Excellent point, you should get modded up. I use the PDF export functionality nearly everyday. I love it and the problems that the gradnparent mentions I've never seen. Maye he's using an old version, or maybe there is something different if you don't use native formats. All I know is that I stick with the OASIS format for all my document writing and editing. Thats what OOo was designed for and thats what I'll use it for. Because of that (using OOo with the format it was *intended* to use) I never experience any of the problems other people complain about and it lets me use and save some of OOo's more advanced features that MS Word doesn't have. People need to start using OOo the way it was meant to be used. The MS Word import features was not designed to be an "end all be all" kind of thing, but rather a stepping stone in your transition to an open format. Regards, Steve
well, it sort of renders most Word documents half-way decently, although checkboxes and such look like crap compared to the real Word from Microsoft
Oh and how well does Microsoft render OASIS? Oh that's right... it doesn't. Try doing everything in OOo's *native* format and you'll see its real power. Sure it can handle most Word Documents, but it wasn't designed nor ever intended to be a drop in replacement for MS Office. When using MS Office do you save as a RTF? Nope, didn't think so. Why? because you'd be losing alot of potential features and capabilities. Sure MS Office can read and write to RTF, but it wasn't designed with that in as its main use. In that same light, sure OpenOffice can read and write MS Word documents, but it was *not* designed with that as its main use and as a result, some functionality may be lost when using those formats. There are many features in OOo that don't have an equivalent in MS Office, and vice versa, so you should really be using the format that was designed for the Word Processor you are using so you are using its maximum potential(no matter what word processor).Stop feeding into Microsoft, break free, and use the open format that its supposed to use. Regards, Steve
When Bill Gates was recently speaking at Berkeley, he stated that Microsoft made and allowed software to become an international thing. I was laughing so hard that I almost cried. Regards, Steve
Because when you run linux you know exactly what services are running, when they run, why they run, and if they need to connect to the internet. None of that "We'll block all of these ports except these 5 because windows services need them, and keep this one open too for good measure." Most linux systems on a fresh install have nothing that tries to connect outside, anything that might connect (say httpd ) is decided by the user at install time. In windows, you can't even boot up to a fresh install without having to connect to the internet or contact Microsoft and let them know what you've been doing with you computer. Regards, Steve
What distro did you try? Almost every major distro preconfigures it for you. And not only that, has an easy to use configuration thingy for services to get through. If you want an easier way to configure iptables try out webmin or I think there is a gui program called guarddog or something like that. Anyway, don't play with big boy toys unless your willing to learn a little bit. Honestly, if you can't handle iptables with the easy to use methods that major distros have in place, then the many other capabilities that linux has to offer would probably also go over your head(not because your stupid, simply because your lazy because you apparently didn't give it much effort or looking at). You should not have gone back to Windows though. Go to MacOSX or maybe even Linspire. Don't just expect to sit down in front of another OS after you've been using Windows for 7 years or so. You forget that when you once first sat in front of windows, you also had no idea how to do many things, only after getting familiar with it you did anything productive. You now take that knowledge for granted. I'd try out linux again if I were you. Steve
Have you ever used JSP? or the JSTL tag libs? Or Java Servlets? Java is probably the best and most efficient way of doing 90% of web apps. And if you use third party software to help, such as Apache Struts, then there is no competition. Regards, Steve
