And you did this why? Around these parts, we call people like you "assholes." I assure you that this isn't a good thing. Really, you should do everything in your power to change before karma comes around and bites you in the butt.
That's not entirely accurate. Ever heard of something called Terminal Services? I know it isn't in 2000 Professional, but 2000 Server had it. Multiple people can use the same computer at the same time over the network by using Remote Desktop. At school, we actually use this for the Mac users so they can use the few Windows-only programs we use.
Oh really? You must not read the Constitution much. I shall quote Article IV Section 1. "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State; And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
The end has to be terminated first if you wanna do that, however. While you could punch down and just label the jacks later, it's a whole lot easier in the long run to have the jacks from one wall outlet in a group, and to have all those groups in a room grouped together. If you punch down and label later, you can't exactly do that.
The anemic RAM included is a good thing. Apple charges far too much for RAM. It's much cheaper to buy your RAM separately instead of upping the RAM on the config you order.
You didn't seem to get my point. You said that real musicians get by on 200 year old instruments. I am simply stating that there have been major improvements in the instruments that musicians have used throughout the years. I haven't even talked about recording equipment.
As for the tuba comment, I was stating that there fucking was no such thing 200 years ago. The instrument that had it's place back then, the serpent, sucked serious ass. There is a reason why nobody plays them anymore and they play tubas instead.
You didn't even touch my comments on saxophones, pianos, and trumpets. Tell me about the history of those instruments and then you can talk about using 200 year old instruments.
As a keyboardist, I happen to like having a synth. I can do all sorts of things I couldn't do without more money and more space.
'real' musicians get by with 200 year old instruments. Why do pop posers need new equipment?
Pianists aren't real musicians? Even a good piano that is well maintained won't last 200 years. Well, it won't be a decent piano to play after that much work unless it's completely overhauled.
Saxophonists aren't real musicians either? Their instrument was invented in 1840's.
Trumpet? Hmm... maybe one of those new fangled keyed bugles if I was lucky.
I would hate to play a tuba from 200 years ago. Oh wait, they played serpents back then. Even 100 years ago would be stupid. Three piston valves? You have got to be kidding me.
Instruments have evolved quite a bit over the past 200 years. Just about the only thing that has remained mostly static are the bowed string instruments.
Honestly, what is so difficult about configuring cisco routers? You just configure the passwords, interfaces, set up a routing protocol, set a gateway of last resort, and you're set. You can learn how to do all this in 30 minutes!
You made things far harder than they really are for yourself when you put in the new hard drive. You could have used a cloning program like Ghost. You would simply plug in the new HD to the secondary IDE channel and clone from primary to secondary. Boom, all your data on a new drive and no reinstallation of anything is necessary.
One, the operating system is Mac OS X, not "OS/X."
Two, what are you talking about with x86 emulation? Sure, you can already get spyware running on a Mac by running Windows in VirtualPC. I somehow doubt, however, that Apple is building something like Wine into the OS and coupling it with x86 emulation. Even so, it would be like installing Windows spyware on a Linux box under Wine. Some simply won't work because they do tweaky stuff to the system at a low level. Others might be made to work through heavy tweaking. It wouldn't be something that users just blindly install without knowing what they are doing. If any Mac spyware is to be made, it's gonna have to be native to the OS. Windows and Mac OS X are far different architecturally to do what you claim will happen.
Three, not all Mac users have lots of money. I myself am I high school student who works part time after school. My Mac is a 500 MHz iBook I bought used for $600 after working for a summer. I bought it simply because I adore Mac OS X and prefer it to any other OS. I didn't buy the iBook because it's pretty. Besides, your choice of color thing doesn't apply. This thing only came in white. The only thing Apple sells today with multiple colors are those new iPod minis.
You seem to think performance is all that matters for some reason. If I wanted performance, I'd be trying to get big iron from Cray, NEC, SGI, IBM, or Sun. Maybe even huge linux based clusters. Why don't I have these kinds of things? One, I don't have the money. Two, I don't have a need for that kind of performance. This little iBook here meets my needs perfectly. It is small enough for me to carry around to all my classes, powerful enough to do the admin work I do after school, and it's a *nix environment where I can play around. It's a godsend in my Cisco cert classes. Not to mention how nifty Cocoa is....
Whatever man. I administer nearly 200 Macs and use them almost exclusively for personal use. I've never ran across any kind of spyware for Mac OS X. The link you posted is bogus. Care to provide some more convincing evidence of what you claim?
% ping -c 10 127.12.34.65 PING 127.12.34.65 (127.12.34.65): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.989 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.037 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.955 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.005 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.427 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.435 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.426 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.437 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.434 ms 64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.432 ms
--- 127.12.34.65 ping statistics --- 10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 0.426/0.657/1.037 ms
Slashdot Mirror
Geeze. Why is everyone talking about the "root servers?" This isn't . (root zone), this is com. and net.! The two are not the same thing!
The school is Stanford and the Google founders never finished their PhD's. They went off and founded Google instead before they finished.
And you did this why? Around these parts, we call people like you "assholes." I assure you that this isn't a good thing. Really, you should do everything in your power to change before karma comes around and bites you in the butt.
There are a few in San Diego that I know of and I'm sure there are more elsewhere.
