You mean Google doing web search, A9 using Google's web and image search results to enhance (their word) the results, now Google doing search which you/they/whatever say it's a copy of A9's. Now, stop that, I'm spinning. From the beginning A9 was a results ripoff with it's own interface. If they have something really worth using, that should do us (users) just good and fine, a little competitiveness can never hurt (if you leave MS out of it, that is:P ).
They can cluster Backstreet Boys and Britney Spears all they want. Just please, pretty please, don't kill any newborn Pink Floyds or Deep Purples with some junky software. This would make me fold little paper boats from my IT degree, that's for sure.
It says If a package you want klik to install depends on a package in this base system it will not be included in the cmg so you must have it installed or add it to the cmg by hand afterwards.
Somebody mentioned earlier this is like apt with web access. Well, reading that, it's more like brain-extracted rpm with web access. You want it, take it.
[...]is developing ingenious new technology that allow[...]
Sorry, please somebody explain me what is so ingeniously novel in this technology. In the digital image compression, pattern recognition and indexing research area answering example-based queries on an image or video database is anything but novel. And that includes color-, histogram-, texture-, object-, depth-, even motion-based indexing and query/retrieval (no secrets here, many conferences every year).
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against commercial (or else) implementations of decades-old research resutls. Just don't call them ingenious and new please.
Despite the frequent publicity around Microsoft's or Amazon's frivolous patents, these two companies are not even on the list.
It's not the quantity that matters, it's quality and topic. I mean, I don't suppose anyone minds when some company developes something useful and patents the stuff. I suppose the most of the granted patents are hardware-related, which -if it's so - I can highly appreciate and have nothing against. The reason so many people complain regarding MS-related (or Amazon, and the like) submitted and/or granted patents are the sometimes even ridiculous nature of what they seem to want to patent (just rememeber "ifnot" and the like).
Eh, but most of you already know all this so you know, I just felt that I have to drop my 2c.
You know what ? The breakthrough in JPEG compression was mainly JPEG-2000.
There had been, was, and has been possible to achieve better compression ratios, and guess what, even in the high times of JPEG we knew that what's inside, it's not the optimal solution. But there were certain aspects which made it stay the way it was, and that was good to be so. The same goes with JPEG-2000. Since the appearance of it there have been many attempts to make it better, and there have been some good results achieved (even I have read and sometimes even reviewed papers dealing with the subject).
It's really no question whether one can make an X% better compression to JPEG with the same quality (expecially today, when JPEG is so old that every joe and his dog had time to develop better ways). The question is, has it enough practical usability to justify its presence ? Is there a well-justified reason why we should use it ? Does it deliver
- better compression rates (smaller size with the same objective & subjective quality) ?
- lower compression times ?
- compatibility ?
- is it any better for hardware implementation purposes (same or lower computation times) ?
If it's just a "better" compression for the compression's own sake and not for our sakes, then this is even less news than me cleaning my room.
I don't know, please tell me, is there any reasonable justification for posting direct links to a joe sixpack's web server (be it a frying pan, a flying saucer, a lawn mower or else) ?
Slashdot-ing my a$$, let's call this Slashdot/DoS.
Via has been offering very - if not the most - stable chipset drivers for Linux for ages. There were many occasions in the past when I specifically chose via chipset brand boards with amd cpus because good experience in the past with Linux. And I never had any bad experience. That doesn't mean I don't have and/or use other chipsets/boards/cpus with Linux on them, I do - but mostly @ work. It's just I never see much sane reason in arguing like I-went-intel-because-of-better-linux-drivers.
/* I'm going to be foftopic again, nevermind.*/ I don't know, tell me, am I alone in feeling there were just one too many Knoppix-rescue articles on/. over the last months ? For God's sake, we really don't have anything else to talk about ?
I'm sure many hundreds of./ users could come up with dozens of ways to rescue data with or without Knoppix, and most of us have some kind of rescue CD's. Do we really need Y.A.K.A. (Yet Another Knoppix Article) ?
Questions, questions. Patching doesn't bring money fast you know, like buying up an antispyware company, giving away their/our software then charge for the updates.
Microsoft brains doesn't work like our humble ones. We seek logic, practicality, usability, security, they seek revenue. These don't always overlap.
Also, please keep in mind that Firefox has had more high/critical security vulnerabilties in the last year than IE has
Uhmm, without checking, just remember that most of the holes IE has are years old. Who cares whether Firefox had more bugs in a time period, if those get damn quickly corrected, and btw most of last years' FFox holes are only pre-1.0.
And one more thing: the dogs ass, maybe that's not the worst place one can be:) At least FFox users are out of that ass, while those with IE... well use your imagination:D:P
Yes, many news sources tell something like this will be going to happen in the future [i.e. charge for updates, good ol' MS way]. Which is really funny, you know, it's like: We suck at security, so you pay us to give you some third party app to help you stay sane while we sill don't give you a safer app/os.
Well, you shall by now know, that this "new" tool wasn't developed by Microsoft in any imaginable way. Hell, if you look close enough you can even find Giant written all over the place after installing.
However, Giant's stuff works ok, that's good. The problem mainly is, that you don't solve a problem by dropping blankets on the stuff sdo you don't see it. If you know the houses you're building keep burning down by themselves every now and then, the solution is not to give away free fire extinguishers. Just build damn good houses.
And what would be wrong with that one ?:) There are many many of us who know both (be that algo or adders wiring). Thing is, you have to keep a clear head and recognize the situations where you are ok to use 1). your implementations 2). libraries like stl. On time pressure, libraries can save your a$$, that's for sure:) Otherwise, always consider all your options.