If the internet was designed as a p2p network (yes, technically it is, but not in the sense we are talking about), more specifically following bittorrent's protocol, then the net would be a completely different place. Information could flow freely from any computer and just about anyone could host a site whether it had a million visitors a month or just 5 visitors a month (assuming they has the hardware for it). That of course is just theoretical. In practice however, many (all?) Linux distributions use bittorrent to distribute their ISOs simply because otherwise the bandwidth would cost them too much. Also, a few game companies release demos as bittorrent links. I personally think that firefox needs to be able to natively handle bittorrent links like regular downloads, then you'll see some massive legitimate migrations to folks using it. Regards, Steve
Re:I code C# for a living
on
Java 1.5 vs C#
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I code in java on the side for some small business apps. I've also coded in C# and have used all of the MS Visual Stuido nonsense. Both languages are at a level that you can do just about anything with one that you can do with the other. So the deciding factors come down to really which is a better platform to develop on and cross platform compatibility (in some cases the latter isn't an issue, but it is for me). As far as IDE's go,I don't get what people like about Visual Studio, especially VS.net. I enjoyed VS 6.0 much better the VS.net, regardless I have since moved to a strictly open source platform and only use Windows for testing. When I did do C# coding, I preferred using vim or Sharpdevelop. I really can't stand VS.net. Anyway, Java, imho, has superior IDEs (some may argue that IDEs reinforce bad programming, etc..., but if used *correctly* they can significantly increase productivity) Eclipse puts Visual Studio to shame in many areas. Eclipse is an amazing IDE and made programming fun again. Another great IDE for Java, that puts great focus on GUI dev, Web App dev, and Mobile phones, is Net Beans. Both IDEs have very nice integrated features with a great tool selection and good plugin frameworks. I use both interchangeably depending upon specific tasks and projects. So in my oppinion as far as having a good platform to work on, Java is superior. Next is cross platform compatibility. Although Mono is making leaps and bounds, Java wins hands down on this. It gives my customers more options and major open source software foundations like the Apache foundation actively work on many java based enterprise applications. This allows my customers to also have low start up and implementation costs.No real need for further discussion on that. Another area where I prefer java is for distributing applications via WebStart. It makes life very easy, in many areas including maintenance and deployment. This is just my 2 cents. I don't really see why anyone would use C#, I mean they took Java and improved, and now Java has taken both its past and C# and improved itself:/ Regards, Steve
That is what I was thinking too, but they claim you can touch and move the objects just like they were really there, which implies that the object can't be directly projected onto anything rotating because touching it would result in your hand being wacked by a screen about 50 times a second.
Email me at sgk25-at-drexel-.edu begin the subject with something like "[GMail] " so i know what it is. I have 6 invites, already gave out invites out to friends who wanted them. Or I could just have 7 gigs of offsite storage.... Regards, Steve
Actually... from what I hear (which may very well all be rumors) AOL engineers actually got sick of waiting for IE to implement standards, features, and new protocols. Most websites already work with IE despite how broken it is, if a site uses ActiveX, then AOL needs its users to be able to use that site. Because of this they are grudgingly using IE as a base and then extending it from there. I could see this one day being ported to firefox when more people use it, but business is business and right now the business is still unfortunately with IE. This is also kind of a mockery of Microsoft by AOL because it shows how behind times Microsoft's browser is that AOL Engineers had to just take what they have and make it better rather, then wait around. People keep speaking negatively about this venture, but in the end I think it will be good. If nothing else, people will become aware of alternatives to IE (despite that it is used as its backend), making them prone to try more browsers in the future. Regards, Steve
If I am home and using my wireless access point which I leave open because I like to share, and I am roaming around my house, go in my kitchen and my computer automatically switched networks to my neighbors, how am I at fault? If they didn't want someone using it, they should have secured it. Ignorance on their part doesn't make it illegal on my part. If they are blasting the radio and I can roam around my house sometimes hearing my radio and sometimes theirs, it doesn't make it illegal for me to listen to it.
