I don't care what order the buttons are in, so long as I can make it consistant across every platform I use. I spend about 50% of my time in Windows, 40% in Linux, and 10% in OS X. OS X could easily have a larger portion, except that it's so annoyingly unconfigurable, and I spend as much time getting fustrated with it than being productive.
The "right" way is how my muscle memory has been programmed, and for better or worse, that's the Microsoft order (despite going for 6 years barely using any MS products).
Um, look at the list of vulnerabilities that Mozilla has had. There have been some very nasty ones found.
90% of the populace are not computer geeks. My grandmother wouldn't know what a Mozilla is if it bit her. My office janitor prolly doesn't either. Most people don't follow computer stuff fanatically.
The Microsoft marketing department has a huge budget. Mozilla/Opera/whatever does not.
Killed directly, or by effect? Despite the fact that it's a bad idea, many critical systems for various bits of infrastructure are online. Do you recall the hubbub when the British sea rescue team got hit with one of the worms? In that case they were idiots for not updating, but in this case it was a zero day exploit that someone innocently surfing could have contracted. I don't think it happened this time, but what happens if a worm gets into 911 call centers, rescue teams, etc.?
Yes, but the Dead only give away _exactly_ what _they_ choose to give away. Try putting up mp3s of their studio albums, and they'll come down on you hard.
Also, the fact two bands (The Dead and Phish) can make a sucessful living with that business model doesn't mean that everyone can. Your argument is like saying that because one or two people hit the jackpot with a lottery means that everyone can do it.
Yes, you're trolling. What part of "for a single person" do you not understand? You're being argumentative, not making any points, and going on and on, hence, trolling.
The large (~27,000 student) school I work for only offers webmail via https, and switched over to POP with SSL last year. There was a small amount of complaining, and some hand holding done by the tech support staff, and it was done with a minimum of fuss.
Students are free to use weak passwords for their accounts, but staff have length/complexity rules. This encourages the use of different passwords for stuff like IM clients and the mail/network access passwords. Someone could sniff the short throwaway password I use for plaintext transmition, but all it would get them is the ability to impersonate me on IM and access to a few websites under my account.
For even more fun, write a virus/worm that does this (including changing the time/date stamp so it's not obvious what file's been changed lately), but cleans up after itself completely. Given the number of documents on the average business computer, the cost of finding a machine that has an open vulnerability but no sign of whether or not it was affected would be tremendous.
If you really want me to put on my English major hat, I'll respond by saying that traditional cartoons, paitings, and cave art are solutions to equations as well, just done by hand rather than by computer. And as with online shopping carts and databases, simply adding a computer to the equation doesn't make it unique in and of itself.
But you are correct that just about anything can be described in a manner that makes it sound artsy. The question is how well that opinion can be defended.
Art is often held to have meaning by artsy fartsty types like me based on whether or not it does something useful such as provide meaningful insight on the human condition. Shrek and Lord of the Rings (the movie) don't really do that - they're more just entertainment. That's not a bad thing - no one wants to spend all their time in deep thought.
You don't really derive much from Shrek other than some of the very basic things you might try to teach a four year old (don't judge people by looks, be nice to each other). And LoTR the movie drops much of the subtlety, religious references, and moral issues in the books. It makes it a better action movie, but how many people came out of the theatre discussing the implications of moral corruptability and how many people came out talking about how cool the battle scenes were?
Maus is art to people like me because it does delve deeply into meaningful issues. Shrek is not, because it doesn't. Maus has helped shape the way I live to some extent. Shrek entertained me for a short period of time. I enjoyed both, for different reasons.
Sigh. This whole discussion is full of lots of opinions from people who don't seem to understand what the paper is talking about, begining with the submitter.
First, the paper is refering to microphone preamps, which are used to boost the very, very low level signals. These signals are affected by impendence, one way that vacume tubes are different that transistors. Both are good, both can be used to make very good gear, both can be used to make very bad gear.
The difference in harmonic orders generated by distortion is important because equipment is often used to intentionally generate distortion because sometimes it's pleasing to the ear. Tubes also begin to compress the waveform when driven into distortion, which often is pleasing to the ear. And sorry, there's no advances in technology that's changed those basic laws of physics/electricity. That's not to say solid state stuff is bad, just different.
Virtually every rock/country/pop CD out there has passed through a selection of vacume and solid state technology. We use the best tools to generate the tone we want, regardless of the technology. If you go to a high quality studio, you'll find that most of the audio monitors are powered by solid state amps. You'll find racks of solid state and vacume tube mic preamps, EQs, and compressors. You'll find lots of tube based guitar amps and very few solid state ones.
An LA2 compressor has tubes and sounds like god on some things. An 1176 doesn't have tubes, and sounds like god on some things. I reach for the one that best serves my needs, not what technology it's built on.
