Unless you have very cheap active speakers and a 10 year old on-board sound card... you can very easily tell the difference between 128 and 192.
Kinda like the difference between 8bit and 16bit pcm data, there's less hiss, more clarity, better rounding of sound (128 has a very blocky bass sound where 192 smoothes it)
Why not have Billie's other half Chris Evans as a dalek. He looks like one, he makes about as much sense as one.. dunno if his extermination gun is as big though..
1) Have a "Ungroup" Action added if you right click it.
That's a brilliant idea
2) Fix the Group Logic.
I was just about to reply saying that. It's logic is very dumb.
Another suggestion I would have is to separate grouping and app pairing. For example, if you turn off the grouping because you don't like it, it won't put matching windows of an app together. They should put those separate.
One big thing I like about it is when IE Goes to a crazy page and starts popups like mad, all you do is Right click the group, select close Group and the 50 popup windows go away.
That's fine unless one of those windows is the one you want.. Perhaps an option to "close all group windows opened in last n seconds".. or make it a taskbar command
If you have the in depth knowledge (and patience), Linux is whatever you want it to be, isn't it?
From my limited-ish knowledge of Linux, I'd say it's probably more of a workstation, but I only say that because it takes quite a bit to learn, so to understand it being a server is gonna take a fair while.
I think that's one of the main things keeping a lot of people away, along with a ton of other things of course
I dunno if setup.exe (or equivalent) is the exact way, but I do agree that the manual compilation process is quite long winded and there should be an easy way for people who don't know it/can't be arsed with it.. Of course the advantage of compiling (I assume) is effeciency and stability. I never really got into it.
As for the K menu (or equiv.) when I was using Linux I did find it annoying that it didn't *appear* to have an easy way of maintaining it. I didn't take a lot of time to look around but then I shouldn't have to.
I wonder how much processor time is given to deciding how much processor time should be given to each process? (note: this is a joke, not a serious question)
A brand new algorithmic search engine -- built from the ground up -- on Microsoft technology
Is that something you'd actually want to boast?
Also, is this gonna be in beta for the next 5 years like Longhorn?
On a more serious note. I always would have thought it better that the engines actually share some ideas and technology.. kinda like a super-search engine. I know that "microsoft" and "co-operative" don't exactly go in the same sentence but it would be a nice idea. It's nice they're creating an "all new" engine to integrate with their old one (who uses that anyway?.. apart from people who's homepages are eaten over by msn messenger installs) but it does seem rather late, especially as google and other engines are so well established and offer far more than, I suspect, MS ever will.
Just as a side note, and slightly offtopic but I am curious.. have any of the linux distributors got a search engine and if so, how do they react to searches for microsoft?
The only problem with 9mp porn, or any other picture, is in.bmp format, EACH of the pics would be 35mb, or about 9 mins over 512k broadband. Even in.jpg they would take a while. Fine for one pic, but if you're picking up a collection, you'd have to wait aaages.
On another point, with so many pixels crammed into a relatively small monitor, even stretching/zooming in on a small picture (say 1024 res) would look fine.
FreeDOS aims to be a complete, free, 100% MS-DOS compatible
operating system.
FreeDOS was previously known as "Free-DOS" and originally as "PD-DOS."
For a little trip down memory lane:
In 1994, I was a physics student at the University of Wisconsin-River
Falls. Most of my work for school had been done using DOS - writing
programs, dialing up to the university computer, network, analysing
lab data, etc. I really loved DOS; I did everything with it.
I had a '386 desktop
system in my dorm room and an XT laptop that I would carry around with
me to do work "on the go".
I liked the simplicity that DOS offered. As a DOS user, you have the
equivalent of 'root' access on your computer. Anything that you want
to do on the PC is possible. Nothing is really stopping you, other
than hardware limitations. I found that this additional degree of
freedom was nice to have, although since I worked in both environments
(UNIX and DOS) I tended to write programs that stuck to "safe areas" that
worked on both platforms. DOS was great.
But that year, there was an announcement that Microsoft would stop
support for DOS, that a new version of Windows was going to be
released that completely removed DOS from the picture. Of course,
this was Windows 95, and it still did have DOS, but at that time we
all had the vision that Microsoft was trying to kill our favorite
operating system.
Everyone was pretty shocked. We didn't
want to be forced to use Windows, which completely removes the command
line. In DOS, everything is done on the command line, and a true
command line "guru" can do amazing things there. In Windows, you are
stuck with the mouse, and if the menus don't let you do something, it
pretty much can't be done.
So things were looking pretty bleak. We were all very upset about
Microsoft's decision to ditch the DOS platform.
Then, I saw a discussion thread on the DOS groups asking "hey, why doesn't
someone write their own free version of DOS?" Remember, this was
about three years after Linus Torvalds announced his work on the Linux
kernel, and by 1993 Linux had shown that free software can achieve
incredible results.
So in 1994, the suggestion that we could write our own free version of
DOS, and give it away with the source code so others could work with
it and improve it, really didn't sound all that far-fetched.
