On track & rockin'! Just around the corner. Any day now. We have hundreds of developers all under NDA working on it. You can sign up to our mailing list with information, only $9.95 a month. Say would you like to buy an AmiZilla Tshirt? only $49.95.
It was a very small, very tiny detail that was forgotten on the UK mission.
Nasa's lander had, among all its technology, a slice of buttered toast, buttered side down, on the bottom of the lander. That's the only way to ensure it landed the correct way up
They very may well do, in time. I suppose the question to ask back would be "why would you edit ANY icons if you're just trying to get an app working". That's the state KOffice is in for now, it's like a kid who showed up at a party without getting changed from his school uniform, and yeah, we're all laughing, but the hard work's done and he's travelled there - he has some neat threads upstairs and just needs to have a shower & change and he'll be mingling with the crowd like everyone else.
That being said, after seeing a few other ported apps between linux, windows, and OSX (in whichever direction) it wouldn't surprise me one bit if nobody with the ability to do so actually fixes those icons:)
Depending on how the charging system works, that may or may not be relevant.
However, what MAY affect things is that I've noticed a great deal of iPods left connected to a mac do get very very hot.
One feature of a Lithium Ion battery is they age - and after around 3 years nearly every one made will be dead, it's just part of their chemistry. Heat drastically speeds up the ageing process in them, and I've no doubt that those iPods left connected and hot are killing their batteries.
I don't know what's causing it, whether it's a software bug that keeps the HD spinning, or an overcharging bug, or they're being used as a HD constantly, for an hour or more at a time, but that heat is damaging to battery life.
http://www.buchmann.ca/ has good lay-readable info about various battery technologies and their characteristics.
> I remember when the press said apple has "announced" > 68060 based macs
This is an interesting one, as back in the day apple was only beginning licensing their products, and Daystar had prototype boards licensed from Apple which were not PPC. No, they would have been the last 68k machines, COMPLETELY redesigned for the 68060 chip. Quite a lot of effort went into making the machines, and they were pulled because of efforts on two fronts. Mainly because the 603 was coming, and was to be available in such speeds and so cheaply that going on with anything more with the 68k line was a futile effort. Adding to the fact that Daystar was also moving ahead with 68k accelerators for Quadras, with replacement ROMs to be compatible with the new 060 caused licensing difficulties, and by the time anything productive began the project was out of date and shelved.
Something good did happen from it however. The changes to the MacOS ROM to support 68060s worked its way into one of the last of the machines, Performa, LC or Quadra 630 to 640 machines are 68060 compatible.
Combined with an adaptor such as this one from Emulation Tech, you get a cooler running and MUCH MUCH faster mac.
I've upgraded six Performa 630s now, and MacOS 8.1 feels like it was made for the 060. It certainly runs far more responsively under the 68060 than any other mac less than a 200 MHz 604.
It's a pity the 68k line couldn't push on a little further, it may have made the difference at one of the darker times in Apple's history.
I think your drunk driving analogy is a bit extreme - you left out the words "Unix code" on that occassion.
Whoops. You're right there.
the latter *is* wrong unless the license of the Unix code concerned permits this, SCO's license does not.
That's the bit I didn't know and the reason I threw those thoughts together in my post, which is all quite a bit of a paranoid rant - they're my thoughts all the same.
If I were one of SCO's customer's I'd be very worried they were about to pull an RIAA and start sueing the hand that pays the bills real soon now... Now *there's* the legal weasel tactic we all expect from SCO.
Linux users, their own customers.. who next? Their ex employees? current employees?
UNLESS of course they dont want the problem solved so much as want to make money from it.
I think thats exactly it. SCO are doing their damnedest NOT to reveal just what they claim is in linux that shouldn't be there. They aren't trying to remedy a thing, and they've been talking about this for nearly 12 months.
I suspect when they say they're "naming 65 files" that they won't name the files as in Linux, but they'll name the files -in SCO's source tree-. They'll say "You have the content of these 65 files in Linux so you must pay" with no way to check the content.
Copied/edited from a comment I posted on Groklaw, and thought very worth mentioning here too. -- SCO, based in Lindon, Utah, is also sending letters to many of its 6,000 Unix licensees requiring them to certify in writing that they are complying with SCO licenses, a company executive said. SCO's Unix licensees are asked to certify that none of their employees or contractors have contributed any Unix code to Linux..
