I never said gas hog was bad solely because it pollutes but a gas hog *is* a polluter. You burn more gas and assuming all other things are equal you release a greater quantity of pollution. Unless you are saying that your massive SUV somehow burns fuel more cleanly than smaller cars?
At any rate, pollution is definitely bad. But so is consuming non-renewable resourced at twice (+) the rate of people who choose to drive smaller cars. Obviously that argument doesn't have any effect on most Americans. Neither does the argument that driving a bigger car increases American dependence on foreign oil. I find that odd but I'm just an ig'nant Canadian living in this mess of a country.:)
20 GB hard drive? 10.4" display? 1 GHz (assuming that compares with a 1 GHz P4)?
The word that comes to mind is "weak". Yes it is very light. But with a 10.4" screen and weak processor IMHO this sounds as much a PDA as it is a laptop. If it had killer battery life that would be a plus but it doesn't. I'd much rather carry something twice as useful, twice as heavy (or less, but 4-5 pounds really is heavy, not!) for basically the same price.
The US isn't rushing towards IPv6 because it has no need. Many other countries (especially in the far east, e.g. Japan) are trying to roll out networks with IPv6 only right now.
If you have reasons for not wanting to run XP, that's fine. But it is retarded to run Windows 98 and on that basis say that Windows sucks. As I asked, do you run and/or recommended using 6 year old Linux distros? And if you go to Mac will you run a 6 year old version of the Mac OS?
It is 2004 and you are talking about Windows 98? Do you recommend that people run six year old Linux distros?
Jesus H Christ! Do you people talk about Windows 98 when you're talking "Windows" because you just don't know any better or are you just looking for ways to make MS look bad? Yes, Windows 98, 98se, and ME are all pieces of crap. But they are ancient history. While you may not like XP hopefully you'll agree that it is a hell of a lot more stable than 98/ME!
Am I the only one who found this article extremely lacking in information? Let's reserve judgement until the story is told rather than clamor for a whipping when all we have to go on is this:
Lawrence Goldfarb, managing partner of BayStar, says that senior executives at the software giant had telephoned him about two months before the investment. Would he be interested in investing in SCO, they asked?
RTFP - we're talking about user-activated email "viruses", not OS/product vulnerabilities.
The quote *does* say that Linux is not vulnerable to this kind of thing because it's not standardized. Read it.
Re:Patriot missile -- really a "failure"
on
Can Software Kill?
·
· Score: 1
Software does not do what it is designed to do, ever. Software does what it is *written* to do. The design is usually very, very different from the implementation even in a "successful" program.
Fair enough - that's why I said that text files have their advantages. Personally I have not had a corrupt registry since I started running NT4. YMMV.
This is not meant to be a personal attack but when a Linux fanboi starts listing off specific reasons why MS sucks, you usually find that at least some of those reasons apply to the oh-so-crappy and now very old releases (98, 98se, ME). I find this very annoying. Do MS users critize 6 year old Linux releases? I don't think so...
"On Linux, because of the large number of different kernel configurations and application distributions (distros) that people run, this kind of exploit must be tailored to each specific target. So Linux systems, by the very nature of their diversity, are not vulnerable to this kind of exploit."
All you are saying is that Linux is not vulnerable because it has no market share and isn't standardized.
If it ever gets high market share it will be from the idiot users that click on the "click me to install mega virus" links. By then it will be standardized - idiots like things to be consistent.
You need to get a clue if you're saying this is Linux's only defense against the clueless user who likes to install viruses!
Clippy was a reasonably good idea gone horribly, horribly wrong. Sad...
Remember, MS users tend to be clueless. This is not a bad thing. MS caters at least partly to the clueless because they need all the help they can get!
There have been Windows viruses that replicate without user intervention. Obviously those are freaking disasters.
But many of the viruses out there require a user to click on something and run a program. Running as admin or not really doesn't matter if all the virus wants to do is read your address book and mail copies of itself to your (also stupid) friends.
I'm not Linux expert but I assume: - Linux mailers can present executable attachments to clueless users, and - Linux mailers have address books
That's all that would be required to emulate the "clueless Windows user" type of virus. Most Linux users are not clueless, however, so there would be little point.
The fact that there are so many clueless MS users does not reflect badly on MS. In fact quite the opposite.
And yes, MS OSes in the past have been flakey as hell. But with Windows XP IMHO the problem is 100% solved. I have never rebooted an XP or Windows 2000 Server box to fix a problem(disclaimer: my server needs are not stressful). They reboot occasionally to apply patches and that's it. I believe I had my 2000 server up for over 8 months last year (got lazy, didn't check for updates for a while).
"Most importantly, config files are easily user editable unlike the registry."
Minor nit but the registry is actually very editable. Maybe you don't like the registry on general principles - that's fine. Text files definitely have some advantages. But leave off the FUD please. The registry has a spanky edit UI plus you can import/export any keys you like via text files.
Slashdot Mirror
Staying away from the internet wouldn't help this poor sod. I'd suggest a nice bouncy rubber room.
:)
I'd love to see his credit card balances.
I feel that would be an acceptable compromise given the other things a functioning holodeck could be used for. ;)
I never said gas hog was bad solely because it pollutes but a gas hog *is* a polluter. You burn more gas and assuming all other things are equal you release a greater quantity of pollution. Unless you are saying that your massive SUV somehow burns fuel more cleanly than smaller cars?
:)
At any rate, pollution is definitely bad. But so is consuming non-renewable resourced at twice (+) the rate of people who choose to drive smaller cars. Obviously that argument doesn't have any effect on most Americans. Neither does the argument that driving a bigger car increases American dependence on foreign oil. I find that odd but I'm just an ig'nant Canadian living in this mess of a country.