That's not entirely accurate. Ever heard of something called Terminal Services? I know it isn't in 2000 Professional, but 2000 Server had it. Multiple people can use the same computer at the same time over the network by using Remote Desktop. At school, we actually use this for the Mac users so they can use the few Windows-only programs we use.
Oh really? You must not read the Constitution much. I shall quote Article IV Section 1. "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State; And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."
While UDP may be unreliable, the name does not say that at all. UDP stands for User Datagram Protocol, not Unreliable Datagram Protocol.
The end has to be terminated first if you wanna do that, however. While you could punch down and just label the jacks later, it's a whole lot easier in the long run to have the jacks from one wall outlet in a group, and to have all those groups in a room grouped together. If you punch down and label later, you can't exactly do that.
The root servers don't have anything to do with how long it takes for a domain to be active. The .com, .net, .org, etc servers are the ones that matter.
The anemic RAM included is a good thing. Apple charges far too much for RAM. It's much cheaper to buy your RAM separately instead of upping the RAM on the config you order.
You didn't seem to get my point. You said that real musicians get by on 200 year old instruments. I am simply stating that there have been major improvements in the instruments that musicians have used throughout the years. I haven't even talked about recording equipment.
As for the tuba comment, I was stating that there fucking was no such thing 200 years ago. The instrument that had it's place back then, the serpent, sucked serious ass. There is a reason why nobody plays them anymore and they play tubas instead.
You didn't even touch my comments on saxophones, pianos, and trumpets. Tell me about the history of those instruments and then you can talk about using 200 year old instruments.
As a keyboardist, I happen to like having a synth. I can do all sorts of things I couldn't do without more money and more space.
'real' musicians get by with 200 year old instruments. Why do pop posers need new equipment?
Pianists aren't real musicians? Even a good piano that is well maintained won't last 200 years. Well, it won't be a decent piano to play after that much work unless it's completely overhauled.
Saxophonists aren't real musicians either? Their instrument was invented in 1840's.
Trumpet? Hmm... maybe one of those new fangled keyed bugles if I was lucky.
I would hate to play a tuba from 200 years ago. Oh wait, they played serpents back then. Even 100 years ago would be stupid. Three piston valves? You have got to be kidding me.
Instruments have evolved quite a bit over the past 200 years. Just about the only thing that has remained mostly static are the bowed string instruments.
Cut the "real musician" crap. Please.
Lunix is the *nix for C64.
You mean trademark, not copyright.
Errr.. and copy run start at the end to save your work.
Honestly, what is so difficult about configuring cisco routers? You just configure the passwords, interfaces, set up a routing protocol, set a gateway of last resort, and you're set. You can learn how to do all this in 30 minutes!
Who actually types all that out?
Gravity_Probe_B> sh ver
You made things far harder than they really are for yourself when you put in the new hard drive. You could have used a cloning program like Ghost. You would simply plug in the new HD to the secondary IDE channel and clone from primary to secondary. Boom, all your data on a new drive and no reinstallation of anything is necessary.
One, the operating system is Mac OS X, not "OS/X."
Two, what are you talking about with x86 emulation? Sure, you can already get spyware running on a Mac by running Windows in VirtualPC. I somehow doubt, however, that Apple is building something like Wine into the OS and coupling it with x86 emulation. Even so, it would be like installing Windows spyware on a Linux box under Wine. Some simply won't work because they do tweaky stuff to the system at a low level. Others might be made to work through heavy tweaking. It wouldn't be something that users just blindly install without knowing what they are doing. If any Mac spyware is to be made, it's gonna have to be native to the OS. Windows and Mac OS X are far different architecturally to do what you claim will happen.
Three, not all Mac users have lots of money. I myself am I high school student who works part time after school. My Mac is a 500 MHz iBook I bought used for $600 after working for a summer. I bought it simply because I adore Mac OS X and prefer it to any other OS. I didn't buy the iBook because it's pretty. Besides, your choice of color thing doesn't apply. This thing only came in white. The only thing Apple sells today with multiple colors are those new iPod minis.
You seem to think performance is all that matters for some reason. If I wanted performance, I'd be trying to get big iron from Cray, NEC, SGI, IBM, or Sun. Maybe even huge linux based clusters. Why don't I have these kinds of things? One, I don't have the money. Two, I don't have a need for that kind of performance. This little iBook here meets my needs perfectly. It is small enough for me to carry around to all my classes, powerful enough to do the admin work I do after school, and it's a *nix environment where I can play around. It's a godsend in my Cisco cert classes. Not to mention how nifty Cocoa is....
Whatever man. I administer nearly 200 Macs and use them almost exclusively for personal use. I've never ran across any kind of spyware for Mac OS X. The link you posted is bogus. Care to provide some more convincing evidence of what you claim?
Errr. I meant Amendment IX. Gah.
According to Roe v. Wade, privacy is a Constitutional right under Amendment X.
Mac OS X 10.3.3....
% ping -c 10 127.12.34.65
PING 127.12.34.65 (127.12.34.65): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=0.989 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=1.037 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.955 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=1.005 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.427 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.435 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.426 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.437 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.434 ms
64 bytes from 127.0.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.432 ms
--- 127.12.34.65 ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 10 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 0.426/0.657/1.037 ms
Back in the day, that was a good thing. Remember when they used to send the floppies? Free disk! w00t!
Screw that. Try ORSC instead. They have been around longer and they aren't crapware authors.