I've been administrating Macs since the days of the Mac II, and I don't recall any such thing. As long as you formatted the drive with Apple's tools, copied the files over, and then used a program like Norton Disk Doctor to "bless" the system folder, you were fine.
They are parasites in this way: Rather than them spend the time and money to upgrade the infrastructure they use that relies on "features" or "quirks" of IE6, they choose not to expend those resources. This just causes everyone else to spend that time and money to support their broken browser. The time and money spent by others to keep their websites usable by this trainwreck of a browser would have been better spent elsewhere. They are making others waste resources for their benefit. Pretty much the definition of a parasite.
Where I work, we spend 4-5 days developing the primary website. We have to avoid doing anything "fancy" or "efficient" with our coding, keeping it as plain jane as we can. Then we have to spend another day or so "fixing" the perfectly reasonable code, css, and graphics to work with IE 6. That's a couple of days we are not spending on the next site.
I have seriously been considering some kind of redirection (at worst) or some other kind of gentle reminder to encourage IE6 users to upgrade. Remember that if you are not using IE6 you are likely a few years behind on patching your windows system overall.
I am personally of the opinion that coddling IE6 users in this fashion gives them no incentive to upgrade - there is no pressure at all. This is holding the internet back, frankly, and at some point I'm going to just start redirecting IE6 users to an appropriate page where they can upgrade to IE7, IE8, or better yet, a standards compliant browser like Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or Opera. Stuff that was written to require ActiveX controls was broken to start with.
While I generally regard using Wikipedia as a laughable "proof" in any sort of internet discussion, I find it doubly so in this case. The article cited has so many weasel words (may, could, should, might) that it becomes entirely devoid of informational content. If you are eating a properly nutritious diet, you will have zero need for any kind of dietary supplements, period. Dependence on the "nutritional" benefits of the minute amounts of calcium, magnesium, etc. in tap water borders on the delusional. Having said that, one adult sized vitamin capsule is going to have more of those trace minerals than 8 glasses of drinking water. As for the benefits of fluoride in the water, too much of it can also cause teeth to become brittle and prone to breakage. All good things in moderation.
Considering where pure H20 ends up when ingested (mixed in with the contents of your stomach) tell me exactly how long it actually remains "pure" in the human body?
100% pure water will do no harm to you, whatsoever. Or your gut bacteria. I'm not sure how this meme got started, but it is not only wrong, but indicative of a confusion of ideas that makes me doubt the rationality of anyone who espouses it.
The Mann "hockey stick" graph has been thoroughly debunked. This is old news, and I'm surprised it even has to be mentioned again. It was based on a poor subset of data, on flawed assumptions as to how trees respond to temperature in their growth patterns, and the data was subject to flawed use of statistical methods. The hockey stick is totally off the table as proof of any unusual recent warming. What else have you got?
Why? Because the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere is already at saturation. Doesn't really matter how much you blacken the windows in a house - once they hit "black" you're not adding any more to the effect. Same with CO2 absorption and re-emission of specific infrared wavelengths - it's already at saturation, and adding any more CO2 will have no effect. What we have left is natural variation in the Earth's temperature budget - changes in incoming energy (solar irradiance, solar wind, effect on cosmic ray cloud nucleation, changes in Albedo) are showing up as a decrease in overall thermal budget. Don't worry, it'll warm up in a few years. And then get cooler again. And then warmer again. Some call it a cycle.;)
Prove it. Since CO2 levels have been higher in the past, it stands to reason that sealife is already adapted to higher levels of dissolved CO2 in seawater. Experts on the subject see no damage being specifically caused by CO2 in seawater. This is not to say that there is no pressing need for action on what happens in the ocean - pollution and fishing practices (like dredging and drag nets) are causing uncountable damage.
I'm from Saskatchewan, Canada, and there is no way we would believe the trucker's woes are caused by a drop in CD and DVD sales. We all know it's the atheists, causing a decreased demand for bibles. Simple when you think about it.
Except, how do you know it's a steaming turd of a movie? I don't know if it's bad or good. If I listened to everyone who hated a movie for one reason or another, I'd have missed out on some of my favorite movies, ever. But to dismiss a movie based on nothing more than opinion, or what you thought of the trailer, or whatever silly prejudice you want to foster, well, that's just not rational.
Maybe it's the greatest graphic novel of all time (I found it a bit self-indulgent and repetitive at times) but dude, it's only a graphic novel. Just like this is only a movie.
Note to Alan Moore: get over yourself already. You write comic books.
