Take a look at the netcraft graphs; it talks about servers when counting the OS, not domain names (that's another set of statistics). Of course IP isn't reliable for big sites either, as the load balancer gets in the way and you may be missing 5+ machines sitting behind it on internal IP addresses. If someone could find the survey methodology it might go some way to explaining what's happening but I really doubt it's surveying OS distribution by domain name simply because it calls them servers.
This downturn started last year when MS paid GoDaddy to swap out (or claim to swap out) its domain parking.
Going to karma hell for this but, tell me, is paying someone (if they did) better or worse than Bruce Perens faking host headers in order to boast Apache ratings? Or is that even sillier than your assertion that MS sneaked IIS back on by default? (which of course wouldn't make a big dent anyway as more Windows boxes are behind firewalls than in front, and those ones already exposed on port 80 are probably doing it on purpose).
As the Perens stunt shows netcraft may not just be relying on host headers at all as you seem to think.
Spotty effects? Iceland's geothermal power plants provide 26% of the power there (the majority is from hydroelectric), plus geothermal heating plants heat around 87% of homes. On the other hand the baths and showers I had there did stink of sulphur.
But if it's true the problem is not editing, it's another example of wikipedia deleting edits by mods and others who have embarrassed them. And that, to my mind, is worse than having a bad moderator, it's against everything Jimbo says he, and wikipedia stands for.
yet here we have somebody stepping up front and center with an apparently freshly installed and freshly owned Vista box.
Incoming P2P connections are proof of ownage? Really? How exactly is showing Peer Guardian *snicker* as a "packet sniffer" on his gateway, which apparently is XP (err, uber 3l1t3 points there) showing incoming traffic from a range of IPs to a Vista machine running P2P software ownage? Heck you can't even tell if it's Vista making the connections, or if they are inbound as normal P2P traffic is because his "packet sniffer" doesn't log that information, it simply logs inbound connections.
Funny how the original forum post this "news" came from was deleted.
However if it is true it's not the first time people poking fun at the Mac have had death threats; Overclockers had them when they pretended to put an Intel/Windows motherboard/system inside a G5 case and Maynor reported death threats after his Wifi debacle.
(Of course I believe you're posting just to raise your google hits with your cut and paste link to your little splog, so never mind, a real answer isn't much good to you is it?
The plugin on sourceforge is a separate menu option, yes. However that's a good thing (in my opinion). Instead of getting lost as a file format under save it appears on the file dialog. Right there, in your face.
And to show Sun is even more behind the times there has been a Microsoft backed ODF import/export available for well over a year. With source. On sourceforge.
Rather an interesting piece of grandstanding from Sun I fear.
And for some reason the same people who complain about DRM in Vista et al are happy to go out and buy the phone that is the most closed out there. Weird isn't it?
the BBC is required to serve all citizens, and not just the customers of a single proprietary company.
And part of serving, me, the citizen, is to raise money via commercial sales outside the UK in order to keep the license fee down (even though the license is paid to the government, not the BBC). And giving content away does not serve that end.
Yeah but MySpace, Flickr, YouTube, Twitter, Google (the whole Google) do not run on those platforms. For that you need Web 2.0. Since you need Web 2.0 anyway to run the Web it is pretty hard to argue for phones that have.net on them but no Web 2.0.
Oh please. You don't need "2.0" to browse flicker, I can do it right now on my phone, and there are uploaders for my phone available. Twitter supplies a mobile interface that works happily with Pocket IE, and of course Twitter was aimed at phones because of the SMS integration. Google supplies a java applet for mail, a phone specific app for maps (as does MS) and changes the search engine so that when it can it scrapes pages and reformats them for the phone. YouTube smells like a red herring. When did you last sit in a coffeeshop or bar and think "Oh I must watch the latest episode of Lonely Girl"? Maybe, just maybe, you have some episodic content you might like on your phone from youtube, but syncing music is more popular.
MySpace is the only one out of your list of mainly straw man that would be a killer app for most mobile phone users. But consider MySpace's demographic, mostly it's not people who can afford the iPhone.
WiFi? Heck I have WiFi on my phone right now. And guess what, it needs an access point to connect to. So, you're going to sit in the local starbucks and hope someone near by has an open access point? Wifi is a red herring when you're mobile, unless you're prepared to pay for a subscription to a cloud that covers your area.