BTW, most real studios don't use the monster cables that audio stores will try to sell you. We use plain old, high quality wire with quality connectors that cost much less than any of the audiophile stuff.
As far as the loud is better stuff spouted in the submission, that has nothing to do with it. You can design a 1 watt tube amp that's very overdriven to get certain sounds at low volume. It's all a matter of knowing what your desired effect is and the purpose, and designing the equipment to deliver it. A 60 watt 4 ohm amp for home listening has entirely different design considerations than an amp designed to deliver 4500 watts 2 ohm for sound reinforcement.
Perhaps this loss that "DG" (whose name you'll find in the above link) can "ill afford" will teach him a lesson?
Perhaps the fact that year that the alledged deceased was born in changed between e-mails should have been a clue? The bank website that was completely unbelievable? The horrible quality of the writing? The use of "banking" terminology that a simple google search would aren't actually used?
It's kind of interesting to read, but really doesn't show anything other than the fact greed is a wonderful tool to get people to ignore all common sense.
Blackberries are flashy toys for most people that have them. Pagers and cell phones, however, are two completely different tools. My cell phone signal goes away in quite a few locations I work in, including our NOC. My pager signal reaches me in those areas.
Those were a few things off the top of my head. There are many more. Flower(whatever you silly mac people call it)-Tab doesn't work the way that it does in the other major operating environments, and Apple intentionally broke the ability to change it to match. This may not be a big deal if all you ever use is a Mac, but the vast majority of people don't. Flower-Tilde sort of duplicates some of the functionality, but that's left to the application writer to do, leading to inconsistancies. And most that do impliment it have it cycle through a circular list of all instances of the program rather than the most recently used.
And no, I'm not wrong on tab closing. Name another application where misclicking on a selection tool can cause a desired window to be lost without confirmation. If I miss the paint tool in Photoshop by 3 pixels, I don't accidentally close the image I'm working on. Would you say that having a little "delete" feature on every file listed in Finder that could easily be clicked by accident would be a good design?
Right clicking (or control clicking for those Mac users who are petrified by the concept of more than one mouse button) to bring up a menu that offers the ability to close that tab without viewing it is the correct behavour. (Or rather, the better - there could be an even better one out there still.)
Beyond that issue, it's a basic violation of Fitt's law. By duplicating a common widget, the target size of the actual tab is reduced, making targeting it with a mouse harder and decreasing the space available to deliver useful information - what the tab has in it.
Expose may work for you, but it doesn't for me, which is the core of my problem with Apple - they expect you to mold your hand to fit the tool rather than molding the tool to fit my hand. I have so many different tasks at work that virtual desktops are the only thing that keep me from being buried under taskbar clutter. Even with tabbed browsing, I have over 40 windows open right now. Virtual desktops lets me segregate those into a graphic design desktop, a database desktop, a web development desktop, a research desktop, and a sysadmin desktop. The sheer number of windows would make Expose unusable for the same purpose.
Having a single button in DVD Player and iTunes for both fast forward and chapter skip while QuickTime has separate buttons is honed to a sheen? Ever try to advance just_a_little in a DVD? There's a reason that 99% of the remotes for standalone DVD players have separate buttons for them. They're two completely different functions.
Not having decent support for the concept of "home" and "end" is a fine sheen?
Having the Safari close tab button be on the tab itself so that a slight mistargetting closes the tab is a well designed UI? (Yes, I know Konq does it as well, and it's wrong there too.)
Apple does some things very well, but they leave a lot of rough edges that the fanatics don't like to see.
You can make statistics to prove just about anything you want. What makes the data useful is good analysis, which this article does not have.
The OS X/Linux vulnerabilities include many, many third party applications that they bundle. The Windows list almost exclusively covers Windows the operating system and IIS. If you really want to do a comparison, load up Windows with two or three office software suites, Visual Studio, Safe Source (the way that the Cisco hackers got in), etc., etc., and then compare vulnerabilities.
Further, the study doesn't correlate remote and system access attacks. The MS RPC vulnerability and the two Linux Kernel escalation of privilege vulnerabilities both gave system access. But one was sitting wide open for random attacker, and two took getting into the system in the first place. A very big difference.
Also, many Linux distributions and OS X ship with a minimum of services turned on, so they are inherently much safer out of the box. Most of the vulnerabilities for *nix/OS X were server related, which desktop users wouldn't have on or installed. Most of the Windows ones were things that you'll find on almost all installations.
If you want, we can do a show of hands of how many Windows systems have been compromised vs. how many Macs. Even adjusted for the Windows/Mac ratio, I'm pretty sure that OS X will come up as safer.
With OS X and most modern Linux systems, you _have_ to work to create security problems. Whereas each new Windows installation I do requires a series of patching via CD or memory key before I can put it online to download the rest of the updates...
