I would be willing to pay $25 for a commercial instant messaging program. For backwards compatability, it should probably implement AIM/ICQ or Yahoo suport.
I'm not talking about Trillian Pro here.
I'm talking about a professionally written program that supports both UNIX and Win32 (using QT, perhaps), doesn't crash every few hours (WTF is up with all the crappy IM clients that crash more than Win 3.1?), implements REAL features, has technical support (for those luser friends of mine who can't figure out how to install AIM, even when I talk them through it), and doesn't use ads or spyware.
Here are the features I want:
Cryptography support. Read my history of comments and you'll find out that I usually say that I have nothing to hide. That's true, and I stand by my assertion that the public doesn't give a fuck about cryptography. However, if I could cryptographically sign my IM history, people couldn't weasel out when I cut 'n' pasted their words back to them (yes, I really am that petty; all New Yorkers live to say, "I told you so!"). Also, giving those paranoid EFF guys the option to use cryptography would go far towards getting UNIX adoption of the IM client.
Stability. I said it once earlier, and I'll say it again. WTF is up with all these IM clients crashing constantly? Are they written by 14 year olds working in their spare time?! Geez. I hate crappy Windows software. Unfortunately, that's most of the Win32 net apps. I stopped using ICQ a few years ago because they didn't care how often the client crashed, as long as it had a dozen new features in every beta release. This is not how software in the real world is designed! Okay, this is not how software in the real world should be designed.
It should look nice and have a cool GUI. Blech. I hate the interfaces in most IM clients. They look like crap. ICQ has too many useless features to navigate through, Yahoo looks even uglier than a GTK program, and... well... let's not even touch AIM or MSN, which actually have ADS embedded in the client! Argh. Talk about user hostile!
It should be IM client, and nothing else. Do one thing, and do it well. That means no creeping featurism, like in ICQ. Webcam support is okay. So is cell phone support. But that's about my limit.
Portability. Obviously. I want to use it on my PowerMac, Linux PC, and Alpha (R.I.P. DEC). Oh yeah. And Win32.
Zero tolerance policy on SPAM. No bots. No porn advertisements. Nothing. I'm pretty sure I can detect this stuff and block it, so why can't Yahoo or ICQ? We're not talking about sophisticated AI here. I hate that crap.
Support for modules. Make a bare-bones IM client, then implement stuff like webcams and SMS messaging as modules. Why doesn't everyone do this? Probably because it sounds like something a 14 year old hobbyist can't do! Argh. Crappy win32 software. I hate it.
An open protocol specification. I'm not afraid of people cloning my app. If they can do a better job writing an IM client, then my product rightfully deserves to lose market share. I welcome the challenge of competition. Why are AOL/ICQ, Yahoo, MSN, etc so scared of competition? Is it because their IM client sucks? Hmmm. Even better yet, make it an official RFC. I suppose I'm willing to be flexible on this point, because corporate America is so dumb about adopting open software.
A real revenue model, not based on ads or spyware. If this necessitates a subscription model, then so be it. Obviously, I dislike that option, but I'd rather pay $5/month than have to constantly run Ad Aware, to see if any new spyware has been installed on my PCs.
A shiny retail box. I couldn't care less about this crap, but some of my friends want to go to CompUSA (blech) to buy their software, rather than download it. No, I don't understand it, either. But in order to get these dorks to use the IM client, it's got to be in retail stores.
I've come to the conclusion that I must write this software myself. Nobody else is going to implement a portable, spyware and ad free IM client that doesn't constantly crash.
If someone beats me to it, I guess I'll pony up my cash. But I'm sort of hoping to get a free ride on my own protocol specification.
I applaud your ability to keep a level head (except, apparently, when you write messages on Slashdot), but some of us actually have to pay money for all the spam we receive. Actually, you do, too, indirectly. Imagine how much cheaper your internet access would be if you didn't have to subsidize your ISP's hardware and bandwidth upgrades due to spam.
Also, I don't know about you, but my time is worth money. Every time I have to delete spam that escapes my filters, that's time that I could have been productive. Deleting a hundred spam e-mails is annoying and time consuming. It takes more time than just hitting the delete key. Some e-mail programs have a really sucky user interface, and in a corporate environment, you don't get to choose which e-mail program you use. Sucks to be you, in that circumstance.
Yeah, yeah, I know... YHBT... but I'm bored and feel like posting.
