I think that the error in your thinking is the idea that people buy Apple products because the "look good."
I think it's partially to do with brand recognition.
For many people, working around the limitations of a clumsily designed product is just a constant irritation, like living in a house where the doorways are all so narrow so you have to turn sideways to walk through and each door has the doorknob in a different place. It's not that you can't get from room to room, it's just annoying.
Indeed, that's why I don't have a iphone.
I like to have keys I can physically feel so I don't need to look at it to use it. I want to be able to load custom software onto the phone should I need it (not too long ago, I installer live messenger on my phone because I needed it).
Plus why would I enjoy being locked into using stupid software like a music player (iTunes) to manage my mobile phone? It's just annoying.
If you are going to pay that much for a product, why not pay a little bit more and have it actually work the way you'd like it to?
I have a 3 Skype Phone currently and I will say - if the phone cost the same as a iPhone, I still would of bought it. It does exactly what I want and more with no fuss (and hell cheap for what it is in my opinion).
I've tried playing around with the Eeee PC, and while I can see the appeal, the GUI experience is a bit sucky. Gnome as is, just wasn't designed with a screen that small in mind, and it shows with the amount of real estate consumed by control buttons and what not in proportion to the data.
I own a Eee and I will tell you right now, the Eee does not run Gnome.
The default setup runs a IceWM as a window manager and Asus Launcher (a tabbed based interface made by ASUS just for the Eee).
What's needed is a kind of minimalist mode, where contol buttons and menus don't get in the way, but can be exposed easily and intuitively as they're required. That's going to be a lot of very hard work.
Eee already does that. I honestly don't believe you have actually played around with it with the things you have mentioned.
Here are some people who have really played around with the Eee
Flash 9 is the number one reason why I still keep rebooting back into Linux
Why aren't you enabling Linux binary support in FreeBSD's kernel and running the Linux version of Firefox with the Flash plugin instead of dueling booting with Linux?
3) No way in this life or the next one will ANY ISP or the government EVER be able to monitor the petabytes of data that flows trough their lines each day, there would not even be enough workers for that...even in an overpopulated world. Even if you write intelligent software...someone has to decipher all that information and only a "human" so far . can make the final judgement on whatever case.
The great Chinese firewall seems to be pretty close.
Too bad the Bush administration wasn't using Macs.
I don't believe Time Machine even existed when the e-mails were deleted. So, I doubt Macs would of helped. I also doubt that if Time Machine did exist during that time period, that the e-mails would of been recovered.
I've been using Apple Mail since 10.0 and it's generally fine. I can't complain at all.
I've not been using Apple Mail since forever and I can complain about other users using it.
I am constantly receiving harassing messages from Apple mail users asking to be removed from mailing lists, because their client removes the footer of every e-mail by default. Meaning, it hides the unsubscribe links.
Usually I am sympathetic to the plight of users, but I sense I will slap Apple mail users around if I encounter them in person.
I hope the Apple mail user agent gets banned from posting messages on mailing lists, so we don't get this harassing crap anymore.
I am already dropping all e-mail to mailbox from Apple Mail user agents, due to this. Unfortunately, I still receive a ton of replies from people telling these 'users' how to remove themselves.
The only way you could think that SPF was better was if you did not understand DKIM or hadn't read the DKIM spec.
I don't think DKIM is better because nobody I communicate with uses it. A unused technology is not useful in this situation.
Also, just because you add DKIM support doesn't mean you have to dump SPF; they are not conflicting technologies. DKIM is simply a better technology. I would even venture to say that generating a private key pair is easier than enumerating all of the IPs and host names in your domain in perpetuity like you do with SPF.
The article linked by the grand parent suggests I dump SPF completely. Since none of the banks, paypal and so on do not use DKIM, I honestly have no real use for it at the moment.
Check your SPF record. Does it end in "~all" like most domains? Are you really satisfied with a technology where the usual answer to a query is "maybe?"
Looking at my domain and a few banks I use, it ends in "-all".
If you use SPF, you will be causing genuine email to be rejected. There are much better alternatives which address the forgery problem without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Let's see. I turn off SPF. I get forgies from paypal, gmail, hotmail and various banks. The alternatives mentioned do not stop the forgies of the above mentioned list. Therefore, the alternatives do not work for me. Period.
Unfortunately, this assumption is false. You do see perfectly genuine mail from my domain, from machines other than mine. This happens due to mail forwarding.
The from address used in the protocol should be from the mail forwarding agent, not the e-mail address it is forwarding for. You can keep that information in the headers of the e-mail just fine.
People tend to change their ISP quite often, but don't want to have to tell everyone that they've changed their email address. So they have an account elsewhere, at a vanity domain or on another computer, and they forward mail from that address to whichever is their current ISP, or their employer.
This seems uncommon from what I have seen - But alas I have no real verifiable statistics on me and you haven't provided any to enforce your point.
Their idea is that when a server forwards a mail, it shouldn't just use the original sender's address as has been done for the last couple of decades.
Actually, the past two decades used "<>" as the from address. Then when such unreturnable addresses started getting blocked, mail providers started using things like mailer-daemon@attheirdomain.com or a spoofed e-mail address. There is a problem identified with the latter.
Then, if a bounce is generated, that faked address receives the bounce and the bounce needs to be forwarded on to the original sender of the original mail.
Most mail servers will reject e-mails at the SMTP connection with a error code actually. Very few mail servers will return bounces as actual e-mails to addresses due to the fact that this was done away with, with how spammers used to bounce spam on other servers through such messages.
