You beat me to it. I was just going to mention Rosetta Stone. I've gone through about half of the Spanish (Spain) course already, and even poked around at the Arabic, Swahili, and Japanese courses just to see what the languages even sound like. It's surprisingly effective the way they have the courses set up.
If I'm not mistaken, Longhorn, which became Windows Vista, was supposed to be (I think even advertised) as a complete rewrite.
At any rate, there are only so many times that you can apply patches and fixes to code before it's time to just scrap it and start over. Security needs to be implemented in the design of a system, from the very beginning of the life cycle, not added in as an afterthought through patches.
Mac computers are not necessarily more secure. They are just less targeted by security exploits because they have a smaller user base. Don't fool yourself. You make a statement like that without backing it up at all. The rest of your comment has absolutely nothing to do with Mac security.
Perhaps Mac is better designed with security in mind than Windows is. I really don't know as I've never really used Mac OS X. Linux is certainly better designed for security out of the box (not necessarily more or less secure) than Windows because of how it prompts the user to create a non-admin account, and assign it a password, during installation. It even (at least some distributions) warns you when you try to log into X as root.
You have a lot more granularity of control over the security configuration of a Linux system than you do in Windows, being able to configure the kernel itself, and other things. Of course that also gives you more power to break the system as well.
What about Norton vs. Symantec? I was always under the impression that Symantec is the corporate-use version, and Norton is the home-use version, but apparently they have a Norton Antivirus Corporate? My systems have always been bogged down and running slow if I run Norton utilities, but I haven't had nearly the same issues with Symantec.
Is it just the Norton line of products people have issues with? As far as I've seen, Symantec isn't so bad. I use Symantec Endpoint Protection at home and it's been working good so far.
There can be NO END to the verys to describe how much of a very, very, VERY bad idea making a CounterStrike map of your school/mall/town/etc would be.
Good point. Although personally, I find that using terms like "very" actually detract from the meaning of the idea in a sentence. If you simply state it's a bad idea, there are no other "padding" words to get in the way of that meaning.
He was angry. -- short, and to the point. Stated simply as a matter of fact.
He was very, very, very, very, very angry. -- it's like you're trying too hard.
I was excited about this news, but then I saw the note at the bottom of the installation instructions. Apparently, by design, this will not give the full-fledged KDE desktop with the K-menu and other features. At least you can use it to run various qt/KDE apps.
It's just like with the Borg. It's unfortunate that an error in the universal translator made them sound like such horrible beings that want nothing other than to assimilate everyone by force.
They just wanted to share their technology, but the universal translator makes it sound like we "will be assimilated..." and that our technology will be added to their own... "resistance is futile." They assume everyone wants nanotechnology integrated into their bodies. They're just trying to share technology they've acquired, and assume we are as peaceful as them and will openly do the same.
Instead, we open fire!
I wonder if they could bundle a virtual machine, like VMware Server (free) within Splashtop. You can configure VMware to boot a guest OS from a physical partition, rather than a VMware partition.
Theoretically, they could configure these systems to boot into either OS, but if you enter Splashtop, maybe have VMware set to boot XP. That way, the user doesn't have to close out of the Linux software they're using just to fire up XP for that other app they need. Alternatively, a lot of software seems to work well through WINE.
Of course, the system would have to have decent specs to be able to run XP through VMware at a decent speed. VMware is just an example.
REboots should only be used when you need to update the system.
That's one thing that always annoyed me about Windows. It seems like almost any type of software update I do, or most configuration updates, it wants me to reboot. Often times, when Automatic Updates pulls down patches for XP, it requires a reboot... well it DEMANDS a reboot.
Often times at the office, I could be working on a project, or taking web-based training where I can't reboot the system. However, XP will pop up a box every 10 minutes asking if I want to reboot now, or later. There is no "don't reboot" option. If I walk away for, say, 15 minutes, it will force a reboot.
I know I can run 'net stop wuauserv' to stop that service until I reboot manually, but since the service is enforced by group policy, I'm screwed. It keeps turning itself back on.
It would be so much better if you could just stop/start individual services that the software update depends on. Maybe you could do that manually, but then you'd have to know which ones they are. They should make the updates take care of that themselves.
