That won't solve the problem.. the first post warriors will just assume they know what they are talkign about and then the replies will still feed off the incorrect information. Then those that post with actual knowledge will get flamed and it will be a battle between the clueful and the clueless. Only solution? Don't read slashdot comments
okay, and its your choice to use Windows with themes. Windows XP can cut down a lot if you shut down unnecessary services, turn of themes, change from explorer to litestep... I am comparing oranges to oranges. I know all about fluxbox and alternative lightweight wms, they just don't compare to a fresh install of windows like KDE does.
What is with slashdot and everyone jumping off topic just to flame you?
I guess i should have said OSX with 256 is a joke. I said with 512 it slows down when i fire up resource intensive apps (wow is hardly resource intensive compared to editing several 2gb video files). With that said, my P4 2.8ghz w/512mb of ram slows down just as much when I start loading large images into photoshop and start switching between that and 15 other firefox windows with java running on half of them. Its all relative to what you're doing. 512 may be more than enough for you...
Hold on hold on, let me get this straight. You originally said that IE is allowing secret hidden APIs (at least that is what is interpreted from your quote) because there was a security hole that allowed VBscript to load arbitrary ActiveX controls. Yet you failed to give any example of how Microsoft has kept developers from integrating VBscript into their own applications (for sake of argument, we will say Mozilla). Then you went to change your argument to how MS is so bad because they allowed such a glaring security hole. Do you see the topic jump there? We've gone away from talking about these secret hidden APIs that supposedly exist to bashing MS because of an old security hole.
3 years ago your post would have been -1 troll or flamebait and no one would have cared to argue with you. Times have changed and moderators are not moderating properly and have given you +5 interesting for a comment that is IRRELEVANT to the article. I am a windows supporter in the fact that I use it on a daily basis. I am also an OSS zealot in the fact that I use and contribute to many OSS projects.
I have yet to see a valid comment about how Microsoft his hiding secret apis from developers. Instead I see this post-apocolyptic wasteland created from your comments and the moderators that are falsely promoting your FUD.
Okay, first of all they are SCRIPT tags, not EMBED tags. Read the friggin source for christs sake. If you don't want to do that scroll down just a few lines and read my follow up post. Microsoft integrated vbscript into IE. Probably a bad idea, however please tell me how integrating vbscript into IE is using secret hidden APIs that no one knows about? THAT is what the original post was about, suddenly this thread has shifted direction to MS bashing because they royally fucked up and didn't secure vbscript. Am I missing something here? We're glorifying an obvious troll post, but no its slashdot and we must shift everything to Microsoft-is-bad posts somehow.
I'm not saying your point isn't valid, i'm saying your post has nothing to do with this thread. The original post is an obvious troll and you guys are falsly agreeing with him by saying that IE has no right to allow vbscript in IE. Okay fine, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIDDEN APIs. please, stay on topic
And he also says that IE is indeed part of the operating system 'so that parts of the OS and other applications can rely on the functionality and APIs being present'. Which presumably would mean a bug in IE could affect those parts of the OS and other applications. Which seems to be to go right along with what I thought the Mozilla guy was saying.
We already know about this.. Active Desktop anyone? Set your (older) desktop to a malware page and watch your computer load spyware each time it starts
No, because you can include vbscript in any application. I will not be a personal reference to MSDN, but I have had to integrate vbscript into applications before. While it's not fun, it is possible and Microsoft tells you how to do it. Just because mozilla doesn't support vbscript doesn't mean its a hidden API that no one knows about.
What the fuck? You just went from saying that because IE allows vbscript in its web browser that it is tied to hidden OS API's (please reread your post before you challenge me on that) and now you're saying that if it was allowed on firefox it would be a bug? How do the two posts even relate to each other? Oh i'm sorry you are trolling.
Not to negate your post, but have you used any modern window manager that was big on eye candy? They use just as much ram as windows xp does. Mac OS X with less than 512mb of ram is a joke (heck,even with 512mb of ram it slows down when I fire up more than one resource intensive app) and KDE is just as bad. If you go back to Windows 95 or NT 4 before all these themed desktops came into light you wouldn't need half a gig of ram to show systray icons..
