered a "cheap" operating system is in relation to all the proprietary unices out there: Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, etc. However, we're talking about the server-side, not the desktop.
The only way I can see Gates justifying this point of view is to argue that Windows is so wonderful that if Microsoft wasn't so kind, it could have charged that much more for it based on its "excellence". Somehow, we're supposed to believe that their doing us a favour by selling it so cheaply. Ha!
Unfortunately, Steve Jobs won't make a version of OS X (from what I hear, it's finally gotten the bugs out, and is substantially superior to both Windows and Linux) for Intel and Linux still isn't quite ready to be a desktop operating system for the average computer user (though it's getting much closer, especially with the release of KDE 3).
What's really sad is that once rival operating systems catch up, Microsoft will pretty much own every national government in the English-speaking world, the way it nows owns the US, British and Canadian governments. By then, it won't make a difference if there's an OS that's 10 times better than Windows. They'll lobby for laws that will keep those OS's out of the market.
If he needs techies' support, then that means the CBTPA is not guaranteed passage in Congress. Furthermore, it means that after having pursued ALL OTHER special interests in the US, he's STILL come up short of the support he needs for passage, and that he's gone to techies as a very last resort.
:)
This is a good sign
I've been considering the move since GWB got elected.
:O
Apparently, Alec Baldwin swore he would leave the States if Bush got elected, but he still hasn't come over. Some Republican handed him a one way bus ticket to Montreal during a speech he made recently.
God I hope he doesn't come here
I'm already here, and I'm not going anywhere.
Nah, just fine Gates a penny for everytime an installation of Windows crashes. He'll be bankrupt within a week :)
Personally, I'd rather give money to RedHat (or maybe SuSe). They seem to be working hard to get Linux accepted in business. Mandrake is very desktop focused, and that is probably the weakest area to forge a business model.. (IMHO)
I think it's EXTREMELY import for the future of desktop computing to have a strong desktop/workstation Linux distro. If for nothing else, this should provide the average desktop user with an actual choice over Windows. I haven't tried SuSE, but Mandrake seems to be the most user-friendly Linux distro that actually has a chance of gaining converts from Windows who are just normal desktop users. Without Mandrake, I think the rate of new Linux Windows converts would drop by almost a half.
Also, there are many businesses that need a good client-side development platform. For instance, Microcell, a Montreal-based cellular service provider, has Mandrake installed on all its development machines, especially for its Java developers. Any business that wants to develop software in a cross-platform environment would find such a distro to be extremely useful.
I, for one, prefer to develop in Linux, because of the rich command-line tools and environment, as well as the greater control over configuration files and settings. Windows is a poor platform for doing any command-line processing, even with cygwin. However, I also need a rich, user-friendly desktop environment with GUI configuration tools, should I require them. Mandrake, despite being somewhat bloated, comes with all these tools pre-configured and ready-to-use right out of the box. AFAIK, RedHat and other distros require quite a bit of initial configuration to get everything running just right.
I actually use Slackware at home, but that's because I can afford to play around with it. When I'm developing at work, I need something that will pretty much run out of the box, without being Windows. Mandrake is the distro I would use at work, were I not in a M$ environment (SourceSafe, Exchange Email Server, MCSE Network Admin) like I am now.
I use my web mail account as my primary email, and I have no problems whatsoever with the interface.
I can read my mail whereever I go.
Before I learned Java, I was a virgin. As soon as I got my first Java programming job, I got laid for the first time.
I almost got another woman afterwards, but then I got laid off from my Java job, and my sex life dried up. As soon as I found out my job search was over after 3 months (a Java programming position) I picked up again. I got laid again within a couple of weeks of starting my new job.
I had varying degrees of success over the course of that job, but when I got my new Java job, my rate of success got even higher. Now I'm in a situation where I'm getting some on a consistent basis.
...he's brought up a very interesting point, one that I'd like to expand upon.
:), I have already dismissed the possibility of taking a job in the US, no matter how much money I'm offered. I imagine many others have already either either taken the decision I have, or are seriously considering it.
Increasingly draconian copyright laws such as the DMCA will destroy innovation in the United States. Before the DMCA, it was possible to come up with an innovative idea without being sued for it. Now, for merely cracking a simplistic incription scheme AND for entering the US, a Russian programmer has been sent to jail. Alan Cox, who works for an American company (RedHat), lives in Wales and REFUSES to enter the United States.
How many of you think that these are not isolated incidents, but instead reflective of a growing trend among software developers? Mozilla (among other projects) has proven that you can successfully run an OpenSource project with your developers scattered all over the world, using only the internet as a means of communicating and submitting/checking out code. This means you can manage a successful OpenSource project without a single one of your developers setting foot on US soil.
What, then, is the incentive for top-notch developers to live and work in the States? ZERO! As a lesser developer
I must congratulate the RIAA and other DMCA lobbiests. They've effectively shot themselves in the foot. Because of their greed and unwillingness to share any of "their" innovations with software developers, they've guaranteed that the flow of innovation to them in their country will dry up.
...so I wouldn't have gotten that junk mail anyway.
Nevertheless, I logged in, and, sure enough, everything was set to "yes". I promptly set everything to "no".
Thanks for the tip.
Well, Gateway's not doing so well nowadays, so I guess they figured: "What the hell!".
