WP 8 still runs just fine/natively on all versions of Linux I have ever installed -- you have to install a couple of older rpm's, but well worth the effort.
It is still much better in a number of respects than other word processors on Linux. Spell / Grammar as you go, QuickCorrect, and many more features not found in OpenOffice and others are much appreciated by my family, and although I direct them to OpenOffice when they need to open an occasional Word document, they always go back to WordPerfect 8.
As with Mozilla versus Netscape, the open-source version goes places the closed-source does not.
It is the only word processor I run on my new Powerbook. It runs fairly well. You have to install the OSX 10.3 XWindow server to run it, but it auto-launches X.
Martin Luther was an earlier advocate of file sharing of establishment-copy-controlled scripture texts with the masses. And many early Americans thrived on ignoring English copyrights.
I forgot, should this be invoked, MPL also allows you to relicense under GPL, which does not have this restriction so it probably has no teeth WRT arbitrary patent suits.
If you choose to sue a code contributor for patent infringement, I believe you lose all right to use the software. Of course, Mozilla is not a monopoly, yet.
With the eclipse project, Sun felt left out. Now, it is time for them to put up or shut up, and if they refuse and IBM decides to open source their own stuff regardless, Sun has no one to blame but themselves.
I am on a broadband connection where I can affort x GB / week.
I have tried freenet carefully setting the supposed bandwidth controls. At first everything was fine, but as days and weeks went by my node got more and more popular. Eventually it was way above the limits I had set and I could find no way to throttle it back to a reasonable rate, so I was forced to remove the service. This was far more problem than even it's slow speed -- it made it impossible for the average user to use. Normal users get into trouble if their bandwidth usage keeps going up without limit. I also run web pages that eventually become unusable if they get too much competition. That is the make-or-break feature for me. I must have bandwidth controls that put a real cap on bandwidth.
Re:Does AMD have anything to compete with Centrino
on
AMD Back in the Black
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The Airport Extreme card (among other things) works in OS X and not in Linux. Portability is why I bought a laptop. Not a hard call why I would keep it in OS X.
If I were an an admin I'd remove this post entirely.
Why? It seems more honest to me to openly show bias than to hide it behind rationalizations as is often done. I am glad you are not an admin.
I completely disagree with the analysis given by the ex-employee, but it gives me insight into the company and situation not present in the many posts done by non-ex-employees. Speaking of honesty, are you perhaps an existing employee and that is why the post offended you? Moderation should clearly not be done on the basis of whether you like / agree with the position taken.
Each camera would contain a tamperproof digital signature chip and a tamperproof clock.
This seems a long ways away from being credible, because it does not take more than a few seconds to think of how to get around it. It is so easy to take a picture of another high-res picture that has been digitally created or modified. Of course, this could be done with a film-based camera, as well. Look all the UFOs people have on film with no digital photography required. Many years ago I knew a photo lab technician for a law firm that loved to dial in the magenta to make injuries look positively gruesome for juries.
If the signing camera were permanently locked in a fixed place (like a police evidence room) with surveilance cameras that observed the photo shoot, and the camera took sequentially-numbered signed pictures, it would be a bit harder to falsify -- but it still seems like it might be like current digital voting -- more prone to undetectable error and fraud than existing technology. Adding secure GPS might help you slightly out of doors (I know of no other good way of securing the timestamp, either).
When you get the negative of a film picture, it is usually between other pictures on a roll that to some extent establish a real time sequence greater than a single picture. Even this seems like better than time stamping.
We are still sending people into battle to kill for Bush's cause that are not old enough / responsible enough to own a gun for their own personal defense. 21 is the age for that, too.
Assembly does not have any of the high-level features (OOP, libraries, etc) features that developers need to know these days.
And C/C++ does? Assembly language is just another language and generally has easy access to all the same libraries that other high-level languages have, that in most operating environments are language-independent. It has at least as much OOP as C, and with any degree of competence (especially using a macro-based language combined with open register access), it naturally lends itself to produce much better OOP than is typically produced using the standard OOP features of C++.
