If the athletes actually feel strongly about issues relating to China, then they can choose not to go. Sure, you'll lose out on marketing deals and fame and... ah, yes, I think we know how deep their feelings actually are.
Many arguments say the best way to bring China into the modern world is to integrate them despite their flaws, to expose their peoples to alternative viewpoints. If they are correct, then the Olympics will overall be a good thing despite any current issues.
One thing I think is certain - the house of the future won't be 5000 square feet. I imagine that single people will be happy to live in 500 square feet, more likely couples will be living in this area. Families will survive within 1000 square feet.
You're still not multitasking when you do both tasks, you're switching between both tasks quickly. As soon as you actually try to do both things at the same time (hopefully the two tasks are different in how they need to be completed - urgent phone call + something else) the quality goes down or the overall time to implement goes up (most likely both). Exceptions are when the tasks are quite simple in nature or you have done them a billion times before - talking whilst typing, moving hand vigorously whilst web surfing, etc). Which I believe is what this article was about although it was a while ago now.
If something comes up at work or at home while we're in the middle of something else that's important, what do you do?
1) Stop the current task 2) Get my wits about me for the new urgent task 3) Start working on the new task until a point whereby the urgency has passed 4) Go back to the first task.
This isn't multitasking. I don't think anyone continues to use a spirit level to ensure the shelf is level and then marks holes and drills and puts up the shelf whilst explaining on the phone to work how to fix the server and where the scripts are and to check xyz, whilst also appreciating the lyrics to a new song on the radio. If they can do this, then the tasks are a lot less complex, like listening to the ex moan about her life on the phone.
That's time-slicing tasks, and it isn't what the article is talking about. Time slicing would mean you'd drive the car, notice the phone went off, pull over, then handle the phone call, then drive off again.
Multitasking in terms of the article is having two resource intensive tasks happening at the same time. Think about running two tasks that would each require 60% of the CPU on a computer at the same time to react in real-time - instead the tasks run slower, reaction time drops or quality of response is lowered (e.g. skipped frames in a video), and so on.
Listening and understanding and forming responses is a resource intensive task for the brain (if it's not all, like, yeah, yeah, really she did that did she?) as is driving, or walking across a tightrope, and so on. Ever noticed how talk radio presenters speak smoothly, slowly and with clear enunciation so that the listeners in cars aren't distracted - you notice it more as a passenger, and I suspect that drivers listen to talk radio a lot because subconsciously it is a lower load on the brain. As you do a task more (like learning to juggle) the more you can handle at the same time (conversations, or more balls) - it's like the repetition JIT-compiles the actions into a more efficient format for the brain to handle.
I'll grant Grails one thing - having read the documentation - it does allow you to specify the database mappings within the "class" that you write. I once worked with JDO and the mappings from the model to the database were done in the motherf*cker of XML files, and the automated schema it generated was pretty damn dire if you wanted to work in the psql command line.
Note that I think that a good developer - in any language - should also be a good database architect and be able to create a good schema with indexes and views and basically making full use of the database's own optimised implementations for functionality. They should also understand how it maps to and from the equivalent model in the programming language - not the fields, but how the relationships work and things you need to do to handle collections, etc. The Grails Object-Relationship-Model actually looks quite reasonable to me.
One constraint it appears to be missing is "maxlength" for strings - which is clearly useful for when you generate the database structure (nvarchar2 or clob?) and the web forms, and validation of data. However it does have "types" like email, postcode, etc, which will incorporate some of this checking (Note that I haven't used Hibernate or Springs, so these features could be inherited.)
Bah! I want to write my own DAOs, and worry about customising each one for different backend databases because their JDBC implementations handle things differently, never mind the SQL differences!
Actually at least you are in control when you do that. Somebody else's programming and database schema paradigm are quite often quite different from your own. It is good for everyone to have to all the parts so that they know how it works. Sure, they might use an off-the-shelf framework later on, but they need to know what's happening inside that framework.
These things make developing web applications easier for cheap Java programmers. You have to hope that the generated database schema is decent. I've seen frameworks generate schemas that were a complete brain-fuck to navigate using traditional methods, basically tying you into accessing the database via that framework only.
