the song, In the Year 2525? Seems Zaeger and Evans were a little optimistic about their timelines for technology. Seems that year 3535 should be re-written to 2010...
That only works if you have permissions to change the registry. Kind of a Catch-22 in companies that truly believe in security. (I'll ignore the hypocrisy of that statement in relation to running windows in the first place...:)
Actually, the problem was there was no existing security to speak of. Rather, it was disabled so a lot of programs assumed that certain actions were legal and depended upon those actions to succeed to run. Now that MS is attempting to force some security within the OS, a lot of those earlier assumptions are causing lots of problems, much like the DLL debacle that only took 13 years to even begin to be addressed.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for XP2 to come out. (Yes, it will come out, eventually, but if it even does half of what it was supposed to do, expect much pain/patching of third party products.)
I believe if you at least glance at the referred article (which is all I did) you'll see that it references an alternate serialization scheme. Maybe something like
I still would like someone to post a list of sites that don't work because of a true firefox issue. Sometimes, some sites are just badly designed, and the differences in rendering engines allows them to look "ok" in one browser, but not another.
My main bank works perfectly fine with Firefox, as do all my other banks (about 6 financial institutions total). I don't buy that for a second, if your bank doesn't work with a non IE browser, leave it. There's plenty that work just fine.
I recently had a bit of fun with a couple of friends along this line, with them saying that FF wouldn't work as a replacement. I challenged them to come up with some sites that didn't work in FF. Their grand total of publicly available sites? 1. And it is created with the latest Visual Studio and the only thing wrong with it is the Flash/DHTML overlay that doesn't show up properly on the main page in FF. This has been stated as bad design in BugTraq.
They also mentioned their internal web sites, which are not publicly accessible, like my own. Our internal website's code works perfectly well with FF, except for the fact that if it's not IE 5.0, 5.5, or 6.0, they disable DHTML on the server side. If they'd remove that code, it would work perfectly well. This occurs because if it's not IE, it must be Netscape 4 or less.
Egads, did you babblefish this? I believe you actually meant to say:
Dan blijf ik nog een jaar de coolste van het dorp met mijn gentoo 64.
This would still be arguable depending on whether you truly are the only one in your small town with a 64 bit OS, unless you happen to be your own small town....
We already covered that. I provided a counterpoint.
And to completely nullify your supposed argument, all Atta would have had to do is pay the ticket, and the bench warrant goes away.
Or, as the apparant leanings of your previous postings indicate, would you insist that anyone with a bench warrant be jailed until such a time that the JD gets around to clearing them as enemy combatants? (I state this because anything less would have had 0 net effect.)
You should also realize that hindsight is 20/20 (which, btw, is not perfect, just average).
Post again when you can say years. OS/2 did that back in 1992/1993. Unix boxes have done it for decades. Its sad that after 20 years, MS is proud of its weeks milestone.
As I'm forced to utilize XP at work, I was rather shocked when ALT-TAB started having odd behavior, then stopped working altogether, random files were locked, and just in general bad behavior started occurring. A reboot was required. This was after only being up 2 weeks. Nope - no virus. I also have a home XP box running "virgin" (ie, no McAfee/Norton/etc, no Windows Update, no other MS products) and it appears relatively stable, staying up months at a time. (Yes, Dorothy, it is possible, and has been since NT came on the scene, depending on which version/SP you had) The difference between home and work? I actually have to occassionlally use IE @ work, and Windows Updates are required by security. Both parts are MS products, and 1 of them definitely screws the system. My work system has never made it to a month, even when there are no Windows Updates installed.
My home linux box has now been up for 4 months (after it was installed and configured, hasn't been rebooted since) and everything just works....
Al Capone didn't want the government concentrating on his tax return either. The government enforces the law - full stop. If you find a law repressive, work towards it's legislative removal. Don't expect police to check their brains by the door when they need to investigate someone.
He didn't want the IRS to investigate him, which is part of its charter, btw. They didn't have the airline ticket counter person forcing a check of his tax return when he's trying to fly somewhere. There's a slight difference there.
BTW,
> > > Only 1 had a warrant, out of 18. Think that would have stopped anything?...
> > Yes, it could. One is more than zero. You completely ignored this point - conceding to the truth only helps.
Massoui.
