I didn't say you could use the installer to force it... I'm talking about an old school xcopy style deployment. You know, manually copying over lots and lots of files.
I could force the same sort of thing on a Linux system, upgrade a Red Hat 6.2 machine by simply copying over a # of files from a Fedora Core 3 system... Shame that Fedora Core 3 is fundamentally broken where it's files can be forced on a legacy system.
Yes, my argument is stupid, but so is yours.
Just about every operating system out there can be hosed by throwing the wrong files on it, don't try to blame Windows because in this case that's what happened.
Programs airing over seas and then in the US months later is also IMO a major reason for tv 'piracy'.
SciFi frequently took very long mid season breaks in airing Farscape in the US... all the while they continue airing on SkyOne.
SciFi does this often sadly... the new Battlestar Galactica series, 'coming to SciFi in January'... has already aired 5 episodes on SkyOne.
Not that I download such things... but I wonder if SciFi's slowness to broadcast could be considered inducement of copyright infringement... thousands of geeks saying "I don't want to wait 4 months to watch the episode just because of where I live legitimately".
From the article: Another source says that the DWP was trialing Windows XP on a small number ("about seven") of machines. "EDS were going to apply a patch to these, unfortunately the request was made to apply it live and it was rolled out across the estate, which hit around 80 per cent of the Win2k desktops. This patch caused the desktops to BSOD and made recovery rather tricky as they couldn't boot to pick any further patches or recalls. I gather that MS consultants have been flown in from the US to clear up the mess." EDS is also thought to be flying in fire brigades."
Brilliant work on the part of EDS, trying to patch the wrong systems, lord only knows what can happen then.
You could force an XPSP2 onto a 2k machine... would you still blame Microsoft for it? That seems to be the case here, EDS screwed up, and of course it's Microsoft's fault in the eyes of/.
How polite and mature of you! And you didn't even offer any evidence of what you say other than 'I say so'. I know this is/., but please try to point to sources, especially when it's something as easy to quote as Apple.
Airport and border security have always been a joke. The point of the TSA is to con you into thinking you're "safe" so you'll go about your life instead of cowering in fear.
Shhh, don't say that too loud.
Do you want the population to hear you undermining our system of security? Every time you criticize our leaders and the safeguards they have put in place to keep you and me safe... you help the terrorists win.
So if what you are advocating were to happen, in addition to pissing off a lot of non computer savvy people who don't know what you are talking about, you'll many plenty spoofing header info, even if just out of principal.
You give that choice of being in the 90% or 10% as if both are ultimately equal, as if there is no difference between being in the two groups... that is not the case.
Today at work, I am one of 6 people wearing dark pants... we are in the majority within the department... so what?
If IE and ____ were equal in every way, then sure, go for the 10%, help em gain some #'s, but the fact that IE is nearly universally accepted makes leaving it all too difficult for many.
In this thread we see a number of posts related to people contacting certain sites, asking/demanding that they support the _____ browser. The fact that this is necessary for the 10% drives far too many away, and I am one of em.
I have better things to do with my time than contact web developers and sites, asking that they support other browsers, so, I keep using IE because it works with nearly everything, which is all I can ever really ask.
I know, I was playing on the official/. official OS.
I do agree with what you said though of how most persons here are not truly Linux users. It'd be interesting to see official #'s though... what % uses what OS and so on... (easy to gather from HTTP header info)... but more so I'd like to see #'s on how people use Linux and OSS, what % has actually written code that is now in an OSS project, etc.
By using IE I'm part of the problem? Wow, that's one of the most elitist positions I've ever heard, far worse than the traditional religious "everyone who doesn't believe in Jesus is going to hell!" one... at least their argument has some basis in logic.
Also, it's a shame when ones choice in browsers becomes... political.
You seem to paint the world in one of two camps... IE users who knowingly or not push non standards... and the alternative browser freedom fighters who fight a desperate battle against the forces of non compliance... shame it's not that simple.
As I said, there are far too many users out there who just want their browser to work and care little about what it takes to make it do so... and yes, I am in that camp, so I guess by your 2 sided logic, I am one of the sheep.
