I still don't agree with people calling something vaporware, just because they don't have the final product in their hands yet. *maybe* you're right and Sun doesn't release anything... I stand corrected then. But everything shows that they're actively developing this and having some difficulties releasing it at the said date. Then again, i remember a game called HalfLife 2 that was supposed to be released, but then wasn't (i'm not talking about the time period when the source got stolen). Everybody on/. loves HL. Nobody called it vaporware then. Or did you?
Why don't they have these services in one package?
I'll tell you why. They want to make more money off of this.
No way! Really? Wow, yeah you're right. Everything falls into place now. No wonder MS didn't bundle Office with their OS. It's all some devilish scheme to create profit!
It's not like Sun has actually released anything. That's because it IS VAPORWARE.
No. That's because it's not released yet. You didn't read the article, right? Or even the postings in the blog(s)?
So according to you everything that is announced to be released, but not released quickly enough, is vaporware.
Who needs to chill out? The people of Sun defending their product, or some kid yelling at a forum for the code to be released because he/she is getting impatient.
I don't think Microsoft will adopt it. Because if they do (in MS Office for example) it means they'll have to support it. Imagine MS giving support for an open source project that they don't even own.
OpenOffice is another matter though, and i don't see any reasons why they wouldn't want to support it. *especially* if MS decides not to;)
I didn't look at the screenshots. I do have the application running at home, so i can tell you that this client is a plugin. And according to my knowledge of plugins, it means it can be disabled.
Correct me if i'm wrong. I start to doubt as well now (not that it's bloated - only an (minimalistic) irc client doesn't make an app bloated) wether or not it can be removed/disabled.
I do. And i strongly advise them *not* to use Linux, for just this reason:)
I always say "how good are you with using MS-DOS?". If the answer is anything like "What's DOS?" or "Not really", i tell them to stick to windows. Saves both them and me a lot of frustration.
I don't quite agree with you on the java issue. I mean, jre from sun/java.com comes as an installer that only requires you to./run-it and follow instructions. True about the distro's and licensing. That's why Gentoo prompted me with an url where i should download it (manually). Even for newbies this should be doable.
A lot of the "problems" the United States has the Netherlands shares, like immigration (the Turkish, etc.).
Sorry, but what problems are you referring to? I live in the Netherlands and i'm not aware of problems with immigration related to Turkish people in specific.
Why would anyone want to run Linux on top of windows
I've installed VMWare (workstation) on my pc at home. I booted a virtual linux pc, created a ramdisk image i needed, booted another linux pc and i used that image. All without rebooting the 'host' computer./me hugs vmware. Oh yeah, the host OS was windows. I was able to do my work without having the trouble of rebooting, installing , etc. So in this case (and i suspect many others) it was damn handy to have linux running on top of windows.
I don't agree with what you say. I think your arguments are flawed:
* It was late - it's MS. are you surprised? is this a valid reason not to upgrade? * Lots of apps don't work with XP SP2, including some of Microsoft's own - not out-of-the-box no. but after disabling/modifying the build-in firewall they will * It's been known to be unstable - a MS product that's unstable? no way!! I can only say that my pc doesn't crash more now that i've installed SP2. * Difficult to install - maybe if you have parkinson disease. i could easily click on the setup file/link after which it installed.. magically! * Additions like the firewall have serious shortcomings - so disable it and buy a real firewall (hw/sw). You didn't have a firewall before SP2, so not upgrading because the new firewall doesn't work perfectly is, again, a bogus reason. * It messes with settings and permissions - didn't encounter those, but could be, yes. But now you know which settings they are, you could easily change them (back), right? * Is still vulnerable anyway in many ways, and it can take weeks or months to force a repair or even admission. - true about vulnerability. Did you really expect that *all* vulnerabilities were fixed? My, but you're optimistic:) * Doesn't fix or remove MSIE - lol. a MS SP that removes IE? Oh, and the fix is a seperate patch/hotfix. * Has DRM features that let spammers 0wn the machine - don't know about that, but i'm sure a good configured firewall takes care of this.
This post might seem like i'm heavily defending MS. I'm not. I just can't stand it when people claim something isn't working without bothering to check for themselves, or giving bogus arguments.
Not upgrading to SP2 because it doesn't 'fix' or remove IE is a terrible argument IMO. But hey, that's just me. And i'm not forcing anyone to upgrade. I'm just saying that most of your arguments aren't valid reasons not to upgrade though.
We have disconnected your computer from our network because we have reason to believe your computer is infected with a virus, causing serious network problems.
Please scan your computer for virusses by going to the following website address....
You're right, i don't. But isn't it better to deal with this internally than to use a shared blacklist? If one person can't manage it, hire more people.
Not. If users complain to me saying their email bounced because on of our IP's is blacklisted by then i tell them exactly this: "Complain with the provider that's hosting the email server and makes use of this list.". Seriously. Contacting some obscure company that's probably run by a geek in his mom's basement is definately not worth the time.
