...relying on my skills as a network administrator (and my Psyc textbook), the following is generally held:
Humans cannot physically remember events that happen before the age of two. Any "memories" that appear to come from prior to that age are either a) purposely or inadvertantly implanted by a third party ("remember when..."), or b) the result of typical happenings for a very young child. For example, many children fall out of bed at least once, so you may remember doing so too whether or not it actually happened.
"I think if we get these new users onto a box that almost never crashes, works well, and doesn't need to be shut down every night in order to have a "fresh" pc in the morning, they will be hooked."
And they are; it's called Windows 2000. While I am sure that the malcontented herd here at Slashdot has a million indestructable tales of how Win2000 crashes every six seconds, in the actual, physical world, it's the most stable desktop OS and, you're right, the world is hooked.
Linux zealots simply cannot use the stability argument anymore.
Oh, so your ethics are also supposed to be his ethics? I see. Well, aren't you objective? Son, some of us feel that it is morally right to become skilled in an area that can actually provide for a family or, at the least, pay the bills. There are others in addition to Microsoft, but few that are as sure of a bet. Oh, but that's not what you believe and is, thus, clearly wrong.
I have a hunch that the real world will come as quite the shock to fanboys like yourself and most of the other respondants in this thread.
A brief synopsis of what just happened: an OSS user waited for the commercial vendors to do the legwork of finding a particular bug, then spent two minutes looking to see if he was affected too and then released a patch that was still later than that of the commercial vendor.
Sounds to me like the XMMS bug would never have been found (or at least not for a long while) if not for Microsoft/Winamp. You must be proud.
...you can say what you want about freedom of information, etc, but the saddest part is that this data really would be used destructively by those who would rather have a barge full of salvaged steel than a glimpse into the past.
It's a serious disappointment that society has arrived (not recently) at a state where truly worthwhile information is rightfully withheld because we, as humans, can't treat things with respect.
As I understand it, the heliopause actually is a magic point (in space terms, mind you) where the magnetic influence of the sun is too weak to "push against" interstellar winds and other influences and, thus, just stops. Although no human craft has ever experienced this point, it's theorized to be a fairly dramatic and bumpy transition.
Re:Not Mozilla compliant?
on
HotBot Returns
·
· Score: 1
Silly him, he must have assumed that "News for Nerds. Stuff That Matters" meant more than a linux fanzine.
Re:Things dont kill people..
on
Google vs. Evil
·
· Score: 1
Cars and bricks at least have a not-lethal purpose and become weapons secondarily. Do guns? Is there such a thing as a purpose for a gun that doesn't involve lethal force? If you have a gun, it is solely to potentially kill someone or some thing.
And that is why your comparisons aren't very good.
Those 'heat spreaders' are completely useless! I know that a half degree can make a world of difference in the world of technology, but if your RAM is getting hot enough where that one-half degree actually means anything, may I suggest that you quit running memory benchmarking apps for ten straight hours?
The kid who wrote that 'review' tips his hand at the very end, as despite being good for nothing in an actual sense, these 'spreaders' offer a whole new 'look' for your computer. You know, that grey box that site under the desk all the time.
Oh, while I'm thinking about it, watch out for my review of those fancy new red-anodized muffin tins which, although offering nothing actually beneficial to the production of muffins, does provide a whole new look to the inside of your oven. Hurray!
Hey, I'm with you, but there appears to be an endless crap cavalcade of articles trying to convince everyone otherwise with, as I noted, the same outcome every time.
The same thing happens every time some jackass brings this point up.
Linux advocates: What, oh what, does the common user want in order to switch from big, bad Microsoft? Common users worldwide: We want one, simple means of installing software and a standardized GUI. Linux advocates: No, that's not it. What, oh what, does the common user want in order to switch from big, bad Microsoft?
Keeerist, if you don't want to hear the answer, then stop asking the damned question. The responses are pigfuckingly obvious to everyone but you. The common user wants one easy means of installing software and a common GUI. Now, please, tell me I'm wrong.
Welp, if polarizing Slashdot even further is your aim, then such a suggestion certainly is the ticket. Groupthink around here is worse than any other web site I am aware of and if it comes to pass that the inmates run the asylum, those of us who aren't hard core zealots are, and correct me if I'm improperly generalizing, out of here.
