I believe that deusx (the original poster of this thread) was saying that Slash is very specific to the Slashdot site. I haven't looked at this release yet, but Slash 0.3 was arguably very specific to Slashdot. Indeed, there were no configuration files in the 0.3 release that could be easily tailored to your site (and I doubt there are any in this release).
That isn't to say that it is impossible to configure Slashdot (or a Slash-based site), but the time involved is much greater. Add to that the fact that Slash, out of the box, was designed to run under mod_perl with mysql running the backend database management. I would assume that CmdrTaco, CowboyNeal, nate, and countless others edited and compiled much of the afformentioned software to work with Slash better. Slashdot runs as well as it does (I'm not being sarcastic) because the site admins have worked at it for so long. So, part of it is changing the locations of files, generating tables, etc. A lot of it is the actual implementation of the code so that it runs.
Re:AOL Time Warner not a monopoly.
on
AOL Nation
·
· Score: 2
There's no way that we can tell for sure what will happen with the AOL-Time Warner merger. But you have to remember that there are millions of people who use AOL services (and those of Time Warner) that either don't care or don't know enough to see that there are other means of accessing information. Many computer users that I unfortunately must deal with only want their applications to run with no problems; many AOL users just want to be able to tell themselves and their friends that they are "online" because it's "cool." It could be called the dictatorship of the majority (does anyone know who coined that term?), and it's a scary to think that there will be one company with so much clout controlling the means of accessing information for people who just don't know any better.
It's true that the AOL-Time Warner congolmerate will most likely be forced to allow other companies to sell different information that will be delivered to users. Accessing the information is another story; many users won't want to make an effort to get to that information, though. (Think about the Dell WebPC commercial: "I was born to be bombarded by information.") On the same token, Apple just invested $200 million in EarthLink and agreed to make EarthLink the "default" ISP on all new Macs. All the new iMac owners who want to get online won't know the difference or care that there is one. They just want to be online because it's popular today. This passive process not necessarily a good thing.
[I know I'm posting pretty late, but I'm hoping that someone more knowledgeable about Windows is reading this.]
And thank you for that one sentence post. That's what the "No Score +1 Bonus" radio button is for.
The point here is that I fail to see how Windows9x is not merely a graphical shell for DOS. Now, I don't have much of a conception of the way WIN.COM works, but I'm curious. It seems that I can still prevent Windows from loading by setting BootGUI=1 in my MSDOS.SYS file. Obviously, something does some pretty crazy stuff to make the graphical part Windows. Isn't this just a shell? If not, what is your definition of a shell, and how does it differ from WIN.COM (or whatever)? Forgive me for my lack of knowledge on this subject; I'm merely curious.
For Be to support G4s, at least those made by Apple, Apple would have to agree to release the hardware specs. I seem to remember Be bitching about this (rightfully so) after Apple ended the clone era and closed all the hardware specs. As far as I know, BeOS doesn't run on any PowerPCs from Apple after the 9600 (correct me if I'm wrong...it may be the 9500). That's why Be released their OS for Intel chips.
The LinuxPPC guys have to essentially reverse-engineer the hardware information to get Linux running on new Apple hardware.
This is why I don't like the fact that Apple killed the clone licenses. I don't mind the fact that it stopped clones from being sold; the action allowed Apple to concentrate on making better hardware.
Now, as for comparing Linux and Mac OS X to System 7.x...have you seen Mac OS 9?:)
Yes. I can agree with that. In fact, I did a relatively large essay for the International Baccalaureate program (I'm still in high school) on GUIs, and what makes them usable. (And by no strech of the ego am I an expert on the subject...it's an area that I plan on studying more when I get to college.) A few of the studies suggested utilizing artistic resources in the design process. I let my OS biases play into my comment, which I should not have done.
Which reminds me of another question: How would you describe the deisgn process used in KDE? Is it similar to the iterative design process used with Windows, which started with a basic design prototype. The designers then moved to setting goals for the Windows interface, and designed prototype after prototype, testing at each phase until they had met those goals. In other words, what sort of usability testing have the KDE programmers used?
