What does this have to do with IE? IE is going to have a built-in popup blocker in about a month from SP2, and toolbars that have it now are plentiful.
Not exactly. Any system administrator (which I assume he is -- not too many Windows 2000 home users) worth his salt knows to slipstream the latest updates into his copy of Windows before installing to a new box (especially a box that will immediately be on the internet).
He didn't do that, he didn't run a firewall... he didn't take any sensible protection. Would you install RedHat 5.0 (out around the same time) and put it out on the web immediately, expecting not to get hit by worms before patching (yes, they exist for Linux)? I rest my case.
"If you move your cursor over each "Exposed" window, it will give you its title."
Yes, but you can do that in Windows and most window managers for *NIX. There's a lot of good things about the GUI in Mac OS X (I actually like the dock, unlike some people). Making windows 20x20 pixels and having to mouse over them to find out their names isn't one of them.
"Sorry, but this just isn't true. Third-party UI hacks have been a part of Mac going back to the beginning."
The GUI was designed to be hackable. Show me what preference I need to change (or text file) that'll let me move Expose windows around. Ok, show me a 3rd-party app that does it then. See?
"That would not be easy for someone who's been using and working on PCs for more than 20 years."
Then act like it. Saying "M$" pretty much pens you as a high school or college-aged zealot. Most of us are open to all software (even the dominating ones). Would you put the letters "M$" down on a budget sheet for your boss?
Au contraire: not in this neck of the woods. We have XP running on new 3 ghz workstations and 300-mhz PIIs at my company. We have Windows 2000 only running on relatively high-end systems (decent speed, lots of memory) because of it's mind-boggling slowness.
Keep in mind: even though XP loads up some unnecessary services, 2000 loads up nearly ALL unnecessary services. Ever watch a system boot 2000? Painful. It's an ok server but a lousy workstation.
Expose it good, but I'd like to be able to move the windows around after showing them all. That's one of the problems with Apple -- if a feature you want doesn't exist within the OS, you basically have to wait for Apple to add it (usually at cost). In Windows case, most 3rd parties will jump in and fix it.
Oh, and there's one other problem with Expose (but this probably only affects me): when you're working with 10 or more windows, it tends to make them really small and put them in a line, rather than (logically) tiling them around the screen. Lots of wasted space, and it's difficult to tell what each window exactly is.
Recently purchased an OS X machine (iBook). Had been messing around with the system off and on for a few years on the company's art department computers. It's good, but it isn't the panacea this guy (and others) make it out to be.
Every OS excels at something. Mac (still) excels at useability. UNIX stability. Windows excels at recognizing just about any piece of hardware or software I've thrown at it in the last 15 years.
If you think about it, Windows isn't THAT bad. I can't think of a single OS that runs the breadth of programs Windows does from so many years of computing. Sure, console apps still work the same in Linux as they did in UNIX from decades ago, and you can (sometimes) get Mac to run applications prior to OS 7, but there have been a number of times I've loaded up DOS programs from the 80s in Windows XP and was surprised they run more or less perfectly (even when the original app expected full control over the computer).
I think, and others can probably vouch for this, the allure of Mac OS in particular kind of wanes after a few weeks of using it. Again, excellent GUI, but there's definitely a feeling (misguided, I think) that Windows "has" to be bad because it's used everywhere. This doesn't translate to some other consumer products (PS2, anyone) so I'm not sure why geeks hate Windows in particular. Do we hate it because we perceive everyone else hates it (the same way people who use MacOS love it more because everyone else who uses it loves it)? Probably something to bring up in a psychology class.
"Plenty of alternatives exist, it depends on what you want to do."
Most people (hi mom!) want to view all photos, music and video without having to think about the program they're using. They don't want to download products supported by hackers or (gasp!) programs they'd have to pay extra for like WinDVD. They want to get a video from their grandkids, open it and have it play.
Not to mention, Windows Media Player uses the exact same codec WinDVD does (try purchasing it from Intervideo). What's the point in bringing up a separate DVD player when you get the exact same functionality in a program most people are already using for music?
I agree. I hate when people try to intergrate things... like in toasters.
I recently was shopping, and I had a hard time buying one that had different tools for all thed ifferent toaster functions. They all wanted to control the heating index, push the bread down, brown it and pop it up. What the hell is that?!?
I require no less than a minimum of 5 different tools to brown toast. I've got the "push-downer", a small tab that's less than inch long. I have the control dial purchased separately and off to the side (it requires unscrewing part of the toaster to use it every time, but I don't mind). I use two different toaster browning codecs (or toastecs) to give subtle variance to the shade of the toast, and I have a very large spring-loaded mechanism used to pop the toast up.