This forwarding of bounces could be easily abused if done naïvely
Such as using the methods the person in mentioned article is discussing rather than using what is done in most real installations.
SRS is not common. If you publish SPF records, you are going to be asking people to throw away genuine email which you did actually send.
This has never happened with me and will never happen. This is a lie. 100% of my e-mails were never denied due to SPF reasons on my domain.
...and won't be compatible with tomorrow's either.
If SPF is not supported by the mail server, the e-mail will go through as normal.
On the other hand, the servers that are forging from addresses from domains that they truely do not operate may get the e-mails either flagged or rejected -- I consider this a good thing.
There is of course the issue where a provider may require that all e-mails that go to them, publish DNS records for SPF. But I don't know of any in existence.
SPF is not an anti-spam technique.
It is actually. It's meant to stop spoofing of domains by reating a whitelist of permitted outgoing servers.
SPF is easily duped.
If I get a e-mail from say @gmail.com. I can be sure that the e-mail which sits in my inbox with a @gmail address came from gmail's servers (any e-mail that does not match the headers in the e-mails gets flagged as junk - mailing list items get filtered into the appropriate folder obviously).
I don't see how duping is working here.
The original sender address is useful information, and can be lost if an intermediate host mangles the mail by using SRS.
Some organizations have tens of thousands of machines this could impact that they can't just up and patch/reboot.
Then thank God that they don't use another operating system which requires more regular reboots for security issues (hint: It's a very popular operating system)?
It is a big deal. Not as big a deal as a remote exploit, but still pretty damn huge. Smug "see, this is why we run OSS so we can fix it the next day!" statements don't make you all look very good.
This is compared to critical exploits being left for months on end in other operating systems. I think it looks better than the 'competition'.
No, exploits aren't good. But they're discovered and patched very quickly within the OSS community usually. Thankfully there is no assessments team on whether a exploit is critical enough to warrant someone fixing it - they just go ahead and fix it.
I attempted to install Ubuntu on my new laptop recently and after several failed attempts to find all of the right drivers (some don't even exist yet) I had to give up.
Slashdot Mirror
I like to have keys I can physically feel so I don't need to look at it to use it. I want to be able to load custom software onto the phone should I need it (not too long ago, I installer live messenger on my phone because I needed it).
Plus why would I enjoy being locked into using stupid software like a music player (iTunes) to manage my mobile phone? It's just annoying.I have a 3 Skype Phone currently and I will say - if the phone cost the same as a iPhone, I still would of bought it. It does exactly what I want and more with no fuss (and hell cheap for what it is in my opinion).
Can we get some sources?
The default setup runs a IceWM as a window manager and Asus Launcher (a tabbed based interface made by ASUS just for the Eee).Eee already does that. I honestly don't believe you have actually played around with it with the things you have mentioned.
Here are some people who have really played around with the Eee
Such stories are contained in the books you refer to.
I don't think the FOSS community is into making closed source website annoyances.
Citibank does SPF.
I am constantly receiving harassing messages from Apple mail users asking to be removed from mailing lists, because their client removes the footer of every e-mail by default. Meaning, it hides the unsubscribe links.
Usually I am sympathetic to the plight of users, but I sense I will slap Apple mail users around if I encounter them in person.
I hope the Apple mail user agent gets banned from posting messages on mailing lists, so we don't get this harassing crap anymore.
I am already dropping all e-mail to mailbox from Apple Mail user agents, due to this. Unfortunately, I still receive a ton of replies from people telling these 'users' how to remove themselves.
Repent! Buy the latest update!
Let's see. I turn off SPF. I get forgies from paypal, gmail, hotmail and various banks. The alternatives mentioned do not stop the forgies of the above mentioned list. Therefore, the alternatives do not work for me. Period.
The from address used in the protocol should be from the mail forwarding agent, not the e-mail address it is forwarding for. You can keep that information in the headers of the e-mail just fine.
This seems uncommon from what I have seen - But alas I have no real verifiable statistics on me and you haven't provided any to enforce your point.
Actually, the past two decades used "<>" as the from address. Then when such unreturnable addresses started getting blocked, mail providers started using things like mailer-daemon@attheirdomain.com or a spoofed e-mail address. There is a problem identified with the latter.
Most mail servers will reject e-mails at the SMTP connection with a error code actually. Very few mail servers will return bounces as actual e-mails to addresses due to the fact that this was done away with, with how spammers used to bounce spam on other servers through such messages.
Such as using the methods the person in mentioned article is discussing rather than using what is done in most real installations.
This has never happened with me and will never happen. This is a lie. 100% of my e-mails were never denied due to SPF reasons on my domain.
If SPF is not supported by the mail server, the e-mail will go through as normal.
On the other hand, the servers that are forging from addresses from domains that they truely do not operate may get the e-mails either flagged or rejected -- I consider this a good thing.
There is of course the issue where a provider may require that all e-mails that go to them, publish DNS records for SPF. But I don't know of any in existence.
It is actually. It's meant to stop spoofing of domains by reating a whitelist of permitted outgoing servers.
If I get a e-mail from say @gmail.com. I can be sure that the e-mail which sits in my inbox with a @gmail address came from gmail's servers (any e-mail that does not match the headers in the e-mails gets flagged as junk - mailing list items get filtered into the appropriate folder obviously).
I don't see how duping is working here.
No, exploits aren't good. But they're discovered and patched very quickly within the OSS community usually. Thankfully there is no assessments team on whether a exploit is critical enough to warrant someone fixing it - they just go ahead and fix it.
Wouldn't you like to be a Pepper too?