Now, I'm dead certain that the extinction of any modicum of objectivity (sorry, "MS Trolls") around here is almost orgasmically desirable for many of the Slashbots, but it sure sounds pretty dull to me. At least the current editors pretend to have an interest in hearing opposing views.
your bank's webpage is broken, you should tell them to fix it. Mozilla is more standars compliant than internet explorer. If they won't use correct HTML, then that's their fault.
Are you linux guys that naive? Seriously. What company of any size just suddenly jumps to attention to appease the nasal whines of someone using -- and let's be honest here -- an oddball product? Standards compliance means, say it with me, nothing in this world that is essentially run by popularity contest.
'Tell[ing] them to fix it' means bringing in some HTML or JS or PHP or Perl or ASP or whatever jerk, who doesn't work for free mind you, to make it go. And, why again? Oh yeah, for 0.03 percent of all potential clients. Ideally, sure, that's just what happens, but in the real world that e-mail never even gets read.
Your idealism is heartwarming, but in order to "tell" anyone anything, you'd better bring some actual business reasons that aren't comprised of a whiteboard presentation of HTML standards and a pocket-full of hope. You (and I) as Mozilla users are ostensibly alone and no one hears our screams.
Now that would have been better. Every company I've ever worked for used Simpsons characters. It sucked being "squeaky_voiced_teen@everywhereiworked.com".
Dude, I know how badly you want to back a winner, but being a Microsoft enemy means virtually nothing. If given six months with which to market, I could get Microsoft to call a sandwich it's "prime enemy". In smart business, there is no such thing as happy co-existence and anyone who wouldn't sell his own mother to crush the competition isn't long for this world.
a) You've been trolled.
b) You're still making no sense. Why in the hell should I have to care about the technical excuses behind why Mozilla was years late in order to speak my mind? Its eventual release was the equivalent of a mother giving birth to a four year old and, while I'm certainly no mother, I am fairly sure it doesn't feel great.
Although it's patently typical of the OSS community to reject any criticism that doesn't come from a 10+ year veteran of the industry who has millions of lines of code under his size 48 belt, one doesn't need more than eyes with which to see in order to cast judgement, using terms like 'bloated' and 'really, really late,' upon Mozilla.
Until either of those descriptions aren't true, it is you who can just shut his doughy mouth.
For that matter, all versions including 2.4 are still supported on a 386-25 with 16M of ram if you happen to have such a beast in working order. Given the timeframes, that would be equivalent to Microsoft still supporting customers that are running Win95 or NT3.51 on that same 386 today and on into the future. Not likely.
This is a pathetic argument and matters to utterly no one outside of those who are hunting in vain for reasons to cheer. This Just In -- North American highways still support the 1923 Packard Roadster, even though there are about six left in the world. Should we all offer the DOT a big high-five? No, because the entire world has moved on. You should look into it.
Popularity is nice for ego gratification, but it really isn't a goal of very many OSS projects.
Maybe not the projects, but it's damned sure the goal of about a hundred thousand pundits and those are the nasal whines that the world hears. All one has to do is look at the front page of Slashdot: how many of this type of story have you seen in the last six months...
Family of Three in Latvia Switches to Linux
... followed by sixty thousand Slashbots backpatting and claiming how they "knew it all along"? Global domination seems to the the only goal of the average Slashdot fanboy who have never written a line of code in his life but is happy to jump on any passing bandwagon.
It's not the silent, qualified nerds who are slaving away at making Apache (and others) a better product that create OSSs public image, it's the noisy malcontents that I and the rest of the world have learned to despise.
Slashdot Mirror
256k
Some of us remember Slashdot stories that interested all geeks.
Humans cannot physically remember events that happen before the age of two. Any "memories" that appear to come from prior to that age are either a) purposely or inadvertantly implanted by a third party ("remember when..."), or b) the result of typical happenings for a very young child. For example, many children fall out of bed at least once, so you may remember doing so too whether or not it actually happened.
And, worldwide, irony calculation machines simultaneously burst into flames.
And they are; it's called Windows 2000. While I am sure that the malcontented herd here at Slashdot has a million indestructable tales of how Win2000 crashes every six seconds, in the actual, physical world, it's the most stable desktop OS and, you're right, the world is hooked.
Linux zealots simply cannot use the stability argument anymore.
I have a hunch that the real world will come as quite the shock to fanboys like yourself and most of the other respondants in this thread.
It was rock solid evidence then and it's rock solid evidence now.
Sounds to me like the XMMS bug would never have been found (or at least not for a long while) if not for Microsoft/Winamp. You must be proud.
