Only slackware would do a stable release when kernel 2.4 is right on the horizon:)....
You don't think this means they're done, do you? Personally I'm not terribly interested in running kernel 2.0.0; I'd much rather wait for, say, 2.0.4 or thereabouts.
Dude, who cares? An older distro is better than a newer distro when it comes to old hardware (except for known security holes).
This is true; Slackware 4.0 might not be a bad choice. That's what I'm running on my 486 right now, although I may change (I haven't really decided yet). For even older systems, Slackware 3.6 might not be bad (2.0.x kernel).
If I were you, I'd just install an old copy of slackware 4.0 and update with some of the newer packages form Slackware 7.1
Dude, are you trying to make him hate life? Not cool. Or are you just not a Slackware user?
I think QuickTime in Mac OS X runs under Cocoa, not Carbon. I could be mistaken. If it was in Carbon, they'd have gotten all of it working by now. The Cocoa port is taking longer.
In any case, it does use Quartz, which is not coming to Linux any time soon.
That's one of the things the Final Judgement in the antitrust case strictly prohibits - if the Supreme Court would just get around to upholding the ruling.;-)
I'm not proposing that Win3.1 should have been released for free in 1995. I'm suggesting that it should be released for free in 2000. And yes, MS-DOS too. It's been five years since they stopped selling them. If, in five years, you can't come up with a new product that's sufficiently better than the old version that people actually want to buy the new one, then perhaps you need to move over and make room for other companies.
As others have pointed out, Gates' push for software copyright protection may not have caused anything significant. But also, just because short-term (less than five years or so, considering the pace of software development) copyright is good doesn't mean long-term copyright on software isn't really bad.
Imagine if Windows 3.1 went into the public domain. Microsoft isn't making any money on it any more anyway, so why not? Who loses from this? Even if the source code isn't opened, why not at least release the binaries for free?
I'm quite pleased that Apple has released their old system software for free, and id Software has released the source code to some of their old games under the GPL. Some companies are doing this voluntarily, but perhaps it would benefit the industry if there were more of an incentive for other companies to make their old stuff available for free?
Use this knowledge of genetics to clone an army of Storm Troopers to attack Naboo, Tatooine and Alderon. Announce that you're trying to stop the Trade Federation in the Senate, but everything is so bogged down by beurocracy that nothing can get done. Call for the Senate to be disbanded, then get appointed Emperor. Kill Shmi and make it look like Obi-Wan was responsible. Turn Anakin to the Dark Side.
Oh, you meant here on Earth, in the present. Oops.
Now the question becomes, "Who is going to want to forego protection against the known in order to protect the race against the unknown?" Imagine if computers were able to choose their own OS.. would any choose to be [insert your least favorite OS] as opposed to [insert your favorite OS], just for the good of the network, at significant personal risk?
Fortunately, my least favorite OS happens to be the most common one, so I don't have to face that issue.;-)
Well my proxy is configured not to tell any site what browser i'm running (it's usually Mozilla) so what happens if I am using Netscape2 behind it?
My site only uses browser detection to decide which theme you get by default. You can change themes if you aren't getting one that's appropriate for your browser. If it doesn't recognize your browser, you get the Simple theme, which works on anything (including Mozilla and Netscape 2).
Actually, i've been getting sites lately refusing content when they get confused in my proxy. So i'm making my proxy randomly choose several major browsers and get them to cycle my HTTP headers. Huzzah!
If you're deliberately mangling the User-Agent string (in violation of the HTTP specification), it's not my fault. You might want to set your proxy server to send something like Mozilla/4.0 (not really, but that's my business) which should work for any Web sites (unless you use Internet Explorer and the server is checking for MSIE to give you code that renders better in MSIE than in Netscape).
Sure this is a trivial example but there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to do this. Shoddy HTML is the only reason why I can't.
From RFC 2616, section 14.43:
The User-Agent request-header field contains information about the user agent originating the request. This is for statistical purposes, the tracing of protocol violations, and automated recognition of user agents
for the sake of tailoring responses to avoid particular user agent limitations. User agents SHOULD include this field with requests.
If you randomize the User-Agent string at your proxy server, you can expect your results to be strange.
nbsp for indenting paragraphs? eh? what's wrong with.. um... CSS p{text-indent:1em} or some such? I read somewhere that Blynx pauses for NBSP as it's considered more purposeful than a breaking space. Many blind people are angry waiting for you!
