They don't get sick, thus don't have vet fees amounting to hundreds a year (if not thousands). They don't pee, they don't shit. They don't cause lawsuits from the paper boy who just got his gonads chewed. And you can silent a yapping robot pet by taking out its batteries and not get the SPCA on your ass.
So hell yeah... robot pets are definitely better than those damn pesky biological ones!
The one thing that the author missed is the "Intention" behind HTML. It was invented primarily to create documents (hence, the availability of h1 to h6 tags as the article illustrates). Furthermore, HTML is oh so accomodating and expandable.
Basically, every example that the author's given can already be replicated using current web technologies albeit via plugins and some scripting (server side and/or client side).
Not bad for a language that was primarily intended to generate documents now, is it? I fail to see why the author chooses to make it very clear at the start of his writeup about how "clunky" and "unsophisticated" HTML is, but concluded it by saying how current innovations like AJAX is already making HTML5 obsolete.
Most of my work involves web/e-Mail/SSH access, and I have a very high spec'd machine with dual-head 1600x1200 screens.
For one thing, according to the "work" you do, most of the things there require interactive user input.
For another, all of the things you've stated as example, doesn't really require much desktop real estate. ie. For web browsing, almost all modern browsers have tabbed browsing nowadays; e-Mail, most modern email apps (GUI or command line) supports multiple mailboxes anyway; SSH, many have mentioned screen before my post.
Like I said, your examples don't really require much screen estate. Other than web browsing, the other activities you're performing can to an extent be automated. ie. Email: use filters and/or auto-responders and/or forwarders; SSH: shell scripts are your friends.
If you provide specific examples of your day-to-day work, then maybe us Slashdotters can help you more.
Re:It's Just Business
on
Pixar For Sale?
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Well, that's one way to look at it. But from my experience, if I really wanted the "talents" behind a company, I'd headhunt the guy. And to be honest, this would be the easiest thing to do... a little more dollars here, a little bit more perks there, chances are I can get my target in an acceptable timeframe.
If I were to takeover a company like Pixar, let's be honest here... name me 2 or 3 animators that you know for sure works there? If you're not really into the animations industry (or are not a fan of the particular artists), you'd be hard pressed to come up with those names. It's all abound the branding, baby.
I could start a brand new animations company with the best personnel in the world, but a large majority of studios would still pick Pixar over my company because of the brand power itself.
It's Just Business
on
Pixar For Sale?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Since when should employee happiness be the basis of whether or not to sell a company?
In the end it's the owners who decide whether to hold on to it, or divest it. However, it does seem a little unwise for Jobs to sell off what seems to be a profitable outfit.
Apparently the FBI currently has the right, through Patriot, to search documents which may contain Canadian information sent to US firms carrying out work under contract.
Then just don't do business with those firms.
Let your money do the talking... apparently politicians listen more to corporations than individuals (especially the average/. geek).
Thank you for replying, I find your post to be highly informative.
It's hard to get a "real" insight to the hosting business nowadays. It seems that almost everyone is just a frontend to a provider, that in turn, is a reseller themselves.
It would make sense for Microsoft to make an anti-spyware product, after all, they should (but may not) know the most about how to protect Windows from spyware.
If they are really are the ones who know the most about protecting Windows from spyware, then almost every Windows user is doomed.
Heck, Mr Gates himself faces the very same spyware problem.
That's not the best way... that's overkill. Hard doesn't necessarily mean best.
But hey, don't think that I'm knocking off LFS. I went through it myself... but after a year plus of using Slackware (following a year of using Mandrake consistently).
LFS is really useful if you want to understand how to build a Linux distro. It's technically not even a distro. It's more of a commando-style survival training, whereas a distro would be summer camp.
I also doubt the "you will know your system inside and out" argument. I believe "you will know how to build a working Linux system" is a better description of the LFS learning process.
Bear in mind that the poster is a Windows admin for five years... and he wants to have working knowledge of adminning Linux... not building a distro. Moving from Windows, and getting an introduction to Linux via LFS is really not something you'd want to go through.
My recommendation? I live and breathe Slackware... but the poster should really try out a few distros. Fedora Core & Mandrake would scratch that need-some-GUIs-to-get-me-going itch for a start. After that, you might want to try some of the more traditional distros... Slackware and Debian would be my recommendation then.
In the end, Linux is about choice. Just sometimes, the choice isn't yours... just your company's. Take a course on whatever distro they've decided upon... but play with a different distro at home for a different "feel".
