My understanding of the issue was that the CD crashed the OS X automounter. Upon rebooting, the CD would not be booted (since it's not bootable) and OS X would start up as usual at which point the automounter would crash again since the CD is still in the drive.
I'm not entirely positive that holding down the mouse button will work for this, but I suspect it will since it is handled by Open Firmware. Someone else posted that you can also hold down Cmd+Opt+O+F and get into OF then type the OF command to eject the CD. I assume holding down the mouse button works just as well since it's also done by OF
Seeing as how you're probably unaware of OF, it's a standard used by Apple as well as Sun. Essentially, it's a Forth interpreter. Forth is turing complete so you can actually write programs in it if you wish. And yes, we have an OLD Sun Netra i5 at work that also boots to OF. In fact, you can drop in to OF at any time by holding down the Stop key and pressing "A". The currently running OS will be paused (even if it's Linux as in my case with the Sun) and you can drop right in to the Firmware. I haven't seen anything like this on recent Macs, though I vaguely remember a key combination on older (Old World) Macs that would drop it in to the machine monitor.
In any case, putting a Celine Dion CD into your Mac is just plain wrong! And yes, I think the issue was WAY overblown. Non-Mac users have a strong tendency to make up believable misinformation so they can feel superior using PCs. Witness that the statement here was that because the iMac doesn't have an emergency eject hole that the CD was stuck forever and the computer required service. Of course, that's not true, the Firmware (BIOS in PC terms) is more than able to eject the disc. But most PC users have no idea what OF is since they're still stuck with crappy BIOSes that boot the computer in 1970s-80s real mode!
I have nothing against PC users, almost all the machines at work are PCs. I've used PCs since 1985. What ticks me off are the people (especially in the media) that feel they have to spread misinformation about Macs.
Heh.. So now you know better. I'm amazed you actually asked, most people would have just trolled and came up with some other reason not to use Macs.:-D
Or you could just hold down the mouse button or the eject key on the keyboard while it was starting up. Simply press and hold one of those as soon as you hear the startup chime and any CD in the drive will be ejected.
In fact, a quick call to 1-800-MY-APPLE would have resulted in the above answer.
I realize you truly believe what you are saying, and I understand where you are coming from having used Windows since the 3.0 days as well as OS/2 2.1 through 4.0 and various Linux desktop environments. However, I must point out that you're really just fooling yourself into believing that maximizing windows is a normal and productive thing. I know this because I've been there.
I've been using Macs since the 10.1 days and absolutely love the UI. The OS X UI is built with multitasking in mind. Windows have drop shadows and sort of blend in with each other. Documents reside in their own toplevel windows. Toolbars and palettes may be placed anywhere on the screen.
One of the big problems with the Microsoft UI is its focus on rectangular boxes butted against each other. A typical MS application must be maximized in order to use it because the menubar, toolbar, and other UI elements are in fixed positions usually to the top and sometimes left of the document area.
On the mac you have ONE menubar. It stays at the top of the screen. It only takes up a small amount of space which is shared between applications (no wasted space having a menu on each window). In addition, the toolbars and floating palettes for an application are only shown when that application is active. Because of this, it's possible to stagger document windows since they are free from extraneous controls and only show the document.
Windows sort of blend together due to the shadow effect so it's less distracting to have document windows staggered on top of each other. If you really must concentrate on one thing, you can use the "Hide others" choice from the application menu (the one displaying the application's name in bold).
I suggest that you get a Mac and give OS X a try for a few months. Forget about your old ways and really learn the new system. I guarantee you'll be surprised. Nearly everything about OS X becomes second nature very easily. After having used OS X for a while, I find it difficult to work with Windows machines. I am used to the computer working sensibly, and Windows simply doesn't. I'm amazed at how much I've already forgotten about the Windows UI! Never in my life did I forget how to use Windows, even after having used OS/2 and Linux and what not. But after having used OS X my eyes have been opened to the Microsoft UI and frankly, all I see is ugliness.
I have to say I'm quite impressed by this 0.7 release of Firebird for OS X. FB 0.6 had some major drawing issues and was overall fairly slow feeling. FB 0.7 just plain SCREAMS through pages.
While the firebird UI is great, it's missing a few things that Camino has (and so I am back writing this in Camino). The absolute MOST important thing it is missing is the Camino style "Go" menu. I realize that almost everyone has become accustomed to the back/forward buttons with little down arrows, but Camino really stumbled upon a great idea here.
For those of you who don't use Camino, I'll briefly explain. Instead of having drop-down arrows next to the back and forward, Camino has a per-window history in the Go menu. At the top of the menu are Home, Search Page, a spacer, then Back, Forward, and another spacer. Then the forwaard most page is listed in top and a checkmark is placed on the currently viewed page. It makes it a lot easier because you don't have to think if you are going back or forward before dropping down the list.
Firebird and Mozilla also have a similar setup, but it is per-browser instead of per-window. I've grown so used to the Camino style go menu I want it in the OS X Finder as well.
The only other issue is the overall spit and polish of the widgets. They desparately need to fit in with the rest of the system. But even then, how it works is much more important than how it looks.
I too have mixed feelings about the death penalty. On the one hand, it sickens me to think that some cases do get shuffled through the court system without proper trials and because of that innocent people are put to death.
On the other hand, there are some people who just deserve to die. Serial killers are firmly in that category for me. Some people just need to be gone. The D.C. area snipers? They confessed, it's admissable, and yes, they probably are crazy, but that's really not an excuse unless they REALLY didn't appreciate the consequences of their actions. Considering they made quite an effort to allude police, I really don't buy that argument. They had to know damn well what the consequences of their actions were in order to do what they did. Hang 'em.