When I started doing Web design, I looked forward to the coming release of Netscape 3, which (on Windows) finally supported more than 16 colors of text. I haven't kept up with some of the newer stuff, including CSS. I'm slowly beginning to get off my lazy ass and fix my code. As for blind people, well, I don't have any non-visual browsers to test my code on.
If I use any HTML standard it still works in older browsers. The uses of font are few (well, none) and when most modern day browsers support CSS you can implement fonts without rubbing the open sore that is the font tag.
Older browsers ignore CSS code. If I rely on CSS code for my layout, I don't call that "working".
The first thing is that practically the entire page is in one big table. Browsers can't render the table until it's got all the text as it never drops to HTML root until the very end (by "HTML root" I mean closing all tags and returning to BODY being your direct parent)
This is true, but just because it's CPU-intensive for the browser doesn't necessarily make it bad code.
Slashdot has a black border around the edge of the page. It's not very useful, but vaguely neat-looking. The only other way to get this would be to convince each browser to render the page with no margin, and artificialy create black-background margins with the tables you suggest - except that each browser handles this differently and many of them won't do it at all.
As for Netscape 2, well, it would be nice if there were an easy way to support it, but there isn't, and almost nobody uses it anyway. However...
Your phroggy.com does the same (nearly black bgcolor and text colour). Try it in Netscape 2 (or 1) then please consider removing your "best viewed in any browser" medal:)
The code you saw won't render decently in Netscape 2, but if you actually use Netscape 2 to view the page you'll see that you get a different version that does render properly. If you don't have Netscape 2 handy, go to any page but the main home page, and over on the right in the Themes box click the link to the Simple theme.
Slashdot uses font tags all over the place: fixed sizes, no user preferences unless you want to screw all font definitions, no fallback fonts families, etc... font is evil.
Sorry, but you can't complain about the use of the font tag and complain that Netscape 2 won't render the page. As for me, I've recently started learning how to use CSS and will be moving away from the use of the font tag, but I do try to use it responsibly.
I use NBSP where necessary too, certainly better than the 1x1 transparent GIF.
I use nbsp for indenting paragraphs, but I've started using a 1x1 transparent gif as a placehlder in table cells. I had been using nbsp, but then I had a table cell that was only a few pixels high, and an nbsp wouldn't fit unless I made the font size really small, and if the browser was set for huge fonts it would break anyway.
I have nothing against LinuxPPC (except that I really hate RedHat); I was trying to point out that there are competing distributions (if you can call it competing).
Yes, Mac OS X does use the Mach microkernel, although I think Mac OS X probably does it differently. Ars Technica has more on this.
I never said I wasn't mad at Apple.
The beta version of Mac OS X might be free, or close to free (as in beer), and in six months it'll be bundled with new Macs.
You're obviously not very familiar with Web design. Slashdot's HTML code is actually quite good; it works in nearly any browser and has some pretty nice formatting elements. The utility you're suggesting would probably break some of the pages I've designed (I've occasionally relied on nbsp characters), and some of the quote marks it removes are probably required by the official HTML specification.
I'd like to see what that program would do to my homepage, and whether the resulting code would render (and in which browsers, if it renders at all). Granted, there's some unnecessary whitespace, but really, do a few bytes matter? There's no way I could work on the code if I stripped the whitespace out; I'd have to maintain original copies and run this program again every time I changed something.
Come on, guys, this has really got to stop. This story was just posted on Slashdot less than 24 hours ago. I can understand forgetting after three months or so.
Does the Slashdot staff read the articles posted to Slashdot?
Any and all proceeds that we receive from the transfer of your domain name registration (up to the full registration fee) will be retained by Network Solutions and your domain name will be transferred to the successful bidder.
Can someone tell me exactly what's being implied by "up to the full registration fee" here? Does that mean they won't auction them for more than $35? Or does it mean if they auction it for $10,000, NSI keeps $35 and then NSI keeps $9,965?
I don't remember what PCP or PSP are, let alone the average consumer. Of those, only PCP and PPP rhyme. Finally, how many of those acronyms have anything to do with privacy?
...but apparently they are doing this without really consulting domain holders.
Uhh, that's not how I read it.
Network Solutions' records indicate that you are the Administrative Contact for the domain name listed above, but we have not yet received payment for our services, as your agreement with us requires. We have already sent two notices to the registrant's billing contact and have deactivated, but not deleted, your registration.
Three e-mails to two addresses AFTER you've forgotten to pay the bill sounds like a reasonable attempt to contact the domain holder.
