I agree. You have two parties engaging each other with heightened emotions which as of late are getting even more heightened with seemingly shorter fuses.
While apps don't solve everything, having a way to communicate prior to a face-to-face confrontation may help ease the situation.
Even trying to explain what you are doing or how you will do it is helpful. Explaining a problem to someone who has no idea what I'm talking about forces me to continually break down the steps. At some point there is that "Oh.....how did I not see that?!" moment. However you do it, it seems stepping away from that internal dialogue to an external one is a great help at times.
I purchased this desk (Amazon.com) for $286 (with a Prime membership).
I wanted to get a relatively inexpensive standing desk to see how I'd like it. I've been using the desk for two months now and love it. I'm sure it doesn't have all the adjustments more expensive desks have but I feel very comfortable working all day.
It took almost two weeks to adjust to standing all day long, but now I cannot imagine not working at a standing desk. I think part of the aforementioned comfort is due to all the movements my body is now making. I do find myself unconsciously stepping back, moving my arms around and other movements that are recommended periodically while sitting all day. I even find myself swaying side to side while I'm thinking through a process and stop as I continue to type away.
The improvement in how my back and shoulders feel is great.
Polar Star has a variety of missions while operating in polar regions. During Antarctic deployments, the primary missions include breaking a channel through the sea ice to resupply the McMurdo Research Station in the Ross Sea. Resupply ships use the channel to bring food, fuel, and other goods to make it through another winter. In addition to these duties, Polar Star also serves as a scientific research platform with five laboratories and accommodations for up to 20 scientists. The "J"-shaped cranes and work areas near the stern and port side of ship give scientists the capability to do at-sea studies in the fields of geology, vulcanology, oceanography, sea-ice physics and other disciplines.
So, my question really is why they are doing this? I'm betting the answer is not one where they have actual usecases in mind.
There was a keynote done by Herb Sutter this past September and at roughly the 57 minute mark of his presentation Keynote: Herb Sutter - One C++ he shows a 15 LOC example of numbers being input and then output sorted. He then said, "We need to get past the VT100 era." He continued saying that the standard C++ program cannot even exercise the abilities of the VT100 which has underscore and bold, etc. Pure, portable C++ code cannot even drive a 1970s era VT100.
If you continue watching you'll see the point Herb is trying to make and that point may help explain why they are looking to do this.
If it is open source, then at least you can recompile and/or port to a new OS.
The OP says, "I can't code in any meaningful way, nor do I aspire to"
You have the option of paying someone to fix a problem.
The OP says, "I could easily pay for a supported version of icewm, but I can't personally pay someone enough to keep it alive."
You have none of those options if the closed-source producer of a package arbitrarily decides to drop it.
What you've written is true, there are more options for open source projects. However, exercising those options just may not be feasible, as the OP points out in this particular case. If resources for continued development cannot be found, the open source project is effectively just as dead.
This is especially true the lower you are on the ladder. When you are entry level, you are probably doing help desk most of the time along with setting up new machines. Sure, when you get that eight core computer in, the computer is probably pretty exciting to check out and play around a bit while you install what is needed, but after a few installs, it's simply repetitive -- just like all the other computers you have set up and will continue to set up. Maybe you get to write reports. You'll definitely awe your friends with how you successfully joined 10 tables to create your latest report.
I think IT gets more exciting and interesting when you reach the point where you are creating solutions to new problems. There is a great deal of responsibility but a much greater feeling of reward and satisfaction. I think the saying about the lead dog having the best view is true and not just in IT.
I enjoyed reading the comment where someone said that IT is like janitorial work.
I agree with you that Doom needs to be there. I didn't get really hooked until Doom 2 but I spent a lot of free time absorbed in Doom II. The multiplayer aspect was the first time I experienced a LAN party, playing on Dwango (OMG...the phone bills) and making endless levels. For me Doom II set the stage for Quake and other FPS to really refine the experience in tools, community, and sophistication.
