What you are saying strikes me as sensible. However, if Macromedia can make
this change without warning users, it can make other changes.
I corresponded with someone at Macromedia about problems of this nature. It is
possible that the company just appears to be sneaky, and in fact they are only
ignorant of proper marketing.
This Slashdot story, "Freaky Flash 6 Fishy Features", has certainly done the
company a huge amount of damage. The story was motivated by the surprise at
what Macromedia has done. That is terrible marketing. For a full
realization of the depth of the damage, reflect upon the fact that Slashdot
readers are a significant percentage of all the people who make technical
policy about computer use at their companies. That is terrible
marketing; it's so bad that it makes me wonder about the ability of the
company managers to make any decision.
Also, look at this quote (2nd
paragraph), from the Macromedia web site: "The data is not public, but
the privacy of this data depends on the policies of the web site where the
movie is hosted."
Translation: "We have arranged a situation in which the privacy of your
computer is out of your control and is dependent on someone else." That is
becoming very close to the exact purpose of spyware and malware.
Translation 2: "We are moving toward a way of making money in which we
make it possible for web sites to control a user's computer, without the
user's understanding or knowledgeable permission."
What is also VERY scary about this is that Macromedia has made programming
mistakes in the past, and will no doubt make mistakes again. When you use
Flash, you are allowing non-standard ways of communicating which have not been
reviewed by a standards committee (such as with the upgrade and install
process). As this shows, and the Slashdot story implies, Macromedia is willing
to make your computer less secure as a result of their money-making schemes.
This gives the strong impression that the user's security is not their
priority.
I agree with the Open BSD team: Security is a primary concern. I don't like
the direction Macromedia wants to take us, and I don't like their ideas of
what is acceptable behavior. But Macromedia is worse than sneaky, the company
has bad judgement, and that is even more frightening.
"i don't know what you mean by pushing the limits of what people will accept."
I consider this Slashdot story is an example of pushing the limits. They are taking more control of the user's computer without making it clear in advance what they are doing. That's abusive, in my opinion. Your computer is your property. You wouldn't feel good about someone using your car without permission. You shouldn't feel comfortable having someone use your computer without permission.
I've been following Macromedia since they started. This Slashdot story was the last straw for me. If something goes wrong with my customer's computers, it will be me who is blamed. Deleting Flash is a sensible precaution on a business network.
"So, ok, _ONE_ security notice. No known exploits of this hole. Company
acknowledgement and fix in less than a day."
Flash has caused several very serious security breaches, and the company
acknowledges this. A computer under my supervision was totally owned by
someone exploiting a bug in a Macromedia product.
"The Flash plug-in is just about default on most browser installs, so few
see that download message."
You forgot something very important. Sometimes there has been more than one
upgrade to Flash within a month. If a web site uses a later version of Flash
than is installed, you see the message.
"Sites are broken because the author didn't care enough to put in detection
for the plug-in, and didn't include alternate non-Flash content. By the way,
the Flash plugin (presence and version) is VERY easy to detect via javascript
or other means (unlike Quicktime)"
Your answer to this extremely serious problem can be shortened to "Sites
are broken..." It is VERY bad advertising if a user gets an error message
instead of a web page. That happens a lot with Flash sites, for many reasons.
For example, the user may have Javascript disabled, or it may be an imperfect
implementation of Javascript, such as with version 5 of Opera.
"Uh huh.... right. Big software company secretly wants to run tiny boutique
webshop in converted factory loft making way kewl Flash pieces."
Your answer is an attempt to influence by innuendo, not logic. Several years
ago I was getting about 40 pieces of spam a day. Many seemed to have a
connection with AOL. It just happened that someone from AOL called, trying to
sell me something. I complained about the spam. Immediately it stopped. Was
AOL doing the spamming? Maybe not; maybe it was someone who worked for the
company who was making some money on the side. Would someone wanting to make
money try to breach your computer security? Here is a small list of attempts
to do so: The
Spyware Infested Software List
The fact remains, when you use Flash, you are giving your customer list to
Macromedia, and to whomever has access to Macromedia computers.
"Download time is a contract between author and viewer; if the content is
good, they'll accept the delay. With broadband, the majority of Flash pieces
download in a few seconds."
The viewer is not aware of any contract. The viewer is aware that he or she
must wait. Again, this is extremely bad advertising.
