This is not surprising at all. Politicians fraternize with the rich and famous, so that's who their friends are, and that's who they marry. And since corporate leaders are rich and sometimes quite well known, they will fraternise with politicians, and they will produce offspring together.
Seriously, "corruption" is a mild word. Our politicians are actually befriending the bosses of megacorporations that work actively to take away our rights. You rub my back and I'll rub yours.
One almost hopes that John Titor is not a hoax, and that a new civil war followed by a third world war will wipe out this "gentleman's club", and put an end to the inbreeding going on among the powerful, rich and famous, and the politicians.
"and you mod up this simple, useless, fanboy comment +5 interesting???"
If nothing else, it is a nice contrast to the constant "Nintendo is dying" mantra which is chanted by some people every time there's a story on the company.
The fact is that Nitendo is making a profit, both from the handheld market and home console market. They are #2 worldwide, and unlike Microsoft, they have very strong teams in-house which produce quality games.
So yeah, I can see why this comment was modded up. It is a refreshing change from the norm here, which seems to be "Nintendo is dying", and we see a lot of "articles" by ignorant "journalists" who try to make it true that Nintendo is dying, even though it isn't.
No matter how much these wannabe journalist might want Nintendo to die, it is still going strong.
"I can reverse engineer, disassemble, whatever, and open it right back up again."
Good luck. If only it were that simple...
As for setting us back. How? Without billions of dollars to push it, we might never have been able to do even half of what's been done today. It is impossible to know, and anyone's guess is as good as any other.
"Can someone please explain how "closed source" can exist without copyright law?"
Simple. Keep the source private. Keep it closed. And you have closed-source.
"It's amazing that anybody can defend something that has become so obsolete and destructive, especially in the last 15 years."
There's money in it, and it is up to me whether I want to release the source or not. Why is it destructive? Because one major company, Microsoft, has been destructive? There are plenty of non-destructive closed-soure applications.
Did you even read the page before commenting on it? From the introduction:
"Note that Outlook has been included for completeness, both because of its popularity and for use as a reference. I did not include Eudora, even though the latest version does include unique features such as a Content Concentrator, Contextual Filing, MoodWatch and Email Usage Stats, as it is both closed source and not available for any UNIX platforms."
From the very beginning he makes it clear that Outlook is just there for one reason - because it's the most popular/widely used client. At the same time he explains that Eudora is not included because it is closed-source and not available for any UNIX. The same goes for Outlook. It is Win32 only, and not available for UNIX.
Again, he only included it as a reference. He included what most people are using, and then listed the e-mail clients that were actually the focus of the review/overview.
He clearly states his intentions before the review begins. Did you even bother to read the review - even the introduction - before shouting about FUD or hypocrisy?
Yes, because it is the most widely used version. Outlook should really have been left out since it's closed-source and Win32 only, but he chose to include the most widely used version, and that is NOT the latest version.
It is his review, so he has the right to include or exclude whatever he feels like.
Even though I don't have to defend him, it is extremely easy to do so: Eudora was excluded because it is closed-source and Win32 only. Outlook is closed-source and Win32 only. So it could have been excluded only on that basis.
But since it is the most widely used, he chose to include it.
HOWEVER: It is not the latest version which is the most widely used. So he included the most widely used version. The fact is that Outlook is extremely expensive, so people won't be upgrading any time soon.
To sum up, he excluded the latest version of Outlook because it is closed-source and Win32 only. He only included the most widely used version to compare it to the competition.
I don't understand what you Microsoft fanboys are crying "foul, foul" for. His decision not to include the latest version of Outlook can easily be justified when you look at what kind of clients he included in the review.
There is no FUD here. There is no hypocrisy. There may be bias, but at least he's clear on what he does and why he does it.
How about Opera's full text indexing and instant searches. How about Opera doing away with folders and using filters/views instead? How about Opera's active contacts and active threads? How about Opera's automatic mailing list recognition? How about Opera's tight integration between contacts and mail?
