Sure enough, it doesn't work. Once upon a time it did. There was a huge buzz around 2000 when the feature was intruduced, with many tech sites headlining silly things like "Microsoft to end domain names as we know them".
So I decided to do some digging. The keyword search was done through a company called RealNames; the agreement between Microsoft and RealNames ended in mid 2002 because the "quality" of keywords results was getting really crappy (type "mp3" and you go to some crappy obscure company's site that sells something related to mp3s; basically the keyword database RealNames provided was getting really spammy). The default behavior was changed to drop you to a search page for your default search engine, with the arguement being that this probably gives typical users a better experience anyway.
Oddly enough, once of the articles I read (http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.php/2164841) suggested that Google should do something exactly like what they're doing here. I had to double check to make sure the article was dated 2 years ago...
Why would IE need to catch up? It has had this "feature" forever.
Open IE, goto the Tools menu, select Internet Options, click the Advanced Tab, scroll to "Search from the Address Bar", and under "When searching" select "Just go to the most likely site".
But that doesn't really matter anyway. At the time of the arrest, he was giving an interview to some guy from msnbc. The officers at the scene did not witness him riding the bike, though they claim they did. They also claimed he was using spraypaint and not chalk. Keep in mind the whole thing is on tape, so there isn't much at doubt...
We didn't invade Iraq for the purpose of removing a murderous dictator either. We invaded Iraq because bogus intelligence suggested there was an imminate threat of attack by weapons of mass destruction from Iraq.
What kind of nitwit troll are you? DirectX is fully backwards compatible with previous versions. The reason why the new games aren't supported on old cards is that the games will run at about 1/2 fps on your old card. You'd have the the exact same problem with games written using OpenGL (witness Doom III).
If you don't like the pc gaming upgrade treadmill, get a console.
Though I suspect the 'novel' aspect to this patent lies no in the concept of navigating to different links using the tab key, but rather how that selection is indicated (they contually reference a non-rectangular shape). Lynx won't count as prior art.
You are exactly correct. That scenario is easy to support with source code diffs, not possible to support with binary diffs, which is why you either need to apply the diffs in a serialized order or have a huge matrix of diffs to apply based on the contents of the original file.
Though your proposal to have the patch install the complete file if it wasn't what was expected amuses me, as it kind of defeats the purpose of sending the patch as a diff in the first place...
A cheap, bottom of the line portable dvd player can be bought for $250. The decent ones sell for around $400.
Your $400 laptop makes a poor media device. Aside from the battery life, you have weight and size concerns, which have a huge influence on the practicality.
If you want a computer that you occasionally watch movies on, great -- get the laptop. If all you want to do is listen to mp3's and watch movies on a long plane trip, the PMC is a better solution.
Source code patches are text and generally follow a simple set of rules. Ie: replace this line of text (surrounded by these other lines of text) with this other line. Source code patches generally don't automatically resolve conflicts (ie: the line of test is different than the source, or the surrounding lines aren't quite what was expected). Even then, it's still possible for the patch to go bad, depending on what else has changed.
Binary diffs don't have any rules other than the start/end point. It isn't really possible to intelligently change part of the binary unless the whole file is what you were expecting, as it isn't possible to make any reasonable assumptions that your change is 'compatible' with the other binary changes in the file. For example, the previous change may have inserted a new string, and added some code to use that string. The insertion changed the address of several other pieces of data, and the other do-dads that referenced that data were also fixed up. Let's say you have a second patch which was created before the first patch, and it knows nothing about this new string or the other data that got moved around. Anything that it patches is now wrong. Your binary is now useless.
You do realize that with 80gb of space you can store so much music that you could listen continuously for roughly a month before you're repeat something, right?
Hell, 20gb is more than enough to play continuously for over a week without repeating anything...
In order for it to be propritary, you have to have exclusive rights to it. If you license it, more than one person has it, and you no longer have exclusive rights to it. There is still a proprietary implementation (that made by Microsoft) but implementations other companies are not proprietary (ex: Tylenol vs acetaminophen), even though they're the same thing.
Taking great pains not to appear trollish, I asked them why they continually referred to Apple's DRMd files as proprietary, but never used that word to describe their own system.