This Slashdot story continues an impression of Macromedia. The company is like
Microsoft in that they tend to push the limits of what people will accept so
that they can make more money. Would you have a friend who continued to test
your limits? No? Then don't have a business association that tests people's
limits.
How can Flash be removed from 1) Windows, and 2) Linux?
Reasons not to run Flash:
Flash presents unknown security risks. Sometimes Flash and other Macromedia
products have been the point of entry of trojans and viruses, as mentioned in
this documentation of a very serious bug, Macromedia
Flash Activex Buffer overflow.
Flash on a website advertises Flash. There must always be some notice that
says "Download Flash if you don't have it", and a link to Macromedia, so that
web site viewers can get the latest version. This forced added content
distracts from the intended content.
Flash is nearly always used to provide images that are irrelevant to the
content. Except for those who care about bright, shiny things more than
content, Flash gets in the way. Flash authors are seldom qualified to provide
moving picture content, and, even if they were, Flash is a very limited
cinematic tool.
Flash often causes long load times. Long load times communicate that the
website viewer's time is less important than the website creator's love of
movement. Flash often causes Website viewers to wait for "Loading..."
messages.
For website viewers who do not want to run Flash and other Macromedia
software, or cannot, web sites using it are broken.
By using Flash, authors of Flash content may cause the URL of their customers
to be transmitted to Macromedia. If some disloyal Macromedia employee, or
Macromedia itself, thought of some profitable reason to approach those
customers directly, Flash content authors could lose business.
Flash content is proprietary content. It is the money-making scheme of one
company. This tends to undermine web standards like HTML. The Internet is a
public utility for all of us to use. Proprietary methods go against that
spirit.
Second to last line of the parent of the parent to this comment: "The FBI
of today is itself a danger to this nation."
Parent to this comment: I am thinking the FBI is about to start a file on
you.
Exactly. No one should think that the FBI's actions always make sense.
Probably no organization with a lot of money and a lot of secrecy is able to
keep things in control. It is extremely difficult to keep everyone in an open
organization contributing sensibly. It is impossible to manage an organization
in which secrecy is part of the organizing philosophy.
I wrote a book about the hidden violent activities of the U.S. government. It
is entirely free. Most of the explanation comes from links to articles at some
of the most respected news agencies in the world: What should be the Response to Violence?
Thanks for this info. Obviously, something goes wrong somewhere when we do the installations. See my post #3506450 for more information about our systems.
Thanks for the tip about Windows XP. Is Windows XP the Windows ME of the NT
series of operating systems? It would make my life much more pleasant if
Microsoft would not sell products before they are ready; it's amazing how much
Microsoft reduces the quality of my life.
We have a lot of experience building systems, but not a lot of experience with
XP. It is a little difficult to sell Windows 2000 now, because customers
demand the latest.
I'd love to sell only Linux or FreeBSD systems, but the user configurability
just isn't there yet. I think it won't be long until Linux is ready, however.
When it is, that will be a wonderful day in my life. (In my experience, FileZilla is an
example of an open source project that is better than the closed source
alternatives.)
We sell systems with Intel motherboards, both the Intel 845BGL and the Intel
815EEA2. Both systems have problems with slowness using Matrox video cards.
We've tried only one ATI card; it was better, but there were still problems.
The Pentium IV machines (Intel 845BGL) have 2 GHz processors, and 256 MB of
266 MHz DDR SDRAM with ECC.
The Pentium III machines (815EEA2) have 866 and 933 MHz processors, and also
256 MB of memory.
We've tried G400, G450, and G550 Matrox cards, all with the latest Matrox
drivers from the Matrox web site. All are unacceptable in the ways discussed
in my original post.
We are using Promise FastTrak 100Tx2 controllers for mirroring two Western
Digital 40 GB 400BB hard drives. The motherboard IDE controller has a DVD
drive and a Plextor CD burner on one channel, and a Western Digital WD1200BB
120 GB drive on the other. This configuration works fine with Windows 98 SE
(within the horrible limitations of the OS, of course).
We have tested the Pentium IV machines without the Promise RAID controllers,
and the problems continued. I just realized that we did not uninstall the
Promise drivers when we tried pulling out the Promise controller.
Good point. No one at Matrox or Microsoft mentioned this.
But, please don't call me a ding-dong. I'm trying to know 3 operating systems, and 3 computer languages,
and I have other complex technical interests, and I have a life. It is easy to
overlook something.
