They didnt purposefully install the malicious software
That would be like saying IE is safe, and its the users fault for purposefully clicking the "Install ActiveX" button that happened to install malware.
Pretty much... Except, IE would often not even tell you that it's installing an ActiveX control.
If the operating system was as safe as the crazy fanboys claim, it wouldnt have been able to install malware in the first place.
Not that im claiming that *any* OS is safer than any other, im justing saying OSX did NOT protect the user.
Can we differentiate between fanboy rantings and technical issues please? In general, Unices are far less vulnerable to frontal attacks than (say) Windows. At the same time however, remember that most fortresses in history were taken by subterfuge, not frontal attacks. Not much the OS can do to protect a total idiot of a user.
On the other hand, Windows/IE of the bad ActiveX days was pretty good at not protecting against even frontal attacks. I think that's a valid criticism.
My favorite "useless feature" is track changes in Word. Do you have any idea how surprised people get when they send me a Word document and I send them back all my edits with cute little bubble comments next them? Does OO support track changes? Cause if they dont, that is a shame... it is a damn useful feature once somebody drops change-tracked document on your lap and you go "wow, I never knew this existed!". But I can only imagine the number of 37-signals followers who sit around and call it "useless bloat!!! off with its head!!"
Actually, it's a fairly useful feature - kind of a VCS inside the file. Damn powerful when you want to see who made what changes in a file. I don't use it much, but my dad pretty much depends on it.
And yes, OO supports it - has since the original Star Office only days, I think. It's one of the first things we looked at when the first versions came out.
I think that pretty much sums up that idea... Working in nearly-machine level that C does, you can't make assumptions of the safety of a particular value. Especially in the case of something like MMIO, for example... You might just be initializing a piece of memory to an instruction that says "Launch all thermonuclear missiles at random targets"...
Er, anyone who was using KDE 4 up until 4.2 was obviously trying to be bleeding edge (I'm included, btw). It was never claimed to be featureful... There's a reason it's called the "bleeding" edge...
On the other hand, I'm really happy with the current iteration (4.2)
I personally don't care whether they've rewritten the code-base. The more important things are whether it's stable, less of a low-hanging fruit for piracy, more feature-rich, and so on. In one word, is it more competitive?
I do have to say that I think it's not. Compared, anyway, to KDE 4.2 and OS X 10.5.x. It's getting there though... Maybe with Windows 8... (which won't be a rewrite either;-) )
1.4 GHz and 512 MB RAM?
You're not doing enough for the treadmill, bro... That's why you should go with Vista - to keep the marketing folks in their jobs...;-)
Which is really what it comes down to: Gold (or any other commodity) only has value as long as someone is willing to exchange it for another commodity (goods/services, generally). It doesn't matter whether it's based on gold or black chocolate - it just matters that somebody is willing to exchange it for something else.
No, '.' is used because PHP is weakly typed. Whether to add or concatenate HAS to be specified by the programmer because unlike in strongly-typed languages (e.g. Java), there's no way for the interpreter to know which you want.
Which is epic fail on the part of PHP - look at Python for comparison:
>>> 'foo''bar'
'foobar'
>>> 'foo'+'bar'
'foobar'
>>> 3 + 5
8
To a Python guy, PHP looks more like an ad-hoc collection of hacks than a true programming language.
Slashdot Mirror
More to the point, where's it coming from?
They didnt purposefully install the malicious software That would be like saying IE is safe, and its the users fault for purposefully clicking the "Install ActiveX" button that happened to install malware.
Pretty much... Except, IE would often not even tell you that it's installing an ActiveX control.
If the operating system was as safe as the crazy fanboys claim, it wouldnt have been able to install malware in the first place.
Not that im claiming that *any* OS is safer than any other, im justing saying OSX did NOT protect the user.
Can we differentiate between fanboy rantings and technical issues please? In general, Unices are far less vulnerable to frontal attacks than (say) Windows. At the same time however, remember that most fortresses in history were taken by subterfuge, not frontal attacks. Not much the OS can do to protect a total idiot of a user.