Why is this necessary? is it all media show just to look like they're being exceptionally diligent in keeping their property under control, leaning on their licensees to make sure they don't bring up a situation like they claim is happening with IBM, or are they asking for something MORE than is in the original 6000 unix licenses?
Presumably, those licenses (for real SCO Unix customers) already prohibit the revealing of code from SCO products to Linux or anything else, so this step of having those licensees say "no we're not contributing" looks to be a double up of effort. They've signed those licenses, isn't that already enough?.
However, the wording as stated in the article may be relevant. It seems a pairing of two things that may not be related; "certify that you are complying with SCO licenses AND that none of your employees have contributed to Linux". It sounds a little like if you're trying to defend yourself against a drunk driving charge, and are being asked to sign a document saying "certify you did not drive while intoxicated AND that your car now belongs to me". You can refuse and it sounds you're saying you did drive drunk, or you can sign and you've given up your car. There's probably a legal term for this tactic, but of course, IANAL. IANEAP.
So do those existing 6000 licenses NOT cover things adequately? Is it possible those licenses may through loopholes, or just by their very nature, allow some level of code copying as the licensees need, into other products, and SCO is trying to plug a hole that could be undermining them? Is it a double up of what's already in the license, or a way of sneakily extending that license?
Or are they hedging bets, to give them more ammunition/evidence to sue their own customers if the IBM case fails.
I do a basic count of how much power there is to use, and don't go over it. At the moment out of the 2400watts I can pull from a wall socket I'd use about 1800 if every device used its maximum power, and that's extremely unlikely.
If I were to plug the 2 servers that I currently have in another room into this wall, then I could have problems, but apart from the power requirements the noise is a good enough reason for them to be off across the house.
I don't know if this was a real apple product released or a true case mod but someone did a widescreen mac SE/30. I can't imagine trying to source one of the widescreen 9 inch displays
OK this is about as much a kiddy thing as how many VWs fit inside a football stadium or something, but......anyone know of a site with info on how current and past supercomputers compare to current desktops? Where are we at now with 2GHz G5s and 3.3GHz P4s, relatively?
One of the comparisons made when I was at university was of a 30-something MHz 386, with a supercomputer from 1973, showing how they do about the same amount of processing/data transfer but in completely different ways. I found that fascinating
Uhm, they are using the legal system IN THE WAY THE LEGAL SYSTEM WAS MEANT TO BE USED.
Riiiiiight. You like just any old entity to be able to decide what information to get about you from your ISP just because THEY suspect you of doing them wrong, instead of going through courts?
You do by what you've just said. Cool. I'll just go subpoena your CC number. Thanks!
Just a note about the headaches. The first presumption I've come across when mentioning caffeine works wonders on my migraines is "well of course, your body's gone too long without its caffeine fix". It's pop medicine, and is a typical reaction rfom doctors, friends, relatives etc. It doesn't mean that caffeine withdrawal headache doesn't happen, but not regarding it as a valid fix for some people is just being dismissive. Hell, some migraine medications -contain- caffeine.
I've gone without using caffeine/coffee for years at a time, and it's had no affect on the frequency of my migraines. They still come along from time to time regardless of my previous intake, and have been doing so since I was 11 - years before touching coffee. It's just one of those things. Nothing else works so well for me as hitting a migraine with a mix of caffeine, sugar and aspirin. Knock it flat and be back to normal in under an hour, instead of 3 days in a darkened room. I know what I prefer!
Especially when you're talking about things like the 11/20, where the processor was actually split up into 14 different boards (with an optional 15th.)
Ahh thats just the kind of difference I thought may not be immediately transferable to "Much like a 386" for example. Thanks for the links and info, I have enough now to thoroughly absorb myself in googling for the night:)
OK this is only barely on topic, and maybe I'm just lazy or something - each time I've went looking around online to find the speed of a PDP11 I can't find an answer that fits in with my perception of computer 'speed'. Maybe I'm too young, or thinking in terms of new machines too much.
So for anyone who's been there done that, used one (or some, or them) what equivalent speed do they have to a current machine? C64 speed? early 386 speed? a tenth of a commodore 64? or were they an entire range that ran everything from half a hertz to blinding fast.
I feel I should be googling this but there's so much other cool archaic stuff I've always been distracted in the past.
That sounds promising then, as I don't respond to it much as a stimulant either.
