I'm curios to know about you people in PA. How many people provide broadband, in what area, and for how much. Also where are you located (city/county) in PA.
Wave to the cops? hah. You've obviously never been ticketed for going 57 in a 55, or something equally outrageous. How about a cop sitting behind a tree at the exact point where the limit drops from 50 to 30. The police have stopped caring about actually helping people and improving highway saftey, and turned it into a game to see how many people they can ticket and how much revenue they can generate.
Funny thing this.
I got pulled over 3 times on my way to/from work going through a particular area in colombus, OH; one from the cop hiding behind the tree at the speed change area (the actual warning for the change of speed was hidden by the tree!). I was doing nothing wrong all 3 times because I had no reason to hurry. I found out in the news paper a day after my third ticket that the governor, sheriff, and half the department there had been found guilty of trumping up charges, throwing away the ticket, and then taking the money from the fake tickets and pocketing it!
That's my story. I don't normally speed unless it's under the allowance that says you can must move with the traffic.
I remember going into a sam's club and "Buying" netscape gold! Then the browser wars hit hard. Now selling a browser isn't even viable until the war ends (unless you're opera or omniWeb of course).
Actually looking at the site [] you have the option of using IE or NS. That may mean that any NS compatible browser could use it regardless of OS unless they are really dumb and are using activeX (which I don't put past them). Here's the minimum requirements:
Minimum Computer Requirements
Next comes the end to video recording and...gasp...computer data recording. The International "software piracy" issue has esculated and become too much of a scape goat of late to rip away any freedom and right of use that they want to. Watch out.
Hey stop stealing our bandwidth for our ip over carrier pigeons!
It is not impossible to comply with apple.
on
iBox Episode 2
·
· Score: 1
"...it is wrong for Apple to exert this sort of control over basic hardware, and also to irrevocably tie its hardware to its software..."
While this seems like a valid point it really is not. Let me explain.
Ignoring the fact that Apple does not irrevocably tie its hardware to its software [yellowdoglinux.com] there are many reasons why this is flawed thinking. First of all if I made a product and wanted to sell it for a higher profit above what my competition sells something akin to it for it is my right to do so. If customers don't like it they don't have to buy it. If then I decide to sell parts to replace parts that might go bad in my product and I specify that it's for repair only again it's my right. If people don't like it they don't have to buy it. That's how a free market works: it doesn't matter if it's fair/competitive or not.
I would love for things to be competitive and I agree there needs to be someone to fill in the cheaper market. I don't agree Apple should be cheaper than x86 pc's. The ppc architecture is much better than the x86 one: so much so that I traded straight up my 1.2ghz 512ram x86 hp laptop for 600mhz 256ram ppc iBook laptop and have never looked back. It's not Apple that I'm crazy for and if someone else made decent systems on this architecture I would take a serious look at it (so if anyone knows of a manufacture please tell me). Yellowdog Linux is more than a capable OS for the ppc arch. However that is all personal preference and not at all the point.
The point is that the contract should be abided by or not signed at all. If it's not signed then eventually Apple will have to change it to survive or not survive at all. The customers and sellers have that choice; and some are taking that choice to heart. I feel that the same goes for all MS stuff too even though I loath the company.
Fair enough. If it's not important to you that's all you have to say. However anyone can afford this if it's important to them: if you have the patience to save a little cash everytime you get a chance over the course of a couple months and cut down on the pizza, beer, etc..., and walk to locations as much as possible. There's sacrifices to be made for things that are important. But then I digress because you state that it's not important to you.
Well let's see. Since p2p is the way the net IS heading this seems like it's coming at the perfect time! Also at one time the first "internet" was free and there were still the same naysayers around. Look where it is now. But better yet to show how this can be funded you need only look to verizon and their succes with "hotspots".
Let's say that one person wants to set up enough equipment in his building so that 100 people could dial into his network which has a connection to this other wireless net. If there's enough interest, if there's enough content and bandwidth available on this wireless net, via computers serving things that can only be gotten on this wireless net, in it he could charge for those connections. All of a sudden you have a dialup ISP on your hands where "rural" people could access this new net and use it's content. I only use dialup as an example; you could do a variety of connections to provide this service.
Don't be blinded by your ego and say absolutely that this could not work financially or otherwise: or even that everyone connecting to this will need WI-FI! I have to fight this myself as I'm almost positive there's flaws in these very comments. Just leave it open and you'll be alright.
