In the past, the main reason I have avoided Yahoo is simply because of all the ads. They slowed down the search to a crawl, and I could barely find any content amongst the ads.
The toolbar 'screenshot' convieniently cuts off the end of the bar... is this to hide ads and other crap? Or are we spared?:)
Either way, I think I'd prefer to just add Yahoo to FireFox's in-built search engine bar. Not that I would use it... since I have Google!
But seriously, Yahoo seems to be going in the right direction. The engine seems to have increased in speed lately. In
fact, search results are as quick to load as on Google. What's
more, the number of ads on the results page has decreased; just
a few textual ads remain.
In fact... Yahoo is looking a lot like Google.
Now I wish Netcraft would write a version of their
toolbar for FireFox.
I'd just like to say how angry and upset I am. The daemon logo is a historical symbol, and has made a great logo for the project all these years.
I'm really annoyed about the fact that this is occuring because of a few trolls on mailing lists.
The logo itself is NOTHING to do with religion.
People always seem to think their religion gives them some sort of moral highground to bitch and complain about this and that. Something always offends SOMEONE.
It'd really be a shame to demote the beastie logo to a "mascot" only, and shove it away in some corner.
Please sign the petition to save the daemon logo... (for what it's worth):
While there are many advantages to using a PC as a console (such
as expansiblity and the ability to use the system for other purposes),
there are a few disadvantages too.
First, rather than relying on a constant, single-purpose firmware
OS designed specifically for the hardware you're running on, you
have to rely on a third-party OS (designed to do a lot more than
just run games), so it's inevitable that you'll end up with a lot
more crashes, etc. Now, crashes and failures on "PCs" are generally
accepted and tolerated, but on a consumer appliance, this is probably not
the case.
Second, you also have changing hardware. A developer writing a game
for the playstation knows exactly what hardware will be there,
exactly what to expect, and (probably) knows the exact hardware
specifics. But, introduce the ability to change or upgrade hardware,
and the constant environment changes. Also, there's probably not
going to be any standard "controller".
On a different topic, would most people going be using a
keyboard/mouse with this,? If so, surely we're going back to needing a
desk -- something most console users probably don't use when playing
on their console.
At last, someone who understands what I was trying to say. I didn't mean to make a big deal out of it, there is no problem; I was just stating that Linux is not focused on a particular "market", as BSD and Windows (arguably) are.
From the FlexBeta article: Microsoft is working on a new search engine algorithm which is
supposed to compete with Google, now that they have upped their
hotmail storage in responce to Gmail's arrival.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Hotmail has upgraded neither their
free accounts nor their paid accounts as of yet. I'm still stuck at 78%,
and I have no more than a few MB of mail in my hotmail account.
Well, running any of the three operating systems as either server or
desktop is possible. With a bit of knowledge and the right tools, even
Windows can be secured to a reasonable degree. But, at heart BSD is
a server platform, and always will be. I run it quite happily as a
desktop system, and it does a mighty fine job (all my hardware is
supported, and runs perfectly). But, when I'm installing it it feels like
it's designed for a server, and the desktop bits and pieces (like X)
are added as extensions.
When I install Linux (ok, I don't really use it much, but based on my
limited experience..) it feels like I'm installing by default as a
desktop machine, and if I twiddle a few options and disable a few
things here and there I can have a server install. Due to the splintering of the userbase as I mentioned, Linux is covering a huge target audience; LinSpire is trying to be as pointy-clicky and anti-user-intervention (not nessecerily a bad thing) as possibly...i.e. it is targeting "consumers", whilst and RedHat and co. are targeting big corperations running Linux as a server platform. Can it accomodate both? Well, it has to.
And as for Windows, even installing 2003 Server Enterprise edition,
it feels like it's aimed to be useable by even the most computer-illiterate
of people. I guess it probably is.
