I think I understand now...eventually we're going to get to the point where no computer will be able to track how high the debt gets...and it will simply rollover and the US economy is back, baby!
Iron is an Internet Browser, like Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Opera. It is based off of the free online source code of "Chromium".
I read that there are tools which attempt to make Chrome anonymous. Why shouldn't I simply use these?
There are worthwhile Freeware tools which offer similar functionality. However, these do not work from source and offer only limited control. Functions like the URL tracker cannot be switched off. This only offers variable security.
Iron is free -- how do you finance it?
In order to keep Iron financed, we place an advertisement on the front page. We also ask for donations if you like the product -- it would make us happy.
How can one be sure that Iron doesn't inadvertantly send data?
This is a concern. We log all incoming and outgoing packets and did not detect any precarious activity. You can also test this yourself.
PS: The harmless (DNS Vorabruf?) has been disabled based on standard, since it can possibly be abused by Spammern.
Do you offer uncompiled source code for Chromium?
This would be useless, because Chromium Builds likewise contain the offending source code. We only offer the modified Iron.
So, um, thanks for giving no actual information about this new revision, with the only real reference a German website with a download link. I guess this could be an incentive to learn Deutsch, but for the average/. reader, this is just an advertisement.
"Due to increased intelligence gathering online, we have come to believe fighters in Iraq have developed some sort of animal growth hormone, capable of increasing fertility exponentially. What they plan to do with it is unknown, but the fact stands, the elephant population in Africa has tripled over the past six months!
Trivia: * African elephants are not normally found all over Africa * Elephants have been in many films, and tend to be used as trucks"
1. Get up from the computer and find someone nearby 2. Ask them, "Would you like a car that gets 65mpg?" 3. After they say "yes", which they will, ask them, "Even if it ran Diesel?" 4. ??? 5. Profit!
Come on, Ford. This is why you're losing the manufacturing race in the US...you've got nothing to bring to the table. The interest in such a vehicle is high, regardless of which pump one has to go to to fill up. When you're holding onto a car that gets the same gas mileage as my Honda Rebel motorcycle -- which has gone completely missing around here due to high sales -- that people would get a little interested?
Why not just trim corners a bit on the ECOnetic? I'm sure we'd settle for anything that gets 45+mpg, and there has got to be some technical aspect that can be removed or revamped to make cheaper...the engine and body alone don't account for the entire cost, I'm sure.
Consumer: "I wish I could have a digital backup of my music..." Sony: "We'll offer you streaming versions of your favorite songs! Buy it once, play it anywhere!" Consumer: "Awesome! So how do I use this on my iPod?" Sony: "...well, you can't." Consumer: "But you just said..." Sony: "Listen, kid. We have a streaming service that works through a couple of major retailers, and works with some very popular devices..." Consumer: "But I want it to work on mine!"
*later*
Consumer: "Alright, I got one of these new-fangled...whatevers...that supports PlayAnywhere. Now what?" Sony: "Go online and buy a CD...like that one you have right there..." Consumer: "This CD? But I already have it..." Sony: "What's your point?" Consumer: "Fine..."
*later*
Consumer: "I lost my new-fangled whatevers! Quick, let me download a copy of my songs!" Sony: "I'd love to, but that new device you just bought supports version 2.7.1 of PlayAnywhere. I'll need you to upgrade your songs or buy them outright -- either way, gimme your wallet." Consumer: "..."
1. "So, Vista is free? How does Microsoft make any money?" 2. "Why do they need to upgrade? XP seems to be fine, I haven't really noticed any problems.." 3. "Yeah, that one! How is that one different from XP and Vista?" 4. "My daughter just went away to college, though, and she asked me to buy her a Mac. They seem a little different, but not something too...hard. How different is Vista from XP?" (it's a trap!) 5. "So, everyone liked Mojave? But people hate Vista? Why don't they just call it Mojave then..."
You would make an amazing salesman, if you aren't already one, but it does boil down to that it's all a game of selective truths...
"I'm really interested in Vista, but I can't afford it. Are there any cheaper alternatives?"
"Hey, can I still use X feature of Vista if I downgrade to XP? Why not?"
