We could get back to the moon if we wanted to, I think it's more of a "been there, done that" mentality. If we can explore something new instead of rehashing where we've already been, then it's a great step. Once we've moved forward a bit, we can go back and see what we might have missed.
They've still got the same policy, which is one of the reasons I switched to them. From their customer help page:
Question
Can I activate VoiceStream service on a phone I bought from another carrier?
Answer
VoiceStream phones use a technology called GSM (For more information on GSM click here. GSM relies upon a smart card to function. If the phone you purchased from another carrier requires a smart card, you can activate it with VoiceStream. If your phone does not require a smart card, it will not be compatible with the VoiceStream system.
If you would like to activate your phone with VoiceStream, or are unsure if your phone uses a smart card, please visit any VoiceStream Sales Office for assistance or call Customer Care at 1-800-937-8997.
Note: You may be required to contact your previous carrier to unblock your phone for VoiceStream activation.
There could be any number of possibilities on this one, one of which might be that most of the people that program for the Mac love their Macs and wouldn't want to do anything destructive to them.
I agree. I think one of the standard financial disclaimers covers this pretty well. "Past performance may not be indicative of future results".
Re:So do they have Linux drivers?
on
ATi Radeon 8500
·
· Score: 1
Brief note, the 8500 will only support Windows®98 SE, Windows Me, Windows 2000 and Windows NT 4.0.
Sorry bout that.
Re:So do they have Linux drivers?
on
ATi Radeon 8500
·
· Score: 2, Informative
According to the FAQ for the FireGL 8800, they list the following operating systems to be supported:
NT 4.0 , W2K, Windows XP, Linux 32, Windows XP 64
Re:The drivers will decide...
on
ATi Radeon 8500
·
· Score: 1
So I guess what I'm saying is that ATI is completely consistent with a Windows environment
It's not just windows that ATI has problems with. ATI has always been seriously behind releasing updated drivers for the Mac, always pointing the finger at Apple and saying that's who needs to be releasing updated ATI drivers.
Don't forget the following though. They didn't purchase the software, simply a license to use it as described by Microsoft.
Do I agree that it should be this way? No. I believe as probably most of you do, that if you DO purchase closed source software, you should be able to use it any way you see fit.
Although OS X isn't god awful slow on my machine, a dual processor g4 500, it's by no means as fast as os 9.1, or even suse running on the same machine.
I've been using MacOS X as my OS since it's release and am presently using version 10.0.4. I'm hoping that within the next few days, apple releases 10.1 with speed increases. MacWorld Expo is happening this week, and hopefully we'll see some new hardware and software.
My decision to use OS X is based on the functionality and productivity I get out of it. On my system the speed is acceptable, but I've seen it running on some slower machines and I don't think I could use it if I didn't have the dual processor machine. I really hope apple increases speed soon.
This all sounds very similar to Robert Ludlum's "The Prometheus Deception". It was a decent read, and the parallels that are drawn between one of the antagonists and Bill Gates are rather humorous. Next thing you know, we'll have a network of satellites that can pick us up no matter where are.
Some might, yes. But what disturbs me the most is that when I build a website, it's being built to the specifications of myself or those of my client. Links are often carefully placed, and having a browser or operating system decide that it's going to add additional links is not going to make me, the client, or the designers happy. I might be able to accept this new technology if there were an opt-in, not an opt-out. XP should check for a meta tag that allows it to display it's own links. Of course Microsoft wouldn't like this as it would eliminate every unmaintained page from using their new toy. *Sigh*. Someone will figure a way around it. Perhaps a browser/OS detect javascript that kills the browser window on load if you're using XP would be perfect.
You bring up a valid point. This case is a bit different. The squatter registered a handful of misspellings of JoeCartoon.com and set out to make money with banner ads.
From the article:
Visitors were trapped or"mousetrapped" in the
sites, which, in the jargon of the computer world, means
that they were unable to exit without clicking on a
succession of advertisements. Zuccarini received between
ten and twenty-five cents from the advertisers for every
click.
Upgrading to systems that are on par with the rest of the world can't be that hard.
For corporations that can't even get their shit together and let you know whether you can get DSL, it's not surprising. One will tell you that you're able to, another will tell you that you're not.
Now, I don't completely understand what's involved in the infrastructure of building a new system nationwide, but it can't be that easy.
In Europe, there are countries in close proximity with eachother. Most of those countries have quite a few mobile service providers. It's easier for them to cover a short space with new technology than it is for a "national" provider here to cover a country that is _very_ large. By the time they've completed, a country the size of Switzerland could have gone through a dozen iterations of new technology, no?