These companies think they're helping the internet, but in fact they're making it worse. Why on earth would any sysadmin make use of a list to block emails, when this list is not even being maintained by him/her???
My opinion: if you have to depend on somebody else to compile a blacklist for you, you are lazy and shouldn't be running a mailserver in the first place.
and if you don't want them to give away password information, don't give them any
Sorry, but that isn't a good solution. In certain cases users have to have a password. We have to teach the users the consequences of giving away their password, and teach them some responsibility. What i always say is: If you give your password to somebody and that somebody uses it for less-than-legal purposes, it will be *your* responsibility. No excuses, no investigation and no second chances. Want to be safe? Don't give away your password, period.
I remember when i worked at a university, there was some intern (sent out by the IT guys) going by every department, asking people to give up their passwords. This was because of some inventory/migration/bullshit-excuse. I kid you not. I refused to give my password to anyone, saying that if i had to give it up to anyone other than the login screen, it was worthless. What was weird about it, was that apparently i was one of the few who refused to give it. Most people had no problem handing over their 'secret' and 'highly personal' data, just because somebody asked for it...
I mean, the thought of a next of kin selling something they don't want to maintain is just horrible
Not to sound very impolite, but: who cares? I mean, you're dead, so obviously you don't care anymore. So what if people sell what you owned in your life? If selling it makes them happy, then by all means let them be happy. Yes, for whatever reason. It's only material stuff anyways. Nothing you can take with you.
And have you ever thought about the fact that your relatives might not even want to live in your house, because it's too emotional for them? I know that from personal experience. If your relatives think like we did, they'll sell the house very quickly.
The suit, which seeks class-action status, asks for restitution, damages and other compensation.
Damages? I can understand the part about restitution, maybe giving new cartridges. And the compensation could probably include the travel expenses. But damages? I know this is the US where you can sue anyone for anything (or so it seems - i'm obviously not a US citizen), but this seems pretty ridiculous.
Slashdot Mirror
lol
... I stand corrected then. But everything shows that they're actively developing this and having some difficulties releasing it at the said date. Then again, i remember a game called HalfLife 2 that was supposed to be released, but then wasn't (i'm not talking about the time period when the source got stolen). Everybody on /. loves HL. Nobody called it vaporware then. Or did you?
I still don't agree with people calling something vaporware, just because they don't have the final product in their hands yet. *maybe* you're right and Sun doesn't release anything
Why don't they have these services in one package?
I'll tell you why. They want to make more money off of this.
No way! Really? Wow, yeah you're right. Everything falls into place now. No wonder MS didn't bundle Office with their OS. It's all some devilish scheme to create profit!
It's not like Sun has actually released anything. That's because it IS VAPORWARE.
...
No. That's because it's not released yet. You didn't read the article, right? Or even the postings in the blog(s)?
So according to you everything that is announced to be released, but not released quickly enough, is vaporware.
Who needs to chill out? The people of Sun defending their product, or some kid yelling at a forum for the code to be released because he/she is getting impatient.
*sigh* indeed
I don't think Microsoft will adopt it. Because if they do (in MS Office for example) it means they'll have to support it. Imagine MS giving support for an open source project that they don't even own.
;)
OpenOffice is another matter though, and i don't see any reasons why they wouldn't want to support it. *especially* if MS decides not to
I didn't look at the screenshots. I do have the application running at home, so i can tell you that this client is a plugin. And according to my knowledge of plugins, it means it can be disabled.
Correct me if i'm wrong. I start to doubt as well now (not that it's bloated - only an (minimalistic) irc client doesn't make an app bloated) wether or not it can be removed/disabled.
I do. And i strongly advise them *not* to use Linux, for just this reason :)
I always say "how good are you with using MS-DOS?". If the answer is anything like "What's DOS?" or "Not really", i tell them to stick to windows. Saves both them and me a lot of frustration.
I don't quite agree with you on the java issue. I mean, jre from sun/java.com comes as an installer that only requires you to ./run-it and follow instructions. True about the distro's and licensing. That's why Gentoo prompted me with an url where i should download it (manually). Even for newbies this should be doable.
We do need a python version though..
No we don't. This (java) version works perfectly already. Why does this _need_ to be ported?
i turned off the option 'block spam'. I have nice filters that *i* control. Not somebody else deciding for me what i will or won't see.
A lot of the "problems" the United States has the Netherlands shares, like immigration (the Turkish, etc.).
Sorry, but what problems are you referring to? I live in the Netherlands and i'm not aware of problems with immigration related to Turkish people in specific.
A quick look at http://filext.com shows that these are indeed the files in question: "Nikon Digital SLR Cameras Raw Graphic File Format".