I wonder what will happen. Chances are they won't wind up being executed because it's a high profile case and the lawyers trying to make a name for themselves are already coming to their rescue.
"[...] at least I can find hope in the fact that most Americans aren't raving racist lunatics"
Yes, you're right, and neither am I a "raving racist lunatic." If anything, I hate the white trash Neo-Nazi shit even more. I did speciifcally mention that I'd like to see some balance restored without turning back the clock 40 years on civil rights.
Of course, you wouldn't bother to read it very carefully because you've apparently made up your mind well ahead of time that Europe's ideas for how the world should be run should be forced upon the entire world, especially the U.S.
Most of Europe seems too busy goose stepping to the beat of the E.U. to realize that there's a world beyond Europe. Ironically, the U.S. has traditionally been the union with the most short-sighted international policies, but it now seems we've passed that buck to the E.U.
How convenient for you to sit across the pond and judge the U.S. based on what little information you hear through your news media and special interest groups.
I realize that it's now fashionable to bitch about the U.S. (and has been for decades now) but this is getting out of hand. How many black people do you have in Norway? Do they generally tend to act like the rest of the population?
You have NO idea about what is really going on in the U.S. Why don't you come here and live in the scum of the earth parts of town? Then tell me that putting cop killers away is bad.
Not all black people in the U.S. are bad and that is true regardless of their economic status. However, there is this growing amount of people who are stupid, unmotivated, extremely poor, and have no desire to ever do anything with their lives. Once they realize they fucked up by dropping out back in 8th grade they turn to illegal activities as a source of income since no one in their right mind would hire them for a real job.
Here's a story I heard from my best friend (who lives in a different state): His wife is in her last year of college and is now student teaching. The kids were being rowdy the other day so she told them that anyone who didn't want to learn should move to the back of the room and turn the desk around to face the wall. The white kids, the asian kids, the hispanic kids, and all of the other kids except for the black kids knew she meant business and paid attention. But the black kids in the class went to the back of the room and thus admitted freely that they weren't interested in learning.
That time she let them do whatever they wanted (homework from another class, sleep, whatever). Next time she does it she is planning on making anyone who decides not to learn write an essay on why they don't want to learn.
Why is it that a country founded on the principle of hard work for great rewards has an ever increasing segment of the population that wants nothing more than to lay back and eek out a living doing the absolute minimum amount of work? Could it be because people like you bitch and scream any time "poor black people" who are just misunderstood "innocent 'criminals'" go to prison for their crimes?
Could it be because an entire political party (the Democratic party) aligns themselves behind nearly every cause relating to black people regardless of how asinine it is simply so they can get the "black vote" and the votes of bleeding hearts? What exactly is the black vote anyway? What motivates almost an entire race to vote in lock step for the same party regardless of how screwed up their social policies are?
There's a growing number of hard working people of all races in this country who are fed up with this shit. My only hope is that we can restore sanity to this country without turning back the clock 40 years on civil rights. Sadly, if more black people don't wake up out of their democratic party induced coma, it's not going to be pretty.
So, how are things in Norway? Are you living next to a slum? No? Oh. Well surely you've got a fair number of perfectly healthy people in your country who refuse to go to school and get decent jobs? No? Well surely you have ethnic tensions in Norway? Oh, your population is almost entirely nordic. I guess you wouldn't have any fucking clue then. Would you?
I started out with wxWindows to write version 2 of PhotoFlair (www.truview.com). I am now developing on my personal time a port for Cocoa known simply as wxCocoa. It is Mac OS X only.
In the meantime, there is a Mac Classic and Carbon port known as wxMac. Current CVS is dropping straight Classic support in favor of Carbon only. It will require Mac OS 9.1 or better.
Developing on a Mac is a great experience, though a nice fast Dual G4 or G5 is really a better system for that. I use a Dual G4-1Ghz at work. Still, I have a G4-500 at home and it's a respectable machine (using it now). Let's hope Isabel doesn't take it out.
If you don't want to jump right in to Mac development, go ahead and start with the Windows version written in wxWindows. You can even use your favorite IDE like Microsoft Visual Studio, or Borland. You can also use MinGW w/ MSYS and GVIM (my personal preference, though most people use MSVS or Borland I think).
Once you have a Windows version it will be easy to port to GTK or Mac OS. The port to Mac is a little rough for certain things, but overall is not bad. I hope to be making things easier for wxCocoa.
And you know what, even if you only use it to do MSW development, I think you'll still find it far better than MFC or raw Win32.:-)
What the AC was trying to say is that it's a common misconception that you have no right to run the software without agreeing to the license. Software publishers WANT you to think that you have to agree to the license to use the program, but that's not true.
If you don't agree to the license then you are only bound by copyright law. Copyright law allows you to run the program.
Why do you think Microsoft started the whole click-thru licensing in the first place? Remember when they simply included the license with the program. Well, that didn't work because you never agreed to it but still had the legal right to run the program. They told you you couldn't run it without agreeing to the license, but that wasn't true. So they made it impossible to run it without agreeing to the license by making you click through.
I wonder how UCITA is worded (I do live in Virginia). Can I hexedit the binary to avoid agreeing to the license and use my rights granted by copyright law?
What about web pages? Can I write some javascript to post the form without actually selecting I agree?
In any case, I am not a lawyer, but I'd LOVE to see a lawyers opinion on all of this.
