Slashdot has a setting to show the domain name. You can set this to always show them, never show them, or to show them in recommended situations. The third option is the default. Mozilla.org is apparently a trusted site.
Check your user options, there's some cool stuff in there.
In a word, yes. Hell, I keep a CD full of useful sofware myself, but it doesn't get updated very often, so something like this is very useful to me. There are also a lot of people (me among them) that are continually reinstalling the same software on new computers or operating systems. Having ready access to an up to date iso image is very helpful.
Having said all that, be careful what you download. Just because somebody releases a collection of open source software does not mean that there are no nasties on it. Either download from a source you trust, or check the source code against the md5 sums posted on their respective websites. If you are distributing the discs, you really should take the trouble to check the sources yourself.
PS: Tried fooling the script at windows update site by changing browser identification, but this only prevented the thank you message, didn't allowed to download the patch
That's because windows update installs via an ActiveX object. Only IE can run that. You probably downloaded the ActiveX object, but since it can't run without IE, it didn't download the update. If you need to download the update separately, check out the adminstrator section of windows update. MS provides all updates as a separate download that you can burn to a disk and install that way.
Unfortunately, simply knowing and understanding the standards just doesn't go far enough. You also need to know the most serious quirks of all of the major browsers. The W3C is not going to help you with that.
Reading and understanding the W3C recs is good, even commendable, but it's only part of the equation. Tutorial sites can tell you things that the W3C cannot. Things like how Internet Explorer messes up the box model (your alignment promlem is most likely here), how IE 6 changed it, why it's still wrong, and what you can do about it. I pick on IE because it's easy, but there are various bugs and mistakes in all the other browsers as well, some of them are serious and can bite you in the butt. Tutorial and web design sites are good places to look for such information.
As a cross platform product, it seems to me that it would be difficult or impossible to follow the Apple UI guidelines. There would have to be some sort of Mac-only build, which is simply not going to happen without a code fork.
That's very interesting, especially in light of the fact that Thompson is an appointed beaurocrat, not an elected official.
I don't have a subscription to Lexis/Nexis, and I doubt that any body else here does either, so the chances of anybody being able to verify your claim is slim. However, opensecrets.org has no information on any politician Mozelle Thompson.
Hate isn't the issue. It's trust. I just can't trust Microsoft to do what's right for users and developers. There will always be the spectre of a hidden agenda or a future gotcha, real or imagined.
The real question though, is whether or not certain interests will be able to stifle the others, removing any impetus to improve. Personally, I don't think any company, no matter how large, can really do that indefinately. There will always be somebody waiting in the wings with that killer app.
Ah, the preview button, it's a love/hate relationship.
Last time I checked, the windows installer didn't do any sort of dependancy checking at all. Windows applications typically contain all the libraries and widgets they need to run the program, with the exception of a few ubiquitously available DLLs that are required for Windows itself. This is why Windows applications are usually much larger than equivalent *Nix apps.
This boils down to a difference in philosophy between the two camps. UNIX philosophy says do everything with a bunch of small open tools that you can string together. The advantage is that the individual utilities that make up an application are well tested (in theory) and best reflect the use to which they are put. Keep the tools simple and let the user figure out the best way to use them: a very powerful system for those that can use it. Of course, up until now very few people could do that.
Windows philosophy basically states elegance be damned, just put it all in the package and then there are no dependancies to worry about. There is some logic in this, especially in these days of copious memory and fat pipes. The application developer can just include everything in a nice looking, easy to use package. The downside is that it's easier to hide behind proprietary binary-only applications where the lack of elegance (or security, or stability) is much less noticable -- which translates to faster intial development and time to market.
At least, that's the way it's been the last few decades. Now, we are getting to somewhat of a meeting of the minds, as it were, and we are seeing more effort in usability on the UNIX side and more attempts at elegance on the Windows side. This is mostly due to the fact that both camps have matured greatly and are now moving past the simple philosophies that have sustained them so well until now.
So, does that mean we going to see dependancy checking in the Windows Installer? I don't know, but I think it's quite possible. Microsoft need only build it in such a way that it checks dependancy when such information is available or else proceeds in the old fashion.
The real question though, is whether or not certain interests will be able to stifle the others, removing any impetus to improve. Personally, I don't think any company, no matter how large, can really do that. There will always be somebody waiting in the wings with that killer app.
Such a program would be illegal in the U.S. and most of the western world. Copyright law makes no distinction between copies produced domestically and those produced abroad. Patent law is similar in that respect. Obviously, countries that do not recognize western copyright/patent laws would not feel so encumbered.
We have our "just say no" campaigns in schools, celebrities tell us to stay off the drugs, and we make all these claims about how bad drugs are for you while ignoring or outright suppressing the truth about their effects as we trample civil liberties. And just how effective is that?