I think it's important to consider what the OS's target
audience is. I believe that both Linux and Windows have tripped up
in the past by putting user-friendliness over security/stability/etc.
OK, I hope that makes sense, I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere:)
I have to agree here. Linux is becoming more and more a "desktop"
operating system. Default installs with lots of bloat and installed
services. One of the reasons I try to avoid using mainstream software...
besides any security (etc.) advantages, is because I like being a geek
and doing things the hard way:). I like to get my hands dirty. I also
like powerful, flexible software that does the job over fancy GUIs and
the like. But, it seems Linux is drifting away in the direction of
Windows.
HOWEVER, one of the reasons the Linux community has become so splintered
(different distros, etc.) is because people are taking Linux in different
directions. SuSE, LinSpire, and many other commercial providers are trying to
make Linux a friendly, easy-to-use experience. Whilst Slackware and Debian
are sticking to their roots.
As a side note: BSD is a server OS (no question about it). Windows is a desktop OS (being twisted into a server platform). But which is Linux?
Unlikely. But, if the law actually get's off it's ass and actually
hands out fines, spammers might be more inclined to stick the equivalent
of "this is spam" (the opt-out message, etc.), which could make
filtering more effective.
Perhaps we should be fining the ISPs who happily let spam-servers loose
on their network?
"It would promote vigilantism on the Net and it probably would not
catch any bad guys," said Louis Mastria, spokesman for the Direct Mail
Association
There are plenty of technically-skilled knowledgable people out there
who might otherwise not have bothered, but who could probably track a
few people down.
'the FCC has so much information on their identities that to get anymore would be useless.'
We don't care whether they're known or not. We just want to bankrupt
them and get the money we have lost* due to spam.
--
* Most end-users don't lose money, but the amount of stress and anger
caused to me by spam has probably shortened my lifespan, and can you
put a price on that?
I think the average web user would be pretty surprised to see what
actually goes on behind the scenes at Google. That simple search
page which holds very little content -- the search controls, a logo,
and a few links -- is actually a front to a mighty army of servers,
and some fairly advanced search technology.
I for one know I often take Google for granted. Yet I use it many times,
virtually every day. In return for a free service, I get to see a few
tiny, highly-revelant unintrusive ads placed alongside my search.
The only improvement for Google I can think of is for them to add
regex searches:D. A lot of pitfalls and obstacles come to mind for that
though.
Anyway, I can't wait to see what Google actually "gives back to us" in
terms of source code. Can they give enough source to be
interesting/useful without helping out their competitors too much?
Haha... so Microsoft's strategy of pushing the idea that Linux has
an equal or greater TCO than Windows basically ignores the fact
that Linux is free and that any businesses wanting to use it will
naturally go for the most expensive possible distribution (i.e
RedHat uber deluxe professional platinum addition for business).
Perhaps if they faced the "facts", their study might be worth something.
And as for the comparison of Linux to a DOS prompt... Microsoft seems to think that adding a huge bloated GUI to a server OS is going to improve things. Well, I say that any half-decent system administrator should be able to do his job completely from a command-line interface and should not need a GUI.
Quandt also contends that FreeBSD is not currently on the same level
as Linux when it comes to supporting heavy enterprise workloads...
I was almost certain this paragraph was going to end praising FreeBSD
over Linux, and I was slightly suprised to see this was not the case.
FreeBSD's ability to cope with extremely high workloads is often
cited as one of the reasons to use it over Linux in such environments.
