In fact, it's very clear there are a number (four?) of buttons on there, plus it is able to recognise a "rocking" motion.
Please read to comprehend.
And with touch-sensitive technology concealed under the seamless top shell, you get the programability of a four-button mouse in a single-button design. Click, roll, squeeze and scroll. This mouse just aced the maze.
I don't see why you're being modded as insightful for this rant. I have really not the slightest idea of why you mentioned Microsoft either.
Here's a few points. First of all, you can configure KDE or Gnome not to ask. Second of all, most users are not admins. Allow me to expand on that. Most people who use computers have no idea of what is harmful and what is not harmful and will install anything. Theoretically the admin should install the basic apps (office, music, and internet) so that users won't go and install a program that'll delete their home directory or something. Third of all, you can already have users setup like that. It's called booting more than one OS, but it seems silly and redundant to me.
Oh, you mean this one?
Of course, mandrake is not the only "desktop distro" out there right now, but it's the best windows replacement distro that I've found so far. I have set up a number of PCs for friends and family running mandrake and they haven't had any problems yet.
Of course, some things can give you trouble (certain hardware combinations), but the fact of the matter is that people like you need to get out of their shells and realize that there are distros out there that are bridging the desktop gap. And you need to either support them or atleast acknowledge their existence.
But I don't think that it's going to be very successful. If only because of how it looks. If given a choice, I think that most kids would go for an iMac. And I doubt that parents will buy such an ugly box just for very young children. After all, computers generally hang around for a few years. What happens when the kids grow up?
Well, I haven't read the article yet (and by the looks of things I won't be doing it either), but offhand the only thing that I have to say is that I've never seen a Pocket PC that can stack up to the Zaurus line of handhelds made by Sharp, on either the coolness factor or the gadget factor.
It will be interesting seeing how they weighed the Pocket PC PDAs against the Linux ones, and how the fact that a number of iPaqs can be ran with either PPC or some kind of Linux.
Lindows came well after windows and was an obvious attempt to bank of off the name, while froogles.com came before google's froogle service, so unless he worked at google and had prior knowledge of froogle (which apparently isn't the cas), then it's an empty claim.
However, even if it's not a sham, it still seems like pretty shady business. Besides, how is it that only this Rolad fellow seems to know anything about it's existence (while of course having no ties to the actual company)?
including 3ActilOS, a multitasking OS, which is not even referenced by Google
Which can be taken to mean that this OS doesn't exist.
1. Your $100 or 100 deposit will be paid into an escrow account until your order is delivered.
2. Your deposit is refundable on request. In this case, we will deduct 8% to cover bank charges.
I'm sorry but something about this escrow account and deposit reeks of a scam. And if that wasn't interesting enough, I should note that the domain was just registered on May 28th of this year, which doesn't seem to be a long enough time for something to be created. I wouldn't give them my 600 bucks.
Umm.... I can't believe you were modded to +5 for getting everything wrong. No one is going to pay 3 dollars per *SONG*. We're not talking about entire cds here, we're talking about individual songs.
[Update: Apr 6 at 7:58pm CDT... Martin Schulze from the Debian team added some more information.]
Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena composed a survey in 2001[*] and discovered that it has taken the Debian security team an average of 35 days to fix vulnerbilities posted to the Bugtraq list. However, over 50% of the vulnerabilities where fixed in a 10-days time frame, and over 15% of them where fixed the same day the advisory was released! For this analysis, all vulnerabilities were treated the same, though.
He has rerun the survey based on vulnerabilities discovered between June 1st 2002 and May 31st 2003 and found out that the median value of delays between the disclosure and releasing an advisory including a correction was 10 days (average is 13.5 days). Again, for this analysis advisories were not classified with different priorities.
Have you ever considered that all of the media that you read and watch is biased?
And actually if you'd read the article, you'll notice that what they say is perfectly reasonable. Basically, the forrester report was much to narrow focused to have a fair assessment of the data.
The simplicity of the initial report is actually laughable. MS fixing 100% of its bugs? Now, remember that Microsoft's code is *not* open source, so they can wait until some poor sap gets bit a bug before they fix it.
The initial report by forrester was faulty and relied upon obscurity and simplicity to blatantly shift the report in Microsoft's favor. And before anyone says that forresster is a research company and as such is unbiased, I recommend that you look to SCO for an example of MS's cleverness.
I would say that was what makes her a good critic. A good reviewer should both point out the flaws and strengths of a product in order to give the readers the ability to judge the product for themselves.
I'm not saying that ELQ's reviews never do this (it's been a while since I've read one), but what I am saying is that obvious bias, unfair assumptions, and skewed data do not constitute an effective review.