Many on Slashdot are saying this -- many who have absolutely no frame of reference and no idea what they're talking about. Microsoft has always said Longhorn would be out in 2006. As far as I know, they're still saying 2006 and they're right on track for 2006, based on the work they've been showing. Expecting a machine to run two years from now is NOT absurd.
According to InfoWorld in Jul 2003, Longhorn was to be released in 2005. Sometime after that, I think in the 4th Quarter of 2003, they stated Longhorn would release in the first half of 2006, and I believe the latest date is second half of 2006. There's also widely publicizeddata on feature reductions in Longhorn, to enable them to maybe make the 2006 date. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the 2006 date may be a bit too agressive (or maybe it does). I personally wouldn't be surprised to see Longhorn ship in 2Q or 3Q of 2007, if not later. Security is, after all, job 1 at MS now, and they have such a stellar record with it... take, for example. XP SP2, delayed yet again.... Yep, MS will surely ship Longhorn in 2006. They said so in early 2004!
There's also the issue of MS release schedules. MS does not do a release more often than every 2 years. Since I believe they're still planning on the "new" XP release, that implies that Longhorn would be no earlier than the end of 2006. Granted, this is conjecture, but has held true so far.
What you're talking about...the absurd specs of 4 GHz, terabyte of hard drive, etc
That was a dual-core 4Ghz CPU btw, and probably necessary to be able to do anything with the original WinFS busily collating and searching all that data. Hardware requirements will be directly affected by the reduced feature set that will actually ship with Longhorn, and I don't wonder that some of the feature clipping will be purely to reduce hardware requirements.
Take WinFS with network share information, somehow that just screams large amounts of RAM and disk space to me. Remove it, and that requirement is seriously reduced, as likely happened within MS once they realized what that actually meant. I'm not surprised that was moved to the vapor BlackComb, which is actually the new, true Longhorn, while Longhorn becomes more like XP. The further this progresses, the more I'm reminded of the never achieved Cairo....
I'm running 3 machines at home at 2 @ 1GB, and 1 at 1.5GB. At work, I have a 2GB machine, and am wishing for a 4GB machine.
In case you're wondering - DBs, multiple appserver instances, Eclipse (the bomb!), and multiple other stuff. General memory load is over 1GB without me actively doing anything....
I'm looking at getting a dual Opteron starting w/ 4GB for home. There's just no substitute for RAM.
try again - longhorn won't be out until at least 2007, and many are saying 2008 or later. But even at its most optimistic, 2007-2004 = 3 years.:)
I think in 3 years, all current computers will be obsolete, with the possible exception of some 64 bit machines.
If anyone doubts that 64 bits aren't the wave of the near future, just look at all the digital cameras and DV camcorders being sold today. People will want to do digital things with that digital media, and 64 bits allows for that to happen faster (in some cases, just allows it to happen). 32 bits is dead, it just doesn't know it yet, much like the wasp body that doesn't know the head has been gone for hours.
Lastly, after seeing the "suggested" specs for a longhorn machine, nothing out there will run it yet. So, all machines will be replaced in 3 years anyways, provided anyone upgrades. (Heck, according to Infoworld, there's still a large contingent of win95/98 machines out in the corporate world. I personally know of 1 50K+ employee company where that is a true statement.)
I hear you. You'd rather have your government handcuffed then have it offer better protection to citizens (i.e. fulfill it's role).
I'd rather have my government concentrate on important things than enforcing local parking ticket warrants.
As for Strawman argument, I'd need to set up a point for a police state for that to be valid. I was curious as to your position, as you seem to seriously be leaning towards police state.
Hint - there is a system in place to keep such people out of the country, it's called "Customs and Immigration". One of the major issues in the 9/11 reports is that current and existing processes and procedures failed miserably because various folks (e.g., CIA/FBI/Local authorities) refuse to communicate.
Only 1 had a warrant, out of 18. Think that would have stopped anything? But, that aside, how many warrants exist for parking tickets, which very well could have blown away? Are all such people to be arrested because they have a business trip to go on for a high powered meeting somewhere?
Finally, there's a thing about jurisdictions. It's a rather small thing, but a rather important one, or do you hold with the police state = good thing?
First, being on the "watch list" didn't stop a couple of them from coming in the country.
Second, Atta had the bench warrant, and was pulled over with a bench warrant, and not arrested.
Third, good grief - everyone with a ticket won't be able to fly? They only write about a gazillion of those things a day.