Object-referenced virtual function tables, GC, etc. do not somehow make less sense in assembly, and C++ "OOP" features can be quite difficult to use as effectively as non-built-in alternatives. Should courses be focusing on pseudo-OOP features of specific languages or OOP principles? Developers are less trapped by the stupidity of particular languages when they learn to apply principles that are applicable regardless of the language.
The advantage of C/C++ over assembly is mostly found in the reusability of procedures, function calls, and and developer knowledge (if carefully restricted to a portable subset) for alternative platforms. If you only use C/C++ to write to the Windows API, to a certain degree you may as well be writing in assembly. I have been involved in huge projects using it to create high-level applications with many millions of lines of code. It is just another language, less-widely but more-strictly standardized (you never worried about varying integer size definitions, etc.), but not inherently less OOP.
When DEC transitioned to Alpha, an arbitrary cross-compiled VAX Macro-32 assembly code was likely to run better, in my experience, on VMS on Alpha with a completely different hardware architecture, than an arbitrary piece of C/C++, because it was likely to be better aligned with the available libraries and operating system environment (because people didn't write Macro32 for non-VMS systems).
Modern machines already translate the instructions to more-native forms, so learning popular CISC instruction sets doesn't necessarily teach much about modern/good architectures.
Shouldn't 64-bit support come naturally by the VM extending the pointers? Does this mean class files compiled for 32 or 64 will be sub-optimal or incompatible with the other environment?
You might not have them in their current polluting terrorist-funding form. What does that have to do with the ability of Europeans to produce technology?
To call the space programs, automotive innovations, etc. not evidence of non-American technology that the American's borrow, is complete detatchment from reality. And it is clearly not Microsoft that is producing any technology, back to the ludicrous assertions that started the thread.
What about the Russian and US space programs, which came out of Germany.
What about all the best cars.
What about the nuclear weapons of mass destruction, which the US loves to own and deny others.
There are a many every day items, a number of which still cannot be found in the US, although the US companies are eventually good at copying.
All the best kitchen appliances.
A huge number of electronics items (from Philips and many others).
How about an easy-to-use version of Linux, which Mandrake had long before Red Hat, in my opinion having used the major releases of both.
If you think Europeans are in need of overpriced American knock-offs, you are mistaken. Successful International companies use European designs when in Europe.
Credible alternative medicine.
The market is subject to incredible manipulation by corporate powers. Do you suppose that when you go into a German store that the things available on the shelf are the same things which captured the American market?
People need Windows because the Microsoft establishment tells them they need it. Where they are told something else is better, they use it. In Japan, they use cell phones to replace online services and clumsy PCs.
Isn't it revolting to taste the chocolate that is sold in America because it is considered good enough by many who live there, and even recent introductions of American alternatives leave a huge amount to be desired?
As long as Americans do not value their computing enough to care about the stagnating and prohibitive effects of the Microsoft stranglehold, they will continue to use Microsoft software, but that does not necessarily make it in anyone else's interest to do so.
Certain ones in power, including those you name, have clearly adopted the neoconservative agenda, or the neoconservatives would not wield such power.
Ashcroft is no conservative in the tradition of conservatism, all for big government and big brother intervening in everyone's business. Sure, there were always those called conservatives who were less oriented towards personal liberty and responsibility and more towards legislating their own religious crusades and granting government monopolies, but I don't think they dominated until today.
Rumsfeld is clearly a neoconservative, warhawk, and one of the biggest parts of the problem and insecurity in the mideast -- pursuing the same strategy with nuclear-secret-exporter and terrorist supporer Pakistan replacing Iraq who used to be his convenient lapdog to use to slaughter Iranian populations.
I am a conservative, and Bush does not represent me on most significant issues because he no longer advances respectable or rational forms of conservative policies in issues that matter, nor is your attempt to spin it as an attack of the liberal left, who I also fundamentally disagree with credible. There are as many liberal war-hawks there who are trying only now to make the war an issue after having supported it for political gain.