And "tiny" - it seems to include its own application server, database engine, several parent frameworks...
Of course the important issue is when the Eclipse support is ready.
Does Grails allow the export of a Java.jar file for the data model and database access, so you can access the schema from traditional Java applications, not via the application server? All with nice Javadoc of course...
I will give this a play however. It seems perfect for small intranet applications. I assume it has a module for user accounts, etc?
Wow, that's the least biased comparison I've ever seen. It's pathetic. "It I twist the argument around, or change the parameters, or make a huge assumption, or lie, I can make the X1 win" - on almost every entry.
"Power. Intel core 2 duo 1.6GHz versus a Centrino mobile 1.1GHz?" - yup, winner X1, even though there will be external battery packs for the Air for long journeys in mere weeks (battery + MagSafe cable, not that hard, and less hassle than carrying a spare battery and swapping it out).
Never mind that the Dell power adaptors that I've seen are veritable bricks - the MBA's adaptor is quite diminutive.
Of course if the X1 was still being made, it would have more up to date specifications - it'd be a dual-core 1.2GHz ULV probably.
Still not quite the right specs or the right price for me though. More USB ports are a must, and lacking Firewire is sad.
And speaking of R&D, one has to remember that Apple, unlike Dell, has an entire operating system division to support.
Apple sells how many Mac OS X devices a year? 8m or so? That's ignoring the Touch and AppleTV and iPhone which are derivatives that leverage the technology.
How much does Apple spend on Mac OS X development each year? $200m? That includes licensing patents and technology and buying out third party stuff like Coverflow.
200m / 8m = $25 per device - that's far cheaper than licensing Vista Premium as an OEM. Oh, and they sell boat loads of each new OS release to existing users. If every two years, 20% of the existing users (of say 16m computers, or 2 years past sales) spend $130 on the upgrade, that's $416m - that's covered the OS development on its own assuming the $200m figure above. Even if Mac OS X development costs were double, it would still only be a cost of $25 per computer sold overall.
Anyone know of a reasonable ballpark figure for the yearly development costs of Mac OS X (not iLife, not iWork)?
go ahead and show some marketing chutzpa Apple, and cut prices by 50%.
Apple's profit margins are 34% overall (probably more profit from iPods than Macs as well). What you suggest makes no sense unless the larger volumes would get them a reduction in component prices, but it's not like they're moving from 10k to 100k, they'd be moving from 1m to 2m - they've already got the cheapest possible component prices.
The 5% price drop every other month makes more sense in that over time production costs are reduced via efficiency gains and component price drops, and Apple could easily pass that on.
I'd call $1b profits a quarter "real money", and it will continue to increase YoY.
How in the hell would forcing Apple make its iPods cheaper help the competition compete?
Instead of being 2/3rds the price, they're now the same price. They'd sell even less.
The market has spoken, they are willing to pay 50% more to get an iPod *despite there being a wealth of competition and alternatives in the marketplace*. That's down to having a more desirable and better product for the mainstream.
Microsoft ACTIVELY hurt their competitors, e.g., stopping things working under DR-DOS, and so on. There's a vast difference in behaviour.
Isn't an iPhone firmware update just a disk image that is written onto the iPhone / iPod Touch overwriting what was there before? That's hardly "thwarting", that's just how it's done.
Nevermind the core APIs changing, making third party applications unlikely to run anyway, even if they were preserved.
As to fixing security flaws that previous hacks have utilised... that's sensible behaviour.
And providing a third party SDK of their own very soon - only 8 months after the device release when the platform has stabilised - that's not so bad. How were the first Palm or Windows CE SDKs and APIs?
We can bitch about the iPhone SDK when it is released and we know what limitations or restrictions it enforces. I'm sure there will be something to upset everyone.
In the meantime we can be happy that it isn't Windows Mobile that's going to take over that area of the market. Haven't ever seen such a piece of poorly designed crapware before, well, since WinME.
What if Apple says "We'll offer your software via iTunes! Written a utility application? We'll sign and verify it for you, and sell it via our hugely accessed portal for $0.99 - we get half, you get half!"?