Finally, since when are airline ticket takers constables? What's next? Your McD's order taker will want your DOB etc so the local cops can come pick you up if you have an unpaid parking ticket?
What about ABC wanting to air Schindler's list in primetime? They were nude. I believe there were some language aspects, although I don't remember for sure. The FCC nearly had a heart attack, then someone pointed out that if they found that obscene (implying sexuality) perhaps they ought to go check themselves in for some serious psychiatric work.
Note: Schindler's List aired in its entirety, uncut. Were any children disturbed? I'd hope they were if they saw it. It was meant to be disturbing.
You're a bit off here, a single 4 channel controller can be had seriously cheap used, or for about $800 for a brand new one. They hold 15 disks per channel.
Your only issues would be heat dissipation, noise, and enough case/power to drive 60 disks. (Hint, they build racks for this).
but contained some droppable scenes. That 2 & 3 didn't "surprise" most the way the first did isn't surprising. Overall, I found them thoroughly enjoyable, and I own all three.
Now, this 10 disc set, the remastered "The Matrix" and the extra 55 min on "Reloaded" intrigue me. I'd still drop a few scenes on #2 though.
LOTR trilogy is still the king of trilogies though, and perhaps as an epic story as well.
Well, I've had a whole weekend to think about this (actually, I spent it thinking about anything but this, so my head's clear today;).
Autohide still sucks. I would prefer a manual hide capability, or even a "remove" capability, for those rare cases when I need it gone, as compared to MS's "autohide". Why, because inevitably the damn thing pops up again when I don't want it to. Your screen real estate is still usuably smaller. (There's probably some way to get rid of the damn thing altogether, just haven't bothered looking for it)
Also, after some thought, the reason we need the stupid thing in the first place is because no decent task switcher exists. But that's another rant...
Slashdot Mirror
the song, In the Year 2525? Seems Zaeger and Evans were a little optimistic about their timelines for technology. Seems that year 3535 should be re-written to 2010...
You won't get one, check out the HCL, and then notice that not everything works with Windows.
That only works if you have permissions to change the registry. Kind of a Catch-22 in companies that truly believe in security. (I'll ignore the hypocrisy of that statement in relation to running windows in the first place...:)
Actually, the problem was there was no existing security to speak of. Rather, it was disabled so a lot of programs assumed that certain actions were legal and depended upon those actions to succeed to run. Now that MS is attempting to force some security within the OS, a lot of those earlier assumptions are causing lots of problems, much like the DLL debacle that only took 13 years to even begin to be addressed.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for XP2 to come out. (Yes, it will come out, eventually, but if it even does half of what it was supposed to do, expect much pain/patching of third party products.)
I believe if you at least glance at the referred article (which is all I did) you'll see that it references an alternate serialization scheme. Maybe something like
<image width="1280" height="1024>[binary image info]</image>
Where the entire frame is rendered in a single binary element. Just guessing though.
I still would like someone to post a list of sites that don't work because of a true firefox issue. Sometimes, some sites are just badly designed, and the differences in rendering engines allows them to look "ok" in one browser, but not another.
My main bank works perfectly fine with Firefox, as do all my other banks (about 6 financial institutions total). I don't buy that for a second, if your bank doesn't work with a non IE browser, leave it. There's plenty that work just fine.
I recently had a bit of fun with a couple of friends along this line, with them saying that FF wouldn't work as a replacement. I challenged them to come up with some sites that didn't work in FF. Their grand total of publicly available sites? 1. And it is created with the latest Visual Studio and the only thing wrong with it is the Flash/DHTML overlay that doesn't show up properly on the main page in FF. This has been stated as bad design in BugTraq.
They also mentioned their internal web sites, which are not publicly accessible, like my own. Our internal website's code works perfectly well with FF, except for the fact that if it's not IE 5.0, 5.5, or 6.0, they disable DHTML on the server side. If they'd remove that code, it would work perfectly well. This occurs because if it's not IE, it must be Netscape 4 or less.
Egads, did you babblefish this? I believe you actually meant to say:
Dan blijf ik nog een jaar de coolste van het dorp met mijn gentoo 64.
This would still be arguable depending on whether you truly are the only one in your small town with a 64 bit OS, unless you happen to be your own small town....
We already covered that. I provided a counterpoint.
