You want to talk about "interface nazis", talk about Apple. There's nothing wrong -- indeed, it may be a great benefit -- with being rigidly inflexible when it comes to understanding HCI (human computer interaction - is that a term used anymore?) and interface design.
Gnome's problem is that, well, they don't have a usable interface design to stick with in the first place. This goes back as far as 2000 - "systems administrators still struggle to install applications on Linux and that antiquated versions of Gnome, a graphical-oriented user interface for the operating system, continue to ship with different distributions of Linux" "http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/st ory/0,10801,54030,00.html"
You have no idea what you're talkin about do you? The article you linked to was from 5 years ago. It is no more relevant then an article talking about OS9.
Noone struggles to install packages on Ubuntu - in fact I guarantee that it's less mouse clicks to install $random app then it is under OSX.
Reverse engineering of software can be accomplished by various methods. The three main groups of software reverse engineering are:
1. Analysis through observation of information exchange, most prevalent in protocol reverse engineering, which involve using bus analyzers and packet sniffers for example for listening into a computer bus or computer network connection, revealing the traffic data underneath. Behaviour on the bus or network can then be analyzed for producing a stand-alone implementation that mimics the same behaviour. This is especially good for reverse engineering of device drivers.
2. Disassembly using a disassembler, meaning the raw machine language of the program is read and understood in its own terms, only with the aid of machine language mnemonics. This works on any computer program but can take quite some time, especially for someone not used to machine code.
3. Decompilation using a decompiler, a process that tries, with varying result, to recreate the source code in some high level language for a program only available in machine code.
I suspect that methods 1 and 2 would have been most useful for the original xbox dvd filesystem.
If your filesystem is writable, you can try:
1. Look at the volume with a hex editor
2. Perform some operation, e.g. create a file
3. Use the hex editor to look for changes
4. Classify and document the changes
5. Repeat steps 1-4 forever
I think the main problem people have with the Microsoft funded studies is the conclusions they come to do not match people real world experiences.- hence questioning the source makes sense.
Whereas this 'study' elicits a 'well duh' type response.
1) People who have been on the 'net longer tend to be more educated. 2) Better educated people tend to be wealthier. 3) People using the 'net longer tend to use google 'cause it works well.
*shrugs*
Re:PLEASE, enough with the words!
on
The Podjacker Threat
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Do we HAVE to invent new contorted words for every variation of everything these days?
Well, Podjacking certainly sounds better (to the writer of the linked article anyway) then I'm-a-retard-who-doesn't-understand-how-the-intern et-works-jacking
Yeeeesh. No doubt people foolish enough to get sucked into using the word 'podcast' will lap this up like the sheep they are....
I have not heard of address spoofing like this in firefox. I see no relationship between the issues the article is talking about and address spoofing.
Can you give us the slightest bit of evidence about what you're talking about? Or is this yet another case of the apple fanboys modding up a nice (but irrelevant) comment about wonderful apple software?
I tend to use "exploit" as something that an attacker can use to their advantage to do something malicious
Well - an attacker can use this exploit to do something malicious - crash your machine:-)
Wikipedia agrees (hah! because I just edited the article*) that Denial of Services are exploits.
This is not a particularly serious exploit, (inspite of all the IE fanboys who are undoubtedly going to come out of the woodwork claiming that this proves firefox is no more secure), but it is an exploit nonetheless.
WOZ: I do own Apple stock and I do believe in the company and I'll never desert it. If I had to use Windows, I'd switch to WebTV or retire forever from using computers.
The guy mainly uses Macs - most of his software is going to come from Apple, so of course thats where his bad (and good) experiences are going to come from.
Just because he said something negative about apple doesn't mean he hates them - he was almost certainly just being honest.
But of course, knock down someone who even slightly criticises Apple and immediately get modded to +5 by the fanboys.
1. Rhymes with broadcast. The idea behind most podcasts was that it was a way for people to distribute their audio content (music, opinions and other ramblings) without having access to a radio station.