However, I don't remember ever seeing any evidence of this, except that
FreeBSD has proven itself time and time again on some of the largest,
busiest internet sites. It'd be interesting to see how the two compared
side-by-side in a real production environment. Perhaps someone can
convince Yahoo to switch to Linux for a day:)
Ugh...looks like it's designed for two-handed use...like some sort of
gameboy-clone. I guess that makes it more suitable as a movie player or
image viewer than an MP3 player. However, it looks a lot better (IMO) than the plasticy-toy type style of the iPod
Maybe iRiver could learn something about ergonomic
design from Apple, but hey, at least it's got a replaceable battery. And it's sounds like going to be more "open" than an iPod. It's always nice to see "hackable" stuff (as the article writer noted), rather than consumer-orientated "appliances"
Perhaps encouraging the spread of scientific knowledge will increase
the general level of education of the population. I for one would be
more willing to look at publications which I wouldn't have done if
I had to pay...e.g., something which I have an interest in, but don't
really have much knowledge/experience with.
I would then probably be willing to donate to authors of particularly
good books...a system which would also help promote high-quality
literature. (ala Slashdot moderation system)
This really does get boring, reading about these IE holes and
vulnerabilities. I'm still at a loss to understand why a powerful
global corperation in business for decades is incapable of fixing
fundamental problems with their browser which are showing up again and
again.
It's entirely possible to be user-friendly and easy-to-use, as
browsers such as Mozilla, FireFox and Opera show. However, seeing
serious and trivial-to-exploit vulnerabilites like this popping
up so frequently makes me wonder what kind of programmers actually
work for Microsoft.
I imagine the codebase for a complex feature-rich browser could get
quite large and complicated, and modern browsers seem to have
everything built in but the kitchen sink (in Microsoft's case, an
entire OS is embedded into IE...;), but why should a web browser EVER
be capable of causing such chaos?
A web browser should NOT be tied into the OS core as IE is with
Windows. A tiny speed gain (or any other reasons for that matter) is
not worth all these security issues.
I think BASIC would be a good choice. It's very simple and easy to learn. If Visual Basic is too complex, perhaps you could find an old copy of QuickBASIC (or PowerBASIC, etc...) or some other DOS or Unix console-orientated compiler/language with integrated IDE.
I've been teaching a young friend of mine some simple programming with Microsoft QBasic. It's easy to use and learn from, and you can still get some useful software out of it. The IDE is great for beginners. It's very good at helping the programmer with fixing errors (or even fixing obvious syntactical errors itself).
Once BASIC has been mastered, you can move on to something a little more complex.
I only briefly skimmed the article, but it seems to me that this isn't as broad as it initially seems.
The translucency can be graduated so that, over time, if the window's contents remain unchanged, the window becomes more translucent. In addition to visual translucency, windows according to the present invention also have a manipulative translucent quality. Upon reaching a certain level of visual translucency, user input in the region of the window is interpreted as an operation on the underlying objects rather than the contents of the overlaying window.
So, the windows fade with time (if they are not used much), and the windows below are phased above the fading window... Rather than just plain old tinted windows.
I personally have never experienced anything like this, it sounds like it could be useful... or maybe I'm just behind the times:)
>...capable of sustaining 50 trillion calculations per second.
Hmm...I wonder if I could borrow it for a few days to give
my dnet stats a boost:D
Want high-quality? Get a real camera!
on
Camera Phone Tips
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It's always nice to see a photo of some random cat or an interestingly
shaped rock from another continent.:)
The tips on the site seemed pretty obvious to me...get close, increase
resolution, don't use digital zoom... the site even states they are
obvious. From my brief look at the other linked sites, it looks like
there are a few slightly more interesting points, but also a lot of
repetition (between the sites).
I think if anyone is a budding photographer, interested in building
a gallery on their site, they should get ahold of a "real" digital
camera (a device whose primary function is as such). It seems to me
that people running "moblogs" aren't going to be too bothered about
having high-quality photos anyway.
I wonder how much Longhorn is going to cost exactly? A combination of
Microsoft's obviously declining userbase and 5+ years of development
costs needing to be covered is going to mean Longhorn's pricetag will
have to be pretty steep if MS is going to profit directly from it.
Hmm... the article claims "Windows runs 93 percent of the world's
personal computers". That's way more than I would have guessed. How is that measured exactly? And who by?