How many people would go "Hmm, I could just give it away, but I'll have to pay that $50 fee for the signing certificate (for example), and I think this is useful, hey, what's the risk of making a bit of money?".
Other apps could be $1.99, $4.99, $9.99,... Apple getting half (distribution, signing, etc) and the developer getting the rest (for writing).
I remember Palm apps selling for tens of dollars, up to $100 or more. For simple tasks. On those Palm software websites. You'd go through, pick up the decent freeware, and get annoyed at people wanting $29.99 for a ToDo list. Pretty much like the Windows Shareware market, ridiculous fees for low-function apps.
You could try to argue the point that Apple should just patch the bugs and leave the apps
That's great if the iPhone OS API that these apps are using has remained stable.
It's highly unlikely that is the case - indeed that's surely one reason why there hasn't been an SDK earlier.
When the SDK is released in February (I would be expecting an SDK developer preview as well - whether that is earlier, or what is given in February is another thing) that will be when the underlying API is solidifying into a stable platform.
For a platform that is only 6 months old (in the public) it's going to have teething issues, and it's good that Apple gets the API as useful as possible before stabilising it. The alternative of waiting to release the iPhone in 2008 is, of course, ludicrous.
I'm sure that all the current third party iPhone apps will be ported to the SDK in very short notice. I also expect the SDK to be free, like XCode. The issue of signing apps is something else entirely, but I can understand why Apple would keep this in place, and why they might have to charge a fee, or distribute via iTunes, etc. I hope that Apple don't refuse to sign stuff they don't like (e.g., NES emulators, chat apps, etc). We will find out more within a month, let's leave it for now.
The other news regarding the update is good. Multiple SMS recipients being the number one feature for most people I imagine (and one that shouldn't have taken so long to implement either).
That's where Maglev should excel - connecting nearby cities.
It will work as long as the stations on the Maglev route are integrated with both local public transport and accessibility for cars with reasonable rate car parks. All too often these things are done in a vacuum, thus being too awkward for people to care to use them. If you can drive, park, and get on the maglev, it will work. That's why airports have been successful, and why trains haven't succeeded so well. Hell, in the UK they can't even get the buses interconnecting with the train station in many locations, resulting in two bus changes in an 8 mile journey just to get onto the train - and they wonder why there is so much congestion on the road even when fuel is over £1 a litre.
A successful Maglev station will have (in my opinion with not too much thought, I welcome additions and amendments):
1) A big bus terminal, interconnecting with the local airport, city and residential areas 2) A local rail station, interconnecting with local rail systems (if applicable for the area) 3) A huge car park on site. 4) A vast remote car park (near highways) with free park and ride bus scheme. 5) A service that runs at least every half hour.
Let's not forget that the fares for the Maglev itself have to be reasonable, as they have to compete with car travel (even though the Maglev will have advantages that are worth a surcharge).
I am glad that the family of the murdered man will finally get to see the perpetrator punished for her crimes.
If she didn't do them, then maybe modern methods can be used to absolve her of the blame.
However she was found guilty, however strange her defence was (likely indicating that there was no means of defence, not even character witnesses at the time) and thus should have been punished. Instead she has lived 35 years as a free person, with only the diminishing worry of being captured; having fun, children, life experiences, etc. The husband she murdered never had that. She's stolen a life from him and his family by escaping, adding further insult to their pain.
It does sound like she is rehabilitated of course, most murders are one-offs.
Oh yes, I'll take Ubuntu over Windows XP as well. The new work laptop has nearly gone out of the window a couple of times already. How can an OS deadlock/hourglass so often with two CPU cores to work with?!!
And yes, the Windows Driver Install is a complete PITA. Linux wins with its driver install as part of the core package, Mac OS X is close behind (doing the same, and now moving driver updates for third party products into Software Update), and Windows is in the stone age.
That's cool, I'll be doing the upgrade to Gutsy soon when I'm next near the box and it'll be good to have Flash working again for when I get YouTube links. Guess I'll have to install FlashBlock again though, darn it! Cheers for the information.
Adium is fully configurable in appearance in Mac OS X. Check it out.
