The trick is to structure a society that avoids letting Stalins act on their dreams, living your life in a way that protects you from things potential Stalins might do is not living at all.
Firefox 7 is a better browser than Firefox 4 was. There are minimal jarring UI changes between those 2 versions. Addon compatibility is being handled better with each release.
Sure, but deleting that entire paragraph doesn't really change your comment; my point was more that there was no need for an aside pointing out that you were assuming that MacTO was using present day usage.
The problem is most people probably don't really want to pay the prices that would be charged if vendors faced legal liability for every issue with their software.
(And currently they don't actually try to deny liability, they just claim that their software shouldn't be used for anything that might incur liability...)
So is your position that people shouldn't trust Microsoft, or is your position that Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to create marketing programs that have hardware requirements?
The main thrust of my first comment in this thread was that they were getting media coverage pretty much since the start of the thing, which is exactly true.
How did you read and understand those words without reading and understanding the rest of my comment?
I mean, I even said "Only if there is no way to disable secure boot". And Microsoft is not doing anything to stop vendors from installing the switch you speak of, so they aren't trying to keep the control you speak of.
Slashdot Mirror
The trick is to structure a society that avoids letting Stalins act on their dreams, living your life in a way that protects you from things potential Stalins might do is not living at all.
Take the "is" out of your first sentence and replace it with "was briefly".
Does a slower release cycle really change any of that? Or does it just make the waiting for updated add-ons seem like it takes less time?
The busy work for add on authors to update their compatibility is not great, but extentions aren't breaking just because of version flags anymore.
It is probably the best free antivirus.
Firefox 4,5 and 6, combined, have more than twice the users as Firefox 3.6.
http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201108-201108-bar
And the trend is for people to move towards the latest version (6 was released in August and already beat 4 for that month...)
Firefox 7 is a better browser than Firefox 4 was. There are minimal jarring UI changes between those 2 versions. Addon compatibility is being handled better with each release.
Not everyone sees those things as a fiasco.
READ MORE Reading.
Sure, but deleting that entire paragraph doesn't really change your comment; my point was more that there was no need for an aside pointing out that you were assuming that MacTO was using present day usage.
Have the class B owners of Google diluted themselves far enough that they no longer have control of the company?
(last I took interest, Schmidt, Brin and Page had a controlling interest in the company, held in unlisted class B shares)
I didn't say in 1985, I said sometime since then. An example of sometime since 1985 would be 1995.
Thanks for the bile.
I'm pretty sure PC stopped referring to a single platform sometime since 1985.
It's a threadjack complaining about the framing of the summary, not someone quibbling with you.
No, it's like the CTU, where they commit righteous atrocities in the name of justice.
You are really beating that drum.
The problem is most people probably don't really want to pay the prices that would be charged if vendors faced legal liability for every issue with their software.
(And currently they don't actually try to deny liability, they just claim that their software shouldn't be used for anything that might incur liability...)
Firefox 7 does a lot better on memory use than 4,5,6 did. There are more memory improvements coming with 8 and 9.
I've only ever used a couple of popular add-ons, so I haven't seen much friction there.
So is your position that people shouldn't trust Microsoft, or is your position that Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to create marketing programs that have hardware requirements?
If I select show "All add-ons" and disable all 4 Sun entries, when I visit here:
http://futureboy.us/frinkdocs/FrinkApplet.html
I get an alert that an add-on is disabled.
(I restarted after disabling them, just to be sure).
So what about "Manage Add Ons"-> "Disable" does not work?
You can bundle a python interpreter and app up so that installation and execution are the same as any other app.
Makes for a larger install package, but that's about it.
Oh, and also, I didn't defend the bailouts as necessary. I said that I accept that they were necessary to maintain the status quo in the country.
That status quo goes a hell of a lot further than Wall St. They certainly are very visible beneficiaries of it though.
I even already said that I wasn't sure that maintaining the status quo was a good thing for me, if you think I am backpedaling here.
Show me exactly where I attack the protestors.
The main thrust of my first comment in this thread was that they were getting media coverage pretty much since the start of the thing, which is exactly true.
How did you read and understand those words without reading and understanding the rest of my comment?
I mean, I even said "Only if there is no way to disable secure boot". And Microsoft is not doing anything to stop vendors from installing the switch you speak of, so they aren't trying to keep the control you speak of.
I was under the impression that present day human energy utilization was on the order of 15 terawatts continuous.
That's about 0.5 zettajoules per year, if I'm getting the math right. What standard of living does doubling that bring the entire planet to?
I assume they want people to be able to upgrade from Windows 7 without having to put up with BS, but who knows.
I don't know. Did I sound like I was trying to justify anything?