If I ever tried to remove MSN Messenger, delete the files and everything, like dark fucking magic everything would reappear and launch if I ever visited a MSN-site with MSIE.
I had to insert dummy-executables in the MSN Messenger directory to get rid of it. However, editing the registry to tell Windows that MSN Messenger wasn't there would also magically cause a reinstall just out of nowhere.
So I let Windows believe the dummy executables were MSN Messenger which were still techincally "installed". That and only that did it for me.
Seems like you got off easy, you lucky bastard!
The way windows constantly tries to battle the user, if he actually dares to defy the devine intensions of Redmond... *shudder* It's really all you need to know about the OS and the vendor.
If I have 20 Internet Explorer windows open, I can navigate between them using the Taskbar's "(20) Internet Explorer" collapsed button or with the ALT-TAB window switcher.
Ever heard of CTRL-TAB? for switching windows inside a browser? Or any other standard-compliant application for that matter.
Personally I prefer to be able to switch to another application when using ALT-TAB without having to go trough my 20 tabs before I get the app I want.
But that may just be me. And my window-management is not thrown off in any way. On the contrary tabbed browsing has enhanched it.
here's a reason for that. USB devices can optionally support serial numbers as part of their identification process.
So when my USB-devices doesn't support that, why the hell do Windows require me to reinstall the same drivers for the same device, simply because I can't remember which of my 8 USB-ports I plugged it into last?
Im not saying the optional feature is useless. I'm saying that reinstalling drivers for a known device, or a device that in any case can't be identified as unique, is stupid.
Last I checked, Linux treated equal (or the same) hotplugging devices with the same kernel-module and stuff just works. Is there anything I'm missing when I think this is how things should work?
I mean seriously, this is just a guess, it takes maybe a few million at most to produce an album?
No, that's the prudction-costs required to produce and camuflache mainstream crap into not sounding like obvious crap.
I wonder how many million dollars Miles Davis spent when he recorded "A kind of blue", the most selling jazz record of all time. I wonder how many million Deutsche-mark Mozart used to write his symphonies.
No, really. It's just crappy pop "artists" who has no actual content in their music that needs these funds to make their stuff sound like actual music. If you left actual musicians, you know those artists who treat music like art, not a money-making machine, those with a devotion for good music. If you left them to run the shop, these insane amounts of money wouldn't be necassery. Plus we'd get actual music.
Ok, so I'm elitist, but tell me Britney Spears is an artist in the true sense of the word art. I dare you!
Apart from Stargate SG-1 which I haven't ever watched (I didn't like the Stargate movie, ok?), I agree that TOS is and will always be the best Star Trek.
And Battlestar Gallactica rocks modern sci-fi. Here's me waiting for season 2...
It is legal to copy a CD to another CD for backup-purposes or for your car or as otherwise specified by fair-use. It will be legal to bypass the protection if it is needed to play back the music on your hardware.
It will however not be legal to do format-shifting, like copying copy-protected cds to mp3s. The reason given for this was that "you would not expect a CD to (physically) fit into a small digital & portable music player" (i kid you not).
So it's stupid, it's crap, but it's not nearly as bad as the pure DMCA.
In essence, you stole their time, their effort, and their money. Anything else is just a rationalization.
No I didn't and no it isn't. I could reply to any post in this thread misapropriatly using the word "steal", but I chose yours because of your arrogant "everyone who doesn't agree with me are wrong"-type attitude. Oh, remember: I devoted my time and creativity to write this work of a post.
In essence, if you don't read this post you stole my time, my effort and my money.
Anything else is just a rationalization.
How is that for seeing your argument being flawed? Dumbass.
You mean like the memorlyleaks in Firefox v1.0 (which they wont fix until v1.1) and Java which puts my machine down from 700MB free mem to 200MB free mem in less than a week?
Yes, indeed. Something terribly wrong with the OS. And boy, am I gonna be flamed for saying naughty stuff about Firefox.
Still offtopic, sorry: You got it wrong
on
Opera 8 Released
·
· Score: 1
When I sign or encrypt my mail with my private key in GPG everyone is still free to download my public key. In fact with modern keyservers people who doesn't have my key can probably do that automatic.
This doesn't hinder anyone in reading the mail or verifying the signature/encryption. In fact all it does is alloving me to ensure whoever I send mail, that it is me sending the mail, not some spoofer or virus. How is this a bad thing?