Of course... your label of sheep is flawed... it assumes that all IE users are sheep... and sheep by definition go along with the crowd rather than make their own decision, the fact that people use IE because it can handle their favorite sites is not a decision of a sheep, but instead one of a person who made a decision based on their needs.
Am I also a sheep because I, like many use Windows and not Linux? Of course... if I were using Linux and visiting/.... wouldn't I then be a sheep? No? Unlike most Windows users, I can tell you exactly why I use Windows and not Linux, as well as why I find Windows to be an infinitely superior system to Linux any day. It is that same logic that applies to my choice of browsers. I want something that works for my needs, and Linux, nor Firefox can meet them, and jumping on an alternative bandwagon for months or years, hoping that it will become what I need is just a waste of my time and energies.
BTW... next time you post... please do not use Bush Doctrine logic (ie you're either with us or against us), such arguments, no matter the source is childish.
So with all that said... still want to call me a sheep? Feel free to do so, please remember though that such name calling will only reinforce my point of the previous paragraph.
It's a decent movie on its own... but the moment you compare it to the books, everything goes to hell IMO.
As an example... at no time during the book The Bourne Supremacy, is Marie killed, nor does anything occur in India or Russia. Hell, I rather enjoyed the ploy from the book used to kidnap Marie and convince David Web to revert in order to track down who he was told took her.
The principal driving force of books 1 and 3 is the assassin Carlos, and Bourne/Web's attempts to stay safe from him. Oh how I wish Carlos the Jackal was in the movies with his old men of Paris... obsessing about the mythical David Web who had established quite the reputation for himself as an assassin in the east... instead of this "nyeh, my government keeps trying to kill me" crap.
I guess I'd find it entertaining to see Matt Damon mumbling "Cain if for Carlos and Delta is for Cain" throughout each movie.
I know, I know, one shouldn't compare movies to their source books... but the Bourne series is one of those area's that just drives me nuts, the books are pretty good, and as said above the movies are good... when viewed alone, but for the literate who've read the material and then seen the flicks... *shuddering*.
With this said... I still fear the impending theatrical versions of Enders Game and Atlas Shrugged... oh how two of the most important books in my life will be butchered!
No, I fully understand the reason why such things happen, and why it happens is not the point.
For the majority of web users, they don't care what browsers a web page works with, they just want it to work, period.
You can give your mother Firefox and tell her how stable it is, how secure it is, etc... but as soon as she can't access sites she wants to, I have no doubt that she'll want to switch back to IE as well.
While it is a nice theory to have everyone using 'standard HTML', it is just a theory. Standards, despite being well documented, are not always adhered to the letter of the law.
I work in the digital television industry and have ISO13818-1 and ATSC A/65 as my bibles when on the job, and do our best to adhere to them whenever possible, we have however identified quite a number of consumer level set top boxes which do not, in unknown ways fully support the specs which cause major problems for some of our products. We could gripe to their manufacturers all we want, but the fact that so many of these non standard decoders are in the field means that it becomes our problem to modify our units (within reason) to make them compatible with the majority of the units in the field.
So the choice comes back to you... do you want to gripe and moan about how the world needs to change... or adapt to the world?
The rendering of/. in Firefox are well known, and the second option is far better than the first no matter how much you make dislike it.
That's part of the reason I gave up using Firefox (well, that and IE quit taking 30 seconds to start on my work PC (I think the network admin was playing a prank)), I got sick of rendering issues on so many pages, including/. and found that my trusty IE had no problem with em.
Bah! You still rely on a piece of potentially traceable technology... with my hate letters (give me money or else ____), I make it a point to cut my letters from various magazines with a straight razor and then glue them to the intended paper (which often too is another magazine page), all while wearing gloves.
Of course... I would have gotten away with it all too if it wasn't for those pesky kids... and the tracking chips in the glue.
I agree, even with a package manager, updating a single app under linux can be a nightmare. If you check out my blog in my sig, you'll see some rantings related to that.
One of my biggest gripes, was how when you try to install the latest version of Foo, it requires the latest version of Bar, which in turn requires newer versions of X and Y and so on.
If you are using a more recent distro, this is far less of a problem, but the moment you move back to something older that cannot be updated as far as required... you end up with problems.