What exactly is it that Opera does just like traditional/old clients?
It looks to me like Opera's M2 already does a lot of this. M2 is definitely not current generation, since it completely breaks with traditional folders. It's one of the first to do mfull mail indexing and automatic sorting.
If you had bothered to read just a few comments before posting, you will have seen that this has been pointed out several times already.
It has also been pointed out that Outlook was just included because it is so popular. Eudora was not included because it is closed source and not available for other platforms. The same goes for Outlook.
(Opera is available for Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc.)
It takes literally less than a second to search through tens of thousands of mails. It's done by indexing the mail messages and thereby making searches work instantly.
Maybe Thunderbird should do text indexing as well, since this seems like the way to go. After you've worked for a while with Opera's mailer it can be difficult to go back to other mailers since it's so insanely fast and convenient.
It can be confusing to use the mailer in Opera if you don't understand what it's all about, since it's quite different from everything else (kind of like Lotus Notes, only in a good way), but there is help available.
Excellent post! I was going to try to explain the point of concerns regarding privacy myself, but yours was a very nice explanation.
Just because he personally doesn't have anything to hide in real life, doesn't mean that someone else don't have perfectly legitimate reasons for preserving their privacy. Just like he has a reason for not posting using his full name and signing with his address and phone number here.
If I want to tell people about myself, then that is my choice. I will reveal about myself what I want to reveal. I do know that the Internet makes it easy to find information about people, but there is no reason why the government should take away my right for privacy.
Whether I have nothing to hide or not is not the point, and it is irrelevant. What is relevant is that people have perfectly good reasons for not wanting to be raided at night without a proper warrant, for not wanting to be arrested and thrown in jail without a trial, and so on. Maybe tealover can't see that, and I hope for his own sake that he will never have to eat crow...
I know what it's like to be incredibly exhausted in the afternoon... following a restless night... but not want to take even a brief nap, because I knew I'd wake up with twice the roar I started with. I've been there.
I know what it's like to see the audiologist's eyes practically fall out of his head during tinnitus matching, because he's thinking, "Now this is impressive.
I know what it's like to want to beat my head against the wall because of the noise.
I know what it's like for the idea of putting food to my mouth to cause my stomach to knot up with nausea because of the trains going by in my head.
I know what it's like to be an adult male in his late forties and want to put my head on my 80-year-old mother's lap so she can rub it and make things quiet... and I know what it's like to see tears in her eyes because she can't help. I've been there.
I know what it's like to want to die.
I know what it's like to see a loving wife sick with worry and fear.
And I know what it's like to just about fall apart when a five year old son looks at his father's ears and says, "Daddy, I wish I could just reach in there with my fingers and pull that bad noise out so you could be happy again." You see, I've been there, too.
Guess not everyone is as lucky as you and I then. We probably have mild cases compared to Dr. Nagler and thousands of other real victims who are actually disabled because of their T.
With research like this going on, will we eventually see a medical solution to tinnitus?
Tinnitus is a serious problem to a lot of people today, and it can have many causes, from various diseases/illnesses, to noise damage. It apparently has to do with the nerves in one's ear, so would this kind of research, might we finally see a way to actually treat tinnitus?
Until you get T, you don't realize how lucky people who can actually be in a quiet room without going mad are...
"Oh! So being on private property is suddently evil now?"
Without permission? Of course. Since they sell tickets and only allow access to those with a valid ticket, you are not welcome without one. That is up to the land owner to decide.
"Why should you be allowed to own land?"
Land is physical property, just like you probably own that monitor you are using while reading this, or anything else you buy or are given.
"While Opera is a "next gen" browser it isn't as polished and perfect as Firefox is."
Please. FireFox has quite a few problems to iron out before 1.0. I am glad the developers and most FF fans aren't like you. They actually recognize that FF has problems, and they work together to remove those problems to really make it polished. But it will never be perfect. No program will ever be perfect.
