Are you saying that if I discovered the secret of eternal youth, then that wouldn't change the world, simply because it's not a new idea, people have been looking for it since the dawn of time?
No. The difference in your (poor) analogy is that people were searching for the secret, but did not find it, whereas you did. With respect to client-server technology, it has been done for years already. Thus, implementing an office suite over the Internet is no different than implementing it over, say, a LAN. The "secret" has already been found.
Just because it's already been thought of doesn't mean that an implementation won't potentially be interesting.
I didn't say it wasn't interesting. I said it wasn't new.
Shouldn't be difficult to make the action of the main window X configurable...
That's a horrible idea, IMO. Changing the default behaviour of what is traditionally a "close application" button would mean that I now have to contemplate what clicking the 'X' does in all future applications. Will it close all of my windows? One of them? Do I have to look for a configuration option in each application and standardize them all?
It's like those horrid web pages that redefine the behaviour of check boxes to act as radio buttons, or vice versa, just because they like the look better.
As others have pointed out, use the red X specifically designed for tabs.
It's only libel if what the person is saying about the doctors is false.
Ye$, but the co$t of defending your$elf -- regardle$$ of whether or not the $uit i$ valid -- add$ up from all of the lawyer fee$. IMO, e$tabli$hed (read: rich) doctor$ have a greater chance of making the i$$ue di$appear via out-of-court $ettlement$, $ince Joe Blogger might have trouble$ putting up thou$and$ of dollar$.
Now, replace diebold with Apple, the ATM machine with FairPlay (the money being copyrighted goods), and the researcher with DVD [Jon].
You're comparing Situation A, which involves random ATM users stealing cash (in limited number) from banks, with Situation B, which involves making a copy of an audio file (which you have previously paid for via iTunes, and which does not decrease the number of audio files in any way) so that you can listen to it on an alternate device. Are you really saying that these two scenarios are even remotely similar?
I don't recall Microsoft having any problems supporting say, WordPerfect documents, which after all were "very specific to the [WordPerfect] productivity suite."
The main difference in this case is that you had to pay for WP. OO.o is free. MS does not want to provide easy conversion tools for a free office suite. What incentive would there be to buy Office?
With WP, people would be shelling out cash for either product, putting them both on a competitive playing field. Today, a large number of people value cost over all other things, and free is pretty much as low as you can get.
Oh yeah, that's a great idea. I can see some scenarios now.
1: "Hey, I think it's time I tried out that new distro that everyone's talking about -- oh, wait a sec. Included CUPS has no Lexmark printer support. Hmmmm, guess not then."
2: "Hey Dad, you should try out Linux!"
"Yeah, I've heard some good things about it."
"Of course you'll have to buy a new printer, or do some Googling and find a printer hack."
"Huh? I just bought this one? Where's that Windows CDR of yours?"
3: Oh, look, the update manager says there's a new CUPS update." *click click* "What the... why can't I print anything?"
I think we need to make it clear that this sort of behavior is not appreciated and should have consequences.
It would have consequences -- it would hurt the people who use Linux/CUPS, and would completely pass by everyone else.
A better idea would be to just not buy Lexmark products.
What other ways are you going to navigate your music library if not by artist, album, or genre?
I organize my music collection based on the number of vowels in the second word of the group's name. If there is only one word, I take the total number of letters in the word (n) and add a number produced by the formula floor((n mod 3)/(n+1))+1. If the group's name is composed entirely of numbers, simple addition of each digit is performed -- if the result is 2 or more digits, the process is repeated until it's down to 1. Prince has his own unique category.
Giving up one proprietary format for another is stupid - the end of this will be lots of licences bought in Adobe Acrobat software, with little or no effect for open source.
Well, given that Adobe Reader is free (and there are other free PDF viewers for Windows/Mac/*nix), AND there are about a bazillion "create PDF using a printer driver" freeware applications out there right now, I don't see why anyone needs to spend piles of money on PDF reading/writing software. Remember: PDF is a "finished" format, intended for final copies of documents, barring small revisions.
Just because PDF can be read by virtually everyone, it is not an "open" file format. In fact, PDF is "protected" by several patents and some options are a well-kept secret of Adobe.
Presumably, if you're using the afore-mentioned readers/writers, you simply won't use those features. Out of curiosity, can you name any? And if so, can you give some examples where such features would be deliberately included in a document by the State, resulting in unreadable documents?
People have voted with their dollars (& pounds, euros, etc). Apple's DRM is simple and consistant unlike MSFT's which change per song. Apple has sold over a half a billion dollars worth of songs. The rest combined barely equal a tenth of that.
I'd warrant that a backlash against Microsoft's DRM isn't what's fueling Apple sales. More likely:
The iPod is THE "wow" music player to have these days
Heavy marketing by Apple
Songs are cheap
I know a number of iPod owners, an DRM doesn't even cross their minds.
Sony Executive 1:... More Madden and Grand Theft Auto!