L33t haxx0r: Notice the on-topic first post above.
Matrox Driver Problems: We are experiencing major driver difficulties
with Matrox products under Windows XP. All of these are with the most recent
Intel motherboards and Matrox G400, G450, and G550 adapters. We are using the
latest Matrox drivers from the Matrox website. We have also tried the
Microsoft certified drivers, which are much worse. We have tested with clean
installations of Windows XP, as well as upgrades from Windows SE.
Our Win XP clean install test machine takes 18 seconds to display 97 items
when doing a DIR directory listing. This appears to be caused by bad
interactions between the Matrox drivers (with a new Matrox G550 adapter) and
Windows XP. We are testing with a 2 GHz Pentium 4 and a new Intel motherboard.
We often see artifacts in DOS windows. Little colored vertical bars are left
on the screen after some operations.
When we reported these things by telephone, the technical support
representative, Bob Alionis, was very reluctant to deal with any matter that
could not be solved quickly. He told us to try a video adapter from another
manufacturer. This was difficult for us, since we have been building computers
only with Matrox cards. Also, if an adapter from another manufacturer worked
well, why would we go back to Matrox?
We tried an ATI Radeon card, and it worked better. We would be reluctant to
switch to selling ATI cards because of our perception that ATI often has
driver problems.
We haven't tried nVidia yet. Do nVidia chipset cards display business
applications crisply? None of our customers run games, so sharpness at 1600 x
1200 resolution on 19" monitors is the most important criteria.
There is apparently no e-mail address for Matrox technical support. Matrox did
not respond to e-mail sent to sales. Matrox did not respond to e-mail about
technical problems sent to the RMA department.
Things have changed at Matrox. They are apparently trying to keep the number
of tech support calls down by making it complicated to report a problem. The
paragraph below is an exact quote from a message sent by a Matrox RMA
department representative. The phone number mentioned is in Canada. Apparently
Matrox does not have a U.S. number.
Jump through hoops RMA procedure:
"You can obtain an RMA for your board through Tech Support. Just make sure that you have registered your Matrox
board on our web site http://www.matrox.com/mga/registration/home.cfm and have
selected the option 'Obtain your tech support client id number...' at the
Registration Menu. Once you obtain the client id number, just call
514-685-0270, then select option 1, followed by option 4, and then finally
option 1 to reach the Tech Support queue to speak to a technician. For
additional information on the RMA procedure, e-mail rma@matrox.com or call
514-822-6000 and ask for the RMA Department."
We wonder if Matrox is unable to fix its driver problems, and they are trying
to avoid taking calls about them.
Nickel Cadmium cells have 2 unfortunate limitations: 1) They have a "memory
effect". 2) Charging them all the time makes them old very quickly, and makes
the memory effect much worse.
So, this is what you do: 1) Don't charge the batteries all the time. I have
two ATT 900 MHz Cordless phones. (I bought one for $30 at Costco, and the
other for $5 at a garage sale. These are not expensive phones.)
I charge the batteries for about 6 hours once a week. I regularly talk for 3
or 4 hours in one phone conversation, and I have never had problems with the
battery going dead. I've never switched phones in the middle of a
conversation, either.
If I have a conversation lasting more than 20 minutes, I charge the phone
then, also, after the call.
This is how you tell if you should stop charging a NiCad battery: It becomes
warm. That is because all of the charge energy goes into making heat after the
battery is fully charged. Before the battery fully charged, some of the charge
energy goes into charging the battery, of course.
Don't worry about overcharging a little. A few extra hours, even 10 extra hours, in
one or two charges a month seems to make no difference. It is 24-hour,
7-days-a-week charging that causes the problems.
2) The memory effect can be completely cured by discharging the battery
completely. To do this, buy a 510 ohm, 1/4 or 1/10 watt resistor (an electronic
component) at Radio Shack or an electronics parts store or an electronics
surplus store. Remove the battery. Just push the leads of the resistor into the contact sockets of the
battery (where the contact pins normally go), and leave it for 12 hours. Once the battery is discharged, it will no
longer have the "memory effect" and will be as good as new, or 95% as good as
new. Then, recharge the battery until it is fully charged (when it becomes
especially warm).
The memory effect works this way: It causes the battery to discharge rapidly,
even though there is a small load. The memory effect causes the battery to
have a "shallow discharge curve", they say.