Unfortunately, no one seemed to pick up the ball. The idea sort of
sat there, waiting. I didn't have much experience in writing C or
Assembly programs (most of my analytical work in physics was limited
to FORTRAN) but I had written some C programs. So I sat down one
weekend and hacked out code for a bunch of DOS file utilities.
I posted what I had done to the DOS newsgroups,
and announced that I intended to form a group on the Internet to write
our own free version of DOS.
I took the opportunity to fix some things.
There are some things about what Microsoft did
with DOS that do irk me. The biggest is that MS-DOS commands lack
options, not that there are lots of MS-DOS commands anyway.
I wanted to have more powerful tools than what
MS-DOS provided me with. So I hacked some of my own. (I wasn't a
strong C programmer at the time, so this wasn't very beautiful code.)
There were several "beta" pre-release packages of my stuff:
0.10 - contained a few basic utilities, just to get the easy ones out of the way: clear (like CLS), echo, more, rem, type, ver, wait (like Pause)
0.11 - added date, test (some do-nothing test program), time
Our software suggests that you're using a browser incompatible with Gmail. Gmail currently supports the following:
Microsoft IE 5.5 and newer (download: Windows)
Netscape 7.1 and newer (download: Windows Macintosh Linux )
Mozilla 1.4 and newer (download: Windows Macintosh Linux )
Mozilla Firefox 0.8 and newer (download: Windows Macintosh Linux )
Safari 1.2.1 and newer (download: Macintosh )
You are kidding right? I'm using Opera 7.5 (Id'ing as Opera), does gmail use some non-opera based code?
To me it seems like having a 24 inch penis. Sure, it'd be big and impressive, but not of much practical use to anyone.
Oh I dunno. You wouldn't have to get out of bed to pee at night.
Could rest your drinks on it
As for a projector, I'd suggest perhaps when you have an outdoor gathering like a barbeque, you could project it against the house
or, dependant on whether the projector would mind, you could project onto the ceiling for lying down viewing
(even though it does just create a window with a common Windows control straight out of a system DLL).
All the demos do is essentially pull bits from other sources (mainly DirectX, and the Arial font). The textures and sounds are in the code, but it's DX that does the actual rendering. If you look in task manager whilst fr-08 is running, you'll see it takes up something like 400MB memory.
A lot of computer vendor companies have that. I think it's partly a marketing thing. Stick something that your average joe has heard of on the front page and it might sell better. Stick "Mandrake linux" (or whoever on it) and joe won't have a clue what it is.
It is bizarre though as companies could offer pc's 70+ cheaper if they bundled linux and a manual.
Slashdot Mirror
Kinda like the difference between 8bit and 16bit pcm data, there's less hiss, more clarity, better rounding of sound (128 has a very blocky bass sound where 192 smoothes it)
That would move the problem rather than solve it.
Why not have Billie's other half Chris Evans as a dalek. He looks like one, he makes about as much sense as one.. dunno if his extermination gun is as big though..
That's a brilliant idea
2) Fix the Group Logic.
I was just about to reply saying that. It's logic is very dumb.
Another suggestion I would have is to separate grouping and app pairing. For example, if you turn off the grouping because you don't like it, it won't put matching windows of an app together. They should put those separate.
One big thing I like about it is when IE Goes to a crazy page and starts popups like mad, all you do is Right click the group, select close Group and the 50 popup windows go away.
That's fine unless one of those windows is the one you want.. Perhaps an option to "close all group windows opened in last n seconds".. or make it a taskbar command
If you have the in depth knowledge (and patience), Linux is whatever you want it to be, isn't it?
From my limited-ish knowledge of Linux, I'd say it's probably more of a workstation, but I only say that because it takes quite a bit to learn, so to understand it being a server is gonna take a fair while.
I dunno if setup.exe (or equivalent) is the exact way, but I do agree that the manual compilation process is quite long winded and there should be an easy way for people who don't know it/can't be arsed with it.. Of course the advantage of compiling (I assume) is effeciency and stability. I never really got into it.
As for the K menu (or equiv.) when I was using Linux I did find it annoying that it didn't *appear* to have an easy way of maintaining it. I didn't take a lot of time to look around but then I shouldn't have to.
I wonder how much processor time is given to deciding how much processor time should be given to each process? (note: this is a joke, not a serious question)
What the hell is pre-emptive in this case.. it does something before you tell it to? That's not so much clever as scary
Also, "Real-time".. er, isn't it supposed to be realtime? Would be a tad annoying if it did it 5 mins after (aka Windows ME)
Lastly, just cos everyone else has and I want a go...:
Yes, but does it run linux?
Is that something you'd actually want to boast?
Also, is this gonna be in beta for the next 5 years like Longhorn?
On a more serious note. I always would have thought it better that the engines actually share some ideas and technology.. kinda like a super-search engine. I know that "microsoft" and "co-operative" don't exactly go in the same sentence but it would be a nice idea. It's nice they're creating an "all new" engine to integrate with their old one (who uses that anyway?.. apart from people who's homepages are eaten over by msn messenger installs) but it does seem rather late, especially as google and other engines are so well established and offer far more than, I suspect, MS ever will.
Just as a side note, and slightly offtopic but I am curious.. have any of the linux distributors got a search engine and if so, how do they react to searches for microsoft?
