Hm... not such a good comparison, between two different operating systems. I've also heard that, much like Firefox, OO is better on Windows.
Having using both on OS X, Windows is slow and buggy. OO is more so. Both are crap in speed, stability and ease of use compared to some of the alternative word processors that are available. Unfortunately Office wins on features, with OO close behind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X: "Mac OS X (pronounced/mæk o s tn/ mak oh es ten)[6] is a series of Unix-based operating systems and graphical user interfaces...."
iPhone apps have to ask to use the GPS. Apple does scan every app store submission to see if it has the ability to collect data it really shouldn't.
RIM appears to have taken the "here are the tools, protect thyself" approach. Apple has taken the "we'll do it for you" approach. Google has done a little from a and a little from b but a half assed job of each.
The majority of the general cell phone using population is always going to be ignorant of security, and is always going to want someone else to deal with it.
iOS is also quite secure by design. It is based on a real UNIX that also has very few wild viruses. iOS has had a couple of bad remote exploits in it's existence, both of which were fixed pretty fast. Android (just like Linux and any other OS) has some too. Fixing them in Android might actually be problemmatic as many carriers seem to take the view that os upgrades are optional. Both systems are inherently as vulnerable to trojans as anything else. The difference is, Apple does a pretty thorough job of prescreening, and doesn't let you install pretty.scr that your friend emailed you. Google doesn't. And tossing your users out to look after their own security doesn't work. Otherwise Windows would be the safest OS.
Google is going to have to step up before something bad and widespread happens. If they don't, someone else, probably the carriers, will do it for them. And if you think Apple is repressive, you've clearly forgotten what (popular) cell phones were like before the iPhone.
Apple also has a vested interest in keeping their users (the majority that actually counts) very happy. They need to keep selling devices, so they keep making money.
Google doesn't have that incentive to nearly such a degree. They only make money off the ads and the information they can gather. Google is probably irritated that the make a buck quick scanners are screwing their long game.
I'd think you were agreeing with me, that characterizing Tylenol as "ridiculously easy to overdose on" is bogus nonsense, but you're the one who originally posted it!
I guess if you follow the TV sitcom dose measurement convention of "just take a handful or two."
If you're able to read, do read the bottle, follow instructions and can tell time, you should be just fine. Tylenol was the standard over the counter painkiller when I was a kid and everybody managed to avoid the "ridiculously easy" overdose.
Even the kid who tried to overdose on purpose in high school didn't actually manage to do herself too much damage. A few years after graduation she did manage to find something stronger that would do the job properly.
We get excited because we KNOW that liquid water is a prerequisite for the only kind of life we've ever found. There's a good reason for getting excited when we find planets that have a chance of being similar to Earth.
Your criticism is really about automatically dismissing the possibilities of life on planets that are very unlikely to be similar to Earth. Which I agree with.
I refrain from naming products for general public consumption because I'm not good at it. That's what people who take communications or marketing in school are good for.
"The oft-cited report about infant mortality in the US leaves out some important factors -- namely that socio-economic diversity in the US, and racial heterogenoy correlate with and explain some of our increased infant mortality."
Interesting. I look at that statement and think makes poor performance worse. You seem to look at it and reach exactly the opposite conclusion.
You can't prove that their is a change either. You CAN show that there is certain, arbitrarily small chance that there is (or is not) a change. You are correct, the latter case has to assume a certain minimum magnitude of change but that can also be made arbitrarily small.
The evidence from their four experiments is somewhat contradictory, but two of them show a a p-value of 0.02 or less (that's in the paper, if you care to go look). That's (roughly) a 2% chance that there is no change, and a 98% chance that there is. In physics that's not sufficient to claim there is a change, but it's certainly not sufficient to conclude there isn't one.
Slashdot Mirror
"what's the status of voip over jabber"
Except for GTalk, text over Jabber is still on life support.
Hm... not such a good comparison, between two different operating systems. I've also heard that, much like Firefox, OO is better on Windows.
Having using both on OS X, Windows is slow and buggy. OO is more so. Both are crap in speed, stability and ease of use compared to some of the alternative word processors that are available. Unfortunately Office wins on features, with OO close behind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X: "Mac OS X (pronounced /mæk o s tn/ mak oh es ten)[6] is a series of Unix-based operating systems and graphical user interfaces...."
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2007/08/mac-os-x-leopard-receives-unix-03-certification.ars: Mac OS X Leopard receives UNIX 03 certification
Oh, and mustn't forget:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_virus: "As of 2006, there are relatively few security exploits targeting Mac OS X (with a Unix-based file system and kernel)."