Broadcast, podcast, webcast all rhyme, they all end with cast.
2. Many people download podcasts so they can listen to them on their portable music player.
I agree - but so what?
3. The most popular portable music player today is the iPod
Riiiiiiight. But again, so what?
4. iTunes is one of the most popular delivery methods for distributing podcasts
Raises eyebrows in astonishment!
Are you sure about that? I thought iTunes was a client?
5. Finally, it is easier to say "podcast" than it is "audio webcast you can save".
I'm a little surprised you haven't heard of webcasts - the word has been been around for a long time.
I'm mildly amused that you accuse me of using buzzwords whilst defending 'podcast' - a word clearly designed for the call-all-mp3-players-ipods crowd.
an RSS feed with the URL of an audio file in each entry
You don't think that is not more accurately described by the existing word webcast? The RSS feed is going to be delivered via http, server by a web server.
At no point is an iPOD neccessary - so Why TF call it a podcast?
So people can send out executable jpegs? No thanks.
I said execute bit in the filesystem.
So - the virus would come in from the mail system with the execute bit set to 0, the user would have to download the file, get its properties, and tick the "execute" checkbox.
Windows needs to be fixed so that executables renamed as PIF are NOT executed. God that's stupid.
How about fixing windows so that it uses execute bit in the filesystem, rather then the extension of the file to decide whether to execute something or not?
As far as I know I can install lots of media players on my box. Actually, I *already* have quite a few on it, vlc, mplayer, windows media player, quicktime, a couple of dvd thingies, and possibily other ones.
Yes, yes. You can install other players. Are they competing with WMP on equal terms however?
Besides, is your take on this that everything Linux is bad because, you know, it gives stuff away for free? Lo and behold, the rampant hypocrisy...
Hypocricy? Cute.
I don't think Microsoft should be forced to sell their products. The OEM should be allowed to decide which media player to include on the final O/S. What is your problem with that?
A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them. [emphasis mine]
*grins* Your second analogy is exactly what people what microsoft don't allow (or didn't before getting their predatory asses hauled through court) - OEMs having Real / Quicktime / etc media players installed instead of Media Player.
Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.
Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis.
Exactly right - when people ask me why I use linux on my desktop I say:
"Its not what you get with linux - its what you don't get. Spyware, viruses, IE updates that break things unexpectely, Ads on your desktop and in your word processing software, I could go on and on and on...."
1) I doubt this thing will be fast enough to transcode a TV show in a timeframe deemed acceptable to Apple's high QA standards.
Apple has a QA standard to tv transcoding? **irrellevant hardware comparisons snipped**
Erm, you haven't ever QAd a product have you? I think Apple probably has QA standards for general waiting times rather then specifics. However, as others have pointed out, they would probably do hardware encoding, so this wouldn't take as long as I thought.
2) Revenue sources (why would anyone buy what they can set their shiny new Apple PVR to record?)
The same reason people with tivos still buy DVDs, extra content. **gushing speculation snipped**
Tivo do not make money selling TV content. Apple plan to. Your analogy breaks down.
So, I still think that Apple will cripple this PVR (if thats what they're coming out with), but (as I have been corrected) for legal and business reasons, rather then technical ones.
Signs of panic: Microsoft launched its own toolbar and protested the decision of the Massachusetts Information Technology Department to dump Office for open source alternatives.
Huh?
1) Nothing to do with google.
2) They mean open format alternatives, no open source (sighs)
I'm not afraid of google, but I am afraid of lazy journalism.
Slashdot Mirror
You want to talk about "interface nazis", talk about Apple. There's nothing wrong -- indeed, it may be a great benefit -- with being rigidly inflexible when it comes to understanding HCI (human computer interaction - is that a term used anymore?) and interface design.
