In other words, If you (or someone nearby) has ALREADY purchased an X-Box to play games on, it would be interesting to stop playing games, right? At this time it's hard to count good Linux games. As for *Wine*, it's not stable enough to be used in real life.
By repurpose I meant use for a different purpose, yes - use the X-Box for something other than playing games.
So, paying M$ for Xbox I will help to destroy the evil? Tell me you're kidding. Personally I would rather donate money to some Linux fund or FSF or even better - buy something from ThinkGeek:)
It wasn't my idea, and as I said, I don't recommend it. Speaking of ThinkGeek, it has come to my attention that I need a tie, and their "ties suck" tie would do nicely...
So, the conclusion is that Linux on Xbox at this stage is unreasonable, it's just a research project.
Can someone explain to me, why would I buy Xbox and install Linux on it?
If you (or someone nearby) has ALREADY purchased an X-Box to play games on, it would be interesting to repurpose that existing hardware.
It has also been suggested that Microsoft loses money on every X-Box sale, and attempts to make it up in game sales, so by buying an X-Box and no games, you're costing them money, which is good because they're evil. Personally I wouldn't recommend buying one for this reason alone, but that's me.
you'd think they had already created every type of bug. Well, in colaboration with EA they've just developed a new type of bug: THE USEFUL BUG. Now where are all those bashers that say that Microsoft never invented anything new?
Sorry, EA is responsible for this one; you can't claim Microsoft invented it. Microsoft still hasn't invented anything new.
That can't be right. I've never seen gzip do better than bzip2, or bzip2 make a large file larger. And of course, as someone else mentioned, tar is NOT a compression format, and the result will ALWAYS be slightly larger than the original, not smaller.
The real answer to your question, though, is: #1) web browsers know how to decode gzip, not rar, so gzip is useful for a web server sending web pages while rar is useless for that purpose, and #2) somebody mentioned that gzip is designed to work with a stream of data, while bzip2 requires analyzing a whole block at once, so bzip2 can't be used on a stream of continuous data, while gzip can. I don't know if the same applies to rar or not, but if so, then rar wouldn't work for some applications where gzip would.
If the problem is with an MS dll and MS patches it, don't expect mod_gzip to work around it when your clients are the ones with the malfunctioning software.
It's still necessary to work around the malfunctioning software, since many of those users won't update for a long time.
If I'm not mistaken, the HP LaserJets are inkjet printers, not laser printers. Does it take ink or toner? If a print head moves back and forth while it's printing, it's not a laser printer.
A laser printer works like a copy machine, charging areas of the paper to make toner stick to it, then basically ironing it down. In a copy machine, it uses the image of the original document. In a laser printer, a laser beam reflected off a rotating mirror produces the image instead. There is no print head moving back and forth.
Of course, modern copy machines are often a combination of scanner and laser printer, which lets them do neat tricks like printing multi-page documents without re-scanning each original page a bazillion times.
I'm sure I've gotten lots of details completely wrong, and equally sure I'll be corrected.:-)
I used to work for Netscape and I know what I am talking about. Mozilla was designed as a modular app. That's what XPCOM in there is for.
Except that currently it is not possible to install Mozilla without including the web browser component. This is theoretically supposed to be possible, so inability to do so is considered a bug, but not a high priority one. Hopefully Minotaur will contribute their fixes back to the Mozilla tree, and will result in the main Mozilla project offering the same capability as Minotaur.
Yeah, so this fork is ego-driven. Sometimes that's a good thing. Having a small number of ego-driven people in charge of a project, instead of a messy bureaucracy, can make things run more smoothly, at least for awhile. Once they've got the bulk of the work done, their changes can be back-ported, either by them or by others.
Sure you do. You just achieve that additional button by holding down some combination of modifier keys while you press the mouse button.
