I'll third your greylist comment, and add, if greylisting is not availible to you, blocking using rbl's of dynamic ip addresses works quite well too. You'll still have some false positives (such as people who never set up rdns for their domain so they end up mixed in with the dsl users, but they can easily be whitelisted) and some will still get through compared with greylisting (because the lists don't have every dynamic ip), but you'll get a lot)
Why not use Xdevelop. I actually use(prefer) this for my windows.net development, and it works on Mac & Linux too. Not to mention it use the same project files as Visual Studio.net.
It's not Pan and Scan, it's widescreen as the parent said. It's just has a reduced vertical resolution when you view on a widescreen display rather than being anamorphic. Pan and Scan refers to the content, anamorphic in it's simplest sense refers to the shape of the pixels.
They probably have a 640x480 square pixel cap right now due to limitations of the iPod. In the event, it was mentioned that you use the same file for the iPod as the computer/tv.
While i believe 640 x XXX is viewable, I'm dissappointed as well at the pricing being so close to a dvd with the resolution being lacking. If they had rentals 640 x XXX it would've be fine.
Actually that's a commonly held over simplification, and if you trust it, at some point you are going to have nasty confusing crashes, and you are going to wonder what's going on. One of the most common things new cocoa developer ignore is autorelease pools, there are occasions in which you need to create and release your own, because if you accumulate too many autorealeased objects before you your pool is released, it will crash your program. Other problems come from the fact that there are cocoa classes that if following the ownership rule should retain a parameter but don't, which means you could get a nasty surprise if you didn't check the api doc for that method.
Security problems? has this guy actually HAD security problems, or has he just read of the threat of problems and anecdotes of others that have had problems? I read them all the time too, but it's not enough for me to change OS AND hardware just because the press overplays this threat.
I think to be mad as hell, this guy would have to have had the problems himself. I know lots of people (in person) that I work with or went to school with, who have virus problems and are very frustrated (but not mad as hell).
You want to hear and anecdote? I know a guy (in person) who got hired at Microsoft and a had a worm infect his machine right away there. What happend was they give him a new machine and between the time he started it up on the microsoft corportate network and he installs the windows updates (a few minutes) his new machine is infected with a worm. That's how bad the problem is. For people trying to do the right thing, you still have to be lucky not to get a virus on your own machine.
Memory. Not all RAM is equal. Some works well. Cheap stuff doesn't.
Again...hello? RAM isn't equal on ANY platform! There is cheap stuff being sold and bought everyday on the Macs too you know. People don't want to overpay Apple for RAM, so they try to get something cheap and WHAM, they end up with problems.
If you owned a mac you would know, if you buy cheap ram that isn't going to work well, the firmware disables it making it obvious that you need to return the ram and buy it from somewhere else. (And this keeps your computer from crashing because of it which is it's true purpose.)
More a space opera than a soap opera, theres a lot of drama in BG. Now DS9 was more of a soap opera than a sci-fi series by the end. The kept mix and matching regular cast hooking up.
I have 1.5 GB of ram, and guess it's always fully utilized. Why, because this isn't windows and Mac OS X caches your file system with your unused ram. That's a significant performance boost.
Yeah but if you just finished copying files to that drive, you might be surprised when you plug it in else where and find out that the files actually weren't copied (because it lazily copies files to flash devices).
"are encoded with a codec that's only bundled with Quicktime itself means it's as good as being a closed format"
Yes, Sorenson 1 & 3 were implemented in the open-source FFMPEG, thus you can watch it in MOV files in your player of choice. EAT YOUR WORDS! EAT IT! EAT IT!
http://ffmpeg.sourceforge.net/ffmpeg-doc.html#SEC1 9
What do you mean? Electronic device failure is modeled by an exponential distribution, meaning every new day you use your computer is the highest probably it's going to fail.
We are hoping someone in the crowd adds it or something like it into an OSS browser. We are going to try make trailblazer into a fully featured browser just for experimentation, however we really don't want to necessarily continue this project year after year, and most likely by next year the group will be working on a new project for engineering open house.
Only when you look at it in the surface does TrailBlazer seem the same as MosaicG. It's just similar in a few regards, specifically visual aspects. Our interface came from figuring out what users remember about the pages they visited, how they get back to them, and how to make this easier for the user.
Users usually remember the general path in which they took to get to a page, so showing the hierarchy allows them to find these paths and get to their destination with out re-traversing every page.
TrailBlazer highlights the path when a person arrives at a member of that path, so that at a later date users can re-pickup the path and finder their destination.
Users remember how a page looks and not necessarily logos, so we have full large thumbnails of the last seen portion of the page.
Users remember relatively when they visit pages so we order paths top to bottom chronologically.
