That's really no surprise - Dell printers are just re-branded Lexmarks (unless something's changed). Lexmark has always made crap.
I have a LaserJet 4, and as someone else mentioned previously, they're built like tanks. I'm also using toner from probably 5 or 6 years ago - no problems at all.
Pretty difficult to do when you troll every GPL and Linux thread!
Except I wasn't trolling, and I think this is really the first time I've ever said anything about the GPL or Linux that might be construed negatively (and it was really the Linux community, NOT Linux OR the GPL that I had a problem with).
I suppose this is Slashdot though, and anyone who doesn't suckle from the GPL teet is obviously a troll.
Frankly, I'm sick of the BSD community trolling GPL/Linux threads on Slashdot when they have no purpose commenting in the article at all. The constant "meh! Wouldn't have this problem with the BSD license" is the equivalent of the GPL zealot saying "Meh! Linux is superior to winblows"
Apparently you have the reading comprehension skills of a 3rd grader. Had drinkypoo not told me to "go run BSD" I wouldn't have even brought it up. My point was the Linux community should fuck off, and let Sun license their code under whatever goddamn license they want, rather than demand everything be GPL or GPL-compatible.
My response can only be "wah wah wah". I'm tired of BSD-types telling everyone else what attitude they should have about software licensing.
So, let me get this straight - I'm telling others telling everyone else what attitude to have about licensing by asking the Linux community not to dictate to Sun what terms they should license their code under? That's rich!
Maybe because FreeBSD 7.0 hasn't been released yet? Sure, it's there, but not all of us run CURRENT. Personally, I'm chomping at the bit to get ZFS, but I'm sticking with STABLE
Are you saying ZFS on FUSE is a production-quality release? At this point, I'd have more faith in the stability and reliability of ZFS on FreeBSD than ZFS on FUSE. If ZFS on FUSE warrants a front page article, surely ZFS on FreeBSD warrants a blurb in the BSD section of/.
ZFS is on OpenSolaris and Sun has claimed to be considering GPL for OpenSolaris. Are they, or aren't they? On top of that, the FSF has muddied the waters through their activity on the GPLv3, further complicating the entire issue.
I don't care if Sun says they're considering GPLing OpenSolaris, ZFS, or anything else for that matter. The poster I replied to accused Sun of keeping ZFS from Linux by not GPLing it - when it's the goddamn GPL that Linux uses that is preventing the inclusion of ZFS!
I don't think you can blame the whole situation on Linux's use of the GPL, which is not coincidentally the reason why many people contributed to Linux. Given that Linux is today considerably ahead of all BSDs in most ways, I think adoption of the GPL is likely the only reason Linux is here today.
I'm not sure how Linux can be ahead of the BSDs, as Linux is just a kernel, while the BSDs are entire operating systems. But let's say you were referring to Linux distributions being "considerably ahead" - I've never seen this. I've always found the BSD's to be elegant systems to work on, and Linux systems to be a mess (I unfortunately have to admin hundreds of Linux boxes at work). Linux supposedly has better driver support, yet I've always found FreeBSD supports my hardware just fine (and for many things, like wireless drivers, I've found the BSDs to have better supprt than Linux). Linux may perform a bit better in some instances, but IMHO the negligible performance gains aren't worth the aggravation.
Finally, if you don't care about software freedom, and only your freedom, why don't you go run BSD, and stop complaining about Linux?
I use FreeBSD on my personal server, and I believe BSD code to be more free than GPL code, but that's irrelevant. Frankly, I'm sick of the Linux community telling everyone else what to do with THEIR code. Besides, you can hardly call my post a complaint - if anyone was complaining, it was the original post I replied to.
Let's find a way to settle these license issues. ZFS looks to be great innovation, but Sun appears to be playing license games with the express purpose of keeping Linux at bay.
Sorry, it's Linux that's playing the license games, not Sun. One only needs to look at ZFS support in FreeBSD to see that (Speaking of, where's the 'ZFS On FreeBSD!' story?).
The GPL "everything under our license" philosophy is the sole cause of these so-called "license issues". If Linux wants to use Sun's code, why should Sun have to release it under Linux' license?
Incidentally, from my personal experience, males are much more opposed to the car than females are.
That's because they're fucking ugly. Then there's the 0 to 100 KM/h in 19.8 seconds (supposedly reduced to 12 seconds in the '08 models).
Fortunately, we don't have many here in Windsor. I haven't had the pleasure of being stuck behind one trying to merge onto the freeway - I imagine it might be doing 60 by the time it reaches the end of the on-ramp, and it's time to merge with 100 KM/h traffic.
Preliminary ZFS support showed up in a Leopard build in April of 2006. Now, there's nothing to say it was ever going to ship, or if they were laying the groundwork for OS X 10.6 or what, but the bits were there (and apparently still are).
I'm still not convinced Apple has dropped it because of Schwartz' comments, however.
If, at some point in the future Apple does do business with ATI again, do you think ATI will take keeping things confidential seriously or do you think they'll stupidly lose a giant contract while gaining nothing again?
