Again you are rating it as a 'showstopper' bug but they don't.
My data is far more valuable to me than the latest shiny new distro. If potential data corruption is not a "showstopper" for RedHat then how can I trust them with my data?
The answer is that I can't.
So yes- RedHat does not consider it a showstopper but it SHOULD be to them, and it certainly is for me which is why I am looking to use a different linux vender in the future.
If we're unwilling to accept a release that changes and break things, how do we move forward with an OS made up of hundreds of packages that all have different timelines, goals, etc?
Q: Was anybody able to submit a patch?
A: No because nobody has access to CVS
It is one thing to find bugs in a distro that the distributor didn't know about but another thing altogether different for a distributor to release something as "gold" that they knowingly knew could trash your data. And if one replies that Microsoft's operating system can do the same thing, I would like to point out that there are legitimate reasons why MS is so often mentioned in a tone of disgust.
But that's the whole point of Fedora, it's shiny new stuff that is *MEANT* to be a playground area. It's going to break, it's not for production systems, it's there as a community wide test lab that isn't quite an end distro and isn't quite beta either.
1) I thought Fedora was supposed to be RedHat's "community distribution" but the community isn't allowed to participate.
2) Just because a distro is supposed to be "on the cutting edge" does not mean one distributes as "gold" a distro with known critical bugs.
and
3) It appears that RedHat's philosophy of what a Linux distribution SHOULD be does not fit with my own so I am looking at other distributions to see if another vendor aligns closer to my values.
If RedHat still does it for you then fine but to me, Fedora is not a finished product and I am not interested in coughing up the cash RedHat wants for Enterprise. I paid 50$ a piece for 3 different versions of RedHat over the years (and was happy to do it) but 180$ (minimum) just to test drive is expensive for a home desktop computer.
FC2 is the first step out of the shadow of legacy for this distro. Everything under the hood is shiny and new - and yes, it has bugs. It's a.0 release, so give it a break.
Why should I give it a break?
If the new stuff has bugs it should:
1) hold off release until the major bugs are ironed out.
and/or
2) Kill some of the shiney new stuff until it is really ready for prime time.
You post that crap was foisted on the user in the past and so this is no big deal. I think the reverse. In the past, Linux was a maturing system that was missing many pieces. However, RedHat has had 10 years to get thier act together and produce a quality distribution only to find that they are STILL shoveling half baked systems in my face! I think I am going to test Novel's SuSe and see if they have got it together any better.
It's not poorly tested. They know the bug they just released anyway.
Now should this bother you more or less?
They knowingly released fedora core 2 with what I would consider a "show stopper". I don't even duel boot my linux machine but the idea that RedHat was willing to release this as gold when this bug was present indicates release schedules are more important than quality to them. For me that is a philisophical gap that can not be bridged. I know for certain that I am not upgrading my FC 1 system to FC 2 so now I am exploring my options.
Technically, murderers are only a problem for one segment of the population too...namely, the segment they're merrily killing off. Just because it's not you doesn't mean it's not a problem of concern.
I don't think the previous poster was to abolishing capital punishment to murderer's. The previous poster I would suspect (with tongue in cheek) say "yeah kill the murderers too".
People, to some degree, are as entertained by the sophistication of the CG animation as they are by the plot, characters, and so on.
If Monster Inc. was not funny and well done, I would not have recommended people to see it or gone to it myself three time (with various different people).
The most ground breaking CG (for its time) I had ever seen was "Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within" but the movie was pure crap. I regretted the purchase of the ticket and recomended the movie be skipped to all my friends and family. Point is Pixar makes good STORIES into good movies and they could do that with real people, 2d animation or 3d animation. CG is Pixars medium to tell a story but little to do with thier success.
Not many people believe this, but I think *Disney* got the better end of the deal when DISNEY dumped PIXAR. (Not the other way around, as the Steve Jobs faithful believe.)...
To trade away the Toy Story/Nemo/Monsters franchise in order to bet that Pixar will continue to make hit movies is a bad bet. Nobody stays on top forever in this business.