Lithium Ion and Nickel Metal Hydride batteries do not have memory effect.
However, they also get old faster if they are constantly charged.
This is reliable information. I was an electronics designer in past years, and
I have talked to an RCA battery engineer about the exact parameters of NiCad
memory effect.
If that is the level of intelligence to be expected at MIT, then be afraid of paying them good money to go there. Remember, where there are ignorant people there are likely to be more ignorant people.
It was not the fumbling that was an attempt to mislead the Court. It was the attempt to mislead the Court that was an attempt to mislead the Court.
The subhead of the CNN story is "MIT professor takes stand again after fumbling answers as states' attorney grilled him Wednesday." I will trust MIT less, also. Someone who is thinking of applying to MIT should perhaps re-consider their choice. How many other professors there would participate in an attempt to mislead the Court?
Even software that is given away free needs marketing, which is simply accurate communication between the software's authors and managers, and the intended users.
Definitely Clippy was a major marketing failure. So was Microsoft Bob. Apparently Microsoft Bob was Bill Gate's wife's idea.
Clippy expresses something accurate about Microsoft's view of it's customers, however: Microsoft thinks it's customers are stupid children, not even smart children.
AbiWord cannot do multiple columns. Open Office can.
AbiWord has self-destructive marketing, like a blue ant as a symbol. Open Office has professional marketing. Generally, over a period of years, poor marketing means poor development, because fewer average people are attracted. I'm not against AbiWord. However, it does not help anyone if the negative issues are hidden. It is best to talk about them openly.
AbiWord is a word processor. Open Office is one coordinated suite that handles your office document needs.
AbiWord has a notably clean-looking design. It would be excellent for someone who was learning computer use, or who had a computer with limited speed and resources.
AbiWord was unable to open any of my HTML documents. Open Office allows editing of HTML (but not completely like Macromedia's expensive Dreamweaver, which is WYSIWYG).
Slashdot Mirror
What you are saying strikes me as sensible. However, if Macromedia can make this change without warning users, it can make other changes.
I corresponded with someone at Macromedia about problems of this nature. It is possible that the company just appears to be sneaky, and in fact they are only ignorant of proper marketing.
This Slashdot story, "Freaky Flash 6 Fishy Features", has certainly done the company a huge amount of damage. The story was motivated by the surprise at what Macromedia has done. That is terrible marketing. For a full realization of the depth of the damage, reflect upon the fact that Slashdot readers are a significant percentage of all the people who make technical policy about computer use at their companies. That is terrible marketing; it's so bad that it makes me wonder about the ability of the company managers to make any decision.
Also, look at this quote (2nd paragraph), from the Macromedia web site: "The data is not public, but the privacy of this data depends on the policies of the web site where the movie is hosted."
Translation: "We have arranged a situation in which the privacy of your computer is out of your control and is dependent on someone else." That is becoming very close to the exact purpose of spyware and malware.
Translation 2: "We are moving toward a way of making money in which we make it possible for web sites to control a user's computer, without the user's understanding or knowledgeable permission."
What is also VERY scary about this is that Macromedia has made programming mistakes in the past, and will no doubt make mistakes again. When you use Flash, you are allowing non-standard ways of communicating which have not been reviewed by a standards committee (such as with the upgrade and install process). As this shows, and the Slashdot story implies, Macromedia is willing to make your computer less secure as a result of their money-making schemes. This gives the strong impression that the user's security is not their priority.
I agree with the Open BSD team: Security is a primary concern. I don't like the direction Macromedia wants to take us, and I don't like their ideas of what is acceptable behavior. But Macromedia is worse than sneaky, the company has bad judgement, and that is even more frightening.
Thanks for your reply.
"i don't know what you mean by pushing the limits of what people will accept."
I consider this Slashdot story is an example of pushing the limits. They are taking more control of the user's computer without making it clear in advance what they are doing. That's abusive, in my opinion. Your computer is your property. You wouldn't feel good about someone using your car without permission. You shouldn't feel comfortable having someone use your computer without permission.
Thanks.
I've been following Macromedia since they started. This Slashdot story was the last straw for me. If something goes wrong with my customer's computers, it will be me who is blamed. Deleting Flash is a sensible precaution on a business network.
"So, ok, _ONE_ security notice. No known exploits of this hole. Company acknowledgement and fix in less than a day."