I agree. I think there's going to come a point where users simply don't need any more computing power. The fastest machine I own is 1.7GHz, and I imagine that will satisfy my needs for a few years to come -- I use 3D modelling tools, compilers, and a few other "intensive" applications, but the machine still operates at a reasonable speed.
Why would I *want* a bloated operating system that needs all those resources? Surely if I need that processing power, I would be better using a lightweight minimalist OS to squeeze every bit of power out of the system.
Also, with Microsoft's Secure Computing initiative, and all that crap, why would I choose this Operating System over an open, free alternative?
Finally, I think the world will be pretty much converted to Unix alternatives (Linux, etc.) by the time 2006 rolls around. During that time, we'll all be enjoying constant updates and improvements, the Linux kernel will have gone through many versions, and Linux (and BSD, etc.) will almost certainly be "READY FOR THE DESKTOP". And hopefully, Linux & co. will have dominance as the gaming and software platform...
Microsoft is obviosly attempting it's usual trick of tieing everything into the kernel, and building an all-in-one "user-friendly" solution...i.e., eliminating choice.
Actually, IIRC, it is possible to have a valid legal marriage without parental consent, except that if you lie about the consent bit, you've committed a crime.
I keep a lot of my smaller stuff (cables, hard drives, DIMMs, electrical components, etc.) in a big filing cabinate.
Of course, the trouble with that is it's all so neatly packed in that I daren't (or can't!) get it out. If I want something from the back/bottom, I have to pull out 95% of the rest of the equipment from that drawer..and then spend ages re-packing it.
So, a lot of it sits there unused, and quickly becomes obsolete:). The cabinate is however very space-effiecient and I can get a lot of stuff in there.
Now that would be fun! I can just imagine...someone with a good taste in music wandering around with hordes of followers trying to listen in on their music.
On the other hand...I'm sure the RIAA wouldn't be too happy about an idea like that!
Slashdot Mirror
In the past, the main reason I have avoided Yahoo is simply because of all the ads. They slowed down the search to a crawl, and I could barely find any content amongst the ads.
:)
The toolbar 'screenshot' convieniently cuts off the end of the bar... is this to hide ads and other crap? Or are we spared?
Either way, I think I'd prefer to just add Yahoo to FireFox's in-built search engine bar. Not that I would use it... since I have Google!
But seriously, Yahoo seems to be going in the right direction. The engine seems to have increased in speed lately. In fact, search results are as quick to load as on Google. What's more, the number of ads on the results page has decreased; just a few textual ads remain.
In fact... Yahoo is looking a lot like Google.
Now I wish Netcraft would write a version of their toolbar for FireFox.
I'd just like to say how angry and upset I am. The daemon logo is a historical symbol, and has made a great logo for the project all these years.
t ml
I'm really annoyed about the fact that this is occuring because of a few trolls on mailing lists. The logo itself is NOTHING to do with religion.
People always seem to think their religion gives them some sort of moral highground to bitch and complain about this and that. Something always offends SOMEONE.
It'd really be a shame to demote the beastie logo to a "mascot" only, and shove it away in some corner.
Please sign the petition to save the daemon logo... (for what it's worth):
http://www.petitiononline.com/fbsdmsc1/petition.h
While there are many advantages to using a PC as a console (such as expansiblity and the ability to use the system for other purposes), there are a few disadvantages too.
First, rather than relying on a constant, single-purpose firmware OS designed specifically for the hardware you're running on, you have to rely on a third-party OS (designed to do a lot more than just run games), so it's inevitable that you'll end up with a lot more crashes, etc. Now, crashes and failures on "PCs" are generally accepted and tolerated, but on a consumer appliance, this is probably not the case.
Second, you also have changing hardware. A developer writing a game for the playstation knows exactly what hardware will be there, exactly what to expect, and (probably) knows the exact hardware specifics. But, introduce the ability to change or upgrade hardware, and the constant environment changes. Also, there's probably not going to be any standard "controller".