Why do you want to be anonymous? What are you hiding?
Back when I first got on the internet, there was relatively no anonymity. When you fucked up and did something obnoxious, you lost your internet account. It was virtually impossible to get back on the internet after that, unless you found some way to convince your network administrator that you had learned your lesson. Of course, there were always some jokers who could hack into whichever server they wanted, but those were rather rare.
Anonymity changes the face of communications. When you can act as antisocial as you please, with no repurcussions, your behavior changes. This is basic psychology.
I have nothing to hide; neither does anyone else I know. I'm suspicious of anyone who doesn't want any way for his actions to be traceable. When you fuck up, you deserve to lose your access to the internet... plus have everyone else know that YOU were the one who fucked up. Public humiliation works wonders.
I'm not sure you've actually used a Mac. There is an extremely limited amount of MacOS supported hardware. Let's compare:
Video Cards that are supported under MacOS X: Nvidia GeForce4 MX, Ti ATI Rage, Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo ATI Radeon 7xxx, 8xxx, 9xxx (I'll be generous and give MacOS X the 9700, but I don't think ATI supports the 9700 under MacOS X yet)
Video Cards that are supported under Linux: Nvidia Riva 128, TNT, TNT2 Nvidia GeForce2, GeForce2 MX Nvidia GeForce3, GeForce3 Ti Nvidia GeForce4 MX, GeForce4 Ti ATI Mach64 ATI Rage, Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo ATI Radeon 7xxx, 8xxx, 9xxx (some cards better supported than others) Matrox Millennium, Millennium 2, Mystique Matrix G100, G200, G400, G450, G550 Matrix Parhelion Intel i810, i820, i845, i850G, etc All SiS video cards Most S3/Via video cards A few other oddball chipsets
Let's try SCSI controllers.
SCSI Controllers supported under MacOS X Atto U3D (Ultra 160) Adaptec PowerDomain Ultra160 series Adaptec PowerDomain Ultra Narrow series QLogic (?? not sure which ones)
SCSI Controllers supported under Linux All Adaptec SCSI controllers All DPT SCSI controllers All AMI SCSI controllers All LSILogic/NEC SCSI controllers All QLogic SCSI controllers All Atto SCSI controllers Dozens of oddball SCSI controllers
How about serial ATA controllers, sound cards, or combo Firewire/USB2.0 cards?
Nah. I think I've basically proven my point.
The only manufacturers who are dragging their feet on Linux support are ATI (uuggghhh... ATI sucks), Logitech (still no webcam drivers for Linux... I chucked my Logitech webcam a long time ago), AMD, and a few extremely minor companies who produce crappy USB/Firewire peripherals. Yes, MacOS does have much better support wrt USB/Firewire peripherals. I have trouble making my USB compact flash reader work with Linux. It's supported under XP and MacOS, though.
Seriously, this is not a troll. I feel that it's silly to go around saying that MacOS X has more drivers than Linux. It's a ridiculous claim that is easily proven false.
I own a Blue & White PowerMac (450 MHz G3) that's got an ATI video card and Adaptec SCSI controller. For a while, I had delusions of upgrading my PowerMac, like you can upgrade a PC. Not so. My choices are limited to an ATI Radeon 7000 PCI video card (no AGP slot on older PowerMacs) or an overpriced Adaptec Ultra160 SCSI controller. Good luck finding Atto or Qlogic SCSI controllers.
After doing a lot of research, I discovered that my PCI slots are basically useless. I can't put in a sound card, TV card, GeForce4 MX video card (because you can't buy them... they are Apple OEM only!), DVD decoder card, or anything else that I put in my Linux PC.
Macs are just not very upgradable. Once you buy a Mac, your upgrade options basically consist of an ATI video card or Adaptec SCSI controller. That's it. Once you buy both of them, you can add more hard drives. Whoop-de-doo.
I should probably rewrite this post so that it doesn't read so much like flamebait or a troll, but I'm too lazy.
Okay, Makarand, that's two articles in a row on the front page. You can stop submitting them now.
Re:It's not that bad
on
Snowflake Photos
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Come on critics, we can have a diversion once in a while. What's wrong with some snowflakes? They are pretty, and the post doesn't take up too much space on the front page of slashdot. It's my opinion that this world could use a little more senseless beauty.
What are you, some sort of commie or hippie?
