I understand that it *might* look like people are complaining about nothing, but the whole PR stunt that is Firefox Download Day, was defined as being a day when people would all download Firefox so that the Mozilla folks could set a record. So, crazy though this might seem, given that I knew Tuesday 17th June was the download day, I thought, that would be the day I could download Firefox.
Since a lot of people around the global now have to wait late in the day before they can download, the download servers are now likely to have to deal with much more traffic all at once... so it goes slower for everyone, OR crashes altogether.
Not that I'm complaining about Mozilla themselves, or Firefox, or all the fantastic work many people have done to get this working.... but the organisation of this here stunt is a bit, well, crap!
Plus, since I am speaking from "The Future", and have come here to post about the problem, I *must* be right!:D
Am I just being picky, or is it a bit dumb that they didn't make it available for download at 2008-06-17 00:00 ?
For anyone outside the US, we have to wait most of the day before being about to download. Personally, I'm going to leave it a few days in protest at such nonsense.
The only way to hurt an entity like this is through their pocket, so switching to a competitor _does_ make a difference.... but only in the same way a vote does. So not actually that much on an individual level, but collectively it *does* matter and therefore you [as in existing Virgin Media customers] should vote with their wallets if disagree.
On a related note, was it not the newly installed head of Virgin Media who said that he though un-throttled broadband was "a load of bollocks" only a month or so ago? I can't help thinking they're sending out some kind of message....
When it went through ISO I think. They decided that the "Office" bit tied it a bit too much to the MS product of the same name, and so calling it simply "Open XML" was better.
But since this SDK is based on the Office 2007 implementation which isn't the spec that went through ISO, the one that has been named Open XML, and the one that isn't actually a standard anyway.... erm... I think this would be better described as an "Office Open XML SDK"!
I've complained about Apple pricing before, but since I've just purchased a MacBook... [engage fanboyism..]
... they are expensive. But the hardware is good, the design is very good, and the software is fantastic. I think they do represent good value for money provided you value all the things that are good about Apple (the things I mentioned). So, not the best product for all users/occasions, but certainly good overall.
Oh, and the reason for my posting here; I purchased my MacBook on 1st May and I paid £734 (inc. VAT) for a black MacBook. But it's the previous one (1GB RAM, 160GB HD, 2.2GHz processor)... but since the specs are pretty similar to an entry level white MacBook, and since the price was similar, it seemed like a good deal to me.**
So despite the fact that Apple don't change the price of their products over time, perhaps they do lower costs to dealers?
**for reference, the official Apple UK lists prices for *current* MacBooks are (from memory) £699 for the entry level white MacBook and £949 for a black MacBook.
Open source developers just walk away from their hobby. There's no reason to even feel bad about it. I don't believe that lower-level code such as this is just someone's hobby! Most, if not all, people contributing this code will be working within the industry and may well be sponsored by their employer. Not only that, these people are undoubtedly IT nerds through and through, who will at the very least feel personally responsible for any bugs they introduce.
No repercussions? Well, probably not for a single bug, even a big one like this, but on the other hand, you can only screw up so many times before you loose credibility.
Also, in another of your replies, you've implied that anyone can just contribute code and have it accepted. AFAIK this is not the case. You really need to work to gain the respect of your peers in order that they'll even look at your contributions let alone include them. Saying that, not all projects are equal... I suspect many less critical projects would be easier to contribute to.
But again, does this differ on any practical level with commercial software? If I work for (say) MS, and introduce a vulnerability somewhere, it isn't any more likely to be discovered than with FOSS. At least with FOSS, more people *could* look at the code.
I must admit, I'm struggling to understand what point you are trying to make! It is true that a commercial product with a serious bug could impact the business in that they *might* get sued and/or loose market share to a competitor.... *BUT* this doesn't appear to make such a bug any less likely. So, why are you searching for some kind of accountability? How does that help you? What are you looking for in a product?
Lots of people *may* commit crimes. We all *may* and that's why we're free isn't it? The day we don't have the option to _maybe_ commit a crime is surely the day we are no longer free.
Note, that the crime in question here may simply be something that the state deems illegal, for example, plotting a political coup.
If you haven't watched/listened to the video yet, *don't* listen to it through headphones. The sound level is really low, so you'll turn the sound up, and up, and then you'll hear various beeps and Windows sounds come through, really, stupidly loud.
One guy was exposed to vacuum when a pressure suit failed during tests. He was recompressed without incident after about a minute. Don't you mean reinflated?
If they decide to quit supporting OOXML, the OOXML SDK, or fuzzykittens32.lib, guess what? All your code's still going to work. None of your binaries will magically disappear off of the face of the earth. Your "MyOOXMLReader.NET" will still read those same OOXML documents. Provided none of the software stack that *your* binaries are built on require "activation" then, you might be right... unfortunately, some MS software (the Windows OS and Office suite include this, ahem, Genuine Advantage[TM]) does require activation! So you can't be sure your code will work.
