I used to have DSL with them up in Minnesota. pricaes were pretty good and the plans were pretty flexible. Speed was pretty nice too (I lived like 1000 feet from the CO). But I tought their hosting plans were way overpriced.
A couple things that Ubuntu does that I found particularly snazzy are the Trash panel-applet, no desktop icons, and the extra top-level menu on the Menu Bar panel applet. The extra menu includes user preferences and system preferences (rather than putting them in the Applications menu), and a few other things. I think they have another top level menu for navigating your computer, to (like the Go menu in Nautilus).It doesn't seem like anything special at first, but I found it to be pretty useful. Overall, these changes are pretty small, but have a pretty good overall effect on usability.
The last time I used JBoss I wanted to pulverize the server with a 20 pound sledgehammer. Granted, I think it may have been more the fault of the application we were running in JBoss. Upon starting, the app would bind several random ports, and when a client connected, the app would give the client the local IP address and those random ports. The problem with this is I had the server behind a NAT and couldn't manually tell it the public IP to broadcast. So the only way to use the app was to run it on a publically routable IP address.
I imgine you could try using the wrong driver and report, but I'd rather just use the right driver. I never really cared for having one driver that handled umpteen different devices, makes me suspicious of bloat.
HP has been selling the nx5000 with Suse Pro 9.1 preinstalled for months. Granted, they say the Intel Pro wireless isn't supported, but Intel has drivers for these cards at ipw2100.sf.net and ipw2200.sf.net. I believe the drivers are open source. So the only thing left is the multibay DVD+RW. But power management should work out of the box, I believe.
Re:What is it about Verizon?
on
Verizon vs. Europe
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Verizon is also the company that stood up the RIAA to say that a John Doe law suit had to be filed so that a subpoena could be issued to force them to reveal subscriber identities, rather than just handing over the identities of all accused subscribers just because the RIAA asked for them.
Also, unless they've changed it, Apple applies a blue paste (don't know for sure what it is) to the screws before the final assembly is made
Probably just Locktite, it's used to hold the screws in tight and keep moisture from seeping through the screw-hole. Should be able to buy it anywhere and re-apply.
They've been surprisingly slow at populating the FC3 tree.
I blame fedora.us for not publishing a sinlge Fedora Extras RPM for FC3 so far. Livna builds on the fedora.us stuff, and has been releasing packages which can be built against the FC2 versions from fedora.us.
I was responding to your use of the term extortion, which it most certainly is not, rather than your statement that nobody would pay. The existence of CentOS and Taolinux and Whitebox, and any other clone, means that people don't have to pay, but they do, because it's convenient and gives them someone to blame. It's unfortunate the clones haven't been able to exaclty reproduce the binaries. I maintain that it is feasible/possible, but don't care enough to prove it.
Those aren't updates. They are source code for the updates paying customers get. Thanks, please come again.
Other than the binary RPM already being compiled, what's the difference? Are you aware that the source RPM contains the build scripts RH uses to build the binary RPMs? You do realise that the GPL doesn't even require the source be made available for free download to the general public, much less precompiled binaries, don't you? Knowing that, how can you possibly call it extortion for Red Hat to charge for the binaries? Under the GPL they only have to give the source to people who paid for the binaries. And they could charge shipping & handling to mail a data DVD or 2 CDs or something. Instead they give you the source, and all the scripts and makefiles and all the tools they used to build the binary RPM, so that you can reproduce the binary RPM by issuing one freaking command, for free.
Yes, and the notion of doing that thrills me.
You could do what Red Hat does, pay somebody to build the binary RPM from the source RPM. It would even cost you less, because RH also pays somebody to maintain those build scripts and patches and write extra scripts and wrappers to integrate the package into the system.
Quit your whining, you big baby. They don't owe you anything you didn't pay for.
1. PowerBooks are brushed Aluminum, iBooks are white.
2. iBooks come in 14", but you hate white.
3. I hate having the speakers partially muted because they're under my palms/wrists like on my thinkpad 600x and inspiron 2600.
