Killing millions of civilians just to wipe out a dozen or so people who may or may not be planning to smuggle a nuke into your country and set it off? How is that better than terrorism? Even if you know they're trying to nuke you, you can still just shoot the bastards. We have the technology to kill individual people from many miles away. Nuking them first means you not only hate the them, but you hate their country, their race, their culture, and you want to wipe them off the face of the planet, because that's the only thing nukes are good for.
Microsoft prohibits open source implementations of their format. Unless anyone expects Wordperfect Office to make a spectacular comeback, that means that Microsoft's format is closed enough that none of its largest competitors will be able to support it. Anyone can support OpenDocument though.
From time to time, I'll assemble a new old pc out of old parts and end up having a couple large openings left on the front of the system because I can't find the plastic covers for them. I'll just pretend it's good for airflow.
SVG support has been working well for many months, but if you just try to reference an SVG from an IMG tag, it won't work. The embed tag should work though. Their website has many SVG examples, even some created and animated using javascript.
The e4x support looks pretty cool too, actually making XML userful and easy rather than just another burdensome technology chosen for its buzzword value.
Buy your drive from from someone who will advance you a new drive as part of the RMA process
Or just buy spares.
Tape drives are cheaper than ever
I am by no means an expert, but after checking some prices on Froogle, it seems cheaper to just buy a set of external hard drives and use them as though they were tapes, or use a seperate backup server. We have a lot of data though.
Other benefits of not using tapes:
Only have to back up modified files, so less hard disk wear, and backups are faster.
Flexible backups. Can do neat things like store a history of changes on one backup disk, rather than overwriting the previous.
Better chance of recovery. Tapes have a high failure rate.
Random access. Quickly recover only the files you want.
If you've ever tried programming javascript for client side error checking of complex forms, you know that standards are very non-existant in the internet world.
BS. There's a standard way to do everything a website ought to be allowed to do. My code works on every single major browser with no browser detection whatsoever. For the most part there are no special features I can provide only by sticking in some browser specific code, nor will it visibly reduce my code size. If you code for IE, you can easily produce a site that's broken in all other browsers. If you code for Mozilla, your sites will usually work everywhere.
Unless you require ActiveX (you never do), there's no reason to make a site that's IE-only. It's not as though it saved them any effort. People who set their useragent string to look like IE were able to use the site with other browsers just fine.
That must have been quite a flame war to be reported on dozens of news sites and finally Slashdot. I hope nobody was killed over it.
Though they were fired over email, I doubt this is material worthy of the "Your Rights Online" section. They were both in the same office, cursing each other during work hours, except via email rather than verbally. Then they forwarded the emails to the rest of the office to get everyone involved, rather than working like their supposed to.
I've used some dirty tricks to get specific new packages in the past. It involved adding breezy to the sources.list, reloading the package list in synaptic, upgrading only the specific package I want, and taking breezy back out of the sources.list when I'm done. If it appears the package requires just too many dependencies to be upgraded (more than 20, or large components of my desktop), I decide to just hold off until I'm ready for a full upgrade to breezy, because the risk of breaking stuff increases with every package I upgrade.
I see the animated title/menu screen as it's probably supposed to appear and I hear music. The volume is erratic and it renders at about a frame every 10 seconds. Nothing freezes up. It responds to input, but it'll take at least another 5 minutes for me to get the mouse cursor down to the "New Game" menu item, because it's only moving a few pixels a frame.
If the software company waits until exploits are wild before they patch something, they will have screwed themselves, and you can point and laugh and get all the publicity for alerting them of the vulnerability years before it was exploited and patched. It takes patience, but being able to say "I told you so" is much better than advertising a vulnerability before it's patched. Software companies like to schedule their security updates to minimize exposure. If the vulnerabilities haven't been exploited yet (who knows?), it makes sense to wait a while and release the patches in one well publicized bundle.
Slashdot Mirror
If you've ever thought of selling to WalMart, you've at least looked at EDI.
Digital media and communication encourages piracy.
Most gamers will want to use both hands. Otherwise, you have to choose between movement OR actions.
Except for the versions that will be capped to 5, or have it disabled altogether.
I bet all 7 versions of vista blow.
All 7 versions will be capped to 10 incoming SMB/CIFS connections.
