Um, no. But I'm not. Unless I'm completely mistaken, I just downloaded the Windows XP preview and get to use it for 180 days because it's a beta. There is no subscription involved because when those 180 days expire, I have the option to go back to Win2000. Or use the Linux side of my box.
"as a good antidote for.Net and other subscription-based systems."
I'm sure I'm not the first person to ask this: "what's wrong with them?" Simply because they're run by Microsoft? Nice excuse, but, I usually need something a bit more substantial...
It seems a little base, but doesn't this sound like typical ZDNet tomfoolery? What would it take to get Kodak to remind their customers to reinstall their software after upgrading to XP? It just seems like the associations are screwed up. (Which happens all the time with MIME types on my Linux box. I can't tell you how many times RealPlayer has wanted to make itself the default MP3 player).
As Jon Stewart said on the Daily Show about a similar robot, "it can be an effective security robot/killing machine, as long as you don't kick it over or throw a blanket on top of it.":)
Maybe it's just me, but wouldn't it make more sense (perhaps with "Internet 2" or any of these other projects) to create infallible network protocols/tools that can't be used for malaciousness? Or is this logically impossible?
It just always seemed to me that, barring the script kiddies, the majority of people who use these tools seem to be hackers with malicious intent. Was the internet built with malcious intent as part of the protocol?
This part of the CNN article disturbed me a little:
"The company also falsely claimed the i-opener could provide complete Internet functionality, when in fact it could not process multimedia features like digital music and video or run software available over the Internet, the FTC said."
Complete Internet functionality? That seems like a loaded statement doesn't it? So my Palm VII doesn't count? My Sprint PCS cell phone? My older Linux box (whose sound card didn't work so I couldn't listen to "digital music")? What constitutes "complete functionality"?
"Evidently Adobe -- yes the Adobe that has not ported a single application apart from its PDF Reader to Linux -- sees a threat in KDE."
And everybody knows that's the key here. Heck, if Adobe had ported *all* their apps, we'd have no reason to yell at them on Slashdot. We would have gone back to bitching about the CueCat.:)
Things are a little bit different if you release something that has the word "Illustrator" in the title and actually acts, feature for feature, like "Adobe Illustrator". I think that constitutes infringement.
I know. I thought the same thing. Kinda looks like their MySQL server was shut off completely (although, it betters my argument that the two machines should always be one for small servers).
Existing email providers on cell phones
on
SMS vs. E-mail?
·
· Score: 2
I find using an existing email provider on my cell phone is the easiest way to send "instant messenges". Yahoo has a cell phone portal that is quick, efficient and appears on most services. I recently started using it with my Sprint PCS phone and it works great as messages appear immediately -- plus, you're using an existing standard and won't have to worry if SMS doesn't become the "final" standard.
Re:Maybe scientifically, but...
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps. But I know, as a far small example, I was born a Catholic but ended up being agnostic to some extent. I know some people are "programmed" to believe in certain and ways, and that's frightening. But wouldn't it be even more frightening if the programming was done before the person left the womb -- and the person couldn't decide to become something else (like agnostic) later on.
Indirect/Direct change to non-choosing individuals
on
Eco-Terrorism
·
· Score: 1
20/20 (which I very rarely watch) had an interesting special on Friday night about the "dangers" of bio-engineering, and the host's final conclusion was that it was good for the benefit of mankind and no different than any other activity humans have done to change themselves or their environment.
However, I racked my brain to think of an underlying logical reason (one that even the bio-terrorists may have missed) as to why human genetics is different than previous "enviormental changes". Isn't human genetics, e.g. designer babies, the first effort by mankind to *directly* alter the biology of itself.
Drugs have indirect effects that often are temporary. Genetically-engineered food can be consumed, but its negative effects (if any) are also temporary. Glasses and contacts can be taken off. Laser eye surgery or heart surgery can permanently affect your body, but often these are reversible to some extent.
As far as I know, biologic engineering is the first effort being made to change a human before he or she has the option to change himself, and in a permanent way. Now I can see why some liberals are up in alarm.
This is the first time we're going to directly, not indirectly, try to change someone before they have a choice to.
Somewhat offtopic, but I used to play a game at my college (which had a day care center off to the side) of "count the SUV".:) Almost as much fun as "count the cell phones".
Nintendo has been losing major stature with the N64, which is incredibly difficult to make games for (and the cartridge format is quite limited). If graphics tie to the hardware, which they do, one could easily argue that the lack of decent graphics is killing Nintendo's N64 game sales.