About the only time I need to reboot a Linux system (in my limited experience at least) is if I upgrade the kernel, or make configuration changes to it.
50 hours? Either that, or MMORPGs that can take YEARS to complete, and even then, you don't really "complete" them. I did always like the "pick up and play" games though.
It was a long time ago, and I can barely remember it, but I believe the first game I truly enjoyed that required my active participation was that one where you drop things from your highchair, and suddenly you have another one just like it. Drop it again, and another one shows up. I was hooked on that game for what must have been at least a month or two.
Not only that, but it was a multiplayer game (2nd player, generally an adult, was required to complete the first level).
That's nothing. I remember my first interactive game. I was swimming in this pool, completely submerged. I found that the pool wall was flexible. Sometimes when I pushed against it, or ran my hand along it, nothing would happen. It got more fun when the wall started to push back. It seemed to repeat the same moves I did, and sometimes did other moves, or that spot on the wall felt warmer. It scared me at first, but I was persistent. I kept trying, and sometimes heard muffled sounds in a language I didn't understand.
That game was fun. It lasted maybe 4 or 5 months I'd say.
I guess it depends on what you consider a game. I remember way back, probably before I even got to elementary school, my father introduced me to programming with Logo. I guess you could consider that a game, in that you controlled a turtle on a screen, giving it commands to walk around in different patterns. There weren't any Goombas to stomp or anything that I can remember.
The first actual game I can remember playing I think would be Parsec. That's one of those left-to-right scrolling space "shoot-em-up" games where you try to blast through alien ships trying to get to the boss of each level.
[insert several other games]
Then there was DOOM. I loved DOOM. I miss DOOM.
3 DOOM 3
If I had to pick one for this list, I'd go with the Panasonic Toughbook 30. That thing is not easy to touch type on. You really have to deliberately press each individual key firmly.
It seems to me that most people wouldn't use this vaccine, unless it's going to be required somehow. If you don't use cocaine in the first place, there is no need to take this vaccine. If you do use cocaine, why would you want to take the vaccine and 'ruin' the effects?
and VoIP? Uhm. 11 years ago there were several popular free internet telephone services.. OK, so you had to connect to the internet to use them, and OK, back in that day and age most everybody connected via modem, BUT.. it was there. As a teenager I was able to talk to many people all across the country with no long distance charges. THAT was cool. VoIP now? Merely an extention of that, made easier due to the proliferation of cable/dsl, and oh now you have to pay for it but hey you can use your regular phone now so I guess that's OK.
I remember using Dialpad.com back in the late '90s when it was free. We were on dial-up (AOL *spits on floor*), but dialpad worked pretty good and being free was a plus. At one point, we switched to Juno for a bit because it was free dial-up service (paid for through advertisements on your desktop - that could be disabled through some hack).
One time, a rep from MCI called me trying to get me to purchase some Friends and Family plan so I could call anyone across the country for 10 cents a minute or something like that. Mind you, I was about 17 at the time, and had no say in what telephone services my parents used at the time, but I had a little fun with the guy. I played dumb with him at first, letting him tell me all about this 'fancy new phone plan'. Then I told him how we make all of our long distance calls through an Internet website called Dialpad. He claimed that "oh those services always come with hidden fees...". Well, no. We don't get any bill, and the company doesn't even HAVE billing information for us. Just browse to the page, dial a phone number, and talk. "Well for 10 cents a minute, you can join Friends and Fam..." How is 10 cents a minute better than free?
There's something seriously wrong with MS Office if it cannot open old file formats in a secure manner. It should be simple, especially for a project with such a huge profit margin, to disable macros, strip out anything that might be executable, and just display the text of an old document. Insecurity is in the software code, not the file format.
I'm sure OpenOffice and KOffice and the like can open these securely, or can be made to at least.
Maybe next Microsoft will disable support for.txt files and remove notepad from the OS?
Yes that could be useful, even while you're actually driving through the real city. Stuck in a traffic jam and want to find an alternate route? Have a passenger "drive" onto that side road to see where it takes you. Looking for a place to eat in an unfamiliar city? Each passenger can "drive" separate ways to find something.