Simple answer: Microsoft is willing to license their technology. Apple isn't.
What he was doing does not meet the legal standard as vandalism or destruction of property. For it to qualify as such, he would have to actually cause damange (something that washing off in the next rainstorm is perminant/damaging by any measure of the word). Additionally, prior precident has been set stating that darwing on the sidewalk with chalk is not vandalism (which is why you will occasionally see art, and why kids playing hopscotch don't get arrested).
In this particular case, they arrested the guy. They didn't tell him what they were arresting him for. He hasn't been charged with anything. The "obvious" thing he was doing wasn't illegal. The only inference that can be made was that he was arrested for/what/ he was chalking on the sidewalk (given that chalking on the sidewalk is a perfectly legal activity).
The first amendment states that the government can/not/ abridge a person's freedom of speech. This means that if a certain kind of "speech" is allowed (chalking a certain kind of thing on the sidewalk), then the government can't restrict any of that kind of speech. Selectively determining what kind of speech is or isn't allowed is a clear violation of the first ammendment, and any law which tries enforce such a selection is not legitiment and will fail a constitutional challenge.
Additionally, your perception of the purpose of the Constitution and its contents is incorrect. The purpose of the Constution is not to enumerate a limited set of "rights" that citizens have. Its purpose is to list what the government can/not/ do.
Word has two HTML formats. One that preserves extra Word formatting and information, and one that doesn't ("filtered html"). Save your document as filtered html and you don't get any of the Word 'crud' in the html file.
The zone content opens in is configured by the application hosting the browser control. IE is doing exactly what winamp stupidly told it to do -- open the content in the local zone.
Slashdot Mirror
[click] [click] [click] [tap] [tap] [tap]
p /2164841) suggested that Google should do something exactly like what they're doing here. I had to double check to make sure the article was dated 2 years ago...
Sure enough, it doesn't work. Once upon a time it did. There was a huge buzz around 2000 when the feature was intruduced, with many tech sites headlining silly things like "Microsoft to end domain names as we know them".
So I decided to do some digging. The keyword search was done through a company called RealNames; the agreement between Microsoft and RealNames ended in mid 2002 because the "quality" of keywords results was getting really crappy (type "mp3" and you go to some crappy obscure company's site that sells something related to mp3s; basically the keyword database RealNames provided was getting really spammy). The default behavior was changed to drop you to a search page for your default search engine, with the arguement being that this probably gives typical users a better experience anyway.
Oddly enough, once of the articles I read (http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/article.ph
Why would IE need to catch up? It has had this "feature" forever.
Open IE, goto the Tools menu, select Internet Options, click the Advanced Tab, scroll to "Search from the Address Bar", and under "When searching" select "Just go to the most likely site".
When he was riding, he was riding on the road.
...
But that doesn't really matter anyway. At the time of the arrest, he was giving an interview to some guy from msnbc. The officers at the scene did not witness him riding the bike, though they claim they did. They also claimed he was using spraypaint and not chalk. Keep in mind the whole thing is on tape, so there isn't much at doubt
Totally bogus.
A factual statement is different than trademark infringement.
It's just as well, as any OS which pays attention to those bits would be much easier to DOS ...
If you want to follow the slippery slope ... Linux is like Unix ...
No. That's wrong too.
We didn't invade Iraq for the purpose of removing a murderous dictator either. We invaded Iraq because bogus intelligence suggested there was an imminate threat of attack by weapons of mass destruction from Iraq.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
What kind of nitwit troll are you? DirectX is fully backwards compatible with previous versions. The reason why the new games aren't supported on old cards is that the games will run at about 1/2 fps on your old card. You'd have the the exact same problem with games written using OpenGL (witness Doom III).
If you don't like the pc gaming upgrade treadmill, get a console.
Though I suspect the 'novel' aspect to this patent lies no in the concept of navigating to different links using the tab key, but rather how that selection is indicated (they contually reference a non-rectangular shape). Lynx won't count as prior art.
Just because they won over Netscape by using the operating system as a way to distribute, doesn't mean that they will nessasarily maintain.
Or perhaps this is merely proof that they didn't "win over" Netscape because they distributed the browser with the operating system.
Your "income" measurement is flawed. It counts only taxable income.