This is a calculation based stamp, not anything financial. It's not going to cost anything. It allows for white-listing on a per user basis that exempts senders from the stamp requirement. Therefore, if you wanted to get on a mailing list, you'd add them to your white-list. Yes, it's an extra step, but what's one extra step when you sign onto a mailing list compared to having to dig through hundreds of spam messages a day?
The lawsuit in question involved suing a number of specific labels, as well as a few retailers. Scroll down for a list of defendants If you want to get riled up about this, do so by all means, but target the correct group. You don't like it when the RIAA accuses all file-swappers of being criminals, so make yourselves look better than them by not doing the same thing.
Despite the/. groupthink, not everything you don't like in the recording industry comes from the RIAA.
The problem is that it's very, very easy to poison the prosecution of the beneficiary of spam. See Basics on JoeJobs Who's to say whether something like this came from you or not?:
Wild, h0t animation tool available! See \/ar1ous polygons in full, sensual contact FREE DEMO CLICK HERE!! sponge arrest carriboo spade kumquat afredo distribution
How do you propose to demonstrate that you didn't pay someone to send it? Turn over all of your financial records to someone to show no payments to an unknown spammer in the Ukrane that runs a server or ten in China?
Trying to sue credit card companies and banks is pretty unreasonable as well. There's no easy way to verify every action that a merchant takes. Even if you suceeded in getting some kind of law to that effect passed, the cost would get handed right back to the consumers. Theoretically suing spammers could work because they are reasonably small operators with a small number of clients. When Visa has hundreds of millions of users, they can abuse them pretty freely.
----- It's against federal laws to interfere with the mail service, so I think someone *could* make a case for companies interfering with email, by extension of that law. -----
And they'd be laughed out of court. Just because something has a similar name doesn't mean it applies. I can't start a gay prostitution company named Hot Male and claim that federal law based on postal mail means that I can't be interfered with. Likewise, I can't start a drug delivery service and call it d-mail and claim that it's similarly protected. If you'd bothered to look at the statute that you're refering to (Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 83, Sec. 1702) you'd see that it spells out exactly what and where it refers to. But then, this is Slashdot, where it's more fun to just spout whatever halfbaked theory comes to mind.
----- What if I saw a package going to your house from my competitor, and I was a Fed-ex agent? Would I be able to simply throw the package out so that you wouldn't use, say, UPS? -----
No, because it's covered by things like larceny and trespassing laws. You know, laws that actually apply.
----- Irregardless -----
Not really a word, FYI.
----- of whether money is involved or any contracts were involved; the act of arbitrary email delivery, to suit corporate needs over the needs of their clients, does transgress the law, one way or another. -----
Um, let me guess, you're not a lawyer are you? Try reading a terms of service some time. MSN TOU Read item nine. Now, cite a legal statute that counteracts it.
Try admining a real mail server some time. (Something with 50,000+ active users.) Even the most benign services drop connections from known major sources of spam.
If you can find a way to do so, I'd recommend getting a four year degree. There's quite a few companies that require a BS or BA, regardless of experience. Stupid, yes, but it's the reality. You'll also find places where you can work without a four year degree, but the kinds of positions you might want to be in 10 years from now require them.
You'll also have the chance to get exposed to a variety of classes that both enhance you personally (I think that a background in history and the like is a good thing) and professionally (if you plan it right, there are classes in statistics and psych that can be very applicable to computers) that a two year program doesn't have a chance to touch on.
And it's fun. Unless you're *that* unsure about the economy holding up, don't rush into the work place unless you utterly have to. Go to school, do road trips, sit on someone's porch discussing philosophy until 4AM. You're young once, you'll spend most of the rest of your life working. Unless you have to, don't rush into it.
I have a friend who graduated from high school and hit the job market immediately. He's an Exchange Guru and manages a system that's beyond many admin's abilities. He makes about 20% more than I do. But he's also hit a ceiling on how far up he can go because of the lack of the degree. Going to school gets a whole lot harder once you've got stuff like house payments to worry about or a husband/wife and kids. And, he wishes that he'd had the experience of going to school.
That said, here's some skills I think serve just about everyone well: 1. Good writing ability. Just about every office job requires some kind of writing at this point. I put more trust in the e-mails that arrive on the internal listserve that are well written than the ones that are garbled. 2. Good speaking ability. You may end up having to be part of a presentation team, be it for training, sales, or whatever. Being able to speak comfortably while making good eye contact and restraining physical twitches is essential. I saw a series of job interviews recently where one guy (who had lots of inside contacts and is a smart and capable guy) LOOKED very uncomfortable and kept doing all kinds of nervous tics. He didn't get the job - not just because of that, but that kind of thing immediately gives you a bad mark in most people's minds. 3. Some demonstrated knowledge of computer science and programming. On the networking side, you might not be writing code in anything other than scripting languages, but a knowledge of "proper" code will likely result in clearer, more maintainable code than someone who's only worked with scripting languages.