Where would Ubuntu be? Microsoft (MS seems to enter every conversation here on/. so I'll follow suit) has a war chest of money and they earn money, but they didnt' start that way. Ubuntu has a lot of money by way of a very wealthy individual. If he took his money elsewhere for whatever reason, what is Ubuntu's business model? Red Hat is earning money by way of their actions and they've been doing so for a long time now, relatively speaking. RedHat also has the experience, especially in the enterprise market. That isn't to say that Ubuntu couldn't but a company looking to transition from one platform to another, for example, generally chooses a company that has a proven track record.
I think I agree with others in previous threads that Ubuntu is a buzzword much like Gentoo and it'll take more than being a fresh name to unseat a stable company like RedHat. Further, how many of us switch distro's on the server side anyway? Has RedHat treated us poorly enough on that front to warrant a change? For those who are looking two switch, maybe a fresh company worth trying, but I don't think those of us who have already made a choice are that fickle.
...and they've chosen to sponsor this despite that knowledge
One could also say that MySQL is supporting their customers who may not have a choice of platform. If I understand correctly, MySQL was supported on SCO and than it wasn't for a time and now it is. I doubt all administrators of SCO systems drink the Kool-Aid SCO offers and would love to switch platforms but cannot due to money, personel, or software that would need to be ported. Sometimes transitions start in phases and running MySQL on SCO might be the start (or an intermediate step) of proving that the existing system can be moved to another platform. I applaud MySQL AB for sticking by customers who are in a less than appealing situation. Someday those administrators or DBAs may find themselves in different jobs and they will probably be more likely to choose MySQL AB products if those products aren't already in place. Additionally if these people choose MySQL sometime back, having the support from MySQL must have been a relief for a number of reasons.
I don't believe users should have to suffer for someone elses mistakes but the big point here, to me, is that MySQL AB is supporting its users and isn't that what we want from any company or source of our choice of tools?
Theo isn't asking for a product. He is asking for documentation (data sheets). Further, as the email points out, he isn't looking for documentation regarding unreleased products, etc. but for documentation that was *freely* available eight years ago. Additionally he points out that other *crypto* companies provide information that is more available. What is unclear to me though is whether or not those companies he vaguely mentions are US companies.
The same thing you get with OSS: a chance your feedback might help resolve a problem you (and presumably others) experience. What do you get when you submit bug reports to Apache, the Linux kernel, Mozilla Firefox, etc? What do you think you should receive?
At least when you beta test an OSS OS you then get rewarded with a stable OS that you can freely install as you choose..
That is assuming that your feedback was used to further develop the software. You're going to get that free OS if you want it regardless of your beta efforts. If you submit a bug report to any company that charges for its software, do you not get the same result if your bug submission(s) were accepted and worked on? A better product, at least for you? Cost of the product aside, a beta effort is still a beta effort if done in good faith. Is it not?
...you call Apple and explain the situation, they can remove the authorization from your account. So it's really not a huge problem right now.
You can do it yourself from your account settings on iTMS. I think the limit is once every 12 months that you can deauthorize all the computers associated with your account.
Hearing this out of MS reminds me of the quote: "We're seeing crazy uptime numbers now, like three months, six months. I fully expect we'll see a year of uptime when Windows Server 2003 is finished," said Jeff Stucky*. So uptimes, for MS's latest and greatest, that are far short of what *nix administrators experience, are a demonstration of MS's commercial stability? Does the other side of the pond experience MS in a different way?
That said, there are plenty of 3rd party applications that run well and are commercial. It's just Windows itself that doesn't run well. Some development groups are more focused on quality than others on both sides of the fence. I run a large number of commercial applications on Windows that run very well. I couldn't ask for more reliability or dependability. I could of Windows and that is the point.
Could you explain what you don't like about the close button being on the tab? If an unselected tab is one you want to close, you must select that tab and then move the mouse all the way to the right to click the close button. With this feature you only have to move a little bit to the right. Of course using a keyboard shortcut is fast but that's not the point of this feature.
I'm genuinely curious why that feature is such a show stopper for you. I've not read much more than "I don't like it." where I've been looking thus far.
Not that it matters much to you but I'm in the camp who likes this feature. Safari has this feature and I think Opera does based on a post I read elsewhere. I'm a heavy tab user and closing tabs with the mouse in Firefox as it stands now is a PITA compared to how it will be with that feature.