Sony Executive 4 (from the back): I've got it! Now hear me out on this. People love Madden. And people have spent millions on our "Grand Thief Auto" series.
Sony Executive 2: "Theft".
Sony Executive 4: No, they really bought it! Anyway, here's what I'm thinking... "Grand Thief Madden"! You have this super hip character, right? And he takes things and stuff, kind of like a thief. And there's this really cool narration thing going on, doing a play-by-play of the things he's taking. You know, cars and trucks and stuff.
Sony Executive 3: Like "Grand Theft Auto"?
Sony Executive 4: "Otto", sure, whatever. His name is irrelevant. The point is that he takes stuff and Madden does the calls. Like he'll take a bike and Madden will say "Hey folks, look here, 'Otto' just took a bike!" or whatever.
Sony Executive 1 (to all): You hear that, boys? Why couldn't you come up with this during the focus meeting? Go with it!
Actually, Google is pretty close to having a monopoly on search engine services.
Well, being a monopoly isn't bad in and of itself. Abusing your powers as a monopoly, however, would be.
Google essentially controlling the search engine market would be one thing. Google using said power to pressure browser developers into disabling access to competitive search engines, for example, would be another.
Q: Can we stream videos from our PCs? ... Now we have to have to not only have a PC in order to use this awesome feature...
I'm confused as to why you are surprised that "streaming videos from a PC" would require a PC.
...we have to have Media Center running on it
While there may be some code/DRM/whatever that requires Media Center, his statement doesn't make thet clear. He says "if you have media center on those pcs, you will be able to stream standard and high definition video." That just says that Media Center will be able to do it. It's like saying "if you have a car, you will be able to drive on the highway." It does not mean that you cannot drive on the highway in a truck, a bus, or even an armoured tank.
Slashdot Mirror
Am I missing something here?
Yes. "Greed".
Fair enough. I felt it was sufficiently implied, but obviously I can't hold them to task over that.
Are you saying that if I discovered the secret of eternal youth, then that wouldn't change the world, simply because it's not a new idea, people have been looking for it since the dawn of time?
No. The difference in your (poor) analogy is that people were searching for the secret, but did not find it, whereas you did. With respect to client-server technology, it has been done for years already. Thus, implementing an office suite over the Internet is no different than implementing it over, say, a LAN. The "secret" has already been found.
Just because it's already been thought of doesn't mean that an implementation won't potentially be interesting.
I didn't say it wasn't interesting. I said it wasn't new.
"the world is about to change this week"
Yes, accessing applications on a remote server. That's certainly a new, world-changing idea.
Except that it isn't.
Shouldn't be difficult to make the action of the main window X configurable...
That's a horrible idea, IMO. Changing the default behaviour of what is traditionally a "close application" button would mean that I now have to contemplate what clicking the 'X' does in all future applications. Will it close all of my windows? One of them? Do I have to look for a configuration option in each application and standardize them all?
It's like those horrid web pages that redefine the behaviour of check boxes to act as radio buttons, or vice versa, just because they like the look better.
As others have pointed out, use the red X specifically designed for tabs.
Does this mark the end of netscape?
I'm not an AOL user, so I don't know if AOL even uses Netscape anymore. But their Downloads page says that AOL Explorer is based on IE.
In any case, there's always Mozilla/Firefox...
It's only libel if what the person is saying about the doctors is false.
Ye$, but the co$t of defending your$elf -- regardle$$ of whether or not the $uit i$ valid -- add$ up from all of the lawyer fee$. IMO, e$tabli$hed (read: rich) doctor$ have a greater chance of making the i$$ue di$appear via out-of-court $ettlement$, $ince Joe Blogger might have trouble$ putting up thou$and$ of dollar$.
Welcome to the Litigou$ $ociety.
Now, replace diebold with Apple, the ATM machine with FairPlay (the money being copyrighted goods), and the researcher with DVD [Jon].
You're comparing Situation A, which involves random ATM users stealing cash (in limited number) from banks, with Situation B, which involves making a copy of an audio file (which you have previously paid for via iTunes, and which does not decrease the number of audio files in any way) so that you can listen to it on an alternate device. Are you really saying that these two scenarios are even remotely similar?
I don't recall Microsoft having any problems supporting say, WordPerfect documents, which after all were "very specific to the [WordPerfect] productivity suite."
The main difference in this case is that you had to pay for WP. OO.o is free. MS does not want to provide easy conversion tools for a free office suite. What incentive would there be to buy Office?
With WP, people would be shelling out cash for either product, putting them both on a competitive playing field. Today, a large number of people value cost over all other things, and free is pretty much as low as you can get.
I think it's time to remove Lexmark from CUPS.
Oh yeah, that's a great idea. I can see some scenarios now.
1: "Hey, I think it's time I tried out that new distro that everyone's talking about -- oh, wait a sec. Included CUPS has no Lexmark printer support. Hmmmm, guess not then."