----- Does anyone make a *new* laptop that uses this guys chips and a via mobo, and is it under 500 clams brand new? -----
No, because laptops are expensive because of more than just the chip. LCDs make up a good portion of the cost of an inexpensive laptop. The engineering and design of laptops takes more money than a desktop because you have to worry about size, power consumption, and weight, three factors that aren't much of an issue with cut rate desktops. A 1 year support policy for a laptop costs more than a desktop, because of all the banging around that laptops take.
----- That's the breakthrough and the sweetspot general pricing range I am waiting for, the linux laptop,comes complete and works outta-the-box, including wireless, under 500$, and *upgradeable*. -----
Keep holding your breath, until LCD prices drop.
If you want something cheap and portable, you've got plenty of options. If you want something with a built in mouse, keyboard, and monitor, you're going to have to be willing to pay for it.
(Note - I am quite the opposite of an MS fanboy (part of my job description is transitioning my department from Windows to Linux), but I find some of this difficult to understand.)
----- I have had Windows boxes on which the antiviruses were updated twice daily - just to find that by the time I had received the update, the malicious software had already been on the machine. -----
How did it get there? There are relatively few worms for Windows (though the effective ones such as Blaster and Sasser tend to be very widespread). Other forms of attack need some kind of user initiated vector, be it clicking in an e-mail, visiting a website (as with this discussion), doing something. Identify how it's getting in, and put an end to it.
----- On a Windows box at home, despite antivirus software, Windows' builtin firewall and a 3rd party firewall software, I once counted 12 (!) different infections within less than 24 hours. -----
What do you define as an infection? On my Windows box at home, I run no firewall other than the one built into my router, Symantec AV, regular Windows Updates, and I don't get infections.
----- Interestingly enough, it's gotten much better for me at home since I've been running my Windows box through a Linux gateway. Still, stuff slips through, but it's on the order of one a week or so. -----
Again, one of what? Sasser and Blaster bounced off my router firewall. The IIS and SQL worms didn't have a chance - even if they got through the firewall because I don't run unnecessary servers, and were I running SQL, it would be locked down to local machines via a firewall.
I get an e-mail virus every now and then in my inbox (most of them get caught by the industrial strength virus scanners that guard the mail servers I use). I don't get infected by not clicking on them. I use Mozilla, which doesn't have the malware targeting it. I don't install Kazaa or Morpheous, etc., that come loaded with junk.
Where are you having a problem? Windows isn't good, but it's nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. Despite minimal Windows admin knowledge, I keep my home machine and a slew of work machines running just fine.
>Also, Plato is very clear that Atlantis was a real place. >He hears about it from an Egyptian priest who says Atlantis existed 9000 years prior.
Um, right, because Egyptian priests are known to be a fount of reliable information. And actually, the priest alledgedly told Solon, who told Plato. Repeating information told to you by another is hearsay, and is not allowed in courts for very good reasons.
Anything passed down for generations (be it 900 or 9000 years) is likely to have severe flaws in it, particularly with early man. Oral tradition is widely known to distort the truth, and writing isn't much better. Look at the multiple versions of the bible. Compare Chaucer with modern prose. Now think of how pictographs' meaning could be distorted.
People believe what they want to believe. I just got yet another one of the "Bill Gates will send you $250 for forwarding this to your friends" e-mails that had been forwarded to hundreds of people within the body of text I got. There are several smart people who should know better involved in the chain, but because it's more fun to believe it's real that fake, it survives.
Given all that, do you really think there's a mystic land named Atlantas, or do you think it was an alegory for something? Particularly given that it's introduced in texts discussing utopian societies?
>I have faith that Plato knew what he was talking about
Would you allow someone to testify against you in court about something they heard from someone else, who heard it from someone else, who obtained the information from written/oral documents that still someone else prepared and passed on?
> as Apple have shown its the system that matters, not the processor.
Yes, but remember, Apple was hurting for quite some time after Motorola stopped working on high end PPC chips. The stagnant G4 hurt Apple - I use encoding software that had started out on Macs but moved the focus of its development to Windows after the the G4 lost steam. The apple version still exists and is supported, but lacks some of the features of the Windows version. And while I've not had a chance to run it on a G5, a dual Athlon MP utterly spanks a dual G4.
The G5 certainly helps, but it still leaves Apple at the mercy of an outside supplier.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't care what order the buttons are in, so long as I can make it consistant across every platform I use. I spend about 50% of my time in Windows, 40% in Linux, and 10% in OS X. OS X could easily have a larger portion, except that it's so annoyingly unconfigurable, and I spend as much time getting fustrated with it than being productive.