"Quick question -- when is the next operating system after Vista coming out? I'm really excited about that one. No, I don't know anything about it yet..."
"How does Vista compare to non-Windows operating systems?" (Open ended, should provide some laughs)
"If Vista is so good, why are you being $20/hour to stand around and tell me how good it is?"
"But satellite information takes hundreds of milliseconds to get to the surface - which is a pain in the rear for anyone who wants low-latency applications (games, 2-way voice and video)."
I still think it's a vast improvement over dial-up or nothing. If you're interested in lag-free gaming, you're also going to be interested in faster hardware, more expensive equipment, etc, and the cost of a landline isn't going to be nearly as prohibitive.
"Once every user needs different content, the model doesn't work very well, unless you add more satellites with narrower beams, or open up more of the wireless spectrum to satellites. Wires don't infringe on an already crowded wireless spectrum (a very scarce resource). If there were a great demand for the advantages of satellite internet, then there would be more subscribers (more demand), and companies would follow the money."
Funny, cellphone companies don't seem to have a problem delivering various types of content to various customers -- using towers and channel access methods (ever hear of CDMA?), we already seem to be working on the infrastructure, albeit the urban areas still get the strongest signals and data communication.
The big question is, how to avoid congestion? How many satellites would it take to keep the network running smoothly, or at least without significant downtime in any one area?
Actually, what they're currently doing makes perfect sense from a business stand-point.
People who don't have or use the Internet are few and far between, being generally uninterested in the concept (read: "I don't even own a computer!"), or they live in an extremely rural environment, which means the profitability of serving them in lessened, having to roll out new cable to serve just a few people.
People who have dial-up, on the other hand, are already online. They know what's out there. They might say, "Well, I only check my e-mail and the news", but give them a taste of high-speed and they become e-addicts. This isn't exactly helped by the driving emphasis on media-rich websites nowadays, to the point where some people feel they should just "bite the bullet". It feels like less and less of an option with each day, especially each time a friend of theirs sends a link to them, only to have them apologize that "I have dial-up, and it will take forever to load..."
Having high-speed is basically becoming an issue of having a bigger e-penis. You don't really need it, and can get by just fine without it, but sometimes that $50 a month doesn't look too bad when cozied up with instant page loads and more accessibility to video content. It's a modern convenience and, much like driving a big car, owning a big house, etc, it can sometimes be a symbol of having enough money to afford such a technology, even when it's outrageously over-priced in comparison.
It's funny, I was discussing this earlier on the drive to work. We both live in a rural area and commute into an urban environment, and experience the pains and joys that both bring.
We both basically reached the same conclusion -- The United States, she is a big place. It's always going to be easier to wire up a thousand people living within a few blocks of each other than that same thousand living within a few miles.
If we really intend to catch up, we need to take a cue from cellular networks and increase the emphasis, availability, efficiency, and cost of satellite internet.
It's basically a matter of a high tech, potentially high-cost solution, or a low-tech, lower-cost band-aid that only treats the screaming wound -- the large urban environments. We have 300+ million people living in this country, and even our biggest city, New York, has only around 8-10 million of that encapsulated. We are a big suburban / rural society still, albeit a lot of times by choice now, and having a large, open-air data network is going to be more key to us than trying to cover each and every house in the U.S. with optical fiber.
Slashdot Mirror
1) Make false assumption about bandwidth usage caps
2) Write article based on false assumptions
3) Blame MMOs
4) Profit???
I think I understand now...eventually we're going to get to the point where no computer will be able to track how high the debt gets...and it will simply rollover and the US economy is back, baby!
What is Iron?
Iron is an Internet Browser, like Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Opera. It is based off of the free online source code of "Chromium".
I read that there are tools which attempt to make Chrome anonymous. Why shouldn't I simply use these?
There are worthwhile Freeware tools which offer similar functionality. However, these do not work from source and offer only limited control. Functions like the URL tracker cannot be switched off. This only offers variable security.
Iron is free -- how do you finance it?
In order to keep Iron financed, we place an advertisement on the front page. We also ask for donations if you like the product -- it would make us happy.
How can one be sure that Iron doesn't inadvertantly send data?