And to completely nullify your supposed argument, all Atta would have had to do is pay the ticket, and the bench warrant goes away.
Or, as the apparant leanings of your previous postings indicate, would you insist that anyone with a bench warrant be jailed until such a time that the JD gets around to clearing them as enemy combatants? (I state this because anything less would have had 0 net effect.)
You should also realize that hindsight is 20/20 (which, btw, is not perfect, just average).
Maybe because that's all they will have scanned by then?
But, usually, when a linux app crashes, it's just the app. Linux keeps on chugging and you simply restart the app.
XP, it's a different story, and even killing a hung process is a serious problem. I especially like the fact that some processes cannot be killed.
Post again when you can say years. OS/2 did that back in 1992/1993. Unix boxes have done it for decades. Its sad that after 20 years, MS is proud of its weeks milestone.
As I'm forced to utilize XP at work, I was rather shocked when ALT-TAB started having odd behavior, then stopped working altogether, random files were locked, and just in general bad behavior started occurring. A reboot was required. This was after only being up 2 weeks. Nope - no virus. I also have a home XP box running "virgin" (ie, no McAfee/Norton/etc, no Windows Update, no other MS products) and it appears relatively stable, staying up months at a time. (Yes, Dorothy, it is possible, and has been since NT came on the scene, depending on which version/SP you had) The difference between home and work? I actually have to occassionlally use IE @ work, and Windows Updates are required by security. Both parts are MS products, and 1 of them definitely screws the system. My work system has never made it to a month, even when there are no Windows Updates installed.
My home linux box has now been up for 4 months (after it was installed and configured, hasn't been rebooted since) and everything just works....
Of course, that assumes that the patch was available pre-virus release.
Al Capone didn't want the government concentrating on his tax return either. The government enforces the law - full stop. If you find a law repressive, work towards it's legislative removal. Don't expect police to check their brains by the door when they need to investigate someone.
He didn't want the IRS to investigate him, which is part of its charter, btw. They didn't have the airline ticket counter person forcing a check of his tax return when he's trying to fly somewhere. There's a slight difference there.
BTW, ...
> > > Only 1 had a warrant, out of 18. Think that would have stopped anything?
> > Yes, it could. One is more than zero.
You completely ignored this point - conceding to the truth only helps.
Massoui.
According to InfoWorld in Jul 2003, Longhorn was to be released in 2005. Sometime after that, I think in the 4th Quarter of 2003, they stated Longhorn would release in the first half of 2006, and I believe the latest date is second half of 2006. There's also widely publicized data on feature reductions in Longhorn, to enable them to maybe make the 2006 date. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the 2006 date may be a bit too agressive (or maybe it does). I personally wouldn't be surprised to see Longhorn ship in 2Q or 3Q of 2007, if not later. Security is, after all, job 1 at MS now, and they have such a stellar record with it... take, for example. XP SP2, delayed yet again.... Yep, MS will surely ship Longhorn in 2006. They said so in early 2004!
There's also the issue of MS release schedules. MS does not do a release more often than every 2 years. Since I believe they're still planning on the "new" XP release, that implies that Longhorn would be no earlier than the end of 2006. Granted, this is conjecture, but has held true so far.
What you're talking about...the absurd specs of 4 GHz, terabyte of hard drive, etc
That was a dual-core 4Ghz CPU btw, and probably necessary to be able to do anything with the original WinFS busily collating and searching all that data. Hardware requirements will be directly affected by the reduced feature set that will actually ship with Longhorn, and I don't wonder that some of the feature clipping will be purely to reduce hardware requirements.
Take WinFS with network share information, somehow that just screams large amounts of RAM and disk space to me. Remove it, and that requirement is seriously reduced, as likely happened within MS once they realized what that actually meant. I'm not surprised that was moved to the vapor BlackComb, which is actually the new, true Longhorn, while Longhorn becomes more like XP. The further this progresses, the more I'm reminded of the never achieved Cairo....
Anymore FUD you wish to discuss/disprove?
Custom configured autoexec.bat and config.sys. Wow, that takes me back, to Pool of Radiance, the original monochrome version.
/. userid or email address used was.... ;)
I believe the first game I had to use a ramdisk for was Humans, a fun little action/puzzle type game sort of along the lines of lemmings.