I guess you know more than the artist who drew the graphic novel, and has, you know, SEEN the movie:
Gibbons: I am feeling very optimistic about the film. I have been pleased with everything I have seen, and every successive thing I see makes me feel better. I've seen parts of it now three or four times, and I can still watch them again very happily. Like a graphic novel, there are depths of detail and meaning in film that give themselves up on a first viewing, and I am really looking forward to getting the director's cut of the DVD so I can go through it frame by frame. Which itself is a similar experience some have the first time they read Watchmen, and which the film is cruelly denying me! [Laughs]
http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/12/archaeologizing.html
I have a reasonably nice TV (720p Sony Bravia) and a PS3 as a blu-ray player. I have a nice little collection of blu-ray movies. I LOVE the increased fidelity of the image. It isn't just the resolution - it is the lack of compression artifacts, increased color depth (no banding), etc. that makes watching a blu-ray movie so much more satisfying and enjoyable than watching the same movie on DVD.
Watch Dark City on DVD and on Blu-Ray -- the difference is startling. I am at the point now where I am getting increasingly reluctant to watch a movie on DVD - the image is just so soft and filled with distracting image artifacts.
Now, I would buy more blu-ray movies, but here is the problem for me: There have not been any really GOOD movies coming out this whole summer. What a long dry spell for the home movie enthusiast. Just about every new film released this summer has been awful dreck - insipid teen movies, bad comedies, crappy "paycheck" dramas, etc. I keep going every week, wanting to get a new movie, and I keep coming away empty handed because I just cannot bring myself to buy the junk that keeps getting released. The high point of this month is going to be "Iron Man". I bet the sales of that blu-ray release go through the roof.
The allowances for copying content for devices we own are rendered null and void for any content medium that contains anti-copying technology, no matter how ineffectual that protection is. This bill would make it illegal for Canadians to archive their DVD collections, put movies they own on their own computers or video devices, illegal to put music on their mp3 players, and more.
Since when is it the government's business to enforce the failed technological approaches to copy protection by industry? They failed with DVDs, they failed with CDs, and they have failed with the new Blu-Ray discs. So, instead of the onus being on them to either come up with a protection scheme that actually works, or to give up the illusion that there is an actual protection scheme that is unbreakable, they have turned to the government to make bypassing these pathetically weak locks illegal.
I own the computer and I own the media I have purchased, and the idea of someone hacking their own property is so completely absurd it beggars belief that anyone could have fashioned this legislation.
Surely with our neighbour to the south playing at becoming a facist police state, our economy under seige from unethical countries that employ prisoners as labour, war around the world, and impurities and diseases in our food supply, the government has better things to worry about than what we do with music and movies. Get some perspective.
I will not be voting Conservative in the next election, which I hope is very very soon.
The reason is that Canadian companies are required by law to adhere to the principles of the PIDPEDA act. Because of the Patriot Act in the US, and its provisions for examination of private data, by thanywhere, at any time, for reasons of national security, there is no way to guarantee the privacy of Canadian data stored on US servers. Therefore they cannot be used, QED.
How in the name of FSM did this get modded insightful? There is nothing wrong with iTunes or Quicktime. Quicktime is not greyware -- it does exactly what it is supposed to do, and costs nothing unless you need the pro features. It does not pop up ads on your machine. It does not report anything back to Apple. It "just works." iTunes is, while a bit bloated, a very capable, and free, media manager/viewer. Most Windows programs should wish to be as well programmed, and kept up to date, as these two fine pieces of software.
You have your facts wrong, a bit. Quicktime is part of OS X. You can't do without it. So you think you didn't install it (for whatever deluded reason) when you installed the OS, but thankfully, the install knew you needed it, and installed it anyway.
iTunes requires Quicktime to work -- you cannot have one without the other, so that is why you always end up with them as a pair. iTunes is free, so why not toss it in with the Quicktime installer?
My completely unsubstantiated guess is that this was a misconfiguration of the Apple Software Update - there was a Safari 3.1 update rolled out, and instead of just those who had it installed seeing it, everyone did. Probably a missed configuration option in there, somewhere.
As people who have to do lots of stuff on the web, why DON'T you have Safari installed? You do need to check your work in it, too, don't you?
Slashdot Mirror
My Playstation 3 was a "Metal Gear Solid 4" edition. The box has no mention of "OtherOS" capability, anywhere.
I've been administrating Macs since the days of the Mac II, and I don't recall any such thing. As long as you formatted the drive with Apple's tools, copied the files over, and then used a program like Norton Disk Doctor to "bless" the system folder, you were fine.
basic rules - don't smell like ass, be funny, and don't be a spaz.
Return of the Jedi has not come out on BluRay yet.