I stand by what I said. The control-click combination for contextual menus was introduced less than five years ago; before then it didn't exist. Apple's Human Interface Guidelines say that control-clicking (or right-clicking) should NEVER be required - there should ALWAYS be another way to perform that function. Apple has been paying less attention to the HIG in Mac OS X (in addition to rewriting the HIG to accomodate Steve Jobs' misguided whims), but in general this is still true.
Name three things that can only be done with a right-click or control-click in Mac OS X, not counting using X11 applications or VirtualPC etc.
My eMac decided to lose its hard drive for no particular reason. Held down the Option key on boot, and nothing showed up. Zapped the PRAM. Booted from an OS X CD, ran Disk Utility, found a minor issue, repaired it. Still couldn't boot.
Booted from an OS 9 CD, opened the Startup Disk control panel, selected the System folder, rebooted, and everything is magically back to normal.
Macs are usually painless and simple, but they do have their quirks. Mac OS 9 is built around these quirks. Mac OS X is not.
But if you watch LOTR, a lot of Gollum's expression is in the movement. Compare this to Darth Vader, who generally just stood around.
Also, the actor who generally just stood around had no idea that his voice was going to be dubbed, and as I recall was rather upset when he saw the final version of the film and discovered that his own voice had been replaced by that of James Earl Jones.
That seemed like a very strange answer to me too, but he did say that he read all the books. He particularly based the movements of his character on Tolkein's descriptions.
Anything that is statically linked to LGPL code has to have a compatible distribution license. Idiots like you aren't allowed to stop the distribution of binaries generated from LGPL code. The same applies to any dynamically linked binaries that are packaged atomically. Just so it's clear, I mean atomically in the sense of indivisible, not some stupid mutation nonsense such as produced you.
You're either trolling, or you're simply ignorant. The restrictions you describe apply to GPL code, not LGPL. This is precisely why the LGPL exists. From the text of the LGPL:
When a program is linked with a library, whether statically or using a shared library, the combination of the two is legally speaking a combined work, a derivative of the original library. The
ordinary General Public License therefore permits such linking only if the entire combination fits its criteria of freedom. The Lesser General Public License permits more lax criteria for linking other code with the library.
The key here is to see that Microsoft is NOT CLAIMING that their software IS SECURE they are claiming that they
try to design it so that it is secure...
However, what Microsoft actually said was (emphasis mine again):
Microsoft software
is carefully designed to keep your company's valuable information in, and unauthorised people and viruses out.
I guess we're getting kinda OT here, but as far as deceptive advertising goes, aren't Apple's switch ads just as bad?
No, because Apple's ads actually feature real people.
What if you're more productive with a 3-button scroll trackball?
Then you can take your 3-button scroll trackball and plug it into your new Mac.
Is Apple's "different" way really better?
Yes, because the UI is designed so you don't actually NEED more than one button, so for the novices who find multiple buttons confusing, they don't have to worry about doing the wrong thing, and for those of us who prefer three buttons, we've got that option too.
Do they have statistics proving applications on OS X are really more stable than those on Windows XP?
I had a kernel panic on OSX about an hour ago, something that probably happens to me more than to most WinXP users. That said, I really love my apps, having UNIX underneath is great, it's much more stable (and multitasks better) than OS9, and the OS will only improve with time.
I can't see any advantage to having all three buttons on the mouse except to cause repetetive stress injuries faster.
This is something that my mom has commented on. She can click with any of three fingers, whichever isn't painful. With a PC she doesn't have that freedom. (Yes, I know you can change which button is which in the control panel, but that requires a conscious effort and interrupts what you're doing.)
Slashdot Mirror
Are you sure it just isn't really Jar Jar?
Jar Jar speaks Finnish?
In other words, If you (or someone nearby) has ALREADY purchased an X-Box to play games on, it would be interesting to stop playing games, right? At this time it's hard to count good Linux games. As for *Wine*, it's not stable enough to be used in real life.
:)
By repurpose I meant use for a different purpose, yes - use the X-Box for something other than playing games.
