Another issue I found is that it is not possible to cut and paste between X apps and windows apps. So if you are surfing using mozilla or IE and want to paste some command from a howto into your xterm, you have a problem. You can paste into a bash terminal (i.e. outside X).
It does _NOT_ run under Windows 95!! I installed it on my state-of-the-art Windows 95 corporate desktop (can you taste the sarcasm?). Not only did it lock up the machine cold, but attempts to run it gave one of those famous "Linked to missing export FOO in BAR.DLL" which you get when trying to run a compiled-for-NT app under 9x. Well, searching Google turned up that that error is Win95 specific, and that you need to upgrade to 98 for it to work properly. So unless you want to go scrounging around for a DLL (which may break other apps), it doesn't work on 95.
I'll disagree. I've used it, and I'd definitely use it... if my school didn't have a site license for Exceed. I just use Exceed. It's so awesome in a multitude of ways. First, it fixes some bugs I noticed in X11 (try XDMing to a Sun box, log in, and notice that the Welcome to Solaris screen is garbled under X11. Exceed displays it perfectly in true color.) Second, my favourite feature, Exceed lets you use its own window manager... which integrates with windows! What's that mean? Well, instead of having to flip back and forth between a separate window for my unix apps, they all show up on the Windows taskbar along with my Windows apps. Oh, and the CDE bar? It sits right on top of the taskbar! Want to switch from IE on Windows to NEdit? Click.
Sure X11 is pretty stable... but so is Exceed. And for all the folks that are claiming that "X11 is more stable" --- let me tell you, Exceed has never crashed on me, while X11 has crashed numerous times. Plus, I don't care what you say, running a native Windows app is theoretically mucho faster than running X11 through that Cygwin1.dll POSIX patch. Here is an example... Open up NT cmd and type 'dir'. It's instant, right? Now open up bash and type 'ls'.... it's slow as a mofo compared to the former!
Exceed comes with a whole bunch of tools along with it as well... the nice part about it is that I can keep multiple sessions with their own individual settings in.ses files, which I can't easily do in X11. (Making individual batch file _is_ a pain.) If Exceed cost $40, I wouldn't mind buying it... but it doesn't. However, like I said we have a site license, so it's all good with me.
Funny, a Howard Stern fan called CNN pretending to be a witness... said that "an overweight white man with a ponytail" (a la Jackie the Jokeman Martling) "started screaming, 'He took my job! Artie took my job! Artie Lange took my job on the Howard Stern show!'" The CNN reporter was clueless until her producer buzzed her in the ear and told her that it was a crank call. Captain Janks used to be the best at this.
I know this is paranoid, but my past experience has been that even people inside MS use JScript if they can avoid VBScript... unless they're forced to use it for marketing reasons. Wonder who's in charge of this initiative.
IIRC, the ASP pages on microsoft.com use JScript; VBScript is great because if you know VB, you can learn VBScript in an hour.
Going to http://xml.house.gov/Members/mbr107.xml renders a perfectly viewable directory of representatives in Internet Explorer, but Mozilla dumps it all as raw text in one giant paragraph. What gives?!?
You think that's bad? I have to use Windows Fucking 95 at work. Why? Cause I'm just a lowly software writer, not good enough like the pimp sysadmins in IT, I suppose. Oh well, they can suck my balls when I get a job somewhere else.
Well, I can tell you even though I used Apache first, I've been a pretty happy IIS user for a couple of years now. I just have to say that anyone, anyone that runs a web server need to be a vigilant admin, set his server up properly, and keep up-to-date with the security patches. Code Red and friends never compromised my server because I had secured it. The "lock up the server room and throw away the key" syndrome is what causes all this crap to happen. I understand that since on IIS it is easier to get a default setup up and running quickly, the admin behind any old IIS box may not be as knowledgeable as a comparible Unix admin (that not saying that you need a good, smart NT admin if you want to do things right). OTOH, if you have a sloppy Unix admin around, with one of those "Apache is unbreakable cause it's open source" attitudes --- that is what worries me. I think that IIS's past reputation may make that admin a little more likely to visit security update pages, while a sloppy Apache admin just might do a Ron Popeil "set it and forget it" kind of thing. If you ever Netcraft a few big university servers, you'll see that they haven't updated their Apaches. If you get a big server on a big pipe DoSing... well, that's a big problem.
I suppose it is not in the frontpage because this is not exactly interesting news to most of the people.
Are you out of your fucking mind?? NOT interesting news? Please. This is like posting a report about a buffer overflow in the hta parser in IIS on the front page, but never posting a story about Code Red and variants.
This is a really lame attempt at a cover-up, plain and simple. This site it the first to bash IIS, but when the real hole hits, the one that affects the product they all tout as being the best, the one that is appearently used by most of the web servers on the Internet, well, we like to hide that one around here.
Slashdot is finally showing its true colors. This site is about as unbiased as Salon.com.
Slashdot Mirror
Another issue I found is that it is not possible to cut and paste between X apps and windows apps. So if you are surfing using mozilla or IE and want to paste some command from a howto into your xterm, you have a problem. You can paste into a bash terminal (i.e. outside X).
Exceed does this natively, flawlessly.
LET ME CLARIFY:
It does _NOT_ run under Windows 95!! I installed it on my state-of-the-art Windows 95 corporate desktop (can you taste the sarcasm?). Not only did it lock up the machine cold, but attempts to run it gave one of those famous "Linked to missing export FOO in BAR.DLL" which you get when trying to run a compiled-for-NT app under 9x. Well, searching Google turned up that that error is Win95 specific, and that you need to upgrade to 98 for it to work properly. So unless you want to go scrounging around for a DLL (which may break other apps), it doesn't work on 95.