The important thing is to get that mix into me as quickly as possible after noticing the visual effects. If the pain has started by the time I drink it I'm screwed for hours afterwards!
Hope it works for your roommate. Relief is bliss:)
I can't vouch personally for caffeine's usefulness at anything else, but I used to have horrific migraines for years, often 2-3 a week which would last more than a day each. I'd been hospitalised a few times, had bunches of scans done, and tried dozens of drugs, variations to my diet, exercise and the like
Turns out that for me the most effective relief is, when I start seeing auras over everything (which comes 20 minutes before the pain) I take a double strength coffee with double sugar, 2 aspirin, and sit quietly. Within half an hour it's easing off, and I'm back to normal within 1. They still take me out of action for an hour at a time, but that is FAR preferable to the feeling of having nails rammed into my eyes for 24 hours straight. That little fix also makes it far less likely another one will come along within a week. It's bliss!
I've managed to end up quite cynical after the flood of crap I watched through the late 90s. I haven't been to a theatre or hired/bought/downloaded a movie since I saw The Sixth Sense - and I can't remember exactly when that was. I'm planning on seeing LOTR sometime after the third is out, however.
The amount of crap in movieland makes it all barely worth watching. blah
I once worked at a place that had banned macs from the network, as the mac Novell client could login with many extra write permissions over most drives it shouldn't have been able to log in to, and could quite easily have screwed things up badly.
Of course, blaming the macs for having a 'buggy client' was the easy solution, instead of finding why the server actually allowed this to happen:P
It's interesting you raise the issue of the GUI as a natural evolution. I remember in the mid-80s when I had my first Amiga, the complete disdain that practically anyone I knew who owned a computer felt towards a GUI or computer with graphics was amazing. It certainly took time and visionaries to push the idea of a GUI, not as an optional gimmick, but bundle it with every machine - or as with the mac, make do with ONLY a GUI. for 15 years or more.
Slashdot Mirror
Is the Amiga Mozilla port any closer?
On track & rockin'! Just around the corner. Any day now. We have hundreds of developers all under NDA working on it. You can sign up to our mailing list with information, only $9.95 a month. Say would you like to buy an AmiZilla Tshirt? only $49.95.
Just you wait until next month!
It was a very small, very tiny detail that was forgotten on the UK mission.
Nasa's lander had, among all its technology, a slice of buttered toast, buttered side down, on the bottom of the lander. That's the only way to ensure it landed the correct way up
The lack of buttered toast is what doomed Beagle2
That dust is coming back to earth in 2006. That's a first.
They very may well do, in time. I suppose the question to ask back would be "why would you edit ANY icons if you're just trying to get an app working". That's the state KOffice is in for now, it's like a kid who showed up at a party without getting changed from his school uniform, and yeah, we're all laughing, but the hard work's done and he's travelled there - he has some neat threads upstairs and just needs to have a shower & change and he'll be mingling with the crowd like everyone else.
:)
That being said, after seeing a few other ported apps between linux, windows, and OSX (in whichever direction) it wouldn't surprise me one bit if nobody with the ability to do so actually fixes those icons
Depending on how the charging system works, that may or may not be relevant.
However, what MAY affect things is that I've noticed a great deal of iPods left connected to a mac do get very very hot.
One feature of a Lithium Ion battery is they age - and after around 3 years nearly every one made will be dead, it's just part of their chemistry. Heat drastically speeds up the ageing process in them, and I've no doubt that those iPods left connected and hot are killing their batteries.
I don't know what's causing it, whether it's a software bug that keeps the HD spinning, or an overcharging bug, or they're being used as a HD constantly, for an hour or more at a time, but that heat is damaging to battery life.
http://www.buchmann.ca/ has good lay-readable info about various battery technologies and their characteristics.
> I remember when the press said apple has "announced"
> 68060 based macs
This is an interesting one, as back in the day apple was only beginning licensing their products, and Daystar had prototype boards licensed from Apple which were not PPC. No, they would have been the last 68k machines, COMPLETELY redesigned for the 68060 chip. Quite a lot of effort went into making the machines, and they were pulled because of efforts on two fronts. Mainly because the 603 was coming, and was to be available in such speeds and so cheaply that going on with anything more with the 68k line was a futile effort. Adding to the fact that Daystar was also moving ahead with 68k accelerators for Quadras, with replacement ROMs to be compatible with the new 060 caused licensing difficulties, and by the time anything productive began the project was out of date and shelved.
