$699? Ouch...
I think I'd rather have a cheap used laptop for that price. More functionality, about the same weight.
Rubbish. The Zaurus is a complete Linux box, and
thus has exactly the same functionality as your
desktop or laptop machine, albeit in a smaller
form factor, and less expansion options. As for
weight, I don't know about the SL-6000, but my SL-C860
is significantly lighter than any laptop I've
ever come across (lighter even than the Libretto).
I would like a IM client (IRC does not rock my world)
Can you explain the difference? Both allow you to talk to others in realtime. What makes one better
than the other (yes, this is a genuine question -- I
use neither, so I don't know the pros and cons).
While you're at it, can you also explain why it
should be part of Mozilla, rather than a standalone
app, the way the gods intended?:-)
For one thing its just a mirror, all that software is available on hundreds of other sites.
It's not just a mirror.
It's a particularly fast and comprehensive
mirror. It's always up, and has everything you need.
OK, so I don't get the full benefit,
but it's still much better than the alternatives,
and
I still get 3.5MB/s downloads, even without being
on JANET. This is not a good day for those in
the UK.
MTA will be either qmail or postfix using maildir. I'd planned to use reiserfs, too--anyone wanna advise me otherwise?
Yep. Any of the others are perfectly viable choices,
but I'd avoid reiserfs. If anyone's interested, the
reasons can be summed up in two words: Hans Reiser.
Too many reports of data loss/corruption, and too
much indifference from the reiserfs developers
("dont' worry about it -- it'll be fixed in the next
version, due in 5 months").
Gnumeric is so great, and it opens Excel files too
Agreed. Like OO.o, it doesn't have 100% coverage of
everything in Excel. But I can say that for
real world use, rather than contrived examples,
it opens every spreadsheet I've tried it with,
without problems[1]. It
also has the benefit of being literally 10 times
faster than oocalc.
[1] I'm talking about recent versions here. If
you haven't tried it lately, give post-1.2 releases a shot. It's come a long way...
No offense to the guys doing wonderful work on the Mozilla project, but there are already lots of calendar apps out there.
Name one. The best I've found is ical.
It's a very sad statement that although over 10
years old, no one has written anything better in
that time. Yes, it has flaws. But fewer than any of
the alternatives. Lots of calendar apps? Yep. But
they all suck. And that's not a healthy position
for us to be in.
Repeat after me: "A calendar has no place in an
email user agent". Anyone that believes otherwise
simply doesn't understand the issues. What people
a crying out for is not a reimplementation of
Outlook, but something that lets them manage
their time with the same ease that Outlook does.
That means sending out meeting requests, with
calendars being updated as appropriate on
acceptance. It means the ability to check others'
calendars to look for a suitably free time slot.
And it means being able to do so with the click
of a button or two. It doesn't require
calendaring and email to be the same application,
though, and indeed, it's much better if they're
not.
But projects like Evolution are too hellbent on reimplementing all the mistakes made by Microsoft
to step back and actually look at doing the right
thing.
"We do actually have a firewall, but aparently it hasn't been updated enough" sais radiographer Jan Bovin. "It was the scanners running Windows 2000 and XP that were affected, the MR-scanners running Linux had no problems," he sais.
The worrying thing here is not that the scanners
were running Windows (although that is certainly
cause for concern), but that those machines were
networked and accessible from other machines.
I completely agree. If some moron breaks a window, you don't blame the windowmaker.
No, but you do blame the idiot that didn't specify
toughened glass for a secure building. In this case,
the blame lies completely with the coastguard for
choosing an insecure OS and not taking suitable
steps to secure the network given that choice.
The correct Commonwealth spelling is centre. (BTW, it's annoying that the American spelling is in the HTML standard)
True, although it's deprecated.
It is, however, still part of the CSS standard. There was some discussion about allowing "centre" as
a synonym, but it didn't make it into the final standard IIRC.
