I can't say I noticed a difference in quality between the shots containing men and women. What I did notice is that any scene with some kind of special effect was noticeably lower resolution. I figured it was just an artifact of whatever new-fangled (at the time) digital special effects process they used.
Hardly. It only works with about one GTK+ theme. Back when I used Industrial, java would spit out errors in the console about how the GTK+ theme was unsupported, and the program would look like crap. These days I use Clearlooks, and get the same behaviour.
Re:Distribution on Windows
on
Why Use GTK+?
·
· Score: 1
Windows users get confused if there isn't an installer. They generally can't comprehend that you can run software without 'installing' it.
Only because they didn't lobby to have cars declared illegal.
Re:I don't want to be stuck with one..
on
Pro C#
·
· Score: 1
How can they make Mono useless by 'changing their code base'?
If they alter anything in the standardised bits of.NET, then they will break their own applications running on their own.NET implementation.
You are correct that ECMA is a bit pants, but you didn't have anything to say againt the ISO standardisation process that was mentioned (although I was not aware that Microsoft were attempting to get.NET standardised by the ISO).
Most of the individuals I deal with within my family and friends network use the free, web based email services(most of them hotmail) and can't use encryption/signing to begin with.
It's not exactly very difficult to copy the encrypted text into a web form and hit submit...
Of course, that's even easier. I wouldn't exactly call 'nv' open source though. It sounds like they are pretty much unmaintainable by people who don't work for Nvidia... see the thread starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/02/msg00 309.html and continuing to the next month (URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/03/ threads.html)
Linux is only a kernel. I would be interested to see a comparison between the amount and severity of security flaws found in Linux compared to the amount found in the NT kernel.
$ dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1M count=1 | xxd > data 1+0 records in 1+0 records out 1048576 bytes transferred in 0.614494 seconds (1706405 bytes/sec)
$ time xterm -fa Monospace -fs 8 -e cat data
real 1m25.087s user 0m4.145s sys 0m0.379s
$ time gnome-terminal -e 'cat data'
real 0m5.292s user 0m3.348s sys 0m0.200s
Once both terminals use the same font rendering system (Xft), the same font (Bitstream Vera Sans Mono, 8 points) and the same window size (80x24), gnome-terminal (version 2.12.0) is must faster than xterm (version 240)! In addition, xterm flickers like hell whereas gnome-terminal's display is rock steady.
Remember that Microsoft own a lot of patents in the 3d graphics field. Perhaps their licensing policy prevents licensees from disclosing their hardware specifications to third parties--effectively preventing the creation of Free Software drivers.
If you want to run xterm with decent fonts (via Freetype, via Xft) then you take a huge speed hit. I think Xgl speeds up RENDER, which will speed up the drawing by Xft of anti-aliased fonts.
I always thought gnome-terminal was innately slow, until I found that the lack of speed is due to Freetype drawomg anti-aliased fonts. If I fire up an xterm -fa monaco, xterm runs even slower than gnome-terminal!
Slashdot Mirror
I can't say I noticed a difference in quality between the shots containing men and women. What I did notice is that any scene with some kind of special effect was noticeably lower resolution. I figured it was just an artifact of whatever new-fangled (at the time) digital special effects process they used.
Hardly. It only works with about one GTK+ theme. Back when I used Industrial, java would spit out errors in the console about how the GTK+ theme was unsupported, and the program would look like crap. These days I use Clearlooks, and get the same behaviour.
Windows users get confused if there isn't an installer. They generally can't comprehend that you can run software without 'installing' it.
/usr/bin/skype: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.0, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped
Only because they didn't lobby to have cars declared illegal.
How can they make Mono useless by 'changing their code base'?
.NET, then they will break their own applications running on their own .NET implementation.
.NET standardised by the ISO).
If they alter anything in the standardised bits of
You are correct that ECMA is a bit pants, but you didn't have anything to say againt the ISO standardisation process that was mentioned (although I was not aware that Microsoft were attempting to get
Like what?
Do you believe that sshing to another host makes you a target?
What about connecting to your IMAP server with TLS?
What about https?
1. HTML email is shit.
2. It seems to handle attachments just fine in my experience--which is all an HTML message is.
Like EVM2K3? :)
More about this phenomenon: http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
You should read http://lxr.linux.no/source/Documentation/stable_ap i_nonsense.txt.
Of course, that's even easier. I wouldn't exactly call 'nv' open source though. It sounds like they are pretty much unmaintainable by people who don't work for Nvidia... see the thread starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/02/msg00 309.html and continuing to the next month (URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/03/ threads.html)
Linux is only a kernel. I would be interested to see a comparison between the amount and severity of security flaws found in Linux compared to the amount found in the NT kernel.
Well then, frankly, you must have fucked up.
e rformance.html is the blog post that triggered me to perform my own experiment.
$ dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1M count=1 | xxd > data
1+0 records in
1+0 records out
1048576 bytes transferred in 0.614494 seconds (1706405 bytes/sec)
$ time xterm -fa Monospace -fs 8 -e cat data
real 1m25.087s
user 0m4.145s
sys 0m0.379s
$ time gnome-terminal -e 'cat data'
real 0m5.292s
user 0m3.348s
sys 0m0.200s
Once both terminals use the same font rendering system (Xft), the same font (Bitstream Vera Sans Mono, 8 points) and the same window size (80x24), gnome-terminal (version 2.12.0) is must faster than xterm (version 240)! In addition, xterm flickers like hell whereas gnome-terminal's display is rock steady.
I think http://mces.blogspot.com/2005/10/gnome-terminal-p
Digital signatures?
During this time Microsoft bought a *lot* of 3d acceleration patents from SGI....
Thanks for such an informative post. If only this information was actually present in the Xorg documentation!
Half-Life 2 isn't going to be ported to Linux any time soon anyway.
Remember that Microsoft own a lot of patents in the 3d graphics field. Perhaps their licensing policy prevents licensees from disclosing their hardware specifications to third parties--effectively preventing the creation of Free Software drivers.
If you want to run xterm with decent fonts (via Freetype, via Xft) then you take a huge speed hit. I think Xgl speeds up RENDER, which will speed up the drawing by Xft of anti-aliased fonts.
I always thought gnome-terminal was innately slow, until I found that the lack of speed is due to Freetype drawomg anti-aliased fonts. If I fire up an xterm -fa monaco, xterm runs even slower than gnome-terminal!
Good god, why do people put up with this crap!