After reading all that you must realize I just described the original structure of the internet we all know now. That's what it was but isn't now. This wireless net gives us a chance to start from scratch and do it over again! This is ultimate freedom in action.
I think it's a great idea for someone to step into this type of project. I'll post a WI-FI here and perhaps I can help rally some local ISP's to do the same. If everyone does their part the net could be free again: free to create new technologies: free to cast off the goverments trying to place there hands in our cookie jar: free to breath again: and finally free to rant all we want on the "new" slashdot;)!
Here, here!
My what a fine day it will be when all things settle down and minimum requirements stay the same from one month to the next.
BTW, we can help this by developing for the past OS's/Hardware. There are plenty of groups who would love the help.
Gee I remember owning an acer p166mhz that had a built in phone. You could actually make phone calls using IBM's mwave modem without it being choppy.
No innovation here.
The ability to switch users without losing state still isn't in mac os X; running 10.2.5 here.
However the ability to run multiple users at the same time (via remote log on or ssh) is something that os x has and windows is catching up to.
Before you reply though I have to say that the various versions of 'nix' had it first. Osx just happened to inherit it via bsd as far as I can see. I may be wrong so don't shoot me;).
BTW, Switching is one of those "features" that are marketed to the unknowledgable public. It's a great way to market your product and make yourself seem to be the best. That's the fault of the other OS's for not marketing it first. So following that line of thought it's the alternative OS's fault that Microsoft has such a consumer share.
I'm a recent switcher. When Safari came out and I used it for a while I kicked IE to the curb. I have used the latest Mozilla (unstable as heck despite claims of stability), Netscape (even worse), Opera 6.2, and Chimera (slow rendering-didn't they have a name change recently). I was so dissappointed them I kicked it to the curb and used IE for a while. Then Safari came out. I used it for a month, LOVED it, and kicked IE out after that. As you can see I give all browsers a chance. I use Opera on Windows (Crap!), Konq on Linux, and Safari on OSX. All these browsers are made to run on their specific platforms and do a great job. I can't use mozilla code; it's too slow, bloated, and unstable; the only one's who use it seem to be HUGE fans of it but I can't use it.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you. What are your average d/u speeds and who is you dsl company?
I'm curios to know about you people in PA. How many people provide broadband, in what area, and for how much. Also where are you located (city/county) in PA.
I got pulled over 3 times on my way to/from work going through a particular area in colombus, OH; one from the cop hiding behind the tree at the speed change area (the actual warning for the change of speed was hidden by the tree!). I was doing nothing wrong all 3 times because I had no reason to hurry. I found out in the news paper a day after my third ticket that the governor, sheriff, and half the department there had been found guilty of trumping up charges, throwing away the ticket, and then taking the money from the fake tickets and pocketing it!
That's my story. I don't normally speed unless it's under the allowance that says you can must move with the traffic.
Good idea. That's the same thing I do with safari. Nice to know other people think alike.
I remember going into a sam's club and "Buying" netscape gold! Then the browser wars hit hard. Now selling a browser isn't even viable until the war ends (unless you're opera or omniWeb of course).
well if you're using opera, mozilla, safari, etc... you can just tell it you're using ie 5.5
Sorry here is the link: http://www.serveusa.gov/public/aca.aspx
Mod this please. Calm and well put.
Next comes the end to video recording and...gasp...computer data recording. The International "software piracy" issue has esculated and become too much of a scape goat of late to rip away any freedom and right of use that they want to. Watch out.
Hey stop stealing our bandwidth for our ip over carrier pigeons!
"...it is wrong for Apple to exert this sort of control over basic hardware, and also to irrevocably tie its hardware to its software..."
While this seems like a valid point it really is not. Let me explain.
Ignoring the fact that Apple does not irrevocably tie its hardware to its software [yellowdoglinux.com] there are many reasons why this is flawed thinking. First of all if I made a product and wanted to sell it for a higher profit above what my competition sells something akin to it for it is my right to do so. If customers don't like it they don't have to buy it. If then I decide to sell parts to replace parts that might go bad in my product and I specify that it's for repair only again it's my right. If people don't like it they don't have to buy it. That's how a free market works: it doesn't matter if it's fair/competitive or not.