It's a serious disappointment that society has arrived (not recently) at a state where truly worthwhile information is rightfully withheld because we, as humans, can't treat things with respect.
Both of the Voyager spacecrafts are pushing the edges of solar influence as well.
Silly him, he must have assumed that "News for Nerds. Stuff That Matters" meant more than a linux fanzine.
And that is why your comparisons aren't very good.
The kid who wrote that 'review' tips his hand at the very end, as despite being good for nothing in an actual sense, these 'spreaders' offer a whole new 'look' for your computer. You know, that grey box that site under the desk all the time.
Oh, while I'm thinking about it, watch out for my review of those fancy new red-anodized muffin tins which, although offering nothing actually beneficial to the production of muffins, does provide a whole new look to the inside of your oven. Hurray!
Hey, I'm with you, but there appears to be an endless crap cavalcade of articles trying to convince everyone otherwise with, as I noted, the same outcome every time.
The same thing happens every time some jackass brings this point up.
Linux advocates: What, oh what, does the common user want in order to switch from big, bad Microsoft?
Common users worldwide: We want one, simple means of installing software and a standardized GUI.
Linux advocates: No, that's not it. What, oh what, does the common user want in order to switch from big, bad Microsoft?
Keeerist, if you don't want to hear the answer, then stop asking the damned question. The responses are pigfuckingly obvious to everyone but you. The common user wants one easy means of installing software and a common GUI. Now, please, tell me I'm wrong.
Now, I'm dead certain that the extinction of any modicum of objectivity (sorry, "MS Trolls") around here is almost orgasmically desirable for many of the Slashbots, but it sure sounds pretty dull to me. At least the current editors pretend to have an interest in hearing opposing views.
Ha! Man, you're either new around here (seems not), lying, or truly the most unaware human stumbling about this planet. I hope you're just lying.
Are you linux guys that naive? Seriously. What company of any size just suddenly jumps to attention to appease the nasal whines of someone using -- and let's be honest here -- an oddball product? Standards compliance means, say it with me, nothing in this world that is essentially run by popularity contest.
'Tell[ing] them to fix it' means bringing in some HTML or JS or PHP or Perl or ASP or whatever jerk, who doesn't work for free mind you, to make it go. And, why again? Oh yeah, for 0.03 percent of all potential clients. Ideally, sure, that's just what happens, but in the real world that e-mail never even gets read.
Your idealism is heartwarming, but in order to "tell" anyone anything, you'd better bring some actual business reasons that aren't comprised of a whiteboard presentation of HTML standards and a pocket-full of hope. You (and I) as Mozilla users are ostensibly alone and no one hears our screams.
Now that would have been better. Every company I've ever worked for used Simpsons characters. It sucked being "squeaky_voiced_teen@everywhereiworked.com".
Dude, I know how badly you want to back a winner, but being a Microsoft enemy means virtually nothing. If given six months with which to market, I could get Microsoft to call a sandwich it's "prime enemy". In smart business, there is no such thing as happy co-existence and anyone who wouldn't sell his own mother to crush the competition isn't long for this world.
a) You've been trolled.
b) You're still making no sense. Why in the hell should I have to care about the technical excuses behind why Mozilla was years late in order to speak my mind? Its eventual release was the equivalent of a mother giving birth to a four year old and, while I'm certainly no mother, I am fairly sure it doesn't feel great.
Although it's patently typical of the OSS community to reject any criticism that doesn't come from a 10+ year veteran of the industry who has millions of lines of code under his size 48 belt, one doesn't need more than eyes with which to see in order to cast judgement, using terms like 'bloated' and 'really, really late,' upon Mozilla.
Until either of those descriptions aren't true, it is you who can just shut his doughy mouth.
How about a burned-out firehouse?
Wow! Now that's helpful. With such a rock-solid support structure, it looks like you're absolutely right.
This is a pathetic argument and matters to utterly no one outside of those who are hunting in vain for reasons to cheer. This Just In -- North American highways still support the 1923 Packard Roadster, even though there are about six left in the world. Should we all offer the DOT a big high-five? No, because the entire world has moved on. You should look into it.
Maybe not the projects, but it's damned sure the goal of about a hundred thousand pundits and those are the nasal whines that the world hears. All one has to do is look at the front page of Slashdot: how many of this type of story have you seen in the last six months...
Family of Three in Latvia Switches to Linux
It's not the silent, qualified nerds who are slaving away at making Apache (and others) a better product that create OSSs public image, it's the noisy malcontents that I and the rest of the world have learned to despise.