I've been waiting my ass off for the Nokia N80, out of the same series of phones. It shares many of the same features. While lacking the Carl Zeiss lens, it gains wireless LAN (802.11g). Combine that with a keyboard accessory, the N80 could be very handy for remote on-the-go system administration (via whatever Series 60 SSH client exists) or blogging while on-the-go with the built-in 3MP camera. For the geeks, the N80 seems a bit cooler and isn't quite as crazy of a form factor as the N90 (though sliders might still be a little off-beat).
Should Companies Delay Products for More Features?
Yes, Microsoft should delay Vista to put the features they touted long ago (that we all looked forward to, even if we'd never use Windows) that they since reneged on.
If that is what you were asking, you should have just asked it.;)
given all of the features they've announced wouldn't be in Vista, WHAT is it, if NOT a release for the sake of income?
They supposedly started from scratch to improve security, modularity, etc. I'd guess this is a release to do it "right."
If we look at it from a Linux perspective, when a new kernel is released, most of the new features are not important/noticable to Joe Sixpack. Even if they dump the pretty new interface, they are still supposed to add support for the new HD optical discs, the 4096 byte sector (according to an article earlier on Slashdot), and probably alot more. So, if they manage to improve stability and security while adding a support for alot of new devices, it could warrant a new release, the same as a new kernel would. The difference is that Microsoft charges for a new version where Linus, et al, do not.
I'm doing the devil's advocate thing here. I, too, laugh every time Microsoft announces that one of the cool-new-features won't be included or they push the release date back. Frankly, all I care about is that IE7 is far more standards compliant than IE6 and that they port IE7 to Windows XP.
>>That's not an issue of good or bad writing. It's a matter of organizational skills.
I think it's a matter of "I saw this article and want to submit it before anyone else, so I'll read the first paragraph and shit it into the submit field on Slashdot."
Anyone who has tried to submit a thoughtful article to Slashdot knows that they get shut down because 1) someone beat them to the punch (or the mods accepted the same post by some one else later, which you'll see in number two) or 2) some idiot made an asinine summary that makes more controversy (and more discussion, on topic or not) than your thoughtful post.
Of course, I am talking about the stereotypical post.
By the way, I only read up until your italics broke, then I gave up and decided to post SOME reply before someone else did so I could score some mod points.
No, this isn't off topic. It's either funny or insightful. Whichever you prefer.
"However one of your premises is false and your argument fails. We were created in Gods image. That does not imply that we remained in that state. Infact it is a central tennet of Christianity that we did not remain in that state. That we are fallen, or bad."
God, if one exists and is perfect, must have free will . Insofar as we were created in his image or his spiritual likeness, we too have free will. Humans just have limited faculties of understanding. We succumb to temptation. God, on the other, hand does not. That's not to say that God COULDN'T do something evil, unjust, or wrong. God just always choses the moral high ground. Why would anyone want to worship an automaton of goodness? That would be as fulfilling as God creating beings that only do good and worship him.
I guess what I'm saying is that, like God, humans have free will. God, being perfect, will always choose good things (not because he HAS to but because that is what he wants), where humans are imperfect and will not always choose good. Humans are, theoretically, capable of only choosing good (otherwise Jesus, who was a human, whether or not he was the embodiment of God, could not have been perfect), we just typically lack the desire to do only good and we lack the omniscience to see whether our choices are actually good or just seem good. So, I think we are still "in the image of God", we are just more inclined to do evil because we lack the level of understanding that God has.
That's what you get when you let an atheist think about theology.
That said, my original post was in jest (I wasn't trying to tear down Christianity... just making a joke). The mods just got confused... Or maybe the "+1 Insightful" and "+1 Interesting" options are too close to the "+1 Funny".
How could a loving God create so much suffering?
Biblically speaking, we were created in god's images. As the old saying goes, we hurt the ones we love. So, god must do the same, just on a much grander scale.
Or maybe god is just really in to S&M. He just forgot to give us a safe word...