I see your stance against Encrypted GPG more as stance on ecnryption in general. Anyway, if I want only one person I know to be able to read my mail because what Im sending him is strictly confidential... Is that wrong? If the recipient of my mail still wants to do something with the content he is free to do so. There is no DRM-mechanisms there to stop him.
When we oppose DRM it should be because it is implemented to take control away from us, the users, and give it to the machine/software/content-owners. GPG however does no such thing.
I think you are overly generalising your (valid) fear.
I've used Opera. It's an excellent browser in every way. It was Gmail and my online banking that forced me to use Firefox in the first place, as I refused to use IE.
Anyhow, as I see it, they both have their strengths and there are improvements I'd like to see in both of them. Last version of Opera I used 7.5, and I doubt too much have changed since then.
And yes, if I had a steady income back in the days when Opera was my main browser I would be more than happy to shell out my cash for such a quality product.
What I reacted on in your post had nothing to do with the oh-so traditional Firefox vs. Opera flamewar.
It was the statement that could easily be read as that the open-source model had achieved much more than the proprietary in just a forth of the time. That was what I found unreasonable and triggered my reaction.
As much as I like the idea of open source software, I think lots of its fanbase behave rather singlemindedly and I guess that annoys me. Personally I don't think there is such a thing as a "perfect" development model which applies to everything.
Firefox uses the Gecko engine which is inherited from the Mozilla suite, which again comes from Netscape. So Firefox, even though it is a standalone project, it does depend on code that was being developed long before the Firefox-project was even started.
If you can agree to this, you can also agree to that Firefox represents a evolutionary fork from Netscape. And that is what I meant by my post.
Had Firefox started out on ground-zero it would have been nowhere near usable as a webbrowser today.
Your's sincerely a happy, but reasonable Firefox user.
Opera has been around for how many years now? Version 8. It has about (based on thecounter.com) 1% marketshare.
Firefox has been around (as a Browser "on the map") for surely no more than 2 years. And it is at 5%+ marketshare already.
Except that before Firefox was Firefox it was Mozilla Firebird, and before that it was Mozilla Pheonix, and before that it was Mozilla and before that it was Netscape Navigator, which probably makes it a little bit more than 2 years. Argue as much as you like, but Firefox is basicly just the evolution of Netscape with the bloat added and removed midstream.
People didn't jump onto Firefox out of nowhere. Many were deep into the Mozilla/Netscape thing to begin with. The people who have jumped on to Firefox probably used Navigator until it bloated into oblivion and got back when the Mozilla foundation had a made a good product out of it again.
If you are going to show of the supiriority of Open Source please use somewhat factual facts, so you don't make the open-source community look like blatant liars.
Offtopic, but Im just wondering?
on
Opera 8 Released
·
· Score: 1
What part og GPG/PGP is it that you consider DRM?
GPG at least is an open standard, and when decrypted no-one is forcing you to keep the content locked down.
Do you consider SSH DRMed Telnet? Just asking.
You FOSS guys FOSS yourselves blind.
on
Opera 8 Released
·
· Score: 1, Troll
As a lot of people probably will comment there is a lot to be said for Opera compared to for instance Firefox. I'm not going to repeat that once again in this thread as I have in thousand of other similar threads, as I'm sure someone else will do that for me.
What I can't get about the FOSS zealots (I'm takling about the zealots here, not the sane people) is that they seem to think that free and open-source software will save the planet and that is all it takes. What they seem to forget is that for that to work in the first place, you need open standards.
Anyone care to show me a fully legal open-source DVD-player? With all the required libraries and decryption codes included? Didn't think so.
Focusing on open-source software alone is shortsighted beyond belief. You would think that the open-source community would have the wits to aknowledge the importance of other products embracing open standards, but given the response I see to every single Opera-story on slashdot: obviously not.
And wasn't open-source about to be about choice? Rideculing a alternative simply because it doesn't suit you in each and every way seems kind of hypcritical in this sense.
I use Firefox myself, but I'm there is in fact lot's of things I like about Opera where Firefox doesn't cut it. Even if there wasn't I'd still appreciate the fact there are other "major" browsers out there wich recognises the fact that the web needs open standards.
Please un-narrow your mind.
Ad-blocking doesn't have to be in the browser
on
Opera 8 Released
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
If you want ad/malware-blocking you can install a local web-proxy like Proxomitron to add this to whatever browser you like.