On the other hand, Windows/IE of the bad ActiveX days was pretty good at not protecting against even frontal attacks. I think that's a valid criticism.
My favorite "useless feature" is track changes in Word. Do you have any idea how surprised people get when they send me a Word document and I send them back all my edits with cute little bubble comments next them? Does OO support track changes? Cause if they dont, that is a shame... it is a damn useful feature once somebody drops change-tracked document on your lap and you go "wow, I never knew this existed!". But I can only imagine the number of 37-signals followers who sit around and call it "useless bloat!!! off with its head!!"
Actually, it's a fairly useful feature - kind of a VCS inside the file. Damn powerful when you want to see who made what changes in a file. I don't use it much, but my dad pretty much depends on it.
And yes, OO supports it - has since the original Star Office only days, I think. It's one of the first things we looked at when the first versions came out.
And maybe 5% have heard of IPv4... Your point being?
Apparently somebody else did too - or he wouldn't have had any seeds... Jim? Kirk? Was that you guys?
...(to what value?) ...
I think that pretty much sums up that idea... Working in nearly-machine level that C does, you can't make assumptions of the safety of a particular value. Especially in the case of something like MMIO, for example... You might just be initializing a piece of memory to an instruction that says "Launch all thermonuclear missiles at random targets"...
To most people, 98 was 95 done right...
Er, anyone who was using KDE 4 up until 4.2 was obviously trying to be bleeding edge (I'm included, btw). It was never claimed to be featureful... There's a reason it's called the "bleeding" edge...
On the other hand, I'm really happy with the current iteration (4.2)
Nor was XP, for that matter...
I personally don't care whether they've rewritten the code-base. The more important things are whether it's stable, less of a low-hanging fruit for piracy, more feature-rich, and so on. In one word, is it more competitive?
I do have to say that I think it's not. Compared, anyway, to KDE 4.2 and OS X 10.5.x. It's getting there though... Maybe with Windows 8... (which won't be a rewrite either ;-) )
Deep Blue achieved consciousness? Congratulations to IBM!
Outside of servers, I cannot even think of any systems I have come across with more than 4GB of physical memory.
Yes, but those extra registers in x64 mode are rather attractive for other apps too...
"Download experience"?
Experience? It's as bad as "For your convenience..."
Looking at the bulk of that thing, I think a good voice-over for the video would be Nikita Khrushchev saying "We will bury you"...
Unfortunately, it's not phallic enough to be Air Force One...
1.4 GHz and 512 MB RAM? You're not doing enough for the treadmill, bro... That's why you should go with Vista - to keep the marketing folks in their jobs... ;-)
You mean the one about Britney?
If you're going to make up your own interpretations, why quote the document to begin with?
So, you shouldn't interpret it, I guess? Then how do you use it?
Which is really what it comes down to: Gold (or any other commodity) only has value as long as someone is willing to exchange it for another commodity (goods/services, generally). It doesn't matter whether it's based on gold or black chocolate - it just matters that somebody is willing to exchange it for something else.
Compressing WoT would be like what they did to Dune... Mindgames don't work so well on screen...
So you're saying that Asimov botched the job of adapting, by making a crappy movie into a good novel?
Careful, they may then reign-force...
No, '.' is used because PHP is weakly typed. Whether to add or concatenate HAS to be specified by the programmer because unlike in strongly-typed languages (e.g. Java), there's no way for the interpreter to know which you want.
Which is epic fail on the part of PHP - look at Python for comparison: >>> 'foo''bar' 'foobar' >>> 'foo'+'bar' 'foobar' >>> 3 + 5 8 To a Python guy, PHP looks more like an ad-hoc collection of hacks than a true programming language.
You forgot to carry the two
That's Poseidon. He's different.
The problem is that greater disparity usually leads to the rich usurping the political process, and enslaving (in fact, if not in name) the poor.
Freedom, security, deserving and not, Franklin and that kind of thing, I guess.
There have been several proposals on this line before, but they've always been vetoed by China.