I think you are VERY wrong! Even if Pixar is incapable of making hit after hit, they rightly don't want to be beholden to Disney. Even if they make a few flops, they will make more hits and those hits will be the sole property of Pixar. Disney has made a few flops and they will make more flops but along the way, they are going to make a few hits too and I don't think Disney would want to give anyone else a cut (and rightfully so). Pixar needed Disney in the beginning because nobody knew who the hell Pixar was but now Pixar is a household name and they don't need (or want) Disney anymore. Setven Spielburg has had a very stellar career because he is a talented film maker. The people at Pixar (right now) are making movies of the consistency that Spielburg did in his early career. Results speak for themselves. Sure Spielburgh (and Disney and everybody else) has made bad films, but they also went on to make new great hits. Pixar has grown too big to be under the wing of Disney.
This looks to me more like one of those videos on "When Animals Attack" where a retarded guy provokes a polar bear by poking it in the ass with a stick.
I consider that natural selection. I would not cheer the bear on but I don't pity the human. I do cheer IBM against SCO because in this case, eliminating SCO's stupidity benefits us all.
I thought one particularly interesting part in the Tanenbaum article was that it seemed pretty clear that Brown hadn't done any reading about Unix before hand. For something like this you surely spend a few weeks reading up at home and making notes before you fly to Holland and interview someone. Smells very fishy to me.
(for the humor impaired, please skip this post)
Pretty simple to me- Free trip to Holland or Homework. If I could get away with billing a free trip to Holland instead of doing REAL work, I know which one I would do!
"But boss, I need to know the syntax to this API, so I have a plain ticket to Brazil to talk to the guys who wrote the API"
w/out jar-jar, there's no emergency powers and hence, no clone wars. i happen to resent it, but that's the way i think it shakes out.
And I am ammazed that thier are people who are so limmited by the boxes others write. It is so easy to get past the emmergency powers deal. Easily done... You could just have someone say the council has given emergency powers without ANY depiction of debate seen in the movie and left the whole thing up to the moviegoers imagination. That is assumming you LIKED the plot. Personally there is not ONE scene in movie 2 I would keep.
As for movie 1, Jar Jar should never have gotten past the drawing boards. R2D2 and 3CPO should not have been introduced in the films (great characters but they don't belong this way in the past). Anikan should have been at least 8 years older.
But lets just say you liked the story line to "movie 2" and you just wanted to edit out JAR JAR. It is easy to come up with plausable excuses for emergency powers:
1) a civilized planet was blown up. Emergency powers given to a strong leader to stop the distruction of civilized space (not knowing given to the one man who blew up the planet in the first place).
2) bribery and blackmail done behind the scenes by a masterfull political genius (and some week and gullable but not jar jar "you will agree with me"... "I will agree with you")
3) During war a delegate is ALWAYS given emergency powers (make it the way the council works) but the person who it is given to is the wrong one.
4) The leader's of the council are killed among others and ther is no time to get things straitened out so emergency powers are given to the man who started the chaos (unbeknowst to the other delegates).
I could go on for hours coming up with excuses for emergency powers given to a delegate. What is amazing is that you could only come up with Jar Jar Binks!
As much as that sounds plausible it's not always. My Presario 2180CA laptop [for instance] is fairly Linux resilient. ACPI crashes it and repeatedly it fails to detect the keyboard [I've never had to "configure" a keyboard]. It got to the point where I just put WinXP on my laptop [well the copy that came with my laptop] because I simply just wanted to *USE* my laptop.
Heres a clue- don't buy hardware that cuts corners. I do my research before buying computer hardware. If a piece of hardware is dodgy, I don't buy it. I try not to reward companies for bad products.
BK starts charging a lot of money to use BK (monthy fee even). Great, so the kernel hackers check out the code and put it in CVS - no big deal.
Oh, but the last BK archive is still around - oh but BK went out of business so it's not accessible....
Could all happen but many pieces of software still WORK even if the company goes out of bussiness!
Before BK there was nothing because Linus did not find an SCM up to the task of working the way he works and if BK flies off the handle, Linus and group are no worse off than they were before BK- which is back to nothing.