They are parasites in this way: Rather than them spend the time and money to upgrade the infrastructure they use that relies on "features" or "quirks" of IE6, they choose not to expend those resources. This just causes everyone else to spend that time and money to support their broken browser. The time and money spent by others to keep their websites usable by this trainwreck of a browser would have been better spent elsewhere. They are making others waste resources for their benefit. Pretty much the definition of a parasite.
Where I work, we spend 4-5 days developing the primary website. We have to avoid doing anything "fancy" or "efficient" with our coding, keeping it as plain jane as we can. Then we have to spend another day or so "fixing" the perfectly reasonable code, css, and graphics to work with IE 6. That's a couple of days we are not spending on the next site.
I have seriously been considering some kind of redirection (at worst) or some other kind of gentle reminder to encourage IE6 users to upgrade. Remember that if you are not using IE6 you are likely a few years behind on patching your windows system overall.
I am personally of the opinion that coddling IE6 users in this fashion gives them no incentive to upgrade - there is no pressure at all. This is holding the internet back, frankly, and at some point I'm going to just start redirecting IE6 users to an appropriate page where they can upgrade to IE7, IE8, or better yet, a standards compliant browser like Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or Opera. Stuff that was written to require ActiveX controls was broken to start with.
Eat a cracker with your water. Problem solved. Do people really believe this nonsense?
Know what's in your stomach? Seriously, think about what you are saying for 5 seconds.
While I generally regard using Wikipedia as a laughable "proof" in any sort of internet discussion, I find it doubly so in this case. The article cited has so many weasel words (may, could, should, might) that it becomes entirely devoid of informational content. If you are eating a properly nutritious diet, you will have zero need for any kind of dietary supplements, period. Dependence on the "nutritional" benefits of the minute amounts of calcium, magnesium, etc. in tap water borders on the delusional. Having said that, one adult sized vitamin capsule is going to have more of those trace minerals than 8 glasses of drinking water. As for the benefits of fluoride in the water, too much of it can also cause teeth to become brittle and prone to breakage. All good things in moderation. Considering where pure H20 ends up when ingested (mixed in with the contents of your stomach) tell me exactly how long it actually remains "pure" in the human body?
100% pure water will do no harm to you, whatsoever. Or your gut bacteria. I'm not sure how this meme got started, but it is not only wrong, but indicative of a confusion of ideas that makes me doubt the rationality of anyone who espouses it.
I can name several: Christmas, Boxing Day, Winter Break for university students, and New Years. Hence, "it's the holidays."
The Mann "hockey stick" graph has been thoroughly debunked. This is old news, and I'm surprised it even has to be mentioned again. It was based on a poor subset of data, on flawed assumptions as to how trees respond to temperature in their growth patterns, and the data was subject to flawed use of statistical methods. The hockey stick is totally off the table as proof of any unusual recent warming. What else have you got?
Why? Because the effect of CO2 in the atmosphere is already at saturation. Doesn't really matter how much you blacken the windows in a house - once they hit "black" you're not adding any more to the effect. Same with CO2 absorption and re-emission of specific infrared wavelengths - it's already at saturation, and adding any more CO2 will have no effect. What we have left is natural variation in the Earth's temperature budget - changes in incoming energy (solar irradiance, solar wind, effect on cosmic ray cloud nucleation, changes in Albedo) are showing up as a decrease in overall thermal budget. Don't worry, it'll warm up in a few years. And then get cooler again. And then warmer again. Some call it a cycle. ;)
Prove it. Since CO2 levels have been higher in the past, it stands to reason that sealife is already adapted to higher levels of dissolved CO2 in seawater. Experts on the subject see no damage being specifically caused by CO2 in seawater. This is not to say that there is no pressing need for action on what happens in the ocean - pollution and fishing practices (like dredging and drag nets) are causing uncountable damage.
I'm from Saskatchewan, Canada, and there is no way we would believe the trucker's woes are caused by a drop in CD and DVD sales. We all know it's the atheists, causing a decreased demand for bibles. Simple when you think about it.
Sheepshaver works just fine on Intel Macs for your crappy old OS 9 software. Runs just fine on PCs for that matter.
Except, how do you know it's a steaming turd of a movie? I don't know if it's bad or good. If I listened to everyone who hated a movie for one reason or another, I'd have missed out on some of my favorite movies, ever. But to dismiss a movie based on nothing more than opinion, or what you thought of the trailer, or whatever silly prejudice you want to foster, well, that's just not rational.
Maybe it's the greatest graphic novel of all time (I found it a bit self-indulgent and repetitive at times) but dude, it's only a graphic novel. Just like this is only a movie.