To speak in "Firefox language" consider it an ad-blocking extension to Opera, or IE or Mozilla, or Lynx or telnet for that matter. No need to put something as basic & genericly useful as ad-blocking in a browser is there?
Plus, if this isn't enough, you can always install a custom hosts ad-blocking file or a custom ad-blocking user-css file. After all all modern browsers support user-css.
I'm using Firefox as we speak, but I've used Opera for a long time and I never had a problem with ads.
As for the rest of your post. Opera comes as big bundle, but noone is forcing you to use anything you dont want. It's not like we are talking Realplayer here!
Incidently I've never had any troubles upgrading Opera either. Why should you have troubles upgrading a browser anyway?
And Opera is faster & more responsive than Firefox has ever been. Using Firefox I still feel impatient every now and then knowing how fast Opera did respond in similar situastions.
So why did I switch from Opera to Firefox? Gmail and my online-banking didn't work in Opera, and I refused to use IE. In the end I got too fed up having to switch browsers. And I needed to get my mail checked and bills paid.
However Im not so narrow-minded I can't see the market for Opera. In fact if there is one thing I hate about Firefox: it's the lousy cache. Loisy crappy only to IE cache. When I press back in Opera, Im back when the mousebutton is released. When I do that in Firefox on my 1GB 2.4GHz P4 I still have to wait several seconds. Which is totally unacceptable.
And for all you Firefox fans out there. Remember all these features like tabed-browsing, popup-stoppers, user-agent switcher, plugin-control and stuff like that which you use to promotote Firefox? Remember how Firefox copied those from Opera? Nothing wrong with reusing a good idea, Im not saying that! But dissing Opera while getting your main attractions from it at the same time... Well, it just smells bad.
But that would probably make you (and the rest of us) a criminal. Maybe even a cyber-criminal. Think "War against Terrorism" & guantamo if you got a tinfoil hat stashed somewhere.
One of the most important changes was the early stages, when the Internet started, when ICANN started in 1998
WTF? The internet started in 1998? Do we want people who doesn't know better than this to govern the internet? I say 'No. No really. No, but we appreciate the thought'.
Slashdot Mirror
If I ever tried to remove MSN Messenger, delete the files and everything, like dark fucking magic everything would reappear and launch if I ever visited a MSN-site with MSIE.
I had to insert dummy-executables in the MSN Messenger directory to get rid of it. However, editing the registry to tell Windows that MSN Messenger wasn't there would also magically cause a reinstall just out of nowhere.
So I let Windows believe the dummy executables were MSN Messenger which were still techincally "installed". That and only that did it for me.
Seems like you got off easy, you lucky bastard!
The way windows constantly tries to battle the user, if he actually dares to defy the devine intensions of Redmond... *shudder* It's really all you need to know about the OS and the vendor.
If I have 20 Internet Explorer windows open, I can navigate between them using the Taskbar's "(20) Internet Explorer" collapsed button or with the ALT-TAB window switcher.
Ever heard of CTRL-TAB? for switching windows inside a browser? Or any other standard-compliant application for that matter.
Personally I prefer to be able to switch to another application when using ALT-TAB without having to go trough my 20 tabs before I get the app I want. But that may just be me. And my window-management is not thrown off in any way. On the contrary tabbed browsing has enhanched it.
So when my USB-devices doesn't support that, why the hell do Windows require me to reinstall the same drivers for the same device, simply because I can't remember which of my 8 USB-ports I plugged it into last?
Im not saying the optional feature is useless. I'm saying that reinstalling drivers for a known device, or a device that in any case can't be identified as unique, is stupid.
Last I checked, Linux treated equal (or the same) hotplugging devices with the same kernel-module and stuff just works. Is there anything I'm missing when I think this is how things should work?
No, that's the prudction-costs required to produce and camuflache mainstream crap into not sounding like obvious crap.
I wonder how many million dollars Miles Davis spent when he recorded "A kind of blue", the most selling jazz record of all time. I wonder how many million Deutsche-mark Mozart used to write his symphonies.
No, really. It's just crappy pop "artists" who has no actual content in their music that needs these funds to make their stuff sound like actual music. If you left actual musicians, you know those artists who treat music like art, not a money-making machine, those with a devotion for good music. If you left them to run the shop, these insane amounts of money wouldn't be necassery. Plus we'd get actual music.