Specifically, I was trying to get some things working under Red Hat 6.2, a 5 year old distro. Many called me dumb for even trying such a thing, which I find quite entertaining considering how many still use 6.2 in server back ends, not unlike how many still use NT4, because it works.
Speaking of NT4, I found it far easier to back port a Windows based app written for XP or 2k back to NT4, jumping back 5-9 years in terms of age, than it is to go from Fedora Core 2 to Red Hat 6.2, a jump of only 5.
This is why I so love Windows, consistent targets (within reason), where the # of system updates is finite and can be controlled.
As for this so called 'Dll hell' people like to bad mouth Windows for... I can't say I've ever had that issue myself... however I did find it worse than hell to try to figure out how to run 2 different versions of GLIBC on a system without recompiling every single application requiring one or the other... Windows has many simple solutions for a problem like that.
The obvious answer... never. I just spent 103 dollars on 2 prescriptions last week... without my basic insurance coverage; it would have been nearly 400 dollars. With such wonderful prices, I would not be surprised to see these cheap RFID tags end up costing more help to pad the pharmaceutical industries pockets just a little more.
Around the same time that a movie hits the theaters, a good # of internal use only DVD's are often manufactured. Some are used for review copies, other are used for connected employees.
The family of a friend of mine has a few good connections within the Hollywood industry and has access to DVD's of feature films with relative ease. Sadly, my friend has never permitted me to borrow one of these discs.
Sadly, it does make sense though. Why charge an employee of X to buy/see/etc one of X's products? It would be a nightmare to have the local theaters permit some in for free, so a limited distribution of DVD's make more sense.
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't say you could use the installer to force it... I'm talking about an old school xcopy style deployment. You know, manually copying over lots and lots of files.
I could force the same sort of thing on a Linux system, upgrade a Red Hat 6.2 machine by simply copying over a # of files from a Fedora Core 3 system... Shame that Fedora Core 3 is fundamentally broken where it's files can be forced on a legacy system.
Yes, my argument is stupid, but so is yours.
Just about every operating system out there can be hosed by throwing the wrong files on it, don't try to blame Windows because in this case that's what happened.
Programs airing over seas and then in the US months later is also IMO a major reason for tv 'piracy'.
SciFi frequently took very long mid season breaks in airing Farscape in the US... all the while they continue airing on SkyOne.
SciFi does this often sadly... the new Battlestar Galactica series, 'coming to SciFi in January'... has already aired 5 episodes on SkyOne.
Not that I download such things... but I wonder if SciFi's slowness to broadcast could be considered inducement of copyright infringement... thousands of geeks saying "I don't want to wait 4 months to watch the episode just because of where I live legitimately".
From the article: Another source says that the DWP was trialing Windows XP on a small number ("about seven") of machines. "EDS were going to apply a patch to these, unfortunately the request was made to apply it live and it was rolled out across the estate, which hit around 80 per cent of the Win2k desktops. This patch caused the desktops to BSOD and made recovery rather tricky as they couldn't boot to pick any further patches or recalls. I gather that MS consultants have been flown in from the US to clear up the mess." EDS is also thought to be flying in fire brigades."
/.
Brilliant work on the part of EDS, trying to patch the wrong systems, lord only knows what can happen then.
You could force an XPSP2 onto a 2k machine... would you still blame Microsoft for it? That seems to be the case here, EDS screwed up, and of course it's Microsoft's fault in the eyes of
How polite and mature of you! And you didn't even offer any evidence of what you say other than 'I say so'. I know this is /., but please try to point to sources, especially when it's something as easy to quote as Apple.
I can just hear Apple crying.
"Please, please buy one! We'll think about adding it in a future firmware upgrade, please, Steve needs to buy a new turtle neck!"
Airport and border security have always been a joke. The point of the TSA is to con you into thinking you're "safe" so you'll go about your life instead of cowering in fear.
Shhh, don't say that too loud.
Do you want the population to hear you undermining our system of security? Every time you criticize our leaders and the safeguards they have put in place to keep you and me safe... you help the terrorists win.
Read again what I said... I did not say that you were saying such a thing.
