Wow, your car increases its fuel efficiency by 100% for each passenger you add, but the bus decreases fuel efficiency for each passenger? You should get all those people from the bus to join your carpool and you'll never have to fill up again.
The article was not about whether MS used proper coding techniques, just about whether they were lying about the browser being a part of the OS.
If that were true then unless future versions of IE maintained complete backwards compatibility with the previous versions (which by the way, they don't)
I'm pretty sure they are backward compatible - that's why they have BeforeNavigate() and BeforeNavigate2() methods [and NavigateComplete()/NavigateComplete2(), and NewWindow()/NewWindow2()/NewWindow3()]. The older methods still work for backward compatibility, but they are marked as deprecated and/or obsolete.
It has been proven, time and time again that technically, yes you could remove the browser, and you could still boot and use the OS, but numerous parts of the system would no longer work or would crash if you tried to use them.
I understand the difference between a rendering engine and a browser, but I highly doubt that the courts or the media do. I'm betting that any references to "browser" in court documents and the news could be replaced with "rendering engine" or "browser libraries" and instantly make all those claims 100% true.
The article is not really about the anti-trust case - it is about Microsoft saying the browser and OS would be difficult to de-couple.
It really doesn't matter why they chose to bundle them together with respect to the current topic. The author of the article is trying to make Microsoft sound like a liar because they said they couldn't unlink the two (in the time specified by the court anyway). The fact that they have solved this problem over 10 years later should not come as a surprise.
Well, then how would you explain why it works on Wine?
Define "it".
Oh, and it appears that I was wrong, the trial started before XP was released, so this actually started with Windows 95/98 and IE4/5. It's just that lots of businesses still use XP and IE6. This only further helps my argument because MS would have already started to separate things by the time Windows XP was released.
Um, when Microsoft made that claim, they were referring to Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 which are both almost 9 years old. At that time, IE6 was very likely tightly linked to the OS. They slowly "unlinked" it over the years which I'm sure was a lot of work. You can argue that they shouldn't have linked it in the first place (you may or may not be right). The fact that you could upgrade from IE6 to IE7 or 8 does not mean it was not linked - can you not upgrade certain pieces of the OS on Linux, Unix, or MacOS in small pieces? Isn't that what a patch is?
We are now to MAJOR OS versions later and Microsoft doesn't claim the OS and the browser are linked anymore.
If companies actually used proper coding techniques, they'd be using their own API, and therefore wouldn't have to "justify such an investment" in creating one. All they would have to do is decide what properties and methods to make publicly visible and generate a wrapper API (which since the internal API is already created should be relatively easy).
Because of the state of the economy, there is currently a controversy over spending $460 million on a new Marine One helicopter. Now that the blueprints for the currently Marine One are supposedly in the hands of our enemies, they can claim they *have to* get the new helicopters for "security" purposes. How convenient...
Be careful about the first/last name check. The place I work has about 1000 employees. 4 of them (mostly foreign) have the same first and last name. I know that's less than 1%, but you don't want to limit real users.
During assembly, another external disturbance is applied (i.e., the robot parts are kicked again).
While impressive, it appears the technology is "not quite there" - they obviously kicked the unattached part because it was having too much trouble re-attaching itself, and needed help to back up and try again.
You are the one who posted the question. The question implies that you either:
a.) do not understand the difference between a recommendation system and a ratings system
-or- b.) do not know English well enough to coherently phrase a meaningful question
My answer to you assumed "a". I'm sorry it turns out it was "b".
The fact is, Netflix isn't trying to change a rating from 3.0 to 3.1 or 2.9. They just want to know if you will like that movie regardless of its average rating.
The question isn't what the current rating is. That's just the average of everyone else's ratings. The recommendation system attempts to figure out if *YOU* would like it based on various factors. If their system is accurate, then they can suggest more movies to you that you will actually like. If they suggest more movies to you that you like, you will continue using their service, or perhaps upgrade your subscription so you can have more of those great movies at once.
Have these people never watched TV before? That Apple commercial is on every 10 minutes. Hey look at this cool new laptop - it's so thin you can fit it in a manila envelope!
