I just wiped my Firefox directory in Program Files clean (I heard you should do that to avoid weird problems) and installed Fx 0.9 RC1. Everything still there except the themes and plugins but that was expected. They have a list of 0.9-compatible themes/plugins on MozillaZine.
the chances of this poor decision being reversed are slim to none as it'd mean the core devs losing face
Actually, the reaction would be the opposite. The community would likely get very excited that the developers are truly listening to a common opinion and fixing it ASAP. I don't think they have anything like that to fear.
Why do they put a default theme that is "nowhere near finished" in a product that's "due very soon"?
Because they think the theme polishing will be done for 1.0? It's still *months* away and the artists are probably not occupied by fixing bugs in the code, so they should have plenty of time to at least make it look respectable.
If I don't like the windows manager, I can choose another one.
Why can't you do the same in Windows? I've recently used Geoshell a lot and it was a real cool minimalist (much more so than KDE or Gnome) Explorer replacement. There are dozens more, and this community is actually thriving in these days.:-)
If I would like to have feature X in program Y, I can file a wishlist or make the modifications myself if I can.
Why can't you file a wishlist to an author of a Windows program? However, I agree about the modification advantage though, although I'm not experienced enough at Linux programming that I could use that freedom. I doubt many Windows users are either, so it's probably no advantage to many switchers.
By contrast, Fedora/SUSE/Mandrake has you up and running from the first login.
This is exactly the problem I'm having with "simple" Linux installs (the ones I'm interested in). That so much bloat is included by default. Newcomers might be inexperienced, but I don't see why so many distros feel a need to dumb the user down by installing tons of junk. Yes, you can deselect stuff but how the heck shall an inexperienced user know what he can uncheck without breaking something vital? For example, Mandrake 10 included *two* browsers for me. And guess what... Both are based on the Gecko engine, so there's not even a reason to have two if a page renderes incorrectly in one of them! Who came up with this bright idea? So then I installed a third one (Firefox) and uninstalled Mozilla. I let the Epiphany junk be for now, but will probably have to uninstall that too (hopefully that will be painless) and install Thunderbird.
Also, another downside with this philoshophy is that the software you install will likely be outdated, so you still have to go through the trouble of upgrading it as the first thing you do anyway.
Yes, Windows integrates stuff too, but that's because Microsoft have to *sell* their OS licenses by making it attractive ("it can now record movies!"), and lock users into using their products. There's necessarily not any such thing with a Linux distro.
Again, I don't want to deselect dozen upon dozens of programs at install-time. Especially when I'm inexperienced and don't even know what everything does. I am perfectly able to install Irfanview in Windows, so why should I have to discover three viewers having been installed in Mandrake, down to an ugly viewer in X that seems to haven't matured since 1970?
How about a SMALL bare-bones Linux distro that doesn't come on several CD's? Why should it need to occupy more than half a CD? One is sufficient for even the bloated (in many Linux zealots eyes at least) Windows XP Professional. Gentoo could've been an option if it was real simple to use. They at least have a start there, but I heard it's not aimed for newbies. I just want a Linux distro that's configured to be simple like many already are, but without more than one software for the same thing, and they can skip stand-alone stuff like media players altogether. Is that really too much to demand? It's good with choice, but I'd rather just download the stuff I need. In that way, I can build up my system over time and know what I have, and not have to reduce it over time by carefully uninstalling one thing after another.
I wonder where we are when Longhorn is released? 8 CD Linux distros for "newcomers"? I think we're already at 4 at least, up from around 2 a few years ago.
These programs are available for windows, but you have to hunt for and install them yourself.
All download sites for the software mentioned above can be found by a Google "I'm feeling lucky" search within a few minutes in total. And it's about as quick to install them. I can't complain.
wow, and it's so easy to assume that there are no repeat numbers, and let's forget the fact that order of characters is important. All hail the mightly suspension of disbelief!
First, a digit only password is pretty bad due to the lack of combinations.