Flash has caused several very serious security breaches, and the company acknowledges this. A computer under my supervision was totally owned by someone exploiting a bug in a Macromedia product.
"The Flash plug-in is just about default on most browser installs, so few see that download message."
You forgot something very important. Sometimes there has been more than one upgrade to Flash within a month. If a web site uses a later version of Flash than is installed, you see the message.
"Sites are broken because the author didn't care enough to put in detection for the plug-in, and didn't include alternate non-Flash content. By the way, the Flash plugin (presence and version) is VERY easy to detect via javascript or other means (unlike Quicktime)"
Your answer to this extremely serious problem can be shortened to "Sites are broken..." It is VERY bad advertising if a user gets an error message instead of a web page. That happens a lot with Flash sites, for many reasons. For example, the user may have Javascript disabled, or it may be an imperfect implementation of Javascript, such as with version 5 of Opera.
"Uh huh.... right. Big software company secretly wants to run tiny boutique webshop in converted factory loft making way kewl Flash pieces."
Your answer is an attempt to influence by innuendo, not logic. Several years ago I was getting about 40 pieces of spam a day. Many seemed to have a connection with AOL. It just happened that someone from AOL called, trying to sell me something. I complained about the spam. Immediately it stopped. Was AOL doing the spamming? Maybe not; maybe it was someone who worked for the company who was making some money on the side. Would someone wanting to make money try to breach your computer security? Here is a small list of attempts to do so: The Spyware Infested Software List
The fact remains, when you use Flash, you are giving your customer list to Macromedia, and to whomever has access to Macromedia computers.
"Download time is a contract between author and viewer; if the content is good, they'll accept the delay. With broadband, the majority of Flash pieces download in a few seconds."
The viewer is not aware of any contract. The viewer is aware that he or she must wait. Again, this is extremely bad advertising.
This Slashdot story continues an impression of Macromedia. The company is like Microsoft in that they tend to push the limits of what people will accept so that they can make more money. Would you have a friend who continued to test your limits? No? Then don't have a business association that tests people's limits.
How can Flash be removed from 1) Windows, and 2) Linux?
Reasons not to run Flash:
Flash presents unknown security risks. Sometimes Flash and other Macromedia products have been the point of entry of trojans and viruses, as mentioned in this documentation of a very serious bug, Macromedia Flash Activex Buffer overflow.
Flash on a website advertises Flash. There must always be some notice that says "Download Flash if you don't have it", and a link to Macromedia, so that web site viewers can get the latest version. This forced added content distracts from the intended content.
Flash is nearly always used to provide images that are irrelevant to the content. Except for those who care about bright, shiny things more than content, Flash gets in the way. Flash authors are seldom qualified to provide moving picture content, and, even if they were, Flash is a very limited cinematic tool.
Flash often causes long load times. Long load times communicate that the website viewer's time is less important than the website creator's love of movement. Flash often causes Website viewers to wait for "Loading..." messages.
For website viewers who do not want to run Flash and other Macromedia software, or cannot, web sites using it are broken.
By using Flash, authors of Flash content may cause the URL of their customers to be transmitted to Macromedia. If some disloyal Macromedia employee, or Macromedia itself, thought of some profitable reason to approach those customers directly, Flash content authors could lose business.
Flash content is proprietary content. It is the money-making scheme of one company. This tends to undermine web standards like HTML. The Internet is a public utility for all of us to use. Proprietary methods go against that spirit.
Thanks, it is valuable to begin thinking more clearly about interrupt conflicts. What you say makes sense.
I'm sympathetic. Microsoft and its uncaring ways have often devastated my weeks and weekends.
Second to last line of the parent of the parent to this comment: "The FBI of today is itself a danger to this nation."
Parent to this comment: I am thinking the FBI is about to start a file on you.
Exactly. No one should think that the FBI's actions always make sense. Probably no organization with a lot of money and a lot of secrecy is able to keep things in control. It is extremely difficult to keep everyone in an open organization contributing sensibly. It is impossible to manage an organization in which secrecy is part of the organizing philosophy.
I wrote a book about the hidden violent activities of the U.S. government. It is entirely free. Most of the explanation comes from links to articles at some of the most respected news agencies in the world: What should be the Response to Violence?
We've been selling Matrox adapters since before the Millennium I. Never had any problems in either Windows or Linux until these with Windows XP.