I've used GAIM/Pidgin in Windows and that was partially configurable - at least the buddy window could be set to have small buddy icons and all that, I like a nice compact buddy window.
Most GTK themes seem to be variants on the same brick-as-a-gui-element basis unfortunately.
Ignoring your initial comment which is typical of people who can't see the forest for the trees, and totally bypassing the entire point...
I'm happy to see that Debian are considering that solution, and I hope it works well. It seems that some people still do realise that the end result is all that people care about so downgrading to 32-bit in the absence of Adobe 64-bit support (which is appalling, and the company should be really ashamed, I wonder what the real reason for this is) is the sensible option.
I didn't do any compiling, the issue was with finding out which software was the correct software to use to install the nVidia drivers, the one that worked correctly instead of the ones that didn't work (like most of the online resources out there). Open source drivers are the solution, of course, even if they have to leave out certain technologies.
Linux is easily available in 64-bit versions. People are therefore much more likely to use it if they try out Linux on their computer - and most computers within the past year have included 64-bit functionality. One of the first things they'll see is the lack of 64-bit flash, which isn't Linux's fault, but they'll blame it on Linux. And go back to 32-bit Windows.
And I like Mac OS X for a reason, it's good. If you haven't used it for a substantial amount of time, you may not know this. Compiz adds a lot of what is good with Mac OS X's desktop to Linux, and it works quite well, although windows are a little too jellyrific.
Your final sentence does not parse, but I've been using Linux since 1996 (yeah, quite late to the game). That still doesn't mean I enjoy reconfiguring X for the thirtieth time. This topic is about Linux On The Desktop. Not Linux For Hardcore Geeks.
Slashdot Mirror
Without the athletes, the Olympics is nothing.
... ah, yes, I think we know how deep their feelings actually are.
If the athletes actually feel strongly about issues relating to China, then they can choose not to go. Sure, you'll lose out on marketing deals and fame and
Many arguments say the best way to bring China into the modern world is to integrate them despite their flaws, to expose their peoples to alternative viewpoints. If they are correct, then the Olympics will overall be a good thing despite any current issues.
One thing I think is certain - the house of the future won't be 5000 square feet. I imagine that single people will be happy to live in 500 square feet, more likely couples will be living in this area. Families will survive within 1000 square feet.
Or maybe we will all move to the countryside.
You're still not multitasking when you do both tasks, you're switching between both tasks quickly. As soon as you actually try to do both things at the same time (hopefully the two tasks are different in how they need to be completed - urgent phone call + something else) the quality goes down or the overall time to implement goes up (most likely both). Exceptions are when the tasks are quite simple in nature or you have done them a billion times before - talking whilst typing, moving hand vigorously whilst web surfing, etc). Which I believe is what this article was about although it was a while ago now.
If something comes up at work or at home while we're in the middle of something else that's important, what do you do?
1) Stop the current task
2) Get my wits about me for the new urgent task
3) Start working on the new task until a point whereby the urgency has passed
4) Go back to the first task.
This isn't multitasking. I don't think anyone continues to use a spirit level to ensure the shelf is level and then marks holes and drills and puts up the shelf whilst explaining on the phone to work how to fix the server and where the scripts are and to check xyz, whilst also appreciating the lyrics to a new song on the radio. If they can do this, then the tasks are a lot less complex, like listening to the ex moan about her life on the phone.
That's time-slicing tasks, and it isn't what the article is talking about. Time slicing would mean you'd drive the car, notice the phone went off, pull over, then handle the phone call, then drive off again.
Multitasking in terms of the article is having two resource intensive tasks happening at the same time. Think about running two tasks that would each require 60% of the CPU on a computer at the same time to react in real-time - instead the tasks run slower, reaction time drops or quality of response is lowered (e.g. skipped frames in a video), and so on.
Listening and understanding and forming responses is a resource intensive task for the brain (if it's not all, like, yeah, yeah, really she did that did she?) as is driving, or walking across a tightrope, and so on. Ever noticed how talk radio presenters speak smoothly, slowly and with clear enunciation so that the listeners in cars aren't distracted - you notice it more as a passenger, and I suspect that drivers listen to talk radio a lot because subconsciously it is a lower load on the brain. As you do a task more (like learning to juggle) the more you can handle at the same time (conversations, or more balls) - it's like the repetition JIT-compiles the actions into a more efficient format for the brain to handle.