I don't know how you define reasonable but I'd venture a reasonable number of people like that feature on other browsers that implement closing of tabs that way. In my opinion, I think it's great that the developers of Firefox are willing to evolve the browser in ways that have been found successful to users of other browsers. Keep up the great work guys, you're making a fantastic browser!
They obviously have all this information and more. Examples of the RIAA and such were suggested consumers of this information. Telco employees cannot be bought? Everyone seems to think the data is "safe" in the hands of the telco's. Just reading/. one gets a sense of some decisions the telco's have made that aren't in our best interest. I don't know that I trust them any more than the NSA or our government.
Re:Yeah, but does it code fold??
on
Vim 7 Released
·
· Score: 1
I was just trying to start something. I've seen heated discussions on the merits (or lack of) of code folding.
It does look a bit tedious to do in Vim.
Yeah, but does it code fold??
on
Vim 7 Released
·
· Score: 1
I believe the GP's point was that Apple changed the terms and conditions of what you could do with your music after the purchase was made.
Read the EULA specifically clause 20. http://www.apple.com/support/itunes/legal/terms. html How can one complain (not you but the GP) when one agreed to the very terms that Apples reserves the right to exert? If one doesn't like the terms, especially any right Apple (or any company) reserves, then go elsewhere. There are a myriad of options for obtaining music. Find a provider that that is on your same moral/ethical level.
Personally Apples EULA for iTMS hasn't been an issue. If in the future I no longer agree with Apple and their terms, I'll just convert my library to MP3 and move on. I've used iTMS since its inception and haven't had a single problem. I have a hard copy of all my music. I've never found a legitimate use for exceeding their burning limits on the play lists, for example, which is a common "complaint".
I'm far less encumbered now than I ever was. I can play my music in any car, hook up to any sound system, and stream music to other rooms. From my point of view, I'm better off than when I used CDs. By a long shot.
Has this guy ever installed Windows XP on a new bare computer?...Linux often supports everything out of the box
It's easy to make that statement when using a current distro against an OS that was released years ago. Take a distro released in 2001 and see how well it does.
Sure, application installation is "harder" in a Linux environment, because it doesn't follow the "double-click-on-that-icon-and-press-next-next-nex t-finish" or even worse "insert-cd-and-automatically-run-a-program-that-mi ght-damage-your-computer" (see Sony Rootkit on Audio CD's...)
I've had the misfortune of using Fedora Core 5 on a machine while my main machine is off being repaired. Installation is an abomination. An "Add/Remove Programs" that only works when connected to the Internet. Dependency h*ll. I've yet to come across an application that puts a shortcut to itself in the menu system. Instead I have to hunt the application binary down and create a desktop menu item each and every time. Did I mention dependency h*ll? No? OK, let me mention it one more time: dependency h*ll.
Sorry, I'm not ranting at you. Installation being "harder" is an understatment. If anything I think the process could be smoother. I'm sure there are distro's that handle installation better than FC 5 but I bet those distro's are in the minority. I'm sure I'm not the only one shaking my head in disbelief over the experience.
Given the vast number of home users MS has, this would seem to make sense. Really, how many *average* home users know what ports their programs use? Further, how many of those customers will want to fight with their firewall to get things working before they get frustrated and just turn it off? Turning the firewall off is far worse than having a firewall that only blocks inbound connections.
I do hope that MS continues to allow you the ability to work with the firewall on an application level. It's much simpler to browse to "program xyz" and tell the firewall to allow whatever ports this program needs. Determining and then defining UPD vs TCP and ranges of ports is just not going to work for most non-technical people.
Lastly, I think the request of the larger corporate customers and government makes sense. They don't want to micro-manage their machines.
I don't understand the complaint here. MS is listening to their customers. Supposedly that is a good thing for a business to do, of course there is a limit. Secondly MS probably doesn't have a smoother way to make managing the firewall any easier than anyone else out there. It's a tough problem, especially for non-technical users.
From Microsoft's side, they heaping pile of exploitable code that is the Windows code base. Of course they don't want to expose any more than they have to because they can see, or know, what they are in for.
On the other hand, like the article brings out, the customers who really deploy on test systems first or have to be super careful about breaking their system due to very custom sofware are at a disadvantage.
