Can I use the Cappuccino as a standalone unit to listen to mp3's or view images on a TV? Sure, I could lug a keyboard and mouse on my trip and hook it to a television, but I don't want to do that.
Does the Cappuccino run on batteries?
Could I flip the Cappuccino on, and with no intervention transfer digital images from my camera to it?
They are two different products with two different purposes in mind. Both are excellent at what they do.
Why do people keep saying this, and why did some even mark it up as insightful? The website does NOT say that this is intended to be a PDA. It's just unfortunate that/. decided to use that term in the headline. It's an information storage device, and it does exactly that perfectly well.
From their website:
mine is a powerful, handheld, internet enabled, personal data storage device ready to meet all of your digital information needs at work and at play.
I would love something like this. Small, good HD space, ethernet, etc.
I would load up all of my utilities/apps, etc. that I could ever possibly need at a client's site. Get there and plug into their network. No problems. A great place to backup important files to before working on a machine.
Finish the job, hop in the car, and listen to some books-on-mp3 on the long drive home.
If I could bookmark my place in an mp3 (for long books) and be able to return to that point when I next wanted to listen, combined with everything else, I would definately buy this.
They really need to do a better job of explaining exactly what this thing does, ports available, how everything ties together, and what type of interaction with it's programs you can have with a 4x20 screen and 3 buttons, etc.
The manual they have up there, for example, shows how to select the type of TV (pal/ntsc) you will be using to display your images on, yet I see no mention of an RCA (assuming) out anywhere.
Q:Why does ScanDisk run automatically when I start mine?
If mine is not shutdowned properly, mine will run ScanDisk so that your data can be recovered. You can cancel ScanDisk process if you do not want to wait.
I've heard several talk show hosts over the last couple of days read the press releases about code red infecting all these MS servers.
They invariably follow it up by saying, "Yeah, I got about 200 copies of code red in my inbox yesterday asking for my advice, but I was smart enough not to open them."
Code Complete is an excellent book. It was given to all the members of our programming team several years ago by our project manager before we started work on a major project.
I can not emphsize enough how much I have gotten from this book. It will never be outdated because it teaches you how to approach a project and product a good final product.
Re:Just to torture myself
on
ICFP 2001 Task
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. Like, just how much more secure is this then just sending a password? Your password is encrypted, right?
Using their logic where the main reason to do this is so you don't have to enter a password is just crazy.
If you don't use passphrase protection on your private key, it's just as risky as creating a shell script that sends your password automatically or entering into a program like SecureCRT and having it remember it.
In fact, since SecureCRT encrypts the saved password, this seems like it's more secure than having a non-passphrase protected private key hanging around.
After you set this up, can you still log in via remotely using your password?
RTFA! Apparently on each connect the server picks a number. It encrypts this number using your public key and sends it to your box. Your private key decrypts it (after entering your passphrase locally if you set it up to do so) and sends the number back to the server. If the correct number is sent back, then it assumes that you had the real private key.
I'm sure that getting that number wouldn't do you any good because surely it's not going to challenge you with the same number each time.
I can't talk for all of Microsoft, but certainly the script technologies group and a bunch of people in the Windows and BackOffice group think it's a fine language and certainly deserves a place in Windows Scripting.
The same goes for the transfer from analog cell phones to digital. You can just tell when someone is on a digital cell phone.
I'd go back to analog in a second if the offered it as an option. Sure, they can handle more traffic with each cell site, but is it worth the degraded quality?
I don't get it. The main point of the article was that by having your web server listen on a non-standard port, an attacker would have to scan a large number of ports to find out where (or if) your webserver was running.
Huh? Ok, maybe for an ultra-secure private site where you can tip everyone off who needs to know the "secret" port address to append to the url, but how does that help me? If I want people to get to my site, it had better be running on port 80.
The underlying message seems to be that one you have changed the port your webserver listens on, you should install (portscan detectors, including Bastille Linux developer Mike Rash's upcoming Port Scan Attack Detector,) THEIR new portscan detector.
I don't see why MP3 is here to stay, even if WMA doesn't replace it.
Because I've already spent hundreds of hours finding mp3's on the 'net and compiling the "Soundtrack of My Life". I don't want to have to go through all that again!