Another issue is that without support for the same software stack, you'll be open to any software vulnerabilities, although arguably you *might* be able to mitigate these by running the stack in a VM.
behind a firewall.
in a steal box.
in a bunker.
in the dark.;)
I think this might be the best idea! Largely because as already mentioned, law enforcement may or may not be interested in pursuing the case but if you have a photo of the culprit, you do get the satisfaction of being able to upload their image to Flickr and then post a story here!!:D
And then you _might_ even get your laptop back. Maybe.
Not sure about the graphics issue; there's a hardware test thing on the 8.04 beta CD, so it might be worth running that and filling a report.... although your network problem might prevent that!
I think wireless problems depend on what chipset is in your wireless card. I have an old Netgear PCMCIA card that uses the Madwifi drivers and that works 100% perfectly. This doesn't help your cousin obviously, but I can only suggest people who think they might want to migrate away from Windows at some point should research what hardware to purchase. That way the hardware manufacturers that are not playing nicely with the FOSS folks might get the message!
My cousin tried to get Ubuntu Hardy installed and it came up with 640x480 andno wireless on his laptop. I'm intrigued as to what hardware is in your cousins laptop. I've tried the 8.04 beta on my desktop (nVidia graphics connected to a 1680x1050 LCD) and laptop (old circa 2003 machine, SiS chipset with a 1024x768 screen) and both have booted the Live CD with the correct native resolution.
Seriously, 8.04 is looking *really* good. Even with 7.10, the only issues I have are on my desktop computer where my nVidia graphics were not automatically recognised by the installer, but the 8.04 beta appears to work perfectly. As for my laptop, everything has worked perfectly "out of the box" for quite a number of releases now. Even my wireless works.
Another problem MS will have is if they continue to support a "lite" version of XP and even actively promote it on low end machines, manufacturers of higher-end machines might be a bit pissed if they can't also ship XP when their customers are still demanding it. They'd almost be better off stripping down XP, changing the UI so it fits a smaller screen but has a more Vista-like appearance, and then call it something like Vista-Mobile or something.
On the otherhand, MS are in a world of pain! They're competing for smaller and smaller margins.... and I don't think the manufacturers will continue putting up with tight margins themselves.
I suspect a stripped down Vista, or Windows 7, would not stand a chance of being available this year, but other suppliers (HP for one, and possibly Dell) are releasing Eee competitors nowish (now or within the next 6 months) so MS really needs something that they can realistically get working in time... and I suppose XP currently, nearly, sorta, works. It could use some UI tweaks to work better with the low resolution (by desktop standards) screen. Plus MS need to bundle software to compete with all the typical Linux software... so they need a graphics package (bitmap and vector I guess since Gimp and Inkscape are both pretty solid), they need an Office suite (not sure how well "Works" would run on an Eee).
Slashdot Mirror
Found them!
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/latest-3.0/MD5SUMS
Since there is no existing record, I wouldn't worry too much; they should, set a new world record.... even with the servers down!
Does anyone have a list of MD5s or SHAs for Firefox? Specifically, right now I'd like to check the en-GB Windows .exe version.
Well obviously *some* people do use these so called standards, but if they were any good, then surely more countries would use them?! ;)
I understand that it *might* look like people are complaining about nothing, but the whole PR stunt that is Firefox Download Day, was defined as being a day when people would all download Firefox so that the Mozilla folks could set a record. So, crazy though this might seem, given that I knew Tuesday 17th June was the download day, I thought, that would be the day I could download Firefox.
:D
Since a lot of people around the global now have to wait late in the day before they can download, the download servers are now likely to have to deal with much more traffic all at once... so it goes slower for everyone, OR crashes altogether.
Not that I'm complaining about Mozilla themselves, or Firefox, or all the fantastic work many people have done to get this working.... but the organisation of this here stunt is a bit, well, crap!
Plus, since I am speaking from "The Future", and have come here to post about the problem, I *must* be right!
Okay, so I should've really read the summary before posting.... obviously this time issue has been noted by others
Am I just being picky, or is it a bit dumb that they didn't make it available for download at 2008-06-17 00:00 ?
For anyone outside the US, we have to wait most of the day before being about to download. Personally, I'm going to leave it a few days in protest at such nonsense.
The only way to hurt an entity like this is through their pocket, so switching to a competitor _does_ make a difference.... but only in the same way a vote does. So not actually that much on an individual level, but collectively it *does* matter and therefore you [as in existing Virgin Media customers] should vote with their wallets if disagree.
On a related note, was it not the newly installed head of Virgin Media who said that he though un-throttled broadband was "a load of bollocks" only a month or so ago? I can't help thinking they're sending out some kind of message....
When it went through ISO I think. They decided that the "Office" bit tied it a bit too much to the MS product of the same name, and so calling it simply "Open XML" was better.
:D
But since this SDK is based on the Office 2007 implementation which isn't the spec that went through ISO, the one that has been named Open XML, and the one that isn't actually a standard anyway.... erm... I think this would be better described as an "Office Open XML SDK"!
Hope that clears up any confusion!