Uh, if mozilla supports vbscript then it would be allowed in mozilla or any other web browser for that matter. That does not make use of any unknown undocumented APIs. Try this, paste this code into a text file (hint: it came straight from your website):
Set oWMP = CreateObject("WMPlayer.OCX.7" ) Set colCDROMs = oWMP.cdromCollection
if colCDROMs.Count >= 1 then
For i = 0 to colCDROMs.Count - 1
colCDROMs.Item(i).Eject
Next ' cdrom End If
wscript.echo "Automatic Cup Holder."
Then run "cscript filename". Oh my god, Microsoft tied vbscript into a stand alone application on your system!!! Give me a break, mod the parent down please
in fact if you look on your card, it says card is not valid unless it is signed, and CID/SeeID/etc is not a valid signature. had the same thing happen when i went to to the post office. so i signed the card and wrote SEE ID in big letters next to my signed name. i am asked for id about 2% of the time. one time i didn't have my id after the cashier asked for it and at first she was going to cancel the sale but after a little bit of flirting i was able to get her to accept the card and i got her number. i never called her
I've been working with Solaris10 for a week now. It's like riding a new Harley after not having touched my Triumph Bonneville for 10 years. I grew up (in my 20's) working in Vax and Sun datacentres, later a Solaris guru working the web... I got real used to Solaris 5, 6, 7... stopped at 8 switched to Linux (RH, SuSE) and wow, what a worldshattering difference. Felt like an 11 year old with his first woodie. Since, I've learnt the ins and outs of Linux server, desktop, struggled mightily with where pkginstall stuck things, the/root, loads of quirks. Now, back to Solaris and wow, I'm home, but someone really redecorated. I cut my teeth in kshell; bash was a real comeuppance, and the new Solaris is like a little of both. Lighten up; I've learnt German, and Dutch, and listening to the two is like very nearly understanding but NOT QUITE. That's kind of what coming back to Solaris 10 is like. It's not quite the Sun I'm used to, but more like it than the Linux I've learnt. If you grew up in Linux, this is going to be kind of like my journey. Give it time, the differences are not bad, they're just different. I'm impressed so far, but not overwhelmed.
What does any of this have to do with my post? Or are you posting after any random post that is higher up so your (late) post can be seen?
if the os locks the drive, that little hole will not send a magical signal to the computer telling it the disc has been ejected against its will. it will assume the disc still exists (at least this has been the case with all of the cdrom drives i've come into contact with)
No need to be a dick. He ran into reasonable problems with some of Solaris' rough edges. let it be known that i did not try to be a dick, but lets not ignore the other side of this.. s/he was testing solaris' usability based off of the install process. if you want to judge a book by its cover then i will do the same...
No. Solaris is Solaris. The Solaris running on your x86 machine is exactly the same as the Solaris running on your SPARC. Obviously there is some platform-specific code, but it is _not_ a port. They are built from the exact same source tree. lets take an example here. gaim is gaim. the gaim running on linux is exactly the same as the gaim running on windows. they are built from the exact same source tree. gaim was ported to windows in the same manner that solaris was ported to x86.. by writing platform-specific code.
Again, don't be a dick.... Do you actually think your semi-informed arrogance is going to make anybody more interested in using Solaris? Pot, kettle, black?
I am going to assume you don't use solaris on a daily basis. If you think solaris is going to work like a redheaded stepchild, you are wrong. you seemed to have come across a bug in the installer, which didn't instruct vold to eject the cd. Because of this, the cdrom drive will remain locked by the volume manager. Forcefully changing the cd will not change anything because the drive never opened, according to vold. I would frequently find solaris machines with nonfunctioning cdrom drives in our datacenter because others that have no solaris experience would paperclip the cdrom drive to get their cds back. Very annoying.
next, don't trust solaris x86 on any hardware that doesn't say sun on the outside. simple as that. solaris is not what is special, its moreso the hardware it runs on and the sparc platform is what solaris is tuned for. yes, x86 may be supported but they don't support every single device created by man.
