Simple solution: kill realsched.exe in the process list. Search for realsched.exe and rename it realsched.xex. Reboot. Guarantee it works on every machine I've done it on.
I've spent a lot of time on the Apple forums (I own a new iBook) and the reaction I've seen to the new iMac has been pretty "eh".
The original iMac, G4 cube and even the last iMac (to a certain extent) were elegant. The iPod had a great design because it was functional enough to fit in a small pocket. It doesn't make a very good consumer PC design.
Also, people have been a little miffed by some design choices. Why have all the wires running out the back of the screen instead of the base (I know, I know, wireless keyboard and mouse -- but most people will be hooking a printer up to this thing). Some people are complaining about it not being wall mountable (which would've been a cool high-end feature). Also, from a marketing standpoint, they completely missed the fall school schedule.
For now, I'm quite happy with my iBook. It has become my computer of choice in a house full of computers, and prompted me to buy an iPod. But I wouldn't buy the new iMac.
Worse than that, they keep articles they really shouldn't. I'm all for encyclopedic integrity but come on. I changed the article to a truthful one and it was beaten down. It's not a matter of what's "correct" encyclopedic-wise, but which a popularity contest for certain points of view.
I've read both statements and, while I agree they can do whatever they want with their software/distributions/etc., I've seen little analysis.
What makes Sender-ID so bad, in comparison to other technologies that both do support (say ASP and SMB). Is it because they reverse-engineered those and MS is trying to release this into the "open"? Are they waiting for a reverse-engineered version?
I know some about coding but little about law. What in particular about this license is causing so much trouble? Could MS change a few lines and it would be accepted?
At least you didn't read it incorrect like I did. I thought it said "stimulating the universe". That's tough. All those weird fetishes and everything. And who knows what aliens like. (Although I guess if someone has an alien fetish we can kill 2 birds with 1 stone).
For the machines we tested at work, the firewall actually blocked more than was necessary. We were surprised to find the admin share totally invisible even though the computers were on a domain.
Methinks something is borked with this anaylsis. A lot of these services aren't accessible on the boxes I've tested with (both on and off domains).
You're assuming there's life on Proxima Centauri. You're also assuming that said life would be trying to reach us (although, given the distances you mentioned, it would be just as unfeasible to come here as to go there).
Meanwhile, we have evidence of water in various places *in our own solar system*. We have a bunch of area within reach (reach being several years) that look like they may have microbes. We're not looking for ET here: we're looking for any sign of life. Start at home in our neck of the galaxy, where we know there's a good chance we'll find some.
They have Radiohead, that's all I care about. I've been waiting for months for it to be added to iTunes. That's what most people will be looking for anyway: does this store carry the music I want? Most people don't even know what an OS is.
"The physical search you advocate is in no way, shape, or form technically or economically feasible at this point in time."
Au contraire. Again, look at the Mars missions. In addition, it adds something SETI hasn't: diehard facts and credibility. We don't know if aliens would communicate using radio waves, but we have a pretty good idea that life needs water to exist.
I look for unreasonable features
on
Palmtop Nirvana?
·
· Score: 1
I look for incredible graphics when there isn't a need. I look for the ability to play back MPEGs. I look for 802.11b. I look for enough power to run emulators. I look for a system I can run Windows CE, Linux, and other stuff on.
In short, I look for Pocket PCs. Seriously. Palms and iPods and Blackberries have their place, but when I want to mess around with raw power, I look at Pocket PCs.
While I originally applauded SETI's efforts, I'm beginning to find this a bit ridiculous. When you lose your dog, you don't normally wait for it to find you: you look for it. We're basically sitting here waiting for a message, when we should be physically searching. Chances are any life worth finding in our neck of the universe won't be communicating via radio signals anyway.
I think the latest Mars expedition was a good step: look for livable areas, later look for life. Don't sit around waiting for it to come to you.
One problem: most public libraries are actually funded by local taxpayers. That's why you need a card (to prove you're from that area). If some guy comes from another town over and uses the wi-fi that my town paid for, I'd be pretty cheesed. Also, it's possibly illegal.
Most local libraries are paid by the town. Should someone from another town over walk in front of my library (that I paid for) and use its wi-fi (that I paid for)? Not on my watch.
Yeah, but I can't play DRM-encrusted AACs from Apple on all devices: only ones Apple condones (OS X and Windows). If they were the good guys, they'd release their spec for everyone to use.
Maybe because MS doesn't want to be the one who makes the decision on that. A while back Wired had an article about a "future" home MS created that was demonstrated in 2 versions: one that recognized who you were when you walked through your door, started playing music you liked and pumped it to rooms of the house as you walked around. The other version was DRM-encrusted and limited. MS didn't say which version it condones: it just wanted to show visions of the future.
Except MS doesn't dominate in all fields. They've cut all hardware except mice and keyboards. Their home software (outside Encarta) was a disaster (remember Microsoft Beethoven?) The Xbox doesn't have anywhere close to the market share they were hoping for. Very few people use MSN.
What MS is doing is no different than Apple, although they actually aren't quite as bad because they're not locking people into hardware they create. Also, if the system is anything like iTunes, the songs themselves won't need to "phone home": the encrypted password will be embedded in the files themselves (try copying and opening a DRM-encrusted AAC between computers without an internet connection).
Slashdot Mirror
Simple solution: kill realsched.exe in the process list. Search for realsched.exe and rename it realsched.xex. Reboot. Guarantee it works on every machine I've done it on.
Let me rephrase the original complaint as I heard it: "Why is the VESA mount OPTIONAL when it comes standard with most LCDs today?"
I've spent a lot of time on the Apple forums (I own a new iBook) and the reaction I've seen to the new iMac has been pretty "eh".