And yes, if I know there are better versions of my music out there, I WILL be compelled to go find it. And I was just getting to the point where I had time to work again...
I know a guy (ahem) who subscribes to audible for audio books. But he wanted to burn them to CD and listen to them on his MP3-CD player in the car, but they required an authentication plugin for Windows Media Player to play.
Now I hear he just starts up Total Recorder and has it capture the audio to an mp3 before he goes to bed each night.
If you can access, or step between, the content management system and the audio driver, there's really no way of creating a foolproof content management system.
I wish I could agree based on my experiences with it on W2K. The install went fine and I was up and browsing in no time. It looked really cool.
I decided to try out the Aqua theme. I downloaded it and was told that the changes would take place the next time I started the program. I exited out and tried to launch it again... "mozilla.exe has generated errors and will be closed by Windows..."
This was the first time I had tried to launch it after the initial install, so I don't know if it would have happened whether I had switched themes or not.
Anyway, I've tried reinstalling, uninstalling - rebooting - installing, everything. I get the same dr. watson error every time.
Oh well, IE has been the only reason I keep this box around anyway... If the linux version has this type of reliability, it looks like I've got quite awhile before I can get rid of Windows completely.
This would never work. First of all, the Open Source community is not a big enough demographic group for anyone other than niche companies to market to.
Second, those of us who are in this group don't need (or want) an ISP who does all of the handholding that you are talking about. We want the cheapest/fastest connection to the 'net that we can find. That's all. Just give me a pipe and I'll do the rest. I'll pick and choose the apps that I want to run to utilize the pipe. And if it doesn't exist, I'll create it and you can use it too!
Slashdot Mirror
Just please make sure you wash it before doing any disection.
I really wish I had mod points. ;)
Thanks for the laugh.
Can I use the Cappuccino as a standalone unit to listen to mp3's or view images on a TV? Sure, I could lug a keyboard and mouse on my trip and hook it to a television, but I don't want to do that.
Does the Cappuccino run on batteries?
Could I flip the Cappuccino on, and with no intervention transfer digital images from my camera to it?
They are two different products with two different purposes in mind. Both are excellent at what they do.
Why do people keep saying this, and why did some even mark it up as insightful? The website does NOT say that this is intended to be a PDA. It's just unfortunate that /. decided to use that term in the headline. It's an information storage device, and it does exactly that perfectly well.
From their website:
mine is a powerful, handheld, internet enabled, personal data storage device ready to meet all of your digital information needs at work and at play.
It has outputs for a television.
I would love something like this. Small, good HD space, ethernet, etc.
I would load up all of my utilities/apps, etc. that I could ever possibly need at a client's site. Get there and plug into their network. No problems. A great place to backup important files to before working on a machine.
Finish the job, hop in the car, and listen to some books-on-mp3 on the long drive home.
If I could bookmark my place in an mp3 (for long books) and be able to return to that point when I next wanted to listen, combined with everything else, I would definately buy this.
They really need to do a better job of explaining exactly what this thing does, ports available, how everything ties together, and what type of interaction with it's programs you can have with a 4x20 screen and 3 buttons, etc.
The manual they have up there, for example, shows how to select the type of TV (pal/ntsc) you will be using to display your images on, yet I see no mention of an RCA (assuming) out anywhere.
...then explain this question from the FAQ:
Q:Why does ScanDisk run automatically when I start mine?
If mine is not shutdowned properly, mine will run ScanDisk so that your data can be recovered. You can cancel ScanDisk process if you do not want to wait.
I've heard several talk show hosts over the last couple of days read the press releases about code red infecting all these MS servers.
They invariably follow it up by saying, "Yeah, I got about 200 copies of code red in my inbox yesterday asking for my advice, but I was smart enough not to open them."
Geez.
Code Complete is an excellent book. It was given to all the members of our programming team several years ago by our project manager before we started work on a major project.
I can not emphsize enough how much I have gotten from this book. It will never be outdated because it teaches you how to approach a project and product a good final product.
#!/bin/bash
gzip *.html
Exactly. Like, just how much more secure is this then just sending a password? Your password is encrypted, right?
Using their logic where the main reason to do this is so you don't have to enter a password is just crazy.