Well, you're right about something, one of us should have done his research before commenting.
iPhone apps have to ask to use the GPS. Apple does scan every app store submission to see if it has the ability to collect data it really shouldn't.
RIM appears to have taken the "here are the tools, protect thyself" approach. Apple has taken the "we'll do it for you" approach. Google has done a little from a and a little from b but a half assed job of each.
The majority of the general cell phone using population is always going to be ignorant of security, and is always going to want someone else to deal with it.
iOS is also quite secure by design. It is based on a real UNIX that also has very few wild viruses. iOS has had a couple of bad remote exploits in it's existence, both of which were fixed pretty fast. Android (just like Linux and any other OS) has some too. Fixing them in Android might actually be problemmatic as many carriers seem to take the view that os upgrades are optional. Both systems are inherently as vulnerable to trojans as anything else. The difference is, Apple does a pretty thorough job of prescreening, and doesn't let you install pretty.scr that your friend emailed you. Google doesn't. And tossing your users out to look after their own security doesn't work. Otherwise Windows would be the safest OS.
Google is going to have to step up before something bad and widespread happens. If they don't, someone else, probably the carriers, will do it for them. And if you think Apple is repressive, you've clearly forgotten what (popular) cell phones were like before the iPhone.
Apple also has a vested interest in keeping their users (the majority that actually counts) very happy. They need to keep selling devices, so they keep making money.
Google doesn't have that incentive to nearly such a degree. They only make money off the ads and the information they can gather. Google is probably irritated that the make a buck quick scanners are screwing their long game.
Actually, it sounds like it would suit most of the powers that be just fine.
1122 times a second sounds like one rotation in something less than a millisecond, no?
I'm curious, what's the harmful bogus nonsense?
I'd think you were agreeing with me, that characterizing Tylenol as "ridiculously easy to overdose on" is bogus nonsense, but you're the one who originally posted it!
I guess if you follow the TV sitcom dose measurement convention of "just take a handful or two."
If you're able to read, do read the bottle, follow instructions and can tell time, you should be just fine. Tylenol was the standard over the counter painkiller when I was a kid and everybody managed to avoid the "ridiculously easy" overdose.
Even the kid who tried to overdose on purpose in high school didn't actually manage to do herself too much damage. A few years after graduation she did manage to find something stronger that would do the job properly.
We get excited because we KNOW that liquid water is a prerequisite for the only kind of life we've ever found. There's a good reason for getting excited when we find planets that have a chance of being similar to Earth.
Your criticism is really about automatically dismissing the possibilities of life on planets that are very unlikely to be similar to Earth. Which I agree with.
Why would it blow up? It would just get hot and expand.
It's only the coolest tag because pushing around virtual blocks in a computer game doesn't qualify for it.
Or Top Office.
Yes, that is the problem. The solution is to hire or otherwise find one of those people. Not make up more stupid names.
I refrain from naming products for general public consumption because I'm not good at it. That's what people who take communications or marketing in school are good for.
Ah, name your office suite the same way you'd name a back alley shop selling cheap knockoffs. Good idea.
Isn't everything openly despised in America also secretly admired?
The whole thing doesn't make any sense if you pronounce "libre" properly in the first place.
"I think the biggest problem with LibreOffice is that it's ugly."
You forgot slow. And badly designed. When you make Office (okay, Office on the Mac) look svelte and user friendly you've got problems.
If you live in a community where the thieves contribute more than the non-theives, then yes, definitely.
Not much. Kind of a bummer if the asteroid isn't nice enough to land in an uninhabited part of Siberia though.
"The oft-cited report about infant mortality in the US leaves out some important factors -- namely that socio-economic diversity in the US, and racial heterogenoy correlate with and explain some of our increased infant mortality."
Interesting. I look at that statement and think makes poor performance worse. You seem to look at it and reach exactly the opposite conclusion.
Sure! You could buy a pay-per-view box from your cable provider. Oh, wait....
The protons in an accelerator move a hell of a lot closer to the speed of light than they do to the speed of sound (in any imaginable substance).
It is accurate.
You can't prove that their is a change either. You CAN show that there is certain, arbitrarily small chance that there is (or is not) a change. You are correct, the latter case has to assume a certain minimum magnitude of change but that can also be made arbitrarily small.
The evidence from their four experiments is somewhat contradictory, but two of them show a a p-value of 0.02 or less (that's in the paper, if you care to go look). That's (roughly) a 2% chance that there is no change, and a 98% chance that there is. In physics that's not sufficient to claim there is a change, but it's certainly not sufficient to conclude there isn't one.