Quake 3, or WFA at least, would let you greatly customize your HUD, even the size and style of your "life-left", ammo, etc. Unfortunately, you had to hack alot of config files to get that far. So, easy access to customization would be better than just allowing them to see what they want.
"A lot of people have tried to label Sparkle as a Flash killer but it is not. Sparkle is a new way to deal with winforms that allows custom UI design without coders running into the traditional limitations of development platforms."
This "Quartz" thing might be close. We'll see.
Bill, Steve just called. He wants his silly name back.
According to a story that I can't find a link to, Steve easily usurped Gil Amelio to become Apple CEO after Apple bought NeXT. I'm sure he could figure out a way to "steal" the reigns from Eisner, who (as far as I've heard) has been as good for Disney as a hole is for a boat.
According to some recent rumor mongering, the Intel supply chain faltered, which is ironic (situational irony, as best I can tell) since that was the very reason they chose Intel.
What a great idea. It reminds me of when I got my first scanner and I'd scan my face, following the light down as it passed my eyes or mouth, which created some very Blackhole Sun video type images. I can't decide if the details he gives on how to make the camera aren't detailed enough because a) I just haven't played with it enough to see that it is self explanatory or b) because it really isn't detailed enough. I can't tell if this is a really old school camera obscura type hack that would require moving parts or if it just focuses the image small enough onto the CCD (or whatever the proper TLA is) that it doesn't have to move. I'm guessing moving parts since the cameras are so big. I need to watch eBay for a cheap scanner. This would be fun to play around with.
At the MacWorld San Francisco keynote, the head of Microsoft's Mac Business Unit said they pledged to keep making Office for at least five years.
That should give Apple plenty of time to make a decent office suite.
Opera seems a little off as far as rendering goes. Mozilla and Safari tend to agree 99% of the time on how things should be rendered. When it comes to certain CSS tags (default borders, default padding, etc), Opera isn't quite there. Granted, if you explicitly set the value, it renders the same across all three. It is a few steps above IE for sure.
What I really wish is that Microsoft would just use Mozilla, even if they funk up the code with proprietary bits so that any submissions back to the community "won't work" (like Apple supposedly did with KHTML). There is no need to reinvent the wheel here. Microsoft could quit worrying about making a top-notch HTML engine and concentrate more on good UI and security while at the same time improving it's Evil Empire image. Web developers would have one less engine to try to test against. The OSS community MIGHT get some useful code back. Most IE users would be none-the-wiser. Everyone wins.
Maybe that is what Dvorak was arguing for Opera, but I didn't RTFA (I'm allergic to Dvorak, sorry). But Opera buying would lose all the OSS goodies that MS would get from using Gecko instead.
I noticed several sites were ripping off my content from my RSS feeds. Some of them are ad sites that, no doubt, gather like-minded blog posts, publish them on their site, and shit ads all over them. Others seem to be attempting to do some sort of service. What with Google punishing duplicate content posts, I don't want my content redistributed without my permission. So, I implemented a system with mod_rewrite and PHP on my site that checks the user agent before allowing access to any page. If the user agent is unknown, it shows a page saying that I don't know who they are but I'll see about allowing them access to my site. I then enter their user agent in a database, after doing some research, and decide whether to allow them or not. Eventually, I'm going to tie this into my robots.txt file so that it denies robots there (if they bother to look) in addition to showing the robot a access denied page.
It isn't the easiest solution (takes a lot of time to manage) and won't always work (e.g. they set their UA to one that looks like a valid browser or some other UA that I allow), but it clears most of the riffraff, i think.
Soundtrack was equally as weird. It wasn't an "Apple" program. It looked fully like a third party app that didn't give a rat's ass about apple's slowly faltering HIG.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't find a version of the font that Font Book doesn't claim is corrupted.
Anyone have any clue what the problem is?
I've been waiting my ass off for the Nokia N80, out of the same series of phones. It shares many of the same features. While lacking the Carl Zeiss lens, it gains wireless LAN (802.11g). Combine that with a keyboard accessory, the N80 could be very handy for remote on-the-go system administration (via whatever Series 60 SSH client exists) or blogging while on-the-go with the built-in 3MP camera. For the geeks, the N80 seems a bit cooler and isn't quite as crazy of a form factor as the N90 (though sliders might still be a little off-beat).