That depends entirely on what effect you are looking for and your appreciation of that effect. It's no coincidence that the prison system is one of the biggest industries in the U.S., nor is it a coincidence that drug policy enforcement is so well funded. There's a lot of money to be made in the drug war, and not just by the dealers.
Essentially, this is a war against Americans by Americans, not a war on drugs. Even that name is patently ridiculous: one cannot wage war against inanimate objects, only other people. No, this truly is a civil war, but the only people fighting are the same ones getting rich. Everyone else qualifies as an innocent victim, drug users and non-users alike.
Greed, as they say, knows no bounds. It was enevitable that the war would spread. For the past thirty years, another front has increasingly become more and more important. By sustaining a war on drugs, the U.S. government is able to suppress the productivity of an entire continent (South America) using a system of corruption and greed. So long as drugs sustain a high price, South American farmers will grow drugs for sale in the American market. Their governments will alternatively support and suppress those efforts according to varying pressure from the U.S. government and local forces such as drug cartels and corrupt politicians.
All of that works in favor of the U.S. dominated status quo: at least in the short run, which is all power-poisoned corporate types care about. Of course it is unsustainable in the long run (like Alcohol Prohibition), but those currently pulling the strings do not care about that. They will be certain of their security in any case.
Noise is the biggest factor cities consider when planning a new airport. Years ago, most cities put their airports outside town where the noise would bother fewer residents. Now, because of urban sprawl, that strategy is not viable in most areas. So, while it's true that air travelers are not greatly concerned by the noise of the aircraft, the residents of the cities where the aircraft operate most definitely are. Making supersonic travel quieter will encourage more supersonic travel; not because the passengers care, but because the people living near the airports do.
It is too fair. Truly, not everyone here feels that way, but a large percentage do. How many times have you heard, directed at a minority, the statement "If you don't like so-and-so, you can go back to your own country" regardless whether or not that person was born here or abroad?
I hear it often directed at Hispanics, many of whom are 3rd, 4th, or even 5th generation Americans.
Yes, they certainly could have done this at any time. In fact, they have had a modified IMAP protocol for a long time that is accessible via Netscape Communicator. Of course Netscape can also access normal IMAP, so the hit to their customers is negligable.
FWIW, Hotmail also has a modified IMAP interface that is accessible via Outlook Express. One wonders if they will follow AOL's lead in this; it would not be all that difficult for them to do so.
Even Yahoo has a way to access their mail service via POP3, though it is restricted to pay accounts.
This is a big step for usability. There are some people who, for whatever reason, cannot use standard web-based email systems. Now they can access AOL mail with any IMAP client of their choosing.
If you are not interested in getting every last bit of speed out of your sailing yacht and you power requirements are light, you could easily attach a water driven generator that charges the batteries. The drag wouldn't really be enough to cause a problem (though it will be noticable), and should provide more than enough power for things like running lights and GPS units.
Obviously, judicious use of electricity is necessary here: no loud sound systems, high power computers, or CRT monitors. You would want a gasoline or deisel generator to accommodate something like that.
A corporation would have to examine the cost/benifit ratio of a donation of that nature. Since it is not a tax-deductible donation, the donation must stand on it's own. Corporations are liable to their stockholders, and frivolous expenses are very much frowned upon.
It's not that the company execs don't appreciate the hard work, it's just that they would have to justify making a donation to somebody who would, in all likelyhood, continue doing what they are doing without it.
This is where non-profit organizations such as OSDN come in. Corporations can take a tax deduction on donations to such entities, which makes it much more palatable to coporate execs. Perhaps phk should consider working for a non-profit that would be willing to support his current work, much as Linus does now.
But by all means, send the guy a few bucks if you can. IMO, he deserves much more than the measely 66k he's asked for.
Yes, I think you may be right. There is something they call a stage 3 tarball that is supposed to be a precompiled kernel and other goodies. I tried it once but did not have much luck with it -- probably my own fault. Gentoo does seem to be designed for hard core Linux users, not newbies. I'm not a noob anymore, but neither have I reached that elite status where I can make Linux do anything I want on just about any hardware. That's why I run Mandrake.
That said, I've been MS free for over a year. W00T!
I agree with you about the sound card too. Personally, I suspect the guy is either lying through his teeth, or he is afraid to name his hardware because he doesn't want anyone to provide him with an easy fix, thereby negating his argument.
Slashdot Mirror
That's interesting. Is there a website that lists various mappings for different products? If not, is there a reason why it couldn't be created?
I'd be interested in doing something about it if there is sufficient demand.
Slashdot has a setting to show the domain name. You can set this to always show them, never show them, or to show them in recommended situations. The third option is the default. Mozilla.org is apparently a trusted site.
Check your user options, there's some cool stuff in there.