This is a concern. We log all incoming and outgoing packets and did not detect any precarious activity. You can also test this yourself.
PS: The harmless (DNS Vorabruf?) has been disabled based on standard, since it can possibly be abused by Spammern.
Do you offer uncompiled source code for Chromium?
This would be useless, because Chromium Builds likewise contain the offending source code. We only offer the modified Iron.
So, um, thanks for giving no actual information about this new revision, with the only real reference a German website with a download link. I guess this could be an incentive to learn Deutsch, but for the average /. reader, this is just an advertisement.
Anyway, here's a Babelfish translated link:
http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.srware.net%2Fsoftware_srware_iron.php&lp=de_en&btnTrUrl=Translate
"Due to increased intelligence gathering online, we have come to believe fighters in Iraq have developed some sort of animal growth hormone, capable of increasing fertility exponentially. What they plan to do with it is unknown, but the fact stands, the elephant population in Africa has tripled over the past six months!
Trivia:
* African elephants are not normally found all over Africa
* Elephants have been in many films, and tend to be used as trucks"
Try this:
1. Get up from the computer and find someone nearby
2. Ask them, "Would you like a car that gets 65mpg?"
3. After they say "yes", which they will, ask them, "Even if it ran Diesel?"
4. ???
5. Profit!
Come on, Ford. This is why you're losing the manufacturing race in the US...you've got nothing to bring to the table. The interest in such a vehicle is high, regardless of which pump one has to go to to fill up. When you're holding onto a car that gets the same gas mileage as my Honda Rebel motorcycle -- which has gone completely missing around here due to high sales -- that people would get a little interested?
Why not just trim corners a bit on the ECOnetic? I'm sure we'd settle for anything that gets 45+mpg, and there has got to be some technical aspect that can be removed or revamped to make cheaper...the engine and body alone don't account for the entire cost, I'm sure.
Consumer: "I wish I could have a digital backup of my music..."
Sony: "We'll offer you streaming versions of your favorite songs! Buy it once, play it anywhere!"
Consumer: "Awesome! So how do I use this on my iPod?"
Sony: "...well, you can't."
Consumer: "But you just said..."
Sony: "Listen, kid. We have a streaming service that works through a couple of major retailers, and works with some very popular devices..."
Consumer: "But I want it to work on mine!"
*later*
Consumer: "Alright, I got one of these new-fangled...whatevers...that supports PlayAnywhere. Now what?"
Sony: "Go online and buy a CD...like that one you have right there..."
Consumer: "This CD? But I already have it..."
Sony: "What's your point?"
Consumer: "Fine..."
*later*
Consumer: "I lost my new-fangled whatevers! Quick, let me download a copy of my songs!"
Sony: "I'd love to, but that new device you just bought supports version 2.7.1 of PlayAnywhere. I'll need you to upgrade your songs or buy them outright -- either way, gimme your wallet."
Consumer: "..."
Title should read, "Rent Once, Play Certain Places Until Obscure Format is No Longer Supported"
Now, 12, that's just pushing it. And 10 would have been unrealistic.
'In just 11 days, we were able to bring a modern Windows application across to Mac and Linux.'
How long would it take to send it back?
"Google and The Pirate Bay team up to provide off-shore copyright-free hosting of content."
*sigh*...perchance to dream...
I have no money, is there a list of laptops for people with large piles of string?
A Beowulf cluster of Eee PCs glued to a go-cart. ...what? Can't a man dream?
"In an attempt to address the problem, Microsoft has investigated building a data centre in the cold climes of Siberia"
Note to self -- Pay for next copy of Windows.
1. "So, Vista is free? How does Microsoft make any money?" ...hard. How different is Vista from XP?" (it's a trap!)
2. "Why do they need to upgrade? XP seems to be fine, I haven't really noticed any problems.."
3. "Yeah, that one! How is that one different from XP and Vista?"
4. "My daughter just went away to college, though, and she asked me to buy her a Mac. They seem a little different, but not something too
5. "So, everyone liked Mojave? But people hate Vista? Why don't they just call it Mojave then..."