Should Companies Delay Products for More Features?
;)
Yes, Microsoft should delay Vista to put the features they touted long ago (that we all looked forward to, even if we'd never use Windows) that they since reneged on.
If that is what you were asking, you should have just asked it.
So this is what if feels like to be inside that bubble gum I stepped in.
given all of the features they've announced wouldn't be in Vista, WHAT is it, if NOT a release for the sake of income?
They supposedly started from scratch to improve security, modularity, etc. I'd guess this is a release to do it "right."
If we look at it from a Linux perspective, when a new kernel is released, most of the new features are not important/noticable to Joe Sixpack. Even if they dump the pretty new interface, they are still supposed to add support for the new HD optical discs, the 4096 byte sector (according to an article earlier on Slashdot), and probably alot more. So, if they manage to improve stability and security while adding a support for alot of new devices, it could warrant a new release, the same as a new kernel would. The difference is that Microsoft charges for a new version where Linus, et al, do not.
I'm doing the devil's advocate thing here. I, too, laugh every time Microsoft announces that one of the cool-new-features won't be included or they push the release date back. Frankly, all I care about is that IE7 is far more standards compliant than IE6 and that they port IE7 to Windows XP.
>>That's not an issue of good or bad writing. It's a matter of organizational skills.
I think it's a matter of "I saw this article and want to submit it before anyone else, so I'll read the first paragraph and shit it into the submit field on Slashdot."
Anyone who has tried to submit a thoughtful article to Slashdot knows that they get shut down because 1) someone beat them to the punch (or the mods accepted the same post by some one else later, which you'll see in number two) or 2) some idiot made an asinine summary that makes more controversy (and more discussion, on topic or not) than your thoughtful post.
Of course, I am talking about the stereotypical post.
By the way, I only read up until your italics broke, then I gave up and decided to post SOME reply before someone else did so I could score some mod points.
No, this isn't off topic. It's either funny or insightful. Whichever you prefer.
They are called Republicans...
"However one of your premises is false and your argument fails. We were created in Gods image. That does not imply that we remained in that state. Infact it is a central tennet of Christianity that we did not remain in that state. That we are fallen, or bad."
God, if one exists and is perfect, must have free will . Insofar as we were created in his image or his spiritual likeness, we too have free will. Humans just have limited faculties of understanding. We succumb to temptation. God, on the other, hand does not. That's not to say that God COULDN'T do something evil, unjust, or wrong. God just always choses the moral high ground. Why would anyone want to worship an automaton of goodness? That would be as fulfilling as God creating beings that only do good and worship him.
I guess what I'm saying is that, like God, humans have free will. God, being perfect, will always choose good things (not because he HAS to but because that is what he wants), where humans are imperfect and will not always choose good. Humans are, theoretically, capable of only choosing good (otherwise Jesus, who was a human, whether or not he was the embodiment of God, could not have been perfect), we just typically lack the desire to do only good and we lack the omniscience to see whether our choices are actually good or just seem good. So, I think we are still "in the image of God", we are just more inclined to do evil because we lack the level of understanding that God has.
That's what you get when you let an atheist think about theology.
That said, my original post was in jest (I wasn't trying to tear down Christianity... just making a joke). The mods just got confused... Or maybe the "+1 Insightful" and "+1 Interesting" options are too close to the "+1 Funny".
How could a loving God create so much suffering? Biblically speaking, we were created in god's images. As the old saying goes, we hurt the ones we love. So, god must do the same, just on a much grander scale.
Or maybe god is just really in to S&M. He just forgot to give us a safe word...
Quake 3, or WFA at least, would let you greatly customize your HUD, even the size and style of your "life-left", ammo, etc. Unfortunately, you had to hack alot of config files to get that far. So, easy access to customization would be better than just allowing them to see what they want.
I liked how this guy said it.