Because if they believe this garbage, it must be pretty low. It's their own damn fault that, as another Slashdot poster pointed out, they installed Outlook as the default email client, which is pretty much a virus magnet. All these bozos would have to do would be to ban Outlook and Outlook Express instead of making their employees pay for upper management's stupidity.
.NET or another competitor.
As a web developper, I must have constant and unrestricted access to the Web in order to do research, download new development tools and API's. I must be able to post questions to bulletin boards if I run into a problem or have a question that must urgently be answered. I need to subscribe to industry mailing lists. Most importantly, I must do the research I need to upgrade my skills and stay current with the goings-on in the industry and trends that are relevant to the methodologies or tools we will be using at work, or even to keep up with the relevance of Java as a development platform vis-a-vis
Also, it's important to give one's employees a chance to take a breather once in a while. It's impossible to work 8 straight hours a day. Anyone will tell you that the average human being is only capable of performing a maximum of four straight hours of work a day of concentrated labour. The rest of the time must be allowed for pseudo-work such as meetings, talking shop with coworkers, and even casual surfing, which I tend to do sometimes.
However, leave it up to upper management to feel the need to stick their nozes in what is clearly none of their business: micromanagement. Instead of relying upon deadlines, assignments, milestones and other project-related objectives to motivate their employees to do their jobs, employers feel they must constantly be in our faces as the only way to get us to do anything, which to be polite, is excessive. This is highly unproductive and will only serve to lower productivity, not increase it.
I can't understand what these Republicans are smoking. They base their entire telecommunications policy on a simplistic and flawed theory: Monopolies are essential to encouraging investment in infrastructure.
Not only is this a fallacy, but it's so incredibly backwards, about 100 years backwards to be exact.
These are the kinds of policies that were favoured to encourage the building of railroads and phone lines. What resulted from this were robber barrons for which the very first antitrust laws were written. So much for lawmakers learning from history.
Promising the Baby Bells and Cable Companies extravagant monopoly profits in order to get them to build broadband infrastructure is like using a streamroller to crush an anthill. It's totally unnecessary by a factor of 100. There are enough subscribers out there for the incumbents AND competitors. Look at the North American long-distance market for instance. Once the market was opened up, several competitors emerged (Sprint and MCI, for instance) who invested in their own long-distance infrastructure simply to save them the money they were paying the Baby Bells to rent their lines.
The problem is that large telcos around the world tend to be very tight-fisted. Bell Canada, for example, is refusing to invest any more money into its DSL infrastructure. This is despite the fact that its subscriber base is growing expenentially and that it's putting its competitors out of business with indefinite pricing promotions (essentially, predatory pricing). Given their present behaviour, how will granting them a monopoly serve their customers?
I guess the only conclusion to draw from all this is that lawmakers no longer take into consideration the needs of the electorate that they supposedly serve, and are instead beholden to the interests of those who made the largest campaign contributions.
Slackware is an excellent distro, but I had to do some fiddling to get everything working right.
:)
I agree, but that's what makes Slackware so COOL
The fact that it forces you to fix things allows you to learn more, and have more control over your system. For instance, in the week I've been running Slackware, I've fixed my lilo, fstab, my sound card, my CD-Writer, and rp-pppoe. I had to dig around a bit to figure it all out, but that's what makes it so fun.
Mandrake had those things automatically set up for me, so I could never figure out how they worked. What's worse, a lot of those things were broken.
Now I can build the system I want, with the applications I want, compliled the way that I want, instead of having everything already done for me, a-la Windows.
Still, I agree that Slackware is not a newbie distro. I started off using Mandrake, and it was great at the time. Once I started to figure out Linux, I needed a distro that offered more of a challenge.
My MP3's are on my harddrive, and they're probably going to stay there aside from me backing them up.
I mainly use CD-R's to either burn Linux/FreeBSD distributions, or to back up my data (admittedly sometimes MP3's). Still, 90% of my CD-R usage involves no burning of audio or video content whatsoever.
I don't feel I should have to pay these outrageous fees simply to burn legitimate and legal non-audio or video content.
If they pass this, they no longer have any justification for passing the DMCA or SSSCA in Canada, since they would be compensated (media fees) for crimes that will no longer be committed.
If the Canadian government passes this, a DMCA AND an SSSCA-like law, then we know the Liberals have totally sold out to the recording industry, and have taken the Canadian electorate completely for granted (no credible government in waiting).
- Keyboard operation. Open a new tab (Ctrl-T), type your URL, switch back to what you were reading (Ctrl-PageUp) and wait for the new tab to stop spinning. Switch back (Ctrl-PageDown), read it and close it (Ctrl-W). I know you can control IE with the keyboard as well, but to switch windows you have to use Ctrl-Tab, which is an incredible pain if you've got a bunch of windows open.
:)
Thanks, dude, I've been searching forever for those keyboard shortcuts
Too bad. I just switch from Mandrake to Slackware a week ago.
You're on your own, Mandrake.
I downloaded the .mov from the site by searching the HTML source for the URL to the .mov file itself, pasting that in my browser, waiting for the movie to load again, and then doing a Page Save.
Once I saved it onto my computer, I tried to play the trailer from my harddrive, but it gave me a message telling me I need QuickTime 5.02. I did Help About and it told me I HAVE QuickTime 5.02.
What gives?