Hey, I agree, they're bastards, but they know what the future is, unlike Bill, who makes bad copies of things. I'm glad they didn't make Woz look like a dick, because he's like the only non-dick in the whole big picture...
Yeah, in hindsight, that was a booboo, unless they had some other (semi-functional?) OS that worked like that... CP/M maybe? I dunno I'm not that old....
Well sure they're dicks, but seriously though, they made Jobs look like a total asshole and Gates just a sniveling weasel (which of course he is). But I think they were a little hard on old Stevey, I think he actually does have a knack (sp?) for seeing the future. Take a look at NeXTStep, it was way ahead of its time, just as most of his ideas, not neccesarily bad, just ahead of their times. But you have to keep in mind, Bill and Steve might have written code and messed with circuit boards back in the '70s, but they are really just marketing geniuses, the real geniuses are portrayed correctly in the movie by showing the folks who did the real innovative work, i.e. Xerox, Woz and the poor sap who wrote DOS. All this aside, I still think Steve Jobs in nowhere near Gates on the DickHead-O-Meter.
Since you're not allowed to have a dish, get one but hide it. Like, set up a bunch of stones in a circle so that it looks like a well and put the dish in there. That way, no one will see it unless they look down in it. Keep in mind that you can paint the dishes too, without any loss of reception. I know it seems stupid, but if you want high bandwidth, a mans gotta do what a mans gotta do....
I think you're talking about LOCAL network stations, I'm in the middle of San Antonio, I can get them fine, yet I still ordered FOX and NBC out of New York so I can switch between Conan O'Brien and "When Microsoft Attacks" without having to mess with rabbit ears. My FOX and NBC come out of New York, so I get their local stuff. I think you are talking about getting the ones from around your locale broadcast onto sattelite, and I think you can only get that with certain circumstances. And don't tell me that I can't get FOX on my dish, cause I watched the frikkin playoff game on it last night. So there, nya nya nyanya nya.
Yes, you can get networks, I get FOX and NBC out of New York on my DishNetwork service. You do pay a little extra (like a buck a month), but it's worth it, especially 'cause FOX has those nifty "Worlds gorriest crocodile attacks" type shows. When I got those two networks, the lady I spoke to said those and CBS were the only ones available for the time being due to some court rulings, but she said she heard a rumor all the other networks will be available soon. Oh yeah, you get WGN out of Chicago (which is a WB network), in case you want to watch yet another Wayans brother with his own show....
You are right and you are wrong, I finally got my LSL RH 6 CD's and yes there are TWO of them, but no, the source isn't included. Is that a violation of the GPL? I dunno, considering the source is available all over the internet, but hey, as an end user, what do I care about the source? If I wan't to see or alter the source of any program, I'll get the freaking source elsewhere, it's not that hard to find...
> It may well be that their IE for Unix codebase > (hopefully they didn't do two individual ports)
Unfortunately, they did, there's two different files to download for the two different unices.
> I have yet to see that on Microsoft browsers. > Try some of the CSS conformance tests in IE > sometime.
Actually, you have a good point, but what I mean is that Navigator 4.5 for Linux doesn't seem to support any CSS at all, except for maybe the color attribute, whereas for Win95, Navigator supports maybe a third of whats available, and IE supports like 60%. I'm guessing as the browser wars progress, IE will continue to have better CSS support, that why I welcome it to Linux.
And you're right about them not using good engineering principles, thats definately the truth when it comes to most of their products, but you gotta admit, they do have some applications that are quality products. But thats probably due to the fact that they might have used their hostile takeover tactics on some good programming shops...
Wow, thanks, maybe now I can stop using Navigator. What I would do before was this: Surf the web in Navigator until it craps out, (for some reason if you kill it and restart it, it still won't work until you reboot). Then I'd use IE until it craps out, then I'd reboot. Maybe now I wont have to reboot as much... Oh yeah, this is windows we're talking about...
Thats funny, because I was told elsewhere that as GNOME becomes more and more complete, it will be more stable but still use the same amount of resources. And I wouldn't know where to even begin... why would a stupid little panel app take up 33% of my 127MB swap space, not to mention most of my 32MB of memory? All the other GNOME apps aren't such hogs, and KDE's panel doesn't even come close... Not to mention my Wharf in AfterStep, while being huge, takes up even less resources that both...
Would it be that hard for them to port it to Linux if they already have IE 4.01 and IE 5.0 for Solaris and HP-UX? (They do have it available for download.) I mean, would there be a lot of code to rewrite If they already got the thing working on other POSIX compliant OS's?
Even though I LOVE Linux, I do welcome IE, even though it's from M$, It is the superior browser, that wasn't the case when they were both like 2.0, but the more they progress, the more bugs I see in netscape, and the the more I see IE handle browsing the web better and better. Even though navigator craps out for me a lot (I'm talking about the Win95 versions here), I tend to use it more, because If IE crashes, it pretty much screwed up the whole Windoze environment, seeing as how they make it part of the "operating system".