So if what you are advocating were to happen, in addition to pissing off a lot of non computer savvy people who don't know what you are talking about, you'll many plenty spoofing header info, even if just out of principal.
You give that choice of being in the 90% or 10% as if both are ultimately equal, as if there is no difference between being in the two groups... that is not the case.
Today at work, I am one of 6 people wearing dark pants... we are in the majority within the department... so what?
If IE and ____ were equal in every way, then sure, go for the 10%, help em gain some #'s, but the fact that IE is nearly universally accepted makes leaving it all too difficult for many.
In this thread we see a number of posts related to people contacting certain sites, asking/demanding that they support the _____ browser. The fact that this is necessary for the 10% drives far too many away, and I am one of em.
I have better things to do with my time than contact web developers and sites, asking that they support other browsers, so, I keep using IE because it works with nearly everything, which is all I can ever really ask.
I know, I was playing on the official /. official OS.
I do agree with what you said though of how most persons here are not truly Linux users. It'd be interesting to see official #'s though... what % uses what OS and so on... (easy to gather from HTTP header info)... but more so I'd like to see #'s on how people use Linux and OSS, what % has actually written code that is now in an OSS project, etc.
By using IE I'm part of the problem? Wow, that's one of the most elitist positions I've ever heard, far worse than the traditional religious "everyone who doesn't believe in Jesus is going to hell!" one... at least their argument has some basis in logic.
/. ... wouldn't I then be a sheep? No? Unlike most Windows users, I can tell you exactly why I use Windows and not Linux, as well as why I find Windows to be an infinitely superior system to Linux any day. It is that same logic that applies to my choice of browsers. I want something that works for my needs, and Linux, nor Firefox can meet them, and jumping on an alternative bandwagon for months or years, hoping that it will become what I need is just a waste of my time and energies.
Also, it's a shame when ones choice in browsers becomes... political.
You seem to paint the world in one of two camps... IE users who knowingly or not push non standards... and the alternative browser freedom fighters who fight a desperate battle against the forces of non compliance... shame it's not that simple.
As I said, there are far too many users out there who just want their browser to work and care little about what it takes to make it do so... and yes, I am in that camp, so I guess by your 2 sided logic, I am one of the sheep.
Of course... your label of sheep is flawed... it assumes that all IE users are sheep... and sheep by definition go along with the crowd rather than make their own decision, the fact that people use IE because it can handle their favorite sites is not a decision of a sheep, but instead one of a person who made a decision based on their needs.
Am I also a sheep because I, like many use Windows and not Linux? Of course... if I were using Linux and visiting
BTW... next time you post... please do not use Bush Doctrine logic (ie you're either with us or against us), such arguments, no matter the source is childish.
So with all that said... still want to call me a sheep? Feel free to do so, please remember though that such name calling will only reinforce my point of the previous paragraph.
It's a decent movie on its own... but the moment you compare it to the books, everything goes to hell IMO.
As an example... at no time during the book The Bourne Supremacy, is Marie killed, nor does anything occur in India or Russia. Hell, I rather enjoyed the ploy from the book used to kidnap Marie and convince David Web to revert in order to track down who he was told took her.
The principal driving force of books 1 and 3 is the assassin Carlos, and Bourne/Web's attempts to stay safe from him. Oh how I wish Carlos the Jackal was in the movies with his old men of Paris... obsessing about the mythical David Web who had established quite the reputation for himself as an assassin in the east... instead of this "nyeh, my government keeps trying to kill me" crap.
I guess I'd find it entertaining to see Matt Damon mumbling "Cain if for Carlos and Delta is for Cain" throughout each movie.
I know, I know, one shouldn't compare movies to their source books... but the Bourne series is one of those area's that just drives me nuts, the books are pretty good, and as said above the movies are good... when viewed alone, but for the literate who've read the material and then seen the flicks... *shuddering*.
With this said... I still fear the impending theatrical versions of Enders Game and Atlas Shrugged... oh how two of the most important books in my life will be butchered!
No, I fully understand the reason why such things happen, and why it happens is not the point.
/. in Firefox are well known, and the second option is far better than the first no matter how much you make dislike it.