To make a user interface usable to the majority of users with a minimum of configuration, a lot of work must be done. I don't think that one should take the perspective of "What should be done to correct the user interface of x?" Your perspective may be the exact opposite of the next guy's.
On the same token, I don't think that a desktop environment/window manager project should start by asking "What is the most preferred 'look' and 'feel' for the majority of users?" As an example, Windows has too many flaws for me to use it for more than a little while at a time. Mac OS, despite its many flaws (and let's not start an OS war here), has a much more consistent and coherent interface than just about anything else, including the various X environments. Since Mac OS 8, they've only improved the interface (and it's a Network Browser that's used to connect to the network, now).
The problem that I have with both GNOME and KDE is that they both feel like Windows, no matter what I do with them. Yes, I'm biased. But it seems like KDE was started with the intention of making it easier for those accustomed to Windows (and maybe Mac OS) to approach Linux. Is this true? I must admit that I haven't followed the development of KDE (1.x especially), but it seems that more could be done to make an original interface strategy, rather than emulating a lot of the features of Windows and some of those in Mac OS. (I'm going to give KDE 2.0 a try, because I think that the programmers have spent a lot of time improving upon the interface, and those screenshots look pretty nice.)
Do you have any thoughts/opinions/feelings about how KDE compares in terms of usability with Windows and Mac OS (or other GUIs), in terms of consistency, flexibility, and other relevant aspects? To what extent is KDE based on the ideas behind Windows and Mac OS (or other GUIs)?
Self-Interest vs. Greed
on
Copyright!
·
· Score: 1
I would like to hear this poster's way of distinguishing between self-interest and greed. Because of the subjectivity of discussions of this nature, it can be hard to tell what the person means.
Anyway, adimarco raises some interesting points. Like a lot of people, he seems to think idealistically. I often wish that people were not so self-centered and self-interested (ahh...what subjective terms) and greedy, but human nature dictates that people will fight for themselves before others (survival of the fittest, in a way). This is what my friends and I refer to as "whoring down." The rare few who fight for the good of all should be seen in a different light, and often are. Donating one's efforts to humankind without a thought to how oneself will benefit is, in my opinion, one of the highest human achievements. It is unfortunate that more of us aren't like that (and I'm not saying that I'm not self-interested, but I make an whole-hearted effort to help others when possible).
Now, in terms of what the RIAA is doing, I would call that greed. I think we can all agree on that: twisting the truth and bending the laws for personal gain is greedy. RIAA pretends to represent every artist in the recording industry (that's my perception, although I don't know much about RIAA). In truth, they represent the executives who have, out of greed, made excessive amounts of money off of the efforts of artists.
Ideally, artists who want to get their music (and their message, if they have one) out into the world shouldn't care about the method of distribution. I agree that, to some extent, it is fair for artists to feel justified in making millions from their music. But where can we draw the line between self-interest and greed? So many artists have sold out, so to speak, so they can make more money. I call that greed.
Anyway, I'm a very idealistic person, like adimarco.
I got a catalog a while ago called "Sony Xtras Direct" or something. They have a sweet-looking remote control with a huge LCD that they claim is "a programmable, teachable remote" that can "control up to 12 different items, including teaching it to recall multiple command sequences with a single touch." They have a website, http://www.sony.com/direct/, but I haven't looked for it there. The quoted price is $179.99. I would think it's worth looking into, given the one you're talking about it quite a bit more expensive.
Linux is definately cool, as are the ideas of open source. The problem is that, while the original goal of the Linux commmunity was most likely not to destroy Windows, it has become a goal of many Linux users to whom I have been exposed. Repeatedly on Slashdot, I see comments from "hardcore" Linux users (and those users of every other OS in existance, to be sure) who utterly despise every other OS in existance just because. They rarely ever see the strong points of another OS, even Windows (and no, I don't like Windows). Oftentimes, strict lines are drawn by people who are evangelizing their OS of choice, and Linux users are no exception.