I think the worst part of this could be that the virus may cause the phones to automatically dial an emergency number.
Extra calls to emergency call centers that flood the lines is going beyond just filling inboxes. Although I'm not familiar with the "110" emergency number stated in the article, if it's anything like 911, it could obviously affect lives. This seems to me to be far worse than a worm that calls numbers at random or freezes up the screen of a phone (also mentioned in the article).
I agree with your comment except for one thing, and it's partially semantic. The very rich aren't the only culprits, the just benefit from it. How frequently do you see very rich people driving around in automobiles that produce an enormous plume of smoke when they drive past? Not very.
On the flip side of the coin, they're probably some of the last to carpool. I could easily argue for both sides of this point.
I do agree that the poor and their (numerous) children usually feel the first effects of pollution. More children means more people to use resources, who produce more children to use more resources, etc.
This post seems to be self defeating. I inevitably end up arguing both sides of an issue, end up contradicting and confusing myself.
One thing I can't argue both sides of, we NEED more fuel efficient vehicles, as well as alternative and renewable sources of energy to power our vehicles and homes. Too bad there's so much money to be made in the oil industry.
Imagine some banana republic sets up a data haven and says, kiddie porn isn't illegal in Gamboonia. The question is, can the US (and decent people everywhere) shut the site down? Should we be able to?
No. Although I think kiddie porn has no place ANYWHERE, to protect the nature of the web we shouldn't be able to shut it down. It's not a matter of what I think about the content, but that if something's legal in the country of origin, then that content should be able to be published. Should China be able to sue and shut down US websites that discuss anti-communism and freedom of religion? No. They shouldn't be able to. Instead they block that content to the best of their ability. That's the way it should be. Leave it to those who disagree with something to block it.
On this specific matter though, yahoo does operate in France. The French can kick yahoo out of their country, or try their best to prohibit their citizens from accessing US servers. Yahoo.fr should be governed by French law, but that's the only place French law should have a say on what the company does.
We're not destroying this planet. The planet is doing just fine. It's we who are slowly diminishing our capability to survive on the planet. The planet will still be around when we're gone, and it will once again clean itself.
Slashdot Mirror
They are working on it, Here is the CNN article: Researcher looks to take the bad out of bean eating
We could get back to the moon if we wanted to, I think it's more of a "been there, done that" mentality. If we can explore something new instead of rehashing where we've already been, then it's a great step. Once we've moved forward a bit, we can go back and see what we might have missed.
They've still got the same policy, which is one of the reasons I switched to them. From their customer help page:
Question
Can I activate VoiceStream service on a phone I bought from another carrier?
Answer
VoiceStream phones use a technology called GSM (For more information on GSM click here. GSM relies upon a smart card to function. If the phone you purchased from another carrier requires a smart card, you can activate it with VoiceStream. If your phone does not require a smart card, it will not be compatible with the VoiceStream system.
If you would like to activate your phone with VoiceStream, or are unsure if your phone uses a smart card, please visit any VoiceStream Sales Office for assistance or call Customer Care at 1-800-937-8997.
Note: You may be required to contact your previous carrier to unblock your phone for VoiceStream activation.
HAHAHA.
Not to mention he's never actually made a public appearance.
Agreed.
The line goes as such: "nice boots, wanna fuck?"
No wonder it doesn't work for you, you've gotten it completely wrong.
There could be any number of possibilities on this one, one of which might be that most of the people that program for the Mac love their Macs and wouldn't want to do anything destructive to them.
Oh happy happy joy joy.
Doesn't feel very historic to me.
That's interesting. As soon as the star wars trailer came on, my girlfriend started laughing hysterically.
I agree. I think one of the standard financial disclaimers covers this pretty well. "Past performance may not be indicative of future results".
Brief note, the 8500 will only support Windows®98 SE, Windows Me, Windows 2000 and Windows NT 4.0.
Sorry bout that.
According to the FAQ for the FireGL 8800, they list the following operating systems to be supported:
NT 4.0 , W2K, Windows XP, Linux 32, Windows XP 64
So I guess what I'm saying is that ATI is completely consistent with a Windows environment
It's not just windows that ATI has problems with. ATI has always been seriously behind releasing updated drivers for the Mac, always pointing the finger at Apple and saying that's who needs to be releasing updated ATI drivers.
Don't forget the following though. They didn't purchase the software, simply a license to use it as described by Microsoft.
Do I agree that it should be this way? No. I believe as probably most of you do, that if you DO purchase closed source software, you should be able to use it any way you see fit.
The layer you are thinking of is Carbon.
Although OS X isn't god awful slow on my machine, a dual processor g4 500, it's by no means as fast as os 9.1, or even suse running on the same machine.