As much as Apple would like to believe the interface can swing it, it appears the only way to code for it right now is to write browser apps (please someone tell me I'm wrong here, I'd love to be). So your apps need to be connected. And costing you money. And limited by the need to be in the browser, so no local caching of information like google maps or live maps for mobile does. No manipulation of files store on the phone. No games outside the browser.
Nokia has the symbian sdks and java, microsoft has the.net compact framework (and in the HTC phones java as well). Apple are restricting everything to the browser (and if we're lucky, they may support flash in the browser).
So why would Symbian or Microsoft steal a restrictive programming framework? The interface may be nice, and it will sell it to end users, but it's not a phone for developers or even corporate users.
Re:Why buy separate?
on
Pimp Your XP
·
· Score: 4, Funny
pay the upgrade fee and get a complete, well-tested package instead
You realise you're posting on slashdot, right?
Re:That's all very well...
on
Pimp Your XP
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Well Stardock is fat bloated and heavy, so it will help simulate the slow down you may experience running Vista on your existing hardware.
Which frankly was a good thing. Before that meeting the clips and downloads on the BBC site were done in Real Media, with no other option. Recently it's been both Real and Microsoft formats. Whilst I have no doubt that won't please people here, it is at least a semblance of choice, even if they're both closed formats.
That's fine up to a point; the majority of businesses still use MS Office and windows and will want to see that experience, and if you completely replace everything with linux or other free alternatives you're just creating another monoculture, and push a free-only view; which is, to my mind, just as bad.
Except the article is wrong. There are a bunch of ways to turn it off, as quite a few people have already said. I find it somewhat weird that people are happy to take the word of a company that's willing to sell your search history and personal details to the highest bidder.
Just do the damned trajectory math. It does not work for much anything except stuff being flung from Tehran.
Share your math, because I don't see how. Placing a missile base in Poland, with, if the publicity is to be believed (and there are more unsuccessful tests than successful ones) the capability to shoot down incoming missiles two minutes after detection means that unless Russia is going to put missiles right on its border with Europe rather than their current locations then it is more than capable of intercepting missiles inbound from the Urals.
And of course why would you be protecting against Iran when (right now) the Shabab 4/5/6 missiles are theoretical? If anything the major threat to the US is (still) North Korea.
You say explaining, I say redefining. You also assume that everyone agrees with RMS's explanations and redefinitions; some of us (who release code under the BSD license) don't; adding a restriction takes away "freedom" not adds to it, and the GPL3 nonsense simply underlines that way of thinking for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Take a look at the netcraft graphs; it talks about servers when counting the OS, not domain names (that's another set of statistics). Of course IP isn't reliable for big sites either, as the load balancer gets in the way and you may be missing 5+ machines sitting behind it on internal IP addresses. If someone could find the survey methodology it might go some way to explaining what's happening but I really doubt it's surveying OS distribution by domain name simply because it calls them servers.
Going to karma hell for this but, tell me, is paying someone (if they did) better or worse than Bruce Perens faking host headers in order to boast Apache ratings? Or is that even sillier than your assertion that MS sneaked IIS back on by default? (which of course wouldn't make a big dent anyway as more Windows boxes are behind firewalls than in front, and those ones already exposed on port 80 are probably doing it on purpose).
As the Perens stunt shows netcraft may not just be relying on host headers at all as you seem to think.
Spotty effects? Iceland's geothermal power plants provide 26% of the power there (the majority is from hydroelectric), plus geothermal heating plants heat around 87% of homes. On the other hand the baths and showers I had there did stink of sulphur.
But if it's true the problem is not editing, it's another example of wikipedia deleting edits by mods and others who have embarrassed them. And that, to my mind, is worse than having a bad moderator, it's against everything Jimbo says he, and wikipedia stands for.
Incoming P2P connections are proof of ownage? Really? How exactly is showing Peer Guardian *snicker* as a "packet sniffer" on his gateway, which apparently is XP (err, uber 3l1t3 points there) showing incoming traffic from a range of IPs to a Vista machine running P2P software ownage? Heck you can't even tell if it's Vista making the connections, or if they are inbound as normal P2P traffic is because his "packet sniffer" doesn't log that information, it simply logs inbound connections.
Funny how the original forum post this "news" came from was deleted.
What, you really believe people Digg due to truth in URLs as opposed to "Micro$oft is evil" contents? Do you want to buy some land?