The same is the case with the so-called open source movement. Sun is a corporation that is testing the open source waters, just as Apple is doing with Darwin. The corporations need time to adapt to the various movements within the computer industry. The open source movement, by nature, is really hard to define. One person's view may be that Sun's Community Source License is just one more manifestation of the open source movement. Just because the GNU General Public License or the Artist's License are the only ones accepted as truly open source in your eyes doesn't mean that Sun isn't starting to see the benefits of open source.
Well, to tell you the truth, we all know why MTV is doing this special. It's all for publicity, as it is for just about anything else that the mainstream media do today. The suits at these companies live their lives thinking of new ways to get their brand name in here or there to make it seem like the company is "innovative" or "society shaping."
The sad thing is that MTV actually has shaped our society. We may not like to admit it, but ninety percent of the people in my high school are what I like to call "media whores." I may be exaggerating, but these people have become MTV's bitches. MTV has shaped popular culture, and, unfortunately, everyday culture. We see it everywhere...in people's clothing, choices in music, and any number of other ways they act. People have become more attentive to TV and computers and less attentive to people. While there were other forces, MTV helped this along at least somewhat.
Getting back on topic, MTV's special on "hackers" shows exactly what the popular conception of crackers and script kiddies really is. Take it for what it's worth: we know better, but MTV doesn't. I'm not trying to be elitist here...I'm saying that it's unfortunate that the truth about these kinds of things will never come to light in society at large.
Nevermind being entirely off-topic, but how did Slashdot sellout? It's still run the same way--with moderators who are the users. I guess the moderators don't want to waste their points on first posters, and would rather concentrate on the good comments posted to an article. The Andover.net purchase has allowed CmdrTaco to make changes to how the site runs, while still keeping the same atmosphere that we all love. As for the first posters, all I can say is go back to Segfault.
In terms of UCITA, does anyone have any idea where I might find some specific websites that we could refer the appropriate state government authorities to, that explain the problems and so on? Any help would be appreciated.
In fact, with a slightly modified version of the Operating Systems Sucks-Rules-O-Meter, I found 2 websites that contained "Slashdot rules," while none for "Segfault rules". There were no websites with the phrases "Slashdot sucks" or "Segfault sucks," however.
Have I missed something? I wouldn't call Steve Jobs a visionary, but he definitely knows how to make products that people will like--he's intelligent in that respect. Jobs has done certain things to get the attention back on Apple, and this event is no exception. Jobs deserves respect for what he has done with Apple, even if you don't like the products Apple has put out under him. Pretty much anything anyone does won't be liked by someone, but it's important to give people the respect they deserve. Jobs has done the dirty work, but he's been graceful about it. Apple wouldn't be Apple without the influence of Jobs on the company, from the beginning. This keynote thing is pretty pointless, except to draw attention to Apple. A few years ago, the MacWorld keynotes were all but ignored by everyone but the Apple faithful. But that's all changed because of Steve Jobs.
I'm surprised at some of the Slashdotters that have replied to this article. I use Mac OS, Linux, and Windoze; Mac OS is my favorite OS for some reasons, Linux for others, and Windoze...well, anyway. I thought most Linux users were capable of respecting the other operating systems and the force behind them. While this force is just as different as the operating systems themselves, it should not be taken for granted. I may be speaking for myself, but most Mac users aren't looking for an "objective" opinion, but rather respect. We have reasons for choosing Mac OS, just like you have reasons for choosing Linux. After experiencing both Linux and Mac OS, I can respect both operating systems. Please do the same.
I would love to see QuickTime opened up, much like the QuickTime Streamimg Server. Giving other platforms the capability to watch QuickTime movies compressed with Sorenson and other codecs would be great for Apple. Apple has made QuickTime available to Java (see this), allowing Java developers to access QuickTime, but only under Mac OS and Windows. Those who are interested enough in QuickTime for other platforms can send an email to leadership@apple.com.
You guys are missing the point. Now, this has been said before, but I'll say it again. As a sys admin, you have to worry that since the machine was cracked, there are other security holes (read: trojans). Just because the crackers put a nice little comment in the index.html saying the old file was copied to index.html.old doesn't mean that something more malicious wasn't done. Who knows. But there are other ways of notifying the admin other than leaving your mark in such a manner as this.