I wouldn't make any bets like that, lots of old timers here. Now, if I could only recall what my original
I'm running 3 machines at home at 2 @ 1GB, and 1 at 1.5GB. At work, I have a 2GB machine, and am wishing for a 4GB machine.
In case you're wondering - DBs, multiple appserver instances, Eclipse (the bomb!), and multiple other stuff. General memory load is over 1GB without me actively doing anything....
I'm looking at getting a dual Opteron starting w/ 4GB for home. There's just no substitute for RAM.
try again - longhorn won't be out until at least 2007, and many are saying 2008 or later. But even at its most optimistic, 2007-2004 = 3 years. :)
I think in 3 years, all current computers will be obsolete, with the possible exception of some 64 bit machines.
If anyone doubts that 64 bits aren't the wave of the near future, just look at all the digital cameras and DV camcorders being sold today. People will want to do digital things with that digital media, and 64 bits allows for that to happen faster (in some cases, just allows it to happen). 32 bits is dead, it just doesn't know it yet, much like the wasp body that doesn't know the head has been gone for hours.
Lastly, after seeing the "suggested" specs for a longhorn machine, nothing out there will run it yet. So, all machines will be replaced in 3 years anyways, provided anyone upgrades. (Heck, according to Infoworld, there's still a large contingent of win95/98 machines out in the corporate world. I personally know of 1 50K+ employee company where that is a true statement.)
I hear you. You'd rather have your government handcuffed then have it offer better protection to citizens (i.e. fulfill it's role).
I'd rather have my government concentrate on important things than enforcing local parking ticket warrants.
As for Strawman argument, I'd need to set up a point for a police state for that to be valid. I was curious as to your position, as you seem to seriously be leaning towards police state.
Hint - there is a system in place to keep such people out of the country, it's called "Customs and Immigration". One of the major issues in the 9/11 reports is that current and existing processes and procedures failed miserably because various folks (e.g., CIA/FBI/Local authorities) refuse to communicate.
Only 1 had a warrant, out of 18. Think that would have stopped anything? But, that aside, how many warrants exist for parking tickets, which very well could have blown away? Are all such people to be arrested because they have a business trip to go on for a high powered meeting somewhere?
Finally, there's a thing about jurisdictions. It's a rather small thing, but a rather important one, or do you hold with the police state = good thing?
First, being on the "watch list" didn't stop a couple of them from coming in the country.
Second, Atta had the bench warrant, and was pulled over with a bench warrant, and not arrested.
Third, good grief - everyone with a ticket won't be able to fly? They only write about a gazillion of those things a day.
Finally, since when are airline ticket takers constables? What's next? Your McD's order taker will want your DOB etc so the local cops can come pick you up if you have an unpaid parking ticket?
What about ABC wanting to air Schindler's list in primetime? They were nude. I believe there were some language aspects, although I don't remember for sure. The FCC nearly had a heart attack, then someone pointed out that if they found that obscene (implying sexuality) perhaps they ought to go check themselves in for some serious psychiatric work.
Note: Schindler's List aired in its entirety, uncut. Were any children disturbed? I'd hope they were if they saw it. It was meant to be disturbing.
You're a bit off here, a single 4 channel controller can be had seriously cheap used, or for about $800 for a brand new one. They hold 15 disks per channel.
Your only issues would be heat dissipation, noise, and enough case/power to drive 60 disks. (Hint, they build racks for this).
So, what is your setup, and do you do HD?
but contained some droppable scenes. That 2 & 3 didn't "surprise" most the way the first did isn't surprising. Overall, I found them thoroughly enjoyable, and I own all three.
Now, this 10 disc set, the remastered "The Matrix" and the extra 55 min on "Reloaded" intrigue me. I'd still drop a few scenes on #2 though.
LOTR trilogy is still the king of trilogies though, and perhaps as an epic story as well.
Well, I've had a whole weekend to think about this (actually, I spent it thinking about anything but this, so my head's clear today;).
Autohide still sucks. I would prefer a manual hide capability, or even a "remove" capability, for those rare cases when I need it gone, as compared to MS's "autohide". Why, because inevitably the damn thing pops up again when I don't want it to. Your screen real estate is still usuably smaller. (There's probably some way to get rid of the damn thing altogether, just haven't bothered looking for it)
Also, after some thought, the reason we need the stupid thing in the first place is because no decent task switcher exists. But that's another rant...