You sound like another neoconservative trying to further usurp the good name of the conservatives who don't accept war-mongering, runaway deficit spending, disregard of constitutional rights, that a few years back we would have thought only the Liberals capable of in their quest for forced leveling of society. Many conservatives have been usurped by neoconservatives in this fashion and no longer stand up for conservative principles due to party affiliation. If the shoe fits, wear it, but it is not clear to me that the poster I was previously responding was neoconservative or party-loyal, however much as you may try to usurp his position and declare his reasons.
Please, before you start bashing all conservatives on this board think about how many good conservatives there are on slashdot and that we don't like being treated as second class citizens.
Have the decency to read thoughtfully before you claim I bash good conservatives. The poster referred to conservatives. I referred to NEOconservatives. The distinction has been quite clear for anyone willing to make a distinction in my reponse and in national debate, except for neoconservatives who try to claim to be reepresenting all conservatives.
Those in power, who are neoconservatives, are clearly behaving like facists, more likely to imprision you without a trial, shoot first and ask questions later, arm the next dictator and trying to drag the rest of the conservatives along with them.
I was an active conservative Republican for 20 years until the recent behavior of Bush and company makes me so deeply ashamed to be associated with them, that I have become completely unaffiliated. I did not change, but they changed the party. I remain a proud conservative. Good neoconservative, on the other hand, is in my book an oxymoron.
The US government was not the only party complicit in Maher Arar's deportation. The Canadian government allowed Arar to be deported after US government officials consulted with Canadians.
I believe you are wrong. According to every news report I have seen, Canada was neither consulted nor informed about his deportation, a statement made both by the US and Canada. Picking a random one from Google:
While the US may have previously received information from Canada, there was no permission, encouragement, excuse for deporting a Canadian Citizen to a place known for torture. If they had a provable case against him, they should have made it or deported him to his own country.
Neoconservative Answer: Damn wife and kids must have been disloyal, attracting a thug like that. Suspicion of their disloyalty is the best proof. BANG, BANG, BANG. They won't do that again. Before things die down, let's see if there are any more thugs I can sell weapons to.
Slashdot Mirror
It is still much better in a number of respects than other word processors on Linux. Spell / Grammar as you go, QuickCorrect, and many more features not found in OpenOffice and others are much appreciated by my family, and although I direct them to OpenOffice when they need to open an occasional Word document, they always go back to WordPerfect 8.
OpenOffice, not StarOffice
As with Mozilla versus Netscape, the open-source version goes places the closed-source does not.
It is the only word processor I run on my new Powerbook. It runs fairly well. You have to install the OSX 10.3 XWindow server to run it, but it auto-launches X.
How about dropped Java because even as a licensee could not get fundamental problems fixed.
Martin Luther was an earlier advocate of file sharing of establishment-copy-controlled scripture texts with the masses. And many early Americans thrived on ignoring English copyrights.
I forgot, should this be invoked, MPL also allows you to relicense under GPL, which does not have this restriction so it probably has no teeth WRT arbitrary patent suits.
If you choose to sue a code contributor for patent infringement, I believe you lose all right to use the software. Of course, Mozilla is not a monopoly, yet.
With the eclipse project, Sun felt left out. Now, it is time for them to put up or shut up, and if they refuse and IBM decides to open source their own stuff regardless, Sun has no one to blame but themselves.
You are right. They claim to have addressed it. It did not seem to me from the referring post that this was what they were talking about.
I believe in the principles of Freenet.
I am willing to dedicate disk space
I am on a broadband connection where I can affort x GB / week.
I have tried freenet carefully setting the supposed bandwidth controls. At first everything was fine, but as days and weeks went by my node got more and more popular. Eventually it was way above the limits I had set and I could find no way to throttle it back to a reasonable rate, so I was forced to remove the service. This was far more problem than even it's slow speed -- it made it impossible for the average user to use. Normal users get into trouble if their bandwidth usage keeps going up without limit. I also run web pages that eventually become unusable if they get too much competition. That is the make-or-break feature for me. I must have bandwidth controls that put a real cap on bandwidth.
Is it supported by Linux (unlike Centrino)?
And quite good.
The Airport Extreme card (among other things) works in OS X and not in Linux. Portability is why I bought a laptop. Not a hard call why I would keep it in OS X.
If I were an an admin I'd remove this post entirely.