Your very wrong:) The subscription is for support for the server and clients (in certain instances), and its, as far as I know, unlimited for the entire subscription period? If something breaks or just doesn't even run how you'd like it to, you call Red Hat tell them whats up and they will take care of it. Red Hat's support is one of the best in the industry, up there with Dell and Veritas. Also, the cheapest RH server is $350 and is capable of doing everything that the cheapest Exchange server can do (typically goes for around $1200). You can run your RH server for nearly 3 and a half years before it cost as much as an Exchange Server. Keep in mind that the RH server has unlimited support for that whole time. If you call Microsoft 5 times over that 3.5 year period (assuming you go with the 5-call pack option they have to save money) because of an issue or two, it will cost you $1225, you've more then doubled the cost of your server. Keep in mind that with RH if you don't want the support after the first year, you don't have to resubscribe to keep your software or be able to install updates (although it becomes slightly more difficult). Also, exchange doesn't scale well. If you run a large shop, Red Hat will save you thousands, if not tens of thousands, a year. I could go on for much longer explaining reasons why it is cheaper, but I have to cut it short. Red Hat is cheaper comparing price to price with Microsoft, Microsoft admits this. That is why they try to claim other things like Exchange has a lower total cost of ownership, because Exchange admins typically get paid less and over time it saves you more, they use a number of other excuses also, most of which are highly arguable, oppinionated, and biased. Then again, what else is the marketing department for? Microsoft I don't believe has ever tried to argue that the cost of Red Hat vs. Exchange exlcuding other associated costs is cheaper. It just blatantly isn't. It is also very nice for sysadmins to just be able to call someone else whenever the shit hits the fan, or you just have a question or curiosity. Companies need support like that, they need to know that if something goes wrong and their own IT department can't fix it, that someone will. In this case, both MS and RH will help you, but RH in most cases is significantly cheaper. Regards, Steve
You can make a wave go faster then light in your own basement for about 300 bucks. The interesting thing being that the wave hits the other side before you technically press the button, but if the wave already touched the other side, and then you hit the button to send that wave, what happens if you decide not to press the button. The answer to the question is interesting from many perspectives, but I won't go into details nor pretend that if I did I'd fully understand it all. Also, there are ways to technically make a particle go faster then light, but most methods that I know of involve warping and/or bending time and space. For instance, if you cleverly bend spacetime in two spots and "join" them (it can be done using massive objects and blackholes), then you can technically beat light in a race. A good visual for such a thing would be if you imagine spacetime of the Universe as a "U" and you want to race light from one end to the other (top left all the way down and around to the top right) then if you can warp the U so that for you the top left and top right are connected like a D turned 90 degrees. Well then you just take the shortcut (a straight line going across the top) and light has to take the long path. Thus you'll get to the other end before the light does. Now this can be performed on smaller scales (doesn't need to be the Universe) but of course there are limitations to this method as well. Regards, Steve
What most people don't realize is that Star Office's code base is 15 years old. Open Office and MS Office aren't emulations of each other, they've just both evolved around the methods in which humans naturally prefer to do word processing and the like. How else would you design a word processor for use with the average person? Saying Open Office just copies MS Office is like saying that is all Corel did too. It seems that, like the typical MS, they saw good proudcts out already, they also saw a market advantage to selling their own Office Suite, so they took all of the good ideas from the other Office Suites and combined them. As with most software applications, it evolves through time, some of those evolutions involve borrowing ideas from other suites that are admittedly implememnted better. You don't really think that MS came up with spell checking or mail merge, do you? But sure enough they have those features. Also, OOo is very usable in its current form, and the biggest issue people complain about (it's UI and load times, which are mostly interrelated) is going through a major overhaul right now. By the time 2.0 is released you should have no reason to stick with MS Office. The OOo gui used to be so horrible simply because they used to have to implement their own widgets and even emulate an entire desktop environment at some points because there was no standard back in the day, now there is more of a standardized base, and its being implemented using it. Regards, Steve
We aren't trying to defeat Iraq. We are there trying to protect its citizens and set up a democracy. Some citizens are trying to kill us because in Pre-US Iraq they had lots of power under Saddam. Now everyone will have equal power and some aren't happy with it. Despite that we have 1000 dead troops over there, the kill ratio is like 1:10000 or something ridiculous like that. So we have killed many more of them. 1000 deaths really isn't many, although its more then I'd like. Look at WWII's numbers. The main problem with Iraq is that in order to effectively keep it peaceful, our troops have to walk amongst the people. The terrorists killing them are cowards and hide amongst the people, then kill when they have the chance, or take hostages who have no chance of defedning themselves and behead them. It's a completely different kind of war and the fact that the US is making so much progress is a good sign (most of the good news you won't hear about on the news, like i'm sure you know that Iraq now has a functioning school system, which was nearly non existant before, also more people then ever have utilities, etc...). We aren't fighting a country, we are in a country trying to filter out terrorists. If this was a traditional war that involved air, land, sea, real soldiers with uniforms and that fight like men, and you know just your typical war against a country, then I don't think any country(or group of countries) would question the U.S.'s ability to win. Regards, Steve
The devil is in the details... to quote myself, "some of the updates aren't applied until you reboot your machine", keyword some. This guy claimed to regularly run windows update, apply all the patches and never had to reboot in 2 months. It's complete bullshit and thats all I was really pointing out. I admin a medium sized network of windows machines and I *know* that some of the updates in the past 2 months have required a reboot. I do prefer linux, and use it whenever I'm not at work, but I'm certainly not clueless about Windows and this guy's claim was just absurd. Regards, Steve
I run Fedora Core 2 and it updated fine, although a post higher up said linux isn't affected by this vulnerability, I can only assume they were wrong. Perhaps you changed something? Or you have some kind of NAT or firewall problem. Regardless, if your that concerned, and your user agent string at the bottom of the mozilla about box doesn't have 0.10.1 then just install teh patch from the link, or download it again off the site. The main page has had the new version up since about mid-yesterday. Regards, Steve
I use windows update every week. I have never had to reboot after installing an update for almost two months now.