I have to agree with namespan here. Singing the style that you are singing using an autotuner is blasphemy. Your being slightly out of tune in Long Time Waitin' on the one note ("when the winter/springtime/etc.") actually added to the overall ambiance of the music.
Penn Station Subway sounded more like that shit I hear on the radio. Bright, Cheery, and DEAD! At first it fools you because it sounds so bright and it seems to be more of a direct hit on the senses. But then the aftertaste sets in and it starts sounding dead. It's.. too.. perfect.
Actually, that may not be entirely correct though. A lot of music sounds better if it is in a more natural key than the western scale. The western scale is 12 equidistant notes. If you haven't taken theory, take it. A quick Physics course as well. If you define a note such as A at 440 Hz then an octave higher is exactly twice that, in this case 880 Hz. On a western scale, each half-step is the previous frequency * 2 ^ (1/12). A fifth is therefore 2^(7/12), and a fourth is 2^(5/12). However, a true fifth is 3/2 and a true forth is 4/3. 440 * 4/3 = 586.66666... 440 * 2 ^ (5.0/12.0) = 587.32953583481515. Notice that that is nearly a full cycle per second difference.
You can use python to do quick calculations.
>>> 440 * pow(2.0,5.0/12.0) (you get the result) >>> 440 * 4.0 / 3.0 (different result)
Don't assume that the autotuner sound is actually preferred. In these cases it is most certainly not preferrable. In a pop song I could potentially see the value of an autotuner. The style of pop music, generally clean cut and dead, lends itself quite well to an autotuner.
I'd say you have a good voice. If you've not taken vocal training and music theory then you should becuase I think it's worth it to unlock all the potential you have. Anybody who is serious about singing should be taking lessons.
The thing is that the constitution doesn't specific mention this sort of case. Intellectual property should and is protected at the same level as property. Such a level where choosen by the founding fathers becuase they discovered that the the intellectual property is vital to a growing economy. In other words, this dessicon is correct under the constitution.
Really? The constitution does not mention "Intellectual property." It does, however, specifically mention things such as copyrights and patents.
Nice signature... proud to be a Republican. I generally do like to vote Republican because I generally tend to agree with them more than Democrats, but I wouldn't say I was proud of it because frankly both political parties in this country suck eggs.
I get the impression that you are eating the party line right up. That's plainly obvious when you make statements suggesting that the founding fathers considered "intellectual property." Whether you agree or disagree with organizations such as GNU, you should go to www.gnu.org and read GNU's position on so-called intellectual property.
To sum up GNU's position: Intellectual property is a term that does nothing but confuse the issues of copyrights, patents, trademarks and other areas of law.
As far as this case is concerned, I see in the article that the judges only ruled that trade secret law trumps free speech rights for this case. They also issued a ruling that the case should be reexamined to find out if any trade secrets actually were violated. I suppose I can view that as a reasonable ruling. However, I would not be able to fathom another ruling that any trade secrets were actually violated. Furthermore, it's generally accepted practice that once a secret is out in the open, it's no longer a trade secret and so no longer deserves the protections.
I wouldn't consider this a setback but more of a readjustment to fit the case in the legal framework where it should have been in the first place.
The original post was very informative. EmagGeek was right on track when he mentioned that one generator got knocked offline for some reason and because of that the power grid compensated by rerouting electricity from other generators.
My dad was vice president of electric supply for NIPSCO for a number of years after having worked his way up the chain of command starting off working at a power plant as an electrical engineer. As VP of electric supply his job included ensuring NIPSCO was generating enough power to cover the needs of all the power customers (including several steel mills), working with regulators to ensure the rates were reasonable so that money could be spent to increase capacity when needed, and working with environmentalists to ensure that emissions were well below accepted government levels.
NIPSCO was a company very interested in serving its customers. As a heavily regulated utility the only reasonable business decision is to service your customers the best that you possibly can. My dad took that to heart. He was strongly opposed to deregulation. Why? Because the simple fact of the matter is that my dad was somewhat of an exception. Most executives tend to look strictly at the bottom line and lose sight of the forest for all the trees. He knew that deregulation would inevitibly lead to cost cutting in areas where costs should not be cut simply because without regulation the power company is at the mercy of its shareholders and shareholders are very often in it strictly for the money.
So, tonight I had a discussion with him about this mess. First of all, the background. Apparently a generator went off grid this afternoon forcing other generators to take up the slack. That can happen for a number of reasons. Equipment does fail, humans do make mistakes, etc. What's supposed to happen is that the rest of the generators and the grid should have enough capacity to take up the slack. Should there not be enough capacity then someone needs to lose power. This should happen at the customer side. That is, a portion of the customers should be blacked out to reduce the load on the grid and allow normal operations to continue. I believe that is what you meant by "putting a release on the chain." You are correct, that's what should have happened. The fact that it didn't indicates that there was some major problem with the logic of the grid. It would have been far better to cut the power to thousands of customers than millions.
Bad logic was part of the cause. The other problem was a seriously overloaded power grid. The power grid was designed to handle the situation where a power company normally had sufficient capacity but due to generator failures was unable to meet demand. Notice that I said failures (plural). If a few generators are knocked off the grid the company ought to have enough energy to supply all of its customers. Furthermore, it ought to have backup generators that can be started and on the grid within an hour. Those backup generators are just that: backups. They cost a hell of a lot of money to operate but they aren't as expensive to build as a main generator. If a few more generators get knocked off grid it's reasonable to expect that a power company will be unable to handle this situation without buying power from another company. That is what the grid is for.