There must be a channel, especially for larger customers, where MS could/would divuldge this information so they aren't in the dark? I can see MS being closed out in public but not behind the scenes. Does anyone know?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. You have two parties engaging each other with heightened emotions which as of late are getting even more heightened with seemingly shorter fuses. While apps don't solve everything, having a way to communicate prior to a face-to-face confrontation may help ease the situation.
Even trying to explain what you are doing or how you will do it is helpful. Explaining a problem to someone who has no idea what I'm talking about forces me to continually break down the steps. At some point there is that "Oh.....how did I not see that?!" moment. However you do it, it seems stepping away from that internal dialogue to an external one is a great help at times.
I purchased this desk (Amazon.com) for $286 (with a Prime membership).
I wanted to get a relatively inexpensive standing desk to see how I'd like it. I've been using the desk for two months now and love it. I'm sure it doesn't have all the adjustments more expensive desks have but I feel very comfortable working all day.
It took almost two weeks to adjust to standing all day long, but now I cannot imagine not working at a standing desk. I think part of the aforementioned comfort is due to all the movements my body is now making. I do find myself unconsciously stepping back, moving my arms around and other movements that are recommended periodically while sitting all day. I even find myself swaying side to side while I'm thinking through a process and stop as I continue to type away.
The improvement in how my back and shoulders feel is great.
... but I HATE the caps lock key. I NEVER use it
What you said about the caps lock key, reminded me of this keyboard: "Do you think the Caps Lock key is pointless, and would be more useful as Ctrl?"
Why would the US Coast Guard own any icebreakers?
According to a Wikipedia article:
Polar Star has a variety of missions while operating in polar regions. During Antarctic deployments, the primary missions include breaking a channel through the sea ice to resupply the McMurdo Research Station in the Ross Sea. Resupply ships use the channel to bring food, fuel, and other goods to make it through another winter. In addition to these duties, Polar Star also serves as a scientific research platform with five laboratories and accommodations for up to 20 scientists. The "J"-shaped cranes and work areas near the stern and port side of ship give scientists the capability to do at-sea studies in the fields of geology, vulcanology, oceanography, sea-ice physics and other disciplines.
So, my question really is why they are doing this? I'm betting the answer is not one where they have actual usecases in mind.
There was a keynote done by Herb Sutter this past September and at roughly the 57 minute mark of his presentation Keynote: Herb Sutter - One C++ he shows a 15 LOC example of numbers being input and then output sorted. He then said, "We need to get past the VT100 era." He continued saying that the standard C++ program cannot even exercise the abilities of the VT100 which has underscore and bold, etc. Pure, portable C++ code cannot even drive a 1970s era VT100.
If you continue watching you'll see the point Herb is trying to make and that point may help explain why they are looking to do this.
If it is open source, then at least you can recompile and/or port to a new OS.
The OP says, "I can't code in any meaningful way, nor do I aspire to"
You have the option of paying someone to fix a problem.
The OP says, "I could easily pay for a supported version of icewm, but I can't personally pay someone enough to keep it alive."
You have none of those options if the closed-source producer of a package arbitrarily decides to drop it.
What you've written is true, there are more options for open source projects. However, exercising those options just may not be feasible, as the OP points out in this particular case. If resources for continued development cannot be found, the open source project is effectively just as dead.
According to this paper, they are called bgrep and bdiff.
This is especially true the lower you are on the ladder. When you are entry level, you are probably doing help desk most of the time along with setting up new machines. Sure, when you get that eight core computer in, the computer is probably pretty exciting to check out and play around a bit while you install what is needed, but after a few installs, it's simply repetitive -- just like all the other computers you have set up and will continue to set up. Maybe you get to write reports. You'll definitely awe your friends with how you successfully joined 10 tables to create your latest report.
I think IT gets more exciting and interesting when you reach the point where you are creating solutions to new problems. There is a great deal of responsibility but a much greater feeling of reward and satisfaction. I think the saying about the lead dog having the best view is true and not just in IT.
I enjoyed reading the comment where someone said that IT is like janitorial work.