It's happening all the time... In fact, most "successful" PC assembly shops do this for "free". Why have the consumer run away just because they find installing Windows to be "complicated".
As a general rule of thumb... if a P4 pc of about 1.8GHz with 256MB RAM costs more than RM1300 (US$1 = RM3.80), it's considered "expensive".
Linux PCs are reportedly selling like hotcakes in Malaysia.
How I wish that it is true. The fact of the matter is that an extremely large majority of Malaysians don't know what the hell Linux is.
I'll bet my life savings that out of 20 random Malaysians you pick in any shopping centre, you'll be lucky if you get even a single person who knows what Linux is...
In my opinion, the preference settings are the least worked on aspect of Firefox. It is virtually the same since version 0.5 (of what was then Firebird).
However, I'm not implying that Firebird is lacking in features... on the contrary, it is to me the most advanced browser available on any platform.
What is severely lacking, is a UI that is can match the raw configurativeness (is there such a word?) that is hidden in about:config.
If you read my poor excuse of a review, I applaud the new implementation of extensions. It is imperative that we can define a whitelist of extension hosts as Firefox becomes more popular. While this is a significant achievement, again why must it be hidden among the forest of about:config settings?
Does it not make sense to put it somewhere more obvious... somewhere like the Preferences dialog perhaps?
I won't argue with you about the new default theme though, because this is more of a personal preference. I don't think there's a one size fits all solution here... everyone has different tastes, it's impossible to please everyone.
Slashdot Mirror
Meaning the 80% of government boxes running Linux will be supplied immediately by a floodgate that's scheduled to open on that year itself?
Amazing.
They don't get sick, thus don't have vet fees amounting to hundreds a year (if not thousands). They don't pee, they don't shit. They don't cause lawsuits from the paper boy who just got his gonads chewed. And you can silent a yapping robot pet by taking out its batteries and not get the SPCA on your ass.
So hell yeah... robot pets are definitely better than those damn pesky biological ones!
The one thing that the author missed is the "Intention" behind HTML. It was invented primarily to create documents (hence, the availability of h1 to h6 tags as the article illustrates). Furthermore, HTML is oh so accomodating and expandable.
Basically, every example that the author's given can already be replicated using current web technologies albeit via plugins and some scripting (server side and/or client side).
Not bad for a language that was primarily intended to generate documents now, is it? I fail to see why the author chooses to make it very clear at the start of his writeup about how "clunky" and "unsophisticated" HTML is, but concluded it by saying how current innovations like AJAX is already making HTML5 obsolete.
Nice writeup, but no clear objectives.
For one thing, according to the "work" you do, most of the things there require interactive user input.
For another, all of the things you've stated as example, doesn't really require much desktop real estate. ie. For web browsing, almost all modern browsers have tabbed browsing nowadays; e-Mail, most modern email apps (GUI or command line) supports multiple mailboxes anyway; SSH, many have mentioned screen before my post.
Like I said, your examples don't really require much screen estate. Other than web browsing, the other activities you're performing can to an extent be automated. ie. Email: use filters and/or auto-responders and/or forwarders; SSH: shell scripts are your friends.
If you provide specific examples of your day-to-day work, then maybe us Slashdotters can help you more.
Well, that's one way to look at it. But from my experience, if I really wanted the "talents" behind a company, I'd headhunt the guy. And to be honest, this would be the easiest thing to do... a little more dollars here, a little bit more perks there, chances are I can get my target in an acceptable timeframe.
If I were to takeover a company like Pixar, let's be honest here... name me 2 or 3 animators that you know for sure works there? If you're not really into the animations industry (or are not a fan of the particular artists), you'd be hard pressed to come up with those names. It's all abound the branding, baby.
I could start a brand new animations company with the best personnel in the world, but a large majority of studios would still pick Pixar over my company because of the brand power itself.
Since when should employee happiness be the basis of whether or not to sell a company?
In the end it's the owners who decide whether to hold on to it, or divest it. However, it does seem a little unwise for Jobs to sell off what seems to be a profitable outfit.
It used to be that becoming a hero is just doing a heroic deed.
Since when do heroes need fancy schfancy stuff and megabucks?
Then just don't do business with those firms.
Let your money do the talking... apparently politicians listen more to corporations than individuals (especially the average
If that was the case all along... The Planet shouldn't have hosted them at all in the first place.
And from what Netcraft shows, they have been using the same hosting company (The Planet?) for quite some time now.
I doubt that this is about money as you so simply put it.
...I for one, hopes that he and his family will be in good health always.