Thanks for this info. Obviously, something goes wrong somewhere when we do the installations. See my post #3506450 for more information about our systems.
Thanks for the tip about Windows XP. Is Windows XP the Windows ME of the NT series of operating systems? It would make my life much more pleasant if Microsoft would not sell products before they are ready; it's amazing how much Microsoft reduces the quality of my life.
We have a lot of experience building systems, but not a lot of experience with XP. It is a little difficult to sell Windows 2000 now, because customers demand the latest.
I'd love to sell only Linux or FreeBSD systems, but the user configurability just isn't there yet. I think it won't be long until Linux is ready, however. When it is, that will be a wonderful day in my life. (In my experience, FileZilla is an example of an open source project that is better than the closed source alternatives.)
We sell systems with Intel motherboards, both the Intel 845BGL and the Intel 815EEA2. Both systems have problems with slowness using Matrox video cards. We've tried only one ATI card; it was better, but there were still problems.
The Pentium IV machines (Intel 845BGL) have 2 GHz processors, and 256 MB of 266 MHz DDR SDRAM with ECC.
The Pentium III machines (815EEA2) have 866 and 933 MHz processors, and also 256 MB of memory.
We've tried G400, G450, and G550 Matrox cards, all with the latest Matrox drivers from the Matrox web site. All are unacceptable in the ways discussed in my original post.
We are using Promise FastTrak 100Tx2 controllers for mirroring two Western Digital 40 GB 400BB hard drives. The motherboard IDE controller has a DVD drive and a Plextor CD burner on one channel, and a Western Digital WD1200BB 120 GB drive on the other. This configuration works fine with Windows 98 SE (within the horrible limitations of the OS, of course).
We have tested the Pentium IV machines without the Promise RAID controllers, and the problems continued. I just realized that we did not uninstall the Promise drivers when we tried pulling out the Promise controller.
Good point. No one at Matrox or Microsoft mentioned this.
But, please don't call me a ding-dong. I'm trying to know 3 operating systems, and 3 computer languages, and I have other complex technical interests, and I have a life. It is easy to overlook something.
We had no problems with Matrox drivers until Windows XP, either.
Thanks for the help.
L33t haxx0r: Notice the on-topic first post above.
Matrox Driver Problems: We are experiencing major driver difficulties with Matrox products under Windows XP. All of these are with the most recent Intel motherboards and Matrox G400, G450, and G550 adapters. We are using the latest Matrox drivers from the Matrox website. We have also tried the Microsoft certified drivers, which are much worse. We have tested with clean installations of Windows XP, as well as upgrades from Windows SE.
Our Win XP clean install test machine takes 18 seconds to display 97 items when doing a DIR directory listing. This appears to be caused by bad interactions between the Matrox drivers (with a new Matrox G550 adapter) and Windows XP. We are testing with a 2 GHz Pentium 4 and a new Intel motherboard.
We often see artifacts in DOS windows. Little colored vertical bars are left on the screen after some operations.
When we reported these things by telephone, the technical support representative, Bob Alionis, was very reluctant to deal with any matter that could not be solved quickly. He told us to try a video adapter from another manufacturer. This was difficult for us, since we have been building computers only with Matrox cards. Also, if an adapter from another manufacturer worked well, why would we go back to Matrox?
We tried an ATI Radeon card, and it worked better. We would be reluctant to switch to selling ATI cards because of our perception that ATI often has driver problems.
We haven't tried nVidia yet. Do nVidia chipset cards display business applications crisply? None of our customers run games, so sharpness at 1600 x 1200 resolution on 19" monitors is the most important criteria.
There is apparently no e-mail address for Matrox technical support. Matrox did not respond to e-mail sent to sales. Matrox did not respond to e-mail about technical problems sent to the RMA department.
Things have changed at Matrox. They are apparently trying to keep the number of tech support calls down by making it complicated to report a problem. The paragraph below is an exact quote from a message sent by a Matrox RMA department representative. The phone number mentioned is in Canada. Apparently Matrox does not have a U.S. number.
Jump through hoops RMA procedure:
"You can obtain an RMA for your board through Tech Support. Just make sure that you have registered your Matrox board on our web site http://www.matrox.com/mga/registration/home.cfm and have selected the option 'Obtain your tech support client id number...' at the Registration Menu. Once you obtain the client id number, just call 514-685-0270, then select option 1, followed by option 4, and then finally option 1 to reach the Tech Support queue to speak to a technician. For additional information on the RMA procedure, e-mail rma@matrox.com or call 514-822-6000 and ask for the RMA Department."