Not to mention, the interface (both in terms of the graphical lay-out and in terms of the user interaction, but more so the latter) is fantastic. Photoshop gives you an absolutely wonderful experience using it
This is just plain not true. I'm not putting Photoshop down, but I struggle to find what I
want when I have to use it. To me, The GIMP is
much more intuitive and natural. Everything is just
in the place I expect it to be. Yes, I know that
puts me in a minority, and I accept that at least
part of that will be learned behaviour -- GIMP
and Photoshop are different, and I'm far more
used to GIMP, so it's only natural that Photoshop
feels alien to me. But it does, and I struggle
to use it comfortably. And the MDI interface on the Windows version sucks. I mean, really, really
sucks.
I haven't seen any precedence yet for forcing people with older vehicles to comply with modern laws.
Here in the UK, my 1979 car has to pass an emissions
test every year, despite the fact that there were
no emissions restrictions in place at the time of
manufacture. Furthermore, the standard it has to
reach is getting more restrictive over time. What
would have passed 5 years ago won't necessarily
pass now (although it is at least required to
reach a lower standard than those cars built since
emissions limits became law). I
believe some US states (e.g., California) have
similar rules.
No one blinks at the mention of having event recorders installed on trains and planes; why should'nt they be installed on automobiles?
Sigh. I really shouldn't feed the trolls, but since
you apparently can't see the difference, trains and
planes take fee paying customers, who are putting
their lives in the hands of the driver/pilot of
that vehicle. I'm fully in favour of buses and
taxis having black boxes. Private vehicles are
different, though.
What DO YOU have so special as to be able to break the law and endanger other people???
So you'd be happy for the government to install
a closed circuit television camera in your house
to ensure that you're not building bombs or
refining heroin? It's OK. It's not monitored
consistently. It only holds the last 24 hours
at any one time. And it's only checking that
you're not breaking the law and endangering
the lives of others. The presence or
absence of a black box has no bearing on my
abilty to break the law. I'm merely saying that
I should be free to go about my business
(lawfully, of course) without
governmental interference.
I just can't get angry at this. Most modern cars already have data recorders that monitor what was happening when the "Check Engine" light goes on.
I can get angry about it when people start
suggesting that black boxes shoulld be mandatory,
and that's the next logical step in this case. Once they start being used in court, there will
be increasing pressure to make it a legal
requirement for all cars to have them.
My car doesn't have a black box. Should I be forced
to install one, presumably at my own expense, just
because I don't want to buy a new car? That's
where this is headed, and I don't like it. Nor
do I like the assumption that the government
has the right to know what I'm doing and how I'm
driving. As for the legal rammifications, I don't
like those much either. How was the black box calibrated?
When was it last calibrated? what are the
error margins on its measurements? What safeguards
are there to prevent the data being tampered with
after the accident?
If I were to change some words and numbers to, let's say, 'airplane' and '3000', it would piss off 250.000.000 people and even though I'm not an anerican I'd say it's would be pretty respectless to make jokes out of this kind of horrible events.
Were you to make those changes, I'd laugh. I'm
sorry, but anyone who thinks there is such a thing
as a joke that is "too tasteless" needs to take a
step back and rethink things. Laughing at tragedy is
a natural human trait. Some of the best jokes
are pretty sick. But that doesn't make them any
less funny. Nor are they disrespectful. Humour
and respect are not mutually exclusive.
Nope, not true. You can write software
without bugs, but it's not usually economically
viable to do so. Using formal proofs with something
like Z will get you software that works exactly as
you intended[1]
(i.e., without bugs). But that comes
at a price. Jonathan Bowen gives a 5 fold decrease
in productivity for using formal methods for
development over standard development methods.
For most applications, that's not an attractive
tradeoff, and you're better off just living with
the relatively few bugs that traditional software
development yields. Remember,
worse is better.
But for certain applications,
it's worthwhile. Space exploration should
fall into that category, for example,
due to the huge costs of
losing a spacecraft. But even there,
budget cutbacks mean
that managers are increasingly looking for short
term cost savings (e.g., development costs)
without considering the bigger picture.