Think about it. Some 15 year old kid thought it might be fun to use his "hacking" skills to make a joke. He's probably in a "hacking" ring full of immature kids just like him. It is sad, though, to see SETI hacked.
Indeed. Many companies, especially those in the computer industry, have lost large sums of money because the opposing company's legal team was able to convince an unknowing jury of something that was questionably true. This is what "reasonable doubt" is to these people. I wonder how some cases would have turned out if the jury had been comprised of more technical people.
What? Mac OS is "not acceptable" to you? Granted, Mac OS doesn't have protected memory, true multitasking, and certain other feautures. All this means is that Mac OS isn't a great server OS, which we already knew. Most users, and especially those that the iMac is targeted to, don't need all those features for everyday computer use. Sure, they're nice, and we can get them with other OSs. But the great thing about Mac OS is the consistency of design. I know where I'm going on pretty much any Mac. I can't say the same for some other OSs.
Re: The point is that Apple IS the innovator here
on
iMac Clone Gets Sued
·
· Score: 1
And no computing experience would be as smooth and consistent if not for Apple. In my opinion, Mac OS is still one of the best GUIs in this respect. It has been improved upon for the last 15 years, and each update has made the experience much more pleasant. I think that this is innovation at its best. The iMac symbolizes the ease of use that is to be expected from Apple.
Yes, the definition of copyright laws are changing constantly as new precedent is established by court cases such as the Gucci watch one. While Apple may have lost the case against Microsoft over Mac OS and Windows, this case will probably be won by Apple. The E-Power machines will probably sell, though, just because of the popularity of the iMac. Clearly, that's why E-Power designed their cases like that. And that's why Apple is suing.
I agree that Triumph was a better documentary, in the technical sense. I'm not surprised one bit, though, that a "mainstream" TV movie has more visibility than Triumph. I remember seeing ads for Pirates on other TV stations a month or two before the movie was played. That's marketing muscle for you.
Cringely makes some great comments. I agree with his opinion that, because of Pirates, it might be the last time the "mainstream" crowd gets to see anything about this subject. Hopefully not. (And, hey, remember all of those disaster movies that came out last year, culminating with Armageddon? Hmm....)
Nevertheless, I think that Woz's approach to giving his feedback was much more interesting to me than Cringely's, in that it was more personal. Woz must have received hundreds of emails about Pirates, many from geeks who haven't seen Triumph. He gracefully answered many emails, offering insightful information about the portrayal of the subject found in Pirates.
I'm not saying I liked Pirates, but I was glad to be able to have my mother learn more about the subject. Believe me, I corrected their mistakes. I also showed her Woz's site. Maybe Pirates wasn't accurate, but I think my mom has a pretty good understanding of the story now.
Re:Which came first, the movie or the society?
on
South Park The Movie
·
· Score: 1
Nicely put. I went to the movie with a bunch of friends thinking I would not like it too much. I was surprised, though, at the underlying message. All in all, I am very glad to have seen it. I only wish that the people who need to understand that message would understand it.
I'd like to share my experiences with corporate America, relating to this topic. I am a high school student, with a job at a Web design company that uses virtual hosting on NT machines running IIS for its sites (*shudder*). We use FrontPage (*shudder*) because "it's simpler," according to my boss. In fact, my boss seems to think that Microsoft technology is superior just because it is Microsoft technology. I try to convice my boss that there are better ways of doing things, even if it means moving away from Microsoft products.
Sometimes I wonder if my boss wants to be Bill Gates. Today, he mentioned that one can only be smarter if one is running ahead of the competition dropping land mines behind, saying that Microsoft's business tactics have been fair. Also today my boss commented on some of my recent anti-Microsoft behavior, saying it was unprofessional to express those feelings in the business world. I can accept that.
My experience with this company, though, has showed me that there is more to Microsoft's "dominance" that what most of the so-called computing world realizes. Mainstream sites may comment on Microsoft, but they neglect to show people that Microsoft has a stranglehold on people, not just computers. I hope I'm making myself clear enough.