I don't know where I'd be if all toasters had ALL THE SAME FUNCTIONS IN ONE DEVICE. Probably in toaster hell.
It's only "moderately" critical (for now) because a simple hardware reset button fixes the problem. Once reset, go into the admin and set a bloody password -- problem never happens again.
It would be more critical if the exploit permanently wrecked the router. As it is, most of them have their simple boot code in flashable ROM. Just grab the last good copy and work with it (if someone figures out a way to update the firmware to a bad version, well, then people are screwed).
"Wouldn't your CD burning software have to support this 'limit copy feature' already? Doesn't most burning software first make an ISO or a BIN of the CD(with encryption) and then burn the EXACT copy of the original CD? So if I'm making an EXACT copy of a product, never changing a bit in the process, how is it going to know I'm making copies?"
Short answer: litigation.
Long answer: CD burning software companies will HAVE to support the new copyright schemes, lest they get blown out of the water by RIAA et all saying "We gave you a copyright scheme, now use it". Watch and see. If "copyright management through litigation" takes off with DRM, you won't be able to purchase a burning program in a few years that doesn't support these schemes. And free software versions will be more or less sued out of existence.
What part of the normal music market will learn to download MP3s off the internet? Probably almost none of it, if they can find or understand them. So that leaves the likes of the Slashdot crowd, and that really isn't a big enough group to put a dent into cultural acceptance. Oh wait...
I use a Pocket PC (been using different ones for the past few years) but have always been impressed by Sony's innovations. If nothing else, they've provided solid competition for Microsoft. Now, it's essentially MS and a very dwindling Palm leading the PDA charge. So much for competition.
"He worked full time and a few $BIG_COMPANIES promised him $XYZ in payment if he delivered $ABC."
Which is kind of the reason some programmers (most?) shouldn't be involved with money-related matters and $BIG_COMPANIES. "Promised" means absolutely nothing in the business world.
He should've let someone else handle financial issues if he was having trouble making rent. Instead, like most programmers, he unfortunately felt that if he mastered one system, he's mastered them all. Not usually the case.
At first I was going to say "Of course the government should adopt open source voting machines," but then I looked at the current situation:
* The government doesn't display the diagrams to locks it has in its buildings. * Most of our miltary documents and weapondry are completely classified (can you tell me what exactly Area 51 does)? * Some of our most cherished documents (like the Constitution) are protected by systems meant to place them underground in the event of a nuclear war (Google it). But how exactly does it work? Who has access to the documents afterwards? The secret shadow government that's up and running in case of an emergency (Google it).
Fact is, very little of government is open source anythin. And yet the US has gotten along for over 200 years. While that doesn't necessarily mean things have been done "correctly", it does mean they've been sufficient enough to keep the country going. The chances we're going to change course now is unlikely.
You're joking, right? Lamo proceeded to dive in and conduct searches without the Times permission. It's akin to the neighbor jumping through the window, rooting around inside, using your TV and refrigerator then saying "Hey, you've got an open window," as he walked away.
Yes, of course, information should be free, yada yada yada. Fact is, there's some rules. Lamo knew the rules but didn't bother to follow them.
Considering the space program essentially used flash memory to store just about everything on the Mars missions, I imagine they're a prime candidate. They'd have to wait for cards that are radiation and durability tested, which may take years.
Hard drives are a liability in space: one more gizmo that can fall apart from vibration, not to mention dust. Flash memory is far more reliable.
Uh, dude, relax. It's the computing industry. You know, jobs and stuff. Things that don't really matter in the grand scheme of life. Lest not live in a
"Would you be willing to pay $600 for a console with all of the capabilities of a standard OEM PC?"
Caveat: I'm a current Xbox owner. It's a great system overall.
I'd get this new system under some conditions:
1.) They stick with the current 2K kernel. Outside of a few games here and there, the current Xbox kernel has been rock solid. No more or less than the GameCube/PS2. If they switch to a full-fledged version of Windows, I'm bailing. 2.) They get a large contingent of companies supporting it. I'm not talking PS2-size, but current Xbox-size. 3.) They don't offer "upgrades" for the system. Doing so would defeat the purpose. 4.) They go with a more common architecture than their current "shared memory frankensystem". It works for games, but I can't even use the DVD drive in another computer without an adapter. 5.) They stick with the Xbox's strengths: great (perhaps the best) online games, solid use of the technology (they had games using pixel shaders before they even became popular on the PC), and good specs for the money.
Slashdot Mirror
What does this have to do with IE? IE is going to have a built-in popup blocker in about a month from SP2, and toolbars that have it now are plentiful.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that everytime a porn site is visited (even accidentally) it opens 20-some-odd popup windows...
Not exactly. Any system administrator (which I assume he is -- not too many Windows 2000 home users) worth his salt knows to slipstream the latest updates into his copy of Windows before installing to a new box (especially a box that will immediately be on the internet).
