If it's got enough horsepower to run XP, it should run about any emulator.
Well, my Toshi 1805-S254 came with XP, and runs that and Linux decently, but don't even try emulators on it. The graphics performance is absymal, even for the DOS mode emulators.
So, after I spend a few weeks poking my way around the source code and finally figuring out where and how to make the changes I need, I could've just gone down to BestBuy and bought another copy of Money or Quicken and have been done with it. What I'm buying is *convenience*.
Of course you are, but you are assuming that you absolutely will be able to buy the feature you want by swinging on down to the store and buying your copy of whatever. Simply because you're in the store waving your credit card around doesn't make the feature you want magically appear.
You see, if the vendor doesn't think the feature you want is worth implementing, it won't get implemented; proprietary software developers are generally paranoid about giving you the means to implement it or pay someone else to implement it.
The hits I got talk about a local Fox affiliate, not the Fox News Channel organization. While it would be silly to say there are no ties between the two, it would be much more silly to try to say FNC is somehow responsible for it.
Shall we also pass legislation when the job market swings the other way, putting employers at a disadvantage? I would assume that we'd repeal the pro-employee legislation at the same time.
...if you had asked "Do you think the US should unilaterally declare war on Irak?"
Good thing we didn't! 50 countries on-board last I heard; mostly former communist bloc countries who know what it's like to live under a repressive regime.
But for some reason, the same people who wouldn't stay if they never got increases would stick around if he cuts their salary, so he has to have a law passed against him?
Someone really needs to start an extra-American hyper technology-driven society with some priorities besides war-war-war. Brotherhood. Unity. Peace. Peace through power! One vision one purpose!
Feel free. Just don't expect anyone to sign a mutual defense treaty with you for when the bad guys show up at your doorstep.
You don't honestly believe that if you remove Saddam there wont be any more of the so called 'evil doers' to take his place?
That has to be one of the most inane arguments I've heard against dispensing any kind of justice. By that logic, no criminal should ever be arrested, no court should ever convict -- because, well, there are more bad guys out there.
You can't be so naive to think that killing peoples fathers, brothers and mothers will actually induce a population that smiles wholeheartedly in the fact of America?
Our goal is to remove the regime that threatens the world, and in removing that regime liberate Iraq. Seeing as today, Saddam tortures dissenters in ways that can only with great charity be called "cruel", I think most would prefer our strategy of taking out the regime while doing everything possible to limit collateral damage to the status quo.
War is never pretty. Saddam forced our hand. We'll make the best we can of it. In the end, the world will be safer -- Iraq included.
Or maybe America should have never fought for its independence, since it necessarily involved killing people? I'd like to see you say what you say today, if that had not happened.
Re:Scary world we live in..
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
True enough.. though I see some scary so-called "security" measures being taken against things in our general life, including the net and our freedom thereof.
Certainly. I reserve some of my highest distaste for those who exploit national security to further their own agendas. But I'm not sure what your links have to do with that? (Not that I think UCITA et al is a good thing...)
Uhhhh.... it did. And, well that seemed to solve a lot didn't it?
It should have, but Bush Sr. dropped the ball, on bad advice (not that I think that excuses him). Saddam should have been taken out in 1991. He wasn't, and the Iraqi deaths since then because Saddam was sacrificing his peoples' well-being in order to build up his own military could have been averted.
But now that we have a president who can make the hard decisions, and we will make it right, and be safer for it.
Re:Scary world we live in..
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
He just said "On my orders.." *shivers*
I for one am glad that Bush takes responsibility for what we've trusted him with here. By contrast, our last president couldn't be found for an hour when the CIA had bin Laden in their sights, then waffled for another hour until the window of opportunity was gone.
I can't begin to imagine where this might take us..
It will take us to a safer world and it will take the Iraqi people to liberation, simply put. None of it would be necessary if the man who invaded Kuwait in 1991 respected the disarmament required of him. His choices are what brought this on.
Re:Early weird news reports
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Knowing CNN, none of this surprises me.
Re:Michael Moore's Letter to Governor Bush
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, you agree with Michael Moore. What a surprise, to hear your opinion of those who listen to Rush Limbaugh.
Re:Michael Moore's Letter to Governor Bush
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Dear Governor Bush:
From this single line, I can extrapolate Michael Moore's attitude, and deduce just about how much weight you can give anything he says (read: none).
The bottom line is that everything he says comes tainted by his axe-grinding over the outcome of the 2000 presidental election. Even if I were to ignore his mockery of 9/11 victims and other tragedies for his own personal profit, I can't take his rants against Bush seriously for the simple reason that it's obvious he simply hates the man.