If that was also the case, Sony would be still holding onto the PS1 right now. And I'd still be playing my old TI-99/4A. Neither Sony nor I is that stupid.
Considering XBox runs on a modified version of the Windows 2000 kernel, and the WINE team has barely touched Windows 2000, I wouldn't expect a port anytime soon.
I wonder if this affects EA's arrangement with multiple platforms, because EA and Square are tied at the hip. While EA does publish to multiple platforms already (Microsoft considered that they scored a coup to get a large number of EA games to come out on the XBox) right now the the margin between PS/PS2 EA games and everyone else is very large.
Also, I wonder how this will affect Sony and Square's arrangement involving Square Pictures (a subsidy of Square, who will be releasing Final Fantasy with Sony this summer in the theatres). Will ties be strained further (as I'm already imagining they are?)
Sony lured Square to the PS to gain an edge in software, and they definitely succeeded. However, Sony seems to be doing the same thing that Nintendo did -- holding onto Square a little too tightly -- that's a big no-no for a mega-software publisher, especially when you bring in the EA factor.
Re:One word makes the difference . . .
on
FreeBSD on DVD
·
· Score: 1
Um, hate to barge in, but what are the possiblities that in the next few years, the MS subscription model is found to be more efficient (for both the consumer and business) and the FreeBSD service changes into that one? You never know.
Mark my words on this one, with experience with Word XP and all the horror stories being detailed on ZDNet -- the current scheme is going to be changed or axed real quickly.
"Usenet of course began in 1979, and is the 2nd of the 3 most important applications on the net (the first being email, and the third being the web)."
I consider myself somewhat "old school" (I was first introduced to the internet through email and newsgroups on CompuServe -- on a 300 baud modem when I was 5), but even I would argue that the web has had more significance than Usenet. True, Usenet fostered a lot of ideas (and, ahem, child pornography), but the web has touched a vast greater majority of people, and while nacient set off an economic boom (and drop) Usenet never saw. Plus, the web is a heck of a lot user-friendlier (something that means a lot in today's computing world -- even to myself).
I imagine this is just another effort by Rob to "stir the Slashdot pot". God it gets irritating after awhile.
Swap file is kept, and they core dump the current RAM to disk as well. It's not nearly as complicated as you think it is (it's similar to putting a laptop in "hibernate" mode). It would require the space for the swap file, and however many megs of RAM you have. (Even in light of a system with 256-512 MB of RAM, this is pretty small).
No, I'm saying that arguing that a system in which a windowing system is optional doesn't require a reboot is stupid in light of the fact that Windows inexplicably ties the two together. Most of the time you are making updates to the windowing system in Windows, not the underlying code. I have never, NEVER seen someone try to update X server and not restart it.
If you want to compare things that way, you should compare the Unix terminal and DOS. (Which if things have at all advanced in the past 15 years, should definitely not require a reboot.) As for the X server, find me a windowing system that wouldn't require a restart.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, no. But I'm not. Unless I'm completely mistaken, I just downloaded the Windows XP preview and get to use it for 180 days because it's a beta. There is no subscription involved because when those 180 days expire, I have the option to go back to Win2000. Or use the Linux side of my box.
I'm sure I'm not the first person to ask this: "what's wrong with them?" Simply because they're run by Microsoft? Nice excuse, but, I usually need something a bit more substantial...
It seems a little base, but doesn't this sound like typical ZDNet tomfoolery? What would it take to get Kodak to remind their customers to reinstall their software after upgrading to XP? It just seems like the associations are screwed up. (Which happens all the time with MIME types on my Linux box. I can't tell you how many times RealPlayer has wanted to make itself the default MP3 player).
Aww man, it uses preprocessor directives? Lame. :)
As Jon Stewart said on the Daily Show about a similar robot, "it can be an effective security robot/killing machine, as long as you don't kick it over or throw a blanket on top of it." :)
It just always seemed to me that, barring the script kiddies, the majority of people who use these tools seem to be hackers with malicious intent. Was the internet built with malcious intent as part of the protocol?
"The company also falsely claimed the i-opener could provide complete Internet functionality, when in fact it could not process multimedia features like digital music and video or run software available over the Internet, the FTC said."
Complete Internet functionality? That seems like a loaded statement doesn't it? So my Palm VII doesn't count? My Sprint PCS cell phone? My older Linux box (whose sound card didn't work so I couldn't listen to "digital music")? What constitutes "complete functionality"?