Then you don't use windows update, or some of the updates aren't applied until you reboot your machine. Besides, I'm pretty sure the more impressive part about this is how well the problem was handled and how far free sofware has come in terms of usability for the average person . You see on linux, one just runs apt, yum, emerge or up2date every day or so and *every thing* on your system is updated. Such a system has never been seen by windows users, windows update only updates MS applications, and out of those applications, only a select few. For other software vendors, a custom implemenation of some form of update method needs to be made to effectively push out updates to clients. Many pieces of commercial software don't even have capabilites like this yet, and firefox does. I find that impressive. Steve
While your logic is good, your reasoning is wrong. This is just version 0.10.0 also known as 1.0PR with a security update which bumped it up to 0.10.1. Doesn't have anything to do with dates, just a coincidence. Regards, Steve
Don't worry, it's evil from any view. Even if they do keep their "promise" and give it all to charity, that just translates to good press and a big tax deduction.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent point, you should get modded up. I use the PDF export functionality nearly everyday. I love it and the problems that the gradnparent mentions I've never seen. Maye he's using an old version, or maybe there is something different if you don't use native formats. All I know is that I stick with the OASIS format for all my document writing and editing. Thats what OOo was designed for and thats what I'll use it for. Because of that (using OOo with the format it was *intended* to use) I never experience any of the problems other people complain about and it lets me use and save some of OOo's more advanced features that MS Word doesn't have. People need to start using OOo the way it was meant to be used. The MS Word import features was not designed to be an "end all be all" kind of thing, but rather a stepping stone in your transition to an open format.
Regards,
Steve
well, it sort of renders most Word documents half-way decently, although checkboxes and such look like crap compared to the real Word from Microsoft
Oh and how well does Microsoft render OASIS? Oh that's right... it doesn't. Try doing everything in OOo's *native* format and you'll see its real power. Sure it can handle most Word Documents, but it wasn't designed nor ever intended to be a drop in replacement for MS Office. When using MS Office do you save as a RTF? Nope, didn't think so. Why? because you'd be losing alot of potential features and capabilities. Sure MS Office can read and write to RTF, but it wasn't designed with that in as its main use. In that same light, sure OpenOffice can read and write MS Word documents, but it was *not* designed with that as its main use and as a result, some functionality may be lost when using those formats. There are many features in OOo that don't have an equivalent in MS Office, and vice versa, so you should really be using the format that was designed for the Word Processor you are using so you are using its maximum potential(no matter what word processor).Stop feeding into Microsoft, break free, and use the open format that its supposed to use.
Regards,
Steve
When Bill Gates was recently speaking at Berkeley, he stated that Microsoft made and allowed software to become an international thing. I was laughing so hard that I almost cried.
Regards,
Steve
Because when you run linux you know exactly what services are running, when they run, why they run, and if they need to connect to the internet. None of that "We'll block all of these ports except these 5 because windows services need them, and keep this one open too for good measure." Most linux systems on a fresh install have nothing that tries to connect outside, anything that might connect (say httpd ) is decided by the user at install time. In windows, you can't even boot up to a fresh install without having to connect to the internet or contact Microsoft and let them know what you've been doing with you computer.