Re:Make your own snowflake!
on
Snowflake Photos
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Finally, I now know how to impress that cute girl at the video rental store!
That is so witty. I never get tired of seeing someone write *nix. It never ceases to amuse me. I just love it ever so much. Please continue doing this. Thank you.
p.s. please also include a fake ^H or two in your post next time. I love seeing that refreshing, original joke.
p.p.s you forgot to use M$ or Micro$oft in your post. Please do so next time.
The NT kernel was good. Then Microsoft moved the GUI into the kernel. We all know what happened after that. Okay, to be fair, the NT kernel is still pretty nice, but it's deeply annoying that Microsoft is so willing to sacrifice stability for a little more speed. I find it difficult to crash Win2k and XP, but it does happen... mostly from PC games.
Yeah. NT on the UDB was actually pretty tolerable. I ran NT4 Server on a 166 MHz 21066 (first generation Alpha). I found it to be quite usable. I didn't keep NT4 on the Alpha for all that long, as this was just an experiment. I had the NT4 disc, I had a UDB, and I had some time to waste.
You have to remember that NT4 was a 32 bit operating system, even on the Alpha. Therefor, you didn't really gain much by going to the Alpha, except for some nice speed boosts (it was definitely the fastest CPU on the market for years).
It was similar to running NT4 on a Pentium Pro 166 or 200.
The biggest problem I had was finding software. However, everyone's favorite telnet app, putty, comes compiled for NT4/Alpha.
The Register previously offered Windows 2000 for the Alpha, if you asked them for it. I never did, since my UDB was seriously underpowered (128MB RAM, 166 MHz).
I don't agree with everything you say, but you are very well-spoken and make me think. That's as much as anyone can hope for on Slashdot, I think. Personally, I think my own style is indistinguishable from trolling. I like to make people think, but I also have too much time on my hands and a perverse sense of humor.
Posting links to goatse.cx doesn't make anyone think, except about how much they hate goatse.cx. Making them think about deeply held (to the point of literal zealotry) beliefs is more than most +5, insightful posts do. It's often the trollish posts that get people thinking.
It's interesting how all the hardware sites lambasted Intel for the design of the Pentium 4, because it didn't have the raw speed of the AMD Athlon or Pentium 3. What made this all rather amusing to me, however, was that these people weren't around to see the evolution of the 386 vs 486, 486 vs Pentium, and, to a lesser extent, the 286 vs 386. In each of these situations, the previous generation of chip was able to eek a few more cycles over the next generation... in the beginning of the next generation's run! Intel has a very strong history of designing chips that ramp up very well (except for their one CPU engineering failure, the Pentium Pro, which was too ambitiously designed).
I wasn't surprised when the AMD Athlon pulled out ahead of the Pentium 4, then fell very far behind. The Athlon was not engineered to ramp up well over 1 GHz. AMD was very foolish to race to that point, seeing as how long it took them to get working silicon at just 2 GHz.
I'm not saying that I bought a Pentium 4, just that I knew it would eventually overtake the Athlon. I'm quite happy with a cheap Athlon, myself. Semiconductors is a soap opera for nerds. That's why I read The Register, not EE Times.
My guess is that there's going to be a lot more consolodation in the semiconductor and memory world. I bet Micron, AMD, Motorola, and Apple are all going to end up merging, buying out, and/or disappearing in the next few months. Maybe HP will buy them all.
I know this is horribly off-topic, but I just wanted to say that it's possibly to have both Homestar Runner and no flash ads. Just delete the flash plug-in from Mozilla (if you even bothered to install it), then use IE to load those few good web sites (ie, Homestar Runner and... uhhh...) that use Flash. Or, if you don't want to use IE, simply keep a backup copy of Mozilla around that has Flash enabled (install it in your home directory).
Re:Linux kernel did not need GCC/GNU/RMS
on
Linus Is A Hero
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Yeah, and RMS doesn't have a house. He needs MIT. Maybe we should start calling him MIT/Stallman.
Re:It's not that hard...
on
Build Your Own Mac
·
· Score: 3, Informative
To tell the truth, I don't really remember. I spent a lot of money on buying 512MB RAM, a SCSI card, video card, chassis, etc. I guess altogether, it was probably around $300 for a 266 MHz G3. I was planning on taking it a lot higher, of course, but the low end G3 CPU let me test the components and make sure everything was working. And it was only $20 shipped. However, Apple then announced the 1 GHz PowerMac, and my 266 MHz CPU seemed very, very puny indeed. Well, suffice to say, I stopped investing money in that computer and decided to save up for something a little more powerful.