Most people using Office 2007 are still saving their documents in XP/2003 format, so don't confuse the use of the format with the use of the software. In addition, Office 2007 has built-in support for PDF which is a better choice of format for the web.
You can't expect major corporations OR small businesses to jump formats overnight (and yes, 7 months is "overnight" when you are talking about major software changes).
ODF is output by various free software. More people are willing to download, upload, and play with free software. Geeks are more likely to play with free software. Geeks are more likely to upload documents to the web than normal internet users.
Word processing documents (in either format) aren't really meant for the web anyway.
All of these things will lower the number of OOXML documents on the web even if the use of Office 2007 is growing. Any opinions of Microsoft, Linux, Office aside, the comparison in TFA means absolutely nothing.
While I certainly don't agree that VB (specifically VB.NET) is a good choice for beginner programmers, I would have to disagree that VB is not a structured language. As the original article states, it is now a fully developed OO language which means you can teach all the appropriate theory on classes, objects, methods, properties, inheritance, etc. However, as a first language, there are too many nuances in VB that could easily confuse a beginner. One of the major strengths of VB is that you can quickly create applications with little work - while great for an advanced programmer, this exactly what you don't want for a beginner.
I am not a Microsoft hater like much of the Slashdot community, but I do personally hate VB and VB.NET because of its syntax. If you want to go with.NET, C# is definately the answer. If VB is your only background, it is much harder to pick up the more tried-and-true languages such as C, C++, and Java.
There is also the issue of platform independence. While the Mono project is well on its way to supporting the.NET languages on Linux, the only true support for.NET is Windows-based. To limit a new programmer to Windows might hold them back.
If you consider that google has crawled over 10 billion web pages, we are already down to a 10% sample. However if you consider the billions and billions of additional uncrawled pages from intranet sites to small sites with no incoming links and sites with their robots.txt or meta tags set to nocrawl or nofollow, 1 billion actually is a very small sample of the web.
That's quite an exaggeration. While the framework download is somewhat large, it is nowhere near 200MB. In fact, not even the v1.1 SDK is 200MB. If you compare it to the JRE download (15MB) which is required to run Java applications, it's not really that big.
.NET Framework Redistributable v1.1: 23MB .NET SDK (not required to run apps): 108MB
.NET Framework Redistributable v2.0: 22MB (even smaller) .NET SDK (not required to run apps): 362MB (much bigger)
There is nothing odd about this. These are the parameters the major search engines use to determine the keywords you searched for. Example:
google.com/search?q=my%20keywords
yahoo.com/search?p=my%20keywords
msn.com/results.aspx?q=my%20keywords
aol.com/aolcom/search?query=my%20keywords
This is a standard item that web analytic software looks for so that it can tell you what keywords, and what search engines people used to find your site.
Can anyone suggest some software that will read/decode closed captioned text from television? It would be nice if there was an Open Source package that did this, however I'd be interested in commercial alternatives as well.
Translation: "The Mac UI is unintuitive if you've been trained on a Windows-like GUI". In fact, numerous studies have shown that Macs are rather more intuitive than Windows for people who are new to the game You're just revealing a sample bias, bud.
Oh, you must mean how I can't just hit the eject button on my CD-ROM drive to open it? I have to drag it to the trash? (WTF!)
Or how I can't open multiple instances of Safari just by clicking on the icon in the dock? Once I have one instance open, I have to go to "File->New".
Or how I need three hands to use some of the keyboard "shortcuts"?
I can't understand why everyone says that Firefox is fast. On a brand new install of WinXP on a brand new 3GHz computer at work, I downloaded and installed Firefox. Not only does it take about 10 seconds just to open, but pages load about 3 to 4 times _slower_ than in IE. Don't get me wrong, I love Firefox. I'm a web developer and I use it as the standard when creating all my stylesheets (if it works in FF then I know it's right - I'm willing to add hacks for other browsers as needed), but it is *****SLOW******.