Anyway, I'm glad that Slashdot has given us a forum to express ourselves. Rock on.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that deusx (the original poster of this thread) was saying that Slash is very specific to the Slashdot site. I haven't looked at this release yet, but Slash 0.3 was arguably very specific to Slashdot. Indeed, there were no configuration files in the 0.3 release that could be easily tailored to your site (and I doubt there are any in this release).
That isn't to say that it is impossible to configure Slashdot (or a Slash-based site), but the time involved is much greater. Add to that the fact that Slash, out of the box, was designed to run under mod_perl with mysql running the backend database management. I would assume that CmdrTaco, CowboyNeal, nate, and countless others edited and compiled much of the afformentioned software to work with Slash better. Slashdot runs as well as it does (I'm not being sarcastic) because the site admins have worked at it for so long. So, part of it is changing the locations of files, generating tables, etc. A lot of it is the actual implementation of the code so that it runs.
There's no way that we can tell for sure what will happen with the AOL-Time Warner merger. But you have to remember that there are millions of people who use AOL services (and those of Time Warner) that either don't care or don't know enough to see that there are other means of accessing information. Many computer users that I unfortunately must deal with only want their applications to run with no problems; many AOL users just want to be able to tell themselves and their friends that they are "online" because it's "cool." It could be called the dictatorship of the majority (does anyone know who coined that term?), and it's a scary to think that there will be one company with so much clout controlling the means of accessing information for people who just don't know any better.
It's true that the AOL-Time Warner congolmerate will most likely be forced to allow other companies to sell different information that will be delivered to users. Accessing the information is another story; many users won't want to make an effort to get to that information, though. (Think about the Dell WebPC commercial: "I was born to be bombarded by information.") On the same token, Apple just invested $200 million in EarthLink and agreed to make EarthLink the "default" ISP on all new Macs. All the new iMac owners who want to get online won't know the difference or care that there is one. They just want to be online because it's popular today. This passive process not necessarily a good thing.
[I know I'm posting pretty late, but I'm hoping that someone more knowledgeable about Windows is reading this.]
And thank you for that one sentence post. That's what the "No Score +1 Bonus" radio button is for.
The point here is that I fail to see how Windows9x is not merely a graphical shell for DOS. Now, I don't have much of a conception of the way WIN.COM works, but I'm curious. It seems that I can still prevent Windows from loading by setting BootGUI=1 in my MSDOS.SYS file. Obviously, something does some pretty crazy stuff to make the graphical part Windows. Isn't this just a shell? If not, what is your definition of a shell, and how does it differ from WIN.COM (or whatever)? Forgive me for my lack of knowledge on this subject; I'm merely curious.
For Be to support G4s, at least those made by Apple, Apple would have to agree to release the hardware specs. I seem to remember Be bitching about this (rightfully so) after Apple ended the clone era and closed all the hardware specs. As far as I know, BeOS doesn't run on any PowerPCs from Apple after the 9600 (correct me if I'm wrong...it may be the 9500). That's why Be released their OS for Intel chips.
:)
The LinuxPPC guys have to essentially reverse-engineer the hardware information to get Linux running on new Apple hardware.
This is why I don't like the fact that Apple killed the clone licenses. I don't mind the fact that it stopped clones from being sold; the action allowed Apple to concentrate on making better hardware.
Now, as for comparing Linux and Mac OS X to System 7.x...have you seen Mac OS 9?
Yes. I can agree with that. In fact, I did a relatively large essay for the International Baccalaureate program (I'm still in high school) on GUIs, and what makes them usable. (And by no strech of the ego am I an expert on the subject...it's an area that I plan on studying more when I get to college.) A few of the studies suggested utilizing artistic resources in the design process. I let my OS biases play into my comment, which I should not have done.
Which reminds me of another question: How would you describe the deisgn process used in KDE? Is it similar to the iterative design process used with Windows, which started with a basic design prototype. The designers then moved to setting goals for the Windows interface, and designed prototype after prototype, testing at each phase until they had met those goals. In other words, what sort of usability testing have the KDE programmers used?