Unfortunately, because of government stupidity (deregulation) and corporate greed the grid is now being used in a way it was never intended to be. It is often loaded to near full capacity drawing power over very long distances. The idea of deregulation was that loosely regulated for-profit companies would compete to generate electricity which the local power companies could purchase instead of generating their own. Because the power companies no longer had to be responsible for providing capacity in excess of what is needed the rates could be
Re:Showed this to my boss.
on
LWCE Wrapup
·
· Score: 1
The only loser I see here is your boss for ignoring Linux because he didn't find a joke funny.
Very true. I'm quite familiar with CD errors as I have done a lot of work with audio CDs which don't have the added layer of error correction present on data discs. For most normal purposes, checking the md5sum of the cooked data before using it should be sufficient. At least you know the cooked data is still reading properly which is better than getting through half of an install and finding out the disc is bad.
I doubt that in the few months that a distro ISO is good for (before the next version comes out) that the disc would deteriorate that much.
I needed to know the CDs weren't going to fail on me like a copied ISO might.
Odd. The only times I've ever had CDs burned from ISOs fail is when the burner failed to burn the disc properly.
There is, of course, a simple way to check that it did burn properly. Assuming you burned it as MODE1 with one data track and no additional postgaps you can do this:
dd if=/dev/cdrom bs=2048 | md5sum
Then compare that with the md5sum of the ISO. If you added a postgap, then specify the number of 2048 byte blocks that make up the ISO with count=XYZ
Another method is to use find and md5sum redirected to a text file, something like:
That works a bit better in cases wher you have intentionally added/deleted/modified files and want to make sure nothing else got changed. Note that you may or may not need to pass that through sort; I'll leave that as an excercise for the reader.
And the OSS/FS could do more of the same. It always worries me when OSS/FS advocates say bad things about Windows and then you find out that they never use it. If you don't know your enemy IN DEPTH then you are missing out. I think every OSS/FS developer ought to have access to a copy of Windows.
Actually, I think that people interested in designing good systems would do a lot better to take a look at Mac OS X. One of the biggest problems with the current open desktop environments is that they borrowed way too much from Microsoft Windows, including the bad things.
Another advantage to borrowing from Apple is that it is UNIX based and so fits in better with a UNIX system. One of the biggest problems with a lot of MS stuff is that it's simply not designed with UNIX in mind.
I'm glad to see that Microsoft is setting up some UNIX test labs. They have an awful lot to learn that would really help make Windows better.
Oh, I don't disagree. I think that's sort of a fuck up on Apple's part.
Unfortunately, michael had to post this story with incorrect and flammatory information, making most of the discussion about how DRM is bad because Apple goes in and deletes your files (they don't) instead of about what might be done to make Apple's implementation a little better.
Still, there was surely a lot more discussion than there otherwise might have been without that comment, so I guess Slashdot wins and its users lose. Either that or michael is just plain incompetent (which isn't unlikely).
Actually, the files are not deleted by Apple and I saw nothing in the article or in Apple's license to indicate they would be. However, if the user deletes the files and/or deauthorizes his computer, reauthorizing it with a non-US credit card will not work.
In short, this is just yet another sensationalist story posted by michael who apparently cannot be bothered to even check the facts in the stories he's posting. He could have simply added a comment like "Despite what the submitter said, I found no evidence or information indicating that the files would actually be deleted by Apple."
Yes, I am supportive of "soft" DRM. Throw the media companies a bone at least once in a while. So long as I can burn it to a CD at least once, what's the difference? If I felt like it I'd make MP3s off of that and do whatever the hell I want with it just like I can with any other normal CD I buy in the store. That unprotected safety valve is what makes iTMS work.
Essentially, your post amounts to the classic Slashdot karma whore troll. "I'm sure I'll get moderated into oblivion..." Moderators: Please do so.
Don't you like your cheap TV made in China or India. What about the low-cost PC made from components made cheaply overseas?
Like it or not, our standard of living depends on people willing to work for peanuts.
Re:The design of X is multi-user
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 1
Look at OS X. It has a frame buffer. It also can have a rootless X server. All the apps for the machine target the frame buffer. None of them work well over the network.
Actually, that's not entirely correct. OS X uses a window server which clients connect to through local Mach ports (similar to a UNIX domain socket).
I've read (just the other day in fact) that NeXT had a program allowing you to run an application on another NeXT and have it displayed locally. It would seem totally possible, just feed the data over the network instead of over a Mach port. Of course, that would only hold true for pure Cocoa apps. For anything using QuickDraw (/old/ MacOS API) I imagine there is probably a lot of shared memory usage.
So, what was that about OS X's GUI being vastly different from X11? The "we need a framebuffer" trolls need to go take a hike. X11 is the proper design, and it is only the implementation of it which needs some improvement.
Sure. Buy the unit and make a formal request in writing for the source code to the GPLed software that you have just purchased in binary form. If requested to do so, provide media (such as a CD-R in modern times, though the GPL mentions tapes) and return postage for that media.
Once you have said source code, you are free to redistribute it (unmodified or modified) under the terms of the GPL.
Until you have the binary, you have NO rights to request the source code under the GPL.
What bothers me most about your comment is the way you think you are somehow entitled to receive the source just because you exist. There is a good balance in the GPL (source needs only be provided to those who have received the binary) and this kind of demand for source code you have no right to receive really puts a black eye on the free software movement.