pkgadd does not ignore -d. get over it.
the install process will also drop you to a text-mode installer if your video card is not supported (a minor problem on our ultra 10s) or don't have a mouse setup. on that note, to fix your X display problem, try disabling it (if you can't figure out how, solaris is definitely not for you yet)
When you try a new OS, you have to get rid of the mentality you're used to. Solaris != Linux, therefore "features" that you normally expect aren't there because the path Solaris takes is different than other OS'. Solaris x86 is basically a direct port from sparc which means, there generally aren't other OS's using the same partition id. Maybe Sun could update the installer, but they didn't. Deal with it. Install everything+oem and lock down the machine with jass, or know what you are doing before you start picking and choosing your packages. Finally, the paths are as they are for historical reasons as well. Solaris didn't always have gcc, they have a much better compiler. GCC was added to the companion cd later since it was publicly available on many sun freeware sites. All non-sun software goes to/usr/sfw.
Welcome to Solaris, if you don't like it, leave and keep preaching for -insert your favorite os here-. If you want to actually do something productive with Solaris, harness it's real power. Like Zones, ZFS, SMF, etc. Quit bitching about how it doesn't perform like Linux.
-dk btw, to revive a zombie cdrom drive, stop vold, eject the cd manually (using the button on the cd/dvd drive), start vold
i never said it was a signal quality issue, that is cable's problem. but 3+1 channels to stream down your wire should be read as "i can only have 3 settop boxes and 1 hdtv box in my house" (similar to signal restricted digital cable and satellite set top boxes) -dk
Slashdot Mirror
and this is why you set your shell prompt to your hostname and current path. you get lazy, you pay the price... sorry
-dk
That won't solve the problem.. the first post warriors will just assume they know what they are talkign about and then the replies will still feed off the incorrect information. Then those that post with actual knowledge will get flamed and it will be a battle between the clueful and the clueless. Only solution? Don't read slashdot comments
-dk
okay, and its your choice to use Windows with themes. Windows XP can cut down a lot if you shut down unnecessary services, turn of themes, change from explorer to litestep... I am comparing oranges to oranges. I know all about fluxbox and alternative lightweight wms, they just don't compare to a fresh install of windows like KDE does.
What is with slashdot and everyone jumping off topic just to flame you?
-dk
I guess i should have said OSX with 256 is a joke. I said with 512 it slows down when i fire up resource intensive apps (wow is hardly resource intensive compared to editing several 2gb video files). With that said, my P4 2.8ghz w/512mb of ram slows down just as much when I start loading large images into photoshop and start switching between that and 15 other firefox windows with java running on half of them. Its all relative to what you're doing. 512 may be more than enough for you...
-dk
Hold on hold on, let me get this straight. You originally said that IE is allowing secret hidden APIs (at least that is what is interpreted from your quote) because there was a security hole that allowed VBscript to load arbitrary ActiveX controls. Yet you failed to give any example of how Microsoft has kept developers from integrating VBscript into their own applications (for sake of argument, we will say Mozilla). Then you went to change your argument to how MS is so bad because they allowed such a glaring security hole. Do you see the topic jump there? We've gone away from talking about these secret hidden APIs that supposedly exist to bashing MS because of an old security hole.
3 years ago your post would have been -1 troll or flamebait and no one would have cared to argue with you. Times have changed and moderators are not moderating properly and have given you +5 interesting for a comment that is IRRELEVANT to the article. I am a windows supporter in the fact that I use it on a daily basis. I am also an OSS zealot in the fact that I use and contribute to many OSS projects.
I have yet to see a valid comment about how Microsoft his hiding secret apis from developers. Instead I see this post-apocolyptic wasteland created from your comments and the moderators that are falsely promoting your FUD.
-dk
No, I mean VBscript. It just so happens that this VBScript loads an ActiveX control.
-dk
No.