Something good did happen from it however. The changes to the MacOS ROM to support 68060s worked its way into one of the last of the machines, Performa, LC or Quadra 630 to 640 machines are 68060 compatible.
Combined with an adaptor such as this one from Emulation Tech, you get a cooler running and MUCH MUCH faster mac.
I've upgraded six Performa 630s now, and MacOS 8.1 feels like it was made for the 060. It certainly runs far more responsively under the 68060 than any other mac less than a 200 MHz 604.
It's a pity the 68k line couldn't push on a little further, it may have made the difference at one of the darker times in Apple's history.
I think your drunk driving analogy is a bit extreme - you left out the words "Unix code" on that occassion.
:)
Whoops. You're right there.
the latter *is* wrong unless the license of the Unix code concerned permits this, SCO's license does not.
That's the bit I didn't know and the reason I threw those thoughts together in my post, which is all quite a bit of a paranoid rant - they're my thoughts all the same.
If I were one of SCO's customer's I'd be very worried they were about to pull an RIAA and start sueing the hand that pays the bills real soon now... Now *there's* the legal weasel tactic we all expect from SCO.
Linux users, their own customers.. who next? Their ex employees? current employees?
(paranoid, yeah
UNLESS of course they dont want the problem solved so much as want to make money from it. I think thats exactly it. SCO are doing their damnedest NOT to reveal just what they claim is in linux that shouldn't be there. They aren't trying to remedy a thing, and they've been talking about this for nearly 12 months. I suspect when they say they're "naming 65 files" that they won't name the files as in Linux, but they'll name the files -in SCO's source tree-. They'll say "You have the content of these 65 files in Linux so you must pay" with no way to check the content.
Copied/edited from a comment I posted on Groklaw, and thought very worth mentioning here too. .
--
SCO, based in Lindon, Utah, is also sending letters to many of its 6,000 Unix licensees requiring them to certify in writing that they are complying with SCO licenses, a company executive said. SCO's Unix licensees are asked to certify that none of their employees or contractors have contributed any Unix code to Linux.
Why is this necessary? is it all media show just to look like they're being exceptionally diligent in keeping their property under control, leaning on their licensees to make sure they don't bring up a situation like they claim is happening with IBM, or are they asking for something MORE than is in the original 6000 unix licenses?
Presumably, those licenses (for real SCO Unix customers) already prohibit the revealing of code from SCO products to Linux or anything else, so this step of having those licensees say "no we're not contributing" looks to be a double up of effort. They've signed those licenses, isn't that already enough?.
However, the wording as stated in the article may be relevant. It seems a pairing of two things that may not be related; "certify that you are complying with SCO licenses AND that none of your employees have contributed to Linux". It sounds a little like if you're trying to defend yourself against a drunk driving charge, and are being asked to sign a document saying "certify you did not drive while intoxicated AND that your car now belongs to me". You can refuse and it sounds you're saying you did drive drunk, or you can sign and you've given up your car. There's probably a legal term for this tactic, but of course, IANAL. IANEAP.
So do those existing 6000 licenses NOT cover things adequately? Is it possible those licenses may through loopholes, or just by their very nature, allow some level of code copying as the licensees need, into other products, and SCO is trying to plug a hole that could be undermining them? Is it a double up of what's already in the license, or a way of sneakily extending that license?
Or are they hedging bets, to give them more ammunition/evidence to sue their own customers if the IBM case fails.
I've never had a problem. Yet.
I do a basic count of how much power there is to use, and don't go over it. At the moment out of the 2400watts I can pull from a wall socket I'd use about 1800 if every device used its maximum power, and that's extremely unlikely.
If I were to plug the 2 servers that I currently have in another room into this wall, then I could have problems, but apart from the power requirements the noise is a good enough reason for them to be off across the house.
So... basically you have no idea what you're on about but thought you found a good spot to stick in an anti-apple comment?
By killing all the idiots like you who post without thinking, and harnessing the energy they would have put into posting.
I don't know if this was a real apple product released or a true case mod but someone did a widescreen mac SE/30. I can't imagine trying to source one of the widescreen 9 inch displays
Oh yes we damnedwell do!