Better yet, just dump the oil into the water in the first place and don't bother with oil-tankers!
Flash + you tube + Firefox 2 on Ubuntu 7.10 = frequent crash
That's *without* pulseaudio's help!
I've complained about Apple pricing before, but since I've just purchased a MacBook... [engage fanboyism..]
... they are expensive. But the hardware is good, the design is very good, and the software is fantastic. I think they do represent good value for money provided you value all the things that are good about Apple (the things I mentioned). So, not the best product for all users/occasions, but certainly good overall.
Oh, and the reason for my posting here; I purchased my MacBook on 1st May and I paid £734 (inc. VAT) for a black MacBook. But it's the previous one (1GB RAM, 160GB HD, 2.2GHz processor)... but since the specs are pretty similar to an entry level white MacBook, and since the price was similar, it seemed like a good deal to me.**
So despite the fact that Apple don't change the price of their products over time, perhaps they do lower costs to dealers?
**for reference, the official Apple UK lists prices for *current* MacBooks are (from memory) £699 for the entry level white MacBook and £949 for a black MacBook.
No repercussions? Well, probably not for a single bug, even a big one like this, but on the other hand, you can only screw up so many times before you loose credibility.
Also, in another of your replies, you've implied that anyone can just contribute code and have it accepted. AFAIK this is not the case. You really need to work to gain the respect of your peers in order that they'll even look at your contributions let alone include them. Saying that, not all projects are equal... I suspect many less critical projects would be easier to contribute to.
But again, does this differ on any practical level with commercial software? If I work for (say) MS, and introduce a vulnerability somewhere, it isn't any more likely to be discovered than with FOSS. At least with FOSS, more people *could* look at the code.
I must admit, I'm struggling to understand what point you are trying to make! It is true that a commercial product with a serious bug could impact the business in that they *might* get sued and/or loose market share to a competitor.... *BUT* this doesn't appear to make such a bug any less likely. So, why are you searching for some kind of accountability? How does that help you? What are you looking for in a product?
Note, that the crime in question here may simply be something that the state deems illegal, for example, plotting a political coup.
Another question is why didn't they down-link the data immediately after collection? Surely they have enough bandwidth to ISS to allow this.
I've never heard that before but you've made me extremely curious.
Ditto. But I do recall when I was young being told not to drop magnets as they loose their magnetism a bit.
...I'll fucking kill them!
If you haven't watched/listened to the video yet, *don't* listen to it through headphones. The sound level is really low, so you'll turn the sound up, and up, and then you'll hear various beeps and Windows sounds come through, really, stupidly loud.
I'll get my coat....
Another issue is that without support for the same software stack, you'll be open to any software vulnerabilities, although arguably you *might* be able to mitigate these by running the stack in a VM.
behind a firewall.
in a steal box.
in a bunker.
in the dark.
I think this might be the best idea! Largely because as already mentioned, law enforcement may or may not be interested in pursuing the case but if you have a photo of the culprit, you do get the satisfaction of being able to upload their image to Flickr and then post a story here!! :D
And then you _might_ even get your laptop back. Maybe.
Not sure about the graphics issue; there's a hardware test thing on the 8.04 beta CD, so it might be worth running that and filling a report.... although your network problem might prevent that!
I think wireless problems depend on what chipset is in your wireless card. I have an old Netgear PCMCIA card that uses the Madwifi drivers and that works 100% perfectly. This doesn't help your cousin obviously, but I can only suggest people who think they might want to migrate away from Windows at some point should research what hardware to purchase. That way the hardware manufacturers that are not playing nicely with the FOSS folks might get the message!
You haven't used Ubuntu recently have you?
Seriously, 8.04 is looking *really* good. Even with 7.10, the only issues I have are on my desktop computer where my nVidia graphics were not automatically recognised by the installer, but the 8.04 beta appears to work perfectly. As for my laptop, everything has worked perfectly "out of the box" for quite a number of releases now. Even my wireless works.
Another problem MS will have is if they continue to support a "lite" version of XP and even actively promote it on low end machines, manufacturers of higher-end machines might be a bit pissed if they can't also ship XP when their customers are still demanding it. They'd almost be better off stripping down XP, changing the UI so it fits a smaller screen but has a more Vista-like appearance, and then call it something like Vista-Mobile or something.
On the otherhand, MS are in a world of pain! They're competing for smaller and smaller margins.... and I don't think the manufacturers will continue putting up with tight margins themselves.
I suspect a stripped down Vista, or Windows 7, would not stand a chance of being available this year, but other suppliers (HP for one, and possibly Dell) are releasing Eee competitors nowish (now or within the next 6 months) so MS really needs something that they can realistically get working in time... and I suppose XP currently, nearly, sorta, works. It could use some UI tweaks to work better with the low resolution (by desktop standards) screen. Plus MS need to bundle software to compete with all the typical Linux software... so they need a graphics package (bitmap and vector I guess since Gimp and Inkscape are both pretty solid), they need an Office suite (not sure how well "Works" would run on an Eee).