So, paying M$ for Xbox I will help to destroy the evil? Tell me you're kidding. Personally I would rather donate money to some Linux fund or FSF or even better - buy something from ThinkGeek
It wasn't my idea, and as I said, I don't recommend it. Speaking of ThinkGeek, it has come to my attention that I need a tie, and their "ties suck" tie would do nicely...
So, the conclusion is that Linux on Xbox at this stage is unreasonable, it's just a research project.
Yes, pretty much. What were you thinking?
As I understand it, Florida's Internet connectivity sucks ass, due mostly to geography and weather.
Can someone explain to me, why would I buy Xbox and install Linux on it?
If you (or someone nearby) has ALREADY purchased an X-Box to play games on, it would be interesting to repurpose that existing hardware.
It has also been suggested that Microsoft loses money on every X-Box sale, and attempts to make it up in game sales, so by buying an X-Box and no games, you're costing them money, which is good because they're evil. Personally I wouldn't recommend buying one for this reason alone, but that's me.
you'd think they had already created every type of bug. Well, in colaboration with EA they've just developed a new type of bug: THE USEFUL BUG. Now where are all those bashers that say that Microsoft never invented anything new?
Sorry, EA is responsible for this one; you can't claim Microsoft invented it. Microsoft still hasn't invented anything new.
That can't be right. I've never seen gzip do better than bzip2, or bzip2 make a large file larger. And of course, as someone else mentioned, tar is NOT a compression format, and the result will ALWAYS be slightly larger than the original, not smaller.
The real answer to your question, though, is: #1) web browsers know how to decode gzip, not rar, so gzip is useful for a web server sending web pages while rar is useless for that purpose, and #2) somebody mentioned that gzip is designed to work with a stream of data, while bzip2 requires analyzing a whole block at once, so bzip2 can't be used on a stream of continuous data, while gzip can. I don't know if the same applies to rar or not, but if so, then rar wouldn't work for some applications where gzip would.
If the problem is with an MS dll and MS patches it, don't expect mod_gzip to work around it when your clients are the ones with the malfunctioning software.
It's still necessary to work around the malfunctioning software, since many of those users won't update for a long time.
If I'm not mistaken, the HP LaserJets are inkjet printers, not laser printers. Does it take ink or toner? If a print head moves back and forth while it's printing, it's not a laser printer.
:-)
A laser printer works like a copy machine, charging areas of the paper to make toner stick to it, then basically ironing it down. In a copy machine, it uses the image of the original document. In a laser printer, a laser beam reflected off a rotating mirror produces the image instead. There is no print head moving back and forth.
Of course, modern copy machines are often a combination of scanner and laser printer, which lets them do neat tricks like printing multi-page documents without re-scanning each original page a bazillion times.
I'm sure I've gotten lots of details completely wrong, and equally sure I'll be corrected.
Let me be the first to point out the irony of someone called Juarez being in charge of an anti-piracy system.
It took me a minute to figure out what the hell you were talking about.
IT'S NOT PRONOUNCED LIKE THAT, YOU RETARDS! NEVER HAS BEEN!
Sorry, I'll shut up now.
Hmm, I do wonder if a mail client will someday be added to Phoenix or Camino.
I used to work for Netscape and I know what I am talking about. Mozilla was designed as a modular app. That's what XPCOM in there is for.
Except that currently it is not possible to install Mozilla without including the web browser component. This is theoretically supposed to be possible, so inability to do so is considered a bug, but not a high priority one. Hopefully Minotaur will contribute their fixes back to the Mozilla tree, and will result in the main Mozilla project offering the same capability as Minotaur.
Yeah, so this fork is ego-driven. Sometimes that's a good thing. Having a small number of ego-driven people in charge of a project, instead of a messy bureaucracy, can make things run more smoothly, at least for awhile. Once they've got the bulk of the work done, their changes can be back-ported, either by them or by others.