It was more Microsoft's general evilness and a desire to use Linux that drove me. I think "Get the Facts" was the last straw.
How big must a company be to get the super-saver deal? And do they offer kickbacks?
Don't forget that XP will drive users to Linux in droves.
Microsoft has an army of trained bayesian modbots to score any pro-Microsoft comments as informative.
Killing millions of civilians just to wipe out a dozen or so people who may or may not be planning to smuggle a nuke into your country and set it off? How is that better than terrorism? Even if you know they're trying to nuke you, you can still just shoot the bastards. We have the technology to kill individual people from many miles away. Nuking them first means you not only hate the them, but you hate their country, their race, their culture, and you want to wipe them off the face of the planet, because that's the only thing nukes are good for.
Microsoft prohibits open source implementations of their format. Unless anyone expects Wordperfect Office to make a spectacular comeback, that means that Microsoft's format is closed enough that none of its largest competitors will be able to support it. Anyone can support OpenDocument though.
From time to time, I'll assemble a new old pc out of old parts and end up having a couple large openings left on the front of the system because I can't find the plastic covers for them. I'll just pretend it's good for airflow.
In 100 years, they'll still be known as Xena, Santa, and the Easter Bunny.
I suspect Microsoft's war on OpenGL might have contributed a bit as well.
99.9% is better than a lot of ISPs I know.
SVG support has been working well for many months, but if you just try to reference an SVG from an IMG tag, it won't work. The embed tag should work though. Their website has many SVG examples, even some created and animated using javascript.
The e4x support looks pretty cool too, actually making XML userful and easy rather than just another burdensome technology chosen for its buzzword value.
I look for 5 year warranties myself. A lot of Seagate drives have them. I haven't checked just how limited a limited warranty is though.
Or just buy spares.
Tape drives are cheaper than ever
I am by no means an expert, but after checking some prices on Froogle, it seems cheaper to just buy a set of external hard drives and use them as though they were tapes, or use a seperate backup server. We have a lot of data though.
Other benefits of not using tapes:
Maybe try resubmitting it.
If you've ever tried programming javascript for client side error checking of complex forms, you know that standards are very non-existant in the internet world.
BS. There's a standard way to do everything a website ought to be allowed to do. My code works on every single major browser with no browser detection whatsoever. For the most part there are no special features I can provide only by sticking in some browser specific code, nor will it visibly reduce my code size. If you code for IE, you can easily produce a site that's broken in all other browsers. If you code for Mozilla, your sites will usually work everywhere.
Unless you require ActiveX (you never do), there's no reason to make a site that's IE-only. It's not as though it saved them any effort. People who set their useragent string to look like IE were able to use the site with other browsers just fine.
That must have been quite a flame war to be reported on dozens of news sites and finally Slashdot. I hope nobody was killed over it.
Though they were fired over email, I doubt this is material worthy of the "Your Rights Online" section. They were both in the same office, cursing each other during work hours, except via email rather than verbally. Then they forwarded the emails to the rest of the office to get everyone involved, rather than working like their supposed to.
I've used some dirty tricks to get specific new packages in the past. It involved adding breezy to the sources.list, reloading the package list in synaptic, upgrading only the specific package I want, and taking breezy back out of the sources.list when I'm done. If it appears the package requires just too many dependencies to be upgraded (more than 20, or large components of my desktop), I decide to just hold off until I'm ready for a full upgrade to breezy, because the risk of breaking stuff increases with every package I upgrade.
I see the animated title/menu screen as it's probably supposed to appear and I hear music. The volume is erratic and it renders at about a frame every 10 seconds. Nothing freezes up. It responds to input, but it'll take at least another 5 minutes for me to get the mouse cursor down to the "New Game" menu item, because it's only moving a few pixels a frame.
If the software company waits until exploits are wild before they patch something, they will have screwed themselves, and you can point and laugh and get all the publicity for alerting them of the vulnerability years before it was exploited and patched. It takes patience, but being able to say "I told you so" is much better than advertising a vulnerability before it's patched. Software companies like to schedule their security updates to minimize exposure. If the vulnerabilities haven't been exploited yet (who knows?), it makes sense to wait a while and release the patches in one well publicized bundle.