So does Mozilla Firebird. A load of my friends wouldn't switch to Opera a few years ago because they relied upon this feature so much, but they're all Firebird converts now.
I always wondered how entire Linux distributions could be given away for noth... oh, wait.
The commercial use isn't something they care about. They just want recognition for their work and compliance with the terms and conditions they have set forth.
Right, but fortunately the rest of us live in the United States, and not Weenie McCrazyland, where Peppermint Moneytrees solve conflicts of interest with a wave of Ayn Rand's nutsack and the Good King Lucky Foopoopenstien's Invisible Hand ensures that greed always comes second to morality.
I don't see what this situation has to do with greed or morality. It boils down to special interest groups screaming "racist" that are so offended by minutia they think that their beliefs of what should and should not be said in media should supersede the Constitution.
The American public seems to have this notion engrained within their minds that the courts are stupid. They aren't. They're people just like the rest of us, and most of the legal professionals in this country happen to be fairly intelligent. I'm really getting tired of hearing the spin put on the McDonald's coffee case every time it's cited. The coffee the woman received was 190 degrees, and if I recall correctly she required plastic surgery and/or skin grafts after receiving the burns. That's not negligence?
Thankfully, I've noticed lately that a lot of stupid warnings on things seem to be disappearing. No "Warning: knives are sharp." or "plastic bag may cause suffocation" are to be seen. It seems consumers are finally beginning to realize that they're not really responsible for every dumbass thing a consumer does.
People are smart enough to determine what's an influence on someone and what's somebody just being a dumbass. I think pretty much anyone can agree that if someone plays a video game and goes out and shoots people, they certainly had underlying mental issues to begin with.
Of course, the violence in the game is not what the article concerns, so you may want to at least read the damned summary before posting comments.
If this issue should be decided anywhere, it should be in the courts.
If this issue should be decided anywhere, it should be in the marketplace, not the courts. Capitalism is a democracy in and of itself in that if something is too racist to be sold, no one will buy it and the company will either change its tactics or be put out of business. And the marketplace, unlike the courtroom or legislature, is a place where every person can cast their vote individually. Special interest lobby groups have no undue influence on the open market.
The beauty of the capitalist system is, of course, that if you don't like something you can opt not to purchase it, and let the market work out what is and is not acceptable rather than a handful of fringe groups with political agendas. Nowhere in any town, state or national ordinances that I'm aware of is it enumerated that one is legally required to purchase and play this game.
First off, where do you get off that everyone defending the Constitution and the rights enumerated therein is a "liberal?" It seems like it's almost trendy these days to refer to the Constitution like it's some antiquated relic preventing this country from being run the way it ought to be. I happen to consider myself a centrist on most issues, leaning slightly to the right on economic issues and slightly to the left on social ones. Though, the broad-stroked brush with which you paint everyone with opposing ideals ought to say enough about you without even needing to go into detail concerning your actual views.
A video game is a form of expression, a work of art, just like a movie or music. I'm not trying to imply a "slippery slope" chronology here, which has been all too cliched recently, but legally, to permit a "ban" of this game would set a legal precedent permitting songs with racist lyrics or movies deemed "politically incorrect" to be banned just for insensitivity to certain cultures. You don't see anything wrong with that?
Haven't we lost enough of our civil liberties in the last two and a half years?
OpenOffice uses its own application toolkit, if I'm not mistaken. Its new platform-specific renderer uses GTK+-alike widgets on Unix OSes, and native Win32 controls on Windows.
Also, KDE != Qt. Qt has existed on Mac for years anyway.
This is a ridiculous notion. This sort of thing might have passed in 1996 -- but even the most illiterate lawmakers are privy to some sort of technology knowledge now, and the past wrongs, like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, are finally beginning to be openly challenged with amendments like the Digital Media Consumer Rights Act.
A lot of posters on Slashdot seem to have this ridiculous belief set engrained that our entire Congress is owned by major corporations and the ones that aren't are merely puppets who are too ignorant to understand our elitist technology issues. This isn't the case. Computing is ubiquitous. People understand the consequences, and besides, people don't trust Microsoft. Do you really think people are going to vote for a law backed by a corporation that's been slapped with more antitrust suits than I can count? Of course not.
And to rebut the argument itself, how many corporations are using Linux/BSD in the backend? How about the military? Do you think they would stand by and let this happen? Of course not. Take off your tinfoil hat and start letting your brain breathe a little.
(Oh and they whine that the Opteron was running a 9800 XT (and the G5 a 9800 Pro). When the difference is only about 8% - and wouldn't have made that much difference when the G5 looses by 40% in the Unreal Tournament benchmark.)
Now, I realize that you're just an annoying troll, but what exactly would make you think that Unreal Tournament would even be using 100% of a 2 GHz CPU?
