How is this insightful? Having it on does not create a security hole. Security holes are created by flaws in the design but where is the real flaw here? All I see is FUD.
FUD? What is one of the first things you should do to lock down any box? How about turning off any unnessecery services. Things that you can't turn off is one of things people blast Windows for all the time. Why should any other OS be any different?
And even if the program poses no risk, if I don't use it, why would I want it sitting there chewing up system resources?
Look at the "Revenue Generating" page. If the police were really concerned about public safety, and the real reasons for speed limits - they would be putting the cameras at bends, blind intersections, etc. to catch the people who speed when it is unsafe. Perhaps then people would respect the cameras more. Instead the cameras tend to get placed on straightaways, bottoms of hills, or at places where the speed limit suddenly drops - for the sole purpose of extracting money from people going 5-10 over where it is fairly safe.
I have found cheap onboard video to be a performance killer, even if all you do is browse the internet and type letters in Word. Especially if it has "shared" memory. Onboard video can chew up a lot of system memory bandwidth and CPU time. That's one of the big reasons cheap OEM machines (Dell, I'm looking at you) are so slow, despite coming with chips like a P4 2.8Ghz. Even an ancient Mach64 salvaged from a Pentium I can improve the performance on machines like those, if all you do is browse the internet.
But as far as onboard sound/lan/etc. are concerned - go ahead and use those. They will chew up some CPU time, but in most cases it's pretty minimal.
They are out there, though they are pretty rare. I believe they use an integrated GeForce4 MX. Which is a hell of a lot better than the SIS solutions, or Intel Extreme graphics.
They cost about the same as board without the integrated video - about $50-$100. Not bad for someone on a budget, who does not need great 3D performance. I don't know why they never really caught on.
Agreed. I have a 800Mhz Celeron small form factor Gateway PC without the legacy "crap" I basically got for free. Being a small form factor PC with some decent horsepower, I have thought up several projects that it would be great for. Except I always run into the problem that it basically only has USB1.1 ports (and it uses those funky 1/2 height PCI slots, to make things even more difficult).
Firefox seems to have a memory leak, or something going on. In Opera, if I have a whole bunch of tabs open, and I close, say half of them - Opera's memory usage clearly goes down in taskmgr. Do the same thing in Firefox, and the memory usage barely budges. If I try to leave FireFox open for a few days, I usually have to close it and reopen in.
Disclaimer: Haven't played around with Firefox 1.1 yet, so maybe this has been addressed. I also suspect that Opera 8.00 has a memory leak in it too, but 7.54 is a solid release.
I have a better solution. My password 'www.google.com' - no one with a keylogger is going to expect that!
Re:Never write off Microsoft...
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
The thing I liked about Netscape 4 vs. IE is that when Netscape crashed, it tended to not bring the whole OS down with it.
But yeah, I agree. Netscape 4 sucked.
Re:Actually, Microsoft is now paying for its
on
Gates on Google
·
· Score: 1
Did the iMac sell because people were wanting translucent blue computers, or did it sell well because it was the all-in-one, budget Mac? The problem is that there is no control in that little experiment.
On the other hand, on the PC side of things the iMac knock-offs were poor sellers. It seemed that PC users overall prefered their beige boxes. Which seems to suggest to me that overall people thought the iMac was ugly (I sure think it is), but people were willing to put up with its looks to get the Apple they wanted at the price they were willing to pay.
The best balance is games that can be beaten quickly, but take long times to complete 100%.
I hate games like this. No better way to turn something that's supposed to be fun to a chore, especially when going from 98% to 100% takes many long, tedious hours. Which is the case with every one of the games like that I have played. Especially when you can't reach that mystical 100% without the strategy guide, which manages to turn every game into something that looks like the "Getting to know Windows 95 tour": a long list of 'click here', 'go here', 'do this' etc. How dull.
Some PCs have an option where you can basically skip all the tests and go straight to booting. When I turn on my crappy Dell box, it's well on the way of booting the OS once the monitor has warmed up (and that's about the only thing that Dell is fast at...)
On the other hand, I have a HP Vectra with 1GB of ram, and it insists on testing every byte of it every time it's turned on. Very annoying.
Why do they not set up barriers so that vehicles must drive in an "S" path to pass the checkpoint. I think this idea has been around since at least WWII.
With what, traffic cones? Probably the best way to do it would be with the concrete dividers they often use at construction sites. Which would be fine for more permanent checkpoints, but would be impractical for the more impromptu ones they like also like to use.
$70 is about right for Windows XP Home. For a PC that is going to essentially going to be an appliance, I don't think any of the limitations of XP Home are going to get in the way.
This database is highly valuable to other casinos. I've heard that rival casinos will pay 10-20k for it.
If I was going to try to sneak a top secret database out of a casino, I would want more than $10k-$20k compensation. That kind of money is nothing to a casino.
Windows XP has the onscreen keyboard (osk.exe) where you can use the mouse to "type" on a virtual keyboard. It's part of the default install. I haven't played around with it that much, but I wonder if the keyloggers can log that (it seems obvious the hardware ones won't, not sure about the software ones).