Slashdot Mirror
Please read to comprehend.
Yeah, you missed this one:
* Let me sum up all the posts to save us all time (and see how much karma I can burn).
Profit!!!! ??? Go To Jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect 200 dollars.
I don't see why you're being modded as insightful for this rant. I have really not the slightest idea of why you mentioned Microsoft either.
Here's a few points. First of all, you can configure KDE or Gnome not to ask. Second of all, most users are not admins. Allow me to expand on that. Most people who use computers have no idea of what is harmful and what is not harmful and will install anything. Theoretically the admin should install the basic apps (office, music, and internet) so that users won't go and install a program that'll delete their home directory or something. Third of all, you can already have users setup like that. It's called booting more than one OS, but it seems silly and redundant to me.
Oh, you mean this one? Of course, mandrake is not the only "desktop distro" out there right now, but it's the best windows replacement distro that I've found so far. I have set up a number of PCs for friends and family running mandrake and they haven't had any problems yet. Of course, some things can give you trouble (certain hardware combinations), but the fact of the matter is that people like you need to get out of their shells and realize that there are distros out there that are bridging the desktop gap. And you need to either support them or atleast acknowledge their existence.
But I don't think that it's going to be very successful. If only because of how it looks. If given a choice, I think that most kids would go for an iMac. And I doubt that parents will buy such an ugly box just for very young children. After all, computers generally hang around for a few years. What happens when the kids grow up?
Non-subscription article is Here
Well, I haven't read the article yet (and by the looks of things I won't be doing it either), but offhand the only thing that I have to say is that I've never seen a Pocket PC that can stack up to the Zaurus line of handhelds made by Sharp, on either the coolness factor or the gadget factor.
It will be interesting seeing how they weighed the Pocket PC PDAs against the Linux ones, and how the fact that a number of iPaqs can be ran with either PPC or some kind of Linux.
Lindows came well after windows and was an obvious attempt to bank of off the name, while froogles.com came before google's froogle service, so unless he worked at google and had prior knowledge of froogle (which apparently isn't the cas), then it's an empty claim.
However, even if it's not a sham, it still seems like pretty shady business. Besides, how is it that only this Rolad fellow seems to know anything about it's existence (while of course having no ties to the actual company)?
Umm.... I can't believe you were modded to +5 for getting everything wrong. No one is going to pay 3 dollars per *SONG*. We're not talking about entire cds here, we're talking about individual songs.
I don't really feel like registering to the NYTimes just to read an article... I'm not paranoid... I'm just lazy...
Go google it for yourself though.
I think that the point that he was trying to make is that Microsoft *has* given Forrester money for a report in the recent past.
Ummm.... So you're saying that Linux is less secure because more valuable data is stored on Linux than on Windows?
If anything, I'd say that validates Linux's usefullness.
Now I only wish someone could tell me what this has to do with the number of bugs...
[Update: Apr 6 at 7:58pm CDT... Martin Schulze from the Debian team added some more information.] Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Pena composed a survey in 2001[*] and discovered that it has taken the Debian security team an average of 35 days to fix vulnerbilities posted to the Bugtraq list. However, over 50% of the vulnerabilities where fixed in a 10-days time frame, and over 15% of them where fixed the same day the advisory was released! For this analysis, all vulnerabilities were treated the same, though. He has rerun the survey based on vulnerabilities discovered between June 1st 2002 and May 31st 2003 and found out that the median value of delays between the disclosure and releasing an advisory including a correction was 10 days (average is 13.5 days). Again, for this analysis advisories were not classified with different priorities.
Have you ever considered that all of the media that you read and watch is biased? And actually if you'd read the article, you'll notice that what they say is perfectly reasonable. Basically, the forrester report was much to narrow focused to have a fair assessment of the data. The simplicity of the initial report is actually laughable. MS fixing 100% of its bugs? Now, remember that Microsoft's code is *not* open source, so they can wait until some poor sap gets bit a bug before they fix it. The initial report by forrester was faulty and relied upon obscurity and simplicity to blatantly shift the report in Microsoft's favor. And before anyone says that forresster is a research company and as such is unbiased, I recommend that you look to SCO for an example of MS's cleverness.
*sigh*
Yet another example of corporate arrogance and stupidity.
I would say that was what makes her a good critic. A good reviewer should both point out the flaws and strengths of a product in order to give the readers the ability to judge the product for themselves. I'm not saying that ELQ's reviews never do this (it's been a while since I've read one), but what I am saying is that obvious bias, unfair assumptions, and skewed data do not constitute an effective review.
Hmmmm, doesn't this count for something?
Sign the petition!
How tall is Bill Gates then?
Linux users play nethack.