Most importantly users remember the CONTENT of the pages so we have summaries generated and index the pages so you can filter your history in real-time by content, thus displaying only the paths that pertain to what you are looking for. All nodes in those paths become subtly smaller and de-saturated so you don't lose your bearing and can find related pages.
The only thing MosaicG shares out of that design is that the pages are shown hierarchy, but even then, they displayed quite differently. MosaicG make the most recent pages larger, while TrailBlazer orders them by the time you access. There's a very good reason why both projects chose to layout their hierarchies in there respective ways.
MosaicG had a different design philosophy, they were trying to make sense of the web people were browsing at that moment. We (with TrailBlazer) were trying to empower people to easily return to pages that they don't visit often, but do know about and want to get back to.
The final and very important detail when comparing TrailBlazer and MosiacG, while the screen shots may fool you, is that TrailBlazer is a GLOBAL history and MosiacG's history is a SESSION history. Which makes a BIG difference in their use.
MosaicG was limited by the technology of the time and they even mention that in their paper, so maybe TrailBlazer's design is an evolution rather than an revolution, as it's not the first graphical history, but that doesn't mean it's not new or not innovative.
Mac OS X was a huge improvement in both polish and underpinnings from Mac OS 9, but not in usability.
I agree, in terms of usability i think OS X has eclisped OS 9 only recently with panther. Early OS X was many steps backwards in usability from OS 9, even though it gave much more power and features.
The early functional prototype was an even more basic and generic looking browser, because we were evaluating the history feature and not the browser for our user evaluations in the original trailblazer project in the fall.
When the project was taken to MacWarriors, the organization had just had an infusing of freshman, who were just learning to object oriented programing and were learning Obj-C in this project. It was easier to try and teach them by implementing standard browser features rather than trying to integrate code. Also with starting from the functional prototype that was 2100 lines of code (which i re-factored much of it before giving them, though much of the original is still there) was a lot easier for them to figure out what was going on compared to hundreds of thousands of lines of Mozilla code.
It's useless to many because it's not a finished browser, but for those who want to experiment it's functional enough and improving. To be a proof of concept it is certainly functional enough. Implementation was only part of the project and that's really at it's begin not it's end, the interface didn't come out of thin air, it came from UI research doing analysis and evaluations on users before the first line of code was written.
Back when I was in middle school I really wanted PowerMac 5200, and my parents bought me one, however due to supply problems apple offered me a 6214 with monitor and a whole 1 gig of hard drive space instead of 800 megs for the same price.
As Netscape example has shown, if you deviate from your core business and start re-writing the entire codebase for the sake of "cleanliness" and "efficiency
Actually, extreme programing and adaptive programing are becoming more popular, and these methods employ rewriting your code to make cleaner by allocating time for refactoring. Really, software is never written right the first time, and it's easier to fix earlier than later, which is what microsoft hopefully has learned, as they are having to re-write their entire operating system from scratch, because they ignored awful code in windows too long. (We had microsoft come and talk about security for a computing conference at our university, and when asked why windows has had so many exploits, and the microsoft guy answered that there is code in windows that's 10 years old and no one has looked at.)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm posting this from a 2G on a wpa2 encrypted dynex access point. I've also connected to a airport express base station with wpa2.
This is not new, they've had the summaries and web badges for GPL since 2004 http://web.archive.org/web/20040416235826/http://c reativecommons.org/license/cc-lgpl?lang=en
And thus it's been added to Bank of America credit cards
I'll third your greylist comment, and add, if greylisting is not availible to you, blocking using rbl's of dynamic ip addresses works quite well too. You'll still have some false positives (such as people who never set up rdns for their domain so they end up mixed in with the dsl users, but they can easily be whitelisted) and some will still get through compared with greylisting (because the lists don't have every dynamic ip), but you'll get a lot)
Why not use Xdevelop. I actually use(prefer) this for my windows .net development, and it works on Mac & Linux too. Not to mention it use the same project files as Visual Studio .net.
Logo is a line programing language for kids to learn on. And there are a ton of open source implementations. Even ones that run on JAVA or the CLR http://sourceforge.net/search/?type_of_search=soft &words=logo
It's not Pan and Scan, it's widescreen as the parent said. It's just has a reduced vertical resolution when you view on a widescreen display rather than being anamorphic. Pan and Scan refers to the content, anamorphic in it's simplest sense refers to the shape of the pixels. They probably have a 640x480 square pixel cap right now due to limitations of the iPod. In the event, it was mentioned that you use the same file for the iPod as the computer/tv. While i believe 640 x XXX is viewable, I'm dissappointed as well at the pricing being so close to a dvd with the resolution being lacking. If they had rentals 640 x XXX it would've be fine.