:)
I guess this is as good a Christmas present one could wish for. Health really is much more meaningful than wealth.
Cheers from a happy Slacker
Why must you restrict it to Open Source ones?
If it's a matter of $$$, there are lots of good freeware email clients out there.
If you're really someone who does things "in the spirit of libre software", you wouldn't be using Windows in the first place.
So there are tons of them... check out freshmeat.net or nonags.com to see some.
Bargh... yet another so-called "geek" behind the times.
/>
If you REALLY are a fan, you'll know that Sauroman is the absolutely EVIL embodiment of an Orc and a Dark Elf crossbreed!
<humour
Thank you for replying, I find your post to be highly informative.
It's hard to get a "real" insight to the hosting business nowadays. It seems that almost everyone is just a frontend to a provider, that in turn, is a reseller themselves.
Again, thanks for sharing.
On your hosting side job...
Do you actually setup the server(s) and/or networking yourself or do you just resell?
Care to share how many clients you have on your hosting project and the sort of revenue you're earning?
Thanks in advance.
here.
Enjoy.
If they are really are the ones who know the most about protecting Windows from spyware, then almost every Windows user is doomed.
Heck, Mr Gates himself faces the very same spyware problem.
It's about time we had another souped up, optimized to the core, compiled from source, fear my USE flags distro to provide competition with Gentoo.
;)
You know what they say... Monopoly is never a good thing
That's not the best way... that's overkill. Hard doesn't necessarily mean best.
But hey, don't think that I'm knocking off LFS. I went through it myself... but after a year plus of using Slackware (following a year of using Mandrake consistently).
LFS is really useful if you want to understand how to build a Linux distro. It's technically not even a distro. It's more of a commando-style survival training, whereas a distro would be summer camp.
I also doubt the "you will know your system inside and out" argument. I believe "you will know how to build a working Linux system" is a better description of the LFS learning process.
Bear in mind that the poster is a Windows admin for five years... and he wants to have working knowledge of adminning Linux... not building a distro. Moving from Windows, and getting an introduction to Linux via LFS is really not something you'd want to go through.
My recommendation? I live and breathe Slackware... but the poster should really try out a few distros. Fedora Core & Mandrake would scratch that need-some-GUIs-to-get-me-going itch for a start. After that, you might want to try some of the more traditional distros... Slackware and Debian would be my recommendation then.
In the end, Linux is about choice. Just sometimes, the choice isn't yours... just your company's. Take a course on whatever distro they've decided upon... but play with a different distro at home for a different "feel".
It's happening all the time... In fact, most "successful" PC assembly shops do this for "free". Why have the consumer run away just because they find installing Windows to be "complicated".
As a general rule of thumb... if a P4 pc of about 1.8GHz with 256MB RAM costs more than RM1300 (US$1 = RM3.80), it's considered "expensive".
And that's with Windows XP (pirated, of course).
How I wish that it is true. The fact of the matter is that an extremely large majority of Malaysians don't know what the hell Linux is.
I'll bet my life savings that out of 20 random Malaysians you pick in any shopping centre, you'll be lucky if you get even a single person who knows what Linux is...
And yes, I'm a Malaysian.
If you consistently update to -current, you should already be using 10 at present.
Try this:
cat
I don't think the screenshots and the article are related.
The article is by Michael Hall while the screenshots (seems like they) are from Eugenia's (the article submitter and OSNews' Editor) Slackware destop.
Ehh... sorry for double posting, but what kinda porn are you downloading on mIRC... I can only make up PoRnD....
For me, pressing Ctrl+ (Control And Plus key) and Ctrl- (Control And Minus key) always fixes this problem. ... And yeah, only on Slashdot.
In my opinion, the preference settings are the least worked on aspect of Firefox. It is virtually the same since version 0.5 (of what was then Firebird).
However, I'm not implying that Firebird is lacking in features... on the contrary, it is to me the most advanced browser available on any platform.
What is severely lacking, is a UI that is can match the raw configurativeness (is there such a word?) that is hidden in about:config.
If you read my poor excuse of a review, I applaud the new implementation of extensions. It is imperative that we can define a whitelist of extension hosts as Firefox becomes more popular. While this is a significant achievement, again why must it be hidden among the forest of about:config settings?
Does it not make sense to put it somewhere more obvious... somewhere like the Preferences dialog perhaps?
I won't argue with you about the new default theme though, because this is more of a personal preference. I don't think there's a one size fits all solution here... everyone has different tastes, it's impossible to please everyone.