Considering you can turn it off with a couple of mouse clicks I'm not sure what the big deal is. The rest of us DO use it. I can't tell you how many times I've done a "close group" command to kill a bunch of CAD windows.
"BTW, my grandpa had the same idea when he'd keep his roofing nails in one coffee can, and his finish nails in another coffee can."
It's NOT the same idea. The MS patent has to do with a very specific grouping on a certain widget that only exists in software. RTFP (read the fucking pamphlet).
"First off, what the hell is "X-windows"? I know of the X Window System, X11, X, X.org, XFree86 -- but I know nothing of this "X-windows.""
Uh, you're basically shooting down his entire argument because of one letter? It's not like he called it X-hippos, which would've made it totally difficult to understand what he was saying. Windows 2003, Windows 2003 Server System, Windows 2003 Server... what's the difference?
So, um, with Friendster, that's been "beta" up until now, but plans on eventually charging for services (read articles about the founder), what's currently there isn't "free"?
"So here starts the next layer of conversion hell!"
Like every version of Visual Studio before it. You can't even open Visual Studio.NET projects in Visual Studio.NET 2003, despite the fact that the IDEs are virtually identical (save for a different version of the CLI they're writing to).
What's the big deal, anyway? Why would you go back to the previous version if you have the new one? Unlike OSs, there isn't a hell of a big advantage in going back to an earlier IDE.
"Since I've abandoned Windows, but must still develop software for it"
"Since I no longer drive a Toyota, but make parts for it." "Since I no longer read books, but no how to write them." "Since I no longer eat, but know how to cook dinner."
"Basically, Core Image means that any developer can write code that offloads image processing work to the GPU without knowing anything about how to program the GPU."
You mean like just about every graphicabstraction level out there? Do you think anyone programs low-level pixel shaders anymore?
There's nothing in Core that hasn't been done before, or is in the process of being created. Avalon is pretty much going to use DirectX from the ground up. By the time Tiger comes out, we'll be one year away from (presumably) Longhorn. By then, if all OSs aren't using similar tech something is seriously wrong.
Have you seen what Panther looks like on an older video card (Blue and White G3s and early G4s)? It may scale, but you don't get nearly the functionality or decent speed you get with a higher-end machine.
I admit that having two 30" LCDs side-by-side would be droolworthy (assuming I could afford the $6000+ cost in displays alone, not to mention the CPU), but I was talking with a coworker over this and was wondering who, if anyone, has room for this kind of thing on their desk.
Even on a wide-open setup, some CAD designers I've seen would still eat up most of their desks with this. Combined with the fact that you can't actually see beyond your desk with two huge monitors in your way, how would this be practical for most people?
I'm still waiting on hologram displays: little buttons I push that can pop up a screen from my desk, display it in air, then turn it off if someone comes by to talk. Adjustable, semi-transparent, it'd be perfect for most work situations.
"Microsoft responded with ActiveX, which bypasses security entirely by making it easy to blame the user for authorizing bad code to execute"
Uh, not quite. ActiveX was more a response to JavaScript/Flash/et al. Anything that created a lightweight web app..NET is their response to Java (and, for all intents and purposes,.NET is miles ahead of anything MS has ever created in terms of security).
Re:... but I'll defend to the death his right...
on
Fahrenheit 9/11 Discussion
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
"I was very upset when I read that a conservative group tried to pressure theater owners into not showing Moore's film."
Interesting story: I went to see the film Friday night, first showing at a local cineplex. We got about halfway through the movie when the fire alarm went off and we were sent out of the theater. No fire, but weren't allowed to see the rest of the flick.
I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories. It could've just been some kids pulling the alarm with nothing else to do on a Friday night. But the timing was AWFULLY convenient.
This is more an issue with running a series dry instead of "old games are better than new games". Case in point: Kingdom Hearts. Totally new concepts, great characters. Sure your kids (especially the older one) would love it.
I work with "PR goons". They aren't the ones that come up with words like this. The PR people go to the technology people and ask for details. The good ones ask for lots of details and learn about the tech. Then, they carefully craft a response (leaving out some of the bad stuff). The good ones do it with a modicum of integrity.
Any PR person worth his salt wouldn't come up with words like "vaporware". They'd get it from some *tech guy* that doesn't know what he's talking about. All PR people do is craft the response to the public in a way that best benefits the company.