Have you even bothered to read and understand the GPL? By the sound of your comment, obviously not. Forget about current practice, pretend you are a lawyer for a bit, and read it. Then wait a few days and read it again. Then wait a few weeks and read it again. It's not a particularly difficult document to read, but like anything it helps to read it multiple times to get a better understanding of it. Any programmer with a modest amount of legal experience should be able to grok it. The GPL is something that anybody serious about writing free software should be quite familiar with. Why trust some schmuck's "Reader's Digest" version of it when you can read the real thing?
Slashdot Mirror
My understanding of the issue was that the CD crashed the OS X automounter. Upon rebooting, the CD would not be booted (since it's not bootable) and OS X would start up as usual at which point the automounter would crash again since the CD is still in the drive.
I'm not entirely positive that holding down the mouse button will work for this, but I suspect it will since it is handled by Open Firmware. Someone else posted that you can also hold down Cmd+Opt+O+F and get into OF then type the OF command to eject the CD. I assume holding down the mouse button works just as well since it's also done by OF
Seeing as how you're probably unaware of OF, it's a standard used by Apple as well as Sun. Essentially, it's a Forth interpreter. Forth is turing complete so you can actually write programs in it if you wish. And yes, we have an OLD Sun Netra i5 at work that also boots to OF. In fact, you can drop in to OF at any time by holding down the Stop key and pressing "A". The currently running OS will be paused (even if it's Linux as in my case with the Sun) and you can drop right in to the Firmware. I haven't seen anything like this on recent Macs, though I vaguely remember a key combination on older (Old World) Macs that would drop it in to the machine monitor.
In any case, putting a Celine Dion CD into your Mac is just plain wrong! And yes, I think the issue was WAY overblown. Non-Mac users have a strong tendency to make up believable misinformation so they can feel superior using PCs. Witness that the statement here was that because the iMac doesn't have an emergency eject hole that the CD was stuck forever and the computer required service. Of course, that's not true, the Firmware (BIOS in PC terms) is more than able to eject the disc. But most PC users have no idea what OF is since they're still stuck with crappy BIOSes that boot the computer in 1970s-80s real mode!
I have nothing against PC users, almost all the machines at work are PCs. I've used PCs since 1985. What ticks me off are the people (especially in the media) that feel they have to spread misinformation about Macs.
Heh.. So now you know better. I'm amazed you actually asked, most people would have just trolled and came up with some other reason not to use Macs. :-D
Or you could just hold down the mouse button or the eject key on the keyboard while it was starting up. Simply press and hold one of those as soon as you hear the startup chime and any CD in the drive will be ejected.
In fact, a quick call to 1-800-MY-APPLE would have resulted in the above answer.
I realize you truly believe what you are saying, and I understand where you are coming from having used Windows since the 3.0 days as well as OS/2 2.1 through 4.0 and various Linux desktop environments. However, I must point out that you're really just fooling yourself into believing that maximizing windows is a normal and productive thing. I know this because I've been there.
I've been using Macs since the 10.1 days and absolutely love the UI. The OS X UI is built with multitasking in mind. Windows have drop shadows and sort of blend in with each other. Documents reside in their own toplevel windows. Toolbars and palettes may be placed anywhere on the screen.
One of the big problems with the Microsoft UI is its focus on rectangular boxes butted against each other. A typical MS application must be maximized in order to use it because the menubar, toolbar, and other UI elements are in fixed positions usually to the top and sometimes left of the document area.
On the mac you have ONE menubar. It stays at the top of the screen. It only takes up a small amount of space which is shared between applications (no wasted space having a menu on each window). In addition, the toolbars and floating palettes for an application are only shown when that application is active. Because of this, it's possible to stagger document windows since they are free from extraneous controls and only show the document.
Windows sort of blend together due to the shadow effect so it's less distracting to have document windows staggered on top of each other. If you really must concentrate on one thing, you can use the "Hide others" choice from the application menu (the one displaying the application's name in bold).
I suggest that you get a Mac and give OS X a try for a few months. Forget about your old ways and really learn the new system. I guarantee you'll be surprised. Nearly everything about OS X becomes second nature very easily. After having used OS X for a while, I find it difficult to work with Windows machines. I am used to the computer working sensibly, and Windows simply doesn't. I'm amazed at how much I've already forgotten about the Windows UI! Never in my life did I forget how to use Windows, even after having used OS/2 and Linux and what not. But after having used OS X my eyes have been opened to the Microsoft UI and frankly, all I see is ugliness.
I have to say I'm quite impressed by this 0.7 release of Firebird for OS X. FB 0.6 had some major drawing issues and was overall fairly slow feeling. FB 0.7 just plain SCREAMS through pages.
While the firebird UI is great, it's missing a few things that Camino has (and so I am back writing this in Camino). The absolute MOST important thing it is missing is the Camino style "Go" menu. I realize that almost everyone has become accustomed to the back/forward buttons with little down arrows, but Camino really stumbled upon a great idea here.
For those of you who don't use Camino, I'll briefly explain. Instead of having drop-down arrows next to the back and forward, Camino has a per-window history in the Go menu. At the top of the menu are Home, Search Page, a spacer, then Back, Forward, and another spacer. Then the forwaard most page is listed in top and a checkmark is placed on the currently viewed page. It makes it a lot easier because you don't have to think if you are going back or forward before dropping down the list.
Firebird and Mozilla also have a similar setup, but it is per-browser instead of per-window. I've grown so used to the Camino style go menu I want it in the OS X Finder as well.
The only other issue is the overall spit and polish of the widgets. They desparately need to fit in with the rest of the system. But even then, how it works is much more important than how it looks.
Thanks. Essentially, this is the core of my argument without all of the excess ranting.
I too have mixed feelings about the death penalty. On the one hand, it sickens me to think that some cases do get shuffled through the court system without proper trials and because of that innocent people are put to death.