Regards,
Steve
What distro did you try? Almost every major distro preconfigures it for you. And not only that, has an easy to use configuration thingy for services to get through. If you want an easier way to configure iptables try out webmin or I think there is a gui program called guarddog or something like that. Anyway, don't play with big boy toys unless your willing to learn a little bit. Honestly, if you can't handle iptables with the easy to use methods that major distros have in place, then the many other capabilities that linux has to offer would probably also go over your head(not because your stupid, simply because your lazy because you apparently didn't give it much effort or looking at). You should not have gone back to Windows though. Go to MacOSX or maybe even Linspire. Don't just expect to sit down in front of another OS after you've been using Windows for 7 years or so. You forget that when you once first sat in front of windows, you also had no idea how to do many things, only after getting familiar with it you did anything productive. You now take that knowledge for granted. I'd try out linux again if I were you.
Steve
Have you ever used JSP? or the JSTL tag libs? Or Java Servlets? Java is probably the best and most efficient way of doing 90% of web apps. And if you use third party software to help, such as Apache Struts, then there is no competition.
Regards,
Steve
If the internet was designed as a p2p network (yes, technically it is, but not in the sense we are talking about), more specifically following bittorrent's protocol, then the net would be a completely different place. Information could flow freely from any computer and just about anyone could host a site whether it had a million visitors a month or just 5 visitors a month (assuming they has the hardware for it). That of course is just theoretical. In practice however, many (all?) Linux distributions use bittorrent to distribute their ISOs simply because otherwise the bandwidth would cost them too much. Also, a few game companies release demos as bittorrent links. I personally think that firefox needs to be able to natively handle bittorrent links like regular downloads, then you'll see some massive legitimate migrations to folks using it.
Regards,
Steve
I code in java on the side for some small business apps. I've also coded in C# and have used all of the MS Visual Stuido nonsense. Both languages are at a level that you can do just about anything with one that you can do with the other. So the deciding factors come down to really which is a better platform to develop on and cross platform compatibility (in some cases the latter isn't an issue, but it is for me). As far as IDE's go,I don't get what people like about Visual Studio, especially VS.net. I enjoyed VS 6.0 much better the VS.net, regardless I have since moved to a strictly open source platform and only use Windows for testing. When I did do C# coding, I preferred using vim or Sharpdevelop. I really can't stand VS.net. Anyway, Java, imho, has superior IDEs (some may argue that IDEs reinforce bad programming, etc..., but if used *correctly* they can significantly increase productivity) Eclipse puts Visual Studio to shame in many areas. Eclipse is an amazing IDE and made programming fun again. Another great IDE for Java, that puts great focus on GUI dev, Web App dev, and Mobile phones, is Net Beans. Both IDEs have very nice integrated features with a great tool selection and good plugin frameworks. I use both interchangeably depending upon specific tasks and projects. So in my oppinion as far as having a good platform to work on, Java is superior. Next is cross platform compatibility. Although Mono is making leaps and bounds, Java wins hands down on this. It gives my customers more options and major open source software foundations like the Apache foundation actively work on many java based enterprise applications. This allows my customers to also have low start up and implementation costs.No real need for further discussion on that. Another area where I prefer java is for distributing applications via WebStart. It makes life very easy, in many areas including maintenance and deployment. This is just my 2 cents. I don't really see why anyone would use C#, I mean they took Java and improved, and now Java has taken both its past and C# and improved itself :/
Regards,
Steve
That is what I was thinking too, but they claim you can touch and move the objects just like they were really there, which implies that the object can't be directly projected onto anything rotating because touching it would result in your hand being wacked by a screen about 50 times a second.
Email me at sgk25-at-drexel-.edu begin the subject with something like "[GMail] " so i know what it is. I have 6 invites, already gave out invites out to friends who wanted them. Or I could just have 7 gigs of offsite storage....