Plug in any multi-button usb mouse and the extra buttons will work.
You're paying for 2 things: precompiled binaries of GPL software; support for those precompiled binaries. You can download and compile the source to the whole RHEL line of products and every update for them, for free. So maybe you could STFU.
Technically, that is against the license. I'm not attributing any moral or ethical status to it, it's just against the letter of the license you agree to to get those binary updates in the first place. Just downloading the source RPMs of the updates and running rpmbuild --rebuild on them should get you the exact same thing as the binary updates (if it works for their kernel packages, you can feel safe that it works for the rest of them).
What do you have against using embryos which a destined to be 'thrown out' from fertility clinics? I'm talking about embryos which were drawn for in vitro fertilization, and then not selected for the procedure. If you think using those is destruction of life, then you should also be campaigning against masturbation, and women who don't get pregnant every 9/10 months.
You're describing a problem with package maintainers specifying needlessly specific dependencies from their own system (/usr/lib/libfoo.2.6.4-a1.so.1.2 instead of/usr/lib/libfoo.so, or even better, libfoo). It's not the fault of the Package Management system. If lonewolf maintainers would build against standardised dependency names, then yum, up2date, apt, urpmi, yast, and anything else would be given a sensible list of dependencies which it can resolve and the world would live in harmony.
Congress passed it the day after it was submitted. Not enough time for read and understand ~350 pages. They failed us by passing it. Some of them have come to realise how bad a mistake that was and now oppose it. Some cities have passed local laws to refuse compliance with it. It can't even be said that such measures were needed to prevent 9/11. Most of the highjackers were already on the no-fly lists and presented valid government ID in their real names, but those were not checked against the lists. How does such a failure to use existing infratructure necessitate the removal of any judicial oversite? You might be interested to know that it was a federal district judge, not the Supreme Court, who ruled one of the warrantless search clauses was unconstitutional. Or perhaps you're referring to the Supreme Court telling the Bush administration that detainees must be given the right to challenge their detainment. You might also be interested to know the Ashcroft ignored them, and placed no pressure on President Bush to comply with this decision.
I find your us vs. them attitude towards your own fellow citizens rather telling. You seem to have a blind faith the government will do no wrong, unless there is a majority position held by the Democratic party. I rather believe the government will do wrong under the misguided belief that it is right, because it is composed of fallible humans. Which is why we need checks and balances. Which is why the PATIOT Act is a bad law.
And just so you know, I tend to vote for gridlock, because statistical data shows that that is when the economy is at its strongest. It has nothing to do with one ideology over the other, it has to do with no party being able to ram through partisan crap through political posturing.
Actually, Ashcroft was using the PATRIOT Act to do things like get rid of legal crops of marijuana intended for medical use (not terrorism), closing down a strip club in vegas (not terrorism), and seizing over a dozen adult film stores throughout central texas (not terrorism). The FBI also used the PATRIOT Act to compell every airline flying in/out of Vegas and every hotel in Vegas to hand over all customer information covering like 2 weeks around Christmas and New Years a couple years ago. I can see how that last one could claim to be for the War on Terror, but it bears to strong a resemblance to Fascism to me.
In spite of your willingness to give them up, I'm not willing to give up your rights, because they're my rights too. Ashcroft had the PATRIOT Act ready to go before the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centers. You don't write ~350 of well thought out sweeping changes in one month. At least, I hope they didn't. That is even scarier to me than my belief that Ashcroft wanted these things in place in absence of a terrorist threat.
Anyway, I love my country, I don't want to curtail my rights because a few psychopaths committed mass murder. That, to me, would be admitting they have a valid point about fundamental flaws in my society, and I strongly disagree with that assertion.
The PATRIOT Act grants FBI search/seizure authority in some cases without a warrant issued by a judge, allowing warrants issued by clerks to suffice. Mostly in regards to financial history. In other words, it removes judicial oversite, which is the whole freaking point of requiring warrants. You seem to be comfortable with the loss of the judicial oversite of the executive branch, but I am not.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe IE just cnat wrok around you're spelinlg and gramamr. :)
I used to have DSL with them up in Minnesota. pricaes were pretty good and the plans were pretty flexible. Speed was pretty nice too (I lived like 1000 feet from the CO). But I tought their hosting plans were way overpriced.
here, here , and here. Also notice the Trash panel applet.