I'll grant Grails one thing - having read the documentation - it does allow you to specify the database mappings within the "class" that you write. I once worked with JDO and the mappings from the model to the database were done in the motherf*cker of XML files, and the automated schema it generated was pretty damn dire if you wanted to work in the psql command line.
Note that I think that a good developer - in any language - should also be a good database architect and be able to create a good schema with indexes and views and basically making full use of the database's own optimised implementations for functionality. They should also understand how it maps to and from the equivalent model in the programming language - not the fields, but how the relationships work and things you need to do to handle collections, etc. The Grails Object-Relationship-Model actually looks quite reasonable to me.
One constraint it appears to be missing is "maxlength" for strings - which is clearly useful for when you generate the database structure (nvarchar2 or clob?) and the web forms, and validation of data. However it does have "types" like email, postcode, etc, which will incorporate some of this checking (Note that I haven't used Hibernate or Springs, so these features could be inherited.)
Bah! I want to write my own DAOs, and worry about customising each one for different backend databases because their JDBC implementations handle things differently, never mind the SQL differences!
...
.jar file for the data model and database access, so you can access the schema from traditional Java applications, not via the application server? All with nice Javadoc of course...
Actually at least you are in control when you do that. Somebody else's programming and database schema paradigm are quite often quite different from your own. It is good for everyone to have to all the parts so that they know how it works. Sure, they might use an off-the-shelf framework later on, but they need to know what's happening inside that framework.
These things make developing web applications easier for cheap Java programmers. You have to hope that the generated database schema is decent. I've seen frameworks generate schemas that were a complete brain-fuck to navigate using traditional methods, basically tying you into accessing the database via that framework only.
And "tiny" - it seems to include its own application server, database engine, several parent frameworks
Of course the important issue is when the Eclipse support is ready.
Does Grails allow the export of a Java
I will give this a play however. It seems perfect for small intranet applications. I assume it has a module for user accounts, etc?
Wow, that's the least biased comparison I've ever seen. It's pathetic. "It I twist the argument around, or change the parameters, or make a huge assumption, or lie, I can make the X1 win" - on almost every entry.
"Power. Intel core 2 duo 1.6GHz versus a Centrino mobile 1.1GHz?" - yup, winner X1, even though there will be external battery packs for the Air for long journeys in mere weeks (battery + MagSafe cable, not that hard, and less hassle than carrying a spare battery and swapping it out).
Never mind that the Dell power adaptors that I've seen are veritable bricks - the MBA's adaptor is quite diminutive.
Of course if the X1 was still being made, it would have more up to date specifications - it'd be a dual-core 1.2GHz ULV probably.
Still not quite the right specs or the right price for me though. More USB ports are a must, and lacking Firewire is sad.
And speaking of R&D, one has to remember that Apple, unlike Dell, has an entire operating system division to support.
Apple sells how many Mac OS X devices a year? 8m or so? That's ignoring the Touch and AppleTV and iPhone which are derivatives that leverage the technology.
How much does Apple spend on Mac OS X development each year? $200m? That includes licensing patents and technology and buying out third party stuff like Coverflow.
200m / 8m = $25 per device - that's far cheaper than licensing Vista Premium as an OEM.
Oh, and they sell boat loads of each new OS release to existing users. If every two years, 20% of the existing users (of say 16m computers, or 2 years past sales) spend $130 on the upgrade, that's $416m - that's covered the OS development on its own assuming the $200m figure above. Even if Mac OS X development costs were double, it would still only be a cost of $25 per computer sold overall.
Anyone know of a reasonable ballpark figure for the yearly development costs of Mac OS X (not iLife, not iWork)?
go ahead and show some marketing chutzpa Apple, and cut prices by 50%.
Apple's profit margins are 34% overall (probably more profit from iPods than Macs as well). What you suggest makes no sense unless the larger volumes would get them a reduction in component prices, but it's not like they're moving from 10k to 100k, they'd be moving from 1m to 2m - they've already got the cheapest possible component prices.