[1] Of course, that assumes that you get your
specification right to start with...
Apart from compiler writers, who needs hand-tuned assembler ?
You do. If you can't write assembly language, then you
will never be as good a programmer as those who can.
Whether you actually use it is another
matter. I haven't had to actually write anything in
assembly language for well over a decade. But the
fact that I could if I needed to helps,
even when writing in a higher level language,
because I have some clue about what's going on
under the covers.
I don't know where you buy your fuel but if you are snagging 100+ octane rated fuels let me know
98 is commonly available here in the UK, which can
easily get to over 100 with octane boosting
additives. There are also a few places that still
sell what used to be called "five star" fuel (100RON), but
they're getting quite rare now.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh for some mod points...
Rubbish. The Zaurus is a complete Linux box, and thus has exactly the same functionality as your desktop or laptop machine, albeit in a smaller form factor, and less expansion options. As for weight, I don't know about the SL-6000, but my SL-C860 is significantly lighter than any laptop I've ever come across (lighter even than the Libretto).
Can you explain the difference? Both allow you to talk to others in realtime. What makes one better than the other (yes, this is a genuine question -- I use neither, so I don't know the pros and cons).
While you're at it, can you also explain why it should be part of Mozilla, rather than a standalone app, the way the gods intended? :-)
Yes...
It's not just a mirror. It's a particularly fast and comprehensive mirror. It's always up, and has everything you need. OK, so I don't get the full benefit, but it's still much better than the alternatives, and I still get 3.5MB/s downloads, even without being on JANET. This is not a good day for those in the UK.
Yep. Any of the others are perfectly viable choices, but I'd avoid reiserfs. If anyone's interested, the reasons can be summed up in two words: Hans Reiser. Too many reports of data loss/corruption, and too much indifference from the reiserfs developers ("dont' worry about it -- it'll be fixed in the next version, due in 5 months").
No, in fact ext3 is one of the few that actually will journal data as well as metadata.
Yep... that it doesn't have an "E" in it :-)
Agreed. Like OO.o, it doesn't have 100% coverage of everything in Excel. But I can say that for real world use, rather than contrived examples, it opens every spreadsheet I've tried it with, without problems[1]. It also has the benefit of being literally 10 times faster than oocalc.
[1] I'm talking about recent versions here. If you haven't tried it lately, give post-1.2 releases a shot. It's come a long way...
Name one. The best I've found is ical. It's a very sad statement that although over 10 years old, no one has written anything better in that time. Yes, it has flaws. But fewer than any of the alternatives. Lots of calendar apps? Yep. But they all suck. And that's not a healthy position for us to be in.
Repeat after me: "A calendar has no place in an email user agent". Anyone that believes otherwise simply doesn't understand the issues. What people a crying out for is not a reimplementation of Outlook, but something that lets them manage their time with the same ease that Outlook does. That means sending out meeting requests, with calendars being updated as appropriate on acceptance. It means the ability to check others' calendars to look for a suitably free time slot. And it means being able to do so with the click of a button or two. It doesn't require calendaring and email to be the same application, though, and indeed, it's much better if they're not.
But projects like Evolution are too hellbent on reimplementing all the mistakes made by Microsoft to step back and actually look at doing the right thing.
The worrying thing here is not that the scanners were running Windows (although that is certainly cause for concern), but that those machines were networked and accessible from other machines.
No, but you do blame the idiot that didn't specify toughened glass for a secure building. In this case, the blame lies completely with the coastguard for choosing an insecure OS and not taking suitable steps to secure the network given that choice.
True, although it's deprecated. It is, however, still part of the CSS standard. There was some discussion about allowing "centre" as a synonym, but it didn't make it into the final standard IIRC.