I want to be able to put my mail on a shared FAT32 drive, and have access to my email seamlessly whether I boot up in Windows or Linux
Related Mozilla bugs include 58647 and 66259. Get a Bugzilla account and vote for these bugs, or contribute if you can.
Sure you do. You just achieve that additional button by holding down some combination of modifier keys while you press the mouse button.
I stand by what I said. The control-click combination for contextual menus was introduced less than five years ago; before then it didn't exist. Apple's Human Interface Guidelines say that control-clicking (or right-clicking) should NEVER be required - there should ALWAYS be another way to perform that function. Apple has been paying less attention to the HIG in Mac OS X (in addition to rewriting the HIG to accomodate Steve Jobs' misguided whims), but in general this is still true.
Name three things that can only be done with a right-click or control-click in Mac OS X, not counting using X11 applications or VirtualPC etc.
My eMac decided to lose its hard drive for no particular reason. Held down the Option key on boot, and nothing showed up. Zapped the PRAM. Booted from an OS X CD, ran Disk Utility, found a minor issue, repaired it. Still couldn't boot.
Booted from an OS 9 CD, opened the Startup Disk control panel, selected the System folder, rebooted, and everything is magically back to normal.
Macs are usually painless and simple, but they do have their quirks. Mac OS 9 is built around these quirks. Mac OS X is not.
So, if I don't like someone, all I have to do is make up a few ads with his number on and stick them up places, and the state will spam him for me?
Yes, or you could post their e-mail address on Slashdot and let the spiders pick it up. They're guaranteed to start getting spam within a few weeks.
Yes. And he's bumbling like an idiot. Perhaps you should highlight the "it's not weird" and "it's quite weird really" parts.
Glad I wasn't the only one who noticed this.
But if you watch LOTR, a lot of Gollum's expression is in the movement. Compare this to Darth Vader, who generally just stood around.
Also, the actor who generally just stood around had no idea that his voice was going to be dubbed, and as I recall was rather upset when he saw the final version of the film and discovered that his own voice had been replaced by that of James Earl Jones.
Remember, we're also reading a transcript of his spoken answers to the questions.
Um, we are? I listened to the RealAudio version of the interview. And yeah, it sounded like he changed his mind in mid-answer.
That seemed like a very strange answer to me too, but he did say that he read all the books. He particularly based the movements of his character on Tolkein's descriptions.
I make that more like 19.5 (9 hours for the theatrical release, then 10.5 for the extended edition....)
That's just for the films. Don't forget the special features on the DVDs!
You're either trolling, or you're simply ignorant. The restrictions you describe apply to GPL code, not LGPL. This is precisely why the LGPL exists. From the text of the LGPL:
Certainly the advertisment is disengenuius, but I can't believe the adverage person would be decieved by it.
I think you overestimate average people.
However, what Microsoft actually said was (emphasis mine again):
Notice the difference?
I guess we're getting kinda OT here, but as far as deceptive advertising goes, aren't Apple's switch ads just as bad?
No, because Apple's ads actually feature real people.
What if you're more productive with a 3-button scroll trackball?
Then you can take your 3-button scroll trackball and plug it into your new Mac.
Is Apple's "different" way really better?
Yes, because the UI is designed so you don't actually NEED more than one button, so for the novices who find multiple buttons confusing, they don't have to worry about doing the wrong thing, and for those of us who prefer three buttons, we've got that option too.
Do they have statistics proving applications on OS X are really more stable than those on Windows XP?
I had a kernel panic on OSX about an hour ago, something that probably happens to me more than to most WinXP users. That said, I really love my apps, having UNIX underneath is great, it's much more stable (and multitasks better) than OS9, and the OS will only improve with time.
I can't see any advantage to having all three buttons on the mouse except to cause repetetive stress injuries faster.
This is something that my mom has commented on. She can click with any of three fingers, whichever isn't painful. With a PC she doesn't have that freedom. (Yes, I know you can change which button is which in the control panel, but that requires a conscious effort and interrupts what you're doing.)