Why? It seems more honest to me to openly show bias than to hide it behind rationalizations as is often done. I am glad you are not an admin.I completely disagree with the analysis given by the ex-employee, but it gives me insight into the company and situation not present in the many posts done by non-ex-employees. Speaking of honesty, are you perhaps an existing employee and that is why the post offended you? Moderation should clearly not be done on the basis of whether you like / agree with the position taken.
Each camera would contain a tamperproof digital signature chip and a tamperproof clock.
This seems a long ways away from being credible, because it does not take more than a few seconds to think of how to get around it. It is so easy to take a picture of another high-res picture that has been digitally created or modified. Of course, this could be done with a film-based camera, as well. Look all the UFOs people have on film with no digital photography required. Many years ago I knew a photo lab technician for a law firm that loved to dial in the magenta to make injuries look positively gruesome for juries.
If the signing camera were permanently locked in a fixed place (like a police evidence room) with surveilance cameras that observed the photo shoot, and the camera took sequentially-numbered signed pictures, it would be a bit harder to falsify -- but it still seems like it might be like current digital voting -- more prone to undetectable error and fraud than existing technology. Adding secure GPS might help you slightly out of doors (I know of no other good way of securing the timestamp, either).
When you get the negative of a film picture, it is usually between other pictures on a roll that to some extent establish a real time sequence greater than a single picture. Even this seems like better than time stamping.
We are still sending people into battle to kill for Bush's cause that are not old enough / responsible enough to own a gun for their own personal defense. 21 is the age for that, too.
Assembly does not have any of the high-level features (OOP, libraries, etc) features that developers need to know these days.
And C/C++ does? Assembly language is just another language and generally has easy access to all the same libraries that other high-level languages have, that in most operating environments are language-independent. It has at least as much OOP as C, and with any degree of competence (especially using a macro-based language combined with open register access), it naturally lends itself to produce much better OOP than is typically produced using the standard OOP features of C++.
Object-referenced virtual function tables, GC, etc. do not somehow make less sense in assembly, and C++ "OOP" features can be quite difficult to use as effectively as non-built-in alternatives. Should courses be focusing on pseudo-OOP features of specific languages or OOP principles? Developers are less trapped by the stupidity of particular languages when they learn to apply principles that are applicable regardless of the language.
The advantage of C/C++ over assembly is mostly found in the reusability of procedures, function calls, and and developer knowledge (if carefully restricted to a portable subset) for alternative platforms. If you only use C/C++ to write to the Windows API, to a certain degree you may as well be writing in assembly. I have been involved in huge projects using it to create high-level applications with many millions of lines of code. It is just another language, less-widely but more-strictly standardized (you never worried about varying integer size definitions, etc.), but not inherently less OOP.
When DEC transitioned to Alpha, an arbitrary cross-compiled VAX Macro-32 assembly code was likely to run better, in my experience, on VMS on Alpha with a completely different hardware architecture, than an arbitrary piece of C/C++, because it was likely to be better aligned with the available libraries and operating system environment (because people didn't write Macro32 for non-VMS systems).
Modern machines already translate the instructions to more-native forms, so learning popular CISC instruction sets doesn't necessarily teach much about modern/good architectures.
Shouldn't 64-bit support come naturally by the VM extending the pointers? Does this mean class files compiled for 32 or 64 will be sub-optimal or incompatible with the other environment?
You might not have them in their current polluting terrorist-funding form. What does that have to do with the ability of Europeans to produce technology?
To call the space programs, automotive innovations, etc. not evidence of non-American technology that the American's borrow, is complete detatchment from reality. And it is clearly not Microsoft that is producing any technology, back to the ludicrous assertions that started the thread.
What about the Russian and US space programs, which came out of Germany.
What about all the best cars.
What about the nuclear weapons of mass destruction, which the US loves to own and deny others.
There are a many every day items, a number of which still cannot be found in the US, although the US companies are eventually good at copying.
All the best kitchen appliances.
A huge number of electronics items (from Philips and many others).
How about an easy-to-use version of Linux, which Mandrake had long before Red Hat, in my opinion having used the major releases of both.