What will you do when they switch to a subscription model and charge $$$ per month? Save them all as.rtf or.txt and import into OpenOffice.org?
who says you have to upgrade? Word 97 should STILL work with those "old" documents.
your post goes off the handle with "what if the sky is falling" without taking into consideration any common sense.
This means that folks working on Free revision control (like me!) are substantially hampered if we want to also do some work on the Linux kernel.
How does BitKeeper hamper you? Aren't you still allowed to send regular patches like Linus got before using BitKeeper?
Yes I agree that the SCM compete clause is lame but Larry is giving the tool away for free and the obnoxious clause is not there if you are willing to pay for it. So if using bitkeeper would really improve your productivity then buy the thing and not worry what projects you can work on. If the price is too high (and I could understand that) then do things the old way and not worry about it. I only wish there was a version around a hundred dollars without the silly clauses that I could use. I agree with Linus Torvalds philosophy of "he who writes the code gets to choose the license". Bitmover owes you no favors and if you don't like it then that is fine but whining about how free(dom) a piece of software is seems churlish.
So I look at this debate over the efficacy of the Hafnium bomb and wonder to myself why it is that humans have this innate need to develop weapons that possess this much power. Why do we see the drawbacks to new technology faster than the benefits?
Simple.
Military is willing to spend a fortune on speculative R&D where most companies and agencies would not. This means that the military gets the toys sooner than the rest. Military spent a fortune to harness atomic energy and later others found uses for the discoveries and inventions the military came up with.
You got to pay to play and the military is willing to pay.
AutoCAD is more complex, but then again, its task is more complex. Either way, they are both complex. Girlfriend 2.0 is not nearly as complicated nor as annoying as Wife 3.0;-)
I have no problems with Wife 1 OS. The trick is that you have to manage your resources carefully. Wife 1 is a multi tasking OS that spawns new procceses that utilize more resources. However, those processes provide a stable environment with many more features than girfriend 2. Girlfriend 2 tends to get flaky on occasion and dumps core when under heavy load but Wife 1 tends to handle high load situations much better. The problem with users of Wife 1 is that after awhile, they neglect occasional maintenance of the system due to its apparent stable environment. If neglected too much, Wife 1 will dump core and unlike girlfriend 2, could ruin hardware in the process. Overall, I prefer Wife 1, but I am more carefull with maintenance due to the possibilty of hardware failure if neglected.
I think things like this, far more than driver compatibility or any such thing, is important. If I had more time, I'd be throwing it at helping develop wine. Until people can switch, and keep all the little niceties that come with software compatibility (I know viruses, spyware and such fall into this category, but it goes with the territory).
Actually a program that works in the exactly opposite direction of wine would be BEST (A program on Windows that would allow a user to run most Linux programs). The reason is that if a developer believes that development for Windows is portable to Linux has no incentive to stop developing on Windows. However, if the Linux comunity could write a program to seemlessly integrate Linux programs into a Windows environment, many developers might move over to Linux for the "kill two birds with one stone" advantage. Even things like Mozilla and OpenOffice could focus on Linux and forget about Windows (assuming the program worked perfectly) instead of having multiple backend implementations of GUI/OS specific stuff. But don't respond about cygwin since it does not provide the functionality of wine nor does it integrate into the windows environment. What I am talking about is full recognition of the Linux ABI that translates to the Windows equivilent so that a user can plop a program they programed and compiled on Linux will just run on Windows.
Terms of service are displayed so that the provider can discontinue the service to that particular client if he breaks them, it's never used to sue anyone. He didn't seem to hurt their website significantly (after all, it was months before they noticed it?) so there's nothing illegal in that.
OTOH, if he signed (and not just viewed or clicked on a button), a confidentiality agreement, then he's fucked.
Personally I think even if he is "squeaky cleen by the law", I still think he is a sleaze bag. Even if it was legally allowable, he knew his previous employer would not want him doing that and he abused the severance package that they gave him to F#(k them over. Seems like a person I would not want to hire in the first place and understandable why they let him go.