Anandtech is generally the best place to find information on anything you're looking for and is where all the cool kids go. They go above and beyond the call of duty in all of their reviews, and their monitor reviews are unsurpassed.
No way, I saw them twice on this tour with Dimmu Borgir, Nevermore and Children of Bodom and they were awesome, they kicked the asses of pretty much any ba......oh.
I'll often, in debate, equate Michael Moore to being the "liberal Ann Coulter," but in all fairness it's really not the case. Moore is absolutely batshit insane and his ultra-liberal and oftentimes hypocritical/conflicting views on many issues leave much to be desired, but I never got the impression from him, even through that shitfest that was the Oscars, that he blamed conservatives for all of the problems in this country. Sure, he might have named plenty of neocons that he didn't like at various times, but he never set out to imply that conservatives in general were the reason for the sorry state of affairs in America right now.
This isn't meant to defend Moore, by the way; I still can't stand him. It's meant to demonize Coulter for being the hateful, overly-emotional and illogical cunt she is.
Erm, there's plenty of technical issues that, yes, also suck. Users, by default, belong to the Administrators group? Unprivileged services like Print Spooler run under the LocalSystem account? The windowing system doesn't have any authentication mechanism and it's easy to elevate user privileges if any higher-level user is running a process with a window handle? Hundreds of stupid buffer overflow problems that aren't caught by shitty peer review processes? Patches released once per month?
I'm afraid my reasons for staying clear of Windows on the desktop are pretty varied.
At the very least, the Linux desktop movement can learn from BeOS's legendary responsiveness. Kernel 2.6.0 is a good step in the right direction, but GTK+ still just feels painfully slow.
And also void your warranty in the process. If I'm going to spend $400+ on an MP3 player (hint: I'm not) I'm going to make damn well sure it lasts me as long as the warranty and/or AppleCare covers.
A car company will still provide parts for their older products for decades.
But we're simply talking about low-overhead manufacturing of a part that is fabricated already and needs no additional engineering or maintenance over the years; just put the existing instructions into the machine and watch the part come out. This is equivalent to companies keeping existing patches for outdated software readily available, which most companies, including Microsoft, do.
Re:The Microsoft line of products is still support
on
Oldest Supported Software?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
To make the all too common analogy, if you have a car, and 5 years from now it breaks down, you bring it to a mechanic, he says "sorry, this model isn't supported anymore, time to upgrade!", what the hell do you say to that? The problem of software companies to stop supporting their products is ridiculous. If you're going to make something, do it right, don't pussyfoot around making a good product, and at least have the balls to admit to your mistake and fix it when the shit jumps off. Screw you all software engineers. Where the hell is my abacus?
That's a terrible analogy. If your car breaks down five years after you bought it, and you return it to the dealer, do you know what he's going to say? "You only have a five-year warranty on parts and labor. Go find a mechanic." The mechanic is much more akin to service-oriented companies like Progeny who are offering commercial support for products that have been EOLed.
Slashdot Mirror
So does Mozilla Firebird. A load of my friends wouldn't switch to Opera a few years ago because they relied upon this feature so much, but they're all Firebird converts now.
I always wondered how entire Linux distributions could be given away for noth... oh, wait.
The commercial use isn't something they care about. They just want recognition for their work and compliance with the terms and conditions they have set forth.
I don't see what this situation has to do with greed or morality. It boils down to special interest groups screaming "racist" that are so offended by minutia they think that their beliefs of what should and should not be said in media should supersede the Constitution.
The American public seems to have this notion engrained within their minds that the courts are stupid. They aren't. They're people just like the rest of us, and most of the legal professionals in this country happen to be fairly intelligent. I'm really getting tired of hearing the spin put on the McDonald's coffee case every time it's cited. The coffee the woman received was 190 degrees, and if I recall correctly she required plastic surgery and/or skin grafts after receiving the burns. That's not negligence?
Thankfully, I've noticed lately that a lot of stupid warnings on things seem to be disappearing. No "Warning: knives are sharp." or "plastic bag may cause suffocation" are to be seen. It seems consumers are finally beginning to realize that they're not really responsible for every dumbass thing a consumer does.
People are smart enough to determine what's an influence on someone and what's somebody just being a dumbass. I think pretty much anyone can agree that if someone plays a video game and goes out and shoots people, they certainly had underlying mental issues to begin with.
Of course, the violence in the game is not what the article concerns, so you may want to at least read the damned summary before posting comments.
If this issue should be decided anywhere, it should be in the marketplace, not the courts. Capitalism is a democracy in and of itself in that if something is too racist to be sold, no one will buy it and the company will either change its tactics or be put out of business. And the marketplace, unlike the courtroom or legislature, is a place where every person can cast their vote individually. Special interest lobby groups have no undue influence on the open market.
The beauty of the capitalist system is, of course, that if you don't like something you can opt not to purchase it, and let the market work out what is and is not acceptable rather than a handful of fringe groups with political agendas. Nowhere in any town, state or national ordinances that I'm aware of is it enumerated that one is legally required to purchase and play this game.