To make a user interface usable to the majority of users with a minimum of configuration, a lot of work must be done. I don't think that one should take the perspective of "What should be done to correct the user interface of x?" Your perspective may be the exact opposite of the next guy's.
On the same token, I don't think that a desktop environment/window manager project should start by asking "What is the most preferred 'look' and 'feel' for the majority of users?" As an example, Windows has too many flaws for me to use it for more than a little while at a time. Mac OS, despite its many flaws (and let's not start an OS war here), has a much more consistent and coherent interface than just about anything else, including the various X environments. Since Mac OS 8, they've only improved the interface (and it's a Network Browser that's used to connect to the network, now).
The problem that I have with both GNOME and KDE is that they both feel like Windows, no matter what I do with them. Yes, I'm biased. But it seems like KDE was started with the intention of making it easier for those accustomed to Windows (and maybe Mac OS) to approach Linux. Is this true? I must admit that I haven't followed the development of KDE (1.x especially), but it seems that more could be done to make an original interface strategy, rather than emulating a lot of the features of Windows and some of those in Mac OS. (I'm going to give KDE 2.0 a try, because I think that the programmers have spent a lot of time improving upon the interface, and those screenshots look pretty nice.)
Do you have any thoughts/opinions/feelings about how KDE compares in terms of usability with Windows and Mac OS (or other GUIs), in terms of consistency, flexibility, and other relevant aspects? To what extent is KDE based on the ideas behind Windows and Mac OS (or other GUIs)?
I would like to hear this poster's way of distinguishing between self-interest and greed. Because of the subjectivity of discussions of this nature, it can be hard to tell what the person means.
Anyway, adimarco raises some interesting points. Like a lot of people, he seems to think idealistically. I often wish that people were not so self-centered and self-interested (ahh...what subjective terms) and greedy, but human nature dictates that people will fight for themselves before others (survival of the fittest, in a way). This is what my friends and I refer to as "whoring down." The rare few who fight for the good of all should be seen in a different light, and often are. Donating one's efforts to humankind without a thought to how oneself will benefit is, in my opinion, one of the highest human achievements. It is unfortunate that more of us aren't like that (and I'm not saying that I'm not self-interested, but I make an whole-hearted effort to help others when possible).
Now, in terms of what the RIAA is doing, I would call that greed. I think we can all agree on that: twisting the truth and bending the laws for personal gain is greedy. RIAA pretends to represent every artist in the recording industry (that's my perception, although I don't know much about RIAA). In truth, they represent the executives who have, out of greed, made excessive amounts of money off of the efforts of artists.
Ideally, artists who want to get their music (and their message, if they have one) out into the world shouldn't care about the method of distribution. I agree that, to some extent, it is fair for artists to feel justified in making millions from their music. But where can we draw the line between self-interest and greed? So many artists have sold out, so to speak, so they can make more money. I call that greed.
Anyway, I'm a very idealistic person, like adimarco.
I got a catalog a while ago called "Sony Xtras Direct" or something. They have a sweet-looking remote control with a huge LCD that they claim is "a programmable, teachable remote" that can "control up to 12 different items, including teaching it to recall multiple command sequences with a single touch." They have a website, http://www.sony.com/direct/, but I haven't looked for it there. The quoted price is $179.99. I would think it's worth looking into, given the one you're talking about it quite a bit more expensive.
The findings will be released today, according to the page.
Linux is definately cool, as are the ideas of open source. The problem is that, while the original goal of the Linux commmunity was most likely not to destroy Windows, it has become a goal of many Linux users to whom I have been exposed. Repeatedly on Slashdot, I see comments from "hardcore" Linux users (and those users of every other OS in existance, to be sure) who utterly despise every other OS in existance just because. They rarely ever see the strong points of another OS, even Windows (and no, I don't like Windows). Oftentimes, strict lines are drawn by people who are evangelizing their OS of choice, and Linux users are no exception.