And not only because of bugs, but also because people have different needs. With FF, you have to download and install extensions, which isn't exactly easy for newbies. Opera, when installed, has everything right there, including a full email client. Firebird requires additional downloads.
Claiming that FF is perfect is a disservice to the FF developers and the community. Actually, it is disrespectful towards the people who contribute to make it better!
"Ask the guy who invented tabbed browsing (forget his name). I read an article where he pretty much said "yeah, I made tabbed browsing in Opera and Safari and Phoenix (this was way back)."
That is completely wrong. Opera has had MDI since version 1.0. Opera 4.0 came with tabs - before Mozilla, and the guy who implemented it still works for Opera.
Opera has true MDI. You can tile and cascade pages, and it keeps everything within one window by default. FireFox is far more limited, especially before downloading extensions.
"In fact, anyone who I've gotten to seriously try out Firewhatever has never looked back. Nobody who browses the web can resist because it is just so objectively superior in all ways."
Is that so? How come FF doesn't open the previous page instantly when going back, like Opera? How come it is a bigger download, but still has fewer features? How come you have to download extensions to get functionality that is considered to be essential in other browsers?
"Short answer, Opera is closed source and payware. Nobody wants to see some small company in Norway get control over the browser market."
No one wants to see any browser control the market. That is a strawman argument.
Opera is actively involved in W3C activities, one of the CSS creators works for Opera. It is not the enemy.
"Lastly and to go back to my first statement Opera costs money. Its been ingrained in consumers heads since the 90's that browsers are Free. If Mozilla costs money you could bet that it never would have stood a chance and IT Press would not be rooting for it."
Then how come people are paying for Opera? Plenty of people are willing to pay for a quality product they are using. This is another strawman argument. Pure speculation, and wrong too. Opera has been available since the mid-nineties. Opera has charged for the browser for almost ten years.
"Frankly Opera just don't have much of a future for general Internet browsing."
Opera also has a loyal following, since it has existed for nearly ten years. It hasn't just been thrown out there. It started out as a geek browser for advanced users, and has gradually moved out into the mass market.
Sales are increasing, and it's receiving lots of praise.
So while Mozilla no doubt has a place in the/. editors' hearts since it is open-source, Opera definitely has a future.
And that is hardly relevant. It is a small company struggling against Microsoft. Is has power user features. It has geek appeal. The concept of paying for software is well known, and rather popular. Even the FSF encourages people to charge for their free as in libre software. The only difference is that Opera is closed-source.
Ultimately, the editors choose which stories to post, and if they choose not to post as many stories about Opera, we will just have to accept that.
But don't give me some FUD about how Opera is this or that and you have to pay for it, because the fact that you have to pay for it doesn't mean that it is a lesser browser or has less geek appeal.
"how many times does it have to be repeated: there is absolutely no reason for anyone to ever pay anything for a web browser."
How many times does it have to be repeated that there are plenty of reasons to buy a product if you find it to be better and more useful than the competition, free or not?
Opera happens to be small, fast, and with a lot of features that are tightly integrated. You don't have to go looking for extensions to do a lot of the stuff Opera does out of the box as you do with FireFox. Yes, FF is flexible and you can make it do just about anything, but you have to download extensions, and they can slow down the browser, and different extensions may not integrate well with each other.
Snap out of your dream world please. Just because you happen to like FF better doesn't mean that others cannot prefer Opera and even pay for it.
Remember, even RMS encourages people to charge for software - free as in libre software. Opera is closed-source, but it is different from FF, and some people think that Opera's way of doing things is better. Don't be so narrow-minded!
"opera IPO??? if you're thinking of buying opera stock just send the money to me, you'll end up with the same ROI."
You seem to forget that Opera is getting big in the embedded market. Just now they secured a deal with Motorola, which is huge in the handheld market.
Shouldn't it be the police, rather than some commercial company, that does the "search and seizure"? It is ridiculous that a commercial company or organization can be allowed to raid people, when even the police needs search warrants.