Ok, so I'm elitist, but tell me Britney Spears is an artist in the true sense of the word art. I dare you!
Apart from Stargate SG-1 which I haven't ever watched (I didn't like the Stargate movie, ok?), I agree that TOS is and will always be the best Star Trek.
And Battlestar Gallactica rocks modern sci-fi. Here's me waiting for season 2...
"Eyes wide shut" is porn?
You need to spend more time on the internet.
Am I the only one who got this one? If anything it should be moded "+1, Sarcasm".
Lousy mods as always.
Which can also be the only explenation for why anyone would try to encode HD-content on todays DVDs.
I can't understand anything else than that the DCT-artifacts would be even more dominant than on todays DVDs (or DVD-rips).
"Can you sing a few bars from this song?
Can you sing a few bars from this song you claim that you own?
Here in the musicians court of law"
A short excerpt from Amon Tobin - Melody Infringement.
Oh, you didn't mean that kind of musical court?
It is legal to copy a CD to another CD for backup-purposes or for your car or as otherwise specified by fair-use. It will be legal to bypass the protection if it is needed to play back the music on your hardware.
It will however not be legal to do format-shifting, like copying copy-protected cds to mp3s. The reason given for this was that "you would not expect a CD to (physically) fit into a small digital & portable music player" (i kid you not).
So it's stupid, it's crap, but it's not nearly as bad as the pure DMCA.
No I didn't and no it isn't. I could reply to any post in this thread misapropriatly using the word "steal", but I chose yours because of your arrogant "everyone who doesn't agree with me are wrong"-type attitude. Oh, remember: I devoted my time and creativity to write this work of a post.
In essence, if you don't read this post you stole my time, my effort and my money.
Anything else is just a rationalization.
How is that for seeing your argument being flawed? Dumbass.
You mean like the memorlyleaks in Firefox v1.0 (which they wont fix until v1.1) and Java which puts my machine down from 700MB free mem to 200MB free mem in less than a week?
Yes, indeed. Something terribly wrong with the OS. And boy, am I gonna be flamed for saying naughty stuff about Firefox.
When I sign or encrypt my mail with my private key in GPG everyone is still free to download my public key. In fact with modern keyservers people who doesn't have my key can probably do that automatic.
This doesn't hinder anyone in reading the mail or verifying the signature/encryption. In fact all it does is alloving me to ensure whoever I send mail, that it is me sending the mail, not some spoofer or virus. How is this a bad thing?
I see your stance against Encrypted GPG more as stance on ecnryption in general. Anyway, if I want only one person I know to be able to read my mail because what Im sending him is strictly confidential... Is that wrong? If the recipient of my mail still wants to do something with the content he is free to do so. There is no DRM-mechanisms there to stop him.
When we oppose DRM it should be because it is implemented to take control away from us, the users, and give it to the machine/software/content-owners. GPG however does no such thing.
I think you are overly generalising your (valid) fear.
Because that would mean more b00bies and photoshoping! Yay!
I've used Opera. It's an excellent browser in every way. It was Gmail and my online banking that forced me to use Firefox in the first place, as I refused to use IE.
Anyhow, as I see it, they both have their strengths and there are improvements I'd like to see in both of them. Last version of Opera I used 7.5, and I doubt too much have changed since then.
And yes, if I had a steady income back in the days when Opera was my main browser I would be more than happy to shell out my cash for such a quality product.
What I reacted on in your post had nothing to do with the oh-so traditional Firefox vs. Opera flamewar.
It was the statement that could easily be read as that the open-source model had achieved much more than the proprietary in just a forth of the time. That was what I found unreasonable and triggered my reaction.
As much as I like the idea of open source software, I think lots of its fanbase behave rather singlemindedly and I guess that annoys me. Personally I don't think there is such a thing as a "perfect" development model which applies to everything.
Well, I'll stand for my post as well.
Firefox uses the Gecko engine which is inherited from the Mozilla suite, which again comes from Netscape. So Firefox, even though it is a standalone project, it does depend on code that was being developed long before the Firefox-project was even started.
If you can agree to this, you can also agree to that Firefox represents a evolutionary fork from Netscape. And that is what I meant by my post. Had Firefox started out on ground-zero it would have been nowhere near usable as a webbrowser today.
Your's sincerely a happy, but reasonable Firefox user.
Firefox has been around (as a Browser "on the map") for surely no more than 2 years. And it is at 5%+ marketshare already.
