Is this another problem with unescaped quotes? When will people learn? Not an hour goes by that a system doesn't get attacked by SQL injection attacks. Why do programmers continue to not use things like prepared statements which are invulnerable against such attacks. I blame it on the people writing the tutorials. Every beginner tutorial on the web shows queries being constructed at runtime, and doesn't have any mention of how insecure doing things like this is. It's hard to break the habit once you've been programming like that for so long.
It's about them wanting to put Linux out there in the cheapest way possible...
Heaven forbid they spend a couple extra bucks to put out something that's a little more usable for the non-so-savvy user so that they might actually have a good experience. I think it may even save them a few bucks from not having users call all the time asking why they can't play MP3s on their new linux boxes.
1) Install a 32 bit browser, along with a bunch of 32 bit libraries. Downside is this takes up extra disk space for the 32 bit libraries, and your browser is only 32 bit. Upside is the rest of your computer is 64 bit, and I don't really think there's a real need to have your browser running in 64 bit.
2) Wine at Adobe until they release 64 bit flash for linux. I think this will be a while, considering they completely skipped version 8 for Linux, and I'm pretty sure version 9 is still in beta.
Re:But will they be cheaper?
on
Dell Linux Details
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The difference is that the PowerEdge line is servers. You can't install crapware on a server. Any admin (I would hope) would promptly wipe the drive anyway and start over from scratch if you included anything close to crapware (or even if you didn't, just because they wanted to do everything from scratch). You can't compare the pricing on their servers to the pricing on their desktop machines, because they serve entirely different purposes, and entirely different markets.
Which proprietary codecs aren't specifically supported? There's a version of LinDVD you can get for Mandriva that AFIAK is completely legal. What about talking with apple and getting some Quicktime codecs. What about other Codecs like MP3 that aren't included in some distros, yet are included in others? Either way, I don't really think it will be a bad thing. Anybody ordering a Linux machine will know how to get their own codecs, or will know someone who does (this will be the person telling them to get the computer). I don't see any noticeable percentage of people buying a linux machine who won't be at the direction of somebody who linux-knowledgable. However, I think that if they don't include things like MP3 playing capability then it's a garauteed failure for all such users, no matter the percentage.
The best one I've heard is getting charged with having sex with a minor, even when you yourself are a minor. I remember a story a few months back when a couple of 16?17?whatver year olds were charge on child pornography laws for sending pictures of themselves to eachother. I've also heard of people being charged for having sex with someone the same age as them because the laws were written such that it didn't matter how old the offender was, so a 15 year old having sex with another 15 year old was charged with having sex with a minor even though they themselves were a minor.
Sorry, I must have mistyped there. What I meant to say was that NOT having a monopoly is required for keeping prices at a minimum... wow, don't know how I messed that one up so bad.
Isn't this a good thing? Isn't having many companies working towards the same objective, offering similar products, good for competition, and good for making things cheaper in the end? Maybe lots of competition could give us the $50 laptop. Having a monopoly in any business, even charity, or to help the poor, is necessary to ensure that costs are being kept to a minimum. How do we know that the $50 laptop isn't possible unless there's competition against the guy offering the $100 laptop.
Well than, so do many other things that are currently part of our economy. Music, movies, even books have an almost $0 reproduction cost. What is the point of this. There's tons of things that have very little actual reproduction cost that have a high cost to produce the first one. Even things like CPUs, which have an extremely high development cost, have an actual very low per unit cost to reproduce. That is, once the chip is designed, and the fab is built, the materials to actually produce a chip are nil. Even an automobile, when you break it down to it's bare parts, is worth almost nothing. I'm sure anybody who has had a car scrapped can tell you that the scrap yard dealer will probably give you around $500 for something that was once bought for $20,000.
It's also said that 90% (maybe higher, I can't remember) of software is written for inhouse projects and would never see anything outside the corporate intranet. I think that there's more than enough work to keep everyone busy just doing all the custom stuff that everyone wants.
Not only that, what if they don't use radio waves to communicate. I know it seems a little far fetched, but they could just have FibreOptic cables running all over the place. The only reason for radio waves is to broadcast stuff. If you have everything on demand, as i hope humans will within the next 40 years, then you don't have much use for radio waves. There's still things like cell phones that require radio waves, but I think the signal may be a little too weak to be picked up by our antennas. Also, we only invented radio less than 150 years ago. I'm sure if we found a civilization as advanced as we were in the 1800s, that it would be quite big news.
Well, I guess I don't have broadband at home. I'm currently using 1 MBit down with 125 KBit up. It's not the fastest, but I really don't want to spend $40 a month for internet, since I don't really download videos. I think this is plenty fast for most home users. But I guess that most home users don't need broadband then.