You forgot step two: twiddle thumbs (small packages), eat dinner (medium-size packages), go to bed and pray that it doesn't error out overnight (the biggies).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, my Toshi 1805-S254 came with XP, and runs that and Linux decently, but don't even try emulators on it. The graphics performance is absymal, even for the DOS mode emulators.
Of course you are, but you are assuming that you absolutely will be able to buy the feature you want by swinging on down to the store and buying your copy of whatever. Simply because you're in the store waving your credit card around doesn't make the feature you want magically appear.
You see, if the vendor doesn't think the feature you want is worth implementing, it won't get implemented; proprietary software developers are generally paranoid about giving you the means to implement it or pay someone else to implement it.
That made me curious too. How much can there possibly be to say about RSS? 222 pages' worth? Hmm.
So do you use your system as root all the time, or is your X installation world-writable?
Oops! Komodo is ActiveState's IDE, based on Mozilla tech.
Nobody in their right mind is going to name a project after guano, though. You may be on to something there.
The hits I got talk about a local Fox affiliate, not the Fox News Channel organization. While it would be silly to say there are no ties between the two, it would be much more silly to try to say FNC is somehow responsible for it.
Oh no, people might watch something and agree with it!
Quickly! We must get the government to stop this! Only Vendekkai-approved news sources must be allowed to have audiences!
And this justifies legislation why, again?
Shall we also pass legislation when the job market swings the other way, putting employers at a disadvantage? I would assume that we'd repeal the pro-employee legislation at the same time.
Good thing we didn't! 50 countries on-board last I heard; mostly former communist bloc countries who know what it's like to live under a repressive regime.
But for some reason, the same people who wouldn't stay if they never got increases would stick around if he cuts their salary, so he has to have a law passed against him?
Feel free. Just don't expect anyone to sign a mutual defense treaty with you for when the bad guys show up at your doorstep.
Oh yes, we need nationalized health care. Maybe we can wait 80 weeks for a tonsillectomy then. Please.
How do you do that?
That's really pertinent to this discussion, seeing as how the laws in question are state laws and all.
When you're done grinding your axe, can I borrow it?
Ugh, ugh, get (it) out of my mind!
Seriously, the Lynch edit was bad. The Smithee version of the same film was pretty good. If you can get past Kyle MacLachlan...
Does this strike anyone else as rather, umm, silly? Well, maybe not so much the ActiveX part, but having to disable JavaScript?
That has to be one of the most inane arguments I've heard against dispensing any kind of justice. By that logic, no criminal should ever be arrested, no court should ever convict -- because, well, there are more bad guys out there.
Our goal is to remove the regime that threatens the world, and in removing that regime liberate Iraq. Seeing as today, Saddam tortures dissenters in ways that can only with great charity be called "cruel", I think most would prefer our strategy of taking out the regime while doing everything possible to limit collateral damage to the status quo.
War is never pretty. Saddam forced our hand. We'll make the best we can of it. In the end, the world will be safer -- Iraq included.
Or maybe America should have never fought for its independence, since it necessarily involved killing people? I'd like to see you say what you say today, if that had not happened.
Certainly. I reserve some of my highest distaste for those who exploit national security to further their own agendas. But I'm not sure what your links have to do with that? (Not that I think UCITA et al is a good thing...)
It should have, but Bush Sr. dropped the ball, on bad advice (not that I think that excuses him). Saddam should have been taken out in 1991. He wasn't, and the Iraqi deaths since then because Saddam was sacrificing his peoples' well-being in order to build up his own military could have been averted.
But now that we have a president who can make the hard decisions, and we will make it right, and be safer for it.
I for one am glad that Bush takes responsibility for what we've trusted him with here. By contrast, our last president couldn't be found for an hour when the CIA had bin Laden in their sights, then waffled for another hour until the window of opportunity was gone.
It will take us to a safer world and it will take the Iraqi people to liberation, simply put. None of it would be necessary if the man who invaded Kuwait in 1991 respected the disarmament required of him. His choices are what brought this on.
Knowing CNN, none of this surprises me.
Hmm, you agree with Michael Moore. What a surprise, to hear your opinion of those who listen to Rush Limbaugh.
From this single line, I can extrapolate Michael Moore's attitude, and deduce just about how much weight you can give anything he says (read: none).
The bottom line is that everything he says comes tainted by his axe-grinding over the outcome of the 2000 presidental election. Even if I were to ignore his mockery of 9/11 victims and other tragedies for his own personal profit, I can't take his rants against Bush seriously for the simple reason that it's obvious he simply hates the man.
So modify your client to do so.
Which works until people start using uuencode, base64, et al...
You forgot step two: twiddle thumbs (small packages), eat dinner (medium-size packages), go to bed and pray that it doesn't error out overnight (the biggies).