OK this is about as much a kiddy thing as how many VWs fit inside a football stadium or something, but... ...anyone know of a site with info on how current and past supercomputers compare to current desktops? Where are we at now with 2GHz G5s and 3.3GHz P4s, relatively?
One of the comparisons made when I was at university was of a 30-something MHz 386, with a supercomputer from 1973, showing how they do about the same amount of processing/data transfer but in completely different ways. I found that fascinating
"Would you like a fries license with that"
I don't get it
Uhm, they are using the legal system IN THE WAY THE LEGAL SYSTEM WAS MEANT TO BE USED.
Riiiiiight. You like just any old entity to be able to decide what information to get about you from your ISP just because THEY suspect you of doing them wrong, instead of going through courts?
You do by what you've just said. Cool. I'll just go subpoena your CC number. Thanks!
Just a note about the headaches. The first presumption I've come across when mentioning caffeine works wonders on my migraines is "well of course, your body's gone too long without its caffeine fix". It's pop medicine, and is a typical reaction rfom doctors, friends, relatives etc. It doesn't mean that caffeine withdrawal headache doesn't happen, but not regarding it as a valid fix for some people is just being dismissive. Hell, some migraine medications -contain- caffeine.
I've gone without using caffeine/coffee for years at a time, and it's had no affect on the frequency of my migraines. They still come along from time to time regardless of my previous intake, and have been doing so since I was 11 - years before touching coffee. It's just one of those things. Nothing else works so well for me as hitting a migraine with a mix of caffeine, sugar and aspirin. Knock it flat and be back to normal in under an hour, instead of 3 days in a darkened room. I know what I prefer!
Especially when you're talking about things like the 11/20, where the processor was actually split up into 14 different boards (with an optional 15th.)
:)
Ahh thats just the kind of difference I thought may not be immediately transferable to "Much like a 386" for example. Thanks for the links and info, I have enough now to thoroughly absorb myself in googling for the night
OK this is only barely on topic, and maybe I'm just lazy or something - each time I've went looking around online to find the speed of a PDP11 I can't find an answer that fits in with my perception of computer 'speed'. Maybe I'm too young, or thinking in terms of new machines too much.
So for anyone who's been there done that, used one (or some, or them) what equivalent speed do they have to a current machine? C64 speed? early 386 speed? a tenth of a commodore 64? or were they an entire range that ran everything from half a hertz to blinding fast.
I feel I should be googling this but there's so much other cool archaic stuff I've always been distracted in the past.
That sounds promising then, as I don't respond to it much as a stimulant either.
:)
The important thing is to get that mix into me as quickly as possible after noticing the visual effects. If the pain has started by the time I drink it I'm screwed for hours afterwards!
Hope it works for your roommate. Relief is bliss
I can't vouch personally for caffeine's usefulness at anything else, but I used to have horrific migraines for years, often 2-3 a week which would last more than a day each. I'd been hospitalised a few times, had bunches of scans done, and tried dozens of drugs, variations to my diet, exercise and the like
Turns out that for me the most effective relief is, when I start seeing auras over everything (which comes 20 minutes before the pain) I take a double strength coffee with double sugar, 2 aspirin, and sit quietly. Within half an hour it's easing off, and I'm back to normal within 1. They still take me out of action for an hour at a time, but that is FAR preferable to the feeling of having nails rammed into my eyes for 24 hours straight. That little fix also makes it far less likely another one will come along within a week. It's bliss!
I've managed to end up quite cynical after the flood of crap I watched through the late 90s. I haven't been to a theatre or hired/bought/downloaded a movie since I saw The Sixth Sense - and I can't remember exactly when that was. I'm planning on seeing LOTR sometime after the third is out, however.
The amount of crap in movieland makes it all barely worth watching. blah
That would make sense to me too.
:P
I once worked at a place that had banned macs from the network, as the mac Novell client could login with many extra write permissions over most drives it shouldn't have been able to log in to, and could quite easily have screwed things up badly.
Of course, blaming the macs for having a 'buggy client' was the easy solution, instead of finding why the server actually allowed this to happen
It's interesting you raise the issue of the GUI as a natural evolution. I remember in the mid-80s when I had my first Amiga, the complete disdain that practically anyone I knew who owned a computer felt towards a GUI or computer with graphics was amazing. It certainly took time and visionaries to push the idea of a GUI, not as an optional gimmick, but bundle it with every machine - or as with the mac, make do with ONLY a GUI. for 15 years or more.