Most people are under the impression that the PDF format is somehow "slow". I for one know it doesn't have to render slow; it opens fast in xpdf (under Linux). Why is it that it takes so long to open a PDF document in Acrobat Reader (at least, that is what I hear)? It could very well be that it would be fast in MS Office 12, just like in xpdf.
I for one find Mozilla Suite's UI very nice. I like it better than Firefox (or Opera or IE). For instance, I like the search in the same field as the address field. It is themable, so you don't have to use the old Netscape skin. The menu's are more logical, IMHO... I mean Extra -> Preferences, what's that (in Firefox)? You want to edit your preferences, right? So that must be Edit -> Preferences (in Mozilla). Anyway, the UI of Mozilla / SeaMonkey really isn't hidious.
The only thing I'm confused about the Mozilla Suite is that it was first on version 1.7/1.8 and now on 1.0 again! The original code name of the project was Seamonkey, right? I'd call it SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha (even though I really dislike version exponentiation).
By bundling a proprietary installer, rip-off applications and accessories we aren't "saving" Linux we are feeding it straight to the devil.
He doesn't talk about proprietary, but "A prioritary installation process". I'm not sure if prioritary is a real word, but it seems to be derived from priority. So what he probably means (asks) with "prioritary" is if we need installers in which you can give some level of verbosity, so a user can configure (give priority to) only the most important things.
As to the referee who stated "he author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic analysis and calculus." He needs to understand that math doesn't work if you don't understand the physics behind. Math without physics tells me if I mix a cup of water and a cup of milk I get two cups of fluid. It just aint so.
The point the referee is trying to make is that you need both a good understanding of math and physics. Lynds seems to lack the first, so he shouldn't try to resolve Zeno's paradox. Besides that, it was already resolved over one hundred years ago, in a satisfying way. (He also says so himself, but he is so ignorant that he ignores his own words.)
...Is this somehow parallel with how to know the exact location of a particle you must actually move the particle from that location?
You are probably referring to the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg, wich says that the location and the momentum of a particle are not simultaniously determinable. Analog to this, Heisenberg says that the location in time and the energy of a particle are not simultaniously determinable. This has however seemingly nothing to do with Lynds's words. I assume he is not trying to reinvent the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg. So what does he mean? I must agree with the referee who says: "I have only read the first two sections as it is clear that the author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic analysis and calculus. I'm afraid I am unwilling to waste any time reading further, and recommend terminal rejection."
I don't know what Lynds tries to do. He says himself that Achilles and the tortoise paradox is resolved in the nineteenth century, so it is... leave it like that, will ya?
What strange numbers he chooses in his attempt to argument his view about the indeterminability of a precise moment: "during the time intervals of 1 and 1.99999...hours and 10.00 and 10.0099999...seconds" What's that all about?
From this point I stopped reading the article, it just doesn't make much sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Most people are under the impression that the PDF format is somehow "slow". I for one know it doesn't have to render slow; it opens fast in xpdf (under Linux). Why is it that it takes so long to open a PDF document in Acrobat Reader (at least, that is what I hear)? It could very well be that it would be fast in MS Office 12, just like in xpdf.
I for one find Mozilla Suite's UI very nice. I like it better than Firefox (or Opera or IE).
For instance, I like the search in the same field as the address field. It is themable, so you don't have to use the old Netscape skin. The menu's are more logical, IMHO... I mean Extra -> Preferences, what's that (in Firefox)? You want to edit your preferences, right? So that must be Edit -> Preferences (in Mozilla).
Anyway, the UI of Mozilla / SeaMonkey really isn't hidious.
The only thing I'm confused about the Mozilla Suite is that it was first on version 1.7/1.8 and now on 1.0 again! The original code name of the project was Seamonkey, right? I'd call it SeaMonkey 2.0 alpha (even though I really dislike version exponentiation).
So even Microsoft has realized you can't do crap under a limited login in XP.
Of course you cannot.
Please, mod parent down, because it is meant sarcastic. It shouldn't be meant sarcastic. It only states the obvious.
I've found it very intuitive under Linux. But after trying it on XP, it really does feel like a crippled version of the package
Why didn't you install The GIMP on Linux then? She was already using Linux for FreeCiv anyway.
Oh sorry, I only RTFA... the submitter (sgant) was the one misreading the pi.
No, everybody is correct.
The only thing is that schematix (grandparent) misread the Pi as a 'n', which look very similar, indeed (on my screen anyway).
By bundling a proprietary installer, rip-off applications and accessories we aren't "saving" Linux we are feeding it straight to the devil.
He doesn't talk about proprietary, but "A prioritary installation process". I'm not sure if prioritary is a real word, but it seems to be derived from priority. So what he probably means (asks) with "prioritary" is if we need installers in which you can give some level of verbosity, so a user can configure (give priority to) only the most important things.
This is not about an exokernel. As the parent says:
The defining characteristic of an exokernel is that it provides no abstraction at all.
From http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/exo.html:
An exokernel eliminates the notion that an operating system should provide abstractions on which applications are built.
Parent is correct. Mod up!
When will there be a Zeppelin XP? or a GNU/Zeppelin Linux?
From the zeppelin-nt website - Website optimized for 1.024 x 768 resolution and Internet Explorer 4.x
Will the zeppelin-xp website be optimized for Internet Explorer 6.x?
If we win this it will be no thanks to people like you.
;-)
No, it is "When we win this [...]". Don't be a pessimist!
No, maybe they should not.
Emacs. Hell, that is ten programs. And it is as big as one hundred.
No! Vi is so much better. This contains an editor, a... uhm... oh wait... never mind.
Absolute numbers do not absolute truth make
Right! And:
All your base are belong to us
I for one still use boot floppies now and then. Therefore I find floppy drives pretty usefull.
Do shoe salesmen really earn that much to be able to buy Opterons with 8 GB of memory?
Seriously though, why do you need more than 4 GB (!) of memory in a computer in a shoe shop?
As to the referee who stated "he author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic analysis and calculus." He needs to understand that math doesn't work if you don't understand the physics behind. Math without physics tells me if I mix a cup of water and a cup of milk I get two cups of fluid. It just aint so.
The point the referee is trying to make is that you need both a good understanding of math and physics. Lynds seems to lack the first, so he shouldn't try to resolve Zeno's paradox. Besides that, it was already resolved over one hundred years ago, in a satisfying way. (He also says so himself, but he is so ignorant that he ignores his own words.)
You are probably referring to the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg, wich says that the location and the momentum of a particle are not simultaniously determinable. Analog to this, Heisenberg says that the location in time and the energy of a particle are not simultaniously determinable.
This has however seemingly nothing to do with Lynds's words. I assume he is not trying to reinvent the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg. So what does he mean? I must agree with the referee who says:
"I have only read the first two sections as it is clear that the author's arguments are based on profound ignorance or misunderstanding of basic analysis and calculus. I'm afraid I am unwilling to waste any time reading further, and recommend terminal rejection."
I don't know what Lynds tries to do. He says himself that Achilles and the tortoise paradox is resolved in the nineteenth century, so it is... leave it like that, will ya?
What strange numbers he chooses in his attempt to argument his view about the indeterminability of a precise moment:
"during the time intervals of 1 and 1.99999...hours and 10.00 and 10.0099999...seconds"
What's that all about?
From this point I stopped reading the article, it just doesn't make much sense.
Then again string theory isn't currently the most usefull theory as it's far from complete.
It is far from complete, indeed. But it is currently the most usefull theory, since there is no better alternative, at the moment.
It is written in Microsoft FrontPage 4.0, though. That was not yet around in the good ol' days.