Slashdot Mirror
I think I'm in love. With your employer.
Seriously, "corruption" is a mild word. Our politicians are actually befriending the bosses of megacorporations that work actively to take away our rights. You rub my back and I'll rub yours.
One almost hopes that John Titor is not a hoax, and that a new civil war followed by a third world war will wipe out this "gentleman's club", and put an end to the inbreeding going on among the powerful, rich and famous, and the politicians.
The fact is that Nitendo is making a profit, both from the handheld market and home console market. They are #2 worldwide, and unlike Microsoft, they have very strong teams in-house which produce quality games.
So yeah, I can see why this comment was modded up. It is a refreshing change from the norm here, which seems to be "Nintendo is dying", and we see a lot of "articles" by ignorant "journalists" who try to make it true that Nintendo is dying, even though it isn't.
No matter how much these wannabe journalist might want Nintendo to die, it is still going strong.
As for setting us back. How? Without billions of dollars to push it, we might never have been able to do even half of what's been done today. It is impossible to know, and anyone's guess is as good as any other.
Remember allowing scripting for mail? Remember opening attachments automatically? Remember MSIE?
"Note that Outlook has been included for completeness, both because of its popularity and for use as a reference. I did not include Eudora, even though the latest version does include unique features such as a Content Concentrator, Contextual Filing, MoodWatch and Email Usage Stats, as it is both closed source and not available for any UNIX platforms."
From the very beginning he makes it clear that Outlook is just there for one reason - because it's the most popular/widely used client. At the same time he explains that Eudora is not included because it is closed-source and not available for any UNIX. The same goes for Outlook. It is Win32 only, and not available for UNIX.
Again, he only included it as a reference. He included what most people are using, and then listed the e-mail clients that were actually the focus of the review/overview.
He clearly states his intentions before the review begins. Did you even bother to read the review - even the introduction - before shouting about FUD or hypocrisy?
Yeah, except it isn't available for other operating systems than Windows.
Even though I don't have to defend him, it is extremely easy to do so: Eudora was excluded because it is closed-source and Win32 only. Outlook is closed-source and Win32 only. So it could have been excluded only on that basis.
But since it is the most widely used, he chose to include it.
HOWEVER: It is not the latest version which is the most widely used. So he included the most widely used version. The fact is that Outlook is extremely expensive, so people won't be upgrading any time soon.
To sum up, he excluded the latest version of Outlook because it is closed-source and Win32 only. He only included the most widely used version to compare it to the competition.
I don't understand what you Microsoft fanboys are crying "foul, foul" for. His decision not to include the latest version of Outlook can easily be justified when you look at what kind of clients he included in the review.
There is no FUD here. There is no hypocrisy. There may be bias, but at least he's clear on what he does and why he does it.
That cannot be said of Microsoft fanboys.
How about Opera's full text indexing and instant searches. How about Opera doing away with folders and using filters/views instead? How about Opera's active contacts and active threads? How about Opera's automatic mailing list recognition? How about Opera's tight integration between contacts and mail?
What exactly is it that Opera does just like traditional/old clients?
It looks to me like Opera's M2 already does a lot of this. M2 is definitely not current generation, since it completely breaks with traditional folders. It's one of the first to do mfull mail indexing and automatic sorting.
It has also been pointed out that Outlook was just included because it is so popular. Eudora was not included because it is closed source and not available for other platforms. The same goes for Outlook.
(Opera is available for Linux, Solaris, FreeBSD, etc.)
Buy some SCO stock now! Before their next publicity stunt, which will make them go up again!
It takes literally less than a second to search through tens of thousands of mails. It's done by indexing the mail messages and thereby making searches work instantly.
Maybe Thunderbird should do text indexing as well, since this seems like the way to go. After you've worked for a while with Opera's mailer it can be difficult to go back to other mailers since it's so insanely fast and convenient.
It can be confusing to use the mailer in Opera if you don't understand what it's all about, since it's quite different from everything else (kind of like Lotus Notes, only in a good way), but there is help available.
