Everyone else cheaps out and you are left with leaky capacitors after a couple of years use or other crap like that.
Funny you should use that example. About a year ago, the video on my second-hand eMac starting flaking out, and a little bit of Googling turned up bad capacitors as the most likely cause. However, Apple recognized that as a problem with the model and extended warranty coverage for that one specific video card to three years. I dropped mine off at an Apple store literally two days before the extended warranty was set to expire, and they made good on the repairs.
I still much prefer Linux to OS X, but after that episode I feel completely comfortable recommending Apple hardware. When they do get a bad batch of parts, they stand behind fixing it.
The person with the bad file runs option 1 to make the check file and sends that to the person with the good file. They run option 2 which identifies bad chunks and exports them, which they send back to the first person. Run option 3 and the exports are patched into their download and it's fixed.
This guy's got some fucking chutzpah, and not the good kind. This is out-and-out harassment.
And some weird notions of how everyone else thinks. Like:
If so, your loving son deserves one now. It should be red and green, for obvious reasons.
Because Ted Bundy likes Christmas? Because The Red Green show is hosted by treacherous Canadians? Because "blue" is God's color so red and green belong to the devil? Really, Jack. What "obvious" point am I too dumb to see?
but for a simple server, FreeBSD is still a viable choice
Could you possibly make that praise any fainter? FreeBSD is still the preferred choice of many server admins for a lot of reasons, including the fact that the newly-released 7-STABLE series is ludicrously fast. For example, when researching PostgreSQL performance tuning, a fairly common recommendation is to run it on FreeBSD.
It's not exactly the limping dinosaur some people around here seem to imagine.
"MSFT" is a fairly commonly used abbreviation for Microsoft in technical conversation now. Shortening "Yahoo" to "YHOO" saves a letter. "Google" to "GOOG" saves you two letters at the expense of goofiness. Changing "Microsoft" to "MSFT" drops over half the letters, is widely understood, and goes well with the trend of abbreviating that company's name and products. For example, almost no one writes "Microsoft Internet Explorer" instead of "MSIE", but everyone spells out "Firefox" and "Safari".
This isn't a conspiracy or sign of a hidden agenda. It's just an abbreviation - and a widely used, clear one at that.
âoeWe continue to believe that our proposed acquisition made sense for Microsoft, Yahoo! and the market as a whole. Our goal in pursuing a combination with Yahoo! was to provide greater choice and innovation in the marketplace and create real value for our respective stockholders and employees,â said Steve Ballmer, chief executive officer of Microsoft.
Microsoft is very interested in providing choice to customers, even if it requires buying out the competition.
I am disappointed that Yahoo! has not moved towards accepting our offer. I first called you with our offer on January 31 because I believed that a combination of our two companies would have created real value for our respective shareholders and would have provided consumers, publishers, and advertisers with greater innovation and choice in the marketplace.
Can't you see how sincere he is? It's all about choice! That's why Yahoo! was supposed to sell to Microsoft. Choice!
But wait - what if Yahoo! were to ally with, well, other search providers?
In addition, it would raise a host of regulatory and legal problems that no acquirer, including Microsoft, would want to inherit. Among other things, this would consolidate market share with the already-dominant paid search provider in a manner that would reduce competition and choice in the marketplace.
That would be bad. See, Microsoft buying Yahoo! means giving people more choices. Yahoo! doing business with Google means reducing choice.
That's why it is crucially important that Yahoo! picks the right megacorp to associate with. Think happy puppies. Think Microsoft.
blaming the language for the failure of the interpreter is tantamount to blaming C for the difference between the output of intel compilers vs. gcc.
You're inadvertently correct. C is to blame for the difficulties in compiling it. For example, constructs like "union" are really slick for certain operations, but cause havoc when the compiler is trying to figure out if it can use certain optimizations. Similarly, the existence of pointers means that you can't ever guarantee that a constant is really a constant. I don't know much about Ruby, but it's certainly possible for a language's design to make it difficult to implement efficiently.
Great! FreeBSD is grown a lot lately, the default installation is over 800 MB.
Dang! At current prices, that'll cost me nearly 14 cents. That's just unacceptable.
Sarcasm aside, I think FreeBSD long ago gave up any pretense of being a minimal OS. There's nothing at all wrong with that goal, but FreeBSD's target hardware is larger servers.
