You have a BSD kernel in Vista. Go to "Programs and Features" (use search box and you'll recognize the dialog box you get) and enable "Services for Unix Applications". New menu item will show on Start menu. Choose download option and afterwards you have ksh, inetd, init, cron, ls, etc.
Actually "Windows Services for UNIX" has been around for a while and just provides some unix programs on windows, so it can interoperate in a mixed enviorment. It looks like the newer one lets you move some things to a windows machine that previously ran on a unix machine, but in no way does this mean Vista runs on a BSD kernel.
So.. id need around 4kg of methane to substitute a gallon of gas (i'm realizing this is a big guesstimate), which takes about 2 weeks to create. How long did it take to make that gallon of gas, a few hundred millions of years or so? I'm not really trying to convince anyone that methane is the way to go, but using a figure of time to show how long it takes to create a type of fuel doesn't really work here. Of course you have the fact that petroleum is releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, and that CO2 has been underground for a long time, by releasing this gas into the air adds to the total amount of carbon in our air, whereas any CO2 a cow releases, if any (sorry dont really want to read about cows right now), doesn't add to the problem we may or may not be having with global warming. In any case, I believe that research into any sort of fuel that 1)Doesn't increase the amount of net CO2 in the atmosphere, and 2)Stops us from relying upon OPEC for most of our oil is going to be a good thing(tm). We should be focusing our efforts in finding a way out of this, vs. not looking ahead and pointing out why we are stuck in the situation we are in.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone think that we would have gone to war in Iraq if they had no oil reserves? Honestly, who gives a shit what happens all the way across the world, when our country is all fucked up. Then again, its really easy to not see the problems at home.. So far, we've spent.. oh, as a guess, about 350 billion dollars on the war in Iraq. Who here thinks that money could have gone to a better cause at home?
There are all sorts of leaders out there who treat their people like shit. Is it strange we only seem to be concerned with a country who has a large amount of oil reserves? Iraq is 2nd behind Saudi Arabia when it comes to oil reserves. Does anyone find it odd that ExxonMobil recorded a record profit of almost 11 billion dollars in just one quarter of last year? In fact, many "gas" companies recorded very high profits from last year. I'm surprised that no one seems to be looking into this. Ok, well, im not surprised, but its alarming. When we had the 9/11 plane crashes, the airline industry took a huge hit. When we went to war against a country who produces a bunch of oil, the companies involved reap in the profits, and its the American "consumer" is the one footing the bill, just trying to make the 200 bucks that day so they can pay their bills.
Then again, I'm not going to pretend that I know how things work. I can only read what is available to me, and, like you said, I try to take that with a grain of salt as well.
Quite honestly, when the profits of a large American corporation are more important then the 300 million people in this country trying to get to work every day, then we have a problem.
Well, sorry for rambling, most of this is not directed towards the parent poster, and im drunk =)
Not that my comment today has much to do with yours, but it has to do with spam. Today I got this email from our corporate wide IT guy, he was showing us how much spam we get a day. We have 702 email accounts setup, and we get anywhere from 190,000, 250,000 emails a day, 96-98% of them being spam, thats pretty insane. Our email servers have been processing 2.8 emails every second 24/7, and each person on an average gets about 350 spam emails a day. Is that a normal type of thing for a mid-sized company?
The new prices on the ipods are actually pretty good i think, only 250 bucks for an 30gig ipod video. You can even get a small connector for it that has a usb port on the other side. Plug your camera in, and move your pictures to your ipod. Here is a link. Looking a bit further into that camera connector, there aren't very many camera's supported =(. BTW, what mp3 players have a cf slot on them?
Yeah, I would have to agree. There are times when im at work, and have to process say.. 40-60 photos at once. (I work at a newspaper so lets say a big car ad). With expose im able to see every one of those photos, the file name, etc with a flick of the wrist. I dont really see how Vista's Flip3D would help me sort thru 40 photos in photoshop with ease. The photos im talking about also are usually shot with the same background, so with vista, id only be seeing the top and left parts of the photos as they stack them behind each other, so all those 40 photos would look the same. Ive not seen Flip3D in action, just a screenshot of what it looks like with a bunch of windows tiled on each other, so there might be something im not seeing. Expose on the other hand is pretty slick, it can show just the windows of the current app your in, or all windows, or can hide all the windows to show your desktop. Im guessing thats why the desktop shows as an open window in Flip3D, im taking a wild guess in saying Microsoft came up with Flip3D as an answer to Expose.