20 GB hard drive? 10.4" display? 1 GHz (assuming that compares with a 1 GHz P4)?
The word that comes to mind is "weak". Yes it is very light. But with a 10.4" screen and weak processor IMHO this sounds as much a PDA as it is a laptop. If it had killer battery life that would be a plus but it doesn't. I'd much rather carry something twice as useful, twice as heavy (or less, but 4-5 pounds really is heavy, not!) for basically the same price.
Who's gonna buy it?
If the environmental gestapo won the argument, why are there so many giant SUVs on the road that (literally) get 10-12 mpg in the city???
For many people around the work the "almighty buck" translates to good food, good living conditions, decent health care, FREEDOM, etc.
Yeah, the almight buck sure is evil!
You may be better off month-to-month but if you plan to work in India and then retire in North America, you're screwed.
Some of us are actually thinking about the long term...
The US isn't rushing towards IPv6 because it has no need. Many other countries (especially in the far east, e.g. Japan) are trying to roll out networks with IPv6 only right now.
That's not barbarism! Try this on for size if you want to read about barbaric immigration practices.
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/000727.html
Troll mod? IMHO I had a valid point but I suppose any viewpoint that is not anti-MS and pro-Linux is a troll on /.
If you have reasons for not wanting to run XP, that's fine. But it is retarded to run Windows 98 and on that basis say that Windows sucks. As I asked, do you run and/or recommended using 6 year old Linux distros? And if you go to Mac will you run a 6 year old version of the Mac OS?
Get real...
It is 2004 and you are talking about Windows 98? Do you recommend that people run six year old Linux distros?
Jesus H Christ! Do you people talk about Windows 98 when you're talking "Windows" because you just don't know any better or are you just looking for ways to make MS look bad? Yes, Windows 98, 98se, and ME are all pieces of crap. But they are ancient history. While you may not like XP hopefully you'll agree that it is a hell of a lot more stable than 98/ME!
Why do you assume making money and making an effective OS are mutually exclusive?
;)
Are you new to Slashdot or something?
Am I the only one who found this article extremely lacking in information? Let's reserve judgement until the story is told rather than clamor for a whipping when all we have to go on is this:
Lawrence Goldfarb, managing partner of BayStar, says that senior executives at the software giant had telephoned him about two months before the investment. Would he be interested in investing in SCO, they asked?
RTFP - we're talking about user-activated email "viruses", not OS/product vulnerabilities.
The quote *does* say that Linux is not vulnerable to this kind of thing because it's not standardized. Read it.
Software does not do what it is designed to do, ever. Software does what it is *written* to do. The design is usually very, very different from the implementation even in a "successful" program.
That's just evolution doing what it can to try and make our species better (which is a losing battle these days).
Yeah? What if I program a robot to kill -- my software would only kill if it was "good programming". :)
(I'm at a loss how the parent got Insightful...)
And usually all of the unreliability issues with Windows are no longer an issue too.
(But security needs work...)
Fair enough - that's why I said that text files have their advantages. Personally I have not had a corrupt registry since I started running NT4. YMMV.
This is not meant to be a personal attack but when a Linux fanboi starts listing off specific reasons why MS sucks, you usually find that at least some of those reasons apply to the oh-so-crappy and now very old releases (98, 98se, ME). I find this very annoying. Do MS users critize 6 year old Linux releases? I don't think so...
"On Linux, because of the large number of different kernel configurations and application distributions (distros) that people run, this kind of exploit must be tailored to each specific target. So Linux systems, by the very nature of their diversity, are not vulnerable to this kind of exploit."
All you are saying is that Linux is not vulnerable because it has no market share and isn't standardized.
If it ever gets high market share it will be from the idiot users that click on the "click me to install mega virus" links. By then it will be standardized - idiots like things to be consistent.
You need to get a clue if you're saying this is Linux's only defense against the clueless user who likes to install viruses!
Clippy was a reasonably good idea gone horribly, horribly wrong. Sad...
Remember, MS users tend to be clueless. This is not a bad thing. MS caters at least partly to the clueless because they need all the help they can get!
There have been Windows viruses that replicate without user intervention. Obviously those are freaking disasters.
But many of the viruses out there require a user to click on something and run a program. Running as admin or not really doesn't matter if all the virus wants to do is read your address book and mail copies of itself to your (also stupid) friends.
I'm not Linux expert but I assume:
- Linux mailers can present executable attachments to clueless users, and
- Linux mailers have address books
That's all that would be required to emulate the "clueless Windows user" type of virus. Most Linux users are not clueless, however, so there would be little point.
The fact that there are so many clueless MS users does not reflect badly on MS. In fact quite the opposite.
And yes, MS OSes in the past have been flakey as hell. But with Windows XP IMHO the problem is 100% solved. I have never rebooted an XP or Windows 2000 Server box to fix a problem(disclaimer: my server needs are not stressful). They reboot occasionally to apply patches and that's it. I believe I had my 2000 server up for over 8 months last year (got lazy, didn't check for updates for a while).
"Most importantly, config files are easily user editable unlike the registry."
Minor nit but the registry is actually very editable. Maybe you don't like the registry on general principles - that's fine. Text files definitely have some advantages. But leave off the FUD please. The registry has a spanky edit UI plus you can import/export any keys you like via text files.
PVRs rule. Television is 99% mindless dreck. A PVR lets you get the little bit of quality that you want without being exposed to the dreck and ads.
If you don't own a PVR and you watch TV, you are living in the dark ages!