If? The issue with Jobs dropping ATI occurred in 2000. Apple has been dealing with ATI for several years now (though since the AMD/ATI merger, Apple seems to be using NVidia GPUs in new products).
I think he/she was referring to Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun, not Steve Jobs.
I don't think there are many doubters of Steve Jobs' worthiness as CEO of Apple. There were many who questioned whether Schwartz could succeed McNealy, however.
Jonathan *had* to know he might get burned for spilling the beans before Steve.
I'm not sure how Jonathan got burned. Sure, it'd look good for Sun to have ZFS integrated into Mac OS X, but at the end of the day it doesn't really do much for them. If anyone got screwed, it's the end-users. That's if Steve really did decide to pull it based on Jonathan's comments.
I'm not convinced ZFS support is far enough along to be included in Leopard.
The way they point to the full read/write kext at developer.apple.com makes me think maybe Apple will ship it flagged as experimental or something (similar to FreeBSD).
The Wings made a good run this year, yet even they didn't sell out playoff games, and this is a team that had sold out ever game (regular season AND playoffs) since December of '96. Possible causes? Detroit fans are spoiled, the Wings have the longest playoff streak of any pro team. Fans are tired of seeing them play the same teams over and over again. The Pistons and (especially) the Tigers are also doing well as of late, and tickets for those teams are significantly cheaper (the Lions continue to suck, and likely will for eternity - plus, their season doesn't overlap the NHL Playoffs).
If the NHL really wants to improve things, they need to fix the schedule. The Wings playing Columbus 8 times a season, yet Toronto once every 2 years is a travesty. Moving a couple teams to Winnipeg and Hamilton might help, too.
Being a Canadian, I'd love to see a Canadian team win the cup again (the '92-93 Canadiens were the last Canadian team to win it), as a life-long Wings fan though, I wouldn't mind another cup in Detroit:) If we could also somehow keep the Maple Leafs from ever making the playoffs again, life would be perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
Sooner or later, ISPs are going to say "enough" and their new consumer offerings will be metered-bandwidth-only.
It's already started here in Canada. New Bell Sympatico accounts are capped at 60GB/Month. I think some of the other ISPs cap connections as well.
I believe the mere fact he mentioned the HURD is sufficient proof that he was not being serious.
That doesn't sound right - the Intel GMA950 (crappy onboard graphics chipset) can decode two HD streams at once. It doesn't even require a fan.
Does this mean the PS3 will finally support force feedback as well, for devices like, say, a racing wheel?
k -for-ps3-racing-wheels-either-226250.php
http://kotaku.com/gaming/sixaxis/no-force-feedbac
That's really no surprise - Dell printers are just re-branded Lexmarks (unless something's changed). Lexmark has always made crap.
I have a LaserJet 4, and as someone else mentioned previously, they're built like tanks. I'm also using toner from probably 5 or 6 years ago - no problems at all.
Pretty difficult to do when you troll every GPL and Linux thread!
Except I wasn't trolling, and I think this is really the first time I've ever said anything about the GPL or Linux that might be construed negatively (and it was really the Linux community, NOT Linux OR the GPL that I had a problem with).
I suppose this is Slashdot though, and anyone who doesn't suckle from the GPL teet is obviously a troll.
Frankly, I'm sick of the BSD community trolling GPL/Linux threads on Slashdot when they have no purpose commenting in the article at all. The constant "meh! Wouldn't have this problem with the BSD license" is the equivalent of the GPL zealot saying "Meh! Linux is superior to winblows"
Apparently you have the reading comprehension skills of a 3rd grader. Had drinkypoo not told me to "go run BSD" I wouldn't have even brought it up. My point was the Linux community should fuck off, and let Sun license their code under whatever goddamn license they want, rather than demand everything be GPL or GPL-compatible.
My response can only be "wah wah wah". I'm tired of BSD-types telling everyone else what attitude they should have about software licensing.
So, let me get this straight - I'm telling others telling everyone else what attitude to have about licensing by asking the Linux community not to dictate to Sun what terms they should license their code under? That's rich!
Hah! Good point!
Maybe because FreeBSD 7.0 hasn't been released yet? Sure, it's there, but not all of us run CURRENT. Personally, I'm chomping at the bit to get ZFS, but I'm sticking with STABLE
/.
Are you saying ZFS on FUSE is a production-quality release? At this point, I'd have more faith in the stability and reliability of ZFS on FreeBSD than ZFS on FUSE. If ZFS on FUSE warrants a front page article, surely ZFS on FreeBSD warrants a blurb in the BSD section of
ZFS is on OpenSolaris and Sun has claimed to be considering GPL for OpenSolaris. Are they, or aren't they? On top of that, the FSF has muddied the waters through their activity on the GPLv3, further complicating the entire issue.
I don't care if Sun says they're considering GPLing OpenSolaris, ZFS, or anything else for that matter. The poster I replied to accused Sun of keeping ZFS from Linux by not GPLing it - when it's the goddamn GPL that Linux uses that is preventing the inclusion of ZFS!
I don't think you can blame the whole situation on Linux's use of the GPL, which is not coincidentally the reason why many people contributed to Linux. Given that Linux is today considerably ahead of all BSDs in most ways, I think adoption of the GPL is likely the only reason Linux is here today.