I agree with you that Doom needs to be there. I didn't get really hooked until Doom 2 but I spent a lot of free time absorbed in Doom II. The multiplayer aspect was the first time I experienced a LAN party, playing on Dwango (OMG ...the phone bills) and making endless levels. For me Doom II set the stage for Quake and other FPS to really refine the experience in tools, community, and sophistication.
Where would Ubuntu be? Microsoft (MS seems to enter every conversation here on /. so I'll follow suit) has a war chest of money and they earn money, but they didnt' start that way. Ubuntu has a lot of money by way of a very wealthy individual. If he took his money elsewhere for whatever reason, what is Ubuntu's business model? Red Hat is earning money by way of their actions and they've been doing so for a long time now, relatively speaking. RedHat also has the experience, especially in the enterprise market. That isn't to say that Ubuntu couldn't but a company looking to transition from one platform to another, for example, generally chooses a company that has a proven track record.
I think I agree with others in previous threads that Ubuntu is a buzzword much like Gentoo and it'll take more than being a fresh name to unseat a stable company like RedHat. Further, how many of us switch distro's on the server side anyway? Has RedHat treated us poorly enough on that front to warrant a change? For those who are looking two switch, maybe a fresh company worth trying, but I don't think those of us who have already made a choice are that fickle.
One could also say that MySQL is supporting their customers who may not have a choice of platform. If I understand correctly, MySQL was supported on SCO and than it wasn't for a time and now it is. I doubt all administrators of SCO systems drink the Kool-Aid SCO offers and would love to switch platforms but cannot due to money, personel, or software that would need to be ported. Sometimes transitions start in phases and running MySQL on SCO might be the start (or an intermediate step) of proving that the existing system can be moved to another platform. I applaud MySQL AB for sticking by customers who are in a less than appealing situation. Someday those administrators or DBAs may find themselves in different jobs and they will probably be more likely to choose MySQL AB products if those products aren't already in place. Additionally if these people choose MySQL sometime back, having the support from MySQL must have been a relief for a number of reasons.
I don't believe users should have to suffer for someone elses mistakes but the big point here, to me, is that MySQL AB is supporting its users and isn't that what we want from any company or source of our choice of tools?
Theo isn't asking for a product. He is asking for documentation (data sheets). Further, as the email points out, he isn't looking for documentation regarding unreleased products, etc. but for documentation that was *freely* available eight years ago. Additionally he points out that other *crypto* companies provide information that is more available. What is unclear to me though is whether or not those companies he vaguely mentions are US companies.
The same thing you get with OSS: a chance your feedback might help resolve a problem you (and presumably others) experience. What do you get when you submit bug reports to Apache, the Linux kernel, Mozilla Firefox, etc? What do you think you should receive?
At least when you beta test an OSS OS you then get rewarded with a stable OS that you can freely install as you choose..That is assuming that your feedback was used to further develop the software. You're going to get that free OS if you want it regardless of your beta efforts. If you submit a bug report to any company that charges for its software, do you not get the same result if your bug submission(s) were accepted and worked on? A better product, at least for you? Cost of the product aside, a beta effort is still a beta effort if done in good faith. Is it not?
You can do it yourself from your account settings on iTMS. I think the limit is once every 12 months that you can deauthorize all the computers associated with your account.
Hearing this out of MS reminds me of the quote: "We're seeing crazy uptime numbers now, like three months, six months. I fully expect we'll see a year of uptime when Windows Server 2003 is finished," said Jeff Stucky*. So uptimes, for MS's latest and greatest, that are far short of what *nix administrators experience, are a demonstration of MS's commercial stability? Does the other side of the pond experience MS in a different way?
That said, there are plenty of 3rd party applications that run well and are commercial. It's just Windows itself that doesn't run well. Some development groups are more focused on quality than others on both sides of the fence. I run a large number of commercial applications on Windows that run very well. I couldn't ask for more reliability or dependability. I could of Windows and that is the point.
*http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/04/25/ballmer _ushers_in_windows/
Could you explain what you don't like about the close button being on the tab? If an unselected tab is one you want to close, you must select that tab and then move the mouse all the way to the right to click the close button. With this feature you only have to move a little bit to the right. Of course using a keyboard shortcut is fast but that's not the point of this feature.