If they could verify that it didn't affect game play then they probably would ban you. But there is no way to tell why you have modded it, and what differences it will cause in your game play, so they just choose to ban everyone who mods their system. I really don't have a problem with this. If you are going to mod your system, the only reason I can think of is to run pirated/hacked games. There's other reasons like running Media Centres off them and stuff like that, but it's much easier to do that with a PC, so I don't see why anybody would go through the trouble. I don't know anybody who has a hacked xbox and doesn't use it to run copied games.
Umm maybe because the summary says that this allows them to get the payments without going through Visa or Mastercard, who charge for every transaction? If you use this to process credit cards, you're just going to run into the same problem.
Because the Apple TV doesn't have any TV Tuner and therefore can't be used to record TV shows. I don't see what use a Media center PC is without a TV tuner. Sure if you want to download all your content over bitttorrent or iTunes, then it might work ok, but I think that TV Tuners are the way to go.
Wow, they're coming out with 34 games, 9 of which are called Untitled, with no release date, and quite a few others that have a name, but still no release date. Is anybody less than impressed with this list of games?
I as well as many other people (along with the OP) are aware that Fun and Graphics are not mutually exclusive. However, they both come from the same budget. I'd rather have a game that had it's budget split 70/30 on fun/graphics than a game that was 30/70 fun/graphics. Many games seem to have only 10/90 fun/graphics split which produces some really nice looking games, but they aren't really that fun to play. Some of the games I had for GC that were really fun without extrememly good graphics are Chibi Robo, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, and Zelda WW. The graphics on some of those aren't terrible, you can see that they spent more of their budget on making the game fun rather than making it look good.
Yes, and although there are a lot of people who will pay $.99 for a digital music file, I am not one of them. I think that as people start to have a larger variety of things to spend their money on, they'll see that the $11 they are spending on an album of digital files isn't worth it anymore. They are already complaining that teenagers aren't spending as much on music as they used to. And thats because they have other stuff that they'd rather buy, like video games, designer clothes, cell phones, and a whole bunch of other stuff that kids didn't spend their money on 30 years ago.
I was trying to overestimate so that I wouldn't get flamed by somebody telling me how expensive it is for bandwidth. I really wanted to say about 1 cent to tranfer an entire album in MP3/AAC format. Which based on the price of $0.13 per GB, 74 Minutes of music, which would probably be about 100 MB, and assuming 1GB is 1024 MB, it places a MP3 album download at around 1.2 cents. That's even assuming an album fills the entire CD, where we already know that it rarely ever does.
It's much easier to do with a portable video player because you can charge a lot more, and you're going to need the processing power to decode the video anyway. You can also charge a lot more for the player because it does a lot more for the consumer. But for most portable music only players, it's still a lot of trouble to add Ogg Vorbis support.
While not all the CDs I see are cheap, I see the majority of albums in the store to be between $8 (yes, many are that cheap) and $15. For examples of prices, check out Amazon.Ca.
While most of the CDs are above $11, it's not a significant amount, usually $2 or $3. So, yes $11 is way too much for a collection of digital files that probably costs them 50 cents in bandwidth to transfer to me.
I joined eMusic 3 months ago, and in those 3 months, I've spent more on music than I have in the previous year. Here's why. I find it really hard to justify that a song is worth 99 cents. I also find it hard to justify a price of $15 on a physical CD. While I listen to music a lot, and I'm not dirt poor, I still find that most of the ways of getting music are way too expensive. It doesn't offer enough benefit for the cost of obtaining the music. So, with eMusic, I can get 50 songs for $15. I always have to spend $15 a month, because they are subscription based, but I get a lot more for that $15. Rather than getting 1 CD a month, I'm getting 3 or more CDs worth of music. I only wish they had a cheaper way of getting some albums that have 20+ songs. But I guess it's fair that you pay more for more content. I've always despised the bands that put out a 30 minute CD with 9 songs and charge as much as the CDs that have 75 Minutes of music.
The difference from what I understand is that Amamzon is going MP3 only. While Apple has some stuff available in MP3, as do other services like Puretracks, they also sell mostly DRM encumbered music. Wading through all the music on these other services to find the stuff that is DRM free can be a real pain. It really sucks with 95% of the content they offer is only available with DRM. For those that are only interested in DRM Free music, a store like Amazon, or eMusic, where all the music will be DRM free is the only real solution.
Well, as far as devices goes, here's the reasoning. Because it's currently very expensive (or impossible?) to get chip decoders for OGG Vorbis, because of lack of demand. So, the other option for decoding OGG Vorbis is a generic processor, which if you want one with enough power also costs extra dollars, and requires a lot of extra electricity. In the small-is-good, and our-player-plays-for-54-hours world of portable music players, supporting tons of formats isn't the best idea. Supporting the one format that everybody uses is the best idea.