When people like this get to air their views, this whole free speech and the internet thing have gone too far.
Suck it up. Freedom is nearly a religion to me, and one of my highest values is that random jackasses get to say things I disagree with. How about this next time someone riles you: don't listen to them. They have as much right to be as vocally wrong as you do.
IBM was a convenient example of a big company that wouldn't care about a random guy pitching a fit. Substitute "HP" or "Microsoft" or "Apple" if those make more sense to you.
This doesn't make sense. There's a clear reason why nobody stepped up before: Hans Reiser. The guy was clearly a bit of a nutbag, however competent he may be at designing filesystems, and I surely wouldn't have wanted to wage a very public and protracted battle with him over his pet project.
But you're not, say, IBM. If they thought that ReiserFS was worthwhile, I don't think they'd hesitate for a second to fork off their own version, and doubt they could care less what Hans might have said about it.
What I mean is that there there's no reason that ReiserFS is suddenly more open now than it was yesterday. If someone wanted to develop it last week, they could have as easily as they can today. Yeah, Hans might've pitched a hissy, but that doesn't seem to carry a lot of weight in FOSS circles. See also: Xorg forking from XFree86, or even Theo forking from NetBSD. Both of those had their ugly moments but they moved ahead anyway.
Given that the code is Free, having it under the control of someone who is not a complete sociopath can't help but the increase uptake of the novel parts of the ReiserFS structure.
Given that the code is Free, it's always been under the control of anyone who wanted it. Since no one had stepped up to the plate before now, I'm betting against anyone doing so in the future.
At this point, I doubt I'll ever buy another photo printer. For routine, share-then-throw-away stuff, I have a color laser that is far cheaper than any of the inkjets I've ever seen. For pictures I want to frame and keep, I can upload the images to Wal-Mart's website and pick them up at the store an hour later. Advantages:
Price. I ran the numbers, and my personal inkjet costs more in supplies alone than Wal-Mart's options, and that's assuming that my home-printed 8x10 comes out perfectly the first time and doesn't smear. Remember, if you pay a photo shop, you're only charged for the prints that actually turn out. You don't get refund on ink you waste at home.
Speed. It's actually quicker for me to upload photos and go fetch them than it is to babysit my inkjet.
Quality. I've had 8x10s printed from 7MP source images, and the results were astounding - as in you could make out individual blades of grass, and use a magnifying glass to see what time the picture was taken by looking at the hands of a watch in the photo. I never managed to get results half that good at home. Also, it uses the same processing as regular photos, so your pictures come back on actual photo paper.
Distance. I can have pictures developed at a different store than the one near my house. My mom seems to be allergic to computers and refuses to get one, and she also lives a half-day drive away from me. I've sent pictures to her local store so she can get them an hour after I've taken them.
I don't want to sound like a Wal-Mart shill. There are lots of online options to pick from, and that's just the one that happens to be most convenient for me. Now, I can understand why people wouldn't want to have certain photos developed, particularly those of a particularly personal nature, but I'd much rather farm my printing out than mess with it myself anymore.
If (and only if) Psystar preinstalls the OS for the customer (as previous articles have claimed they plan to do), then it would be copyright infringement.
How? If they've paid for each and every copy they distribute, then there's no infringement.
Slashdot Mirror
Many words OK.
Funny you should use that example. About a year ago, the video on my second-hand eMac starting flaking out, and a little bit of Googling turned up bad capacitors as the most likely cause. However, Apple recognized that as a problem with the model and extended warranty coverage for that one specific video card to three years. I dropped mine off at an Apple store literally two days before the extended warranty was set to expire, and they made good on the repairs.
I still much prefer Linux to OS X, but after that episode I feel completely comfortable recommending Apple hardware. When they do get a bad batch of parts, they stand behind fixing it.
...and is also attracted to Zelnick, or at least thinks that he's handsome. I think that explains the fixation.
Isn't that almost exactly how rsync works?
So was reality. What you make of it is up to you.
And some weird notions of how everyone else thinks. Like:
Because Ted Bundy likes Christmas? Because The Red Green show is hosted by treacherous Canadians? Because "blue" is God's color so red and green belong to the devil? Really, Jack. What "obvious" point am I too dumb to see?