Well, I'm a college student, I don't have a lot of money, but I got plenty of time. Macs are expensive, and you can get a hell of a lot of PC for $500. Besides, if you are smart about picking out components and know what you are doing when it comes it Windows (and Linux), you're talking about a couple days worth of time to pick everything out, order it, assemble it, and install everything. Then you have a low maintance, working computer for atleast a couple of years. Though, I must admit I like to twink and upgrade, so I'm always messing with my computer.
Glancing over the page, it looks like the Apple machines have all been upgraded to 2GB of ram, so the cost will be a bit more for the Apple. Who knows what they did with the x86 machines (if anything).
By that time many PCs had already been supporting USB via Win95 OSR2 for a while. It was a bit crap
To say it was a bit crap is an understatement. I never, ever got USB to work under Windows 95. As far as I could tell, the USB support for 95 was a complete joke, with Microsoft laughing all the way to the bank with all the money from people "upgrading" to 98.
God Damn! Last year they were saying 256mb wasn't enough and people complained, now Apple doubles it and the trolls are out again. Next year when they hit a 1GB for a machine, people are gonna bitch again and comment on how cheap 2GB of RAM is!
Well, 2GB of ram is cheap! We are talking about a $3000 computer here. Why be so stingy with the components? No wonder people say Apple computers are overpriced.
I prefer it (just like other people have said) to get my memory elsewhere and cheaper than Apple provides. I'd be pissed if they gave to much RAM and then overcharged on the entire system.
Apple really should offer a bare-bones system for a reasonable price. Not that I expect they ever will, but it would win over quite a few of the build-it-yourself crowd.
Take a look at the G5's design. You just can't order a new optical drive from newegg.com for $30 and slap it in the case like all of us PC users are used to doing. That's why it is a big deal in the Apple world, while everyone else could care less.
Are you sure about the false-positives? I've run a virus scanner for years, and false positives are rare. Mostly what I have seen is occasionally I'll pick up a virus that seem to be imbedded into html files - probably trying to exploit something in IE. Opera doesn't know what to do with them, so they are harmless to me.
And I've installed Windows XP on a Pentium 120 (socket 5), with 128MB of 128MB of 72pin memory. Install took forever, but it ran reasonably well browsing the internet on FireFox. However, I didn't do this for any other reason than to see if it could be done.
Slashdot Mirror
How is this insightful? Having it on does not create a security hole. Security holes are created by flaws in the design but where is the real flaw here? All I see is FUD.
FUD? What is one of the first things you should do to lock down any box? How about turning off any unnessecery services. Things that you can't turn off is one of things people blast Windows for all the time. Why should any other OS be any different?
And even if the program poses no risk, if I don't use it, why would I want it sitting there chewing up system resources?
Look at the "Revenue Generating" page. If the police were really concerned about public safety, and the real reasons for speed limits - they would be putting the cameras at bends, blind intersections, etc. to catch the people who speed when it is unsafe. Perhaps then people would respect the cameras more. Instead the cameras tend to get placed on straightaways, bottoms of hills, or at places where the speed limit suddenly drops - for the sole purpose of extracting money from people going 5-10 over where it is fairly safe.
I have found cheap onboard video to be a performance killer, even if all you do is browse the internet and type letters in Word. Especially if it has "shared" memory. Onboard video can chew up a lot of system memory bandwidth and CPU time. That's one of the big reasons cheap OEM machines (Dell, I'm looking at you) are so slow, despite coming with chips like a P4 2.8Ghz. Even an ancient Mach64 salvaged from a Pentium I can improve the performance on machines like those, if all you do is browse the internet.
But as far as onboard sound/lan/etc. are concerned - go ahead and use those. They will chew up some CPU time, but in most cases it's pretty minimal.
They are out there, though they are pretty rare. I believe they use an integrated GeForce4 MX. Which is a hell of a lot better than the SIS solutions, or Intel Extreme graphics.
They cost about the same as board without the integrated video - about $50-$100. Not bad for someone on a budget, who does not need great 3D performance. I don't know why they never really caught on.
Agreed. I have a 800Mhz Celeron small form factor Gateway PC without the legacy "crap" I basically got for free. Being a small form factor PC with some decent horsepower, I have thought up several projects that it would be great for. Except I always run into the problem that it basically only has USB1.1 ports (and it uses those funky 1/2 height PCI slots, to make things even more difficult).
Don't worry, by the time Firefox has those features, I'm sure Opera will have innovated something new that you've got to have.
I mean, Firefox is great and all - but can't they do any better than just copy Opera?
Firefox seems to have a memory leak, or something going on. In Opera, if I have a whole bunch of tabs open, and I close, say half of them - Opera's memory usage clearly goes down in taskmgr. Do the same thing in Firefox, and the memory usage barely budges. If I try to leave FireFox open for a few days, I usually have to close it and reopen in.
Disclaimer: Haven't played around with Firefox 1.1 yet, so maybe this has been addressed. I also suspect that Opera 8.00 has a memory leak in it too, but 7.54 is a solid release.