Since the driver for the JVC GR-DV500 isn't certified by MS (at least the one I just downloaded from their website), I don't exactly see your point. Of course it screws up -- next time get a driver that actually supports the system you're using.
1.) CEOs are rarely involved with anything the CTO does. 2.) Even IF the CEO was involved, I'd hope he/she would ask questions like "Do any of our critical pieces of software besides web browsing require IE libraries? What kind of downtime are we looking at to install on several hundred/thousands machines? What kind of training?"
May I ask why? Your users (family) are obviously telling you something: they don't like your solution. In addition, if you're actually deleting IE (not just removing the icon) you're probably breaking a lot of apps like Norton Antivirus that requires the MSHTML.dll (among others), making things worse.
Always make new software an option, not "trick" the user or remove their old software. Explain the reasons for the change and the benefits of the new software. If they don't find any, obviously your argument doesn't hold as much weight as you thought it would.
"What I have always done is download Firefox, change the icon to the blue E, and rename the shortcut "Internet Explorer". I then tell them, "It's the new version of Internet Explorer, called Mozilla.""
So the only recourse to introducing the new software is to *trick* people into using it? Doesn't sound like a very effective (or fair) argument.
"They happen 'all the time' -- often enough -- but they mostly just don't result in an advantage that'll make you more successful, natural selection wise."
True, at least according to one theory. I've also heard that some mutations seem to burst forth in "spurts" all at once (usually due to a massive environmental change), and those mutations are the ones that tend to stick.
There are some graphs out there -- maybe you've seen them. One shows more or less a steady line of mutations for evolution, the other one looks like stairs. I don't think it's been decided (or can be decided) which one is "right".
Slashdot Mirror
Considering you can turn it off with a couple of mouse clicks I'm not sure what the big deal is. The rest of us DO use it. I can't tell you how many times I've done a "close group" command to kill a bunch of CAD windows.
"BTW, my grandpa had the same idea when he'd keep his roofing nails in one coffee can, and his finish nails in another coffee can."
It's NOT the same idea. The MS patent has to do with a very specific grouping on a certain widget that only exists in software. RTFP (read the fucking pamphlet).
Ha. No, really. You belong in the catskills. :P
"First off, what the hell is "X-windows"? I know of the X Window System, X11, X, X.org, XFree86 -- but I know nothing of this "X-windows.""
Uh, you're basically shooting down his entire argument because of one letter? It's not like he called it X-hippos, which would've made it totally difficult to understand what he was saying. Windows 2003, Windows 2003 Server System, Windows 2003 Server... what's the difference?
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of US representatives. Never mind... that wouldn't produce much more work than one representative (0 x any number...)
So, um, with Friendster, that's been "beta" up until now, but plans on eventually charging for services (read articles about the founder), what's currently there isn't "free"?
"So here starts the next layer of conversion hell!"
.NET projects in Visual Studio .NET 2003, despite the fact that the IDEs are virtually identical (save for a different version of the CLI they're writing to).
Like every version of Visual Studio before it. You can't even open Visual Studio
What's the big deal, anyway? Why would you go back to the previous version if you have the new one? Unlike OSs, there isn't a hell of a big advantage in going back to an earlier IDE.
"Since I've abandoned Windows, but must still develop software for it"
"Since I no longer drive a Toyota, but make parts for it."
"Since I no longer read books, but no how to write them."
"Since I no longer eat, but know how to cook dinner."
Anyone else find this statement strange?
"Basically, Core Image means that any developer can write code that offloads image processing work to the GPU without knowing anything about how to program the GPU."
You mean like just about every graphic abstraction level out there? Do you think anyone programs low-level pixel shaders anymore?
There's nothing in Core that hasn't been done before, or is in the process of being created. Avalon is pretty much going to use DirectX from the ground up. By the time Tiger comes out, we'll be one year away from (presumably) Longhorn. By then, if all OSs aren't using similar tech something is seriously wrong.
Have you seen what Panther looks like on an older video card (Blue and White G3s and early G4s)? It may scale, but you don't get nearly the functionality or decent speed you get with a higher-end machine.
"Its pretty good in terms of security, but still has weaknesses when compared to Java."
Such as? Curious to hear this. Most people I've talked to say the two are about neck and neck.