Regards,
Steve
Actually... from what I hear (which may very well all be rumors) AOL engineers actually got sick of waiting for IE to implement standards, features, and new protocols. Most websites already work with IE despite how broken it is, if a site uses ActiveX, then AOL needs its users to be able to use that site. Because of this they are grudgingly using IE as a base and then extending it from there. I could see this one day being ported to firefox when more people use it, but business is business and right now the business is still unfortunately with IE. This is also kind of a mockery of Microsoft by AOL because it shows how behind times Microsoft's browser is that AOL Engineers had to just take what they have and make it better rather, then wait around. People keep speaking negatively about this venture, but in the end I think it will be good. If nothing else, people will become aware of alternatives to IE (despite that it is used as its backend), making them prone to try more browsers in the future.
Regards,
Steve
Thats why I use Tomcat :) Java is a wonderful thing.
Regards,
Steve
If I am home and using my wireless access point which I leave open because I like to share, and I am roaming around my house, go in my kitchen and my computer automatically switched networks to my neighbors, how am I at fault? If they didn't want someone using it, they should have secured it. Ignorance on their part doesn't make it illegal on my part. If they are blasting the radio and I can roam around my house sometimes hearing my radio and sometimes theirs, it doesn't make it illegal for me to listen to it.
Your very wrong :) The subscription is for support for the server and clients (in certain instances), and its, as far as I know, unlimited for the entire subscription period? If something breaks or just doesn't even run how you'd like it to, you call Red Hat tell them whats up and they will take care of it. Red Hat's support is one of the best in the industry, up there with Dell and Veritas. Also, the cheapest RH server is $350 and is capable of doing everything that the cheapest Exchange server can do (typically goes for around $1200). You can run your RH server for nearly 3 and a half years before it cost as much as an Exchange Server. Keep in mind that the RH server has unlimited support for that whole time. If you call Microsoft 5 times over that 3.5 year period (assuming you go with the 5-call pack option they have to save money) because of an issue or two, it will cost you $1225, you've more then doubled the cost of your server. Keep in mind that with RH if you don't want the support after the first year, you don't have to resubscribe to keep your software or be able to install updates (although it becomes slightly more difficult). Also, exchange doesn't scale well. If you run a large shop, Red Hat will save you thousands, if not tens of thousands, a year. I could go on for much longer explaining reasons why it is cheaper, but I have to cut it short. Red Hat is cheaper comparing price to price with Microsoft, Microsoft admits this. That is why they try to claim other things like Exchange has a lower total cost of ownership, because Exchange admins typically get paid less and over time it saves you more, they use a number of other excuses also, most of which are highly arguable, oppinionated, and biased. Then again, what else is the marketing department for? Microsoft I don't believe has ever tried to argue that the cost of Red Hat vs. Exchange exlcuding other associated costs is cheaper. It just blatantly isn't. It is also very nice for sysadmins to just be able to call someone else whenever the shit hits the fan, or you just have a question or curiosity. Companies need support like that, they need to know that if something goes wrong and their own IT department can't fix it, that someone will. In this case, both MS and RH will help you, but RH in most cases is significantly cheaper.
Regards,
Steve
You can make a wave go faster then light in your own basement for about 300 bucks. The interesting thing being that the wave hits the other side before you technically press the button, but if the wave already touched the other side, and then you hit the button to send that wave, what happens if you decide not to press the button. The answer to the question is interesting from many perspectives, but I won't go into details nor pretend that if I did I'd fully understand it all. Also, there are ways to technically make a particle go faster then light, but most methods that I know of involve warping and/or bending time and space. For instance, if you cleverly bend spacetime in two spots and "join" them (it can be done using massive objects and blackholes), then you can technically beat light in a race. A good visual for such a thing would be if you imagine spacetime of the Universe as a "U" and you want to race light from one end to the other (top left all the way down and around to the top right) then if you can warp the U so that for you the top left and top right are connected like a D turned 90 degrees. Well then you just take the shortcut (a straight line going across the top) and light has to take the long path. Thus you'll get to the other end before the light does. Now this can be performed on smaller scales (doesn't need to be the Universe) but of course there are limitations to this method as well.
Regards,
Steve
or Google? :) I really hope they come out with a GIM.