He didn't do that, he didn't run a firewall... he didn't take any sensible protection. Would you install RedHat 5.0 (out around the same time) and put it out on the web immediately, expecting not to get hit by worms before patching (yes, they exist for Linux)? I rest my case.
"If you move your cursor over each "Exposed" window, it will give you its title."
Yes, but you can do that in Windows and most window managers for *NIX. There's a lot of good things about the GUI in Mac OS X (I actually like the dock, unlike some people). Making windows 20x20 pixels and having to mouse over them to find out their names isn't one of them.
"Sorry, but this just isn't true. Third-party UI hacks have been a part of Mac going back to the beginning."
The GUI was designed to be hackable. Show me what preference I need to change (or text file) that'll let me move Expose windows around. Ok, show me a 3rd-party app that does it then. See?
"That would not be easy for someone who's been using and working on PCs for more than 20 years."
Then act like it. Saying "M$" pretty much pens you as a high school or college-aged zealot. Most of us are open to all software (even the dominating ones). Would you put the letters "M$" down on a budget sheet for your boss?
"PS2 is a popular product, but I don't *HAVE* to use it."
Actually, if you're a gamer, you pretty much *HAVE* to have PS2, because most games only come out for it.
Yes, your argument surely carries weight when you use "M$" and "winblows". *rolls eyes* Still in high school?
"XP is CRAZY slower than 2k."
Au contraire: not in this neck of the woods. We have XP running on new 3 ghz workstations and 300-mhz PIIs at my company. We have Windows 2000 only running on relatively high-end systems (decent speed, lots of memory) because of it's mind-boggling slowness.
Keep in mind: even though XP loads up some unnecessary services, 2000 loads up nearly ALL unnecessary services. Ever watch a system boot 2000? Painful. It's an ok server but a lousy workstation.
Expose it good, but I'd like to be able to move the windows around after showing them all. That's one of the problems with Apple -- if a feature you want doesn't exist within the OS, you basically have to wait for Apple to add it (usually at cost). In Windows case, most 3rd parties will jump in and fix it.
Oh, and there's one other problem with Expose (but this probably only affects me): when you're working with 10 or more windows, it tends to make them really small and put them in a line, rather than (logically) tiling them around the screen. Lots of wasted space, and it's difficult to tell what each window exactly is.
Recently purchased an OS X machine (iBook). Had been messing around with the system off and on for a few years on the company's art department computers. It's good, but it isn't the panacea this guy (and others) make it out to be.
Every OS excels at something. Mac (still) excels at useability. UNIX stability. Windows excels at recognizing just about any piece of hardware or software I've thrown at it in the last 15 years.
If you think about it, Windows isn't THAT bad. I can't think of a single OS that runs the breadth of programs Windows does from so many years of computing. Sure, console apps still work the same in Linux as they did in UNIX from decades ago, and you can (sometimes) get Mac to run applications prior to OS 7, but there have been a number of times I've loaded up DOS programs from the 80s in Windows XP and was surprised they run more or less perfectly (even when the original app expected full control over the computer).
I think, and others can probably vouch for this, the allure of Mac OS in particular kind of wanes after a few weeks of using it. Again, excellent GUI, but there's definitely a feeling (misguided, I think) that Windows "has" to be bad because it's used everywhere. This doesn't translate to some other consumer products (PS2, anyone) so I'm not sure why geeks hate Windows in particular. Do we hate it because we perceive everyone else hates it (the same way people who use MacOS love it more because everyone else who uses it loves it)? Probably something to bring up in a psychology class.
"Plenty of alternatives exist, it depends on what you want to do."
Most people (hi mom!) want to view all photos, music and video without having to think about the program they're using. They don't want to download products supported by hackers or (gasp!) programs they'd have to pay extra for like WinDVD. They want to get a video from their grandkids, open it and have it play.
Not to mention, Windows Media Player uses the exact same codec WinDVD does (try purchasing it from Intervideo). What's the point in bringing up a separate DVD player when you get the exact same functionality in a program most people are already using for music?
I agree. I hate when people try to intergrate things... like in toasters.
I recently was shopping, and I had a hard time buying one that had different tools for all thed ifferent toaster functions. They all wanted to control the heating index, push the bread down, brown it and pop it up. What the hell is that?!?
I require no less than a minimum of 5 different tools to brown toast. I've got the "push-downer", a small tab that's less than inch long. I have the control dial purchased separately and off to the side (it requires unscrewing part of the toaster to use it every time, but I don't mind). I use two different toaster browning codecs (or toastecs) to give subtle variance to the shade of the toast, and I have a very large spring-loaded mechanism used to pop the toast up.