A couple things that Ubuntu does that I found particularly snazzy are the Trash panel-applet, no desktop icons, and the extra top-level menu on the Menu Bar panel applet. The extra menu includes user preferences and system preferences (rather than putting them in the Applications menu), and a few other things. I think they have another top level menu for navigating your computer, to (like the Go menu in Nautilus).It doesn't seem like anything special at first, but I found it to be pretty useful. Overall, these changes are pretty small, but have a pretty good overall effect on usability.
The last time I used JBoss I wanted to pulverize the server with a 20 pound sledgehammer. Granted, I think it may have been more the fault of the application we were running in JBoss. Upon starting, the app would bind several random ports, and when a client connected, the app would give the client the local IP address and those random ports. The problem with this is I had the server behind a NAT and couldn't manually tell it the public IP to broadcast. So the only way to use the app was to run it on a publically routable IP address.
I imgine you could try using the wrong driver and report, but I'd rather just use the right driver. I never really cared for having one driver that handled umpteen different devices, makes me suspicious of bloat.
HP has been selling the nx5000 with Suse Pro 9.1 preinstalled for months. Granted, they say the Intel Pro wireless isn't supported, but Intel has drivers for these cards at ipw2100.sf.net and ipw2200.sf.net. I believe the drivers are open source. So the only thing left is the multibay DVD+RW. But power management should work out of the box, I believe.
I'm curious what graphics chipsets have you been running? Also the last time you ran Linux on a laptop.
You mean for the 2100 and 2200 chipsets?
Verizon is also the company that stood up the RIAA to say that a John Doe law suit had to be filed so that a subpoena could be issued to force them to reveal subscriber identities, rather than just handing over the identities of all accused subscribers just because the RIAA asked for them.
Probably just Locktite, it's used to hold the screws in tight and keep moisture from seeping through the screw-hole. Should be able to buy it anywhere and re-apply.
I blame fedora.us for not publishing a sinlge Fedora Extras RPM for FC3 so far. Livna builds on the fedora.us stuff, and has been releasing packages which can be built against the FC2 versions from fedora.us.
There's a reasonable assumption that none of those things get up to 70C or even 80C like some [bad] laptops.
I was responding to your use of the term extortion, which it most certainly is not, rather than your statement that nobody would pay. The existence of CentOS and Taolinux and Whitebox, and any other clone, means that people don't have to pay, but they do, because it's convenient and gives them someone to blame. It's unfortunate the clones haven't been able to exaclty reproduce the binaries. I maintain that it is feasible/possible, but don't care enough to prove it.
Other than the binary RPM already being compiled, what's the difference? Are you aware that the source RPM contains the build scripts RH uses to build the binary RPMs? You do realise that the GPL doesn't even require the source be made available for free download to the general public, much less precompiled binaries, don't you? Knowing that, how can you possibly call it extortion for Red Hat to charge for the binaries? Under the GPL they only have to give the source to people who paid for the binaries. And they could charge shipping & handling to mail a data DVD or 2 CDs or something. Instead they give you the source, and all the scripts and makefiles and all the tools they used to build the binary RPM, so that you can reproduce the binary RPM by issuing one freaking command, for free.
Yes, and the notion of doing that thrills me.
You could do what Red Hat does, pay somebody to build the binary RPM from the source RPM. It would even cost you less, because RH also pays somebody to maintain those build scripts and patches and write extra scripts and wrappers to integrate the package into the system.
Quit your whining, you big baby. They don't owe you anything you didn't pay for.
1. PowerBooks are brushed Aluminum, iBooks are white. 2. iBooks come in 14", but you hate white. 3. I hate having the speakers partially muted because they're under my palms/wrists like on my thinkpad 600x and inspiron 2600. Plug in any multi-button usb mouse and the extra buttons will work.
damnit. updates
download
updates
You're paying for 2 things: precompiled binaries of GPL software; support for those precompiled binaries. You can download and compile the source to the whole RHEL line of products and every update for them, for free. So maybe you could STFU.
