As far as I remember this feature was introduced in Outlook Express v6. I don't think it's available in any version of Outlook up to 2000; don't know about later versions.
"Turning off the preview panel is completely useless if you subsequently open the message."
Setting to 'read as text' as per previous comments should cover most cases; for fuller info Right click message, select "details" (or something like that) then click "message source" and you get the full raw email text including headers, boundaries etc. Not very convienient but a safe way to inspect emails you're not sure of if you have to use OE...
"Overall, I like the idea a lot though. I wish more Linux filesystems implemented this. For example, documentation could be always kept compressed, and still immediately readable. Most distributions seem to keep most of the docs gzipped, but it's less convenient." The amount of space taken up by documentation compared to the capacity of even a modest h/d these days is such that it's just not worth bothering. I would think that mostly, the only files that take up a *lot* of space relative to modern drive sizes are already in compressed formats - mp3, mpeg, etc. So I can't see much of a case for h/d based compression now.
...but not for long. Chip & pin is well on the way and by the end of next year should be fully rolled out - then you *will* be able to laugh at drunks in the pub trying to remember their PINs. (But laugh discreetly unless you want a glass in you face).
Two of my toes are joined together (true!) so I can only count up to 19 even if I take off my socks. I'm thinking of having the least useful 3 toes/fingers amputated in order to standardize on base 16.
A few points: 1/ Invoking 'National security/emergency' (which this could easily become) allows countries to do pretty much what they please *within their own borders*. 2/ A lot of international law is pretty woolly and countries tend to ignore it when it suits them. 3/ Sovereign states (as far as I know) always reserve the right to pull out of any treaties/international agreements which make up international law.
If you're saying that the US (as the home of MS and the only country with the means to do it in practical terms) would invade the EU and forcibly install a compliant government in order to protect MS's intellectual property/enforce its concept of international law then I'd concede this is a theoretical possibility (with probability <0.1%). Appeals to the WTO are also possible, but in the end the EU could leave the WTO enbloc in this sort of extreme situation. Then presumably you would get an all out trade war - but this would likely damage both sides roughly equally. I think the EU could sustain this because I believe when it comes to a showdown between 20 elected governments versus one multi-national coporation, the EU citizens would be overwhelmingly behind the governments that *they* had elected.
You can believe what you like about my windows reinstall. It happens to be true. It would get most of the way through the installation process (nearly 2hrs) and then crash with a totally meaningless error message just before you got a bootable system. I vaguely remembered reading somewhere about sometimes having to remove certain hardware to get the installer to run and it took me that many attempts to work out the right combination. OK, so if I have to reinstall again, I'll know what to disconnect/remove. But I shouldn't have to.
Your remarks about Red Hat apparently doing 'the same thing' as windows seem to indicate that you've missed the main points of the article. Red hat and other Linux distros: 1/ Are not generally installed on new PCs whether you like it or not but are installed as a positive choice (unlike Windows). 2/ Do not incorporate applications into the O/S - all the functions I mentioned can be removed completely without any effect on the base operating system. (unlike some of the windows 'applications' which cannot be fully removed because they 'blur' into the OS). 3/ Come with a selection of different tools for each purpose including multiple browsers, office suites, cd burning packages etc. (unlike windows where your 'choice' is made for you). 4/ Ask you during the install process whether you actually want to install any, some or all of these tools (unlike windows, where certain applications must be installed since they form part of the OS). 5/ Gain no monopolistic benefit over their competitors by distributing the many applications it does since its competitors are generally free to distribute the same or equivalent applications at no cost, and the applications are generally not written by or controlled by RH (unlike windows, where MS can (and has been found to in court) severely damaged its competitors). I could go on but I think I have made my point - the fact that RH or any other distro is supplied with lots of applications is irrelevant for the reasons above. Its behaviour can in no way be described as anti-competitive.
