I hate the stupid questions too, but I have a feeling the editors like them and are more likely to post a submission with them. Maybe they think it makes the site more professional sounding or something? Or maybe, if they are smart, they realize how annoying and retarded the question is, guaranteeing a lot of comments answering the question, and thus generating more page views.
Do the mods even know what redundant means? Why bother wasting the mod point on modding it redundant when you could just tell me the answer. Especially when it's not even in this thread.
1. Due to the various interactions between programs from multiple vendors, they may get blamed for system instability if there is a negative interaction with another app that a user has installed.
Huh? It's software. Software usually has bugs. Sometimes these bugs are serious enough to cause instability. Having it be a service/hidden app or present a window to the user has absolutely no bearing on its stability.
2. Microsoft, since they percieve Google to be a threat are very likely going to make this Dekstop thing break.
As someone else said, prove it. The old GDS is still software, just like everything else, and Microsoft could break that if they wanted, but they haven't.
Finally, they'd be better off designing a replacement shell for Windows if they really want to have a "Google Desktop".
Wow. Writing an entire OS shell and a uitlity with some news and weather are very different undertakings with very different magnitudes/scopes. What makes you think Google is remotely interested in that route?
You know, I'm starting to see Slashdot in a different light. I used to think it was the place to learn about/discuss cutting edge new technologies. Instead, I'm increasingly finding there to be a conservative, hostile view towards new technologies.
Bah humbug. I don't see the point of technology XYZ. Why can't we do it like we used to. When I was a boy we used simple web pages coded in HTML 1.0 by hand. And liked it!
I don't see many posters using RSS or things like del.ici.ous even though they are becoming pretty popular in the so-called blogosphere.
Well it supports the x86 architecture. It doesn't have to support special features of AMD, but it should not purposely run different code (than it would on an intel proc) to crash the system. That's pushing the limit on anti-competitive, next thing you know ford is selling fuel that runs great in their cars but can tell if it's in a toyota and decides to spontaneously combust in the tank then.
I'm curious - if Intel checked if it was an AMD chip and just refused to compile code at all, would people be up in arms? I doubt it. I don't think Intel is under any obligation to make compilers that work for AMD chips at all, never mind optimize for them.
I can't believe I just read this and everyone saying they agree with you. We should forget this? Not even acknowledge it? Just wait for the next bomb to blow up innocent people and don't worry about it? Don't even worry about the thousands of people affected by this - families, friends, etc.
We can't learn anything form this? We can't be surprised that one of the cultural centres of the Western world is rocked by terrorism? We shouldn't reflect on what this means in our own lives? What our lives are worth?
Wow, every Apple story now has at least a few posts like this. It's not a big deal. It's mostly a recompile. And it's a good year away. Chillax everyone.
I didn't realize Linx on the iPod was this far along/this easy to install.
I'd love to be able to add On-The-Go support to my 1G iPod. Does anyone know if anyone has implemented that feature? I'd probably be interested enough to work on it myself if not.
I gues the question is moot until the audio playback support is up to snuff/can handle real-time without skipping. That and play AACs from iTMS. (Could FairKeys be used?)
Slashdot Mirror
Does this apply to international iPod owners as well?
I hate the stupid questions too, but I have a feeling the editors like them and are more likely to post a submission with them. Maybe they think it makes the site more professional sounding or something? Or maybe, if they are smart, they realize how annoying and retarded the question is, guaranteeing a lot of comments answering the question, and thus generating more page views.
That's my guess.
Do the mods even know what redundant means? Why bother wasting the mod point on modding it redundant when you could just tell me the answer. Especially when it's not even in this thread.
Any idea what Google pays for a starting salary for someone fresh out of college? I'm curious. Thanks!
Huh? It's software. Software usually has bugs. Sometimes these bugs are serious enough to cause instability. Having it be a service/hidden app or present a window to the user has absolutely no bearing on its stability.
2. Microsoft, since they percieve Google to be a threat are very likely going to make this Dekstop thing break.
As someone else said, prove it. The old GDS is still software, just like everything else, and Microsoft could break that if they wanted, but they haven't.
Finally, they'd be better off designing a replacement shell for Windows if they really want to have a "Google Desktop".
Wow. Writing an entire OS shell and a uitlity with some news and weather are very different undertakings with very different magnitudes/scopes. What makes you think Google is remotely interested in that route?
Ironic, considering he works at Google now, one of the biggest corporate Linux users in the world.
Ok, Robbin, with 2 'b's, is mentioned. But he was the firmware lead. It was Faddell's idea and Faddell is widely credited as "father of the iPod"
No, it's Tony Faddell. That article doesn't even contain the name Robin.
Bah humbug. I don't see the point of technology XYZ. Why can't we do it like we used to. When I was a boy we used simple web pages coded in HTML 1.0 by hand. And liked it!
I don't see many posters using RSS or things like del.ici.ous even though they are becoming pretty popular in the so-called blogosphere.
That scheme is old news. They have moved away from that now in 2.6.
I think "just" is the keyword my friend.
Wow, I bet they don't get tired of that joke there.
+5 Insightful? This is extremely off-topic. Want that feature? Code it, or get someone to code it for you, in iPodLinux. Then enjoy.
I'm curious - if Intel checked if it was an AMD chip and just refused to compile code at all, would people be up in arms? I doubt it. I don't think Intel is under any obligation to make compilers that work for AMD chips at all, never mind optimize for them.
I can't believe I just read this and everyone saying they agree with you. We should forget this? Not even acknowledge it? Just wait for the next bomb to blow up innocent people and don't worry about it? Don't even worry about the thousands of people affected by this - families, friends, etc.
We can't learn anything form this? We can't be surprised that one of the cultural centres of the Western world is rocked by terrorism? We shouldn't reflect on what this means in our own lives? What our lives are worth?
I'm amazed.
The beef one is tricky - here's the score: The mad cow beef from Canada is bad. The mad cow beef from the US is good.
Eclipse is the Teh Suck because it doesn't compile my L337 app. You call that a release? Is it *possible* that the problem may be with your app?
Wow, every Apple story now has at least a few posts like this. It's not a big deal. It's mostly a recompile. And it's a good year away. Chillax everyone.
List of Canadian MPs
I'd love to be able to add On-The-Go support to my 1G iPod. Does anyone know if anyone has implemented that feature? I'd probably be interested enough to work on it myself if not.
I gues the question is moot until the audio playback support is up to snuff/can handle real-time without skipping. That and play AACs from iTMS. (Could FairKeys be used?)
Who says it is a hoax? The guy said it's been confirmed.
I wish I could get some of the crystal meth that Cringely and Dvorak are regularly smoking.
Dude, I concur with your analysis and thoroughly enjoyed your signature.
Wow, you were right. Interesting!
Apple said they will allow their Intel-based Macs to run Windows? Really? I definitely did not hear that. Do you have a reference/source? Thanks.