I have a better solution. My password 'www.google.com' - no one with a keylogger is going to expect that!
The thing I liked about Netscape 4 vs. IE is that when Netscape crashed, it tended to not bring the whole OS down with it.
But yeah, I agree. Netscape 4 sucked.
Did the iMac sell because people were wanting translucent blue computers, or did it sell well because it was the all-in-one, budget Mac? The problem is that there is no control in that little experiment.
On the other hand, on the PC side of things the iMac knock-offs were poor sellers. It seemed that PC users overall prefered their beige boxes. Which seems to suggest to me that overall people thought the iMac was ugly (I sure think it is), but people were willing to put up with its looks to get the Apple they wanted at the price they were willing to pay.
The best balance is games that can be beaten quickly, but take long times to complete 100%.
I hate games like this. No better way to turn something that's supposed to be fun to a chore, especially when going from 98% to 100% takes many long, tedious hours. Which is the case with every one of the games like that I have played. Especially when you can't reach that mystical 100% without the strategy guide, which manages to turn every game into something that looks like the "Getting to know Windows 95 tour": a long list of 'click here', 'go here', 'do this' etc. How dull.
Some PCs have an option where you can basically skip all the tests and go straight to booting. When I turn on my crappy Dell box, it's well on the way of booting the OS once the monitor has warmed up (and that's about the only thing that Dell is fast at...)
On the other hand, I have a HP Vectra with 1GB of ram, and it insists on testing every byte of it every time it's turned on. Very annoying.
Why do they not set up barriers so that vehicles must drive in an "S" path to pass the checkpoint. I think this idea has been around since at least WWII.
With what, traffic cones? Probably the best way to do it would be with the concrete dividers they often use at construction sites. Which would be fine for more permanent checkpoints, but would be impractical for the more impromptu ones they like also like to use.
$70 is about right for Windows XP Home. For a PC that is going to essentially going to be an appliance, I don't think any of the limitations of XP Home are going to get in the way.
This database is highly valuable to other casinos. I've heard that rival casinos will pay 10-20k for it.
If I was going to try to sneak a top secret database out of a casino, I would want more than $10k-$20k compensation. That kind of money is nothing to a casino.
Windows XP has the onscreen keyboard (osk.exe) where you can use the mouse to "type" on a virtual keyboard. It's part of the default install. I haven't played around with it that much, but I wonder if the keyloggers can log that (it seems obvious the hardware ones won't, not sure about the software ones).
Well, I'm a college student, I don't have a lot of money, but I got plenty of time. Macs are expensive, and you can get a hell of a lot of PC for $500. Besides, if you are smart about picking out components and know what you are doing when it comes it Windows (and Linux), you're talking about a couple days worth of time to pick everything out, order it, assemble it, and install everything. Then you have a low maintance, working computer for atleast a couple of years. Though, I must admit I like to twink and upgrade, so I'm always messing with my computer.
Glancing over the page, it looks like the Apple machines have all been upgraded to 2GB of ram, so the cost will be a bit more for the Apple. Who knows what they did with the x86 machines (if anything).
By that time many PCs had already been supporting USB via Win95 OSR2 for a while. It was a bit crap
To say it was a bit crap is an understatement. I never, ever got USB to work under Windows 95. As far as I could tell, the USB support for 95 was a complete joke, with Microsoft laughing all the way to the bank with all the money from people "upgrading" to 98.
God Damn! Last year they were saying 256mb wasn't enough and people complained, now Apple doubles it and the trolls are out again. Next year when they hit a 1GB for a machine, people are gonna bitch again and comment on how cheap 2GB of RAM is!
Well, 2GB of ram is cheap! We are talking about a $3000 computer here. Why be so stingy with the components? No wonder people say Apple computers are overpriced.
I prefer it (just like other people have said) to get my memory elsewhere and cheaper than Apple provides. I'd be pissed if they gave to much RAM and then overcharged on the entire system.
Apple really should offer a bare-bones system for a reasonable price. Not that I expect they ever will, but it would win over quite a few of the build-it-yourself crowd.
Doesn't the new dual core Dell [dell.com] start at $3000, and with only 512MB RAM?
Yes, Dell sucks too. We all know that.
Take a look at the G5's design. You just can't order a new optical drive from newegg.com for $30 and slap it in the case like all of us PC users are used to doing. That's why it is a big deal in the Apple world, while everyone else could care less.
Just be happy they all now come with 512MB of ram standard. And a two year old video card. Welcome to 2003, Apple.
Are you sure about the false-positives? I've run a virus scanner for years, and false positives are rare. Mostly what I have seen is occasionally I'll pick up a virus that seem to be imbedded into html files - probably trying to exploit something in IE. Opera doesn't know what to do with them, so they are harmless to me.
And I've installed Windows XP on a Pentium 120 (socket 5), with 128MB of 128MB of 72pin memory. Install took forever, but it ran reasonably well browsing the internet on FireFox. However, I didn't do this for any other reason than to see if it could be done.