You would make an amazing salesman, if you aren't already one, but it does boil down to that it's all a game of selective truths...
"I'm really interested in Vista, but I can't afford it. Are there any cheaper alternatives?"
"Hey, can I still use X feature of Vista if I downgrade to XP? Why not?"
"Quick question -- when is the next operating system after Vista coming out? I'm really excited about that one. No, I don't know anything about it yet..."
"How does Vista compare to non-Windows operating systems?" (Open ended, should provide some laughs)
"If Vista is so good, why are you being $20/hour to stand around and tell me how good it is?"
Given the commercials, I think it would be more appropriate for them to wander around Foot Locker...
"This obviously raises some questions about creationism, not to mention some scary bio-research-gone-wild scenarios."
For the sake of brevity, we will not, however, be listing these questions here.
So God's role has been relegated to making dirt?
That's kinda boring.
On a sidenote, is the OP saying that we shouldn't recycle batteries, or that batteries are wrong? I'm a little fuzzy here...
"I don't understand battery recycling, are Liberals killing the world with hybrid batteries?"
No.
"But satellite information takes hundreds of milliseconds to get to the surface - which is a pain in the rear for anyone who wants low-latency applications (games, 2-way voice and video)."
I still think it's a vast improvement over dial-up or nothing. If you're interested in lag-free gaming, you're also going to be interested in faster hardware, more expensive equipment, etc, and the cost of a landline isn't going to be nearly as prohibitive.
"Once every user needs different content, the model doesn't work very well, unless you add more satellites with narrower beams, or open up more of the wireless spectrum to satellites. Wires don't infringe on an already crowded wireless spectrum (a very scarce resource). If there were a great demand for the advantages of satellite internet, then there would be more subscribers (more demand), and companies would follow the money."
Funny, cellphone companies don't seem to have a problem delivering various types of content to various customers -- using towers and channel access methods (ever hear of CDMA?), we already seem to be working on the infrastructure, albeit the urban areas still get the strongest signals and data communication.
The big question is, how to avoid congestion? How many satellites would it take to keep the network running smoothly, or at least without significant downtime in any one area?
Actually, what they're currently doing makes perfect sense from a business stand-point.
People who don't have or use the Internet are few and far between, being generally uninterested in the concept (read: "I don't even own a computer!"), or they live in an extremely rural environment, which means the profitability of serving them in lessened, having to roll out new cable to serve just a few people.
People who have dial-up, on the other hand, are already online. They know what's out there. They might say, "Well, I only check my e-mail and the news", but give them a taste of high-speed and they become e-addicts. This isn't exactly helped by the driving emphasis on media-rich websites nowadays, to the point where some people feel they should just "bite the bullet". It feels like less and less of an option with each day, especially each time a friend of theirs sends a link to them, only to have them apologize that "I have dial-up, and it will take forever to load..."
Having high-speed is basically becoming an issue of having a bigger e-penis. You don't really need it, and can get by just fine without it, but sometimes that $50 a month doesn't look too bad when cozied up with instant page loads and more accessibility to video content. It's a modern convenience and, much like driving a big car, owning a big house, etc, it can sometimes be a symbol of having enough money to afford such a technology, even when it's outrageously over-priced in comparison.
I'm going to go ahead and assume that the director of a marketing agency has left his hometown at least once in his life, possibly more.
It's funny, I was discussing this earlier on the drive to work. We both live in a rural area and commute into an urban environment, and experience the pains and joys that both bring.
We both basically reached the same conclusion -- The United States, she is a big place. It's always going to be easier to wire up a thousand people living within a few blocks of each other than that same thousand living within a few miles.
If we really intend to catch up, we need to take a cue from cellular networks and increase the emphasis, availability, efficiency, and cost of satellite internet.
It's basically a matter of a high tech, potentially high-cost solution, or a low-tech, lower-cost band-aid that only treats the screaming wound -- the large urban environments. We have 300+ million people living in this country, and even our biggest city, New York, has only around 8-10 million of that encapsulated. We are a big suburban / rural society still, albeit a lot of times by choice now, and having a large, open-air data network is going to be more key to us than trying to cover each and every house in the U.S. with optical fiber.