Note to Alan Moore: get over yourself already. You write comic books.
I guess you know more than the artist who drew the graphic novel, and has, you know, SEEN the movie:
Gibbons: I am feeling very optimistic about the film. I have been pleased with everything I have seen, and every successive thing I see makes me feel better. I've seen parts of it now three or four times, and I can still watch them again very happily. Like a graphic novel, there are depths of detail and meaning in film that give themselves up on a first viewing, and I am really looking forward to getting the director's cut of the DVD so I can go through it frame by frame. Which itself is a similar experience some have the first time they read Watchmen, and which the film is cruelly denying me! [Laughs]
http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/12/archaeologizing.html
I have a reasonably nice TV (720p Sony Bravia) and a PS3 as a blu-ray player. I have a nice little collection of blu-ray movies. I LOVE the increased fidelity of the image. It isn't just the resolution - it is the lack of compression artifacts, increased color depth (no banding), etc. that makes watching a blu-ray movie so much more satisfying and enjoyable than watching the same movie on DVD.
Watch Dark City on DVD and on Blu-Ray -- the difference is startling. I am at the point now where I am getting increasingly reluctant to watch a movie on DVD - the image is just so soft and filled with distracting image artifacts.
Now, I would buy more blu-ray movies, but here is the problem for me: There have not been any really GOOD movies coming out this whole summer. What a long dry spell for the home movie enthusiast. Just about every new film released this summer has been awful dreck - insipid teen movies, bad comedies, crappy "paycheck" dramas, etc. I keep going every week, wanting to get a new movie, and I keep coming away empty handed because I just cannot bring myself to buy the junk that keeps getting released. The high point of this month is going to be "Iron Man". I bet the sales of that blu-ray release go through the roof.
Thank you for your non-response to my concerns.
The allowances for copying content for devices we own are rendered null and void for any content medium that contains anti-copying technology, no matter how ineffectual that protection is. This bill would make it illegal for Canadians to archive their DVD collections, put movies they own on their own computers or video devices, illegal to put music on their mp3 players, and more.
Since when is it the government's business to enforce the failed technological approaches to copy protection by industry? They failed with DVDs, they failed with CDs, and they have failed with the new Blu-Ray discs. So, instead of the onus being on them to either come up with a protection scheme that actually works, or to give up the illusion that there is an actual protection scheme that is unbreakable, they have turned to the government to make bypassing these pathetically weak locks illegal.
I own the computer and I own the media I have purchased, and the idea of someone hacking their own property is so completely absurd it beggars belief that anyone could have fashioned this legislation.
Surely with our neighbour to the south playing at becoming a facist police state, our economy under seige from unethical countries that employ prisoners as labour, war around the world, and impurities and diseases in our food supply, the government has better things to worry about than what we do with music and movies. Get some perspective.
I will not be voting Conservative in the next election, which I hope is very very soon.
The reason is that Canadian companies are required by law to adhere to the principles of the PIDPEDA act. Because of the Patriot Act in the US, and its provisions for examination of private data, by thanywhere, at any time, for reasons of national security, there is no way to guarantee the privacy of Canadian data stored on US servers. Therefore they cannot be used, QED.
Amen brother. I've been waiting for an adaptation of At The Mountains of Madness for a long time.
How in the name of FSM did this get modded insightful? There is nothing wrong with iTunes or Quicktime. Quicktime is not greyware -- it does exactly what it is supposed to do, and costs nothing unless you need the pro features. It does not pop up ads on your machine. It does not report anything back to Apple. It "just works." iTunes is, while a bit bloated, a very capable, and free, media manager/viewer. Most Windows programs should wish to be as well programmed, and kept up to date, as these two fine pieces of software.
Yes, and also in Safari (Windows) as well. Weird.
Pass Acid 3? Is there a browser that can properly display the page you linked to? What is with all the "t"'s in reversed yellow boxes?
You have your facts wrong, a bit. Quicktime is part of OS X. You can't do without it. So you think you didn't install it (for whatever deluded reason) when you installed the OS, but thankfully, the install knew you needed it, and installed it anyway.
iTunes requires Quicktime to work -- you cannot have one without the other, so that is why you always end up with them as a pair. iTunes is free, so why not toss it in with the Quicktime installer?
My completely unsubstantiated guess is that this was a misconfiguration of the Apple Software Update - there was a Safari 3.1 update rolled out, and instead of just those who had it installed seeing it, everyone did. Probably a missed configuration option in there, somewhere.
As people who have to do lots of stuff on the web, why DON'T you have Safari installed? You do need to check your work in it, too, don't you?