Technically, that is against the license. I'm not attributing any moral or ethical status to it, it's just against the letter of the license you agree to to get those binary updates in the first place. Just downloading the source RPMs of the updates and running rpmbuild --rebuild on them should get you the exact same thing as the binary updates (if it works for their kernel packages, you can feel safe that it works for the rest of them).
What do you have against using embryos which a destined to be 'thrown out' from fertility clinics? I'm talking about embryos which were drawn for in vitro fertilization, and then not selected for the procedure. If you think using those is destruction of life, then you should also be campaigning against masturbation, and women who don't get pregnant every 9/10 months.
You're describing a problem with package maintainers specifying needlessly specific dependencies from their own system (/usr/lib/libfoo.2.6.4-a1.so.1.2 instead of /usr/lib/libfoo.so, or even better, libfoo). It's not the fault of the Package Management system. If lonewolf maintainers would build against standardised dependency names, then yum, up2date, apt, urpmi, yast, and anything else would be given a sensible list of dependencies which it can resolve and the world would live in harmony.
You mean I've been practicing my dramatic look off-screne with my hands on my waist for nothing?
Congress passed it the day after it was submitted. Not enough time for read and understand ~350 pages. They failed us by passing it. Some of them have come to realise how bad a mistake that was and now oppose it. Some cities have passed local laws to refuse compliance with it. It can't even be said that such measures were needed to prevent 9/11. Most of the highjackers were already on the no-fly lists and presented valid government ID in their real names, but those were not checked against the lists. How does such a failure to use existing infratructure necessitate the removal of any judicial oversite? You might be interested to know that it was a federal district judge, not the Supreme Court, who ruled one of the warrantless search clauses was unconstitutional. Or perhaps you're referring to the Supreme Court telling the Bush administration that detainees must be given the right to challenge their detainment. You might also be interested to know the Ashcroft ignored them, and placed no pressure on President Bush to comply with this decision.
I find your us vs. them attitude towards your own fellow citizens rather telling. You seem to have a blind faith the government will do no wrong, unless there is a majority position held by the Democratic party. I rather believe the government will do wrong under the misguided belief that it is right, because it is composed of fallible humans. Which is why we need checks and balances. Which is why the PATIOT Act is a bad law.
And just so you know, I tend to vote for gridlock, because statistical data shows that that is when the economy is at its strongest. It has nothing to do with one ideology over the other, it has to do with no party being able to ram through partisan crap through political posturing.
Actually, Ashcroft was using the PATRIOT Act to do things like get rid of legal crops of marijuana intended for medical use (not terrorism), closing down a strip club in vegas (not terrorism), and seizing over a dozen adult film stores throughout central texas (not terrorism). The FBI also used the PATRIOT Act to compell every airline flying in/out of Vegas and every hotel in Vegas to hand over all customer information covering like 2 weeks around Christmas and New Years a couple years ago. I can see how that last one could claim to be for the War on Terror, but it bears to strong a resemblance to Fascism to me.
In spite of your willingness to give them up, I'm not willing to give up your rights, because they're my rights too. Ashcroft had the PATRIOT Act ready to go before the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centers. You don't write ~350 of well thought out sweeping changes in one month. At least, I hope they didn't. That is even scarier to me than my belief that Ashcroft wanted these things in place in absence of a terrorist threat.
Anyway, I love my country, I don't want to curtail my rights because a few psychopaths committed mass murder. That, to me, would be admitting they have a valid point about fundamental flaws in my society, and I strongly disagree with that assertion.
The PATRIOT Act grants FBI search/seizure authority in some cases without a warrant issued by a judge, allowing warrants issued by clerks to suffice. Mostly in regards to financial history. In other words, it removes judicial oversite, which is the whole freaking point of requiring warrants. You seem to be comfortable with the loss of the judicial oversite of the executive branch, but I am not.