The "right" way is how my muscle memory has been programmed, and for better or worse, that's the Microsoft order (despite going for 6 years barely using any MS products).
Um, look at the list of vulnerabilities that Mozilla has had. There have been some very nasty ones found.
90% of the populace are not computer geeks. My grandmother wouldn't know what a Mozilla is if it bit her. My office janitor prolly doesn't either. Most people don't follow computer stuff fanatically.
The Microsoft marketing department has a huge budget. Mozilla/Opera/whatever does not.
Killed directly, or by effect? Despite the fact that it's a bad idea, many critical systems for various bits of infrastructure are online. Do you recall the hubbub when the British sea rescue team got hit with one of the worms? In that case they were idiots for not updating, but in this case it was a zero day exploit that someone innocently surfing could have contracted. I don't think it happened this time, but what happens if a worm gets into 911 call centers, rescue teams, etc.?
Yes, but the Dead only give away _exactly_ what _they_ choose to give away. Try putting up mp3s of their studio albums, and they'll come down on you hard.
Also, the fact two bands (The Dead and Phish) can make a sucessful living with that business model doesn't mean that everyone can. Your argument is like saying that because one or two people hit the jackpot with a lottery means that everyone can do it.
Yes, you're trolling. What part of "for a single person" do you not understand? You're being argumentative, not making any points, and going on and on, hence, trolling.
The large (~27,000 student) school I work for only offers webmail via https, and switched over to POP with SSL last year. There was a small amount of complaining, and some hand holding done by the tech support staff, and it was done with a minimum of fuss.
Students are free to use weak passwords for their accounts, but staff have length/complexity rules. This encourages the use of different passwords for stuff like IM clients and the mail/network access passwords. Someone could sniff the short throwaway password I use for plaintext transmition, but all it would get them is the ability to impersonate me on IM and access to a few websites under my account.
For even more fun, write a virus/worm that does this (including changing the time/date stamp so it's not obvious what file's been changed lately), but cleans up after itself completely. Given the number of documents on the average business computer, the cost of finding a machine that has an open vulnerability but no sign of whether or not it was affected would be tremendous.
If you really want me to put on my English major hat, I'll respond by saying that traditional cartoons, paitings, and cave art are solutions to equations as well, just done by hand rather than by computer. And as with online shopping carts and databases, simply adding a computer to the equation doesn't make it unique in and of itself.
But you are correct that just about anything can be described in a manner that makes it sound artsy. The question is how well that opinion can be defended.
Art is often held to have meaning by artsy fartsty types like me based on whether or not it does something useful such as provide meaningful insight on the human condition. Shrek and Lord of the Rings (the movie) don't really do that - they're more just entertainment. That's not a bad thing - no one wants to spend all their time in deep thought.
You don't really derive much from Shrek other than some of the very basic things you might try to teach a four year old (don't judge people by looks, be nice to each other). And LoTR the movie drops much of the subtlety, religious references, and moral issues in the books. It makes it a better action movie, but how many people came out of the theatre discussing the implications of moral corruptability and how many people came out talking about how cool the battle scenes were?
Maus is art to people like me because it does delve deeply into meaningful issues. Shrek is not, because it doesn't. Maus has helped shape the way I live to some extent. Shrek entertained me for a short period of time. I enjoyed both, for different reasons.
Sigh. This whole discussion is full of lots of opinions from people who don't seem to understand what the paper is talking about, begining with the submitter.
First, the paper is refering to microphone preamps, which are used to boost the very, very low level signals. These signals are affected by impendence, one way that vacume tubes are different that transistors. Both are good, both can be used to make very good gear, both can be used to make very bad gear.
The difference in harmonic orders generated by distortion is important because equipment is often used to intentionally generate distortion because sometimes it's pleasing to the ear. Tubes also begin to compress the waveform when driven into distortion, which often is pleasing to the ear. And sorry, there's no advances in technology that's changed those basic laws of physics/electricity. That's not to say solid state stuff is bad, just different.
Virtually every rock/country/pop CD out there has passed through a selection of vacume and solid state technology. We use the best tools to generate the tone we want, regardless of the technology. If you go to a high quality studio, you'll find that most of the audio monitors are powered by solid state amps. You'll find racks of solid state and vacume tube mic preamps, EQs, and compressors. You'll find lots of tube based guitar amps and very few solid state ones.
An LA2 compressor has tubes and sounds like god on some things. An 1176 doesn't have tubes, and sounds like god on some things. I reach for the one that best serves my needs, not what technology it's built on.
BTW, most real studios don't use the monster cables that audio stores will try to sell you. We use plain old, high quality wire with quality connectors that cost much less than any of the audiophile stuff.
