It's not very convenient though: apt doesn't do binary diffs as far as I know, so the 2GB file would have to be downloaded every time it's changed... With 30000 users that would be 60 terabytes per update.
Really, there's NO reason this couldn't be an esay to use configuration option
Of course there is. Main one would be one of the reasons Firefox exists: If you include every possible configuration option in Preferences, you end up with Mozilla suite.
If a (legal and free-market) industry has enormous profits it will be swamped with new competitors, which will then lower the prices... It's called economics 101. I'd say it's quite smart to assume foul play if that doesn't happen.
Your point about pricing isn't really related to this in any way.
I hit 'back' and I observe network activity even when the page is entirely 100% cacheable content.
Check again. Old Firefox/Mozilla functionality is precisely what you're asking for here: Firefox re-renders the cached content without reloading it from the server (since you sounded so sure, I had to try it myself -- back button works with the network cable unplugged).
What's new here is that not only the page content, but also the DOM tree is saved -- there's no need to render the page again. With complex pages this is quite noticeable.
Sure. It's just that normally stockholders like their companies to only do business in areas the companies are good at. As in "I'm perfectly capable of investing into voip myself, if I thought that was smart".
A move like this should have some justification other than "we think VOIP is good business", otherwise the stockholders would rather have the cash used to buy Skype as dividend to invest it themselves (to VOIP if that's what they think is wise)...
In other words: if Ebay has nothing to offer Skype but money, it's going to look very bad to the stockholders.
I originally chose my preferred file format based on quality and freeness and support. I'm still prepared to change to another format, based on those same properties. You may call that being emotionally committed to a file format if you want to -- it does sound a little degrading, so I'd prefer you didn't.
My choice means that the ipod product line hasn't got anything to offer me at the moment. That could mean I'm part of a minuscule market segment Apple is not interested in, but I'm not sure about it: There are companies producing ogg enabled devices, so there seems to be a market for them, right? Without knowing anything about ipod the platform and the difficulty of development on it, I can't really speculate on the costs of adding ogg support to ipod either... But maybe you have better information.
Someone rich, who wants to take over the player market, and has a history of launching proxy wars to harass and intimidate its competitors, on feeble or completely false pretexts.
Someone who has been fighting hard to get software patents enabled in Europe, through proxy groups such as the BSA and C4C.
Linux growth according to those figures) has been something like 20%/year. "Treading water" like that for 15 years or so would make Linux the dominant OS.
I'm not claiming that number has any statistical value, just pointing out that your comment has very little to do with reality.
That's Lexus, and it really is cool. Just walk to your car and open the door... Once you push the start button it naturally adjusts the seat, mirrors, steering wheel and radio stations automatically. The 'key' is large though, definitely not credit card sized.
Bashing the current US administration may be cool. Often it seems to not be misplaced though. Anyway, I had the impression that what the grandparent wrote was very close to an accepted truth? I mean they didn't sell the chemical weapon components themselves, but knew and very much approved of it -- "the enemy of Iran is my friend".
So.... why my isn't my car called a Lotus/Toyota Elise, but instead is just called a Lotus Elise?
Honest opinion? They're called just Lotuses for the same reason they call Lexus a Lexus... People wouldn't buy them if they were Toyota Lotuses and Toyota Lexuses. It would still be fair and informative to call 'em that, I think.
I really think we ought to stop making these Operating System - car comparisons. They always come up, and they rarely bring anything to the discussion...
Almost as bad, it's buggy as hell and slow. Why does opening a menu from the panel take 2 seconds on my 1.4Ghz Athlon? It should open in less than 1/4 of a second for seamless operation. It should open in milliseconds to not be an embarrassment.
Just wanted to let you know that there was/is something seriously borked with your system... Menus open instantly (or definitely in less than 1/4 secs) on my 400Mhz machine.
You should have become a journalist -- that was some major twisting of the truth: The Gates Foundation actually funded Cascadia:
The mission of the Cascadia Center is to support the development of a balanced, integrated, and expanded transportation system for people and goods in central Puget Sound and the greater Cascadia region of Washington, British Columbia, and Oregon.
Cascadia Center is part of Discovery Institute, which does support creationism as a science. So there was a grain of truth in your accusation -- it would have been a great headline...
I agree with you on almost all points, but the last one is not, in my opinion, true:
The distro MUST allow the user to install their own software and this would just entail some boxes that the user would just click through without thinking about it. Not just that, but you don't even need root access to spread a worm/virus. You just need direct or indirect access to an internet connected program, such as e-mail. IT can spread entirely within a regular user's account.
A regular user does not need to install their own programs. I'm using Ubuntu as the example here, since that's what I am using: Official "guaranteed" Ubuntu repositories include everything they really need. As a side effect of only installing via Synaptic (or something similar) a regular user does not even need to know how to set the executable bit on their email attachments...
I agree that a regular user coming from the Windows world might object at first (Whaddaya mean I can't install this desktop eyecandy stuff I found in a seedy corner of the 'net?... I should install gdesklets from Synaptic instead? Naah...), but I don't think there are 'real' reasons for not accepting a different way of installing stuff.
You're saying I didn't read the GP, but I'm not sure you read my five liner...
* I'm not claiming Intel is not crooked.