On the other hand, there are some people who just deserve to die. Serial killers are firmly in that category for me. Some people just need to be gone. The D.C. area snipers? They confessed, it's admissable, and yes, they probably are crazy, but that's really not an excuse unless they REALLY didn't appreciate the consequences of their actions. Considering they made quite an effort to allude police, I really don't buy that argument. They had to know damn well what the consequences of their actions were in order to do what they did. Hang 'em.
I wonder what will happen. Chances are they won't wind up being executed because it's a high profile case and the lawyers trying to make a name for themselves are already coming to their rescue.
"[...] at least I can find hope in the fact that most Americans aren't raving racist lunatics"
Yes, you're right, and neither am I a "raving racist lunatic." If anything, I hate the white trash Neo-Nazi shit even more. I did speciifcally mention that I'd like to see some balance restored without turning back the clock 40 years on civil rights.
Of course, you wouldn't bother to read it very carefully because you've apparently made up your mind well ahead of time that Europe's ideas for how the world should be run should be forced upon the entire world, especially the U.S.
Most of Europe seems too busy goose stepping to the beat of the E.U. to realize that there's a world beyond Europe. Ironically, the U.S. has traditionally been the union with the most short-sighted international policies, but it now seems we've passed that buck to the E.U.
The good news is that we still have the bombs.
How convenient for you to sit across the pond and judge the U.S. based on what little information you hear through your news media and special interest groups.
I realize that it's now fashionable to bitch about the U.S. (and has been for decades now) but this is getting out of hand. How many black people do you have in Norway? Do they generally tend to act like the rest of the population?
You have NO idea about what is really going on in the U.S. Why don't you come here and live in the scum of the earth parts of town? Then tell me that putting cop killers away is bad.
Not all black people in the U.S. are bad and that is true regardless of their economic status. However, there is this growing amount of people who are stupid, unmotivated, extremely poor, and have no desire to ever do anything with their lives. Once they realize they fucked up by dropping out back in 8th grade they turn to illegal activities as a source of income since no one in their right mind would hire them for a real job.
Here's a story I heard from my best friend (who lives in a different state): His wife is in her last year of college and is now student teaching. The kids were being rowdy the other day so she told them that anyone who didn't want to learn should move to the back of the room and turn the desk around to face the wall. The white kids, the asian kids, the hispanic kids, and all of the other kids except for the black kids knew she meant business and paid attention. But the black kids in the class went to the back of the room and thus admitted freely that they weren't interested in learning.
That time she let them do whatever they wanted (homework from another class, sleep, whatever). Next time she does it she is planning on making anyone who decides not to learn write an essay on why they don't want to learn.
Why is it that a country founded on the principle of hard work for great rewards has an ever increasing segment of the population that wants nothing more than to lay back and eek out a living doing the absolute minimum amount of work? Could it be because people like you bitch and scream any time "poor black people" who are just misunderstood "innocent 'criminals'" go to prison for their crimes?
Could it be because an entire political party (the Democratic party) aligns themselves behind nearly every cause relating to black people regardless of how asinine it is simply so they can get the "black vote" and the votes of bleeding hearts? What exactly is the black vote anyway? What motivates almost an entire race to vote in lock step for the same party regardless of how screwed up their social policies are?
There's a growing number of hard working people of all races in this country who are fed up with this shit. My only hope is that we can restore sanity to this country without turning back the clock 40 years on civil rights. Sadly, if more black people don't wake up out of their democratic party induced coma, it's not going to be pretty.
So, how are things in Norway? Are you living next to a slum? No? Oh. Well surely you've got a fair number of perfectly healthy people in your country who refuse to go to school and get decent jobs? No? Well surely you have ethnic tensions in Norway? Oh, your population is almost entirely nordic. I guess you wouldn't have any fucking clue then. Would you?
I suggest using wxWindows.
I started out with wxWindows to write version 2 of PhotoFlair (www.truview.com). I am now developing on my personal time a port for Cocoa known simply as wxCocoa. It is Mac OS X only.
In the meantime, there is a Mac Classic and Carbon port known as wxMac. Current CVS is dropping straight Classic support in favor of Carbon only. It will require Mac OS 9.1 or better.
Developing on a Mac is a great experience, though a nice fast Dual G4 or G5 is really a better system for that. I use a Dual G4-1Ghz at work. Still, I have a G4-500 at home and it's a respectable machine (using it now). Let's hope Isabel doesn't take it out.
If you don't want to jump right in to Mac development, go ahead and start with the Windows version written in wxWindows. You can even use your favorite IDE like Microsoft Visual Studio, or Borland. You can also use MinGW w/ MSYS and GVIM (my personal preference, though most people use MSVS or Borland I think).
Once you have a Windows version it will be easy to port to GTK or Mac OS. The port to Mac is a little rough for certain things, but overall is not bad. I hope to be making things easier for wxCocoa.
And you know what, even if you only use it to do MSW development, I think you'll still find it far better than MFC or raw Win32. :-)
Err. No.
What the AC was trying to say is that it's a common misconception that you have no right to run the software without agreeing to the license. Software publishers WANT you to think that you have to agree to the license to use the program, but that's not true.
If you don't agree to the license then you are only bound by copyright law. Copyright law allows you to run the program.
Why do you think Microsoft started the whole click-thru licensing in the first place? Remember when they simply included the license with the program. Well, that didn't work because you never agreed to it but still had the legal right to run the program. They told you you couldn't run it without agreeing to the license, but that wasn't true. So they made it impossible to run it without agreeing to the license by making you click through.