It's probably as much just what the server finds first as it is swaying the results
Ok hands up who couldn't see that reply coming (both puns intended)
The only problem with 9mp porn, or any other picture, is in .bmp format, EACH of the pics would be 35mb, or about 9 mins over 512k broadband. Even in .jpg they would take a while. Fine for one pic, but if you're picking up a collection, you'd have to wait aaages.
On another point, with so many pixels crammed into a relatively small monitor, even stretching/zooming in on a small picture (say 1024 res) would look fine.
FreeDOS aims to be a complete, free, 100% MS-DOS compatible operating system.
FreeDOS was previously known as "Free-DOS" and originally as "PD-DOS." For a little trip down memory lane: In 1994, I was a physics student at the University of Wisconsin-River Falls. Most of my work for school had been done using DOS - writing programs, dialing up to the university computer, network, analysing lab data, etc. I really loved DOS; I did everything with it. I had a '386 desktop system in my dorm room and an XT laptop that I would carry around with me to do work "on the go".
I liked the simplicity that DOS offered. As a DOS user, you have the equivalent of 'root' access on your computer. Anything that you want to do on the PC is possible. Nothing is really stopping you, other than hardware limitations. I found that this additional degree of freedom was nice to have, although since I worked in both environments (UNIX and DOS) I tended to write programs that stuck to "safe areas" that worked on both platforms. DOS was great.
But that year, there was an announcement that Microsoft would stop support for DOS, that a new version of Windows was going to be released that completely removed DOS from the picture. Of course, this was Windows 95, and it still did have DOS, but at that time we all had the vision that Microsoft was trying to kill our favorite operating system. Everyone was pretty shocked. We didn't want to be forced to use Windows, which completely removes the command line. In DOS, everything is done on the command line, and a true command line "guru" can do amazing things there. In Windows, you are stuck with the mouse, and if the menus don't let you do something, it pretty much can't be done. So things were looking pretty bleak. We were all very upset about Microsoft's decision to ditch the DOS platform.
Then, I saw a discussion thread on the DOS groups asking "hey, why doesn't someone write their own free version of DOS?" Remember, this was about three years after Linus Torvalds announced his work on the Linux kernel, and by 1993 Linux had shown that free software can achieve incredible results. So in 1994, the suggestion that we could write our own free version of DOS, and give it away with the source code so others could work with it and improve it, really didn't sound all that far-fetched.
Unfortunately, no one seemed to pick up the ball. The idea sort of sat there, waiting. I didn't have much experience in writing C or Assembly programs (most of my analytical work in physics was limited to FORTRAN) but I had written some C programs. So I sat down one weekend and hacked out code for a bunch of DOS file utilities. I posted what I had done to the DOS newsgroups, and announced that I intended to form a group on the Internet to write our own free version of DOS.
I took the opportunity to fix some things. There are some things about what Microsoft did with DOS that do irk me. The biggest is that MS-DOS commands lack options, not that there are lots of MS-DOS commands anyway. I wanted to have more powerful tools than what MS-DOS provided me with. So I hacked some of my own. (I wasn't a strong C programmer at the time, so this wasn't very beautiful code.)
There were several "beta" pre-release packages of my stuff:
Afte
here Curious, /. keeps putting a space between the r and t in report.. i.e. repor t.html
On the other hand (no pun), the window could be funny "Howdy neighbour"
We're sorry, but we don't seem to be compatible.
Our software suggests that you're using a browser incompatible with Gmail. Gmail currently supports the following:
Microsoft IE 5.5 and newer (download: Windows)
Netscape 7.1 and newer (download: Windows Macintosh Linux )
Mozilla 1.4 and newer (download: Windows Macintosh Linux )
Mozilla Firefox 0.8 and newer (download: Windows Macintosh Linux )
Safari 1.2.1 and newer (download: Macintosh )
You are kidding right? I'm using Opera 7.5 (Id'ing as Opera), does gmail use some non-opera based code?
Oh I dunno. You wouldn't have to get out of bed to pee at night.
Could rest your drinks on it
As for a projector, I'd suggest perhaps when you have an outdoor gathering like a barbeque, you could project it against the house
or, dependant on whether the projector would mind, you could project onto the ceiling for lying down viewing
Same way as a thesaurus I expect. Set of keywords bunched together that all appear when one is called.. depending on context of word of course
All the demos do is essentially pull bits from other sources (mainly DirectX, and the Arial font). The textures and sounds are in the code, but it's DX that does the actual rendering. If you look in task manager whilst fr-08 is running, you'll see it takes up something like 400MB memory.
It is very very good, as is candytron although candy is much more cpu intense
Try running the demo in the lowest resolution with level 3 antialiasing on, and watch from a bit of a distance. It's really cool.
Nah, "popular" was the 8meg one codenamed fr-025 whereas "poem" was 64k coded fr-019. I'm not entirely sure which came first but they aren't the same
Here
Wouldn't it be funny if the RIAA sued MS for tada.wav (as first seen in windows 3.1 (3.0?). I wouldn't put it past them
It is bizarre though as companies could offer pc's 70+ cheaper if they bundled linux and a manual.