Plus, in this extremely unlikely event (MS pulls out of EU), the EU nations could declare it an 'emergency situation' and pass laws allowing (for example) corporate versions of windows with no activation to be freely copied and distributed unless and until MS played ball...
But MS won't pull out, because they know they would permanantly lose many customers in a fairly short time and would never get their trust back even if the EU backed down after a while.
Quote: "Linux can be useful to a common user if you would like to take the time to make it useful, Windows is useful to common users right after installation."
Funny, my experience was exactly the opposite. I installed RH9 a while ago (from a magazine cover disc) and it was useful immediately - web browser, CD burning, office suite, printer etc. etc. all working with no configuration etc. to do. I reinstalled windows and all these items need configuration/installation. Also, the RH9 install took about 1-2 hours, mostly copying files from CD. The windows install took 2 weeks worth of 2 hour daily attempts as the installer crashed repeatedly at different points until I worked out I had to remove the soundcard and disconnect the secondary hard drive before installing.
Some possibilities: 1/ If you want IE: Pick up a free ISP CD (not AOL!) - these usually have the latest version of IE on it. 2/ If you want something else: Buy a magazine with a cover CD containing one or more non-MS browsers (MS won't allow their browsers to be distributed this way anymore). 3/ Get a friend to burn you a CD with some browsers on it. 4/ Use ftp to download a browser. I'm sure there are other ways...
OK I'll bite. Copyright violation *is not theft*. Find me a piece of legislation (not an RIAA press release) that says it is and I'll buy you a large virtual drink...
Morally speaking, in your universe it may be theft. But not in most people's. Try asking a random selection of 1000 people the following question:
"Am I a thief if I make a tape of a friend's (copyrighted) CD?"
(this is a form of copyright violation most people, even not computer literate, can understand and relate to).
If you can honestly say that more than a small percentage will agree that you're a thief, then I think you're deluded.
So: If you do it, then you *are* morally a thief since you believe yourself to be. The rest of us aren't.
Wind forward a few years (say 5-10).
What happens when (for example) 95% of people are using versions of closed-source software (like Photoshop) with counterfeit detection in which the suppliers put in 'voluntarily' and 5% are using open-source software (like The Gimp) with no such measures. Won't the US government start thinking of restrictions on open source software creation/distribution/use? Even if any law introduced was unenforceable in practice, this could have a chilling effect on open source software preception in the business world. Major Linux distros might come under pressure to 'do something'. High profile developers working in the area could get 'approached' for 'co-operation'...
I don't think this is alarmist. I hope someone can tell me why this [b]won't[/b] happen...
No it isn't.
You are specifically allowed, in the US, to reproduce currency given that you follow certain conditions relating to size (your size>=150% or real size, your size =75% real size, one sided only etc.) and delete the image after 'use'.
Software with the conterfeit detectors in it prevents you from doing things that the US government specifically allows you to do.
If this was the case, the anti-spam software doesn't have to include a plain-text version of the copyright haiku - an encrypted version or an MD3 hash or something would do the trick and not fall foul of copyright law.
Being generous, some sites do have 'obscenity filters' and such crap. Maybe they thought this would avoid the post being rejected or the word entirely *'d out?
Oh wait, this is/. Generosity is for wusses! Carry on...
Maybe MS figure that by 2006 loads more of the PCs currently running Win98 will have died, and been replaced by new PCs with WinXP preinstalled (as 90%+ do).
Then they'll be able to drop support without too much hassle. I'd guess that by then Win98's 'market share' will have dropped from the current 20-30% to 5-10% maximum...
It's also interesting to note that such formations as "Banana's" and "Tomato's" were once considered correct usage - any plural of a non-English word (as these were considered many years ago) was typically written with an apostrophe.
(This information is courtesy of Lynn Truss in her excellent little book about punctuation, titled "Eats, shoots and leaves".)