On a different topic, would most people going be using a keyboard/mouse with this,? If so, surely we're going back to needing a desk -- something most console users probably don't use when playing on their console.
At last, someone who understands what I was trying to say. I didn't mean to make a big deal out of it, there is no problem; I was just stating that Linux is not focused on a particular "market", as BSD and Windows (arguably) are.
From the FlexBeta article:
Microsoft is working on a new search engine algorithm which is supposed to compete with Google, now that they have upped their hotmail storage in responce to Gmail's arrival.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Hotmail has upgraded neither their free accounts nor their paid accounts as of yet. I'm still stuck at 78%, and I have no more than a few MB of mail in my hotmail account.
Well, running any of the three operating systems as either server or desktop is possible. With a bit of knowledge and the right tools, even Windows can be secured to a reasonable degree. But, at heart BSD is a server platform, and always will be. I run it quite happily as a desktop system, and it does a mighty fine job (all my hardware is supported, and runs perfectly). But, when I'm installing it it feels like it's designed for a server, and the desktop bits and pieces (like X) are added as extensions.
:)
When I install Linux (ok, I don't really use it much, but based on my limited experience..) it feels like I'm installing by default as a desktop machine, and if I twiddle a few options and disable a few things here and there I can have a server install. Due to the splintering of the userbase as I mentioned, Linux is covering a huge target audience; LinSpire is trying to be as pointy-clicky and anti-user-intervention (not nessecerily a bad thing) as possibly...i.e. it is targeting "consumers", whilst and RedHat and co. are targeting big corperations running Linux as a server platform. Can it accomodate both? Well, it has to.
And as for Windows, even installing 2003 Server Enterprise edition, it feels like it's aimed to be useable by even the most computer-illiterate of people. I guess it probably is.
I think it's important to consider what the OS's target audience is. I believe that both Linux and Windows have tripped up in the past by putting user-friendliness over security/stability/etc.
OK, I hope that makes sense, I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere
I have to agree here. Linux is becoming more and more a "desktop" operating system. Default installs with lots of bloat and installed services. One of the reasons I try to avoid using mainstream software... besides any security (etc.) advantages, is because I like being a geek and doing things the hard way :). I like to get my hands dirty. I also
like powerful, flexible software that does the job over fancy GUIs and
the like. But, it seems Linux is drifting away in the direction of
Windows.
HOWEVER, one of the reasons the Linux community has become so splintered (different distros, etc.) is because people are taking Linux in different directions. SuSE, LinSpire, and many other commercial providers are trying to make Linux a friendly, easy-to-use experience. Whilst Slackware and Debian are sticking to their roots.
As a side note: BSD is a server OS (no question about it). Windows is a desktop OS (being twisted into a server platform). But which is Linux?
Can A Bounty System Cure Spam?
Unlikely. But, if the law actually get's off it's ass and actually hands out fines, spammers might be more inclined to stick the equivalent of "this is spam" (the opt-out message, etc.), which could make filtering more effective.
Perhaps we should be fining the ISPs who happily let spam-servers loose on their network?
"It would promote vigilantism on the Net and it probably would not catch any bad guys," said Louis Mastria, spokesman for the Direct Mail Association
There are plenty of technically-skilled knowledgable people out there who might otherwise not have bothered, but who could probably track a few people down.
'the FCC has so much information on their identities that to get anymore would be useless.'
We don't care whether they're known or not. We just want to bankrupt them and get the money we have lost* due to spam.
--
* Most end-users don't lose money, but the amount of stress and anger caused to me by spam has probably shortened my lifespan, and can you put a price on that?
I think the average web user would be pretty surprised to see what actually goes on behind the scenes at Google. That simple search page which holds very little content -- the search controls, a logo, and a few links -- is actually a front to a mighty army of servers, and some fairly advanced search technology.