I did what this article describes. In an effort to minimize my investment, I bought the components individually from ebay and online stores, put it all together, and had a custom PowerMac. The problem is that some of those components aren't brand new, and they may very well fail. Then you're left with a cheap-ass PowerMac that needs a new power supply. And one of the PCI slots is a little flakey. And...
It's easier to just buy a used PowerMac on ebay (or from a friend), which is what I ended up doing after I pieced together the parts individually. I still play around with that Frankenstein Mac, but it's not as useful as the used PowerMac.
However, if you invest in newer parts, I think you'll have better success than me. The stuff I bought was pretty old (and damn cheap).
Farscape sucked, anyways. Who needs another Star Trek ripoff? We've already had a thousand Star Trek shows, Babylon Five, Battlestar Galactica, and a shitload of others.
I'm sick and tired of muppets in space plus humans who have funny noses. I'm glad farscape got cancelled.
Watch -- the Slashdot groupthink will moderate me down into oblivion. But this must be said, because not everyone is sad to see another Trek clone go off the air!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not talking about Trillian Pro here.
I'm talking about a professionally written program that supports both UNIX and Win32 (using QT, perhaps), doesn't crash every few hours (WTF is up with all the crappy IM clients that crash more than Win 3.1?), implements REAL features, has technical support (for those luser friends of mine who can't figure out how to install AIM, even when I talk them through it), and doesn't use ads or spyware.
Here are the features I want:
I've come to the conclusion that I must write this software myself. Nobody else is going to implement a portable, spyware and ad free IM client that doesn't constantly crash.
If someone beats me to it, I guess I'll pony up my cash. But I'm sort of hoping to get a free ride on my own protocol specification.
And please don't suggest Trillian Pro. Thank you.
I applaud your ability to keep a level head (except, apparently, when you write messages on Slashdot), but some of us actually have to pay money for all the spam we receive. Actually, you do, too, indirectly. Imagine how much cheaper your internet access would be if you didn't have to subsidize your ISP's hardware and bandwidth upgrades due to spam.
Also, I don't know about you, but my time is worth money. Every time I have to delete spam that escapes my filters, that's time that I could have been productive. Deleting a hundred spam e-mails is annoying and time consuming. It takes more time than just hitting the delete key. Some e-mail programs have a really sucky user interface, and in a corporate environment, you don't get to choose which e-mail program you use. Sucks to be you, in that circumstance.
Yeah, yeah, I know... YHBT... but I'm bored and feel like posting.
I think it is.
Why do you want to be anonymous? What are you hiding?
Back when I first got on the internet, there was relatively no anonymity. When you fucked up and did something obnoxious, you lost your internet account. It was virtually impossible to get back on the internet after that, unless you found some way to convince your network administrator that you had learned your lesson. Of course, there were always some jokers who could hack into whichever server they wanted, but those were rather rare.
Anonymity changes the face of communications. When you can act as antisocial as you please, with no repurcussions, your behavior changes. This is basic psychology.
I have nothing to hide; neither does anyone else I know. I'm suspicious of anyone who doesn't want any way for his actions to be traceable. When you fuck up, you deserve to lose your access to the internet... plus have everyone else know that YOU were the one who fucked up. Public humiliation works wonders.
Seriously? Well, thanks for the correction. However, I have no intention of dying.
I'm not sure you've actually used a Mac. There is an extremely limited amount of MacOS supported hardware. Let's compare:
Video Cards that are supported under MacOS X:
Nvidia GeForce4 MX, Ti
ATI Rage, Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo
ATI Radeon 7xxx, 8xxx, 9xxx (I'll be generous and give MacOS X the 9700, but I don't think ATI supports the 9700 under MacOS X yet)
Video Cards that are supported under Linux:
Nvidia Riva 128, TNT, TNT2
Nvidia GeForce2, GeForce2 MX
Nvidia GeForce3, GeForce3 Ti
Nvidia GeForce4 MX, GeForce4 Ti
ATI Mach64
ATI Rage, Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo
ATI Radeon 7xxx, 8xxx, 9xxx (some cards better supported than others)
Matrox Millennium, Millennium 2, Mystique
Matrix G100, G200, G400, G450, G550
Matrix Parhelion
Intel i810, i820, i845, i850G, etc
All SiS video cards
Most S3/Via video cards
A few other oddball chipsets
Let's try SCSI controllers.