In any case, ive been using pc's for years, and just started (2 years ago) working on mac's. Work is done so much more efficiently on a mac vs. windows in my opinion. I think the biggest reason is that all windows programs pretty much run in fullscreen, whereas on a mac I have like 6-7 programs all tiled on each other, and its either just a click of a corner of a window, or using expose to get me to where i need to go, instead of flipping thru buttons on my taskbar like I do with Windows.
I did download vista a while back and ran it in vmware, which probably isnt going to show me all the bells and whistles of it but.. I was really disappointed to see what has been done with the simplest things like the toolbars in Windows Explorer. Windows as it was already had too many ways of doing the same thing. Things that have been around since win3.1 (the menu you get when you click on the program icon in the upper left hand corner of the screen). Then they tried to like pull an office type of thing with the other menu's you get on the screen, like a button to email a picture to a friend or something silly like that. I guess it might be handy for those who dont know computers well, but I like things to be streamlined, quick, easily accessable, and Vista did not give me that feeling.
My guess is that soon as Leopard comes out, you would be able to buy an intel-compatable version of it for those who have bought an intel mac that came with Tiger. Theres really no point in selling intel-Tiger at this moment, if you have an intel mac, you have Tiger already.
As far as I understand it, the RAW format is used because it gives the photographer pretty much the exact data the image sensor picked up, without being converted in the camera to a jpg/tiff file. Things like white balance, etc are normally set before you take the shot, which may or may not work for the shot you are taking. With a RAW image you are able to set that later on a computer, which would give you better control over how the image ends up looking like.
We have a few nice Canon camera's at my work, and the photographers use RAW. They also have 4gig CF cards, I believe 2 for each camera, so they dont run out of room often. From what I remember the RAW image is about 24mb.
Well, the way I see it is that sports games kinda need to have that type of stuff in it. Its what happens if you watch the same thing on TV.
Although, it made me sick, the last pro baseball game I went to, the 7th inning stretch was sponsored by a company. Then of course you have just about every stadium named after a company as well. Im not saying its right, but it fits in the world that they are trying to recreate.
I did not in any way endorse rape; I simply pointed out that it is the responsibility of the government to police such acts, and that Nike wasn't raping anyone, people were. This means that people, not Nike, are to be held accountable for this.
My question is, lets say if Nike did know about this, would they act differently because its being done in a country that has more lax laws then lets say the U.S.?
I love the ps2 controller and am glad they are sticking with the same style. As for the motion sensing thing, its a gimmick. The idea didnt take off when Microsoft made a controller like that for the PC years ago.
I have about 5500 songs in iTunes and when I do a search, it instantly gives me results, not even a 5 second wait. Although I do have a pretty speedy machine, I still didnt have any problems when I was using an athlon 1800+. Thats actually the reason why I stopped using winamp. I could have my entire library at the tip of my fingers and searching was instant.
Although its not around anymore, i'd say the best way to get songs ever was a program called audiogalaxy. There was a program that you would run on your home machine, then you would log into the website using the same name and queue up songs. Whereever the program was running at, thats where it would actually download the files. So, you could sit at work and queue up songs and it would go home. It was a great program.
Yes, I would agree completely here. I was a windows user, and would run every application maximized, and switch tasks using the taskbar at the bottom.
Lately ive been using macs instead. Now I have layered windows all over the place, and either use expose, which, by the way is the greatest thing ever invented, or, I just leave little spots of windows here and there so I can click on them to switch tasks that way. Its *a lot* easier to work in a lot of applications on a mac then it is on windows, something I have realized since Ive started to use them.
I noticed the expose type thing with vista and it doesnt look very slick. It kinda organizes all the windows at like an isometric view type of thing and I guess you use the scrollwheel to cycle thru them. With osx, I just flick my wrist to the top right of the screen and I have every open window available to me. Anyway, osx has made me realize that windows is very clunky.
Slashdot Mirror
Another thing they would do is if lets say Dell sold a machine without Windows, they would have to pay Microsoft for a copy of Windows anyway.
Actually "Windows Services for UNIX" has been around for a while and just provides some unix programs on windows, so it can interoperate in a mixed enviorment. It looks like the newer one lets you move some things to a windows machine that previously ran on a unix machine, but in no way does this mean Vista runs on a BSD kernel.