As far as the loud is better stuff spouted in the submission, that has nothing to do with it. You can design a 1 watt tube amp that's very overdriven to get certain sounds at low volume. It's all a matter of knowing what your desired effect is and the purpose, and designing the equipment to deliver it. A 60 watt 4 ohm amp for home listening has entirely different design considerations than an amp designed to deliver 4500 watts 2 ohm for sound reinforcement.
Smirk
Perhaps this loss that "DG" (whose name you'll find in the above link) can "ill afford" will teach him a lesson?
Perhaps the fact that year that the alledged deceased was born in changed between e-mails should have been a clue? The bank website that was completely unbelievable? The horrible quality of the writing? The use of "banking" terminology that a simple google search would aren't actually used?
It's kind of interesting to read, but really doesn't show anything other than the fact greed is a wonderful tool to get people to ignore all common sense.
Blackberries are flashy toys for most people that have them. Pagers and cell phones, however, are two completely different tools. My cell phone signal goes away in quite a few locations I work in, including our NOC. My pager signal reaches me in those areas.
Those were a few things off the top of my head. There are many more. Flower(whatever you silly mac people call it)-Tab doesn't work the way that it does in the other major operating environments, and Apple intentionally broke the ability to change it to match. This may not be a big deal if all you ever use is a Mac, but the vast majority of people don't. Flower-Tilde sort of duplicates some of the functionality, but that's left to the application writer to do, leading to inconsistancies. And most that do impliment it have it cycle through a circular list of all instances of the program rather than the most recently used.
And no, I'm not wrong on tab closing. Name another application where misclicking on a selection tool can cause a desired window to be lost without confirmation. If I miss the paint tool in Photoshop by 3 pixels, I don't accidentally close the image I'm working on. Would you say that having a little "delete" feature on every file listed in Finder that could easily be clicked by accident would be a good design?
Right clicking (or control clicking for those Mac users who are petrified by the concept of more than one mouse button) to bring up a menu that offers the ability to close that tab without viewing it is the correct behavour. (Or rather, the better - there could be an even better one out there still.)
Beyond that issue, it's a basic violation of Fitt's law. By duplicating a common widget, the target size of the actual tab is reduced, making targeting it with a mouse harder and decreasing the space available to deliver useful information - what the tab has in it.
Expose may work for you, but it doesn't for me, which is the core of my problem with Apple - they expect you to mold your hand to fit the tool rather than molding the tool to fit my hand. I have so many different tasks at work that virtual desktops are the only thing that keep me from being buried under taskbar clutter. Even with tabbed browsing, I have over 40 windows open right now. Virtual desktops lets me segregate those into a graphic design desktop, a database desktop, a web development desktop, a research desktop, and a sysadmin desktop. The sheer number of windows would make Expose unusable for the same purpose.
Having a single button in DVD Player and iTunes for both fast forward and chapter skip while QuickTime has separate buttons is honed to a sheen? Ever try to advance just_a_little in a DVD? There's a reason that 99% of the remotes for standalone DVD players have separate buttons for them. They're two completely different functions.
Not having decent support for the concept of "home" and "end" is a fine sheen?
Having the Safari close tab button be on the tab itself so that a slight mistargetting closes the tab is a well designed UI? (Yes, I know Konq does it as well, and it's wrong there too.)
Apple does some things very well, but they leave a lot of rough edges that the fanatics don't like to see.
You can make statistics to prove just about anything you want. What makes the data useful is good analysis, which this article does not have.
The OS X/Linux vulnerabilities include many, many third party applications that they bundle. The Windows list almost exclusively covers Windows the operating system and IIS. If you really want to do a comparison, load up Windows with two or three office software suites, Visual Studio, Safe Source (the way that the Cisco hackers got in), etc., etc., and then compare vulnerabilities.
Further, the study doesn't correlate remote and system access attacks. The MS RPC vulnerability and the two Linux Kernel escalation of privilege vulnerabilities both gave system access. But one was sitting wide open for random attacker, and two took getting into the system in the first place. A very big difference.
Also, many Linux distributions and OS X ship with a minimum of services turned on, so they are inherently much safer out of the box. Most of
the vulnerabilities for *nix/OS X were server related, which desktop users wouldn't have on or installed. Most of the Windows ones were things that you'll find on almost all installations.
If you want, we can do a show of hands of how many Windows systems have been compromised vs. how many Macs. Even adjusted for the Windows/Mac ratio, I'm pretty sure that OS X will come up as safer.
With OS X and most modern Linux systems, you _have_ to work to create security problems. Whereas each new Windows installation I do requires a series of patching via CD or memory key before I can put it online to download the rest of the updates...