Just because he personally doesn't have anything to hide in real life, doesn't mean that someone else don't have perfectly legitimate reasons for preserving their privacy. Just like he has a reason for not posting using his full name and signing with his address and phone number here.
If I want to tell people about myself, then that is my choice. I will reveal about myself what I want to reveal. I do know that the Internet makes it easy to find information about people, but there is no reason why the government should take away my right for privacy.
Whether I have nothing to hide or not is not the point, and it is irrelevant. What is relevant is that people have perfectly good reasons for not wanting to be raided at night without a proper warrant, for not wanting to be arrested and thrown in jail without a trial, and so on. Maybe tealover can't see that, and I hope for his own sake that he will never have to eat crow...
Tinnitus is a serious problem to a lot of people today, and it can have many causes, from various diseases/illnesses, to noise damage. It apparently has to do with the nerves in one's ear, so would this kind of research, might we finally see a way to actually treat tinnitus?
Until you get T, you don't realize how lucky people who can actually be in a quiet room without going mad are...
You are trespassing on private property, so your argument falls apart. His disctinction is not worthless.
And not only because of bugs, but also because people have different needs. With FF, you have to download and install extensions, which isn't exactly easy for newbies. Opera, when installed, has everything right there, including a full email client. Firebird requires additional downloads.
Claiming that FF is perfect is a disservice to the FF developers and the community. Actually, it is disrespectful towards the people who contribute to make it better!
That is completely wrong. Opera has had MDI since version 1.0. Opera 4.0 came with tabs - before Mozilla, and the guy who implemented it still works for Opera.Opera has true MDI. You can tile and cascade pages, and it keeps everything within one window by default. FireFox is far more limited, especially before downloading extensions.
Is that so? How come FF doesn't open the previous page instantly when going back, like Opera? How come it is a bigger download, but still has fewer features? How come you have to download extensions to get functionality that is considered to be essential in other browsers?Opera is actively involved in W3C activities, one of the CSS creators works for Opera. It is not the enemy.
Then how come people are paying for Opera? Plenty of people are willing to pay for a quality product they are using. This is another strawman argument. Pure speculation, and wrong too. Opera has been available since the mid-nineties. Opera has charged for the browser for almost ten years. You seem to be forgetting that Opera is on its way to dominate the handhelt market. Today, Motorola entered an agreement with Opera for their devices, and Motorola is huge.Opera also has a loyal following, since it has existed for nearly ten years. It hasn't just been thrown out there. It started out as a geek browser for advanced users, and has gradually moved out into the mass market.
Sales are increasing, and it's receiving lots of praise.
So while Mozilla no doubt has a place in the /. editors' hearts since it is open-source, Opera definitely has a future.
Ultimately, the editors choose which stories to post, and if they choose not to post as many stories about Opera, we will just have to accept that.
But don't give me some FUD about how Opera is this or that and you have to pay for it, because the fact that you have to pay for it doesn't mean that it is a lesser browser or has less geek appeal.
Opera happens to be small, fast, and with a lot of features that are tightly integrated. You don't have to go looking for extensions to do a lot of the stuff Opera does out of the box as you do with FireFox. Yes, FF is flexible and you can make it do just about anything, but you have to download extensions, and they can slow down the browser, and different extensions may not integrate well with each other.
Snap out of your dream world please. Just because you happen to like FF better doesn't mean that others cannot prefer Opera and even pay for it.
Remember, even RMS encourages people to charge for software - free as in libre software. Opera is closed-source, but it is different from FF, and some people think that Opera's way of doing things is better. Don't be so narrow-minded!
You seem to forget that Opera is getting big in the embedded market. Just now they secured a deal with Motorola, which is huge in the handheld market.Please, stop spreading FUD, OK?
Shouldn't it be the police, rather than some commercial company, that does the "search and seizure"? It is ridiculous that a commercial company or organization can be allowed to raid people, when even the police needs search warrants.