Invisishield
Except Windows Mobile is a major pain in the ass to use.
So.. id need around 4kg of methane to substitute a gallon of gas (i'm realizing this is a big guesstimate), which takes about 2 weeks to create. How long did it take to make that gallon of gas, a few hundred millions of years or so? I'm not really trying to convince anyone that methane is the way to go, but using a figure of time to show how long it takes to create a type of fuel doesn't really work here. Of course you have the fact that petroleum is releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, and that CO2 has been underground for a long time, by releasing this gas into the air adds to the total amount of carbon in our air, whereas any CO2 a cow releases, if any (sorry dont really want to read about cows right now), doesn't add to the problem we may or may not be having with global warming. In any case, I believe that research into any sort of fuel that 1)Doesn't increase the amount of net CO2 in the atmosphere, and 2)Stops us from relying upon OPEC for most of our oil is going to be a good thing(tm). We should be focusing our efforts in finding a way out of this, vs. not looking ahead and pointing out why we are stuck in the situation we are in.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone think that we would have gone to war in Iraq if they had no oil reserves? Honestly, who gives a shit what happens all the way across the world, when our country is all fucked up. Then again, its really easy to not see the problems at home.. So far, we've spent.. oh, as a guess, about 350 billion dollars on the war in Iraq. Who here thinks that money could have gone to a better cause at home?
There are all sorts of leaders out there who treat their people like shit. Is it strange we only seem to be concerned with a country who has a large amount of oil reserves? Iraq is 2nd behind Saudi Arabia when it comes to oil reserves. Does anyone find it odd that ExxonMobil recorded a record profit of almost 11 billion dollars in just one quarter of last year? In fact, many "gas" companies recorded very high profits from last year. I'm surprised that no one seems to be looking into this. Ok, well, im not surprised, but its alarming. When we had the 9/11 plane crashes, the airline industry took a huge hit. When we went to war against a country who produces a bunch of oil, the companies involved reap in the profits, and its the American "consumer" is the one footing the bill, just trying to make the 200 bucks that day so they can pay their bills.
Then again, I'm not going to pretend that I know how things work. I can only read what is available to me, and, like you said, I try to take that with a grain of salt as well.
Quite honestly, when the profits of a large American corporation are more important then the 300 million people in this country trying to get to work every day, then we have a problem.
Well, sorry for rambling, most of this is not directed towards the parent poster, and im drunk =)
It was once a week, no matter if theres a patch or not.
I'm pretty sure that when I lived in Carson City, I've heard people refer to the Sierra Nevada mountain range as the Sierras.
Not that my comment today has much to do with yours, but it has to do with spam. Today I got this email from our corporate wide IT guy, he was showing us how much spam we get a day. We have 702 email accounts setup, and we get anywhere from 190,000, 250,000 emails a day, 96-98% of them being spam, thats pretty insane. Our email servers have been processing 2.8 emails every second 24/7, and each person on an average gets about 350 spam emails a day. Is that a normal type of thing for a mid-sized company?
Maybe all the dolphins that know to stay away get caught and die, so they aren't able to fully communicate the issue.
You can buy 802.11n routers and network cards now and as far as I know the 802.11n spec wont be finalized until next year.
Amazingly enough its 25.1mb on Windows, exactly half the size. Id still rather be using firefox on a mac though..
The new prices on the ipods are actually pretty good i think, only 250 bucks for an 30gig ipod video. You can even get a small connector for it that has a usb port on the other side. Plug your camera in, and move your pictures to your ipod. Here is a link. Looking a bit further into that camera connector, there aren't very many camera's supported =(. BTW, what mp3 players have a cf slot on them?
Yeah, I would have to agree. There are times when im at work, and have to process say.. 40-60 photos at once. (I work at a newspaper so lets say a big car ad). With expose im able to see every one of those photos, the file name, etc with a flick of the wrist. I dont really see how Vista's Flip3D would help me sort thru 40 photos in photoshop with ease. The photos im talking about also are usually shot with the same background, so with vista, id only be seeing the top and left parts of the photos as they stack them behind each other, so all those 40 photos would look the same. Ive not seen Flip3D in action, just a screenshot of what it looks like with a bunch of windows tiled on each other, so there might be something im not seeing. Expose on the other hand is pretty slick, it can show just the windows of the current app your in, or all windows, or can hide all the windows to show your desktop. Im guessing thats why the desktop shows as an open window in Flip3D, im taking a wild guess in saying Microsoft came up with Flip3D as an answer to Expose.