We wonder if Matrox is unable to fix its driver problems, and they are trying to avoid taking calls about them.
I've had major problems with Matrox drivers under Windows XP.
I'm surprised no one else has said this:
Nickel Cadmium cells have 2 unfortunate limitations: 1) They have a "memory effect". 2) Charging them all the time makes them old very quickly, and makes the memory effect much worse.
So, this is what you do: 1) Don't charge the batteries all the time. I have two ATT 900 MHz Cordless phones. (I bought one for $30 at Costco, and the other for $5 at a garage sale. These are not expensive phones.)
I charge the batteries for about 6 hours once a week. I regularly talk for 3 or 4 hours in one phone conversation, and I have never had problems with the battery going dead. I've never switched phones in the middle of a conversation, either.
If I have a conversation lasting more than 20 minutes, I charge the phone then, also, after the call.
This is how you tell if you should stop charging a NiCad battery: It becomes warm. That is because all of the charge energy goes into making heat after the battery is fully charged. Before the battery fully charged, some of the charge energy goes into charging the battery, of course.
Don't worry about overcharging a little. A few extra hours, even 10 extra hours, in one or two charges a month seems to make no difference. It is 24-hour, 7-days-a-week charging that causes the problems.
2) The memory effect can be completely cured by discharging the battery completely. To do this, buy a 510 ohm, 1/4 or 1/10 watt resistor (an electronic component) at Radio Shack or an electronics parts store or an electronics surplus store. Remove the battery. Just push the leads of the resistor into the contact sockets of the battery (where the contact pins normally go), and leave it for 12 hours. Once the battery is discharged, it will no longer have the "memory effect" and will be as good as new, or 95% as good as new. Then, recharge the battery until it is fully charged (when it becomes especially warm).
The memory effect works this way: It causes the battery to discharge rapidly, even though there is a small load. The memory effect causes the battery to have a "shallow discharge curve", they say.
Lithium Ion and Nickel Metal Hydride batteries do not have memory effect. However, they also get old faster if they are constantly charged.
This is reliable information. I was an electronics designer in past years, and I have talked to an RCA battery engineer about the exact parameters of NiCad memory effect.
As you say, the new version does support columns. I must have been using an older version when I last reviewed it.
You forgot to mention products that almost never install correctly on the first try.
Also, troublesome printer software, that even HP tech support tells you should be used.
If that is the level of intelligence to be expected at MIT, then be afraid of paying them good money to go there. Remember, where there are ignorant people there are likely to be more ignorant people.
It was not the fumbling that was an attempt to mislead the Court. It was the attempt to mislead the Court that was an attempt to mislead the Court.
Excellent story, Roblimo. Really good story.
I will certainly trust CNN less.
The subhead of the CNN story is "MIT professor takes stand again after fumbling answers as states' attorney grilled him Wednesday." I will trust MIT less, also. Someone who is thinking of applying to MIT should perhaps re-consider their choice. How many other professors there would participate in an attempt to mislead the Court?
Even software that is given away free needs marketing, which is simply accurate communication between the software's authors and managers, and the intended users.
Definitely Clippy was a major marketing failure. So was Microsoft Bob. Apparently Microsoft Bob was Bill Gate's wife's idea.
Clippy expresses something accurate about Microsoft's view of it's customers, however: Microsoft thinks it's customers are stupid children, not even smart children.
AbiWord cannot do multiple columns. Open Office can.
AbiWord has self-destructive marketing, like a blue ant as a symbol. Open Office has professional marketing. Generally, over a period of years, poor marketing means poor development, because fewer average people are attracted. I'm not against AbiWord. However, it does not help anyone if the negative issues are hidden. It is best to talk about them openly.
AbiWord is a word processor. Open Office is one coordinated suite that handles your office document needs.
AbiWord has a notably clean-looking design. It would be excellent for someone who was learning computer use, or who had a computer with limited speed and resources.
AbiWord was unable to open any of my HTML documents. Open Office allows editing of HTML (but not completely like Macromedia's expensive Dreamweaver, which is WYSIWYG).
Grammatik has also been sold independently as a stand-alone program.
Bill Gates can do anything he likes. But, you can't do anything to him. It's a child's dream.