Working in a university setting I have a 100Mbit line direct to my workstation and web pages (especially images and tables) are noticably slow to download on FF while IE is nearly instantaneous. I'm not working through any hardware firewalls or proxies. The problem isn't limited to a single computer or this specific internet connection either. Regardless of the problems I have with it, I use it exclusively at home for security.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, your car increases its fuel efficiency by 100% for each passenger you add, but the bus decreases fuel efficiency for each passenger? You should get all those people from the bus to join your carpool and you'll never have to fill up again.
Windows was not built to be modular.
The article was not about whether MS used proper coding techniques, just about whether they were lying about the browser being a part of the OS.
If that were true then unless future versions of IE maintained complete backwards compatibility with the previous versions (which by the way, they don't)
I'm pretty sure they are backward compatible - that's why they have BeforeNavigate() and BeforeNavigate2() methods [and NavigateComplete()/NavigateComplete2(), and NewWindow()/NewWindow2()/NewWindow3()]. The older methods still work for backward compatibility, but they are marked as deprecated and/or obsolete.
It has been proven, time and time again that technically, yes you could remove the browser, and you could still boot and use the OS, but numerous parts of the system would no longer work or would crash if you tried to use them.
I understand the difference between a rendering engine and a browser, but I highly doubt that the courts or the media do. I'm betting that any references to "browser" in court documents and the news could be replaced with "rendering engine" or "browser libraries" and instantly make all those claims 100% true.
The article is not really about the anti-trust case - it is about Microsoft saying the browser and OS would be difficult to de-couple.
It really doesn't matter why they chose to bundle them together with respect to the current topic. The author of the article is trying to make Microsoft sound like a liar because they said they couldn't unlink the two (in the time specified by the court anyway). The fact that they have solved this problem over 10 years later should not come as a surprise.
Well, then how would you explain why it works on Wine?
Define "it".
Oh, and it appears that I was wrong, the trial started before XP was released, so this actually started with Windows 95/98 and IE4/5. It's just that lots of businesses still use XP and IE6. This only further helps my argument because MS would have already started to separate things by the time Windows XP was released.
Um, when Microsoft made that claim, they were referring to Windows XP and Internet Explorer 6 which are both almost 9 years old. At that time, IE6 was very likely tightly linked to the OS. They slowly "unlinked" it over the years which I'm sure was a lot of work. You can argue that they shouldn't have linked it in the first place (you may or may not be right). The fact that you could upgrade from IE6 to IE7 or 8 does not mean it was not linked - can you not upgrade certain pieces of the OS on Linux, Unix, or MacOS in small pieces? Isn't that what a patch is?
We are now to MAJOR OS versions later and Microsoft doesn't claim the OS and the browser are linked anymore.
If companies actually used proper coding techniques, they'd be using their own API, and therefore wouldn't have to "justify such an investment" in creating one. All they would have to do is decide what properties and methods to make publicly visible and generate a wrapper API (which since the internal API is already created should be relatively easy).
Since when is Facebook usable at 3mbps? Facebook is still slow on my 100mbps LAN.
Because of the state of the economy, there is currently a controversy over spending $460 million on a new Marine One helicopter. Now that the blueprints for the currently Marine One are supposedly in the hands of our enemies, they can claim they *have to* get the new helicopters for "security" purposes. How convenient...
Be careful about the first/last name check. The place I work has about 1000 employees. 4 of them (mostly foreign) have the same first and last name. I know that's less than 1%, but you don't want to limit real users.
I know it's sci-fi, but not a single one of those actors looks old enough to be put in charge of a starship. Kind of ruins the realism.
You are the one who posted the question. The question implies that you either:
a.) do not understand the difference between a recommendation system and a ratings system
-or-
b.) do not know English well enough to coherently phrase a meaningful question
My answer to you assumed "a". I'm sorry it turns out it was "b".
The fact is, Netflix isn't trying to change a rating from 3.0 to 3.1 or 2.9. They just want to know if you will like that movie regardless of its average rating.