2: "Hey Dad, you should try out Linux!"
"Yeah, I've heard some good things about it."
"Of course you'll have to buy a new printer, or do some Googling and find a printer hack."
"Huh? I just bought this one? Where's that Windows CDR of yours?"
3: Oh, look, the update manager says there's a new CUPS update." *click click* "What the... why can't I print anything?"
I think we need to make it clear that this sort of behavior is not appreciated and should have consequences.
It would have consequences -- it would hurt the people who use Linux/CUPS, and would completely pass by everyone else.
A better idea would be to just not buy Lexmark products.
What other ways are you going to navigate your music library if not by artist, album, or genre?
I organize my music collection based on the number of vowels in the second word of the group's name. If there is only one word, I take the total number of letters in the word (n) and add a number produced by the formula floor((n mod 3)/(n+1))+1. If the group's name is composed entirely of numbers, simple addition of each digit is performed -- if the result is 2 or more digits, the process is repeated until it's down to 1. Prince has his own unique category.
Really, I thought everyone did it this way.
Seriously, searching the site doesn't take long, and now uses Google to do it, A quick search of Creative and virus would have found the original.
Even easier -- just click on the "worm" icon, and you'll see the story sitting right there beneath the dupe.
Giving up one proprietary format for another is stupid - the end of this will be lots of licences bought in Adobe Acrobat software, with little or no effect for open source.
Well, given that Adobe Reader is free (and there are other free PDF viewers for Windows/Mac/*nix), AND there are about a bazillion "create PDF using a printer driver" freeware applications out there right now, I don't see why anyone needs to spend piles of money on PDF reading/writing software. Remember: PDF is a "finished" format, intended for final copies of documents, barring small revisions.
Just because PDF can be read by virtually everyone, it is not an "open" file format. In fact, PDF is "protected" by several patents and some options are a well-kept secret of Adobe.
Presumably, if you're using the afore-mentioned readers/writers, you simply won't use those features. Out of curiosity, can you name any? And if so, can you give some examples where such features would be deliberately included in a document by the State, resulting in unreadable documents?
People have voted with their dollars (& pounds, euros, etc). Apple's DRM is simple and consistant unlike MSFT's which change per song. Apple has sold over a half a billion dollars worth of songs. The rest combined barely equal a tenth of that.
I'd warrant that a backlash against Microsoft's DRM isn't what's fueling Apple sales. More likely:
I know a number of iPod owners, an DRM doesn't even cross their minds.
It's better to try something like Smart Boot Manager. It brings up a menu allowing you to boot from any of your listed devices.
I have used it several times when installing Linux on older laptops that do not allow CD-booting.
It's been so long, my memory has gone with it.
I hear a sequel is already in the works, and is due anytime now...
The guy must have been a speed-writing champion.
Perhaps he wrote at Mach speed.
Sony Executive 1: ... More Madden and Grand Theft Auto!
Sony Executive 4 (from the back): I've got it! Now hear me out on this. People love Madden. And people have spent millions on our "Grand Thief Auto" series.
Sony Executive 2: "Theft".
Sony Executive 4: No, they really bought it! Anyway, here's what I'm thinking... "Grand Thief Madden"! You have this super hip character, right? And he takes things and stuff, kind of like a thief. And there's this really cool narration thing going on, doing a play-by-play of the things he's taking. You know, cars and trucks and stuff.
Sony Executive 3: Like "Grand Theft Auto"?
Sony Executive 4: "Otto", sure, whatever. His name is irrelevant. The point is that he takes stuff and Madden does the calls. Like he'll take a bike and Madden will say "Hey folks, look here, 'Otto' just took a bike!" or whatever.
Sony Executive 1 (to all): You hear that, boys? Why couldn't you come up with this during the focus meeting? Go with it!
I doubt 'pig game' is gonna get me far.
Maybe not, but I'll bet it would make an interesting Google Image Search with Safe-search turned off.
*dares not try at work*
Well, being a monopoly isn't bad in and of itself. Abusing your powers as a monopoly, however, would be.
Google essentially controlling the search engine market would be one thing. Google using said power to pressure browser developers into disabling access to competitive search engines, for example, would be another.
So, when flying over crowds of people, does this new plane drop its cargo every so often?
Q: Can we stream videos from our PCs?
...
Now we have to have to not only have a PC in order to use this awesome feature...
I'm confused as to why you are surprised that "streaming videos from a PC" would require a PC.
While there may be some code/DRM/whatever that requires Media Center, his statement doesn't make thet clear. He says "if you have media center on those pcs, you will be able to stream standard and high definition video." That just says that Media Center will be able to do it. It's like saying "if you have a car, you will be able to drive on the highway." It does not mean that you cannot drive on the highway in a truck, a bus, or even an armoured tank.
After a backflip you still face the same direction.
Reminds me of Jason Kidd's quote, "We're going to turn this team around a full 360." Ok then.