".Net is MS's answer to J2EE."
.NET Compact Framework is much closer to J2EE than .NET is.
I would say
I admit that having two 30" LCDs side-by-side would be droolworthy (assuming I could afford the $6000+ cost in displays alone, not to mention the CPU), but I was talking with a coworker over this and was wondering who, if anyone, has room for this kind of thing on their desk.
Even on a wide-open setup, some CAD designers I've seen would still eat up most of their desks with this. Combined with the fact that you can't actually see beyond your desk with two huge monitors in your way, how would this be practical for most people?
I'm still waiting on hologram displays: little buttons I push that can pop up a screen from my desk, display it in air, then turn it off if someone comes by to talk. Adjustable, semi-transparent, it'd be perfect for most work situations.
"Microsoft responded with ActiveX, which bypasses security entirely by making it easy to blame the user for authorizing bad code to execute"
.NET is their response to Java (and, for all intents and purposes, .NET is miles ahead of anything MS has ever created in terms of security).
Uh, not quite. ActiveX was more a response to JavaScript/Flash/et al. Anything that created a lightweight web app.
"I was very upset when I read that a conservative group tried to pressure theater owners into not showing Moore's film."
Interesting story: I went to see the film Friday night, first showing at a local cineplex. We got about halfway through the movie when the fire alarm went off and we were sent out of the theater. No fire, but weren't allowed to see the rest of the flick.
I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories. It could've just been some kids pulling the alarm with nothing else to do on a Friday night. But the timing was AWFULLY convenient.
This is more an issue with running a series dry instead of "old games are better than new games". Case in point: Kingdom Hearts. Totally new concepts, great characters. Sure your kids (especially the older one) would love it.
I work with "PR goons". They aren't the ones that come up with words like this. The PR people go to the technology people and ask for details. The good ones ask for lots of details and learn about the tech. Then, they carefully craft a response (leaving out some of the bad stuff). The good ones do it with a modicum of integrity.
Any PR person worth his salt wouldn't come up with words like "vaporware". They'd get it from some *tech guy* that doesn't know what he's talking about. All PR people do is craft the response to the public in a way that best benefits the company.
Easily one of the funniest things I've read on Slashdot.
"Well let me ask you this: Should something like a shitty driver for a modem (of all things) be able to bring the Entire OS down?"
Considering a bad modem can routinely bring a kernel panic to some distributions of Linux, I'd say "yes".
Since the driver for the JVC GR-DV500 isn't certified by MS (at least the one I just downloaded from their website), I don't exactly see your point. Of course it screws up -- next time get a driver that actually supports the system you're using.
1.) CEOs are rarely involved with anything the CTO does.
2.) Even IF the CEO was involved, I'd hope he/she would ask questions like "Do any of our critical pieces of software besides web browsing require IE libraries? What kind of downtime are we looking at to install on several hundred/thousands machines? What kind of training?"
Switching browsers isn't easy for a corporation.
"no I didn't put them there, no, they shouldn't be there, but our dev team wants ASP"
Well, then they should be there.
"and even gone to the point of deleting IE"
May I ask why? Your users (family) are obviously telling you something: they don't like your solution. In addition, if you're actually deleting IE (not just removing the icon) you're probably breaking a lot of apps like Norton Antivirus that requires the MSHTML.dll (among others), making things worse.
Always make new software an option, not "trick" the user or remove their old software. Explain the reasons for the change and the benefits of the new software. If they don't find any, obviously your argument doesn't hold as much weight as you thought it would.
"What I have always done is download Firefox, change the icon to the blue E, and rename the shortcut "Internet Explorer". I then tell them, "It's the new version of Internet Explorer, called Mozilla.""
So the only recourse to introducing the new software is to *trick* people into using it? Doesn't sound like a very effective (or fair) argument.
"They happen 'all the time' -- often enough -- but they mostly just don't result in an advantage that'll make you more successful, natural selection wise."
True, at least according to one theory. I've also heard that some mutations seem to burst forth in "spurts" all at once (usually due to a massive environmental change), and those mutations are the ones that tend to stick.
There are some graphs out there -- maybe you've seen them. One shows more or less a steady line of mutations for evolution, the other one looks like stairs. I don't think it's been decided (or can be decided) which one is "right".