Why does it matter if they have the big labels. Most of the stuff put out by the big labels is repetitive drivel, made to sound just right as to not offend anyone so they have the chance of the most people buying it. There's plenty of good music from independent labels. Money doesn't make good music, good musicians make good music.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this another problem with unescaped quotes? When will people learn? Not an hour goes by that a system doesn't get attacked by SQL injection attacks. Why do programmers continue to not use things like prepared statements which are invulnerable against such attacks. I blame it on the people writing the tutorials. Every beginner tutorial on the web shows queries being constructed at runtime, and doesn't have any mention of how insecure doing things like this is. It's hard to break the habit once you've been programming like that for so long.
There's a couple options for you.
1) Install a 32 bit browser, along with a bunch of 32 bit libraries. Downside is this takes up extra disk space for the 32 bit libraries, and your browser is only 32 bit. Upside is the rest of your computer is 64 bit, and I don't really think there's a real need to have your browser running in 64 bit.
2) Wine at Adobe until they release 64 bit flash for linux. I think this will be a while, considering they completely skipped version 8 for Linux, and I'm pretty sure version 9 is still in beta.
The difference is that the PowerEdge line is servers. You can't install crapware on a server. Any admin (I would hope) would promptly wipe the drive anyway and start over from scratch if you included anything close to crapware (or even if you didn't, just because they wanted to do everything from scratch). You can't compare the pricing on their servers to the pricing on their desktop machines, because they serve entirely different purposes, and entirely different markets.
Which proprietary codecs aren't specifically supported? There's a version of LinDVD you can get for Mandriva that AFIAK is completely legal. What about talking with apple and getting some Quicktime codecs. What about other Codecs like MP3 that aren't included in some distros, yet are included in others? Either way, I don't really think it will be a bad thing. Anybody ordering a Linux machine will know how to get their own codecs, or will know someone who does (this will be the person telling them to get the computer). I don't see any noticeable percentage of people buying a linux machine who won't be at the direction of somebody who linux-knowledgable. However, I think that if they don't include things like MP3 playing capability then it's a garauteed failure for all such users, no matter the percentage.
The best one I've heard is getting charged with having sex with a minor, even when you yourself are a minor. I remember a story a few months back when a couple of 16?17?whatver year olds were charge on child pornography laws for sending pictures of themselves to eachother. I've also heard of people being charged for having sex with someone the same age as them because the laws were written such that it didn't matter how old the offender was, so a 15 year old having sex with another 15 year old was charged with having sex with a minor even though they themselves were a minor.
Sorry, I must have mistyped there. What I meant to say was that NOT having a monopoly is required for keeping prices at a minimum... wow, don't know how I messed that one up so bad.
Isn't this a good thing? Isn't having many companies working towards the same objective, offering similar products, good for competition, and good for making things cheaper in the end? Maybe lots of competition could give us the $50 laptop. Having a monopoly in any business, even charity, or to help the poor, is necessary to ensure that costs are being kept to a minimum. How do we know that the $50 laptop isn't possible unless there's competition against the guy offering the $100 laptop.
Well than, so do many other things that are currently part of our economy. Music, movies, even books have an almost $0 reproduction cost. What is the point of this. There's tons of things that have very little actual reproduction cost that have a high cost to produce the first one. Even things like CPUs, which have an extremely high development cost, have an actual very low per unit cost to reproduce. That is, once the chip is designed, and the fab is built, the materials to actually produce a chip are nil. Even an automobile, when you break it down to it's bare parts, is worth almost nothing. I'm sure anybody who has had a car scrapped can tell you that the scrap yard dealer will probably give you around $500 for something that was once bought for $20,000.
It's also said that 90% (maybe higher, I can't remember) of software is written for inhouse projects and would never see anything outside the corporate intranet. I think that there's more than enough work to keep everyone busy just doing all the custom stuff that everyone wants.
Not only that, what if they don't use radio waves to communicate. I know it seems a little far fetched, but they could just have FibreOptic cables running all over the place. The only reason for radio waves is to broadcast stuff. If you have everything on demand, as i hope humans will within the next 40 years, then you don't have much use for radio waves. There's still things like cell phones that require radio waves, but I think the signal may be a little too weak to be picked up by our antennas. Also, we only invented radio less than 150 years ago. I'm sure if we found a civilization as advanced as we were in the 1800s, that it would be quite big news.
Well, I guess I don't have broadband at home. I'm currently using 1 MBit down with 125 KBit up. It's not the fastest, but I really don't want to spend $40 a month for internet, since I don't really download videos. I think this is plenty fast for most home users. But I guess that most home users don't need broadband then.
If they could verify that it didn't affect game play then they probably would ban you. But there is no way to tell why you have modded it, and what differences it will cause in your game play, so they just choose to ban everyone who mods their system. I really don't have a problem with this. If you are going to mod your system, the only reason I can think of is to run pirated/hacked games. There's other reasons like running Media Centres off them and stuff like that, but it's much easier to do that with a PC, so I don't see why anybody would go through the trouble. I don't know anybody who has a hacked xbox and doesn't use it to run copied games.