The biggest reason I welcome IE to Linux is because I'd like to see a Linux browser that properly handles Cascading Style Sheets. I have yet to see that on Linux browsers.
Now, I'm not posting this to start a flame war about which Desktop Environment/Window Manager is better, but I do have something to say about GNOME.
Ever since I upgraded to RedHat 6, I decided I'd install GNOME, thinking it would be further along than it was when it was relesed with RH 5.2. Boy was that a mistake, GNOME hogs resources as much as Windows 95 does and it crashes even more often than that. Now, I know GNOME is actually a set of tools and blah blah blah, but I'm talking about the whole Panel interface, It craps out on me on a regular basis, both on my box at home and on my box a work. I've tried to compare how it adds up to KDE on both my machines. On my computer at work (Pentium 233, 32MB RAM, 127MB Swap), it crawls along at the pace that Win95 does on my the other box in my cubicle (A Pentium 100 for crying out loud! Also with 32MB RAM mind you). And more than that, GNOME uses 33% of my 127MB swap file! Don't get me wrong, I think GNOME is hella-slick, and I use it on my computer at home, since its a PII 450, with 128MB RAM and I got 127MB Swap, there's plenty of resources to spare. Now KDE runs A LOT smoother on my 233 at work, almost no slowdown, if any. For some reason though, I don't particularly care for KDE, and GNOME is just such crap, that I revert to using my dearly loved AfterStep. I do use the GNOME programs in AfterStep, and it works just fine.
But my comment is this: I thought the whole reason things were OpenSource was so that we could get away from badly written programs that hog lots of resources (Win 95, for example), and that's exactly what GNOME is. Why are RedHat software and so many others pumping all this manpower and time and money into such a huge pile of crap?
It just sucks so much, cause if GNOME worked properly, and ran smoothly, without hogging resources it would be the most awesome thing.
Sorry if I'm bringing up a subject that's been discussed before, but I haven't really read to much about this particular subject, I'm just talking from my experience. A good tip for someone who doesn't like KDE and doesn't have 128MB RAM would be just to use your favorite GNUstep window manager using the various programs that come with KDE and GNOME, that seems to work best with me..
When you order it from LSL, it specifically mentions that you are getting 2 CD's. I'm pretty sure the second CD is full of SRPMs. So therefore, the source IS included.
Slashdot Mirror
With a budget of only $20 Million (relatively low these days for a hollywood flick), I think SP is gonna totally make some mad cash.
Dude, you must be a hella-slow typer, your "first post" is like #19. Haha.
It's good to see slashdot get supported like that. Congrats to u guys.
It's all a communist plot to overthrow the world.
I totally agree with you dude, as much as I hate Bill Gates, it's not cause he's rich, its the way he got rich.
Fuckin commie bastard.
Hey, I agree, they're bastards, but they know what the future is, unlike Bill, who makes bad copies of things. I'm glad they didn't make Woz look like a dick, because he's like the only non-dick in the whole big picture...
Yeah, in hindsight, that was a booboo, unless they had some other (semi-functional?) OS that worked like that... CP/M maybe? I dunno I'm not that old....
Hehe
Well sure they're dicks, but seriously though, they made Jobs look like a total asshole and Gates just a sniveling weasel (which of course he is). But I think they were a little hard on old Stevey, I think he actually does have a knack (sp?) for seeing the future. Take a look at NeXTStep, it was way ahead of its time, just as most of his ideas, not neccesarily bad, just ahead of their times. But you have to keep in mind, Bill and Steve might have written code and messed with circuit boards back in the '70s, but they are really just marketing geniuses, the real geniuses are portrayed correctly in the movie by showing the folks who did the real innovative work, i.e. Xerox, Woz and the poor sap who wrote DOS. All this aside, I still think Steve Jobs in nowhere near Gates on the DickHead-O-Meter.
Hey, I know...
Since you're not allowed to have a dish, get one but hide it. Like, set up a bunch of stones in a circle so that it looks like a well and put the dish in there. That way, no one will see it unless they look down in it. Keep in mind that you can paint the dishes too, without any loss of reception. I know it seems stupid, but if you want high bandwidth, a mans gotta do what a mans gotta do....
I think you're talking about LOCAL network stations, I'm in the middle of San Antonio, I can get them fine, yet I still ordered FOX and NBC out of New York so I can switch between Conan O'Brien and "When Microsoft Attacks" without having to mess with rabbit ears. My FOX and NBC come out of New York, so I get their local stuff. I think you are talking about getting the ones from around your locale broadcast onto sattelite, and I think you can only get that with certain circumstances. And don't tell me that I can't get FOX on my dish, cause I watched the frikkin playoff game on it last night. So there, nya nya nyanya nya.
Yes, you can get networks, I get FOX and NBC out of New York on my DishNetwork service. You do pay a little extra (like a buck a month), but it's worth it, especially 'cause FOX has those nifty "Worlds gorriest crocodile attacks" type shows. When I got those two networks, the lady I spoke to said those and CBS were the only ones available for the time being due to some court rulings, but she said she heard a rumor all the other networks will be available soon. Oh yeah, you get WGN out of Chicago (which is a WB network), in case you want to watch yet another Wayans brother with his own show....