The same is the case with the so-called open source movement. Sun is a corporation that is testing the open source waters, just as Apple is doing with Darwin. The corporations need time to adapt to the various movements within the computer industry. The open source movement, by nature, is really hard to define. One person's view may be that Sun's Community Source License is just one more manifestation of the open source movement. Just because the GNU General Public License or the Artist's License are the only ones accepted as truly open source in your eyes doesn't mean that Sun isn't starting to see the benefits of open source.
Anyway, enough of my ranting.
Well, to tell you the truth, we all know why MTV is doing this special. It's all for publicity, as it is for just about anything else that the mainstream media do today. The suits at these companies live their lives thinking of new ways to get their brand name in here or there to make it seem like the company is "innovative" or "society shaping."
The sad thing is that MTV actually has shaped our society. We may not like to admit it, but ninety percent of the people in my high school are what I like to call "media whores." I may be exaggerating, but these people have become MTV's bitches. MTV has shaped popular culture, and, unfortunately, everyday culture. We see it everywhere...in people's clothing, choices in music, and any number of other ways they act. People have become more attentive to TV and computers and less attentive to people. While there were other forces, MTV helped this along at least somewhat.
Getting back on topic, MTV's special on "hackers" shows exactly what the popular conception of crackers and script kiddies really is. Take it for what it's worth: we know better, but MTV doesn't. I'm not trying to be elitist here...I'm saying that it's unfortunate that the truth about these kinds of things will never come to light in society at large.
Nevermind being entirely off-topic, but how did Slashdot sellout? It's still run the same way--with moderators who are the users. I guess the moderators don't want to waste their points on first posters, and would rather concentrate on the good comments posted to an article. The Andover.net purchase has allowed CmdrTaco to make changes to how the site runs, while still keeping the same atmosphere that we all love. As for the first posters, all I can say is go back to Segfault.
In terms of UCITA, does anyone have any idea where I might find some specific websites that we could refer the appropriate state government authorities to, that explain the problems and so on? Any help would be appreciated.
In fact, with a slightly modified version of the Operating Systems Sucks-Rules-O-Meter, I found 2 websites that contained "Slashdot rules," while none for "Segfault rules". There were no websites with the phrases "Slashdot sucks" or "Segfault sucks," however.
Interesting, huh?
:-)
Have I missed something? I wouldn't call Steve Jobs a visionary, but he definitely knows how to make products that people will like--he's intelligent in that respect. Jobs has done certain things to get the attention back on Apple, and this event is no exception. Jobs deserves respect for what he has done with Apple, even if you don't like the products Apple has put out under him. Pretty much anything anyone does won't be liked by someone, but it's important to give people the respect they deserve. Jobs has done the dirty work, but he's been graceful about it. Apple wouldn't be Apple without the influence of Jobs on the company, from the beginning. This keynote thing is pretty pointless, except to draw attention to Apple. A few years ago, the MacWorld keynotes were all but ignored by everyone but the Apple faithful. But that's all changed because of Steve Jobs.
I'm surprised at some of the Slashdotters that have replied to this article. I use Mac OS, Linux, and Windoze; Mac OS is my favorite OS for some reasons, Linux for others, and Windoze...well, anyway. I thought most Linux users were capable of respecting the other operating systems and the force behind them. While this force is just as different as the operating systems themselves, it should not be taken for granted. I may be speaking for myself, but most Mac users aren't looking for an "objective" opinion, but rather respect. We have reasons for choosing Mac OS, just like you have reasons for choosing Linux. After experiencing both Linux and Mac OS, I can respect both operating systems. Please do the same.
I would love to see QuickTime opened up, much like the QuickTime Streamimg Server. Giving other platforms the capability to watch QuickTime movies compressed with Sorenson and other codecs would be great for Apple. Apple has made QuickTime available to Java (see this), allowing Java developers to access QuickTime, but only under Mac OS and Windows. Those who are interested enough in QuickTime for other platforms can send an email to leadership@apple.com.
You guys are missing the point. Now, this has been said before, but I'll say it again. As a sys admin, you have to worry that since the machine was cracked, there are other security holes (read: trojans). Just because the crackers put a nice little comment in the index.html saying the old file was copied to index.html.old doesn't mean that something more malicious wasn't done. Who knows. But there are other ways of notifying the admin other than leaving your mark in such a manner as this.