:D. A lot of pitfalls and obstacles come to mind for that
though.
I for one know I often take Google for granted. Yet I use it many times, virtually every day. In return for a free service, I get to see a few tiny, highly-revelant unintrusive ads placed alongside my search.
The only improvement for Google I can think of is for them to add regex searches
Anyway, I can't wait to see what Google actually "gives back to us" in terms of source code. Can they give enough source to be interesting/useful without helping out their competitors too much?
Haha... so Microsoft's strategy of pushing the idea that Linux has an equal or greater TCO than Windows basically ignores the fact that Linux is free and that any businesses wanting to use it will naturally go for the most expensive possible distribution (i.e RedHat uber deluxe professional platinum addition for business).
Perhaps if they faced the "facts", their study might be worth something.
And as for the comparison of Linux to a DOS prompt... Microsoft seems to think that adding a huge bloated GUI to a server OS is going to improve things. Well, I say that any half-decent system administrator should be able to do his job completely from a command-line interface and should not need a GUI.
Quandt also contends that FreeBSD is not currently on the same level as Linux when it comes to supporting heavy enterprise workloads...
:)
I was almost certain this paragraph was going to end praising FreeBSD over Linux, and I was slightly suprised to see this was not the case. FreeBSD's ability to cope with extremely high workloads is often cited as one of the reasons to use it over Linux in such environments.
However, I don't remember ever seeing any evidence of this, except that FreeBSD has proven itself time and time again on some of the largest, busiest internet sites. It'd be interesting to see how the two compared side-by-side in a real production environment. Perhaps someone can convince Yahoo to switch to Linux for a day
</ BSD advocacy >
Ugh...looks like it's designed for two-handed use...like some sort of gameboy-clone. I guess that makes it more suitable as a movie player or image viewer than an MP3 player. However, it looks a lot better (IMO) than the plasticy-toy type style of the iPod
Maybe iRiver could learn something about ergonomic design from Apple, but hey, at least it's got a replaceable battery. And it's sounds like going to be more "open" than an iPod. It's always nice to see "hackable" stuff (as the article writer noted), rather than consumer-orientated "appliances"
It's working thus far with software :)
Perhaps encouraging the spread of scientific knowledge will increase the general level of education of the population. I for one would be more willing to look at publications which I wouldn't have done if I had to pay...e.g., something which I have an interest in, but don't really have much knowledge/experience with.
I would then probably be willing to donate to authors of particularly good books...a system which would also help promote high-quality literature. (ala Slashdot moderation system)
This really does get boring, reading about these IE holes and vulnerabilities. I'm still at a loss to understand why a powerful global corperation in business for decades is incapable of fixing fundamental problems with their browser which are showing up again and again.
;), but why should a web browser EVER
be capable of causing such chaos?
It's entirely possible to be user-friendly and easy-to-use, as browsers such as Mozilla, FireFox and Opera show. However, seeing serious and trivial-to-exploit vulnerabilites like this popping up so frequently makes me wonder what kind of programmers actually work for Microsoft.
I imagine the codebase for a complex feature-rich browser could get quite large and complicated, and modern browsers seem to have everything built in but the kitchen sink (in Microsoft's case, an entire OS is embedded into IE...
A web browser should NOT be tied into the OS core as IE is with Windows. A tiny speed gain (or any other reasons for that matter) is not worth all these security issues.
I think BASIC would be a good choice. It's very simple and easy to learn. If Visual Basic is too complex, perhaps you could find an old copy of QuickBASIC (or PowerBASIC, etc...) or some other DOS or Unix console-orientated compiler/language with integrated IDE.
I've been teaching a young friend of mine some simple programming with Microsoft QBasic. It's easy to use and learn from, and you can still get some useful software out of it. The IDE is great for beginners. It's very good at helping the programmer with fixing errors (or even fixing obvious syntactical errors itself).
Once BASIC has been mastered, you can move on to something a little more complex.