., post about this.
t ory/0,10801,54030,00.html"
Apple are not interface Nazi's anymore either - Here's an interesting
Gnome's problem is that, well, they don't have a usable interface design to stick with in the first place. This goes back as far as 2000 - "systems administrators still struggle to install applications on Linux and that antiquated versions of Gnome, a graphical-oriented user interface for the operating system, continue to ship with different distributions of Linux" "http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/os/s
You have no idea what you're talkin about do you? The article you linked to was from 5 years ago. It is no more relevant then an article talking about OS9.
Noone struggles to install packages on Ubuntu - in fact I guarantee that it's less mouse clicks to install $random app then it is under OSX.
From Wikipedias Reverse Engineering Page I suspect that methods 1 and 2 would have been most useful for the original xbox dvd filesystem.
If your filesystem is writable, you can try:
1. Look at the volume with a hex editor
2. Perform some operation, e.g. create a file
3. Use the hex editor to look for changes
4. Classify and document the changes
5. Repeat steps 1-4 forever
(from The linux ntfs faq
I think the main problem people have with the Microsoft funded studies is the conclusions they come to do not match people real world experiences.- hence questioning the source makes sense.
Whereas this 'study' elicits a 'well duh' type response.
1) People who have been on the 'net longer tend to be more educated.
2) Better educated people tend to be wealthier.
3) People using the 'net longer tend to use google 'cause it works well.
*shrugs*
Do we HAVE to invent new contorted words for every variation of everything these days?
n et-works-jacking
Well, Podjacking certainly sounds better (to the writer of the linked article anyway) then I'm-a-retard-who-doesn't-understand-how-the-inter
Yeeeesh. No doubt people foolish enough to get sucked into using the word 'podcast' will lap this up like the sheep they are....
nternet Explorer and Firefox will display http://www.stealyourpassword.com/paypal as http://www.paypal.com/ while Safari will show it's true address. It's to avoid forwarding addresses that are spoofed.
+5 interesting? WTF?
I have not heard of address spoofing like this in firefox. I see no relationship between the issues the article is talking about and address spoofing.
Can you give us the slightest bit of evidence about what you're talking about? Or is this yet another case of the apple fanboys modding up a nice (but irrelevant) comment about wonderful apple software?
I tend to use "exploit" as something that an attacker can use to their advantage to do something malicious
:-)
Well - an attacker can use this exploit to do something malicious - crash your machine
Wikipedia agrees (hah! because I just edited the article*) that Denial of Services are exploits.
This is not a particularly serious exploit, (inspite of all the IE fanboys who are undoubtedly going to come out of the woodwork claiming that this proves firefox is no more secure), but it is an exploit nonetheless.
*For the humour impaired this is a joke...
Just because he said something negative about apple doesn't mean he hates them - he was almost certainly just being honest.
But of course, knock down someone who even slightly criticises Apple and immediately get modded to +5 by the fanboys.
1. Rhymes with broadcast. The idea behind most podcasts was that it was a way for people to distribute their audio content (music, opinions and other ramblings) without having access to a radio station.
Broadcast, podcast, webcast all rhyme, they all end with cast.
2. Many people download podcasts so they can listen to them on their portable music player.
I agree - but so what?
3. The most popular portable music player today is the iPod
Riiiiiiight. But again, so what?
4. iTunes is one of the most popular delivery methods for distributing podcasts
Raises eyebrows in astonishment!
Are you sure about that? I thought iTunes was a client?
5. Finally, it is easier to say "podcast" than it is "audio webcast you can save".
Erm, my point was why not just call it a webcast?
Hmmmn,
I'm a little surprised you haven't heard of webcasts - the word has been been around for a long time.
I'm mildly amused that you accuse me of using buzzwords whilst defending 'podcast' - a word clearly designed for the call-all-mp3-players-ipods crowd.
an RSS feed with the URL of an audio file in each entry
You don't think that is not more accurately described by the existing word webcast? The RSS feed is going to be delivered via http, server by a web server.
At no point is an iPOD neccessary - so Why TF call it a podcast?
It's just a webcast you can save.
There's nothing particularly special about it.
So people can send out executable jpegs? No thanks.