Also... if a "sun scientist" were smart enough to build a probe an launch it out of the suns gravity to the earth (keep in mind that that is exponentially harder then us sending probes to mars as they don't have orbital dynamics working in their favor), don't you think they would also be smart enough to build said probe out of something solid and non-molten, as to not destroy the planet they intend to explore?
Actually the "Sun Scientists" have been transmitting large dosages of radiation into space to find life in the universe and were quickly surprised to find life on the third moon from the sun. Some scientist in the community ponder weather the life existed before the experiment started and wonder whether the search for life alters the data findings. This controversial project to find life in the universe may be coming to an end due to pressures from galaxy enviromentalists and budget cuts on the project.
Over 22,000 word files on their site. Assuming they are all still there, that is a lot of cleaning up to do. I wonder what else people will find.
If it is as uneventfull as the batch I just read, I will assume that Microsoft is a squeeky clean company. I didn't find anything in those documents that would embarass me if I had been the writer of any of those documents. Hell- I have posted stuff on slashdot more embarrasing than what this guy "discoved" in MS PR documents.
Media Player isn't near a monopoly in media players. Almost everyone has Quicktime installed, Real comes preinstalled on Dells, DivX is out there. There are things Microsoft has done that I don't think were right, but bundling software with the OS isn't one of them.
One could have said the same thing when IE was new to the market and where is Netscape today? Lets STOP the damage BEFORE it is too late. It would not even be so bad if a user could truly remove the media player from the OS with a simple unistall option but Microsoft won't do that because they are relying on its pervasiveness to grow its popularity (leveraging thier desktop monopoly) to get developers and service providers to become dependent on media player (like business is dependent on MS Word and Web Sites are normally tested and designed around IE alone). So the fact that the "shit has not hit the fan" be an excuse to let Microsoft try.
Re:Yes, yes, yes, Apple's dying, blah blah blah
on
Why iPod Can't Save Apple
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Loss of market share sucks. Big time. That is exactly why it is so often cited as such an important metric.
Rolls Royce probably has a small market share but nice profit margins. Profit Margins can be much more important than market share. And personally, I would rather be in a niche market with high margins than a big business with low margins. Lots of businesses with low margins go out "of business" but "large margin" products are a god send... the problem is that when others notice the large margin you are making, they want a piece of the action.
I hope it is apparent in my post that I don't think MS should shut this SP out; I just think it'll cause a lot of headaches, and I really hope they have an option to turn it off! (I.e. turn off the new security protections).
I think they should release it as Windows XP SE. Anytime an operating system breaks compatibility, it should be released as a new edition. That way, people can continue to use XP without having to wiegh the importance of compatibility vs. patches/security. Windows XP SE would give the consumer a more secure OS as an upgrade path. I am surprised MS didn't just do that- hell, they could have made it profitable for themselves.
People who quibble because someone said something that someone else said in the books, or the Ents didn't decide to go to war and instead had to be convinced, etc., are UPTIGHT.
The Ents are supposed to be an intelectual and contemplative race that DO NOT make rash decisions. They decide to go to war knowing that this was probably "the last march of the Ents" thus showing that they may take a long time to come to a decision but once they do, they are fast to act.
Jackson turns them into long winded but rash and emotional tree lovers who fought because a wizard cut some trees down in his backyard. Maybe I am being uptight but it just seemed so SILLY for Jackson to change such a neat and noble race into the opposite of what they were.
So they don't have to remember every lie they ever told - which they have to do in order to avoid being sprung, and TSG hasn't been doing so well at this recently.
Actually I almost never lie but not for the reason you mention. I have a good memory and the best lies are those that are MOSTLY true. But the reasons I don't lie is:
1. I respect the people who I deal with and to lie is very disrespectful and I feel bad if I treat someone like shit.
2. If you get caught in a lie then people respect you less (and for good reason- you are less "trustworthy").
3. When I lie, even if others don't know I treated them like shit or that I am not trustworthy, I WOULD KNOW. I don't want to erode my self respect.
exceptions to these rules are the "white lies" in which someone asks for your "sense of taste" such as "how do you like my new hair style?".