In a word, yes. Hell, I keep a CD full of useful sofware myself, but it doesn't get updated very often, so something like this is very useful to me. There are also a lot of people (me among them) that are continually reinstalling the same software on new computers or operating systems. Having ready access to an up to date iso image is very helpful.
Having said all that, be careful what you download. Just because somebody releases a collection of open source software does not mean that there are no nasties on it. Either download from a source you trust, or check the source code against the md5 sums posted on their respective websites. If you are distributing the discs, you really should take the trouble to check the sources yourself.
PS: Tried fooling the script at windows update site by changing browser identification, but this only prevented the thank you message, didn't allowed to download the patch
That's because windows update installs via an ActiveX object. Only IE can run that. You probably downloaded the ActiveX object, but since it can't run without IE, it didn't download the update. If you need to download the update separately, check out the adminstrator section of windows update. MS provides all updates as a separate download that you can burn to a disk and install that way.
Unfortunately, simply knowing and understanding the standards just doesn't go far enough. You also need to know the most serious quirks of all of the major browsers. The W3C is not going to help you with that.
;)
Reading and understanding the W3C recs is good, even commendable, but it's only part of the equation. Tutorial sites can tell you things that the W3C cannot. Things like how Internet Explorer messes up the box model (your alignment promlem is most likely here), how IE 6 changed it, why it's still wrong, and what you can do about it. I pick on IE because it's easy, but there are various bugs and mistakes in all the other browsers as well, some of them are serious and can bite you in the butt. Tutorial and web design sites are good places to look for such information.
Oh, and by the way, sanity is for wussies
As a cross platform product, it seems to me that it would be difficult or impossible to follow the Apple UI guidelines. There would have to be some sort of Mac-only build, which is simply not going to happen without a code fork.
That's very interesting, especially in light of the fact that Thompson is an appointed beaurocrat, not an elected official.
I don't have a subscription to Lexis/Nexis, and I doubt that any body else here does either, so the chances of anybody being able to verify your claim is slim. However, opensecrets.org has no information on any politician Mozelle Thompson.
So who modded this guy up anyway?
So you are saying that there is something better than free beer? Man, what are you smoking?
Can I have some?
I'd love to see a complete copy of the internal memo. Anybody?
Hate isn't the issue. It's trust. I just can't trust Microsoft to do what's right for users and developers. There will always be the spectre of a hidden agenda or a future gotcha, real or imagined.
Because the calculator sucks.
Asahh, don't shoot! I was only kidding!
The real question though, is whether or not certain interests will be able to stifle the others, removing any impetus to improve. Personally, I don't think any company, no matter how large, can really do that indefinately. There will always be somebody waiting in the wings with that killer app.
Ah, the preview button, it's a love/hate relationship.
Last time I checked, the windows installer didn't do any sort of dependancy checking at all. Windows applications typically contain all the libraries and widgets they need to run the program, with the exception of a few ubiquitously available DLLs that are required for Windows itself. This is why Windows applications are usually much larger than equivalent *Nix apps.
This boils down to a difference in philosophy between the two camps. UNIX philosophy says do everything with a bunch of small open tools that you can string together. The advantage is that the individual utilities that make up an application are well tested (in theory) and best reflect the use to which they are put. Keep the tools simple and let the user figure out the best way to use them: a very powerful system for those that can use it. Of course, up until now very few people could do that.
Windows philosophy basically states elegance be damned, just put it all in the package and then there are no dependancies to worry about. There is some logic in this, especially in these days of copious memory and fat pipes. The application developer can just include everything in a nice looking, easy to use package. The downside is that it's easier to hide behind proprietary binary-only applications where the lack of elegance (or security, or stability) is much less noticable -- which translates to faster intial development and time to market.
At least, that's the way it's been the last few decades. Now, we are getting to somewhat of a meeting of the minds, as it were, and we are seeing more effort in usability on the UNIX side and more attempts at elegance on the Windows side. This is mostly due to the fact that both camps have matured greatly and are now moving past the simple philosophies that have sustained them so well until now.
So, does that mean we going to see dependancy checking in the Windows Installer? I don't know, but I think it's quite possible. Microsoft need only build it in such a way that it checks dependancy when such information is available or else proceeds in the old fashion.
The real question though, is whether or not certain interests will be able to stifle the others, removing any impetus to improve. Personally, I don't think any company, no matter how large, can really do that. There will always be somebody waiting in the wings with that killer app.
Such a program would be illegal in the U.S. and most of the western world. Copyright law makes no distinction between copies produced domestically and those produced abroad. Patent law is similar in that respect. Obviously, countries that do not recognize western copyright/patent laws would not feel so encumbered.
We have our "just say no" campaigns in schools, celebrities tell us to stay off the drugs, and we make all these claims about how bad drugs are for you while ignoring or outright suppressing the truth about their effects as we trample civil liberties. And just how effective is that?