Actually, it says "Platform for Privacy Preferences (P3P) Project", implying that P3P stands for Platform for Privacy Preferences, and this is the P3P Project.
But you may be right that the acronym is actually supposed to include the word "Project", in which case I withdraw my comment.
That's exactly the point. MS makes a relatively small addition to the VB compiler, and boom! Suddenly they have a simple, powerful, cross-platform language, suitable for web applets and similar network-based apps. It would take a big chunk out of the Java market very quickly.
If it were anyone but Microsoft, this would make perfect sense. Microsoft won't do it.
Anyway, I know freedom of speech has taken a lot of hits lately, but I'm pretty sure that Sun doesn't yet have the power to decide who can compile to Java bytecode, any more than Intel has the power to decide who can compile to x86 machine code.
Has it occurred to anyone else that the name P3P was chosen just to confuse consumers who've heard the name PGP floating around before? It's supposed to be an abbreviation for three words that start with P. P3 or 3P would make sense, but P3P is redundant and can only have been chosen because it sounds familiar.
The World Wide Web Consortium is abbreviated W3C, and this makes sense. P3P would make sense if there were another P, but there isn't.
IANAL, but is this grounds for a lawsuit by whoever owns PGP trademark?
In fact, I'll bet that this new "language" will resemble BASIC (or maybe even FoxPro) in syntax more that anything else. Maybe it'll use C++ and JAVA functions, but it'll never be called innovative by anyone familiar with the industry.
Why would it resemble BASIC more closely than C++ or Java? Basing it on C++/Java/JavaScript/Perl would make much more sense to me than basing it on Visual Basic.
umm, Sun won't let them do it unless they're 100% compliant with Sun's spec, which means VB apps could be compiled to run on Linux/Solaris/Mac OS/etc., and Microsoft isn't gonna do that. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see a "Compile to C#VM" feature, though.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't think this means they're done, do you? Personally I'm not terribly interested in running kernel 2.0.0; I'd much rather wait for, say, 2.0.4 or thereabouts.
--
This is true; Slackware 4.0 might not be a bad choice. That's what I'm running on my 486 right now, although I may change (I haven't really decided yet). For even older systems, Slackware 3.6 might not be bad (2.0.x kernel).
If I were you, I'd just install an old copy of slackware 4.0 and update with some of the newer packages form Slackware 7.1
Dude, are you trying to make him hate life? Not cool. Or are you just not a Slackware user?
--
In any case, it does use Quartz, which is not coming to Linux any time soon.
--
I'm not proposing that Win3.1 should have been released for free in 1995. I'm suggesting that it should be released for free in 2000. And yes, MS-DOS too. It's been five years since they stopped selling them. If, in five years, you can't come up with a new product that's sufficiently better than the old version that people actually want to buy the new one, then perhaps you need to move over and make room for other companies.
--
Imagine if Windows 3.1 went into the public domain. Microsoft isn't making any money on it any more anyway, so why not? Who loses from this? Even if the source code isn't opened, why not at least release the binaries for free?
I'm quite pleased that Apple has released their old system software for free, and id Software has released the source code to some of their old games under the GPL. Some companies are doing this voluntarily, but perhaps it would benefit the industry if there were more of an incentive for other companies to make their old stuff available for free?
--
--
Oh, you meant here on Earth, in the present. Oops.
Damn I'm bored.
--
Fortunately, my least favorite OS happens to be the most common one, so I don't have to face that issue.
--
Yay! SMP on quad G4 boxes!
--
My site only uses browser detection to decide which theme you get by default. You can change themes if you aren't getting one that's appropriate for your browser. If it doesn't recognize your browser, you get the Simple theme, which works on anything (including Mozilla and Netscape 2).
Actually, i've been getting sites lately refusing content when they get confused in my proxy. So i'm making my proxy randomly choose several major browsers and get them to cycle my HTTP headers. Huzzah!
If you're deliberately mangling the User-Agent string (in violation of the HTTP specification), it's not my fault. You might want to set your proxy server to send something like Mozilla/4.0 (not really, but that's my business) which should work for any Web sites (unless you use Internet Explorer and the server is checking for MSIE to give you code that renders better in MSIE than in Netscape).
Sure this is a trivial example but there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to do this. Shoddy HTML is the only reason why I can't.
From RFC 2616, section 14.43:
If you randomize the User-Agent string at your proxy server, you can expect your results to be strange.
nbsp for indenting paragraphs? eh? what's wrong with.. um... CSS p{text-indent:1em} or some such? I read somewhere that Blynx pauses for NBSP as it's considered more purposeful than a breaking space. Many blind people are angry waiting for you!