There are occasions that I would LIKE to lie to my wife but I don't because in the long run I know she trusts and respects me more. This could be important if someday I seem to be participating in something dubious; I have enough respect from her to explain the situation but if I was a "liar" how would I explain a dubious situation?
Slashdot Mirror
My data is far more valuable to me than the latest shiny new distro. If potential data corruption is not a "showstopper" for RedHat then how can I trust them with my data?
The answer is that I can't.
So yes- RedHat does not consider it a showstopper but it SHOULD be to them, and it certainly is for me which is why I am looking to use a different linux vender in the future.
Q: Was anybody able to submit a patch?
A: No because nobody has access to CVS
It is one thing to find bugs in a distro that the distributor didn't know about but another thing altogether different for a distributor to release something as "gold" that they knowingly knew could trash your data. And if one replies that Microsoft's operating system can do the same thing, I would like to point out that there are legitimate reasons why MS is so often mentioned in a tone of disgust.
1) I thought Fedora was supposed to be RedHat's "community distribution" but the community isn't allowed to participate.
2) Just because a distro is supposed to be "on the cutting edge" does not mean one distributes as "gold" a distro with known critical bugs.
and
3) It appears that RedHat's philosophy of what a Linux distribution SHOULD be does not fit with my own so I am looking at other distributions to see if another vendor aligns closer to my values.
If RedHat still does it for you then fine but to me, Fedora is not a finished product and I am not interested in coughing up the cash RedHat wants for Enterprise. I paid 50$ a piece for 3 different versions of RedHat over the years (and was happy to do it) but 180$ (minimum) just to test drive is expensive for a home desktop computer.
Why should I give it a break?
If the new stuff has bugs it should:
1) hold off release until the major bugs are ironed out.
and/or
2) Kill some of the shiney new stuff until it is really ready for prime time.
You post that crap was foisted on the user in the past and so this is no big deal. I think the reverse. In the past, Linux was a maturing system that was missing many pieces. However, RedHat has had 10 years to get thier act together and produce a quality distribution only to find that they are STILL shoveling half baked systems in my face! I think I am going to test Novel's SuSe and see if they have got it together any better.
Now should this bother you more or less?
They knowingly released fedora core 2 with what I would consider a "show stopper". I don't even duel boot my linux machine but the idea that RedHat was willing to release this as gold when this bug was present indicates release schedules are more important than quality to them. For me that is a philisophical gap that can not be bridged. I know for certain that I am not upgrading my FC 1 system to FC 2 so now I am exploring my options.
I don't think the previous poster was to abolishing capital punishment to murderer's. The previous poster I would suspect (with tongue in cheek) say "yeah kill the murderers too".
If Monster Inc. was not funny and well done, I would not have recommended people to see it or gone to it myself three time (with various different people).
The most ground breaking CG (for its time) I had ever seen was "Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within" but the movie was pure crap. I regretted the purchase of the ticket and recomended the movie be skipped to all my friends and family. Point is Pixar makes good STORIES into good movies and they could do that with real people, 2d animation or 3d animation. CG is Pixars medium to tell a story but little to do with thier success.
I think you are VERY wrong! Even if Pixar is incapable of making hit after hit, they rightly don't want to be beholden to Disney. Even if they make a few flops, they will make more hits and those hits will be the sole property of Pixar. Disney has made a few flops and they will make more flops but along the way, they are going to make a few hits too and I don't think Disney would want to give anyone else a cut (and rightfully so). Pixar needed Disney in the beginning because nobody knew who the hell Pixar was but now Pixar is a household name and they don't need (or want) Disney anymore. Setven Spielburg has had a very stellar career because he is a talented film maker. The people at Pixar (right now) are making movies of the consistency that Spielburg did in his early career. Results speak for themselves. Sure Spielburgh (and Disney and everybody else) has made bad films, but they also went on to make new great hits. Pixar has grown too big to be under the wing of Disney.