SCSI Controllers supported under MacOS X
Atto U3D (Ultra 160)
Adaptec PowerDomain Ultra160 series
Adaptec PowerDomain Ultra Narrow series
QLogic (?? not sure which ones)
SCSI Controllers supported under Linux
All Adaptec SCSI controllers
All DPT SCSI controllers
All AMI SCSI controllers
All LSILogic/NEC SCSI controllers
All QLogic SCSI controllers
All Atto SCSI controllers
Dozens of oddball SCSI controllers
How about serial ATA controllers, sound cards, or combo Firewire/USB2.0 cards?
Nah. I think I've basically proven my point.
The only manufacturers who are dragging their feet on Linux support are ATI (uuggghhh... ATI sucks), Logitech (still no webcam drivers for Linux... I chucked my Logitech webcam a long time ago), AMD, and a few extremely minor companies who produce crappy USB/Firewire peripherals. Yes, MacOS does have much better support wrt USB/Firewire peripherals. I have trouble making my USB compact flash reader work with Linux. It's supported under XP and MacOS, though.
Seriously, this is not a troll. I feel that it's silly to go around saying that MacOS X has more drivers than Linux. It's a ridiculous claim that is easily proven false.
I own a Blue & White PowerMac (450 MHz G3) that's got an ATI video card and Adaptec SCSI controller. For a while, I had delusions of upgrading my PowerMac, like you can upgrade a PC. Not so. My choices are limited to an ATI Radeon 7000 PCI video card (no AGP slot on older PowerMacs) or an overpriced Adaptec Ultra160 SCSI controller. Good luck finding Atto or Qlogic SCSI controllers.
After doing a lot of research, I discovered that my PCI slots are basically useless. I can't put in a sound card, TV card, GeForce4 MX video card (because you can't buy them... they are Apple OEM only!), DVD decoder card, or anything else that I put in my Linux PC.
Macs are just not very upgradable. Once you buy a Mac, your upgrade options basically consist of an ATI video card or Adaptec SCSI controller. That's it. Once you buy both of them, you can add more hard drives. Whoop-de-doo.
I should probably rewrite this post so that it doesn't read so much like flamebait or a troll, but I'm too lazy.
Sir, I must protest. This link does not redirect you to goatse.cx. Please, won't anyone think of the children???
That was a joke, son.
About as sharp as a bag of potatoes, this one.
Okay, Makarand, that's two articles in a row on the front page. You can stop submitting them now.
What are you, some sort of commie or hippie?
Finally, I now know how to impress that cute girl at the video rental store!
That is so witty. I never get tired of seeing someone write *nix. It never ceases to amuse me. I just love it ever so much. Please continue doing this. Thank you.
p.s. please also include a fake ^H or two in your post next time. I love seeing that refreshing, original joke.
p.p.s you forgot to use M$ or Micro$oft in your post. Please do so next time.
That would have been very cool.
That way, when you were gaming, you could have all the speed you wanted, while risking the occasional BSOD.
I've got WHQL drivers, too, but I can still crash XP. Like I said, it really doesn't happen often. But it's possible.
The NT kernel was good. Then Microsoft moved the GUI into the kernel. We all know what happened after that. Okay, to be fair, the NT kernel is still pretty nice, but it's deeply annoying that Microsoft is so willing to sacrifice stability for a little more speed. I find it difficult to crash Win2k and XP, but it does happen... mostly from PC games.
Yeah. NT on the UDB was actually pretty tolerable. I ran NT4 Server on a 166 MHz 21066 (first generation Alpha). I found it to be quite usable. I didn't keep NT4 on the Alpha for all that long, as this was just an experiment. I had the NT4 disc, I had a UDB, and I had some time to waste.
You have to remember that NT4 was a 32 bit operating system, even on the Alpha. Therefor, you didn't really gain much by going to the Alpha, except for some nice speed boosts (it was definitely the fastest CPU on the market for years).
It was similar to running NT4 on a Pentium Pro 166 or 200.
The biggest problem I had was finding software. However, everyone's favorite telnet app, putty, comes compiled for NT4/Alpha.