When I started doing Web design, I looked forward to the coming release of Netscape 3, which (on Windows) finally supported more than 16 colors of text. I haven't kept up with some of the newer stuff, including CSS. I'm slowly beginning to get off my lazy ass and fix my code. As for blind people, well, I don't have any non-visual browsers to test my code on.
If I use any HTML standard it still works in older browsers. The uses of font are few (well, none) and when most modern day browsers support CSS you can implement fonts without rubbing the open sore that is the font tag.
Older browsers ignore CSS code. If I rely on CSS code for my layout, I don't call that "working".
--
Interesting that Microsoft doesn't own the office.net domain.
I noticed that stupidpaperclip.net isn't registered yet. Anyone feeling up to the task of throwing together a parody site?
--
This is true, but just because it's CPU-intensive for the browser doesn't necessarily make it bad code.
Slashdot has a black border around the edge of the page. It's not very useful, but vaguely neat-looking. The only other way to get this would be to convince each browser to render the page with no margin, and artificialy create black-background margins with the tables you suggest - except that each browser handles this differently and many of them won't do it at all.
As for Netscape 2, well, it would be nice if there were an easy way to support it, but there isn't, and almost nobody uses it anyway. However...
Your phroggy.com does the same (nearly black bgcolor and text colour). Try it in Netscape 2 (or 1) then please consider removing your "best viewed in any browser" medal
The code you saw won't render decently in Netscape 2, but if you actually use Netscape 2 to view the page you'll see that you get a different version that does render properly. If you don't have Netscape 2 handy, go to any page but the main home page, and over on the right in the Themes box click the link to the Simple theme.
Slashdot uses font tags all over the place: fixed sizes, no user preferences unless you want to screw all font definitions, no fallback fonts families, etc... font is evil.
Sorry, but you can't complain about the use of the font tag and complain that Netscape 2 won't render the page. As for me, I've recently started learning how to use CSS and will be moving away from the use of the font tag, but I do try to use it responsibly.
I use NBSP where necessary too, certainly better than the 1x1 transparent GIF.
I use nbsp for indenting paragraphs, but I've started using a 1x1 transparent gif as a placehlder in table cells. I had been using nbsp, but then I had a table cell that was only a few pixels high, and an nbsp wouldn't fit unless I made the font size really small, and if the browser was set for huge fonts it would break anyway.
Still, good discussions, eh?
Definitely.
--
Yes, Mac OS X does use the Mach microkernel, although I think Mac OS X probably does it differently. Ars Technica has more on this.
I never said I wasn't mad at Apple.
The beta version of Mac OS X might be free, or close to free (as in beer), and in six months it'll be bundled with new Macs.
--
I'd like to see what that program would do to my homepage, and whether the resulting code would render (and in which browsers, if it renders at all). Granted, there's some unnecessary whitespace, but really, do a few bytes matter? There's no way I could work on the code if I stripped the whitespace out; I'd have to maintain original copies and run this program again every time I changed something.
--
Does the Slashdot staff read the articles posted to Slashdot?
--
Can someone tell me exactly what's being implied by "up to the full registration fee" here? Does that mean they won't auction them for more than $35? Or does it mean if they auction it for $10,000, NSI keeps $35 and then NSI keeps $9,965?
--
Who said anything about it being good?
--
I don't remember what PCP or PSP are, let alone the average consumer. Of those, only PCP and PPP rhyme. Finally, how many of those acronyms have anything to do with privacy?
--
--
Uhh, that's not how I read it.
Three e-mails to two addresses AFTER you've forgotten to pay the bill sounds like a reasonable attempt to contact the domain holder.
--
But you may be right that the acronym is actually supposed to include the word "Project", in which case I withdraw my comment.
--
If it were anyone but Microsoft, this would make perfect sense. Microsoft won't do it.
Anyway, I know freedom of speech has taken a lot of hits lately, but I'm pretty sure that Sun doesn't yet have the power to decide who can compile to Java bytecode, any more than Intel has the power to decide who can compile to x86 machine code.
Correct, AFAIK.
--
The World Wide Web Consortium is abbreviated W3C, and this makes sense. P3P would make sense if there were another P, but there isn't.
IANAL, but is this grounds for a lawsuit by whoever owns PGP trademark?
--
Why would it resemble BASIC more closely than C++ or Java? Basing it on C++/Java/JavaScript/Perl would make much more sense to me than basing it on Visual Basic.
--
--