And everybody knows that's the key here. Heck, if Adobe had ported *all* their apps, we'd have no reason to yell at them on Slashdot. We would have gone back to bitching about the CueCat. :)
Things are a little bit different if you release something that has the word "Illustrator" in the title and actually acts, feature for feature, like "Adobe Illustrator". I think that constitutes infringement.
I know. I thought the same thing. Kinda looks like their MySQL server was shut off completely (although, it betters my argument that the two machines should always be one for small servers).
I find using an existing email provider on my cell phone is the easiest way to send "instant messenges". Yahoo has a cell phone portal that is quick, efficient and appears on most services. I recently started using it with my Sprint PCS phone and it works great as messages appear immediately -- plus, you're using an existing standard and won't have to worry if SMS doesn't become the "final" standard.
Perhaps. But I know, as a far small example, I was born a Catholic but ended up being agnostic to some extent. I know some people are "programmed" to believe in certain and ways, and that's frightening. But wouldn't it be even more frightening if the programming was done before the person left the womb -- and the person couldn't decide to become something else (like agnostic) later on.
However, I racked my brain to think of an underlying logical reason (one that even the bio-terrorists may have missed) as to why human genetics is different than previous "enviormental changes". Isn't human genetics, e.g. designer babies, the first effort by mankind to *directly* alter the biology of itself.
Drugs have indirect effects that often are temporary. Genetically-engineered food can be consumed, but its negative effects (if any) are also temporary. Glasses and contacts can be taken off. Laser eye surgery or heart surgery can permanently affect your body, but often these are reversible to some extent.
As far as I know, biologic engineering is the first effort being made to change a human before he or she has the option to change himself, and in a permanent way. Now I can see why some liberals are up in alarm.
This is the first time we're going to directly, not indirectly, try to change someone before they have a choice to.
Somewhat offtopic, but I used to play a game at my college (which had a day care center off to the side) of "count the SUV". :) Almost as much fun as "count the cell phones".
Or never go outside again. :) It seems in some ways England is more backwards than the US, and in others the US is more backwards than England.
Out of curiousity, what's the thinnest available in existence? Not keeping it to a particular OS. (Although FreeBSD/Linux would be nice)
If that was also the case, Sony would be still holding onto the PS1 right now. And I'd still be playing my old TI-99/4A. Neither Sony nor I is that stupid.
Considering XBox runs on a modified version of the Windows 2000 kernel, and the WINE team has barely touched Windows 2000, I wouldn't expect a port anytime soon.
Also, I wonder how this will affect Sony and Square's arrangement involving Square Pictures (a subsidy of Square, who will be releasing Final Fantasy with Sony this summer in the theatres). Will ties be strained further (as I'm already imagining they are?)
Sony lured Square to the PS to gain an edge in software, and they definitely succeeded. However, Sony seems to be doing the same thing that Nintendo did -- holding onto Square a little too tightly -- that's a big no-no for a mega-software publisher, especially when you bring in the EA factor.
Um, hate to barge in, but what are the possiblities that in the next few years, the MS subscription model is found to be more efficient (for both the consumer and business) and the FreeBSD service changes into that one? You never know.
Mark my words on this one, with experience with Word XP and all the horror stories being detailed on ZDNet -- the current scheme is going to be changed or axed real quickly.
I consider myself somewhat "old school" (I was first introduced to the internet through email and newsgroups on CompuServe -- on a 300 baud modem when I was 5), but even I would argue that the web has had more significance than Usenet. True, Usenet fostered a lot of ideas (and, ahem, child pornography), but the web has touched a vast greater majority of people, and while nacient set off an economic boom (and drop) Usenet never saw. Plus, the web is a heck of a lot user-friendlier (something that means a lot in today's computing world -- even to myself).
I imagine this is just another effort by Rob to "stir the Slashdot pot". God it gets irritating after awhile.
Actually, my first experience with the internet was with email. I'd guess that for most people, this would be the case.
Swap file is kept, and they core dump the current RAM to disk as well. It's not nearly as complicated as you think it is (it's similar to putting a laptop in "hibernate" mode). It would require the space for the swap file, and however many megs of RAM you have. (Even in light of a system with 256-512 MB of RAM, this is pretty small).
If you want to compare things that way, you should compare the Unix terminal and DOS. (Which if things have at all advanced in the past 15 years, should definitely not require a reboot.) As for the X server, find me a windowing system that wouldn't require a restart.