Apple and Microsoft aren't enemies; they have patent cross licensing agreements and they are in different markets. All this Apple vs Microsoft bluster is more marketing gimmick than reality. Microsoft likes Apple as the token competitor and Apple like Microsoft because it validates their proprietary approach to software.
I agree with that as far as traditional desktop/laptop computers go -- Apple don't really compete with MS, but instead sell high-end, high-margin hardware -- but with music players/phones/tablets/set-top boxes, it's all different. Apple is making MS look like the dumb, lumbering dinosaur it is, whilst building their own walled garden / revenue streams and being apparently very successful at it.
I don't disagree that Android is a threat to Apple though, and arguably to MS too... I say arguably because MS are probably screwed in mobile space regardless. So MS probably just want to come to an "arrangement" with Motorola so they get a slice of the action, whereas Apple is more likely to try to stifle competition. I'm guessing anyway!:D
Not sure in Sky's case, but in BT's case, they've doubley cocked up by sending the information to ACS:Law via an unencrypted email attachement. This, according to the BBC, means BT "appear to be in contempt of a high court order" since the initial request specified that the data be supplied as an encrypted Excel spreadsheet on a CD or other digital media.
So, one "Prakash Mistry", a lawyer working for BT who sent the unencrypted data to ACS:Law has presumably got himself stuck neck deep in shit... although presumably he had to ask IT for the data, so maybe they're in the shit too? Shame that these particular peoples were almost certainly not being particularly evil, just a bit dumb, and now they're going to get beaten up pretty bad in the cross fire.
I can't believe how hilariously this is panning out though -- Andrew Crossley must be seriously regretting his comments. Ha ha!!:D
There is a lot of noise on the Ubuntu forums, but I can't help thinking that it doesn't help that that forum (and soooo many others) have a useless search faciility -- if I search for "term1 term2" it'll bring up threads that mention either term. If I use Google instead, and search (say):
"ubuntu 9.10" foobar
it'll bring up pages for different versions of Ubuntu, because rather brilliantly, the pages on Ubuntu forums mention loads of other things on the same page, e.g. the Ubuntu version each user uses.
So I can kind of understand why people end up posting the same questions over and over!
I think some flash apps are worse than others. I used to be rocking a Celeron 2.8GHz (with 2GB RAM + nVidia 6200) until last year, and that was okay with BBC iPlayer and YouTube (provided there weren't any CPU heavy adverts on the page), but some websites with embedded flash-video were unusable. And whilst the hardware I was using wasn't current, it shouldn't have been so poor as to not work.
But I should stress just how well the BBC iPlayer always worked... it did seem considerably better than most other flash video apps.
So my point here is that it's likely not that flash is so bad, but more that most websites with embedded flash expect people to be running modern laptop/desktop hardware. I think Adobe should provide a CPU/resource restricted test environment to try to encourage better flash apps.
If that really is the price, they'll have a tough time competing with anything... I mean, the iPad is not badly priced for an Apple device, and the iPod Touch, whilst obviously being smaller and not having 3G, is still considerably cheaper.
Also, Archos have a few new Android devices out soon, one of which is sub-£100 (£99.99 I think!), which is probably more on a par with the iPod Touch (not the new 4th-Gen model, but the previous ones) in terms of spec, so not as good as the Galaxy Tab, but it's *FAR* cheaper.
The main down-side is that I _believe_ that Google only allow access to the Android App-store for phone type devices, so the Galaxy Tab would qualify where the Archos does not. I might be wrong about this though!!
But the SATA cable in question was on a NAS box which was feeding data to Malcolm's "Naim HDX/DAC/XPS", so it is a bit of a stretch to suggest that EMI noise from the cheapy SATA cable was interfering with the audio output of the Naim kit.
But for that reason, Google presumably remove images out of courtesy rather than because of a legal requirement? And surely that's a nice way to behave?
Seriously, the more exposed our lives become, the more we're going to appreciate people behaving "nicely". Yes, there's no legal reason to "expect" this, which is where there is a distinction between people behaving nicely or not.
And if so many people do act like Jens, and other people decide to try to make this illegal, we'll all be up in arms about our rights being trodden on!
I'm guessing there are specific buildings that Jens feels should be included, and perhaps there's a case for those. But to say you intend capturing *everything* is just dumb, and a bit shitty IMHO!
IANAL, but the law is not as clear as you would like to believe (and I used to believe). If it was this simple lawyers would go broke, so there is a grey area where if your code requires other code it could under some circumstances be considered a derivative work. (the conditions are not clearly defined, but after giving your lawyer lots of money, your lawyer should be able to give you a guess at how much it will cost for you get a definitive answer for your specific case.)
But WordPress requires PHP to work, and PHP isn't GPLed!
BTW, if you really want to fuck around with people who have this perverse view of what a derived work is, write a new system that is compatible with WordPress plugins. Then all WP plugins will automagically and retroactively become derived works of your program in addition to WordPress itself. License your program in a way that is incompatible with GPL and then you'll end up with a beautiful paradox. Their heads will explode, we can hose the mess away, and all will be well again.