This is a calculation based stamp, not anything financial. It's not going to cost anything. It allows for white-listing on a per user basis that exempts senders from the stamp requirement. Therefore, if you wanted to get on a mailing list, you'd add them to your white-list. Yes, it's an extra step, but what's one extra step when you sign onto a mailing list compared to having to dig through hundreds of spam messages a day?
Have some (slightly out of date) documentation:
One section
Another section
The lawsuit in question involved suing a number of specific labels, as well as a few retailers. Scroll down for a list of defendants If you want to get riled up about this, do so by all means, but target the correct group. You don't like it when the RIAA accuses all file-swappers of being criminals, so make yourselves look better than them by not doing the same thing.
/. groupthink, not everything you don't like in the recording industry comes from the RIAA.
Despite the
The problem is that it's very, very easy to poison the prosecution of the beneficiary of spam. See Basics on JoeJobs Who's to say whether something like this came from you or not? :
Wild, h0t animation tool available!
See \/ar1ous polygons in full, sensual contact
FREE DEMO
CLICK HERE!!
sponge arrest carriboo spade
kumquat afredo distribution
How do you propose to demonstrate that you didn't pay someone to send it? Turn over all of your financial records to someone to show no payments to an unknown spammer in the Ukrane that runs a server or ten in China?
Trying to sue credit card companies and banks is pretty unreasonable as well. There's no easy way to verify every action that a merchant takes. Even if you suceeded in getting some kind of law to that effect passed, the cost would get handed right back to the consumers. Theoretically suing spammers could work because they are reasonably small operators with a small number of clients. When Visa has hundreds of millions of users, they can abuse them pretty freely.
-----
It's against federal laws to interfere with the mail service, so I think someone *could* make a case for companies interfering with email, by extension of that law.
-----
And they'd be laughed out of court. Just because something has a similar name doesn't mean it applies. I can't start a gay prostitution company named Hot Male and claim that federal law based on postal mail means that I can't be interfered with. Likewise, I can't start a drug delivery service and call it d-mail and claim that it's similarly protected. If you'd bothered to look at the statute that you're refering to (Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 83, Sec. 1702) you'd see that it spells out exactly what and where it refers to. But then, this is Slashdot, where it's more fun to just spout whatever halfbaked theory comes to mind.
-----
What if I saw a package going to your house from my competitor, and I was a Fed-ex agent? Would I be able to simply throw the package out so that you wouldn't use, say, UPS?
-----
No, because it's covered by things like larceny and trespassing laws. You know, laws that actually apply.
-----
Irregardless
-----
Not really a word, FYI.
-----
of whether money is involved or any contracts were involved; the act of arbitrary email delivery, to suit corporate needs over the needs of their clients, does transgress the law, one way or another.
-----
Um, let me guess, you're not a lawyer are you? Try reading a terms of service some time. MSN TOU Read item nine. Now, cite a legal statute that counteracts it.
Try admining a real mail server some time. (Something with 50,000+ active users.) Even the most benign services drop connections from known major sources of spam.
If you can find a way to do so, I'd recommend getting a four year degree. There's quite a few companies that require a BS or BA, regardless of experience. Stupid, yes, but it's the reality. You'll also find places where you can work without a four year degree, but the kinds of positions you might want to be in 10 years from now require them.
You'll also have the chance to get exposed to a variety of classes that both enhance you personally (I think that a background in history and the like is a good thing) and professionally (if you plan it right, there are classes in statistics and psych that can be very applicable to computers) that a two year program doesn't have a chance to touch on.
And it's fun. Unless you're *that* unsure about the economy holding up, don't rush into the work place unless you utterly have to. Go to school, do road trips, sit on someone's porch discussing philosophy until 4AM. You're young once, you'll spend most of the rest of your life working. Unless you have to, don't rush into it.
I have a friend who graduated from high school and hit the job market immediately. He's an Exchange Guru and manages a system that's beyond many admin's abilities. He makes about 20% more than I do. But he's also hit a ceiling on how far up he can go because of the lack of the degree. Going to school gets a whole lot harder once you've got stuff like house payments to worry about or a husband/wife and kids. And, he wishes that he'd had the experience of going to school.
That said, here's some skills I think serve just about everyone well:
1. Good writing ability. Just about every office job requires some kind of writing at this point. I put more trust in the e-mails that arrive on the internal listserve that are well written than the ones that are garbled.
2. Good speaking ability. You may end up having to be part of a presentation team, be it for training, sales, or whatever. Being able to speak comfortably while making good eye contact and restraining physical twitches is essential. I saw a series of job interviews recently where one guy (who had lots of inside contacts and is a smart and capable guy) LOOKED very uncomfortable and kept doing all kinds of nervous tics. He didn't get the job - not just because of that, but that kind of thing immediately gives you a bad mark in most people's minds.