I've been using the free, non-nagging, non-adware, 100% compatable EasyZip in windows for the last 4 years. Why anyone would pay for (or use a cracked version) of WinZip is beyond me.
I've been using rh9 on my home system for a few months now and managing fine so far without asking questions in forums etc. but if I had to ask a Linux related question, I'd be really careful how I asked it.
I would feel like I had to creep around and lick some serious ass in the sort of "I'm sure I'm displaying serious ignorance here and I've searched and blah blah but if someone could just drop me a few crumbs/clues about this issue I'd be very grateful...".
This is despite the fact I've been working in IT for 20 years. If I feel like this then I imagine it's a lot worse for the truly inexperienced.
This 'more managers than doctors/nurses/beds whatever' is frequently quoted with variations and in my opinion is very misleading. Many of the staff classed as managers are in fact health care proffessionals who spend up to 90% of their time on duties which most people would clearly consider clinical.
My personal experience of the NHS (which I and my partner have used extensively in the last few years) is that it is improving rapidly - waiting times reducing, lots of new buildings, being called for appointments on time... The media always latch onto the worst cases, so as a result those who haven't used the NHS recently think it is much worse than it actually is.
It is in the national interest to have healthcare available to all regardless of means in the same way it was in the national interest years ago to provide a proper sewage system instead of having it rotting in the street.
It's all very well to say that each individual should be responsible for their own healthcare but that's not much consolation to those who *have* paid when they are (for example) killed by an epidemic which starts among the 'uncovered' population.
Or take the example of a low paid worker with no health cover who currently makes a small contribution to GDP and taxation. A leg injury which needs an operation they can't afford permanantly removes them from the labour market, even though it is actually cheaper for the rest of the population to pay for the operation and get them back to work and contributing...
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I remember this feature was introduced in Outlook Express v6. I don't think it's available in any version of Outlook up to 2000; don't know about later versions.
"Turning off the preview panel is completely useless if you subsequently open the message."
Setting to 'read as text' as per previous comments should cover most cases; for fuller info
Right click message, select "details" (or something like that) then click "message source" and you get the full raw email text including headers, boundaries etc. Not very convienient but a safe way to inspect emails you're not sure of if you have to use OE...
"Overall, I like the idea a lot though. I wish more Linux filesystems implemented this. For example, documentation could be always kept compressed, and still immediately readable. Most distributions seem to keep most of the docs gzipped, but it's less convenient."
The amount of space taken up by documentation compared to the capacity of even a modest h/d these days is such that it's just not worth bothering. I would think that mostly, the only files that take up a *lot* of space relative to modern drive sizes are already in compressed formats - mp3, mpeg, etc.
So I can't see much of a case for h/d based compression now.
"check how many places still use Office 97 or NT4"
Yes, that's us - 1000's of low-spec PCs (400MhZ PII 64Mb) running exactly the above combination - stable and meets our current needs.
Whining (also whingeing, moaning, grousing, carping and complaining) is fun. Without it my life would be empty and meaningless...
...but not for long. Chip & pin is well on the way and by the end of next year should be fully rolled out - then you *will* be able to laugh at drunks in the pub trying to remember their PINs. (But laugh discreetly unless you want a glass in you face).
Two of my toes are joined together (true!) so I can only count up to 19 even if I take off my socks.
I'm thinking of having the least useful 3 toes/fingers amputated in order to standardize on base 16.
Iguanas, snakes, Koalas. They really do have two. So I guess they're all happy...
http://www.greenigsociety.org/glossary.htm
and look for 'hemipenes'
A few points:
1/ Invoking 'National security/emergency' (which this could easily become) allows countries to do pretty much what they please *within their own borders*.
2/ A lot of international law is pretty woolly and countries tend to ignore it when it suits them.
3/ Sovereign states (as far as I know) always reserve the right to pull out of any treaties/international agreements which make up international law.