I consider that natural selection. I would not cheer the bear on but I don't pity the human. I do cheer IBM against SCO because in this case, eliminating SCO's stupidity benefits us all.
(for the humor impaired, please skip this post)
Pretty simple to me- Free trip to Holland or Homework. If I could get away with billing a free trip to Holland instead of doing REAL work, I know which one I would do!
"But boss, I need to know the syntax to this API, so I have a plain ticket to Brazil to talk to the guys who wrote the API"
"What do you mean the library is down the street"
"You mean you expect me to do research instead?"
"I have to refund the plane ticket..."
"But I have already arranged the interview!"
And I am ammazed that thier are people who are so limmited by the boxes others write. It is so easy to get past the emmergency powers deal. Easily done... You could just have someone say the council has given emergency powers without ANY depiction of debate seen in the movie and left the whole thing up to the moviegoers imagination. That is assumming you LIKED the plot. Personally there is not ONE scene in movie 2 I would keep.
As for movie 1, Jar Jar should never have gotten past the drawing boards. R2D2 and 3CPO should not have been introduced in the films (great characters but they don't belong this way in the past). Anikan should have been at least 8 years older.
But lets just say you liked the story line to "movie 2" and you just wanted to edit out JAR JAR. It is easy to come up with plausable excuses for emergency powers: 1) a civilized planet was blown up. Emergency powers given to a strong leader to stop the distruction of civilized space (not knowing given to the one man who blew up the planet in the first place). 2) bribery and blackmail done behind the scenes by a masterfull political genius (and some week and gullable but not jar jar "you will agree with me" ... "I will agree with you")
3) During war a delegate is ALWAYS given emergency powers (make it the way the council works) but the person who it is given to is the wrong one.
4) The leader's of the council are killed among others and ther is no time to get things straitened out so emergency powers are given to the man who started the chaos (unbeknowst to the other delegates).
I could go on for hours coming up with excuses for emergency powers given to a delegate. What is amazing is that you could only come up with Jar Jar Binks!
Heres a clue- don't buy hardware that cuts corners. I do my research before buying computer hardware. If a piece of hardware is dodgy, I don't buy it. I try not to reward companies for bad products.
Oh, but the last BK archive is still around - oh but BK went out of business so it's not accessible....
Could all happen but many pieces of software still WORK even if the company goes out of bussiness!
Before BK there was nothing because Linus did not find an SCM up to the task of working the way he works and if BK flies off the handle, Linus and group are no worse off than they were before BK- which is back to nothing.
What will you do when they switch to a subscription model and charge $$$ per month? Save them all as .rtf or .txt and import into OpenOffice.org?
who says you have to upgrade? Word 97 should STILL work with those "old" documents.
your post goes off the handle with "what if the sky is falling" without taking into consideration any common sense.
How does BitKeeper hamper you? Aren't you still allowed to send regular patches like Linus got before using BitKeeper?
Yes I agree that the SCM compete clause is lame but Larry is giving the tool away for free and the obnoxious clause is not there if you are willing to pay for it. So if using bitkeeper would really improve your productivity then buy the thing and not worry what projects you can work on. If the price is too high (and I could understand that) then do things the old way and not worry about it. I only wish there was a version around a hundred dollars without the silly clauses that I could use. I agree with Linus Torvalds philosophy of "he who writes the code gets to choose the license". Bitmover owes you no favors and if you don't like it then that is fine but whining about how free(dom) a piece of software is seems churlish.
Simple.
Military is willing to spend a fortune on speculative R&D where most companies and agencies would not. This means that the military gets the toys sooner than the rest. Military spent a fortune to harness atomic energy and later others found uses for the discoveries and inventions the military came up with.
You got to pay to play and the military is willing to pay.
I have no problems with Wife 1 OS. The trick is that you have to manage your resources carefully. Wife 1 is a multi tasking OS that spawns new procceses that utilize more resources. However, those processes provide a stable environment with many more features than girfriend 2. Girlfriend 2 tends to get flaky on occasion and dumps core when under heavy load but Wife 1 tends to handle high load situations much better. The problem with users of Wife 1 is that after awhile, they neglect occasional maintenance of the system due to its apparent stable environment. If neglected too much, Wife 1 will dump core and unlike girlfriend 2, could ruin hardware in the process. Overall, I prefer Wife 1, but I am more carefull with maintenance due to the possibilty of hardware failure if neglected.