Except that before Firefox was Firefox it was Mozilla Firebird, and before that it was Mozilla Pheonix, and before that it was Mozilla and before that it was Netscape Navigator, which probably makes it a little bit more than 2 years. Argue as much as you like, but Firefox is basicly just the evolution of Netscape with the bloat added and removed midstream.
People didn't jump onto Firefox out of nowhere. Many were deep into the Mozilla/Netscape thing to begin with. The people who have jumped on to Firefox probably used Navigator until it bloated into oblivion and got back when the Mozilla foundation had a made a good product out of it again.
If you are going to show of the supiriority of Open Source please use somewhat factual facts, so you don't make the open-source community look like blatant liars.
What part og GPG/PGP is it that you consider DRM?
GPG at least is an open standard, and when decrypted no-one is forcing you to keep the content locked down.
Do you consider SSH DRMed Telnet? Just asking.
As a lot of people probably will comment there is a lot to be said for Opera compared to for instance Firefox. I'm not going to repeat that once again in this thread as I have in thousand of other similar threads, as I'm sure someone else will do that for me.
What I can't get about the FOSS zealots (I'm takling about the zealots here, not the sane people) is that they seem to think that free and open-source software will save the planet and that is all it takes. What they seem to forget is that for that to work in the first place, you need open standards.
Anyone care to show me a fully legal open-source DVD-player? With all the required libraries and decryption codes included? Didn't think so.
Focusing on open-source software alone is shortsighted beyond belief. You would think that the open-source community would have the wits to aknowledge the importance of other products embracing open standards, but given the response I see to every single Opera-story on slashdot: obviously not.
And wasn't open-source about to be about choice? Rideculing a alternative simply because it doesn't suit you in each and every way seems kind of hypcritical in this sense.
I use Firefox myself, but I'm there is in fact lot's of things I like about Opera where Firefox doesn't cut it. Even if there wasn't I'd still appreciate the fact there are other "major" browsers out there wich recognises the fact that the web needs open standards.
Please un-narrow your mind.
If you want ad/malware-blocking you can install a local web-proxy like Proxomitron to add this to whatever browser you like. To speak in "Firefox language" consider it an ad-blocking extension to Opera, or IE or Mozilla, or Lynx or telnet for that matter. No need to put something as basic & genericly useful as ad-blocking in a browser is there?
Plus, if this isn't enough, you can always install a custom hosts ad-blocking file or a custom ad-blocking user-css file. After all all modern browsers support user-css. I'm using Firefox as we speak, but I've used Opera for a long time and I never had a problem with ads.
As for the rest of your post. Opera comes as big bundle, but noone is forcing you to use anything you dont want. It's not like we are talking Realplayer here!
Incidently I've never had any troubles upgrading Opera either. Why should you have troubles upgrading a browser anyway?
And Opera is faster & more responsive than Firefox has ever been. Using Firefox I still feel impatient every now and then knowing how fast Opera did respond in similar situastions.
So why did I switch from Opera to Firefox? Gmail and my online-banking didn't work in Opera, and I refused to use IE. In the end I got too fed up having to switch browsers. And I needed to get my mail checked and bills paid.
However Im not so narrow-minded I can't see the market for Opera. In fact if there is one thing I hate about Firefox: it's the lousy cache. Loisy crappy only to IE cache. When I press back in Opera, Im back when the mousebutton is released. When I do that in Firefox on my 1GB 2.4GHz P4 I still have to wait several seconds. Which is totally unacceptable.
And for all you Firefox fans out there. Remember all these features like tabed-browsing, popup-stoppers, user-agent switcher, plugin-control and stuff like that which you use to promotote Firefox? Remember how Firefox copied those from Opera? Nothing wrong with reusing a good idea, Im not saying that! But dissing Opera while getting your main attractions from it at the same time... Well, it just smells bad.
Yours sincerely, a less zealous Firefox user.
Im not even into gaming and I knew this.
Anyone else suspects that the slashdot editors are merelely a random (accept/submit) function?
But that would probably make you (and the rest of us) a criminal. Maybe even a cyber-criminal. Think "War against Terrorism" & guantamo if you got a tinfoil hat stashed somewhere.
WTF? The internet started in 1998? Do we want people who doesn't know better than this to govern the internet? I say 'No. No really. No, but we appreciate the thought'.