Think about it. Some 15 year old kid thought it might be fun to use his "hacking" skills to make a joke. He's probably in a "hacking" ring full of immature kids just like him. It is sad, though, to see SETI hacked.
Indeed. Many companies, especially those in the computer industry, have lost large sums of money because the opposing company's legal team was able to convince an unknowing jury of something that was questionably true. This is what "reasonable doubt" is to these people. I wonder how some cases would have turned out if the jury had been comprised of more technical people.
What? Mac OS is "not acceptable" to you? Granted, Mac OS doesn't have protected memory, true multitasking, and certain other feautures. All this means is that Mac OS isn't a great server OS, which we already knew. Most users, and especially those that the iMac is targeted to, don't need all those features for everyday computer use. Sure, they're nice, and we can get them with other OSs. But the great thing about Mac OS is the consistency of design. I know where I'm going on pretty much any Mac. I can't say the same for some other OSs.
And no computing experience would be as smooth and consistent if not for Apple. In my opinion, Mac OS is still one of the best GUIs in this respect. It has been improved upon for the last 15 years, and each update has made the experience much more pleasant. I think that this is innovation at its best. The iMac symbolizes the ease of use that is to be expected from Apple.
Yes, the definition of copyright laws are changing constantly as new precedent is established by court cases such as the Gucci watch one. While Apple may have lost the case against Microsoft over Mac OS and Windows, this case will probably be won by Apple. The E-Power machines will probably sell, though, just because of the popularity of the iMac. Clearly, that's why E-Power designed their cases like that. And that's why Apple is suing.
I agree that Triumph was a better documentary, in the technical sense. I'm not surprised one bit, though, that a "mainstream" TV movie has more visibility than Triumph. I remember seeing ads for Pirates on other TV stations a month or two before the movie was played. That's marketing muscle for you.
Cringely makes some great comments. I agree with his opinion that, because of Pirates, it might be the last time the "mainstream" crowd gets to see anything about this subject. Hopefully not. (And, hey, remember all of those disaster movies that came out last year, culminating with Armageddon? Hmm....)
Nevertheless, I think that Woz's approach to giving his feedback was much more interesting to me than Cringely's, in that it was more personal. Woz must have received hundreds of emails about Pirates, many from geeks who haven't seen Triumph. He gracefully answered many emails, offering insightful information about the portrayal of the subject found in Pirates.
I'm not saying I liked Pirates, but I was glad to be able to have my mother learn more about the subject. Believe me, I corrected their mistakes. I also showed her Woz's site. Maybe Pirates wasn't accurate, but I think my mom has a pretty good understanding of the story now.
Nicely put. I went to the movie with a bunch of friends thinking I would not like it too much. I was surprised, though, at the underlying message. All in all, I am very glad to have seen it. I only wish that the people who need to understand that message would understand it.
I'd like to share my experiences with corporate America, relating to this topic. I am a high school student, with a job at a Web design company that uses virtual hosting on NT machines running IIS for its sites (*shudder*). We use FrontPage (*shudder*) because "it's simpler," according to my boss. In fact, my boss seems to think that Microsoft technology is superior just because it is Microsoft technology. I try to convice my boss that there are better ways of doing things, even if it means moving away from Microsoft products.
Sometimes I wonder if my boss wants to be Bill Gates. Today, he mentioned that one can only be smarter if one is running ahead of the competition dropping land mines behind, saying that Microsoft's business tactics have been fair. Also today my boss commented on some of my recent anti-Microsoft behavior, saying it was unprofessional to express those feelings in the business world. I can accept that.
My experience with this company, though, has showed me that there is more to Microsoft's "dominance" that what most of the so-called computing world realizes. Mainstream sites may comment on Microsoft, but they neglect to show people that Microsoft has a stranglehold on people, not just computers. I hope I'm making myself clear enough.
Anyway, I'm glad that Slashdot has given us a forum to express ourselves. Rock on.