Let's assume a person used all alphanumeric characters (a-z, 0-9). That's 36 possible characters. For a password that's 7 characters long, that's 36^7 = 78364164096 combinations, which might not be able to be brute force cracked in reasonable time.
OK, let's then assume you are McGyver who saw which characters he pressed after analyzing the keyboard, noticing that 5 different keys were used (some keystrokes were repeated). Even if he doesn't know the order or which were repeated, that would be only 5^7 = 78125 combinations which can be tested with password cracking software within seconds or minutes. (although it would of course depend on if it's a software he was cracking or what, but you get the idea)
Hmm, well, maybe I just try to enforce the distinction because I know people who get trouble when their "avi movies" don't play. Then I have to tell them that it's an XviD movie and they only have the DivX codec, etc...
Re:And what was Firefix was for, again ??
on
A New Look For Firefox
·
· Score: 2, Informative
However, those have nothing to do with C++ in particular, which const have on the other hand. And I don't use caps for those. Dunno why I don't like it, but maybe because const is just a modifier to a variable and not a preprocessor directive.
Hmm, that's weird, since I also didn't believe 0.0.0.0 was invalid and also that only 127.0.0.1 was localhost, according to the standards.
I think it would be safest to use something like 1.0.0.0 in that case then. Especially if this tip is supposed to be platform independent. Wouldn't surprised me if *nix OS'es followed the standards better than Windows here. I wouldn't rely on that no software would try to send to all interfaces when getting redirected to 0.0.0.0. It could be rather disastrous actually, depending on your system and what network you're connected to (and how).
Just think of all the children that could have been fed with this $400 million.:( Or all the landmines that could be removed. Instead, we get playtoys for stupid white men. Micheal Moore needs to do his next expose on "science".
Why do these comments always come up when NASA's budget is neglible compared to others? In the big picture, NASA's funding has given them a hard time to find things already, since the government need the money for military funding. Oops, weren't you just argumenting against these things?
but when windows update comes up to tell them there's a new patch for a bad virus, they're clicking no?
The problem is that Windows Update doesn't have that behavior as default. Users need to setup their Windows Update client to work like that first. I think they've changed the WU client defaults in Windows XP SP2.
I've used MPC with Real Alternative. It can then play Quicktime (.mov), Real Media (.rm), SVCD, DVD, MPG. And that's basically the formats I need to play.
However, I did notice that Real Alternative didn't seem to play back RM as well as the "real thing" (it can with Quicktime though IMHO). Could be some setting though -- it basically seemed like it thought I had less bandwidth available than I did.
No, I didn't like it and gave some reasons why. As for "who cares?" -- aren't we supposed to discuss the player in this topic? But maybe it's not here to give opinions, but to slam Bill Gates and DRM like usual?:-P
- New skin (who cares? I play music and movies on it, not look at decorated borders)
- Integrated online stores (I really think these should be on the web instead of in the player... anyway, I won't use them since they probably just offer WMA, being in Microsoft's player)
- Enhanced device support (nice feature, but I don't have a NOMAD or Lyra player so no reason to use this for that either)
- Improved All-in-One Smart Jukebox (not sure how much this would help me since other players already support media libraries... this feature alone would probably not make me switch anyway:-P)
One more thing, I hope this cooperation will continue, as space is such a high cost / high risk business at least with our current technology, that for us to be truly successful in exploring it, I think international cooperation is not only beneficial, but necessary.
Slashdot Mirror
Weird, it worked just fine here.
I just wiped my Firefox directory in Program Files clean (I heard you should do that to avoid weird problems) and installed Fx 0.9 RC1. Everything still there except the themes and plugins but that was expected. They have a list of 0.9-compatible themes/plugins on MozillaZine.
the chances of this poor decision being reversed are slim to none as it'd mean the core devs losing face
Actually, the reaction would be the opposite. The community would likely get very excited that the developers are truly listening to a common opinion and fixing it ASAP. I don't think they have anything like that to fear.
Why do they put a default theme that is "nowhere near finished" in a product that's "due very soon"?