That depends entirely on what effect you are looking for and your appreciation of that effect. It's no coincidence that the prison system is one of the biggest industries in the U.S., nor is it a coincidence that drug policy enforcement is so well funded. There's a lot of money to be made in the drug war, and not just by the dealers.
Essentially, this is a war against Americans by Americans, not a war on drugs. Even that name is patently ridiculous: one cannot wage war against inanimate objects, only other people. No, this truly is a civil war, but the only people fighting are the same ones getting rich. Everyone else qualifies as an innocent victim, drug users and non-users alike.
Greed, as they say, knows no bounds. It was enevitable that the war would spread. For the past thirty years, another front has increasingly become more and more important. By sustaining a war on drugs, the U.S. government is able to suppress the productivity of an entire continent (South America) using a system of corruption and greed. So long as drugs sustain a high price, South American farmers will grow drugs for sale in the American market. Their governments will alternatively support and suppress those efforts according to varying pressure from the U.S. government and local forces such as drug cartels and corrupt politicians.
All of that works in favor of the U.S. dominated status quo: at least in the short run, which is all power-poisoned corporate types care about. Of course it is unsustainable in the long run (like Alcohol Prohibition), but those currently pulling the strings do not care about that. They will be certain of their security in any case.
Noise is the biggest factor cities consider when planning a new airport. Years ago, most cities put their airports outside town where the noise would bother fewer residents. Now, because of urban sprawl, that strategy is not viable in most areas. So, while it's true that air travelers are not greatly concerned by the noise of the aircraft, the residents of the cities where the aircraft operate most definitely are. Making supersonic travel quieter will encourage more supersonic travel; not because the passengers care, but because the people living near the airports do.
Who is this "Common" person to whom you speak?
Or when trilogies begin and end with Part One.
(History of the World)
It is too fair. Truly, not everyone here feels that way, but a large percentage do. How many times have you heard, directed at a minority, the statement "If you don't like so-and-so, you can go back to your own country" regardless whether or not that person was born here or abroad?
I hear it often directed at Hispanics, many of whom are 3rd, 4th, or even 5th generation Americans.
Yes, they certainly could have done this at any time. In fact, they have had a modified IMAP protocol for a long time that is accessible via Netscape Communicator. Of course Netscape can also access normal IMAP, so the hit to their customers is negligable.
FWIW, Hotmail also has a modified IMAP interface that is accessible via Outlook Express. One wonders if they will follow AOL's lead in this; it would not be all that difficult for them to do so.
Even Yahoo has a way to access their mail service via POP3, though it is restricted to pay accounts.
This is a big step for usability. There are some people who, for whatever reason, cannot use standard web-based email systems. Now they can access AOL mail with any IMAP client of their choosing.
If you are not interested in getting every last bit of speed out of your sailing yacht and you power requirements are light, you could easily attach a water driven generator that charges the batteries. The drag wouldn't really be enough to cause a problem (though it will be noticable), and should provide more than enough power for things like running lights and GPS units.
Obviously, judicious use of electricity is necessary here: no loud sound systems, high power computers, or CRT monitors. You would want a gasoline or deisel generator to accommodate something like that.
A corporation would have to examine the cost/benifit ratio of a donation of that nature. Since it is not a tax-deductible donation, the donation must stand on it's own. Corporations are liable to their stockholders, and frivolous expenses are very much frowned upon.
It's not that the company execs don't appreciate the hard work, it's just that they would have to justify making a donation to somebody who would, in all likelyhood, continue doing what they are doing without it.
This is where non-profit organizations such as OSDN come in. Corporations can take a tax deduction on donations to such entities, which makes it much more palatable to coporate execs. Perhaps phk should consider working for a non-profit that would be willing to support his current work, much as Linus does now.
But by all means, send the guy a few bucks if you can. IMO, he deserves much more than the measely 66k he's asked for.
What next, a "Lite-Brite" style mouse pad?
What a great idea! I'd buy one. I think.
Nah, probably not. Still pretty cool though.
On second thought, maybe it would be kind of distracting, all those lights.
Lights constantly blaring, garish colors... yeah, it would probably end up in the garbage inside of a week.
What a horrible idea! Ugghh.
Yes, I think you may be right. There is something they call a stage 3 tarball that is supposed to be a precompiled kernel and other goodies. I tried it once but did not have much luck with it -- probably my own fault. Gentoo does seem to be designed for hard core Linux users, not newbies. I'm not a noob anymore, but neither have I reached that elite status where I can make Linux do anything I want on just about any hardware. That's why I run Mandrake.
That said, I've been MS free for over a year. W00T!
I agree with you about the sound card too. Personally, I suspect the guy is either lying through his teeth, or he is afraid to name his hardware because he doesn't want anyone to provide him with an easy fix, thereby negating his argument.
Pffth.
It won't work. Some people will play with chocolate on those parts.
Those are the fun people.