Umm maybe because the summary says that this allows them to get the payments without going through Visa or Mastercard, who charge for every transaction? If you use this to process credit cards, you're just going to run into the same problem.
Because the Apple TV doesn't have any TV Tuner and therefore can't be used to record TV shows. I don't see what use a Media center PC is without a TV tuner. Sure if you want to download all your content over bitttorrent or iTunes, then it might work ok, but I think that TV Tuners are the way to go.
Wow, they're coming out with 34 games, 9 of which are called Untitled, with no release date, and quite a few others that have a name, but still no release date. Is anybody less than impressed with this list of games?
I as well as many other people (along with the OP) are aware that Fun and Graphics are not mutually exclusive. However, they both come from the same budget. I'd rather have a game that had it's budget split 70/30 on fun/graphics than a game that was 30/70 fun/graphics. Many games seem to have only 10/90 fun/graphics split which produces some really nice looking games, but they aren't really that fun to play. Some of the games I had for GC that were really fun without extrememly good graphics are Chibi Robo, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, and Zelda WW. The graphics on some of those aren't terrible, you can see that they spent more of their budget on making the game fun rather than making it look good.
Yes, and although there are a lot of people who will pay $.99 for a digital music file, I am not one of them. I think that as people start to have a larger variety of things to spend their money on, they'll see that the $11 they are spending on an album of digital files isn't worth it anymore. They are already complaining that teenagers aren't spending as much on music as they used to. And thats because they have other stuff that they'd rather buy, like video games, designer clothes, cell phones, and a whole bunch of other stuff that kids didn't spend their money on 30 years ago.
I was trying to overestimate so that I wouldn't get flamed by somebody telling me how expensive it is for bandwidth. I really wanted to say about 1 cent to tranfer an entire album in MP3/AAC format. Which based on the price of $0.13 per GB, 74 Minutes of music, which would probably be about 100 MB, and assuming 1GB is 1024 MB, it places a MP3 album download at around 1.2 cents. That's even assuming an album fills the entire CD, where we already know that it rarely ever does.
It's much easier to do with a portable video player because you can charge a lot more, and you're going to need the processing power to decode the video anyway. You can also charge a lot more for the player because it does a lot more for the consumer. But for most portable music only players, it's still a lot of trouble to add Ogg Vorbis support.
While not all the CDs I see are cheap, I see the majority of albums in the store to be between $8 (yes, many are that cheap) and $15. For examples of prices, check out Amazon.Ca. While most of the CDs are above $11, it's not a significant amount, usually $2 or $3. So, yes $11 is way too much for a collection of digital files that probably costs them 50 cents in bandwidth to transfer to me.
I joined eMusic 3 months ago, and in those 3 months, I've spent more on music than I have in the previous year. Here's why. I find it really hard to justify that a song is worth 99 cents. I also find it hard to justify a price of $15 on a physical CD. While I listen to music a lot, and I'm not dirt poor, I still find that most of the ways of getting music are way too expensive. It doesn't offer enough benefit for the cost of obtaining the music. So, with eMusic, I can get 50 songs for $15. I always have to spend $15 a month, because they are subscription based, but I get a lot more for that $15. Rather than getting 1 CD a month, I'm getting 3 or more CDs worth of music. I only wish they had a cheaper way of getting some albums that have 20+ songs. But I guess it's fair that you pay more for more content. I've always despised the bands that put out a 30 minute CD with 9 songs and charge as much as the CDs that have 75 Minutes of music.
The difference from what I understand is that Amamzon is going MP3 only. While Apple has some stuff available in MP3, as do other services like Puretracks, they also sell mostly DRM encumbered music. Wading through all the music on these other services to find the stuff that is DRM free can be a real pain. It really sucks with 95% of the content they offer is only available with DRM. For those that are only interested in DRM Free music, a store like Amazon, or eMusic, where all the music will be DRM free is the only real solution.
Well, as far as devices goes, here's the reasoning. Because it's currently very expensive (or impossible?) to get chip decoders for OGG Vorbis, because of lack of demand. So, the other option for decoding OGG Vorbis is a generic processor, which if you want one with enough power also costs extra dollars, and requires a lot of extra electricity. In the small-is-good, and our-player-plays-for-54-hours world of portable music players, supporting tons of formats isn't the best idea. Supporting the one format that everybody uses is the best idea.
Why does it matter if they have the big labels. Most of the stuff put out by the big labels is repetitive drivel, made to sound just right as to not offend anyone so they have the chance of the most people buying it. There's plenty of good music from independent labels. Money doesn't make good music, good musicians make good music.