I only briefly skimmed the article, but it seems to me that this isn't as broad as it initially seems.
:)
The translucency can be graduated so that, over time, if the window's contents remain unchanged, the window becomes more translucent. In addition to visual translucency, windows according to the present invention also have a manipulative translucent quality. Upon reaching a certain level of visual translucency, user input in the region of the window is interpreted as an operation on the underlying objects rather than the contents of the overlaying window.
So, the windows fade with time (if they are not used much), and the windows below are phased above the fading window... Rather than just plain old tinted windows.
I personally have never experienced anything like this, it sounds like it could be useful... or maybe I'm just behind the times
> ...capable of sustaining 50 trillion calculations per second.
:D
Hmm...I wonder if I could borrow it for a few days to give my dnet stats a boost
It's always nice to see a photo of some random cat or an interestingly shaped rock from another continent. :)
The tips on the site seemed pretty obvious to me...get close, increase resolution, don't use digital zoom... the site even states they are obvious. From my brief look at the other linked sites, it looks like there are a few slightly more interesting points, but also a lot of repetition (between the sites).
I think if anyone is a budding photographer, interested in building a gallery on their site, they should get ahold of a "real" digital camera (a device whose primary function is as such). It seems to me that people running "moblogs" aren't going to be too bothered about having high-quality photos anyway.
And...of course, this is after I've bought my nice new 6GHz/2GB/1TB machine to run it on :)
I wonder how much Longhorn is going to cost exactly? A combination of Microsoft's obviously declining userbase and 5+ years of development costs needing to be covered is going to mean Longhorn's pricetag will have to be pretty steep if MS is going to profit directly from it.
Hmm... the article claims "Windows runs 93 percent of the world's personal computers". That's way more than I would have guessed. How is that measured exactly? And who by?
I agree. I think there's going to come a point where users simply don't need any more computing power. The fastest machine I own is 1.7GHz, and I imagine that will satisfy my needs for a few years to come -- I use 3D modelling tools, compilers, and a few other "intensive" applications, but the machine still operates at a reasonable speed.
Why would I *want* a bloated operating system that needs all those resources? Surely if I need that processing power, I would be better using a lightweight minimalist OS to squeeze every bit of power out of the system.
Also, with Microsoft's Secure Computing initiative, and all that crap, why would I choose this Operating System over an open, free alternative?
Finally, I think the world will be pretty much converted to Unix alternatives (Linux, etc.) by the time 2006 rolls around. During that time, we'll all be enjoying constant updates and improvements, the Linux kernel will have gone through many versions, and Linux (and BSD, etc.) will almost certainly be "READY FOR THE DESKTOP". And hopefully, Linux & co. will have dominance as the gaming and software platform...
Microsoft is obviosly attempting it's usual trick of tieing everything into the kernel, and building an all-in-one "user-friendly" solution...i.e., eliminating choice.
Actually, IIRC, it is possible to have a valid legal marriage without parental consent, except that if you lie about the consent bit, you've committed a crime.
:)
But what the hell... you're married!
Here in the UK, most of us don't get a chance to use anything over 2Mbps :(. I pay 65/mo (~$110 USD) for 2Mbps, but I can't get any faster than that.
I keep a lot of my smaller stuff (cables, hard drives, DIMMs, electrical components, etc.) in a big filing cabinate.
:). The cabinate is however very space-effiecient and I can get a lot of stuff in there.
Of course, the trouble with that is it's all so neatly packed in that I daren't (or can't!) get it out. If I want something from the back/bottom, I have to pull out 95% of the rest of the equipment from that drawer..and then spend ages re-packing it.
So, a lot of it sits there unused, and quickly becomes obsolete
Now that would be fun! I can just imagine...someone with a good taste in music wandering around with hordes of followers trying to listen in on their music.
On the other hand...I'm sure the RIAA wouldn't be too happy about an idea like that!