You are right and you are wrong, I finally got my LSL RH 6 CD's and yes there are TWO of them, but no, the source isn't included. Is that a violation of the GPL? I dunno, considering the source is available all over the internet, but hey, as an end user, what do I care about the source? If I wan't to see or alter the source of any program, I'll get the freaking source elsewhere, it's not that hard to find...
> It may well be that their IE for Unix codebase
> (hopefully they didn't do two individual ports)
Unfortunately, they did, there's two different files to download for the two different unices.
> I have yet to see that on Microsoft browsers.
> Try some of the CSS conformance tests in IE
> sometime.
Actually, you have a good point, but what I mean is that Navigator 4.5 for Linux doesn't seem to support any CSS at all, except for maybe the color attribute, whereas for Win95, Navigator supports maybe a third of whats available, and IE supports like 60%. I'm guessing as the browser wars progress, IE will continue to have better CSS support, that why I welcome it to Linux.
And you're right about them not using good engineering principles, thats definately the truth when it comes to most of their products, but you gotta admit, they do have some applications that are quality products. But thats probably due to the fact that they might have used their hostile takeover tactics on some good programming shops...
Wow, thanks, maybe now I can stop using Navigator. What I would do before was this: Surf the web in Navigator until it craps out, (for some reason if you kill it and restart it, it still won't work until you reboot). Then I'd use IE until it craps out, then I'd reboot. Maybe now I wont have to reboot as much... Oh yeah, this is windows we're talking about...
Appreciate the tip man!
Thats funny, because I was told elsewhere that as GNOME becomes more and more complete, it will be more stable but still use the same amount of resources. And I wouldn't know where to even begin... why would a stupid little panel app take up 33% of my 127MB swap space, not to mention most of my 32MB of memory? All the other GNOME apps aren't such hogs, and KDE's panel doesn't even come close... Not to mention my Wharf in AfterStep, while being huge, takes up even less resources that both...
Would it be that hard for them to port it to Linux if they already have IE 4.01 and IE 5.0 for Solaris and HP-UX? (They do have it available for download.) I mean, would there be a lot of code to rewrite If they already got the thing working on other POSIX compliant OS's?
Even though I LOVE Linux, I do welcome IE, even though it's from M$, It is the superior browser, that wasn't the case when they were both like 2.0, but the more they progress, the more bugs I see in netscape, and the the more I see IE handle browsing the web better and better. Even though navigator craps out for me a lot (I'm talking about the Win95 versions here), I tend to use it more, because If IE crashes, it pretty much screwed up the whole Windoze environment, seeing as how they make it part of the "operating system".
The biggest reason I welcome IE to Linux is because I'd like to see a Linux browser that properly handles Cascading Style Sheets. I have yet to see that on Linux browsers.
Now, I'm not posting this to start a flame war about which Desktop Environment/Window Manager is better, but I do have something to say about GNOME.
Ever since I upgraded to RedHat 6, I decided I'd install GNOME, thinking it would be further along than it was when it was relesed with RH 5.2. Boy was that a mistake, GNOME hogs resources as much as Windows 95 does and it crashes even more often than that. Now, I know GNOME is actually a set of tools and blah blah blah, but I'm talking about the whole Panel interface, It craps out on me on a regular basis, both on my box at home and on my box a work. I've tried to compare how it adds up to KDE on both my machines. On my computer at work (Pentium 233, 32MB RAM, 127MB Swap), it crawls along at the pace that Win95 does on my the other box in my cubicle (A Pentium 100 for crying out loud! Also with 32MB RAM mind you). And more than that, GNOME uses 33% of my 127MB swap file! Don't get me wrong, I think GNOME is hella-slick, and I use it on my computer at home, since its a PII 450, with 128MB RAM and I got 127MB Swap, there's plenty of resources to spare. Now KDE runs A LOT smoother on my 233 at work, almost no slowdown, if any. For some reason though, I don't particularly care for KDE, and GNOME is just such crap, that I revert to using my dearly loved AfterStep. I do use the GNOME programs in AfterStep, and it works just fine.
But my comment is this: I thought the whole reason things were OpenSource was so that we could get away from badly written programs that hog lots of resources (Win 95, for example), and that's exactly what GNOME is. Why are RedHat software and so many others pumping all this manpower and time and money into such a huge pile of crap?
It just sucks so much, cause if GNOME worked properly, and ran smoothly, without hogging resources it would be the most awesome thing.
Sorry if I'm bringing up a subject that's been discussed before, but I haven't really read to much about this particular subject, I'm just talking from my experience. A good tip for someone who doesn't like KDE and doesn't have 128MB RAM would be just to use your favorite GNUstep window manager using the various programs that come with KDE and GNOME, that seems to work best with me..
When you order it from LSL, it specifically mentions that you are getting 2 CD's. I'm pretty sure the second CD is full of SRPMs. So therefore, the source IS included.