If you're saying that the US (as the home of MS and the only country with the means to do it in practical terms) would invade the EU and forcibly install a compliant government in order to protect MS's intellectual property/enforce its concept of international law then I'd concede this is a theoretical possibility (with probability <0.1%).
Appeals to the WTO are also possible, but in the end the EU could leave the WTO enbloc in this sort of extreme situation. Then presumably you would get an all out trade war - but this would likely damage both sides roughly equally.
I think the EU could sustain this because I believe when it comes to a showdown between 20 elected governments versus one multi-national coporation, the EU citizens would be overwhelmingly behind the governments that *they* had elected.
You can believe what you like about my windows reinstall. It happens to be true. It would get most of the way through the installation process (nearly 2hrs) and then crash with a totally meaningless error message just before you got a bootable system. I vaguely remembered reading somewhere about sometimes having to remove certain hardware to get the installer to run and it took me that many attempts to work out the right combination. OK, so if I have to reinstall again, I'll know what to disconnect/remove. But I shouldn't have to.
Your remarks about Red Hat apparently doing 'the same thing' as windows seem to indicate that you've missed the main points of the article.
Red hat and other Linux distros:
1/ Are not generally installed on new PCs whether you like it or not but are installed as a positive choice (unlike Windows).
2/ Do not incorporate applications into the O/S - all the functions I mentioned can be removed completely without any effect on the base operating system. (unlike some of the windows 'applications' which cannot be fully removed because they 'blur' into the OS).
3/ Come with a selection of different tools for each purpose including multiple browsers, office suites, cd burning packages etc. (unlike windows where your 'choice' is made for you).
4/ Ask you during the install process whether you actually want to install any, some or all of these tools (unlike windows, where certain applications must be installed since they form part of the OS).
5/ Gain no monopolistic benefit over their competitors by distributing the many applications it does since its competitors are generally free to distribute the same or equivalent applications at no cost, and the applications are generally not written by or controlled by RH (unlike windows, where MS can (and has been found to in court) severely damaged its competitors).
I could go on but I think I have made my point - the fact that RH or any other distro is supplied with lots of applications is irrelevant for the reasons above. Its behaviour can in no way be described as anti-competitive.
Plus, in this extremely unlikely event (MS pulls out of EU), the EU nations could declare it an 'emergency situation' and pass laws allowing (for example) corporate versions of windows with no activation to be freely copied and distributed unless and until MS played ball... But MS won't pull out, because they know they would permanantly lose many customers in a fairly short time and would never get their trust back even if the EU backed down after a while.
Quote:
"Linux can be useful to a common user if you would like to take the time to make it useful, Windows is useful to common users right after installation."
Funny, my experience was exactly the opposite.
I installed RH9 a while ago (from a magazine cover disc) and it was useful immediately - web browser, CD burning, office suite, printer etc. etc. all working with no configuration etc. to do. I reinstalled windows and all these items need configuration/installation.
Also, the RH9 install took about 1-2 hours, mostly copying files from CD.
The windows install took 2 weeks worth of 2 hour daily attempts as the installer crashed repeatedly at different points until I worked out I had to remove the soundcard and disconnect the secondary hard drive before installing.
Some possibilities:
1/ If you want IE: Pick up a free ISP CD (not AOL!) - these usually have the latest version of IE on it.
2/ If you want something else: Buy a magazine with a cover CD containing one or more non-MS browsers (MS won't allow their browsers to be distributed this way anymore).
3/ Get a friend to burn you a CD with some browsers on it.
4/ Use ftp to download a browser.
I'm sure there are other ways...
OK I'll bite. Copyright violation *is not theft*. Find me a piece of legislation (not an RIAA press release) that says it is and I'll buy you a large virtual drink... Morally speaking, in your universe it may be theft. But not in most people's. Try asking a random selection of 1000 people the following question: "Am I a thief if I make a tape of a friend's (copyrighted) CD?" (this is a form of copyright violation most people, even not computer literate, can understand and relate to). If you can honestly say that more than a small percentage will agree that you're a thief, then I think you're deluded. So: If you do it, then you *are* morally a thief since you believe yourself to be. The rest of us aren't.