Because they think the theme polishing will be done for 1.0? It's still *months* away and the artists are probably not occupied by fixing bugs in the code, so they should have plenty of time to at least make it look respectable.
Meanwhile, just use another theme...
If I don't like the windows manager, I can choose another one.
:-)
Why can't you do the same in Windows? I've recently used Geoshell a lot and it was a real cool minimalist (much more so than KDE or Gnome) Explorer replacement. There are dozens more, and this community is actually thriving in these days.
If I would like to have feature X in program Y, I can file a wishlist or make the modifications myself if I can.
Why can't you file a wishlist to an author of a Windows program? However, I agree about the modification advantage though, although I'm not experienced enough at Linux programming that I could use that freedom. I doubt many Windows users are either, so it's probably no advantage to many switchers.
By contrast, Fedora/SUSE/Mandrake has you up and running from the first login.
This is exactly the problem I'm having with "simple" Linux installs (the ones I'm interested in). That so much bloat is included by default. Newcomers might be inexperienced, but I don't see why so many distros feel a need to dumb the user down by installing tons of junk. Yes, you can deselect stuff but how the heck shall an inexperienced user know what he can uncheck without breaking something vital? For example, Mandrake 10 included *two* browsers for me. And guess what... Both are based on the Gecko engine, so there's not even a reason to have two if a page renderes incorrectly in one of them! Who came up with this bright idea? So then I installed a third one (Firefox) and uninstalled Mozilla. I let the Epiphany junk be for now, but will probably have to uninstall that too (hopefully that will be painless) and install Thunderbird.
Also, another downside with this philoshophy is that the software you install will likely be outdated, so you still have to go through the trouble of upgrading it as the first thing you do anyway.
Yes, Windows integrates stuff too, but that's because Microsoft have to *sell* their OS licenses by making it attractive ("it can now record movies!"), and lock users into using their products. There's necessarily not any such thing with a Linux distro.
Again, I don't want to deselect dozen upon dozens of programs at install-time. Especially when I'm inexperienced and don't even know what everything does. I am perfectly able to install Irfanview in Windows, so why should I have to discover three viewers having been installed in Mandrake, down to an ugly viewer in X that seems to haven't matured since 1970?
How about a SMALL bare-bones Linux distro that doesn't come on several CD's? Why should it need to occupy more than half a CD? One is sufficient for even the bloated (in many Linux zealots eyes at least) Windows XP Professional. Gentoo could've been an option if it was real simple to use. They at least have a start there, but I heard it's not aimed for newbies. I just want a Linux distro that's configured to be simple like many already are, but without more than one software for the same thing, and they can skip stand-alone stuff like media players altogether. Is that really too much to demand? It's good with choice, but I'd rather just download the stuff I need. In that way, I can build up my system over time and know what I have, and not have to reduce it over time by carefully uninstalling one thing after another.
I wonder where we are when Longhorn is released? 8 CD Linux distros for "newcomers"? I think we're already at 4 at least, up from around 2 a few years ago.
These programs are available for windows, but you have to hunt for and install them yourself.
All download sites for the software mentioned above can be found by a Google "I'm feeling lucky" search within a few minutes in total. And it's about as quick to install them. I can't complain.
wow, and it's so easy to assume that there are no repeat numbers, and let's forget the fact that order of characters is important. All hail the mightly suspension of disbelief!
First, a digit only password is pretty bad due to the lack of combinations.
Let's assume a person used all alphanumeric characters (a-z, 0-9). That's 36 possible characters. For a password that's 7 characters long, that's 36^7 = 78364164096 combinations, which might not be able to be brute force cracked in reasonable time.
OK, let's then assume you are McGyver who saw which characters he pressed after analyzing the keyboard, noticing that 5 different keys were used (some keystrokes were repeated). Even if he doesn't know the order or which were repeated, that would be only 5^7 = 78125 combinations which can be tested with password cracking software within seconds or minutes. (although it would of course depend on if it's a software he was cracking or what, but you get the idea)
Hmm, well, maybe I just try to enforce the distinction because I know people who get trouble when their "avi movies" don't play. Then I have to tell them that it's an XviD movie and they only have the DivX codec, etc...