The 5% price drop every other month makes more sense in that over time production costs are reduced via efficiency gains and component price drops, and Apple could easily pass that on.
I'd call $1b profits a quarter "real money", and it will continue to increase YoY.
If you read the article, you'd see that the projector was only VGA resolution, or 0.3mp.
Imagine those big pixels at 50". It certainly wouldn't be able to show anything like the 5mp images your phone can take.
This technology would be better made into a separate unit that can plug into a compatible phone.
When the resolution improves to even 0.8mp or 1.2mp then we are talking about something that is actually useful.
How in the hell would forcing Apple make its iPods cheaper help the competition compete?
Instead of being 2/3rds the price, they're now the same price. They'd sell even less.
The market has spoken, they are willing to pay 50% more to get an iPod *despite there being a wealth of competition and alternatives in the marketplace*. That's down to having a more desirable and better product for the mainstream.
Microsoft ACTIVELY hurt their competitors, e.g., stopping things working under DR-DOS, and so on. There's a vast difference in behaviour.
Isn't an iPhone firmware update just a disk image that is written onto the iPhone / iPod Touch overwriting what was there before? That's hardly "thwarting", that's just how it's done.
... that's sensible behaviour.
Nevermind the core APIs changing, making third party applications unlikely to run anyway, even if they were preserved.
As to fixing security flaws that previous hacks have utilised
And providing a third party SDK of their own very soon - only 8 months after the device release when the platform has stabilised - that's not so bad. How were the first Palm or Windows CE SDKs and APIs?
We can bitch about the iPhone SDK when it is released and we know what limitations or restrictions it enforces. I'm sure there will be something to upset everyone.
In the meantime we can be happy that it isn't Windows Mobile that's going to take over that area of the market. Haven't ever seen such a piece of poorly designed crapware before, well, since WinME.
So faster than DSL via Virgin Media in London then... i've taken up reading again when i'm down there.
What if Apple says "We'll offer your software via iTunes! Written a utility application? We'll sign and verify it for you, and sell it via our hugely accessed portal for $0.99 - we get half, you get half!"?
... Apple getting half (distribution, signing, etc) and the developer getting the rest (for writing).
How many people would go "Hmm, I could just give it away, but I'll have to pay that $50 fee for the signing certificate (for example), and I think this is useful, hey, what's the risk of making a bit of money?".
Other apps could be $1.99, $4.99, $9.99,
I remember Palm apps selling for tens of dollars, up to $100 or more. For simple tasks. On those Palm software websites. You'd go through, pick up the decent freeware, and get annoyed at people wanting $29.99 for a ToDo list. Pretty much like the Windows Shareware market, ridiculous fees for low-function apps.
That's great if the iPhone OS API that these apps are using has remained stable.
It's highly unlikely that is the case - indeed that's surely one reason why there hasn't been an SDK earlier.
When the SDK is released in February (I would be expecting an SDK developer preview as well - whether that is earlier, or what is given in February is another thing) that will be when the underlying API is solidifying into a stable platform.
For a platform that is only 6 months old (in the public) it's going to have teething issues, and it's good that Apple gets the API as useful as possible before stabilising it. The alternative of waiting to release the iPhone in 2008 is, of course, ludicrous.
I'm sure that all the current third party iPhone apps will be ported to the SDK in very short notice. I also expect the SDK to be free, like XCode. The issue of signing apps is something else entirely, but I can understand why Apple would keep this in place, and why they might have to charge a fee, or distribute via iTunes, etc. I hope that Apple don't refuse to sign stuff they don't like (e.g., NES emulators, chat apps, etc). We will find out more within a month, let's leave it for now.
The other news regarding the update is good. Multiple SMS recipients being the number one feature for most people I imagine (and one that shouldn't have taken so long to implement either).
Well you'd be correct, Waggle Dance.
(Hmm, since when do you have to be legally allowed to drink beer in order to VIEW DETAILS of a beer?)
That's where Maglev should excel - connecting nearby cities.