However if it is true it's not the first time people poking fun at the Mac have had death threats; Overclockers had them when they pretended to put an Intel/Windows motherboard/system inside a G5 case and Maynor reported death threats after his Wifi debacle.
Come on, in order to win the desktop Linux needs to be more like windows. More frequent service packs, errr, kernel upgrades will help.
So use a fully open source one. BSD licensed. Code available. And 1 year old.
(Of course I believe you're posting just to raise your google hits with your cut and paste link to your little splog, so never mind, a real answer isn't much good to you is it?
The plugin on sourceforge is a separate menu option, yes. However that's a good thing (in my opinion). Instead of getting lost as a file format under save it appears on the file dialog. Right there, in your face.
Rather an interesting piece of grandstanding from Sun I fear.
And for some reason the same people who complain about DRM in Vista et al are happy to go out and buy the phone that is the most closed out there. Weird isn't it?
Because it doesn't come with a poster of Natalie Portman naked, petrified and covered in grits. Darned newbies, just don't get what makes us tick.
And part of serving, me, the citizen, is to raise money via commercial sales outside the UK in order to keep the license fee down (even though the license is paid to the government, not the BBC). And giving content away does not serve that end.
Oh please. You don't need "2.0" to browse flicker, I can do it right now on my phone, and there are uploaders for my phone available. Twitter supplies a mobile interface that works happily with Pocket IE, and of course Twitter was aimed at phones because of the SMS integration. Google supplies a java applet for mail, a phone specific app for maps (as does MS) and changes the search engine so that when it can it scrapes pages and reformats them for the phone. YouTube smells like a red herring. When did you last sit in a coffeeshop or bar and think "Oh I must watch the latest episode of Lonely Girl"? Maybe, just maybe, you have some episodic content you might like on your phone from youtube, but syncing music is more popular.
MySpace is the only one out of your list of mainly straw man that would be a killer app for most mobile phone users. But consider MySpace's demographic, mostly it's not people who can afford the iPhone.
WiFi? Heck I have WiFi on my phone right now. And guess what, it needs an access point to connect to. So, you're going to sit in the local starbucks and hope someone near by has an open access point? Wifi is a red herring when you're mobile, unless you're prepared to pay for a subscription to a cloud that covers your area.
As much as Apple would like to believe the interface can swing it, it appears the only way to code for it right now is to write browser apps (please someone tell me I'm wrong here, I'd love to be). So your apps need to be connected. And costing you money. And limited by the need to be in the browser, so no local caching of information like google maps or live maps for mobile does. No manipulation of files store on the phone. No games outside the browser.
Nokia has the symbian sdks and java, microsoft has the .net compact framework (and in the HTC phones java as well). Apple are restricting everything to the browser (and if we're lucky, they may support flash in the browser).
So why would Symbian or Microsoft steal a restrictive programming framework? The interface may be nice, and it will sell it to end users, but it's not a phone for developers or even corporate users.
You realise you're posting on slashdot, right?
Well Stardock is fat bloated and heavy, so it will help simulate the slow down you may experience running Vista on your existing hardware.
Which frankly was a good thing. Before that meeting the clips and downloads on the BBC site were done in Real Media, with no other option. Recently it's been both Real and Microsoft formats. Whilst I have no doubt that won't please people here, it is at least a semblance of choice, even if they're both closed formats.
That's fine up to a point; the majority of businesses still use MS Office and windows and will want to see that experience, and if you completely replace everything with linux or other free alternatives you're just creating another monoculture, and push a free-only view; which is, to my mind, just as bad.
Except the article is wrong. There are a bunch of ways to turn it off, as quite a few people have already said. I find it somewhat weird that people are happy to take the word of a company that's willing to sell your search history and personal details to the highest bidder.
Share your math, because I don't see how. Placing a missile base in Poland, with, if the publicity is to be believed (and there are more unsuccessful tests than successful ones) the capability to shoot down incoming missiles two minutes after detection means that unless Russia is going to put missiles right on its border with Europe rather than their current locations then it is more than capable of intercepting missiles inbound from the Urals.
And of course why would you be protecting against Iran when (right now) the Shabab 4/5/6 missiles are theoretical? If anything the major threat to the US is (still) North Korea.
You say explaining, I say redefining. You also assume that everyone agrees with RMS's explanations and redefinitions; some of us (who release code under the BSD license) don't; adding a restriction takes away "freedom" not adds to it, and the GPL3 nonsense simply underlines that way of thinking for me.