-
zoom for readability
-
reading layout view
-
keyboard shortcuts
-
and don't forget scroll with your mouse
I'd like to see Open Office add those features!Actually that's a commonly held over simplification, and if you trust it, at some point you are going to have nasty confusing crashes, and you are going to wonder what's going on. One of the most common things new cocoa developer ignore is autorelease pools, there are occasions in which you need to create and release your own, because if you accumulate too many autorealeased objects before you your pool is released, it will crash your program. Other problems come from the fact that there are cocoa classes that if following the ownership rule should retain a parameter but don't, which means you could get a nasty surprise if you didn't check the api doc for that method.
rather than a fusion reaction, duh.
Although I may need to watch more Star Trek to be sure.
TrailBlazer was a proof of concept of what you were talking about. http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/macwarriors/projects/trail blazer
More a space opera than a soap opera, theres a lot of drama in BG. Now DS9 was more of a soap opera than a sci-fi series by the end. The kept mix and matching regular cast hooking up.
I have 1.5 GB of ram, and guess it's always fully utilized. Why, because this isn't windows and Mac OS X caches your file system with your unused ram. That's a significant performance boost.
Yeah but if you just finished copying files to that drive, you might be surprised when you plug it in else where and find out that the files actually weren't copied (because it lazily copies files to flash devices).
"are encoded with a codec that's only bundled with Quicktime itself means it's as good as being a closed format" Yes, Sorenson 1 & 3 were implemented in the open-source FFMPEG, thus you can watch it in MOV files in your player of choice. EAT YOUR WORDS! EAT IT! EAT IT! http://ffmpeg.sourceforge.net/ffmpeg-doc.html#SEC1 9
What do you mean? Electronic device failure is modeled by an exponential distribution, meaning every new day you use your computer is the highest probably it's going to fail.
We are hoping someone in the crowd adds it or something like it into an OSS browser. We are going to try make trailblazer into a fully featured browser just for experimentation, however we really don't want to necessarily continue this project year after year, and most likely by next year the group will be working on a new project for engineering open house.
Only when you look at it in the surface does TrailBlazer seem the same as MosaicG. It's just similar in a few regards, specifically visual aspects. Our interface came from figuring out what users remember about the pages they visited, how they get back to them, and how to make this easier for the user.
The only thing MosaicG shares out of that design is that the pages are shown hierarchy, but even then, they displayed quite differently. MosaicG make the most recent pages larger, while TrailBlazer orders them by the time you access. There's a very good reason why both projects chose to layout their hierarchies in there respective ways.
MosaicG had a different design philosophy, they were trying to make sense of the web people were browsing at that moment. We (with TrailBlazer) were trying to empower people to easily return to pages that they don't visit often, but do know about and want to get back to.
The final and very important detail when comparing TrailBlazer and MosiacG, while the screen shots may fool you, is that TrailBlazer is a GLOBAL history and MosiacG's history is a SESSION history. Which makes a BIG difference in their use.
MosaicG was limited by the technology of the time and they even mention that in their paper, so maybe TrailBlazer's design is an evolution rather than an revolution, as it's not the first graphical history, but that doesn't mean it's not new or not innovative.
Mac OS X was a huge improvement in both polish and underpinnings from Mac OS 9, but not in usability.
I agree, in terms of usability i think OS X has eclisped OS 9 only recently with panther. Early OS X was many steps backwards in usability from OS 9, even though it gave much more power and features.The early functional prototype was an even more basic and generic looking browser, because we were evaluating the history feature and not the browser for our user evaluations in the original trailblazer project in the fall.
When the project was taken to MacWarriors, the organization had just had an infusing of freshman, who were just learning to object oriented programing and were learning Obj-C in this project. It was easier to try and teach them by implementing standard browser features rather than trying to integrate code. Also with starting from the functional prototype that was 2100 lines of code (which i re-factored much of it before giving them, though much of the original is still there) was a lot easier for them to figure out what was going on compared to hundreds of thousands of lines of Mozilla code.
It's useless to many because it's not a finished browser, but for those who want to experiment it's functional enough and improving. To be a proof of concept it is certainly functional enough. Implementation was only part of the project and that's really at it's begin not it's end, the interface didn't come out of thin air, it came from UI research doing analysis and evaluations on users before the first line of code was written.
'Lucene' from the Jakarta project: http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/
Back when I was in middle school I really wanted PowerMac 5200, and my parents bought me one, however due to supply problems apple offered me a 6214 with monitor and a whole 1 gig of hard drive space instead of 800 megs for the same price.
I think you made a typo in your address, I think you meant to type Nigeria.