I've been using MacOS X as my OS since it's release and am presently using version 10.0.4. I'm hoping that within the next few days, apple releases 10.1 with speed increases. MacWorld Expo is happening this week, and hopefully we'll see some new hardware and software.
My decision to use OS X is based on the functionality and productivity I get out of it. On my system the speed is acceptable, but I've seen it running on some slower machines and I don't think I could use it if I didn't have the dual processor machine. I really hope apple increases speed soon.
This all sounds very similar to Robert Ludlum's "The Prometheus Deception". It was a decent read, and the parallels that are drawn between one of the antagonists and Bill Gates are rather humorous. Next thing you know, we'll have a network of satellites that can pick us up no matter where are.
OmniWeb for MacOS X allows disabling of images that aren't from the site they're shown on. Nifty feature.
Some might, yes. But what disturbs me the most is that when I build a website, it's being built to the specifications of myself or those of my client. Links are often carefully placed, and having a browser or operating system decide that it's going to add additional links is not going to make me, the client, or the designers happy. I might be able to accept this new technology if there were an opt-in, not an opt-out. XP should check for a meta tag that allows it to display it's own links. Of course Microsoft wouldn't like this as it would eliminate every unmaintained page from using their new toy. *Sigh*. Someone will figure a way around it. Perhaps a browser/OS detect javascript that kills the browser window on load if you're using XP would be perfect.
You bring up a valid point. This case is a bit different. The squatter registered a handful of misspellings of JoeCartoon.com and set out to make money with banner ads.
From the article:
Visitors were trapped or"mousetrapped" in the
sites, which, in the jargon of the computer world, means
that they were unable to exit without clicking on a
succession of advertisements. Zuccarini received between
ten and twenty-five cents from the advertisers for every
click.
Upgrading to systems that are on par with the rest of the world can't be that hard.
For corporations that can't even get their shit together and let you know whether you can get DSL, it's not surprising. One will tell you that you're able to, another will tell you that you're not.
Now, I don't completely understand what's involved in the infrastructure of building a new system nationwide, but it can't be that easy.
In Europe, there are countries in close proximity with eachother. Most of those countries have quite a few mobile service providers. It's easier for them to cover a short space with new technology than it is for a "national" provider here to cover a country that is _very_ large. By the time they've completed, a country the size of Switzerland could have gone through a dozen iterations of new technology, no?
I think the worst part of this could be that the virus may cause the phones to automatically dial an emergency number.
Extra calls to emergency call centers that flood the lines is going beyond just filling inboxes. Although I'm not familiar with the "110" emergency number stated in the article, if it's anything like 911, it could obviously affect lives. This seems to me to be far worse than a worm that calls numbers at random or freezes up the screen of a phone (also mentioned in the article).
East St. Louis... *shiver*
I agree with your comment except for one thing, and it's partially semantic. The very rich aren't the only culprits, the just benefit from it. How frequently do you see very rich people driving around in automobiles that produce an enormous plume of smoke when they drive past? Not very.
On the flip side of the coin, they're probably some of the last to carpool. I could easily argue for both sides of this point.
I do agree that the poor and their (numerous) children usually feel the first effects of pollution. More children means more people to use resources, who produce more children to use more resources, etc.
This post seems to be self defeating. I inevitably end up arguing both sides of an issue, end up contradicting and confusing myself.
One thing I can't argue both sides of, we NEED more fuel efficient vehicles, as well as alternative and renewable sources of energy to power our vehicles and homes. Too bad there's so much money to be made in the oil industry.
Imagine some banana republic sets up a data haven and says, kiddie porn isn't illegal in Gamboonia. The question is, can the US (and decent people everywhere) shut the site down? Should we be able to?
No. Although I think kiddie porn has no place ANYWHERE, to protect the nature of the web we shouldn't be able to shut it down. It's not a matter of what I think about the content, but that if something's legal in the country of origin, then that content should be able to be published. Should China be able to sue and shut down US websites that discuss anti-communism and freedom of religion? No. They shouldn't be able to. Instead they block that content to the best of their ability. That's the way it should be. Leave it to those who disagree with something to block it.
On this specific matter though, yahoo does operate in France. The French can kick yahoo out of their country, or try their best to prohibit their citizens from accessing US servers. Yahoo.fr should be governed by French law, but that's the only place French law should have a say on what the company does.
We're not destroying this planet. The planet is doing just fine. It's we who are slowly diminishing our capability to survive on the planet. The planet will still be around when we're gone, and it will once again clean itself.
Given the rolling blackouts in California, I doubt anyone would have noticed even if they had succeeded :)