First off, where do you get off that everyone defending the Constitution and the rights enumerated therein is a "liberal?" It seems like it's almost trendy these days to refer to the Constitution like it's some antiquated relic preventing this country from being run the way it ought to be. I happen to consider myself a centrist on most issues, leaning slightly to the right on economic issues and slightly to the left on social ones. Though, the broad-stroked brush with which you paint everyone with opposing ideals ought to say enough about you without even needing to go into detail concerning your actual views.
A video game is a form of expression, a work of art, just like a movie or music. I'm not trying to imply a "slippery slope" chronology here, which has been all too cliched recently, but legally, to permit a "ban" of this game would set a legal precedent permitting songs with racist lyrics or movies deemed "politically incorrect" to be banned just for insensitivity to certain cultures. You don't see anything wrong with that?
Haven't we lost enough of our civil liberties in the last two and a half years?
OpenOffice uses its own application toolkit, if I'm not mistaken. Its new platform-specific renderer uses GTK+-alike widgets on Unix OSes, and native Win32 controls on Windows.
Also, KDE != Qt. Qt has existed on Mac for years anyway.
Unfortunately, it wasn't a woman, and this is, sadly, the largest DDR demographic.
This is a ridiculous notion. This sort of thing might have passed in 1996 -- but even the most illiterate lawmakers are privy to some sort of technology knowledge now, and the past wrongs, like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, are finally beginning to be openly challenged with amendments like the Digital Media Consumer Rights Act.
A lot of posters on Slashdot seem to have this ridiculous belief set engrained that our entire Congress is owned by major corporations and the ones that aren't are merely puppets who are too ignorant to understand our elitist technology issues. This isn't the case. Computing is ubiquitous. People understand the consequences, and besides, people don't trust Microsoft. Do you really think people are going to vote for a law backed by a corporation that's been slapped with more antitrust suits than I can count? Of course not.
And to rebut the argument itself, how many corporations are using Linux/BSD in the backend? How about the military? Do you think they would stand by and let this happen? Of course not. Take off your tinfoil hat and start letting your brain breathe a little.
Now, I realize that you're just an annoying troll, but what exactly would make you think that Unreal Tournament would even be using 100% of a 2 GHz CPU?
Anandtech is generally the best place to find information on anything you're looking for and is where all the cool kids go. They go above and beyond the call of duty in all of their reviews, and their monitor reviews are unsurpassed.
If it's good enough for kernel.org it's good enough for me.
...that imp3.gif looks distressingly similar to certain famous Holocaust photo featuring Night author Elie Wiesel?
Better than being the national hymen, I suppose.
No way, I saw them twice on this tour with Dimmu Borgir, Nevermore and Children of Bodom and they were awesome, they kicked the asses of pretty much any ba...
Or how about just applying the patch that's been freely available for six months?
*glares at manager*
I'll often, in debate, equate Michael Moore to being the "liberal Ann Coulter," but in all fairness it's really not the case. Moore is absolutely batshit insane and his ultra-liberal and oftentimes hypocritical/conflicting views on many issues leave much to be desired, but I never got the impression from him, even through that shitfest that was the Oscars, that he blamed conservatives for all of the problems in this country. Sure, he might have named plenty of neocons that he didn't like at various times, but he never set out to imply that conservatives in general were the reason for the sorry state of affairs in America right now.
This isn't meant to defend Moore, by the way; I still can't stand him. It's meant to demonize Coulter for being the hateful, overly-emotional and illogical cunt she is.
Erm, there's plenty of technical issues that, yes, also suck. Users, by default, belong to the Administrators group? Unprivileged services like Print Spooler run under the LocalSystem account? The windowing system doesn't have any authentication mechanism and it's easy to elevate user privileges if any higher-level user is running a process with a window handle? Hundreds of stupid buffer overflow problems that aren't caught by shitty peer review processes? Patches released once per month?
I'm afraid my reasons for staying clear of Windows on the desktop are pretty varied.
I do, for precisely this reason. ;) However, there are plenty of people who judge the entire speed of desktop Linux off of Gnome and Mozilla.
At the very least, the Linux desktop movement can learn from BeOS's legendary responsiveness. Kernel 2.6.0 is a good step in the right direction, but GTK+ still just feels painfully slow.
epenis++
And also void your warranty in the process. If I'm going to spend $400+ on an MP3 player (hint: I'm not) I'm going to make damn well sure it lasts me as long as the warranty and/or AppleCare covers.
That's a terrible analogy. If your car breaks down five years after you bought it, and you return it to the dealer, do you know what he's going to say? "You only have a five-year warranty on parts and labor. Go find a mechanic." The mechanic is much more akin to service-oriented companies like Progeny who are offering commercial support for products that have been EOLed.