In any case, ive been using pc's for years, and just started (2 years ago) working on mac's. Work is done so much more efficiently on a mac vs. windows in my opinion. I think the biggest reason is that all windows programs pretty much run in fullscreen, whereas on a mac I have like 6-7 programs all tiled on each other, and its either just a click of a corner of a window, or using expose to get me to where i need to go, instead of flipping thru buttons on my taskbar like I do with Windows.
I did download vista a while back and ran it in vmware, which probably isnt going to show me all the bells and whistles of it but.. I was really disappointed to see what has been done with the simplest things like the toolbars in Windows Explorer. Windows as it was already had too many ways of doing the same thing. Things that have been around since win3.1 (the menu you get when you click on the program icon in the upper left hand corner of the screen). Then they tried to like pull an office type of thing with the other menu's you get on the screen, like a button to email a picture to a friend or something silly like that. I guess it might be handy for those who dont know computers well, but I like things to be streamlined, quick, easily accessable, and Vista did not give me that feeling.
My guess is that soon as Leopard comes out, you would be able to buy an intel-compatable version of it for those who have bought an intel mac that came with Tiger. Theres really no point in selling intel-Tiger at this moment, if you have an intel mac, you have Tiger already.
You can buy Tiger in a box in many places. Its for those who have older mac's who want the new OS.
One way to get around this is to take AAC encoded songs and burn them to an audio cd. Rip the audio cd to mp3, or even AAC files again, minus the DRM.
As far as I understand it, the RAW format is used because it gives the photographer pretty much the exact data the image sensor picked up, without being converted in the camera to a jpg/tiff file. Things like white balance, etc are normally set before you take the shot, which may or may not work for the shot you are taking. With a RAW image you are able to set that later on a computer, which would give you better control over how the image ends up looking like.
We have a few nice Canon camera's at my work, and the photographers use RAW. They also have 4gig CF cards, I believe 2 for each camera, so they dont run out of room often. From what I remember the RAW image is about 24mb.
Well, the way I see it is that sports games kinda need to have that type of stuff in it. Its what happens if you watch the same thing on TV.
Although, it made me sick, the last pro baseball game I went to, the 7th inning stretch was sponsored by a company. Then of course you have just about every stadium named after a company as well. Im not saying its right, but it fits in the world that they are trying to recreate.
Just to add on to this
20/20 vision means that when you stand away from something at 20ft, what you see is what the normal person would see at 20ft.
20/40 is, well, if you stand 20ft away, you see what a normal person would see at 40ft
Same goes for 20/10.
On a mac you dont normally do anything that takes up the entire screen.
My question is, lets say if Nike did know about this, would they act differently because its being done in a country that has more lax laws then lets say the U.S.?
I love the ps2 controller and am glad they are sticking with the same style. As for the motion sensing thing, its a gimmick. The idea didnt take off when Microsoft made a controller like that for the PC years ago.
I have about 5500 songs in iTunes and when I do a search, it instantly gives me results, not even a 5 second wait. Although I do have a pretty speedy machine, I still didnt have any problems when I was using an athlon 1800+. Thats actually the reason why I stopped using winamp. I could have my entire library at the tip of my fingers and searching was instant.
Although its not around anymore, i'd say the best way to get songs ever was a program called audiogalaxy. There was a program that you would run on your home machine, then you would log into the website using the same name and queue up songs. Whereever the program was running at, thats where it would actually download the files. So, you could sit at work and queue up songs and it would go home. It was a great program.
Yes, I would agree completely here. I was a windows user, and would run every application maximized, and switch tasks using the taskbar at the bottom.
Lately ive been using macs instead. Now I have layered windows all over the place, and either use expose, which, by the way is the greatest thing ever invented, or, I just leave little spots of windows here and there so I can click on them to switch tasks that way. Its *a lot* easier to work in a lot of applications on a mac then it is on windows, something I have realized since Ive started to use them.
I noticed the expose type thing with vista and it doesnt look very slick. It kinda organizes all the windows at like an isometric view type of thing and I guess you use the scrollwheel to cycle thru them. With osx, I just flick my wrist to the top right of the screen and I have every open window available to me. Anyway, osx has made me realize that windows is very clunky.