You are exactly correct. That scenario is easy to support with source code diffs, not possible to support with binary diffs, which is why you either need to apply the diffs in a serialized order or have a huge matrix of diffs to apply based on the contents of the original file.
...
Though your proposal to have the patch install the complete file if it wasn't what was expected amuses me, as it kind of defeats the purpose of sending the patch as a diff in the first place
A cheap, bottom of the line portable dvd player can be bought for $250. The decent ones sell for around $400.
Your $400 laptop makes a poor media device. Aside from the battery life, you have weight and size concerns, which have a huge influence on the practicality.
If you want a computer that you occasionally watch movies on, great -- get the laptop. If all you want to do is listen to mp3's and watch movies on a long plane trip, the PMC is a better solution.
Source code patches are text and generally follow a simple set of rules. Ie: replace this line of text (surrounded by these other lines of text) with this other line. Source code patches generally don't automatically resolve conflicts (ie: the line of test is different than the source, or the surrounding lines aren't quite what was expected). Even then, it's still possible for the patch to go bad, depending on what else has changed.
Binary diffs don't have any rules other than the start/end point. It isn't really possible to intelligently change part of the binary unless the whole file is what you were expecting, as it isn't possible to make any reasonable assumptions that your change is 'compatible' with the other binary changes in the file. For example, the previous change may have inserted a new string, and added some code to use that string. The insertion changed the address of several other pieces of data, and the other do-dads that referenced that data were also fixed up. Let's say you have a second patch which was created before the first patch, and it knows nothing about this new string or the other data that got moved around. Anything that it patches is now wrong. Your binary is now useless.
Size, weight, price, ease of use, and battery life come to mind ...
You do realize that with 80gb of space you can store so much music that you could listen continuously for roughly a month before you're repeat something, right?
...
Hell, 20gb is more than enough to play continuously for over a week without repeating anything
In order for it to be propritary, you have to have exclusive rights to it. If you license it, more than one person has it, and you no longer have exclusive rights to it. There is still a proprietary implementation (that made by Microsoft) but implementations other companies are not proprietary (ex: Tylenol vs acetaminophen), even though they're the same thing.
Taking great pains not to appear trollish, I asked them why they continually referred to Apple's DRMd files as proprietary, but never used that word to describe their own system.
Simple answer: Microsoft is willing to license their technology. Apple isn't.
What were they doing during those five years? Forget about Windows Server 2003 perchance?
It means that they've currently got a list of work and projects that spans 10 years.
What he was doing does not meet the legal standard as vandalism or destruction of property. For it to qualify as such, he would have to actually cause damange (something that washing off in the next rainstorm is perminant/damaging by any measure of the word). Additionally, prior precident has been set stating that darwing on the sidewalk with chalk is not vandalism (which is why you will occasionally see art, and why kids playing hopscotch don't get arrested).
/what/ he was chalking on the sidewalk (given that chalking on the sidewalk is a perfectly legal activity).
/not/ abridge a person's freedom of speech. This means that if a certain kind of "speech" is allowed (chalking a certain kind of thing on the sidewalk), then the government can't restrict any of that kind of speech. Selectively determining what kind of speech is or isn't allowed is a clear violation of the first ammendment, and any law which tries enforce such a selection is not legitiment and will fail a constitutional challenge.
/not/ do.
In this particular case, they arrested the guy. They didn't tell him what they were arresting him for. He hasn't been charged with anything. The "obvious" thing he was doing wasn't illegal. The only inference that can be made was that he was arrested for
The first amendment states that the government can
Additionally, your perception of the purpose of the Constitution and its contents is incorrect. The purpose of the Constution is not to enumerate a limited set of "rights" that citizens have. Its purpose is to list what the government can
Show me. I've got none in the file I created.
I've noticed no "word specific junk" in the filtered html. It *does* use styles to an extreme, but it is proper html.
As far as your IE problems, sounds like you hit F11...
Word has two HTML formats. One that preserves extra Word formatting and information, and one that doesn't ("filtered html"). Save your document as filtered html and you don't get any of the Word 'crud' in the html file.
The zone content opens in is configured by the application hosting the browser control. IE is doing exactly what winamp stupidly told it to do -- open the content in the local zone.