"A lot of people have tried to label Sparkle as a Flash killer but it is not. Sparkle is a new way to deal with winforms that allows custom UI design without coders running into the traditional limitations of development platforms."
This "Quartz" thing might be close. We'll see.
Bill, Steve just called. He wants his silly name back.
Ack. Now I have to find that damned article.
(It's 9:25 PM when I started my search)
Okay, I got lucky. It only took 60 seconds.
The article is: 500 Days at the Helm: The Rise and Fall of Gil Amelio. It's a good read and where I got my impression of Job's "usurping" Gil Amelio.
According to a story that I can't find a link to, Steve easily usurped Gil Amelio to become Apple CEO after Apple bought NeXT. I'm sure he could figure out a way to "steal" the reigns from Eisner, who (as far as I've heard) has been as good for Disney as a hole is for a boat.
According to some recent rumor mongering, the Intel supply chain faltered, which is ironic (situational irony, as best I can tell) since that was the very reason they chose Intel.
What a great idea. It reminds me of when I got my first scanner and I'd scan my face, following the light down as it passed my eyes or mouth, which created some very Blackhole Sun video type images. I can't decide if the details he gives on how to make the camera aren't detailed enough because a) I just haven't played with it enough to see that it is self explanatory or b) because it really isn't detailed enough. I can't tell if this is a really old school camera obscura type hack that would require moving parts or if it just focuses the image small enough onto the CCD (or whatever the proper TLA is) that it doesn't have to move. I'm guessing moving parts since the cameras are so big. I need to watch eBay for a cheap scanner. This would be fun to play around with.
Or JavaScript console. Well, I couldn't find it, anyway.
At the MacWorld San Francisco keynote, the head of Microsoft's Mac Business Unit said they pledged to keep making Office for at least five years. That should give Apple plenty of time to make a decent office suite.
Opera seems a little off as far as rendering goes. Mozilla and Safari tend to agree 99% of the time on how things should be rendered. When it comes to certain CSS tags (default borders, default padding, etc), Opera isn't quite there. Granted, if you explicitly set the value, it renders the same across all three. It is a few steps above IE for sure.
What I really wish is that Microsoft would just use Mozilla, even if they funk up the code with proprietary bits so that any submissions back to the community "won't work" (like Apple supposedly did with KHTML). There is no need to reinvent the wheel here. Microsoft could quit worrying about making a top-notch HTML engine and concentrate more on good UI and security while at the same time improving it's Evil Empire image. Web developers would have one less engine to try to test against. The OSS community MIGHT get some useful code back. Most IE users would be none-the-wiser. Everyone wins.
Maybe that is what Dvorak was arguing for Opera, but I didn't RTFA (I'm allergic to Dvorak, sorry). But Opera buying would lose all the OSS goodies that MS would get from using Gecko instead.
We don't want to invade people's privacy too much
:\
Yes. We want to invade their privacy just the right amount.
doh!
I noticed several sites were ripping off my content from my RSS feeds. Some of them are ad sites that, no doubt, gather like-minded blog posts, publish them on their site, and shit ads all over them. Others seem to be attempting to do some sort of service. What with Google punishing duplicate content posts, I don't want my content redistributed without my permission. So, I implemented a system with mod_rewrite and PHP on my site that checks the user agent before allowing access to any page. If the user agent is unknown, it shows a page saying that I don't know who they are but I'll see about allowing them access to my site. I then enter their user agent in a database, after doing some research, and decide whether to allow them or not. Eventually, I'm going to tie this into my robots.txt file so that it denies robots there (if they bother to look) in addition to showing the robot a access denied page.
It isn't the easiest solution (takes a lot of time to manage) and won't always work (e.g. they set their UA to one that looks like a valid browser or some other UA that I allow), but it clears most of the riffraff, i think.
The Incredible Invisible Case
Another hit from'02.
Soundtrack was equally as weird. It wasn't an "Apple" program. It looked fully like a third party app that didn't give a rat's ass about apple's slowly faltering HIG.
but UDP never felt so good!
I've got an eMac, but I don't use emacs on it.