I wonder how UCITA is worded (I do live in Virginia). Can I hexedit the binary to avoid agreeing to the license and use my rights granted by copyright law?
What about web pages? Can I write some javascript to post the form without actually selecting I agree?
In any case, I am not a lawyer, but I'd LOVE to see a lawyers opinion on all of this.
I have to agree with namespan here. Singing the style that you are singing using an autotuner is blasphemy. Your being slightly out of tune in Long Time Waitin' on the one note ("when the winter/springtime/etc.") actually added to the overall ambiance of the music.
Penn Station Subway sounded more like that shit I hear on the radio. Bright, Cheery, and DEAD! At first it fools you because it sounds so bright and it seems to be more of a direct hit on the senses. But then the aftertaste sets in and it starts sounding dead. It's.. too.. perfect.
Actually, that may not be entirely correct though. A lot of music sounds better if it is in a more natural key than the western scale. The western scale is 12 equidistant notes. If you haven't taken theory, take it. A quick Physics course as well. If you define a note such as A at 440 Hz then an octave higher is exactly twice that, in this case 880 Hz. On a western scale, each half-step is the previous frequency * 2 ^ (1/12). A fifth is therefore 2^(7/12), and a fourth is 2^(5/12). However, a true fifth is 3/2 and a true forth is 4/3. 440 * 4/3 = 586.66666... 440 * 2 ^ (5.0/12.0) = 587.32953583481515. Notice that that is nearly a full cycle per second difference.
You can use python to do quick calculations.
Don't assume that the autotuner sound is actually preferred. In these cases it is most certainly not preferrable. In a pop song I could potentially see the value of an autotuner. The style of pop music, generally clean cut and dead, lends itself quite well to an autotuner.
I'd say you have a good voice. If you've not taken vocal training and music theory then you should becuase I think it's worth it to unlock all the potential you have. Anybody who is serious about singing should be taking lessons.
Really? The constitution does not mention "Intellectual property." It does, however, specifically mention things such as copyrights and patents.
Nice signature... proud to be a Republican. I generally do like to vote Republican because I generally tend to agree with them more than Democrats, but I wouldn't say I was proud of it because frankly both political parties in this country suck eggs.
I get the impression that you are eating the party line right up. That's plainly obvious when you make statements suggesting that the founding fathers considered "intellectual property." Whether you agree or disagree with organizations such as GNU, you should go to www.gnu.org and read GNU's position on so-called intellectual property.
To sum up GNU's position: Intellectual property is a term that does nothing but confuse the issues of copyrights, patents, trademarks and other areas of law.
As far as this case is concerned, I see in the article that the judges only ruled that trade secret law trumps free speech rights for this case. They also issued a ruling that the case should be reexamined to find out if any trade secrets actually were violated. I suppose I can view that as a reasonable ruling. However, I would not be able to fathom another ruling that any trade secrets were actually violated. Furthermore, it's generally accepted practice that once a secret is out in the open, it's no longer a trade secret and so no longer deserves the protections.
I wouldn't consider this a setback but more of a readjustment to fit the case in the legal framework where it should have been in the first place.
The original post was very informative. EmagGeek was right on track when he mentioned that one generator got knocked offline for some reason and because of that the power grid compensated by rerouting electricity from other generators.
My dad was vice president of electric supply for NIPSCO for a number of years after having worked his way up the chain of command starting off working at a power plant as an electrical engineer. As VP of electric supply his job included ensuring NIPSCO was generating enough power to cover the needs of all the power customers (including several steel mills), working with regulators to ensure the rates were reasonable so that money could be spent to increase capacity when needed, and working with environmentalists to ensure that emissions were well below accepted government levels.
NIPSCO was a company very interested in serving its customers. As a heavily regulated utility the only reasonable business decision is to service your customers the best that you possibly can. My dad took that to heart. He was strongly opposed to deregulation. Why? Because the simple fact of the matter is that my dad was somewhat of an exception. Most executives tend to look strictly at the bottom line and lose sight of the forest for all the trees. He knew that deregulation would inevitibly lead to cost cutting in areas where costs should not be cut simply because without regulation the power company is at the mercy of its shareholders and shareholders are very often in it strictly for the money.
So, tonight I had a discussion with him about this mess. First of all, the background. Apparently a generator went off grid this afternoon forcing other generators to take up the slack. That can happen for a number of reasons. Equipment does fail, humans do make mistakes, etc. What's supposed to happen is that the rest of the generators and the grid should have enough capacity to take up the slack. Should there not be enough capacity then someone needs to lose power. This should happen at the customer side. That is, a portion of the customers should be blacked out to reduce the load on the grid and allow normal operations to continue. I believe that is what you meant by "putting a release on the chain." You are correct, that's what should have happened. The fact that it didn't indicates that there was some major problem with the logic of the grid. It would have been far better to cut the power to thousands of customers than millions.
Bad logic was part of the cause. The other problem was a seriously overloaded power grid. The power grid was designed to handle the situation where a power company normally had sufficient capacity but due to generator failures was unable to meet demand. Notice that I said failures (plural). If a few generators are knocked off the grid the company ought to have enough energy to supply all of its customers. Furthermore, it ought to have backup generators that can be started and on the grid within an hour. Those backup generators are just that: backups. They cost a hell of a lot of money to operate but they aren't as expensive to build as a main generator. If a few more generators get knocked off grid it's reasonable to expect that a power company will be unable to handle this situation without buying power from another company. That is what the grid is for.