If you think Europeans are in need of overpriced American knock-offs, you are mistaken. Successful International companies use European designs when in Europe.
Credible alternative medicine.
The market is subject to incredible manipulation by corporate powers. Do you suppose that when you go into a German store that the things available on the shelf are the same things which captured the American market?
People need Windows because the Microsoft establishment tells them they need it. Where they are told something else is better, they use it. In Japan, they use cell phones to replace online services and clumsy PCs.
Isn't it revolting to taste the chocolate that is sold in America because it is considered good enough by many who live there, and even recent introductions of American alternatives leave a huge amount to be desired?
As long as Americans do not value their computing enough to care about the stagnating and prohibitive effects of the Microsoft stranglehold, they will continue to use Microsoft software, but that does not necessarily make it in anyone else's interest to do so.
Certain ones in power, including those you name, have clearly adopted the neoconservative agenda, or the neoconservatives would not wield such power.
Ashcroft is no conservative in the tradition of conservatism, all for big government and big brother intervening in everyone's business. Sure, there were always those called conservatives who were less oriented towards personal liberty and responsibility and more towards legislating their own religious crusades and granting government monopolies, but I don't think they dominated until today.
Rumsfeld is clearly a neoconservative, warhawk, and one of the biggest parts of the problem and insecurity in the mideast -- pursuing the same strategy with nuclear-secret-exporter and terrorist supporer Pakistan replacing Iraq who used to be his convenient lapdog to use to slaughter Iranian populations.
I am a conservative, and Bush does not represent me on most significant issues because he no longer advances respectable or rational forms of conservative policies in issues that matter, nor is your attempt to spin it as an attack of the liberal left, who I also fundamentally disagree with credible. There are as many liberal war-hawks there who are trying only now to make the war an issue after having supported it for political gain.
You sound like another neoconservative trying to further usurp the good name of the conservatives who don't accept war-mongering, runaway deficit spending, disregard of constitutional rights, that a few years back we would have thought only the Liberals capable of in their quest for forced leveling of society. Many conservatives have been usurped by neoconservatives in this fashion and no longer stand up for conservative principles due to party affiliation. If the shoe fits, wear it, but it is not clear to me that the poster I was previously responding was neoconservative or party-loyal, however much as you may try to usurp his position and declare his reasons.
Please, before you start bashing all conservatives on this board think about how many good conservatives there are on slashdot and that we don't like being treated as second class citizens.
Have the decency to read thoughtfully before you claim I bash good conservatives. The poster referred to conservatives. I referred to NEOconservatives. The distinction has been quite clear for anyone willing to make a distinction in my reponse and in national debate, except for neoconservatives who try to claim to be reepresenting all conservatives.
Those in power, who are neoconservatives, are clearly behaving like facists, more likely to imprision you without a trial, shoot first and ask questions later, arm the next dictator and trying to drag the rest of the conservatives along with them.
I was an active conservative Republican for 20 years until the recent behavior of Bush and company makes me so deeply ashamed to be associated with them, that I have become completely unaffiliated. I did not change, but they changed the party. I remain a proud conservative. Good neoconservative, on the other hand, is in my book an oxymoron.
The US government was not the only party complicit in Maher Arar's deportation. The Canadian government allowed Arar to be deported after US government officials consulted with Canadians.
I believe you are wrong. According to every news report I have seen, Canada was neither consulted nor informed about his deportation, a statement made both by the US and Canada. Picking a random one from Google:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVN ews/1074772060027_197/?hub=Canada
While the US may have previously received information from Canada, there was no permission, encouragement, excuse for deporting a Canadian Citizen to a place known for torture. If they had a provable case against him, they should have made it or deported him to his own country.
Neoconservative Answer: Damn wife and kids must have been disloyal, attracting a thug like that. Suspicion of their disloyalty is the best proof. BANG, BANG, BANG. They won't do that again. Before things die down, let's see if there are any more thugs I can sell weapons to.
You said a mouthful. If the US would stick to its own business, there would be less injustice in cases such as this one.
I agree that his mistake was his travel arrangements through a hostile place like New York. No sane person would travel through there now.