The Register previously offered Windows 2000 for the Alpha, if you asked them for it. I never did, since my UDB was seriously underpowered (128MB RAM, 166 MHz).
I don't agree with everything you say, but you are very well-spoken and make me think. That's as much as anyone can hope for on Slashdot, I think. Personally, I think my own style is indistinguishable from trolling. I like to make people think, but I also have too much time on my hands and a perverse sense of humor.
Posting links to goatse.cx doesn't make anyone think, except about how much they hate goatse.cx. Making them think about deeply held (to the point of literal zealotry) beliefs is more than most +5, insightful posts do. It's often the trollish posts that get people thinking.
p2p is ftp for idiots.
Who knows. Maybe there are a lot of idiots in management.
It's overpriced and only good for a SOHO PC.
Well, duh.
Warning!!! Goatse links in the above post!!!
Can it factor large primes in mere seconds? I've designed a processor that can! I'm just looking for investors now...
It's interesting how all the hardware sites lambasted Intel for the design of the Pentium 4, because it didn't have the raw speed of the AMD Athlon or Pentium 3. What made this all rather amusing to me, however, was that these people weren't around to see the evolution of the 386 vs 486, 486 vs Pentium, and, to a lesser extent, the 286 vs 386. In each of these situations, the previous generation of chip was able to eek a few more cycles over the next generation... in the beginning of the next generation's run! Intel has a very strong history of designing chips that ramp up very well (except for their one CPU engineering failure, the Pentium Pro, which was too ambitiously designed).
I wasn't surprised when the AMD Athlon pulled out ahead of the Pentium 4, then fell very far behind. The Athlon was not engineered to ramp up well over 1 GHz. AMD was very foolish to race to that point, seeing as how long it took them to get working silicon at just 2 GHz.
I'm not saying that I bought a Pentium 4, just that I knew it would eventually overtake the Athlon. I'm quite happy with a cheap Athlon, myself. Semiconductors is a soap opera for nerds. That's why I read The Register, not EE Times.
My guess is that there's going to be a lot more consolodation in the semiconductor and memory world. I bet Micron, AMD, Motorola, and Apple are all going to end up merging, buying out, and/or disappearing in the next few months. Maybe HP will buy them all.
I know this is horribly off-topic, but I just wanted to say that it's possibly to have both Homestar Runner and no flash ads. Just delete the flash plug-in from Mozilla (if you even bothered to install it), then use IE to load those few good web sites (ie, Homestar Runner and... uhhh...) that use Flash. Or, if you don't want to use IE, simply keep a backup copy of Mozilla around that has Flash enabled (install it in your home directory).
Yeah, and RMS doesn't have a house. He needs MIT. Maybe we should start calling him MIT/Stallman.
To tell the truth, I don't really remember. I spent a lot of money on buying 512MB RAM, a SCSI card, video card, chassis, etc. I guess altogether, it was probably around $300 for a 266 MHz G3. I was planning on taking it a lot higher, of course, but the low end G3 CPU let me test the components and make sure everything was working. And it was only $20 shipped. However, Apple then announced the 1 GHz PowerMac, and my 266 MHz CPU seemed very, very puny indeed. Well, suffice to say, I stopped investing money in that computer and decided to save up for something a little more powerful.
I did what this article describes. In an effort to minimize my investment, I bought the components individually from ebay and online stores, put it all together, and had a custom PowerMac. The problem is that some of those components aren't brand new, and they may very well fail. Then you're left with a cheap-ass PowerMac that needs a new power supply. And one of the PCI slots is a little flakey. And...
It's easier to just buy a used PowerMac on ebay (or from a friend), which is what I ended up doing after I pieced together the parts individually. I still play around with that Frankenstein Mac, but it's not as useful as the used PowerMac.
However, if you invest in newer parts, I think you'll have better success than me. The stuff I bought was pretty old (and damn cheap).
Farscape sucked, anyways. Who needs another Star Trek ripoff? We've already had a thousand Star Trek shows, Babylon Five, Battlestar Galactica, and a shitload of others.
I'm sick and tired of muppets in space plus humans who have funny noses. I'm glad farscape got cancelled.
Watch -- the Slashdot groupthink will moderate me down into oblivion. But this must be said, because not everyone is sad to see another Trek clone go off the air!