It will work as long as the stations on the Maglev route are integrated with both local public transport and accessibility for cars with reasonable rate car parks. All too often these things are done in a vacuum, thus being too awkward for people to care to use them. If you can drive, park, and get on the maglev, it will work. That's why airports have been successful, and why trains haven't succeeded so well. Hell, in the UK they can't even get the buses interconnecting with the train station in many locations, resulting in two bus changes in an 8 mile journey just to get onto the train - and they wonder why there is so much congestion on the road even when fuel is over £1 a litre.
A successful Maglev station will have (in my opinion with not too much thought, I welcome additions and amendments):
1) A big bus terminal, interconnecting with the local airport, city and residential areas
2) A local rail station, interconnecting with local rail systems (if applicable for the area)
3) A huge car park on site.
4) A vast remote car park (near highways) with free park and ride bus scheme.
5) A service that runs at least every half hour.
Let's not forget that the fares for the Maglev itself have to be reasonable, as they have to compete with car travel (even though the Maglev will have advantages that are worth a surcharge).
I am glad that the family of the murdered man will finally get to see the perpetrator punished for her crimes.
If she didn't do them, then maybe modern methods can be used to absolve her of the blame.
However she was found guilty, however strange her defence was (likely indicating that there was no means of defence, not even character witnesses at the time) and thus should have been punished. Instead she has lived 35 years as a free person, with only the diminishing worry of being captured; having fun, children, life experiences, etc. The husband she murdered never had that. She's stolen a life from him and his family by escaping, adding further insult to their pain.
It does sound like she is rehabilitated of course, most murders are one-offs.
Taking my time to reply here, heh.
Oh yes, I'll take Ubuntu over Windows XP as well. The new work laptop has nearly gone out of the window a couple of times already. How can an OS deadlock/hourglass so often with two CPU cores to work with?!!
And yes, the Windows Driver Install is a complete PITA. Linux wins with its driver install as part of the core package, Mac OS X is close behind (doing the same, and now moving driver updates for third party products into Software Update), and Windows is in the stone age.
That's cool, I'll be doing the upgrade to Gutsy soon when I'm next near the box and it'll be good to have Flash working again for when I get YouTube links. Guess I'll have to install FlashBlock again though, darn it! Cheers for the information.
I did try nVidia's installer. It failed on a plain-jane Ubuntu install.
Still, the new Ubuntu has Compiz support out of the box so I'm sure this entire thread is now moot.
Adium is fully configurable in appearance in Mac OS X. Check it out.
I've used GAIM/Pidgin in Windows and that was partially configurable - at least the buddy window could be set to have small buddy icons and all that, I like a nice compact buddy window.
Most GTK themes seem to be variants on the same brick-as-a-gui-element basis unfortunately.
Ignoring your initial comment which is typical of people who can't see the forest for the trees, and totally bypassing the entire point...
I'm happy to see that Debian are considering that solution, and I hope it works well. It seems that some people still do realise that the end result is all that people care about so downgrading to 32-bit in the absence of Adobe 64-bit support (which is appalling, and the company should be really ashamed, I wonder what the real reason for this is) is the sensible option.
I didn't do any compiling, the issue was with finding out which software was the correct software to use to install the nVidia drivers, the one that worked correctly instead of the ones that didn't work (like most of the online resources out there). Open source drivers are the solution, of course, even if they have to leave out certain technologies.
You fail to see my point.
Linux is easily available in 64-bit versions. People are therefore much more likely to use it if they try out Linux on their computer - and most computers within the past year have included 64-bit functionality. One of the first things they'll see is the lack of 64-bit flash, which isn't Linux's fault, but they'll blame it on Linux. And go back to 32-bit Windows.
And I like Mac OS X for a reason, it's good. If you haven't used it for a substantial amount of time, you may not know this. Compiz adds a lot of what is good with Mac OS X's desktop to Linux, and it works quite well, although windows are a little too jellyrific.
Your final sentence does not parse, but I've been using Linux since 1996 (yeah, quite late to the game). That still doesn't mean I enjoy reconfiguring X for the thirtieth time. This topic is about Linux On The Desktop. Not Linux For Hardcore Geeks.