I said execute bit in the filesystem.
So - the virus would come in from the mail system with the execute bit set to 0, the user would have to download the file, get its properties, and tick the "execute" checkbox.
Windows needs to be fixed so that executables renamed as PIF are NOT executed. God that's stupid.
How about fixing windows so that it uses execute bit in the filesystem, rather then the extension of the file to decide whether to execute something or not?
I don't know about you but I'd rather have Windows Media Player than RealPlayer or Quicktime installed by default.
Well, I don't know about you - but I would much rather have mplayer, Zoomplayer or Classic Media Player installed by default then Windows Media Player
The point here is currently only one entity can decide.
As far as I know I can install lots of media players on my box. Actually, I *already* have quite a few on it, vlc, mplayer, windows media player, quicktime, a couple of dvd thingies, and possibily other ones.
Yes, yes. You can install other players. Are they competing with WMP on equal terms however?
Besides, is your take on this that everything Linux is bad because, you know, it gives stuff away for free? Lo and behold, the rampant hypocrisy...
Hypocricy? Cute.
I don't think Microsoft should be forced to sell their products. The OEM should be allowed to decide which media player to include on the final O/S. What is your problem with that?
A better analogy would be, Coke making most of the fridges, so they should be banned from providing free cans of coke when you buy one. Or they have to allow Rola Cola to advertise inside them. [emphasis mine]
*grins* Your second analogy is exactly what people what microsoft don't allow (or didn't before getting their predatory asses hauled through court) - OEMs having Real / Quicktime / etc media players installed instead of Media Player.
Unbundling media player helps no-one. It just hurts the user as they have to go out and download a media player rather than having it built in.
Nonsense. Unbundling media player helps the market as it allows all the media players to compete on an even basis.
Yeah, I don't know what the sense in this is. So, now, Microsoft could simply choose to SELL messenger and media player to the people in these places.
Err, yes - and compete with the other players.
It's on the same vein as forcing them to unbundle notepad from the system, or to unbundle Excel from Word when you buy Office. It's really stupid.
Force them to provide links to competitors? That's like saying Pepsi must provide coupons for Coke on their packages! wtf?
Not its not.
Imagine if coke was the sole supplier of fridges as well as being a major drink company.
It would be like saying that coke must allow drinks other then coke to be stocked in coke fridges.
Its about using a monopoly in one market to unfairly compete in another.
If it's a carnivore as the article speculates, then almost certainly not very good.
Poodles for instance taste horrible
Covered here
Oh... you meant code comments... never mind!
Exactly right - when people ask me why I use linux on my desktop I say:
"Its not what you get with linux - its what you don't get. Spyware, viruses, IE updates that break things unexpectely, Ads on your desktop and in your word processing software, I could go on and on and on...."
Erm,
I think that they're copying these guys - I hope they have good lawyers. Because they're about to get sued by MS!
2) Revenue sources (why would anyone buy what they can set their shiny new Apple PVR to record?) Tivo do not make money selling TV content. Apple plan to. Your analogy breaks down.
3) Fear of getting sued. Hmmmn, You do realise that NBC have been making noises about suing Tivo (for video Ipod / PSP transcoding) don't you?
So, I still think that Apple will cripple this PVR (if thats what they're coming out with), but (as I have been corrected) for legal and business reasons, rather then technical ones.
this is an obvious step... it better be able to sync with a video ipod.
I can guarantee that it will not sync with the video ipod in a useful way (ie transcode TV shows to ipod's low res format)
Because:
1) I doubt this thing will be fast enough to transcode a TV show in a timeframe deemed acceptable to Apple's high QA standards.
2) Revenue sources (why would anyone buy what they can set their shiny new Apple PVR to record?)
3) Fear of getting sued.
This idea is from Ralph Yarro
I wonder if it will be as successful as the SCO group under his leadership?
1) Nothing to do with google.
2) They mean open format alternatives, no open source (sighs)
I'm not afraid of google, but I am afraid of lazy journalism.