This is just plain not true. I'm not putting Photoshop down, but I struggle to find what I want when I have to use it. To me, The GIMP is much more intuitive and natural. Everything is just in the place I expect it to be. Yes, I know that puts me in a minority, and I accept that at least part of that will be learned behaviour -- GIMP and Photoshop are different, and I'm far more used to GIMP, so it's only natural that Photoshop feels alien to me. But it does, and I struggle to use it comfortably. And the MDI interface on the Windows version sucks. I mean, really, really sucks.
Slightly different. A 420R needs a sparc64 version, which is more readily available than sparc32.
That may be true, but the OED is the ultimate arbiter of the English language, and the OED only lists it as being a noun.
<ob_grammar_nazi>
Leverage is a noun, not a verb. The word you're looking for is lever.
</ob_grammar_nazi>
Here in the UK, my 1979 car has to pass an emissions test every year, despite the fact that there were no emissions restrictions in place at the time of manufacture. Furthermore, the standard it has to reach is getting more restrictive over time. What would have passed 5 years ago won't necessarily pass now (although it is at least required to reach a lower standard than those cars built since emissions limits became law). I believe some US states (e.g., California) have similar rules.
Sigh. I really shouldn't feed the trolls, but since you apparently can't see the difference, trains and planes take fee paying customers, who are putting their lives in the hands of the driver/pilot of that vehicle. I'm fully in favour of buses and taxis having black boxes. Private vehicles are different, though.
What DO YOU have so special as to be able to break the law and endanger other people???
So you'd be happy for the government to install a closed circuit television camera in your house to ensure that you're not building bombs or refining heroin? It's OK. It's not monitored consistently. It only holds the last 24 hours at any one time. And it's only checking that you're not breaking the law and endangering the lives of others. The presence or absence of a black box has no bearing on my abilty to break the law. I'm merely saying that I should be free to go about my business (lawfully, of course) without governmental interference.
I can get angry about it when people start suggesting that black boxes shoulld be mandatory, and that's the next logical step in this case. Once they start being used in court, there will be increasing pressure to make it a legal requirement for all cars to have them. My car doesn't have a black box. Should I be forced to install one, presumably at my own expense, just because I don't want to buy a new car? That's where this is headed, and I don't like it. Nor do I like the assumption that the government has the right to know what I'm doing and how I'm driving. As for the legal rammifications, I don't like those much either. How was the black box calibrated? When was it last calibrated? what are the error margins on its measurements? What safeguards are there to prevent the data being tampered with after the accident?
Were you to make those changes, I'd laugh. I'm sorry, but anyone who thinks there is such a thing as a joke that is "too tasteless" needs to take a step back and rethink things. Laughing at tragedy is a natural human trait. Some of the best jokes are pretty sick. But that doesn't make them any less funny. Nor are they disrespectful. Humour and respect are not mutually exclusive.
Nope, not true. You can write software without bugs, but it's not usually economically viable to do so. Using formal proofs with something like Z will get you software that works exactly as you intended[1] (i.e., without bugs). But that comes at a price. Jonathan Bowen gives a 5 fold decrease in productivity for using formal methods for development over standard development methods. For most applications, that's not an attractive tradeoff, and you're better off just living with the relatively few bugs that traditional software development yields. Remember, worse is better. But for certain applications, it's worthwhile. Space exploration should fall into that category, for example, due to the huge costs of losing a spacecraft. But even there, budget cutbacks mean that managers are increasingly looking for short term cost savings (e.g., development costs) without considering the bigger picture.
[1] Of course, that assumes that you get your specification right to start with...
You do. If you can't write assembly language, then you will never be as good a programmer as those who can. Whether you actually use it is another matter. I haven't had to actually write anything in assembly language for well over a decade. But the fact that I could if I needed to helps, even when writing in a higher level language, because I have some clue about what's going on under the covers.
98 is commonly available here in the UK, which can easily get to over 100 with octane boosting additives. There are also a few places that still sell what used to be called "five star" fuel (100RON), but they're getting quite rare now.
You say that like it's a bad thing!