Yeah but Linux doesn't let you go to the compatibility tab, check the "Solaris 7" box, double-click and go, now, does it? ;+)
I'll disagree. I've used it, and I'd definitely use it... if my school didn't have a site license for Exceed. I just use Exceed. It's so awesome in a multitude of ways. First, it fixes some bugs I noticed in X11 (try XDMing to a Sun box, log in, and notice that the Welcome to Solaris screen is garbled under X11. Exceed displays it perfectly in true color.) Second, my favourite feature, Exceed lets you use its own window manager... which integrates with windows! What's that mean? Well, instead of having to flip back and forth between a separate window for my unix apps, they all show up on the Windows taskbar along with my Windows apps. Oh, and the CDE bar? It sits right on top of the taskbar! Want to switch from IE on Windows to NEdit? Click.
.ses files, which I can't easily do in X11. (Making individual batch file _is_ a pain.) If Exceed cost $40, I wouldn't mind buying it... but it doesn't. However, like I said we have a site license, so it's all good with me.
Sure X11 is pretty stable... but so is Exceed. And for all the folks that are claiming that "X11 is more stable" --- let me tell you, Exceed has never crashed on me, while X11 has crashed numerous times. Plus, I don't care what you say, running a native Windows app is theoretically mucho faster than running X11 through that Cygwin1.dll POSIX patch. Here is an example... Open up NT cmd and type 'dir'. It's instant, right? Now open up bash and type 'ls'.... it's slow as a mofo compared to the former!
Exceed comes with a whole bunch of tools along with it as well... the nice part about it is that I can keep multiple sessions with their own individual settings in
Actually, Windows NT 4.0 used to run on MIPS... I wonder if that IS possible?
Anyone up to the challenge?
You seemed to have left out the phrase "Nice mouse mod... for me to poop on! "
Yeah, imagine trying to watch scrambled porn on that tiny LCD screen... it's impossible!
Please go suck a putrid, herpes-infected dick you zealot cocksucker.
IE runs on real Unixes, like Solaris and HP-UX. Grow some pubes, take a shower, and get a life.
I use IE6... =) I was just curious what it would look like in moz... I only use moz for browsing for pr0n... all those tabs!
At least IE has the decency to delimit and color code it in a collapsible tree, unlike moz which mashes it all together.
Funny, a Howard Stern fan called CNN pretending to be a witness... said that "an overweight white man with a ponytail" (a la Jackie the Jokeman Martling) "started screaming, 'He took my job! Artie took my job! Artie Lange took my job on the Howard Stern show!'" The CNN reporter was clueless until her producer buzzed her in the ear and told her that it was a crank call. Captain Janks used to be the best at this.
I know this is paranoid, but my past experience has been that even people inside MS use JScript if they can avoid VBScript... unless they're forced to use it for marketing reasons. Wonder who's in charge of this initiative.
IIRC, the ASP pages on microsoft.com use JScript; VBScript is great because if you know VB, you can learn VBScript in an hour.
Going to http://xml.house.gov/Members/mbr107.xml renders a perfectly viewable directory of representatives in Internet Explorer, but Mozilla dumps it all as raw text in one giant paragraph. What gives?!?
They use their special Google Perpetual Motion machine!
I think it's more around the words of "the drug smugglers have better soft/hardware than software developers do"...
I have a crap p2-233 to work on (running nt4).
You still beat me. I have a P/200 with 95. Jeez.
You think that's bad? I have to use Windows Fucking 95 at work. Why? Cause I'm just a lowly software writer, not good enough like the pimp sysadmins in IT, I suppose. Oh well, they can suck my balls when I get a job somewhere else.
Yeah... this is his scheme behind "Unbreakable Oracle" -- we'll replicate the database across dozens and dozens of XBoxes!
This is a worm spreading via the exploit. It's a totally different story.
Well, if you look and see whose turn it is to post stories... that might answer your question.
Well, I can tell you even though I used Apache first, I've been a pretty happy IIS user for a couple of years now. I just have to say that anyone, anyone that runs a web server need to be a vigilant admin, set his server up properly, and keep up-to-date with the security patches. Code Red and friends never compromised my server because I had secured it. The "lock up the server room and throw away the key" syndrome is what causes all this crap to happen. I understand that since on IIS it is easier to get a default setup up and running quickly, the admin behind any old IIS box may not be as knowledgeable as a comparible Unix admin (that not saying that you need a good, smart NT admin if you want to do things right). OTOH, if you have a sloppy Unix admin around, with one of those "Apache is unbreakable cause it's open source" attitudes --- that is what worries me. I think that IIS's past reputation may make that admin a little more likely to visit security update pages, while a sloppy Apache admin just might do a Ron Popeil "set it and forget it" kind of thing. If you ever Netcraft a few big university servers, you'll see that they haven't updated their Apaches. If you get a big server on a big pipe DoSing... well, that's a big problem.
We'll find out soon enough.
I suppose it is not in the frontpage because this is not exactly interesting news to most of the people.
Are you out of your fucking mind?? NOT interesting news? Please. This is like posting a report about a buffer overflow in the hta parser in IIS on the front page, but never posting a story about Code Red and variants.
This is a really lame attempt at a cover-up, plain and simple. This site it the first to bash IIS, but when the real hole hits, the one that affects the product they all tout as being the best, the one that is appearently used by most of the web servers on the Internet, well, we like to hide that one around here.
Slashdot is finally showing its true colors. This site is about as unbiased as Salon.com.
Have you ever seen that shirt that says "Support Free Software! Send us money!"
I think Michael is trying to steal my identity ;)
Will the good folks at Berkeley be accepting auction bids in grams of pot, or is there actual money involved?
Thanks.