Well yes, then there's the whole 'GTA' aspect of it too.:-)
[sarcasm]Tell me it isn't so! Microsoft worked so hard to get their monopoly. We can't let other companies threaten everything they have accomplished.[/sarcasm]
And all of that is offset by the fact that you still can't sort emails into folders.
Just use labels instead. Same end result really. Of course you could then set up filters on incoming messages to assign labels to them and remove them from the inbox (remove the "inbox" label from them). That way your inbox is cleaner, and those emails from the Christmas 2006 party are in the "Christmas 2006 party" label.
One thing labels have over folders is you can have multiple labels on a single message instead of having to create multiple copies of the message to store in different folders.
Back when I was job searching, I had careerbuilder job alerts automatically show up under "Careerbuilder Alerts". Jobs I actually applied to kept that label, but also got the "Careerbuilder Applications" label.
As far as I'm concerned, it would seem this feature works as expected. If I want to share an interesting article with everyone publicly, I can "share" it. If I want to share it specifically with a group of people, I can forward it to them specifically.
Of course if you were a politician, or a military commander, or a corporate CEO, or a secretary, janitor... or any user wanting to share information publicly, you wouldn't use a public email/reader service. I certainly wouldn't add my coworkers to my gmail contact list and then post articles publicly about our internal projects.
That's what corporate email is for.
If you want to share a "funny" email with a select group of friends, and hide it from others because they might be offended, isn't that what forwards are for? So far, I don't see much wrong with this feature. If you want to mark something as shared, it makes sense that it would be shared with everyone, at least everyone that you keep in contact with.
Perhaps the one thing Google should do is remove the feature that automatically adds people that you email (or ones that email you) to your contact list. That way people don't have access to your public shares just because they sent you a spam email. Which, btw, don't you have to respond to them for them to be actually added?
They have signed papers indicating they are permitted to do penetration testing, by request of the organization they are testing. If they get arrested, they show the papers, the police verify them, and they get released.
I was just going to post something about this in another spot of this thread. That's actually a great way to go about doing the penetration testing. If there was no police element, the pen testers wouldn't have to be quite as careful. This way it makes it more realistic. They have to perform the penetration tests the same way an illegal group of people would.
(d) automatic updates for all software on the system, not just the OS.
Yeah. If Microsoft tried to do something like this (offer lots of really useful, free software, and update them all from a central location), they'd probably get charged with being a monopoly. That's what happened with Internet Explorer in the United States, and with Windows Media Player in the EU.
Of course if Microsoft centrally managed it all, then people would cry monopoly. With Linux, I can point my package manager (portage, apt, yum...) at different repositories, whether at the main distro's site, or community repositories. The software will happily grab updated packages from those repositories.
Microsoft could design Automatic Updates the same way. The update software could download from Microsoft's servers by default, but allow users to add 'community' repositories as well. In Ubuntu, and I assume other distros, I can tell apt to download the latest packages for, say, wine, from winehq.com instead of the usual ubuntu apt repositories.
I just found this on Sourceforge. I've never used it, but it looks interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
You beat me to it. I was just going to mention Rosetta Stone. I've gone through about half of the Spanish (Spain) course already, and even poked around at the Arabic, Swahili, and Japanese courses just to see what the languages even sound like. It's surprisingly effective the way they have the courses set up.
If I'm not mistaken, Longhorn, which became Windows Vista, was supposed to be (I think even advertised) as a complete rewrite. At any rate, there are only so many times that you can apply patches and fixes to code before it's time to just scrap it and start over. Security needs to be implemented in the design of a system, from the very beginning of the life cycle, not added in as an afterthought through patches.
What about Norton vs. Symantec? I was always under the impression that Symantec is the corporate-use version, and Norton is the home-use version, but apparently they have a Norton Antivirus Corporate? My systems have always been bogged down and running slow if I run Norton utilities, but I haven't had nearly the same issues with Symantec. Is it just the Norton line of products people have issues with? As far as I've seen, Symantec isn't so bad. I use Symantec Endpoint Protection at home and it's been working good so far.