3. Some demonstrated knowledge of computer science and programming. On the networking side, you might not be writing code in anything other than scripting languages, but a knowledge of "proper" code will likely result in clearer, more maintainable code than someone who's only worked with scripting languages.
Good luck.
-----
Does anyone make a *new* laptop that uses this guys chips and a via mobo, and is it under 500 clams brand new?
-----
No, because laptops are expensive because of more than just the chip. LCDs make up a good portion of the cost of an inexpensive laptop. The engineering and design of laptops takes more money than a desktop because you have to worry about size, power consumption, and weight, three factors that aren't much of an issue with cut rate desktops. A 1 year support policy for a laptop costs more than a desktop, because of all the banging around that laptops take.
-----
That's the breakthrough and the sweetspot general pricing range I am waiting for, the linux laptop,comes complete and works outta-the-box, including wireless, under 500$, and *upgradeable*.
-----
Keep holding your breath, until LCD prices drop.
If you want something cheap and portable, you've got plenty of options. If you want something with a built in mouse, keyboard, and monitor, you're going to have to be willing to pay for it.
(Note - I am quite the opposite of an MS fanboy (part of my job description is transitioning my department from Windows to Linux), but I find some of this difficult to understand.)
-----
I have had Windows boxes on which the antiviruses were updated twice daily - just to find that by the time I had received the update, the malicious software had already been on the machine.
-----
How did it get there? There are relatively few worms for Windows (though the effective ones such as Blaster and Sasser tend to be very widespread). Other forms of attack need some kind of user initiated vector, be it clicking in an e-mail, visiting a website (as with this discussion), doing something. Identify how it's getting in, and put an end to it.
-----
On a Windows box at home, despite antivirus software, Windows' builtin firewall and a 3rd party firewall software, I once counted 12 (!) different infections within less than 24 hours.
-----
What do you define as an infection? On my Windows box at home, I run no firewall other than the one built into my router, Symantec AV, regular Windows Updates, and I don't get infections.
-----
Interestingly enough, it's gotten much better for me at home since I've been running my Windows box through a Linux gateway. Still, stuff slips through, but it's on the order of one a week or so.
-----
Again, one of what? Sasser and Blaster bounced off my router firewall. The IIS and SQL worms didn't have a chance - even if they got through the firewall because I don't run unnecessary servers, and were I running SQL, it would be locked down to local machines via a firewall.
I get an e-mail virus every now and then in my inbox (most of them get caught by the industrial strength virus scanners that guard the mail servers I use). I don't get infected by not clicking on them. I use Mozilla, which doesn't have the malware targeting it. I don't install Kazaa or Morpheous, etc., that come loaded with junk.
Where are you having a problem? Windows isn't good, but it's nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be. Despite minimal Windows admin knowledge, I keep my home machine and a slew of work machines running just fine.
>Also, Plato is very clear that Atlantis was a real place.
>He hears about it from an Egyptian priest who says Atlantis existed 9000 years prior.
Um, right, because Egyptian priests are known to be a fount of reliable information. And actually, the priest alledgedly told Solon, who told Plato. Repeating information told to you by another is hearsay, and is not allowed in courts for very good reasons.
Anything passed down for generations (be it 900 or 9000 years) is likely to have severe flaws in it, particularly with early man. Oral tradition is widely known to distort the truth, and writing isn't much better. Look at the multiple versions of the bible. Compare Chaucer with modern prose. Now think of how pictographs' meaning could be distorted.
People believe what they want to believe. I just got yet another one of the "Bill Gates will send you $250 for forwarding this to your friends" e-mails that had been forwarded to hundreds of people within the body of text I got. There are several smart people who should know better involved in the chain, but because it's more fun to believe it's real that fake, it survives.
Given all that, do you really think there's a mystic land named Atlantas, or do you think it was an alegory for something? Particularly given that it's introduced in texts discussing utopian societies?
>I have faith that Plato knew what he was talking about
Would you allow someone to testify against you in court about something they heard from someone else, who heard it from someone else, who obtained the information from written/oral documents that still someone else prepared and passed on?
> as Apple have shown its the system that matters, not the processor.
Yes, but remember, Apple was hurting for quite some time after Motorola stopped working on high end PPC chips. The stagnant G4 hurt Apple - I use encoding software that had started out on Macs but moved the focus of its development to Windows after the the G4 lost steam. The apple version still exists and is supported, but lacks some of the features of the Windows version. And while I've not had a chance to run it on a G5, a dual Athlon MP utterly spanks a dual G4.
The G5 certainly helps, but it still leaves Apple at the mercy of an outside supplier.
-----
If they implement all the low-level stuff well, it seems to me that they could easily use the MS binaries for DirectX compatibility.
-----
Which would require having a Windows license, which would seem to defeat the purpose.