-dk
Okay, first of all they are SCRIPT tags, not EMBED tags. Read the friggin source for christs sake. If you don't want to do that scroll down just a few lines and read my follow up post. Microsoft integrated vbscript into IE. Probably a bad idea, however please tell me how integrating vbscript into IE is using secret hidden APIs that no one knows about? THAT is what the original post was about, suddenly this thread has shifted direction to MS bashing because they royally fucked up and didn't secure vbscript. Am I missing something here? We're glorifying an obvious troll post, but no its slashdot and we must shift everything to Microsoft-is-bad posts somehow.
-dk
I'm not saying your point isn't valid, i'm saying your post has nothing to do with this thread. The original post is an obvious troll and you guys are falsly agreeing with him by saying that IE has no right to allow vbscript in IE. Okay fine, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIDDEN APIs. please, stay on topic
-dk
And he also says that IE is indeed part of the operating system 'so that parts of the OS and other applications can rely on the functionality and APIs being present'. Which presumably would mean a bug in IE could affect those parts of the OS and other applications. Which seems to be to go right along with what I thought the Mozilla guy was saying.
We already know about this.. Active Desktop anyone? Set your (older) desktop to a malware page and watch your computer load spyware each time it starts
-dk
No, because you can include vbscript in any application. I will not be a personal reference to MSDN, but I have had to integrate vbscript into applications before. While it's not fun, it is possible and Microsoft tells you how to do it. Just because mozilla doesn't support vbscript doesn't mean its a hidden API that no one knows about.
-dk
What the fuck? You just went from saying that because IE allows vbscript in its web browser that it is tied to hidden OS API's (please reread your post before you challenge me on that) and now you're saying that if it was allowed on firefox it would be a bug? How do the two posts even relate to each other? Oh i'm sorry you are trolling.
-dk
please mod parent and this post down
Not to negate your post, but have you used any modern window manager that was big on eye candy? They use just as much ram as windows xp does. Mac OS X with less than 512mb of ram is a joke (heck,even with 512mb of ram it slows down when I fire up more than one resource intensive app) and KDE is just as bad. If you go back to Windows 95 or NT 4 before all these themed desktops came into light you wouldn't need half a gig of ram to show systray icons..
-dk
Uh, if mozilla supports vbscript then it would be allowed in mozilla or any other web browser for that matter. That does not make use of any unknown undocumented APIs. Try this, paste this code into a text file (hint: it came straight from your website):
Set oWMP = CreateObject("WMPlayer.OCX.7" )
Set colCDROMs = oWMP.cdromCollection
if colCDROMs.Count >= 1 then
For i = 0 to colCDROMs.Count - 1
colCDROMs.Item(i).Eject
Next ' cdrom
End If
wscript.echo "Automatic Cup Holder."
Then run "cscript filename". Oh my god, Microsoft tied vbscript into a stand alone application on your system!!! Give me a break, mod the parent down please
-dk
in fact if you look on your card, it says card is not valid unless it is signed, and CID/SeeID/etc is not a valid signature. had the same thing happen when i went to to the post office. so i signed the card and wrote SEE ID in big letters next to my signed name. i am asked for id about 2% of the time. one time i didn't have my id after the cashier asked for it and at first she was going to cancel the sale but after a little bit of flirting i was able to get her to accept the card and i got her number. i never called her
no, freshmeat has been slow since 7am (EST) this morning. i think they have bigger problems at hand than slashdot...
-dk
Mod parent up! Mod this post funny
I've been working with Solaris10 for a week now. It's like riding a new Harley after not having touched my Triumph Bonneville for 10 years. I grew up (in my 20's) working in Vax and Sun datacentres, later a Solaris guru working the web ... I got real used to Solaris 5, 6, 7 ... stopped at 8 switched to Linux (RH, SuSE) and wow, what a worldshattering difference. Felt like an 11 year old with his first woodie. Since, I've learnt the ins and outs of Linux server, desktop, struggled mightily with where pkginstall stuck things, the /root, loads of quirks. Now, back to Solaris and wow, I'm home, but someone really redecorated. I cut my teeth in kshell; bash was a real comeuppance, and the new Solaris is like a little of both. Lighten up; I've learnt German, and Dutch, and listening to the two is like very nearly understanding but NOT QUITE. That's kind of what coming back to Solaris 10 is like. It's not quite the Sun I'm used to, but more like it than the Linux I've learnt. If you grew up in Linux, this is going to be kind of like my journey. Give it time, the differences are not bad, they're just different. I'm impressed so far, but not overwhelmed.