Wind forward a few years (say 5-10). What happens when (for example) 95% of people are using versions of closed-source software (like Photoshop) with counterfeit detection in which the suppliers put in 'voluntarily' and 5% are using open-source software (like The Gimp) with no such measures. Won't the US government start thinking of restrictions on open source software creation/distribution/use? Even if any law introduced was unenforceable in practice, this could have a chilling effect on open source software preception in the business world. Major Linux distros might come under pressure to 'do something'. High profile developers working in the area could get 'approached' for 'co-operation'... I don't think this is alarmist. I hope someone can tell me why this [b]won't[/b] happen...
No it isn't. You are specifically allowed, in the US, to reproduce currency given that you follow certain conditions relating to size (your size>=150% or real size, your size =75% real size, one sided only etc.) and delete the image after 'use'. Software with the conterfeit detectors in it prevents you from doing things that the US government specifically allows you to do.
If this was the case, the anti-spam software doesn't have to include a plain-text version of the copyright haiku - an encrypted version or an MD3 hash or something would do the trick and not fall foul of copyright law.
Being generous, some sites do have 'obscenity filters' and such crap. Maybe they thought this would avoid the post being rejected or the word entirely *'d out? Oh wait, this is /. Generosity is for wusses! Carry on...
Maybe MS figure that by 2006 loads more of the PCs currently running Win98 will have died, and been replaced by new PCs with WinXP preinstalled (as 90%+ do). Then they'll be able to drop support without too much hassle. I'd guess that by then Win98's 'market share' will have dropped from the current 20-30% to 5-10% maximum...
It's also interesting to note that such formations as "Banana's" and "Tomato's" were once considered correct usage - any plural of a non-English word (as these were considered many years ago) was typically written with an apostrophe. (This information is courtesy of Lynn Truss in her excellent little book about punctuation, titled "Eats, shoots and leaves".)
I've been using the free, non-nagging, non-adware, 100% compatable EasyZip in windows for the last 4 years. Why anyone would pay for (or use a cracked version) of WinZip is beyond me.
I've been using rh9 on my home system for a few months now and managing fine so far without asking questions in forums etc. but if I had to ask a Linux related question, I'd be really careful how I asked it. I would feel like I had to creep around and lick some serious ass in the sort of "I'm sure I'm displaying serious ignorance here and I've searched and blah blah but if someone could just drop me a few crumbs/clues about this issue I'd be very grateful...". This is despite the fact I've been working in IT for 20 years. If I feel like this then I imagine it's a lot worse for the truly inexperienced.
This 'more managers than doctors/nurses/beds whatever' is frequently quoted with variations and in my opinion is very misleading. Many of the staff classed as managers are in fact health care proffessionals who spend up to 90% of their time on duties which most people would clearly consider clinical.
My personal experience of the NHS (which I and my partner have used extensively in the last few years) is that it is improving rapidly - waiting times reducing, lots of new buildings, being called for appointments on time... The media always latch onto the worst cases, so as a result those who haven't used the NHS recently think it is much worse than it actually is. It is in the national interest to have healthcare available to all regardless of means in the same way it was in the national interest years ago to provide a proper sewage system instead of having it rotting in the street. It's all very well to say that each individual should be responsible for their own healthcare but that's not much consolation to those who *have* paid when they are (for example) killed by an epidemic which starts among the 'uncovered' population. Or take the example of a low paid worker with no health cover who currently makes a small contribution to GDP and taxation. A leg injury which needs an operation they can't afford permanantly removes them from the labour market, even though it is actually cheaper for the rest of the population to pay for the operation and get them back to work and contributing...
Time have merged with Tiny and are now called 'The Computer World'. The general recommendation seems to be 'avoid like the plague'.