But without any real life references, how do you know for sure that those few gigs of references are in fact representative of real life?
I was excited about this news, but then I saw the note at the bottom of the installation instructions. Apparently, by design, this will not give the full-fledged KDE desktop with the K-menu and other features. At least you can use it to run various qt/KDE apps.
It's just like with the Borg. It's unfortunate that an error in the universal translator made them sound like such horrible beings that want nothing other than to assimilate everyone by force. They just wanted to share their technology, but the universal translator makes it sound like we "will be assimilated..." and that our technology will be added to their own... "resistance is futile." They assume everyone wants nanotechnology integrated into their bodies. They're just trying to share technology they've acquired, and assume we are as peaceful as them and will openly do the same. Instead, we open fire!
I wonder if they could bundle a virtual machine, like VMware Server (free) within Splashtop. You can configure VMware to boot a guest OS from a physical partition, rather than a VMware partition. Theoretically, they could configure these systems to boot into either OS, but if you enter Splashtop, maybe have VMware set to boot XP. That way, the user doesn't have to close out of the Linux software they're using just to fire up XP for that other app they need. Alternatively, a lot of software seems to work well through WINE. Of course, the system would have to have decent specs to be able to run XP through VMware at a decent speed. VMware is just an example.
50 hours? Either that, or MMORPGs that can take YEARS to complete, and even then, you don't really "complete" them. I did always like the "pick up and play" games though.
I guess it depends on what you consider a game. I remember way back, probably before I even got to elementary school, my father introduced me to programming with Logo. I guess you could consider that a game, in that you controlled a turtle on a screen, giving it commands to walk around in different patterns. There weren't any Goombas to stomp or anything that I can remember. The first actual game I can remember playing I think would be Parsec. That's one of those left-to-right scrolling space "shoot-em-up" games where you try to blast through alien ships trying to get to the boss of each level. [insert several other games] Then there was DOOM. I loved DOOM. I miss DOOM. 3 DOOM 3
If I had to pick one for this list, I'd go with the Panasonic Toughbook 30. That thing is not easy to touch type on. You really have to deliberately press each individual key firmly.
It seems to me that most people wouldn't use this vaccine, unless it's going to be required somehow. If you don't use cocaine in the first place, there is no need to take this vaccine. If you do use cocaine, why would you want to take the vaccine and 'ruin' the effects?
There's something seriously wrong with MS Office if it cannot open old file formats in a secure manner. It should be simple, especially for a project with such a huge profit margin, to disable macros, strip out anything that might be executable, and just display the text of an old document. Insecurity is in the software code, not the file format. I'm sure OpenOffice and KOffice and the like can open these securely, or can be made to at least. Maybe next Microsoft will disable support for .txt files and remove notepad from the OS?
Yes that could be useful, even while you're actually driving through the real city. Stuck in a traffic jam and want to find an alternate route? Have a passenger "drive" onto that side road to see where it takes you. Looking for a place to eat in an unfamiliar city? Each passenger can "drive" separate ways to find something. Well yes, then there's the whole 'GTA' aspect of it too. :-)
[sarcasm]Tell me it isn't so! Microsoft worked so hard to get their monopoly. We can't let other companies threaten everything they have accomplished.[/sarcasm]
As far as I'm concerned, it would seem this feature works as expected. If I want to share an interesting article with everyone publicly, I can "share" it. If I want to share it specifically with a group of people, I can forward it to them specifically.
Of course if you were a politician, or a military commander, or a corporate CEO, or a secretary, janitor... or any user wanting to share information publicly, you wouldn't use a public email/reader service. I certainly wouldn't add my coworkers to my gmail contact list and then post articles publicly about our internal projects. That's what corporate email is for. If you want to share a "funny" email with a select group of friends, and hide it from others because they might be offended, isn't that what forwards are for? So far, I don't see much wrong with this feature. If you want to mark something as shared, it makes sense that it would be shared with everyone, at least everyone that you keep in contact with. Perhaps the one thing Google should do is remove the feature that automatically adds people that you email (or ones that email you) to your contact list. That way people don't have access to your public shares just because they sent you a spam email. Which, btw, don't you have to respond to them for them to be actually added?