The question isn't what the current rating is. That's just the average of everyone else's ratings. The recommendation system attempts to figure out if *YOU* would like it based on various factors. If their system is accurate, then they can suggest more movies to you that you will actually like. If they suggest more movies to you that you like, you will continue using their service, or perhaps upgrade your subscription so you can have more of those great movies at once.
Have these people never watched TV before? That Apple commercial is on every 10 minutes. Hey look at this cool new laptop - it's so thin you can fit it in a manila envelope!
All of these things will lower the number of OOXML documents on the web even if the use of Office 2007 is growing. Any opinions of Microsoft, Linux, Office aside, the comparison in TFA means absolutely nothing.
While I certainly don't agree that VB (specifically VB.NET) is a good choice for beginner programmers, I would have to disagree that VB is not a structured language. As the original article states, it is now a fully developed OO language which means you can teach all the appropriate theory on classes, objects, methods, properties, inheritance, etc. However, as a first language, there are too many nuances in VB that could easily confuse a beginner. One of the major strengths of VB is that you can quickly create applications with little work - while great for an advanced programmer, this exactly what you don't want for a beginner.
I am not a Microsoft hater like much of the Slashdot community, but I do personally hate VB and VB.NET because of its syntax. If you want to go with .NET, C# is definately the answer. If VB is your only background, it is much harder to pick up the more tried-and-true languages such as C, C++, and Java.
There is also the issue of platform independence. While the Mono project is well on its way to supporting the .NET languages on Linux, the only true support for .NET is Windows-based. To limit a new programmer to Windows might hold them back.
If you consider that google has crawled over 10 billion web pages, we are already down to a 10% sample. However if you consider the billions and billions of additional uncrawled pages from intranet sites to small sites with no incoming links and sites with their robots.txt or meta tags set to nocrawl or nofollow, 1 billion actually is a very small sample of the web.
That's quite an exaggeration. While the framework download is somewhat large, it is nowhere near 200MB. In fact, not even the v1.1 SDK is 200MB. If you compare it to the JRE download (15MB) which is required to run Java applications, it's not really that big.
.NET Framework Redistributable v1.1: 23MB
.NET SDK (not required to run apps): 108MB
.NET Framework Redistributable v2.0: 22MB (even smaller)
.NET SDK (not required to run apps): 362MB (much bigger)
There is nothing odd about this. These are the parameters the major search engines use to determine the keywords you searched for. Example:
This is a standard item that web analytic software looks for so that it can tell you what keywords, and what search engines people used to find your site.
When I read the title, I thought this would be something more along the lines of the Global Consciousness Project (a /. story a few months ago).
Guessing where someone is during the day is hardly even interesting other than its potential for abuse.
Can anyone suggest some software that will read/decode closed captioned text from television? It would be nice if there was an Open Source package that did this, however I'd be interested in commercial alternatives as well.
Oh, you must mean how I can't just hit the eject button on my CD-ROM drive to open it? I have to drag it to the trash? (WTF!)
Or how I can't open multiple instances of Safari just by clicking on the icon in the dock? Once I have one instance open, I have to go to "File->New".
Or how I need three hands to use some of the keyboard "shortcuts"?
Yes, very intuitive...
I can't understand why everyone says that Firefox is fast. On a brand new install of WinXP on a brand new 3GHz computer at work, I downloaded and installed Firefox. Not only does it take about 10 seconds just to open, but pages load about 3 to 4 times _slower_ than in IE. Don't get me wrong, I love Firefox. I'm a web developer and I use it as the standard when creating all my stylesheets (if it works in FF then I know it's right - I'm willing to add hacks for other browsers as needed), but it is *****SLOW******.
Working in a university setting I have a 100Mbit line direct to my workstation and web pages (especially images and tables) are noticably slow to download on FF while IE is nearly instantaneous. I'm not working through any hardware firewalls or proxies. The problem isn't limited to a single computer or this specific internet connection either. Regardless of the problems I have with it, I use it exclusively at home for security.
He said he used "pre-cut images", so maybe its just the images that are 90 degrees offset.
Whenever I fill out online forms requiring my email address, I always enter postmaster@[current domain requesting my email].
Let them receive their own spam.