The original iMac, G4 cube and even the last iMac (to a certain extent) were elegant. The iPod had a great design because it was functional enough to fit in a small pocket. It doesn't make a very good consumer PC design.
Also, people have been a little miffed by some design choices. Why have all the wires running out the back of the screen instead of the base (I know, I know, wireless keyboard and mouse -- but most people will be hooking a printer up to this thing). Some people are complaining about it not being wall mountable (which would've been a cool high-end feature). Also, from a marketing standpoint, they completely missed the fall school schedule.
For now, I'm quite happy with my iBook. It has become my computer of choice in a house full of computers, and prompted me to buy an iPod. But I wouldn't buy the new iMac.
Worse than that, they keep articles they really shouldn't. I'm all for encyclopedic integrity but come on. I changed the article to a truthful one and it was beaten down. It's not a matter of what's "correct" encyclopedic-wise, but which a popularity contest for certain points of view.
I've read both statements and, while I agree they can do whatever they want with their software/distributions/etc., I've seen little analysis.
What makes Sender-ID so bad, in comparison to other technologies that both do support (say ASP and SMB). Is it because they reverse-engineered those and MS is trying to release this into the "open"? Are they waiting for a reverse-engineered version?
I know some about coding but little about law. What in particular about this license is causing so much trouble? Could MS change a few lines and it would be accepted?
At least you didn't read it incorrect like I did. I thought it said "stimulating the universe". That's tough. All those weird fetishes and everything. And who knows what aliens like. (Although I guess if someone has an alien fetish we can kill 2 birds with 1 stone).
May as well add DivX, OGG and others to the compatible list. The first thing I'm doing when I get one of these is hacking it.
That depends. The special editions come with forks to gogue one's eyes out.
For the machines we tested at work, the firewall actually blocked more than was necessary. We were surprised to find the admin share totally invisible even though the computers were on a domain.
Methinks something is borked with this anaylsis. A lot of these services aren't accessible on the boxes I've tested with (both on and off domains).
They have close to 20 songs. What are you talking about? Search for Radiohead.
You're assuming there's life on Proxima Centauri. You're also assuming that said life would be trying to reach us (although, given the distances you mentioned, it would be just as unfeasible to come here as to go there).
Meanwhile, we have evidence of water in various places *in our own solar system*. We have a bunch of area within reach (reach being several years) that look like they may have microbes. We're not looking for ET here: we're looking for any sign of life. Start at home in our neck of the galaxy, where we know there's a good chance we'll find some.
They have Radiohead, that's all I care about. I've been waiting for months for it to be added to iTunes. That's what most people will be looking for anyway: does this store carry the music I want? Most people don't even know what an OS is.
"The physical search you advocate is in no way, shape, or form technically or economically feasible at this point in time."
Au contraire. Again, look at the Mars missions. In addition, it adds something SETI hasn't: diehard facts and credibility. We don't know if aliens would communicate using radio waves, but we have a pretty good idea that life needs water to exist.
I look for incredible graphics when there isn't a need. I look for the ability to play back MPEGs. I look for 802.11b. I look for enough power to run emulators. I look for a system I can run Windows CE, Linux, and other stuff on.
In short, I look for Pocket PCs. Seriously. Palms and iPods and Blackberries have their place, but when I want to mess around with raw power, I look at Pocket PCs.
While I originally applauded SETI's efforts, I'm beginning to find this a bit ridiculous. When you lose your dog, you don't normally wait for it to find you: you look for it. We're basically sitting here waiting for a message, when we should be physically searching. Chances are any life worth finding in our neck of the universe won't be communicating via radio signals anyway.
I think the latest Mars expedition was a good step: look for livable areas, later look for life. Don't sit around waiting for it to come to you.
One problem: most public libraries are actually funded by local taxpayers. That's why you need a card (to prove you're from that area). If some guy comes from another town over and uses the wi-fi that my town paid for, I'd be pretty cheesed. Also, it's possibly illegal.
Most local libraries are paid by the town. Should someone from another town over walk in front of my library (that I paid for) and use its wi-fi (that I paid for)? Not on my watch.
No, it's neither. MS said they're putting the whole thing on the backburner (code, nexus, everything). Again, try reading more current articles.
You do know Paladium was scrapped, right? Try reading articles more current than 2 years old.
That was a really funny impersonation of a Mac zealot. :) Thanks for giving me a laugh.
Yeah, but I can't play DRM-encrusted AACs from Apple on all devices: only ones Apple condones (OS X and Windows). If they were the good guys, they'd release their spec for everyone to use.
Maybe because MS doesn't want to be the one who makes the decision on that. A while back Wired had an article about a "future" home MS created that was demonstrated in 2 versions: one that recognized who you were when you walked through your door, started playing music you liked and pumped it to rooms of the house as you walked around. The other version was DRM-encrusted and limited. MS didn't say which version it condones: it just wanted to show visions of the future.
"I haven't even up(down)graded to WMP 9 yet, it's so sticky with DRM issues."
Um, so is iTunes. I can't even buy a song off the iTunes store without DRM cruft. Why do we complain when it's MS but not Apple?
Except MS doesn't dominate in all fields. They've cut all hardware except mice and keyboards. Their home software (outside Encarta) was a disaster (remember Microsoft Beethoven?) The Xbox doesn't have anywhere close to the market share they were hoping for. Very few people use MSN.
What MS is doing is no different than Apple, although they actually aren't quite as bad because they're not locking people into hardware they create. Also, if the system is anything like iTunes, the songs themselves won't need to "phone home": the encrypted password will be embedded in the files themselves (try copying and opening a DRM-encrusted AAC between computers without an internet connection).
How are AACs from iTunes music store any different? At all? Both players play regular MP3s, so you get the same "freedom" regardless.