I would love for things to be competitive and I agree there needs to be someone to fill in the cheaper market. I don't agree Apple should be cheaper than x86 pc's. The ppc architecture is much better than the x86 one: so much so that I traded straight up my 1.2ghz 512ram x86 hp laptop for 600mhz 256ram ppc iBook laptop and have never looked back. It's not Apple that I'm crazy for and if someone else made decent systems on this architecture I would take a serious look at it (so if anyone knows of a manufacture please tell me). Yellowdog Linux is more than a capable OS for the ppc arch. However that is all personal preference and not at all the point.
The point is that the contract should be abided by or not signed at all. If it's not signed then eventually Apple will have to change it to survive or not survive at all. The customers and sellers have that choice; and some are taking that choice to heart. I feel that the same goes for all MS stuff too even though I loath the company.
Fair enough. If it's not important to you that's all you have to say. However anyone can afford this if it's important to them: if you have the patience to save a little cash everytime you get a chance over the course of a couple months and cut down on the pizza, beer, etc..., and walk to locations as much as possible. There's sacrifices to be made for things that are important. But then I digress because you state that it's not important to you.
Lame excuse. http://www.turnpoint.net/wireless/cantennahowto.ht ml
Well let's see. Since p2p is the way the net IS heading this seems like it's coming at the perfect time! Also at one time the first "internet" was free and there were still the same naysayers around. Look where it is now. But better yet to show how this can be funded you need only look to verizon and their succes with "hotspots".
;)!
Let's say that one person wants to set up enough equipment in his building so that 100 people could dial into his network which has a connection to this other wireless net. If there's enough interest, if there's enough content and bandwidth available on this wireless net, via computers serving things that can only be gotten on this wireless net, in it he could charge for those connections. All of a sudden you have a dialup ISP on your hands where "rural" people could access this new net and use it's content. I only use dialup as an example; you could do a variety of connections to provide this service.
Don't be blinded by your ego and say absolutely that this could not work financially or otherwise: or even that everyone connecting to this will need WI-FI! I have to fight this myself as I'm almost positive there's flaws in these very comments. Just leave it open and you'll be alright.
After reading all that you must realize I just described the original structure of the internet we all know now. That's what it was but isn't now. This wireless net gives us a chance to start from scratch and do it over again! This is ultimate freedom in action.
I think it's a great idea for someone to step into this type of project. I'll post a WI-FI here and perhaps I can help rally some local ISP's to do the same. If everyone does their part the net could be free again: free to create new technologies: free to cast off the goverments trying to place there hands in our cookie jar: free to breath again: and finally free to rant all we want on the "new" slashdot
Here, here!
My what a fine day it will be when all things settle down and minimum requirements stay the same from one month to the next.
BTW, we can help this by developing for the past OS's/Hardware. There are plenty of groups who would love the help.
I like to concure with this gentleman. Linux never made it this easy to do all of that at once; and I use both daily.
Gee I remember owning an acer p166mhz that had a built in phone. You could actually make phone calls using IBM's mwave modem without it being choppy. No innovation here.
The ability to switch users without losing state still isn't in mac os X; running 10.2.5 here.
;).
However the ability to run multiple users at the same time (via remote log on or ssh) is something that os x has and windows is catching up to.
Before you reply though I have to say that the various versions of 'nix' had it first. Osx just happened to inherit it via bsd as far as I can see. I may be wrong so don't shoot me
BTW, Switching is one of those "features" that are marketed to the unknowledgable public. It's a great way to market your product and make yourself seem to be the best. That's the fault of the other OS's for not marketing it first. So following that line of thought it's the alternative OS's fault that Microsoft has such a consumer share.
Jealousy...
I'm a recent switcher. When Safari came out and I used it for a while I kicked IE to the curb. I have used the latest Mozilla (unstable as heck despite claims of stability), Netscape (even worse), Opera 6.2, and Chimera (slow rendering-didn't they have a name change recently). I was so dissappointed them I kicked it to the curb and used IE for a while. Then Safari came out. I used it for a month, LOVED it, and kicked IE out after that. As you can see I give all browsers a chance. I use Opera on Windows (Crap!), Konq on Linux, and Safari on OSX. All these browsers are made to run on their specific platforms and do a great job. I can't use mozilla code; it's too slow, bloated, and unstable; the only one's who use it seem to be HUGE fans of it but I can't use it.
.NET ! Bleck!!! You really do want MS to rule the world.