If you don't use passphrase protection on your private key, it's just as risky as creating a shell script that sends your password automatically or entering into a program like SecureCRT and having it remember it.
In fact, since SecureCRT encrypts the saved password, this seems like it's more secure than having a non-passphrase protected private key hanging around.
After you set this up, can you still log in via remotely using your password?
RTFA! Apparently on each connect the server picks a number. It encrypts this number using your public key and sends it to your box. Your private key decrypts it (after entering your passphrase locally if you set it up to do so) and sends the number back to the server. If the correct number is sent back, then it assumes that you had the real private key.
I'm sure that getting that number wouldn't do you any good because surely it's not going to challenge you with the same number each time.
Your private key is never sent to the server.
From the MSDN article "Perl of Wisdom":
What Does Microsoft Think of Perl?
I can't talk for all of Microsoft, but certainly the script technologies group and a bunch of people in the Windows and BackOffice group think it's a fine language and certainly deserves a place in Windows Scripting.
The MSDN article
Heh, I've got "The Complete Rainbow Guide to OS-9 Level II, Volume 1: A Beginners Guide to Windows" sitting on my bookshelf here.
I learned a lot from OS-9. It showed me what an OS could be.
The same goes for the transfer from analog cell phones to digital. You can just tell when someone is on a digital cell phone.
I'd go back to analog in a second if the offered it as an option. Sure, they can handle more traffic with each cell site, but is it worth the degraded quality?
I don't get it. The main point of the article was that by having your web server listen on a non-standard port, an attacker would have to scan a large number of ports to find out where (or if) your webserver was running.
Huh? Ok, maybe for an ultra-secure private site where you can tip everyone off who needs to know the "secret" port address to append to the url, but how does that help me? If I want people to get to my site, it had better be running on port 80.
The underlying message seems to be that one you have changed the port your webserver listens on, you should install (portscan detectors, including Bastille Linux developer Mike Rash's upcoming Port Scan Attack Detector,) THEIR new portscan detector.
Wait, is this an ad?
Geez, don't be so harsh. I think he was quoting the article on /.
Toshiba has managed to squeeze 5GB of storage space into a PCMCIA Type II SAN disk.
That's a great tip! Simple, but I hadn't thought of it.
Thanks!
I don't see why MP3 is here to stay, even if WMA doesn't replace it.
Because I've already spent hundreds of hours finding mp3's on the 'net and compiling the "Soundtrack of My Life". I don't want to have to go through all that again!
And yes, if I know there are better versions of my music out there, I WILL be compelled to go find it. And I was just getting to the point where I had time to work again...
As long as we have Total Recorder, it's all good.
I know a guy (ahem) who subscribes to audible for audio books. But he wanted to burn them to CD and listen to them on his MP3-CD player in the car, but they required an authentication plugin for Windows Media Player to play.
Now I hear he just starts up Total Recorder and has it capture the audio to an mp3 before he goes to bed each night.
If you can access, or step between, the content management system and the audio driver, there's really no way of creating a foolproof content management system.
So, does it comply with the recent Linux Standard Base 1.0 document?
I wish I could agree based on my experiences with it on W2K. The install went fine and I was up and browsing in no time. It looked really cool.
I decided to try out the Aqua theme. I downloaded it and was told that the changes would take place the next time I started the program. I exited out and tried to launch it again... "mozilla.exe has generated errors and will be closed by Windows..."
This was the first time I had tried to launch it after the initial install, so I don't know if it would have happened whether I had switched themes or not.
Anyway, I've tried reinstalling, uninstalling - rebooting - installing, everything. I get the same dr. watson error every time.
Oh well, IE has been the only reason I keep this box around anyway... If the linux version has this type of reliability, it looks like I've got quite awhile before I can get rid of Windows completely.
This would never work. First of all, the Open Source community is not a big enough demographic group for anyone other than niche companies to market to.
Second, those of us who are in this group don't need (or want) an ISP who does all of the handholding that you are talking about. We want the cheapest/fastest connection to the 'net that we can find. That's all. Just give me a pipe and I'll do the rest. I'll pick and choose the apps that I want to run to utilize the pipe. And if it doesn't exist, I'll create it and you can use it too!
Geez, relax. I think it was a joke.