* I'm not saying Intel doesn't use FUD in general.
* I just wanted to comment that Otellinis response was the standard corporate response. No market leader is ever going to let a smaller competitor decide how the battle is fought...
In other words AMD did a nice marketing stunt and Intel responded with a standard (marketing driven) response. You may hate Intel how much you want, but this time they responded like any smart company would -- talking about FUD in this context is just stupid.
"products are best judged in the marketplace" == FUD? This is currently at +4, but I just can't understand where in Otellinis response there is Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt...
Correct me if I'm wrong but this is what I got from your post: When Intel tries to suggest they are faster it's FUD and not a fair contest. When AMD suggests (by challenging) that they are faster, the same does not apply?
To me this looks like a PR stunt, plain and simple.
Correct. However, I do believe that the actual release would have had the same "feature" had there not been a considerable amount of noise about it at the time (remember, Microsoft also tried to prevent DRI from getting their hands on the win3.1 beta...).
People on Slashdot love claiming that MS has intentionally broken competitor's applications on Windows or DOS, but nobody is ever able to produce a single shred of actual evidence to support this claim. Sorry, but just because the claim is repeated thousands of times in a Google search result doesn't make it true.
In my opinion there is one real case, the DR-DOS / MS-DOS -battle. It's a long story, but as an example: A Microsoft manager wrote this about Win3.1 (to the win3.1 project manager if I recall correctly): "It's pretty clear we need to make sure Windows 3.1 only runs on top of MS DOS or an OEM version of it," and "[t]he approach we will take is to detect dr 6 and refuse to load. The error message should be something like 'Invalid device driver interface.'".
Microsoft tried multiple times to get the court to throw the case out before the actual trial, and when that didn't work they settled with Caldera for an undisclosed (but allegedly massive) sum of money. I guess one could argue that the case isn't clear because of that... but go read the court docs.
Slashdot Mirror
... or maybe you (and the mod weho gave you Insightful) just have a strange sense of humour?
Unfortunately, it's still a press release, no matter how you present it...
It's not very convenient though: apt doesn't do binary diffs as far as I know, so the 2GB file would have to be downloaded every time it's changed... With 30000 users that would be 60 terabytes per update.
They didn't say the attack wasn't distributed. And I hope you weren't trying to say that handling DDOS attacks is a piece of cake...
Your point about pricing isn't really related to this in any way.
What's new here is that not only the page content, but also the DOM tree is saved -- there's no need to render the page again. With complex pages this is quite noticeable.
A move like this should have some justification other than "we think VOIP is good business", otherwise the stockholders would rather have the cash used to buy Skype as dividend to invest it themselves (to VOIP if that's what they think is wise)...
In other words: if Ebay has nothing to offer Skype but money, it's going to look very bad to the stockholders.
My choice means that the ipod product line hasn't got anything to offer me at the moment. That could mean I'm part of a minuscule market segment Apple is not interested in, but I'm not sure about it: There are companies producing ogg enabled devices, so there seems to be a market for them, right? Without knowing anything about ipod the platform and the difficulty of development on it, I can't really speculate on the costs of adding ogg support to ipod either... But maybe you have better information.
You mean Google Groups, I suppose. It's a nice interface, but I really don't see what it would bring to the slashdot-experience...
I'm not claiming that number has any statistical value, just pointing out that your comment has very little to do with reality.
That's Lexus, and it really is cool. Just walk to your car and open the door... Once you push the start button it naturally adjusts the seat, mirrors, steering wheel and radio stations automatically. The 'key' is large though, definitely not credit card sized.
Unilever was (or pretended to be) thinking of moving from unix to linux, ok?
Do you really think that a CIO of a gigantic company like Unilever should know how to secure a Linux system? Really?
Washington Post writeup on this
I really think we ought to stop making these Operating System - car comparisons. They always come up, and they rarely bring anything to the discussion...
I agree that a regular user coming from the Windows world might object at first (Whaddaya mean I can't install this desktop eyecandy stuff I found in a seedy corner of the 'net? ... I should install gdesklets from Synaptic instead? Naah...), but I don't think there are 'real' reasons for not accepting a different way of installing stuff.
* I'm not claiming Intel is not crooked.
* I'm not saying Intel doesn't use FUD in general.
* I just wanted to comment that Otellinis response was the standard corporate response. No market leader is ever going to let a smaller competitor decide how the battle is fought...
In other words AMD did a nice marketing stunt and Intel responded with a standard (marketing driven) response. You may hate Intel how much you want, but this time they responded like any smart company would -- talking about FUD in this context is just stupid.
Correct me if I'm wrong but this is what I got from your post: When Intel tries to suggest they are faster it's FUD and not a fair contest. When AMD suggests (by challenging) that they are faster, the same does not apply?
To me this looks like a PR stunt, plain and simple.
Correct. However, I do believe that the actual release would have had the same "feature" had there not been a considerable amount of noise about it at the time (remember, Microsoft also tried to prevent DRI from getting their hands on the win3.1 beta...).
Microsoft tried multiple times to get the court to throw the case out before the actual trial, and when that didn't work they settled with Caldera for an undisclosed (but allegedly massive) sum of money. I guess one could argue that the case isn't clear because of that... but go read the court docs.