-Steve
What most people don't realize is that Star Office's code base is 15 years old. Open Office and MS Office aren't emulations of each other, they've just both evolved around the methods in which humans naturally prefer to do word processing and the like. How else would you design a word processor for use with the average person? Saying Open Office just copies MS Office is like saying that is all Corel did too. It seems that, like the typical MS, they saw good proudcts out already, they also saw a market advantage to selling their own Office Suite, so they took all of the good ideas from the other Office Suites and combined them. As with most software applications, it evolves through time, some of those evolutions involve borrowing ideas from other suites that are admittedly implememnted better. You don't really think that MS came up with spell checking or mail merge, do you? But sure enough they have those features. Also, OOo is very usable in its current form, and the biggest issue people complain about (it's UI and load times, which are mostly interrelated) is going through a major overhaul right now. By the time 2.0 is released you should have no reason to stick with MS Office. The OOo gui used to be so horrible simply because they used to have to implement their own widgets and even emulate an entire desktop environment at some points because there was no standard back in the day, now there is more of a standardized base, and its being implemented using it.
Regards,
Steve
We aren't trying to defeat Iraq. We are there trying to protect its citizens and set up a democracy. Some citizens are trying to kill us because in Pre-US Iraq they had lots of power under Saddam. Now everyone will have equal power and some aren't happy with it. Despite that we have 1000 dead troops over there, the kill ratio is like 1:10000 or something ridiculous like that. So we have killed many more of them. 1000 deaths really isn't many, although its more then I'd like. Look at WWII's numbers. The main problem with Iraq is that in order to effectively keep it peaceful, our troops have to walk amongst the people. The terrorists killing them are cowards and hide amongst the people, then kill when they have the chance, or take hostages who have no chance of defedning themselves and behead them. It's a completely different kind of war and the fact that the US is making so much progress is a good sign (most of the good news you won't hear about on the news, like i'm sure you know that Iraq now has a functioning school system, which was nearly non existant before, also more people then ever have utilities, etc...). We aren't fighting a country, we are in a country trying to filter out terrorists. If this was a traditional war that involved air, land, sea, real soldiers with uniforms and that fight like men, and you know just your typical war against a country, then I don't think any country(or group of countries) would question the U.S.'s ability to win.
Regards,
Steve
The devil is in the details... to quote myself, "some of the updates aren't applied until you reboot your machine", keyword some. This guy claimed to regularly run windows update, apply all the patches and never had to reboot in 2 months. It's complete bullshit and thats all I was really pointing out. I admin a medium sized network of windows machines and I *know* that some of the updates in the past 2 months have required a reboot. I do prefer linux, and use it whenever I'm not at work, but I'm certainly not clueless about Windows and this guy's claim was just absurd.
Regards,
Steve
I run Fedora Core 2 and it updated fine, although a post higher up said linux isn't affected by this vulnerability, I can only assume they were wrong. Perhaps you changed something? Or you have some kind of NAT or firewall problem. Regardless, if your that concerned, and your user agent string at the bottom of the mozilla about box doesn't have 0.10.1 then just install teh patch from the link, or download it again off the site. The main page has had the new version up since about mid-yesterday.
Regards,
Steve
I use windows update every week. I have never had to reboot after installing an update for almost two months now.
Then you don't use windows update, or some of the updates aren't applied until you reboot your machine. Besides, I'm pretty sure the more impressive part about this is how well the problem was handled and how far free sofware has come in terms of usability for the average person . You see on linux, one just runs apt, yum, emerge or up2date every day or so and *every thing* on your system is updated. Such a system has never been seen by windows users, windows update only updates MS applications, and out of those applications, only a select few. For other software vendors, a custom implemenation of some form of update method needs to be made to effectively push out updates to clients. Many pieces of commercial software don't even have capabilites like this yet, and firefox does. I find that impressive.
Steve
While your logic is good, your reasoning is wrong. This is just version 0.10.0 also known as 1.0PR with a security update which bumped it up to 0.10.1. Doesn't have anything to do with dates, just a coincidence.
Regards,
Steve
How do you set it up to update automaticaly?
Regards,
Steve
Don't worry, it's evil from any view. Even if they do keep their "promise" and give it all to charity, that just translates to good press and a big tax deduction.
Yep.