Actually a program that works in the exactly opposite direction of wine would be BEST (A program on Windows that would allow a user to run most Linux programs). The reason is that if a developer believes that development for Windows is portable to Linux has no incentive to stop developing on Windows. However, if the Linux comunity could write a program to seemlessly integrate Linux programs into a Windows environment, many developers might move over to Linux for the "kill two birds with one stone" advantage. Even things like Mozilla and OpenOffice could focus on Linux and forget about Windows (assuming the program worked perfectly) instead of having multiple backend implementations of GUI/OS specific stuff. But don't respond about cygwin since it does not provide the functionality of wine nor does it integrate into the windows environment. What I am talking about is full recognition of the Linux ABI that translates to the Windows equivilent so that a user can plop a program they programed and compiled on Linux will just run on Windows.
Personally I think even if he is "squeaky cleen by the law", I still think he is a sleaze bag. Even if it was legally allowable, he knew his previous employer would not want him doing that and he abused the severance package that they gave him to F#(k them over. Seems like a person I would not want to hire in the first place and understandable why they let him go.
Actually the "Sun Scientists" have been transmitting large dosages of radiation into space to find life in the universe and were quickly surprised to find life on the third moon from the sun. Some scientist in the community ponder weather the life existed before the experiment started and wonder whether the search for life alters the data findings. This controversial project to find life in the universe may be coming to an end due to pressures from galaxy enviromentalists and budget cuts on the project.
If it is as uneventfull as the batch I just read, I will assume that Microsoft is a squeeky clean company. I didn't find anything in those documents that would embarass me if I had been the writer of any of those documents. Hell- I have posted stuff on slashdot more embarrasing than what this guy "discoved" in MS PR documents.
One could have said the same thing when IE was new to the market and where is Netscape today? Lets STOP the damage BEFORE it is too late. It would not even be so bad if a user could truly remove the media player from the OS with a simple unistall option but Microsoft won't do that because they are relying on its pervasiveness to grow its popularity (leveraging thier desktop monopoly) to get developers and service providers to become dependent on media player (like business is dependent on MS Word and Web Sites are normally tested and designed around IE alone). So the fact that the "shit has not hit the fan" be an excuse to let Microsoft try.
Rolls Royce probably has a small market share but nice profit margins. Profit Margins can be much more important than market share. And personally, I would rather be in a niche market with high margins than a big business with low margins. Lots of businesses with low margins go out "of business" but "large margin" products are a god send... the problem is that when others notice the large margin you are making, they want a piece of the action.
I think they should release it as Windows XP SE. Anytime an operating system breaks compatibility, it should be released as a new edition. That way, people can continue to use XP without having to wiegh the importance of compatibility vs. patches/security. Windows XP SE would give the consumer a more secure OS as an upgrade path. I am surprised MS didn't just do that- hell, they could have made it profitable for themselves.
The Ents are supposed to be an intelectual and contemplative race that DO NOT make rash decisions. They decide to go to war knowing that this was probably "the last march of the Ents" thus showing that they may take a long time to come to a decision but once they do, they are fast to act.
Jackson turns them into long winded but rash and emotional tree lovers who fought because a wizard cut some trees down in his backyard. Maybe I am being uptight but it just seemed so SILLY for Jackson to change such a neat and noble race into the opposite of what they were.
Actually I almost never lie but not for the reason you mention. I have a good memory and the best lies are those that are MOSTLY true. But the reasons I don't lie is:
exceptions to these rules are the "white lies" in which someone asks for your "sense of taste" such as "how do you like my new hair style?".There are occasions that I would LIKE to lie to my wife but I don't because in the long run I know she trusts and respects me more. This could be important if someday I seem to be participating in something dubious; I have enough respect from her to explain the situation but if I was a "liar" how would I explain a dubious situation?