I can't help wondering if there isn't a slight issue already. As I understand it, end-user installs WordPress, end-user installs theme by dropping theme files into relevant directory, WordPress then discovers the theme and presents it as an option to the end-user, end-user selects the theme to enable it, and *then* WordPress in the first instance makes a call to the theme to get it to register! So surely by Matt Mullenweg's logic, WordPress is a derivative of the theme and should abide by it's licence?
I've often thought that the problem with OEMs selling Linux is that they try to sell it cheaper than Windows. I can't help thinking that Dell would be better shipping Ubuntu on their nicer looking hardware (e.g. Dell Vostro V13 which isn't expensive and it looks quite nice) and then charge a premium for it -- explain it isn't Windows, and explain it is a robust OS which is perfect for most home users. Because it is!
I mean... basically, this is what Apple does and it seems to be working well for them. Instead, pretty much all the OEMs see their margins getting squeezed and yet none seem to be able to think of any new ideas. Dell's best idea is to charge for customised covers for their machines... which isn't a bad idea, but really it isn't gone to save the company. And where Sony produce nice looking hardware, when netbooks started to take off, one of their execs stated that he thought it was the start of a "race to the bottom" because all he could see was a price war I guess.
And before anyone says... but then people would buy a Windows machine and install Ubuntu on it themselves... who cares? Dell would still profit either way and most users aren't smart enough to do that.
I've done a test install, but I noticed there's a problem with Open Office where if I enable the quickstarter, Ubuntu won't shutdown! I have to right click the quickstarter icon and get it quit that way, and *then* the OS will shutdown.
Also, no uber-important, but the same quickstarter icon has a white background. And before you say, "well that's because the new theme is dark", I currently use 9.10 with the New Wave theme which is also dark.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple and Microsoft aren't enemies; they have patent cross licensing agreements and they are in different markets. All this Apple vs Microsoft bluster is more marketing gimmick than reality. Microsoft likes Apple as the token competitor and Apple like Microsoft because it validates their proprietary approach to software.
I agree with that as far as traditional desktop/laptop computers go -- Apple don't really compete with MS, but instead sell high-end, high-margin hardware -- but with music players/phones/tablets/set-top boxes, it's all different. Apple is making MS look like the dumb, lumbering dinosaur it is, whilst building their own walled garden / revenue streams and being apparently very successful at it.
:D
I don't disagree that Android is a threat to Apple though, and arguably to MS too... I say arguably because MS are probably screwed in mobile space regardless. So MS probably just want to come to an "arrangement" with Motorola so they get a slice of the action, whereas Apple is more likely to try to stifle competition. I'm guessing anyway!
Not sure in Sky's case, but in BT's case, they've doubley cocked up by sending the information to ACS:Law via an unencrypted email attachement. This, according to the BBC, means BT "appear to be in contempt of a high court order" since the initial request specified that the data be supplied as an encrypted Excel spreadsheet on a CD or other digital media.
:D
So, one "Prakash Mistry", a lawyer working for BT who sent the unencrypted data to ACS:Law has presumably got himself stuck neck deep in shit... although presumably he had to ask IT for the data, so maybe they're in the shit too? Shame that these particular peoples were almost certainly not being particularly evil, just a bit dumb, and now they're going to get beaten up pretty bad in the cross fire.
I can't believe how hilariously this is panning out though -- Andrew Crossley must be seriously regretting his comments. Ha ha!!
Maybe it's my eyes but isn't the picture in the linked article showing a small, squat, bird-like creature, surfing on the ocean?
Or perhaps I've not been keeping up with the latest Mars news!
Oh wait, you meant that Wing Commander ran great in a different OS that most people don't install by default just to play ancient games.
Irony ahoy!!
There is a lot of noise on the Ubuntu forums, but I can't help thinking that it doesn't help that that forum (and soooo many others) have a useless search faciility -- if I search for "term1 term2" it'll bring up threads that mention either term. If I use Google instead, and search (say): "ubuntu 9.10" foobar it'll bring up pages for different versions of Ubuntu, because rather brilliantly, the pages on Ubuntu forums mention loads of other things on the same page, e.g. the Ubuntu version each user uses.
So I can kind of understand why people end up posting the same questions over and over!
Ahhh.... so you have access to the time even when you're away from home? Clever! ;)
I think some flash apps are worse than others. I used to be rocking a Celeron 2.8GHz (with 2GB RAM + nVidia 6200) until last year, and that was okay with BBC iPlayer and YouTube (provided there weren't any CPU heavy adverts on the page), but some websites with embedded flash-video were unusable. And whilst the hardware I was using wasn't current, it shouldn't have been so poor as to not work.
But I should stress just how well the BBC iPlayer always worked... it did seem considerably better than most other flash video apps.
So my point here is that it's likely not that flash is so bad, but more that most websites with embedded flash expect people to be running modern laptop/desktop hardware. I think Adobe should provide a CPU/resource restricted test environment to try to encourage better flash apps.