What does any of this have to do with my post? Or are you posting after any random post that is higher up so your (late) post can be seen?
if the os locks the drive, that little hole will not send a magical signal to the computer telling it the disc has been ejected against its will. it will assume the disc still exists (at least this has been the case with all of the cdrom drives i've come into contact with)
-dk
No need to be a dick. He ran into reasonable problems with some of Solaris' rough edges.
... Do you actually think your semi-informed arrogance is going to make anybody more interested in using Solaris?
let it be known that i did not try to be a dick, but lets not ignore the other side of this.. s/he was testing solaris' usability based off of the install process. if you want to judge a book by its cover then i will do the same...
No. Solaris is Solaris. The Solaris running on your x86 machine is exactly the same as the Solaris running on your SPARC. Obviously there is some platform-specific code, but it is _not_ a port. They are built from the exact same source tree.
lets take an example here. gaim is gaim. the gaim running on linux is exactly the same as the gaim running on windows. they are built from the exact same source tree. gaim was ported to windows in the same manner that solaris was ported to x86.. by writing platform-specific code.
Again, don't be a dick.
Pot, kettle, black?
I wonder if the information sent to whatever-the-hell-it-is is encrypted...
Yes. Even those standalone-shady-looking ATM's that dialup an 800 number and connect at 1200baud will have encrypted transmissions.
well played troll... i'll bite.
/usr/sfw.
I am going to assume you don't use solaris on a daily basis. If you think solaris is going to work like a redheaded stepchild, you are wrong. you seemed to have come across a bug in the installer, which didn't instruct vold to eject the cd. Because of this, the cdrom drive will remain locked by the volume manager. Forcefully changing the cd will not change anything because the drive never opened, according to vold. I would frequently find solaris machines with nonfunctioning cdrom drives in our datacenter because others that have no solaris experience would paperclip the cdrom drive to get their cds back. Very annoying.
next, don't trust solaris x86 on any hardware that doesn't say sun on the outside. simple as that. solaris is not what is special, its moreso the hardware it runs on and the sparc platform is what solaris is tuned for. yes, x86 may be supported but they don't support every single device created by man.
pkgadd does not ignore -d. get over it.
the install process will also drop you to a text-mode installer if your video card is not supported (a minor problem on our ultra 10s) or don't have a mouse setup. on that note, to fix your X display problem, try disabling it (if you can't figure out how, solaris is definitely not for you yet)
Look at what google turns up about your usb storage device
When you try a new OS, you have to get rid of the mentality you're used to. Solaris != Linux, therefore "features" that you normally expect aren't there because the path Solaris takes is different than other OS'. Solaris x86 is basically a direct port from sparc which means, there generally aren't other OS's using the same partition id. Maybe Sun could update the installer, but they didn't. Deal with it. Install everything+oem and lock down the machine with jass, or know what you are doing before you start picking and choosing your packages. Finally, the paths are as they are for historical reasons as well. Solaris didn't always have gcc, they have a much better compiler. GCC was added to the companion cd later since it was publicly available on many sun freeware sites. All non-sun software goes to
Welcome to Solaris, if you don't like it, leave and keep preaching for -insert your favorite os here-. If you want to actually do something productive with Solaris, harness it's real power. Like Zones, ZFS, SMF, etc. Quit bitching about how it doesn't perform like Linux.
-dk
btw, to revive a zombie cdrom drive, stop vold, eject the cd manually (using the button on the cd/dvd drive), start vold
Court Says FCC Out-of-Bounds With Digital TV
Mirrordot link
-dk
i never said it was a signal quality issue, that is cable's problem. but 3+1 channels to stream down your wire should be read as "i can only have 3 settop boxes and 1 hdtv box in my house" (similar to signal restricted digital cable and satellite set top boxes)
-dk