Why would anyone want to run Linux on top of windows
/me hugs vmware. Oh yeah, the host OS was windows. I was able to do my work without having the trouble of rebooting, installing , etc. So in this case (and i suspect many others) it was damn handy to have linux running on top of windows.
I've installed VMWare (workstation) on my pc at home. I booted a virtual linux pc, created a ramdisk image i needed, booted another linux pc and i used that image. All without rebooting the 'host' computer.
I don't agree with what you say. I think your arguments are flawed:
.. magically! :)
* It was late
- it's MS. are you surprised? is this a valid reason not to upgrade?
* Lots of apps don't work with XP SP2, including some of Microsoft's own
- not out-of-the-box no. but after disabling/modifying the build-in firewall they will
* It's been known to be unstable
- a MS product that's unstable? no way!! I can only say that my pc doesn't crash more now that i've installed SP2.
* Difficult to install
- maybe if you have parkinson disease. i could easily click on the setup file/link after which it installed
* Additions like the firewall have serious shortcomings
- so disable it and buy a real firewall (hw/sw). You didn't have a firewall before SP2, so not upgrading because the new firewall doesn't work perfectly is, again, a bogus reason.
* It messes with settings and permissions
- didn't encounter those, but could be, yes. But now you know which settings they are, you could easily change them (back), right?
* Is still vulnerable anyway in many ways, and it can take weeks or months to force a repair or even admission.
- true about vulnerability. Did you really expect that *all* vulnerabilities were fixed? My, but you're optimistic
* Doesn't fix or remove MSIE
- lol. a MS SP that removes IE? Oh, and the fix is a seperate patch/hotfix.
* Has DRM features that let spammers 0wn the machine
- don't know about that, but i'm sure a good configured firewall takes care of this.
This post might seem like i'm heavily defending MS. I'm not. I just can't stand it when people claim something isn't working without bothering to check for themselves, or giving bogus arguments.
Not upgrading to SP2 because it doesn't 'fix' or remove IE is a terrible argument IMO. But hey, that's just me. And i'm not forcing anyone to upgrade. I'm just saying that most of your arguments aren't valid reasons not to upgrade though.
We have disconnected your computer from our network because we have reason to believe your computer is infected with a virus, causing serious network problems.
Please scan your computer for virusses by going to the following website address....
Thanks for explaining me this. I didn't know there was so much involved (time/people/resources).
You're right, i don't. But isn't it better to deal with this internally than to use a shared blacklist? If one person can't manage it, hire more people.
Not. If users complain to me saying their email bounced because on of our IP's is blacklisted by then i tell them exactly this: "Complain with the provider that's hosting the email server and makes use of this list.". Seriously. Contacting some obscure company that's probably run by a geek in his mom's basement is definately not worth the time.
These companies think they're helping the internet, but in fact they're making it worse. Why on earth would any sysadmin make use of a list to block emails, when this list is not even being maintained by him/her???
My opinion: if you have to depend on somebody else to compile a blacklist for you, you are lazy and shouldn't be running a mailserver in the first place.
And you'll risk that Mitnick comes and exposes you :(
i like linux on a mac. especially gentoo on an iMac. Macs are cool. Easy to fix too :D
because they get paid (more) ?
and if you don't want them to give away password information, don't give them any
Sorry, but that isn't a good solution. In certain cases users have to have a password. We have to teach the users the consequences of giving away their password, and teach them some responsibility. What i always say is: If you give your password to somebody and that somebody uses it for less-than-legal purposes, it will be *your* responsibility. No excuses, no investigation and no second chances. Want to be safe? Don't give away your password, period.
I remember when i worked at a university, there was some intern (sent out by the IT guys) going by every department, asking people to give up their passwords. This was because of some inventory/migration/bullshit-excuse. I kid you not. I refused to give my password to anyone, saying that if i had to give it up to anyone other than the login screen, it was worthless. What was weird about it, was that apparently i was one of the few who refused to give it. Most people had no problem handing over their 'secret' and 'highly personal' data, just because somebody asked for it...
you can also use NetTransport to save streaming media.
I mean, the thought of a next of kin selling something they don't want to maintain is just horrible
Not to sound very impolite, but: who cares? I mean, you're dead, so obviously you don't care anymore. So what if people sell what you owned in your life? If selling it makes them happy, then by all means let them be happy. Yes, for whatever reason. It's only material stuff anyways. Nothing you can take with you.
And have you ever thought about the fact that your relatives might not even want to live in your house, because it's too emotional for them? I know that from personal experience. If your relatives think like we did, they'll sell the house very quickly.
The suit, which seeks class-action status, asks for restitution, damages and other compensation.
Damages? I can understand the part about restitution, maybe giving new cartridges. And the compensation could probably include the travel expenses. But damages? I know this is the US where you can sue anyone for anything (or so it seems - i'm obviously not a US citizen), but this seems pretty ridiculous.