I'm genuinely curious why that feature is such a show stopper for you. I've not read much more than "I don't like it." where I've been looking thus far.
Not that it matters much to you but I'm in the camp who likes this feature. Safari has this feature and I think Opera does based on a post I read elsewhere. I'm a heavy tab user and closing tabs with the mouse in Firefox as it stands now is a PITA compared to how it will be with that feature.
I don't know how you define reasonable but I'd venture a reasonable number of people like that feature on other browsers that implement closing of tabs that way. In my opinion, I think it's great that the developers of Firefox are willing to evolve the browser in ways that have been found successful to users of other browsers. Keep up the great work guys, you're making a fantastic browser!
They obviously have all this information and more. Examples of the RIAA and such were suggested consumers of this information. Telco employees cannot be bought? Everyone seems to think the data is "safe" in the hands of the telco's. Just reading /. one gets a sense of some decisions the telco's have made that aren't in our best interest. I don't know that I trust them any more than the NSA or our government.
I was just trying to start something. I've seen heated discussions on the merits (or lack of) of code folding. It does look a bit tedious to do in Vim.
Read the EULA specifically clause 20.. html
http://www.apple.com/support/itunes/legal/terms
How can one complain (not you but the GP) when one agreed to the very terms that Apples reserves the right to exert? If one doesn't like the terms, especially any right Apple (or any company) reserves, then go elsewhere. There are a myriad of options for obtaining music. Find a provider that that is on your same moral/ethical level.
Personally Apples EULA for iTMS hasn't been an issue. If in the future I no longer agree with Apple and their terms, I'll just convert my library to MP3 and move on. I've used iTMS since its inception and haven't had a single problem. I have a hard copy of all my music. I've never found a legitimate use for exceeding their burning limits on the play lists, for example, which is a common "complaint".
I'm far less encumbered now than I ever was. I can play my music in any car, hook up to any sound system, and stream music to other rooms. From my point of view, I'm better off than when I used CDs. By a long shot.
It's easy to make that statement when using a current distro against an OS that was released years ago. Take a distro released in 2001 and see how well it does.
I've had the misfortune of using Fedora Core 5 on a machine while my main machine is off being repaired. Installation is an abomination. An "Add/Remove Programs" that only works when connected to the Internet. Dependency h*ll. I've yet to come across an application that puts a shortcut to itself in the menu system. Instead I have to hunt the application binary down and create a desktop menu item each and every time. Did I mention dependency h*ll? No? OK, let me mention it one more time: dependency h*ll.
Sorry, I'm not ranting at you. Installation being "harder" is an understatment. If anything I think the process could be smoother. I'm sure there are distro's that handle installation better than FC 5 but I bet those distro's are in the minority. I'm sure I'm not the only one shaking my head in disbelief over the experience.
I like the point you raise.
Given the vast number of home users MS has, this would seem to make sense. Really, how many *average* home users know what ports their programs use? Further, how many of those customers will want to fight with their firewall to get things working before they get frustrated and just turn it off? Turning the firewall off is far worse than having a firewall that only blocks inbound connections.
I do hope that MS continues to allow you the ability to work with the firewall on an application level. It's much simpler to browse to "program xyz" and tell the firewall to allow whatever ports this program needs. Determining and then defining UPD vs TCP and ranges of ports is just not going to work for most non-technical people.
Lastly, I think the request of the larger corporate customers and government makes sense. They don't want to micro-manage their machines.
I don't understand the complaint here. MS is listening to their customers. Supposedly that is a good thing for a business to do, of course there is a limit. Secondly MS probably doesn't have a smoother way to make managing the firewall any easier than anyone else out there. It's a tough problem, especially for non-technical users.
From Microsoft's side, they heaping pile of exploitable code that is the Windows code base. Of course they don't want to expose any more than they have to because they can see, or know, what they are in for.
On the other hand, like the article brings out, the customers who really deploy on test systems first or have to be super careful about breaking their system due to very custom sofware are at a disadvantage.
There must be a channel, especially for larger customers, where MS could/would divuldge this information so they aren't in the dark? I can see MS being closed out in public but not behind the scenes. Does anyone know?