I'm not sure how Linux can be ahead of the BSDs, as Linux is just a kernel, while the BSDs are entire operating systems. But let's say you were referring to Linux distributions being "considerably ahead" - I've never seen this. I've always found the BSD's to be elegant systems to work on, and Linux systems to be a mess (I unfortunately have to admin hundreds of Linux boxes at work). Linux supposedly has better driver support, yet I've always found FreeBSD supports my hardware just fine (and for many things, like wireless drivers, I've found the BSDs to have better supprt than Linux). Linux may perform a bit better in some instances, but IMHO the negligible performance gains aren't worth the aggravation.
Finally, if you don't care about software freedom, and only your freedom, why don't you go run BSD, and stop complaining about Linux?
I use FreeBSD on my personal server, and I believe BSD code to be more free than GPL code, but that's irrelevant. Frankly, I'm sick of the Linux community telling everyone else what to do with THEIR code. Besides, you can hardly call my post a complaint - if anyone was complaining, it was the original post I replied to.
Why is Sun switching to the GPL the "Right Thing"?
Maybe the "Right Thing" would be for Linux to switch to a compatible license, like the CDDL, or BSD.
Let's find a way to settle these license issues. ZFS looks to be great innovation, but Sun appears to be playing license games with the express purpose of keeping Linux at bay.
Sorry, it's Linux that's playing the license games, not Sun. One only needs to look at ZFS support in FreeBSD to see that (Speaking of, where's the 'ZFS On FreeBSD!' story?).
The GPL "everything under our license" philosophy is the sole cause of these so-called "license issues". If Linux wants to use Sun's code, why should Sun have to release it under Linux' license?
Incidentally, from my personal experience, males are much more opposed to the car than females are.
That's because they're fucking ugly. Then there's the 0 to 100 KM/h in 19.8 seconds (supposedly reduced to 12 seconds in the '08 models).
Fortunately, we don't have many here in Windsor. I haven't had the pleasure of being stuck behind one trying to merge onto the freeway - I imagine it might be doing 60 by the time it reaches the end of the on-ramp, and it's time to merge with 100 KM/h traffic.
Love Maddox' site, but I doubt he was the first person to say that.
I don't appreciate the competition - ever been to a restaurant only to find out they're out of prime rib?!
So, does this mean PETA will fuck off and die now?
Preliminary ZFS support showed up in a Leopard build in April of 2006. Now, there's nothing to say it was ever going to ship, or if they were laying the groundwork for OS X 10.6 or what, but the bits were there (and apparently still are).
I'm still not convinced Apple has dropped it because of Schwartz' comments, however.
If, at some point in the future Apple does do business with ATI again, do you think ATI will take keeping things confidential seriously or do you think they'll stupidly lose a giant contract while gaining nothing again?
If? The issue with Jobs dropping ATI occurred in 2000. Apple has been dealing with ATI for several years now (though since the AMD/ATI merger, Apple seems to be using NVidia GPUs in new products).
I think he/she was referring to Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun, not Steve Jobs.
I don't think there are many doubters of Steve Jobs' worthiness as CEO of Apple. There were many who questioned whether Schwartz could succeed McNealy, however.
Jonathan *had* to know he might get burned for spilling the beans before Steve.
I'm not sure how Jonathan got burned. Sure, it'd look good for Sun to have ZFS integrated into Mac OS X, but at the end of the day it doesn't really do much for them. If anyone got screwed, it's the end-users. That's if Steve really did decide to pull it based on Jonathan's comments.
I'm not convinced ZFS support is far enough along to be included in Leopard.
Apparently, the work they've done is still in the WWDC beta build.
The way they point to the full read/write kext at developer.apple.com makes me think maybe Apple will ship it flagged as experimental or something (similar to FreeBSD).
Fortunately, the league has already had it's gambling scandal.
get the cup back to Detroit
:) If we could also somehow keep the Maple Leafs from ever making the playoffs again, life would be perfect.
The Wings made a good run this year, yet even they didn't sell out playoff games, and this is a team that had sold out ever game (regular season AND playoffs) since December of '96. Possible causes? Detroit fans are spoiled, the Wings have the longest playoff streak of any pro team. Fans are tired of seeing them play the same teams over and over again. The Pistons and (especially) the Tigers are also doing well as of late, and tickets for those teams are significantly cheaper (the Lions continue to suck, and likely will for eternity - plus, their season doesn't overlap the NHL Playoffs).
If the NHL really wants to improve things, they need to fix the schedule. The Wings playing Columbus 8 times a season, yet Toronto once every 2 years is a travesty. Moving a couple teams to Winnipeg and Hamilton might help, too.
Being a Canadian, I'd love to see a Canadian team win the cup again (the '92-93 Canadiens were the last Canadian team to win it), as a life-long Wings fan though, I wouldn't mind another cup in Detroit
There's already a slew of "iPhone Killer" articles out there, which is pretty sad considering the iPhone hasn't even shipped yet.
Apple have no experience at making phones.
Apple had no experience making MP3 players, either.