Unfortunately, because of government stupidity (deregulation) and corporate greed the grid is now being used in a way it was never intended to be. It is often loaded to near full capacity drawing power over very long distances. The idea of deregulation was that loosely regulated for-profit companies would compete to generate electricity which the local power companies could purchase instead of generating their own. Because the power companies no longer had to be responsible for providing capacity in excess of what is needed the rates could be
The only loser I see here is your boss for ignoring Linux because he didn't find a joke funny.
Now THAT is funny! :-)
Very true. I'm quite familiar with CD errors as I have done a lot of work with audio CDs which don't have the added layer of error correction present on data discs. For most normal purposes, checking the md5sum of the cooked data before using it should be sufficient. At least you know the cooked data is still reading properly which is better than getting through half of an install and finding out the disc is bad.
I doubt that in the few months that a distro ISO is good for (before the next version comes out) that the disc would deteriorate that much.
Odd. The only times I've ever had CDs burned from ISOs fail is when the burner failed to burn the disc properly.
There is, of course, a simple way to check that it did burn properly. Assuming you burned it as MODE1 with one data track and no additional postgaps you can do this:
Then compare that with the md5sum of the ISO. If you added a postgap, then specify the number of 2048 byte blocks that make up the ISO with count=XYZ
Another method is to use find and md5sum redirected to a text file, something like:
That works a bit better in cases wher you have intentionally added/deleted/modified files and want to make sure nothing else got changed. Note that you may or may not need to pass that through sort; I'll leave that as an excercise for the reader.
Actually, I think that people interested in designing good systems would do a lot better to take a look at Mac OS X. One of the biggest problems with the current open desktop environments is that they borrowed way too much from Microsoft Windows, including the bad things.
Another advantage to borrowing from Apple is that it is UNIX based and so fits in better with a UNIX system. One of the biggest problems with a lot of MS stuff is that it's simply not designed with UNIX in mind.
I'm glad to see that Microsoft is setting up some UNIX test labs. They have an awful lot to learn that would really help make Windows better.
Oh, I don't disagree. I think that's sort of a fuck up on Apple's part.
Unfortunately, michael had to post this story with incorrect and flammatory information, making most of the discussion about how DRM is bad because Apple goes in and deletes your files (they don't) instead of about what might be done to make Apple's implementation a little better.
Still, there was surely a lot more discussion than there otherwise might have been without that comment, so I guess Slashdot wins and its users lose. Either that or michael is just plain incompetent (which isn't unlikely).
:-) That really needs to be modded up. So true.
Actually, the files are not deleted by Apple and I saw nothing in the article or in Apple's license to indicate they would be. However, if the user deletes the files and/or deauthorizes his computer, reauthorizing it with a non-US credit card will not work.
In short, this is just yet another sensationalist story posted by michael who apparently cannot be bothered to even check the facts in the stories he's posting. He could have simply added a comment like "Despite what the submitter said, I found no evidence or information indicating that the files would actually be deleted by Apple."
Yes, I am supportive of "soft" DRM. Throw the media companies a bone at least once in a while. So long as I can burn it to a CD at least once, what's the difference? If I felt like it I'd make MP3s off of that and do whatever the hell I want with it just like I can with any other normal CD I buy in the store. That unprotected safety valve is what makes iTMS work.
Essentially, your post amounts to the classic Slashdot karma whore troll. "I'm sure I'll get moderated into oblivion..." Moderators: Please do so.
Damn.. I had mod points but already posted to this discussion. I made almost the same comment.
It's a pity you were marked down as flamebait for speaking the truth.
God forbid we became self-sufficient.
Don't you like your cheap TV made in China or India. What about the low-cost PC made from components made cheaply overseas?
Like it or not, our standard of living depends on people willing to work for peanuts.
Actually, that's not entirely correct. OS X uses a window server which clients connect to through local Mach ports (similar to a UNIX domain socket).
I've read (just the other day in fact) that NeXT had a program allowing you to run an application on another NeXT and have it displayed locally. It would seem totally possible, just feed the data over the network instead of over a Mach port. Of course, that would only hold true for pure Cocoa apps. For anything using QuickDraw (/old/ MacOS API) I imagine there is probably a lot of shared memory usage.
So, what was that about OS X's GUI being vastly different from X11? The "we need a framebuffer" trolls need to go take a hike. X11 is the proper design, and it is only the implementation of it which needs some improvement.
Hmm. I'll be damned. It does in fact say third party in section 3b. Thanks!
Sure. Buy the unit and make a formal request in writing for the source code to the GPLed software that you have just purchased in binary form. If requested to do so, provide media (such as a CD-R in modern times, though the GPL mentions tapes) and return postage for that media.
Once you have said source code, you are free to redistribute it (unmodified or modified) under the terms of the GPL.
Until you have the binary, you have NO rights to request the source code under the GPL.
What bothers me most about your comment is the way you think you are somehow entitled to receive the source just because you exist. There is a good balance in the GPL (source needs only be provided to those who have received the binary) and this kind of demand for source code you have no right to receive really puts a black eye on the free software movement.
Have you even bothered to read and understand the GPL? By the sound of your comment, obviously not. Forget about current practice, pretend you are a lawyer for a bit, and read it. Then wait a few days and read it again. Then wait a few weeks and read it again. It's not a particularly difficult document to read, but like anything it helps to read it multiple times to get a better understanding of it. Any programmer with a modest amount of legal experience should be able to grok it. The GPL is something that anybody serious about writing free software should be quite familiar with. Why trust some schmuck's "Reader's Digest" version of it when you can read the real thing?