For the majority of web users, they don't care what browsers a web page works with, they just want it to work, period.
You can give your mother Firefox and tell her how stable it is, how secure it is, etc... but as soon as she can't access sites she wants to, I have no doubt that she'll want to switch back to IE as well.
While it is a nice theory to have everyone using 'standard HTML', it is just a theory. Standards, despite being well documented, are not always adhered to the letter of the law.
I work in the digital television industry and have ISO13818-1 and ATSC A/65 as my bibles when on the job, and do our best to adhere to them whenever possible, we have however identified quite a number of consumer level set top boxes which do not, in unknown ways fully support the specs which cause major problems for some of our products. We could gripe to their manufacturers all we want, but the fact that so many of these non standard decoders are in the field means that it becomes our problem to modify our units (within reason) to make them compatible with the majority of the units in the field.
So the choice comes back to you... do you want to gripe and moan about how the world needs to change... or adapt to the world?
The rendering of
That's part of the reason I gave up using Firefox (well, that and IE quit taking 30 seconds to start on my work PC (I think the network admin was playing a prank)), I got sick of rendering issues on so many pages, including /. and found that my trusty IE had no problem with em.
Bah! You still rely on a piece of potentially traceable technology... with my hate letters (give me money or else ____), I make it a point to cut my letters from various magazines with a straight razor and then glue them to the intended paper (which often too is another magazine page), all while wearing gloves.
Of course... I would have gotten away with it all too if it wasn't for those pesky kids... and the tracking chips in the glue.
My thoughts exactly!
At last! Turn about is fair play!
I agree, even with a package manager, updating a single app under linux can be a nightmare. If you check out my blog in my sig, you'll see some rantings related to that.
One of my biggest gripes, was how when you try to install the latest version of Foo, it requires the latest version of Bar, which in turn requires newer versions of X and Y and so on.
If you are using a more recent distro, this is far less of a problem, but the moment you move back to something older that cannot be updated as far as required... you end up with problems.
Specifically, I was trying to get some things working under Red Hat 6.2, a 5 year old distro. Many called me dumb for even trying such a thing, which I find quite entertaining considering how many still use 6.2 in server back ends, not unlike how many still use NT4, because it works.
Speaking of NT4, I found it far easier to back port a Windows based app written for XP or 2k back to NT4, jumping back 5-9 years in terms of age, than it is to go from Fedora Core 2 to Red Hat 6.2, a jump of only 5.
This is why I so love Windows, consistent targets (within reason), where the # of system updates is finite and can be controlled.
As for this so called 'Dll hell' people like to bad mouth Windows for... I can't say I've ever had that issue myself... however I did find it worse than hell to try to figure out how to run 2 different versions of GLIBC on a system without recompiling every single application requiring one or the other... Windows has many simple solutions for a problem like that.
oh I know... I deal with those damn endians weekly
It's taken this long to decide on what is the Least Significant Bit?
Is that not it? It sure would be nice if the editors would stop posting articles that do not describe what they are intending to be describing.
double-plus funny? my god man! I think you are one of the only ones here to have actually read Orwell!
The obvious answer... never. I just spent 103 dollars on 2 prescriptions last week... without my basic insurance coverage; it would have been nearly 400 dollars. With such wonderful prices, I would not be surprised to see these cheap RFID tags end up costing more help to pad the pharmaceutical industries pockets just a little more.
One must also not forget Sencore and Lodgenet.
But to answer your question... more, we want more!
South Dakota gladly welcomes it's new in-sourcing overlords!
One hopes this expands my job prospects here... not that it matters too much, I love my job.
Around the same time that a movie hits the theaters, a good # of internal use only DVD's are often manufactured. Some are used for review copies, other are used for connected employees.
The family of a friend of mine has a few good connections within the Hollywood industry and has access to DVD's of feature films with relative ease. Sadly, my friend has never permitted me to borrow one of these discs.
Sadly, it does make sense though. Why charge an employee of X to buy/see/etc one of X's products? It would be a nightmare to have the local theaters permit some in for free, so a limited distribution of DVD's make more sense.
You can find product on the OnAirUSB-HDTV there and and buy from www.copperbox.com here