If that really is the price, they'll have a tough time competing with anything... I mean, the iPad is not badly priced for an Apple device, and the iPod Touch, whilst obviously being smaller and not having 3G, is still considerably cheaper.
Also, Archos have a few new Android devices out soon, one of which is sub-£100 (£99.99 I think!), which is probably more on a par with the iPod Touch (not the new 4th-Gen model, but the previous ones) in terms of spec, so not as good as the Galaxy Tab, but it's *FAR* cheaper.
The main down-side is that I _believe_ that Google only allow access to the Android App-store for phone type devices, so the Galaxy Tab would qualify where the Archos does not. I might be wrong about this though!!
I've arrived here late, so the hifiwigwam thread has gone, but here's the google-cached version.
But the SATA cable in question was on a NAS box which was feeding data to Malcolm's "Naim HDX/DAC/XPS", so it is a bit of a stretch to suggest that EMI noise from the cheapy SATA cable was interfering with the audio output of the Naim kit.
But for that reason, Google presumably remove images out of courtesy rather than because of a legal requirement? And surely that's a nice way to behave?
Seriously, the more exposed our lives become, the more we're going to appreciate people behaving "nicely". Yes, there's no legal reason to "expect" this, which is where there is a distinction between people behaving nicely or not.
And if so many people do act like Jens, and other people decide to try to make this illegal, we'll all be up in arms about our rights being trodden on!
I'm guessing there are specific buildings that Jens feels should be included, and perhaps there's a case for those. But to say you intend capturing *everything* is just dumb, and a bit shitty IMHO!
uniquely suited to compromise this persons account
I've never heard it called that before!
The only thing I ever did for them was looking for Steve Fosset's plane / crash site. And that was quite obviously not for the money.
Especially since you didn't even manage to find it! ;)
So they've shielded all the electronics, but won't the solar panels get damaged by the radiation?
IANAL, but the law is not as clear as you would like to believe (and I used to believe). If it was this simple lawyers would go broke, so there is a grey area where if your code requires other code it could under some circumstances be considered a derivative work. (the conditions are not clearly defined, but after giving your lawyer lots of money, your lawyer should be able to give you a guess at how much it will cost for you get a definitive answer for your specific case.)
But WordPress requires PHP to work, and PHP isn't GPLed!
BTW, if you really want to fuck around with people who have this perverse view of what a derived work is, write a new system that is compatible with WordPress plugins. Then all WP plugins will automagically and retroactively become derived works of your program in addition to WordPress itself. License your program in a way that is incompatible with GPL and then you'll end up with a beautiful paradox. Their heads will explode, we can hose the mess away, and all will be well again.
I can't help wondering if there isn't a slight issue already. As I understand it, end-user installs WordPress, end-user installs theme by dropping theme files into relevant directory, WordPress then discovers the theme and presents it as an option to the end-user, end-user selects the theme to enable it, and *then* WordPress in the first instance makes a call to the theme to get it to register! So surely by Matt Mullenweg's logic, WordPress is a derivative of the theme and should abide by it's licence?
I've often thought that the problem with OEMs selling Linux is that they try to sell it cheaper than Windows. I can't help thinking that Dell would be better shipping Ubuntu on their nicer looking hardware (e.g. Dell Vostro V13 which isn't expensive and it looks quite nice) and then charge a premium for it -- explain it isn't Windows, and explain it is a robust OS which is perfect for most home users. Because it is!
I mean... basically, this is what Apple does and it seems to be working well for them. Instead, pretty much all the OEMs see their margins getting squeezed and yet none seem to be able to think of any new ideas. Dell's best idea is to charge for customised covers for their machines... which isn't a bad idea, but really it isn't gone to save the company. And where Sony produce nice looking hardware, when netbooks started to take off, one of their execs stated that he thought it was the start of a "race to the bottom" because all he could see was a price war I guess.
And before anyone says... but then people would buy a Windows machine and install Ubuntu on it themselves... who cares? Dell would still profit either way and most users aren't smart enough to do that.
"driver error" or "a driver error"?
Good thing you didn't actually link to megavideo there -- we'd be certain to loose slashdot if you had!
They just "think" they're good, and that alone makes them this hugely profitable global company? Cool!!
What the hell is Google going to do? Beat them up?
Welcome to GoogleBank(TM) [BETA]! ;)
And the funny thing is... as much as I do worry that Google knows too much, I'd still trust them *vastly* more than any existing bank.
This is a firm but fair response to everything that is Facebook. I don't think anyone could have a problem with this.
:D
Proceed!
Any idea why they don't just use percentages instead rather than tying the percentage to a letter?
I've done a test install, but I noticed there's a problem with Open Office where if I enable the quickstarter, Ubuntu won't shutdown! I have to right click the quickstarter icon and get it quit that way, and *then* the OS will shutdown.
Also, no uber-important, but the same quickstarter icon has a white background. And before you say, "well that's because the new theme is dark", I currently use 9.10 with the New Wave theme which is also dark.
Nice comment you got there.... shame if someone mod'ed it down!