Firefox download size becomes 4.6 MB
I did try opera once before, a couple of years ago
They've fixed most clutter problems with the GUI since then, particularly in Opera 7.5.
I agree about that when it comes to #define's.
However, those have nothing to do with C++ in particular, which const have on the other hand. And I don't use caps for those. Dunno why I don't like it, but maybe because const is just a modifier to a variable and not a preprocessor directive.
So why don't we speak of "Avi movies" instead of DivX movies? They're rarely named MyMovie.divx, but instead MyMovie.avi.
In this case, AVI is an encapsulation format... just like Ogg!
Hmm, that's weird, since I also didn't believe 0.0.0.0 was invalid and also that only 127.0.0.1 was localhost, according to the standards.
I think it would be safest to use something like 1.0.0.0 in that case then. Especially if this tip is supposed to be platform independent. Wouldn't surprised me if *nix OS'es followed the standards better than Windows here. I wouldn't rely on that no software would try to send to all interfaces when getting redirected to 0.0.0.0. It could be rather disastrous actually, depending on your system and what network you're connected to (and how).
Heh, mine was 641 and I generated it a rather long time ago?
Just think of all the children that could have been fed with this $400 million. :( Or all the landmines that could be removed. Instead, we get playtoys for stupid white men. Micheal Moore needs to do his next expose on "science".
Why do these comments always come up when NASA's budget is neglible compared to others? In the big picture, NASA's funding has given them a hard time to find things already, since the government need the money for military funding. Oops, weren't you just argumenting against these things?
The Federal Pie Chart
NASA gets in total $15.5 billion for fiscal year 2004. Compare that to the billions in the pie chart above.
but when windows update comes up to tell them there's a new patch for a bad virus, they're clicking no?
The problem is that Windows Update doesn't have that behavior as default. Users need to setup their Windows Update client to work like that first. I think they've changed the WU client defaults in Windows XP SP2.
Since we can use the woman as a reference, maybe the picture could be untweaked to get the true picture back? :)
Ah, how could I forget... It can of course play Windows Media Video too. As long as you have DirectShow filters installed for it, it can play it.
I've used MPC with Real Alternative. It can then play Quicktime (.mov), Real Media (.rm), SVCD, DVD, MPG. And that's basically the formats I need to play.
However, I did notice that Real Alternative didn't seem to play back RM as well as the "real thing" (it can with Quicktime though IMHO). Could be some setting though -- it basically seemed like it thought I had less bandwidth available than I did.
I haven't used BSPlayer much, but MPC on the other hand.
Any opinions regarding BSPlayer vs Media Player Classic?
Pros / cons?
No, I didn't like it and gave some reasons why. As for "who cares?" -- aren't we supposed to discuss the player in this topic? But maybe it's not here to give opinions, but to slam Bill Gates and DRM like usual? :-P
Yes, I know. It just doesn't matter to me. :-)
When I play music, I have the player minimized, and when I play movies, I play in full screen. I never even see the skin.
And yeah, I use Winamp for music and MPC for movies. But I didn't go for Winamp partially for its skinning support.
- New skin (who cares? I play music and movies on it, not look at decorated borders)
:-P)
- Integrated online stores (I really think these should be on the web instead of in the player... anyway, I won't use them since they probably just offer WMA, being in Microsoft's player)
- Enhanced device support (nice feature, but I don't have a NOMAD or Lyra player so no reason to use this for that either)
- Improved All-in-One Smart Jukebox (not sure how much this would help me since other players already support media libraries... this feature alone would probably not make me switch anyway
Hmm... Why go through all the work to port it to the .NET framework when it wasn't developed for it in the first place.
You're probably thinking of Andorra. Yeah, I guess it's not in the EU. :-)
One more thing, I hope this cooperation will continue, as space is such a high cost / high risk business at least with our current technology, that for us to be truly successful in exploring it, I think international cooperation is not only beneficial, but necessary.