I don't know where I'd be if all toasters had ALL THE SAME FUNCTIONS IN ONE DEVICE. Probably in toaster hell.
It's only "moderately" critical (for now) because a simple hardware reset button fixes the problem. Once reset, go into the admin and set a bloody password -- problem never happens again.
It would be more critical if the exploit permanently wrecked the router. As it is, most of them have their simple boot code in flashable ROM. Just grab the last good copy and work with it (if someone figures out a way to update the firmware to a bad version, well, then people are screwed).
Nah, next is someone trying to patent the patenting procedure. Then the world explodes.
"Wouldn't your CD burning software have to support this 'limit copy feature' already? Doesn't most burning software first make an ISO or a BIN of the CD(with encryption) and then burn the EXACT copy of the original CD? So if I'm making an EXACT copy of a product, never changing a bit in the process, how is it going to know I'm making copies?"
Short answer: litigation.
Long answer: CD burning software companies will HAVE to support the new copyright schemes, lest they get blown out of the water by RIAA et all saying "We gave you a copyright scheme, now use it". Watch and see. If "copyright management through litigation" takes off with DRM, you won't be able to purchase a burning program in a few years that doesn't support these schemes. And free software versions will be more or less sued out of existence.
What part of the normal music market will learn to download MP3s off the internet? Probably almost none of it, if they can find or understand them. So that leaves the likes of the Slashdot crowd, and that really isn't a big enough group to put a dent into cultural acceptance. Oh wait...
I use a Pocket PC (been using different ones for the past few years) but have always been impressed by Sony's innovations. If nothing else, they've provided solid competition for Microsoft. Now, it's essentially MS and a very dwindling Palm leading the PDA charge. So much for competition.
"He worked full time and a few $BIG_COMPANIES promised him $XYZ in payment if he delivered $ABC."
Which is kind of the reason some programmers (most?) shouldn't be involved with money-related matters and $BIG_COMPANIES. "Promised" means absolutely nothing in the business world.
He should've let someone else handle financial issues if he was having trouble making rent. Instead, like most programmers, he unfortunately felt that if he mastered one system, he's mastered them all. Not usually the case.
At first I was going to say "Of course the government should adopt open source voting machines," but then I looked at the current situation:
* The government doesn't display the diagrams to locks it has in its buildings.
* Most of our miltary documents and weapondry are completely classified (can you tell me what exactly Area 51 does)?
* Some of our most cherished documents (like the Constitution) are protected by systems meant to place them underground in the event of a nuclear war (Google it). But how exactly does it work? Who has access to the documents afterwards? The secret shadow government that's up and running in case of an emergency (Google it).
Fact is, very little of government is open source anythin. And yet the US has gotten along for over 200 years. While that doesn't necessarily mean things have been done "correctly", it does mean they've been sufficient enough to keep the country going. The chances we're going to change course now is unlikely.
You're joking, right? Lamo proceeded to dive in and conduct searches without the Times permission. It's akin to the neighbor jumping through the window, rooting around inside, using your TV and refrigerator then saying "Hey, you've got an open window," as he walked away.
Yes, of course, information should be free, yada yada yada. Fact is, there's some rules. Lamo knew the rules but didn't bother to follow them.
Considering the space program essentially used flash memory to store just about everything on the Mars missions, I imagine they're a prime candidate. They'd have to wait for cards that are radiation and durability tested, which may take years.
Hard drives are a liability in space: one more gizmo that can fall apart from vibration, not to mention dust. Flash memory is far more reliable.
"I can't bear it any more."
Uh, dude, relax. It's the computing industry. You know, jobs and stuff. Things that don't really matter in the grand scheme of life. Lest not live in a
"Would you be willing to pay $600 for a console with all of the capabilities of a standard OEM PC?"
Caveat: I'm a current Xbox owner. It's a great system overall.
I'd get this new system under some conditions:
1.) They stick with the current 2K kernel. Outside of a few games here and there, the current Xbox kernel has been rock solid. No more or less than the GameCube/PS2. If they switch to a full-fledged version of Windows, I'm bailing.
2.) They get a large contingent of companies supporting it. I'm not talking PS2-size, but current Xbox-size.
3.) They don't offer "upgrades" for the system. Doing so would defeat the purpose.
4.) They go with a more common architecture than their current "shared memory frankensystem". It works for games, but I can't even use the DVD drive in another computer without an adapter.
5.) They stick with the Xbox's strengths: great (perhaps the best) online games, solid use of the technology (they had games using pixel shaders before they even became popular on the PC), and good specs for the money.
Do that and I'll be all over it.
Thanks for ruining comedic timing.
Yeah, but where do aircraft attendants put their coats when they're on the job? Huh?!? Where you now, smart guy?!?