Could you possibly make that praise any fainter? FreeBSD is still the preferred choice of many server admins for a lot of reasons, including the fact that the newly-released 7-STABLE series is ludicrously fast. For example, when researching PostgreSQL performance tuning, a fairly common recommendation is to run it on FreeBSD.
It's not exactly the limping dinosaur some people around here seem to imagine.
"MSFT" is a fairly commonly used abbreviation for Microsoft in technical conversation now. Shortening "Yahoo" to "YHOO" saves a letter. "Google" to "GOOG" saves you two letters at the expense of goofiness. Changing "Microsoft" to "MSFT" drops over half the letters, is widely understood, and goes well with the trend of abbreviating that company's name and products. For example, almost no one writes "Microsoft Internet Explorer" instead of "MSIE", but everyone spells out "Firefox" and "Safari".
This isn't a conspiracy or sign of a hidden agenda. It's just an abbreviation - and a widely used, clear one at that.
Microsoft is very interested in providing choice to customers, even if it requires buying out the competition.
Can't you see how sincere he is? It's all about choice! That's why Yahoo! was supposed to sell to Microsoft. Choice!
But wait - what if Yahoo! were to ally with, well, other search providers?
That would be bad. See, Microsoft buying Yahoo! means giving people more choices. Yahoo! doing business with Google means reducing choice.
That's why it is crucially important that Yahoo! picks the right megacorp to associate with. Think happy puppies. Think Microsoft.
I am suing you for cleaning the sprayed coffee out of my keyboard. You have been served.
Ray, you are now officially one of us - for better or for worse.
You're inadvertently correct. C is to blame for the difficulties in compiling it. For example, constructs like "union" are really slick for certain operations, but cause havoc when the compiler is trying to figure out if it can use certain optimizations. Similarly, the existence of pointers means that you can't ever guarantee that a constant is really a constant. I don't know much about Ruby, but it's certainly possible for a language's design to make it difficult to implement efficiently.
Snort.
Dang! At current prices, that'll cost me nearly 14 cents. That's just unacceptable.
Sarcasm aside, I think FreeBSD long ago gave up any pretense of being a minimal OS. There's nothing at all wrong with that goal, but FreeBSD's target hardware is larger servers.
Umm, yes. That's why the KDE project announced all over the place that 4.0 was a developers' release and not meant for end users.
That may be the lamest backpedal I've read in a while.
Suck it up. Freedom is nearly a religion to me, and one of my highest values is that random jackasses get to say things I disagree with. How about this next time someone riles you: don't listen to them. They have as much right to be as vocally wrong as you do.
Umm, he's behind glass. I'd say it to Charles Manson, for all he could do about it.
IBM was a convenient example of a big company that wouldn't care about a random guy pitching a fit. Substitute "HP" or "Microsoft" or "Apple" if those make more sense to you.
Is there anything worthwhile left that hasn't been folded into other projects, being GPL and all?
But you're not, say, IBM. If they thought that ReiserFS was worthwhile, I don't think they'd hesitate for a second to fork off their own version, and doubt they could care less what Hans might have said about it.
What I mean is that there there's no reason that ReiserFS is suddenly more open now than it was yesterday. If someone wanted to develop it last week, they could have as easily as they can today. Yeah, Hans might've pitched a hissy, but that doesn't seem to carry a lot of weight in FOSS circles. See also: Xorg forking from XFree86, or even Theo forking from NetBSD. Both of those had their ugly moments but they moved ahead anyway.
Given that the code is Free, it's always been under the control of anyone who wanted it. Since no one had stepped up to the plate before now, I'm betting against anyone doing so in the future.
At this point, I doubt I'll ever buy another photo printer. For routine, share-then-throw-away stuff, I have a color laser that is far cheaper than any of the inkjets I've ever seen. For pictures I want to frame and keep, I can upload the images to Wal-Mart's website and pick them up at the store an hour later. Advantages:
I don't want to sound like a Wal-Mart shill. There are lots of online options to pick from, and that's just the one that happens to be most convenient for me. Now, I can understand why people wouldn't want to have certain photos developed, particularly those of a particularly personal nature, but I'd much rather farm my printing out than mess with it myself anymore.
How? If they've paid for each and every copy they distribute, then there's no infringement.
You don't RC. It requires an "Apple-labeled" computer.
(Don't tell anyone, but Emacs's python.el has keybinding to move to the beginning or end of the current block.)