I have a bit offtopic but still amusing (in a peculiar way:)) story regarding library use. It happened on an interview for a coder's job. I had to complete some test before anything else. I had a pretty good score, then in one of the verbal interviews a coder guy asked me what I knew about STL. Well, I told him all about STL, then I said I don't really use it (which was quite true). He looked a bit shocked to say the least:) when I explained I trust my code better:) when I have the time for it. Well, times have changed since then - not regarding my trust in my code:) - (btw, the job was offered, but I declined because of another) and I use everything that can save me time these days.
I find it sad though that most greenhorn coders think the word "optimization" is just an archaism associated with commodores and z80's, with hacking and scene quarters.
I mean please let us give -10 "junk" "yesterday's news" "no sane human being interested" "FUD" "poster is an analphabet [i.e. can't read the news, just post]" whatever.
First, most of said "bugs" were fixed the day before last blue moon. Second, there are "bugs" mentioned which are the fault of 1). windows 2). user (which means they can't freaking configure the darn Thunderbird to store the mails where they know it's most safe). This last one is as saying an applciation is faulty and buggy because it has a default store directory option which it uses if nothing else is specified. Come on. Whatever. To the malformed URL "bug": you can do that on every and each browser, huw is that a sw bug. Get lost.
Get a life, post news. Junk we have a'plenty already.
/* Note: this is going to be off topic, so I don't mind if it gets modded that way */
I read the damn thing at least 3 times... not that I didn't understand for first (I know about it all over, and the linked stuff) but for the plain reason that I just couldn't believe my eyes someone could put together a paragraph which sounds so totally out of language non-human gibberish all over. My head just hurts. Indeed.
Gee, so that's why my friends in the CFD group have been running flow solving codes using MPI and Windows 2000 machines!
So the ability of using a message handling library for parallel programming does indeed make Windows the tool for parallel computing. Now that's the point where I usually wake up laughing my a** off.
And that shall be carved on their gravestone (and Seattle Computer Products also should be notified, just so they know).
What I would like to see happen is to virtually equal out the financial situation of MS to the level of FOSS developers, and see how they could perform that way. For the ignorant masses out there, it would be a huge lesson to see how MS could perform without the trackloads of cash they posess, unable to spend on brainwashing marketing, FUD campaigns, and senseless discussions like this one.
Old games were just great. You didn't need almost photorealistic quality to imagine your in-game enemies, or to be excited during gameplay. Graphics were simple, control was fairly easy, and still, you could just forget anything and dive into one of these games for hours long a day, for many days in a row.
I won't list titles here, many of you probably would know most or all of them anyways:) but come on, for me playing games like willow pattern for a few hours (I know, I know:) was just damn close to heaven.
Ehh, you just all know this, so why am I even telling all this ? Because it makes me feel very positively nostalgic, and I like that:)
Ok, just one example for counter-examples: my little sister was really little, when she ever could've seen me fool around with my C64. But she later remembered how Flimbo's Quest looked like and it happened just 1-2 years ago (she was/is a teenager now) on some weekend afternoon when she asked whether I still had my old computer somewhere. Of course I had, and she played about 2 hours long of Flimbo's Quest:)
After she finished playing I couldn't help but play the darn thing all night long !:] And it was FUN, all with capitals.
I played Doom 3 during an afternoon, and I felt no desire to play it again after that. It was nice to be able to see what Carmack has put together again, but that's it, just another braindead slashing, never felt excited about it longer than a few minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean Google doing web search, A9 using Google's web and image search results to enhance (their word) the results, now Google doing search which you/they/whatever say it's a copy of A9's. Now, stop that, I'm spinning. From the beginning A9 was a results ripoff with it's own interface. If they have something really worth using, that should do us (users) just good and fine, a little competitiveness can never hurt (if you leave MS out of it, that is :P ).
Yes it does. I blocked it, installed it fine, then disabled automatic update checking and never tried to connect again.
They can cluster Backstreet Boys and Britney Spears all they want. Just please, pretty please, don't kill any newborn Pink Floyds or Deep Purples with some junky software. This would make me fold little paper boats from my IT degree, that's for sure.
Is it more remote or less remote than Gnome (just as an example) ? :)
Come on, this is a happy thread, don't search for shadows.
It says If a package you want klik to install depends on a package in this base system it will not be included in the cmg so you must have it installed or add it to the cmg by hand afterwards.
Somebody mentioned earlier this is like apt with web access. Well, reading that, it's more like brain-extracted rpm with web access. You want it, take it.
Is it me or do the k-folks have a totally kde-centric world-view?
Surely no Gnome-user would have a gnome-centric world-view ever.
[...]is developing ingenious new technology that allow[...]
Sorry, please somebody explain me what is so ingeniously novel in this technology. In the digital image compression, pattern recognition and indexing research area answering example-based queries on an image or video database is anything but novel. And that includes color-, histogram-, texture-, object-, depth-, even motion-based indexing and query/retrieval (no secrets here, many conferences every year).
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against commercial (or else) implementations of decades-old research resutls. Just don't call them ingenious and new please.
Despite the frequent publicity around Microsoft's or Amazon's frivolous patents, these two companies are not even on the list.
It's not the quantity that matters, it's quality and topic. I mean, I don't suppose anyone minds when some company developes something useful and patents the stuff. I suppose the most of the granted patents are hardware-related, which -if it's so - I can highly appreciate and have nothing against. The reason so many people complain regarding MS-related (or Amazon, and the like) submitted and/or granted patents are the sometimes even ridiculous nature of what they seem to want to patent (just rememeber "ifnot" and the like).
Eh, but most of you already know all this so you know, I just felt that I have to drop my 2c.
You know what ? The breakthrough in JPEG compression was mainly JPEG-2000.
There had been, was, and has been possible to achieve better compression ratios, and guess what, even in the high times of JPEG we knew that what's inside, it's not the optimal solution. But there were certain aspects which made it stay the way it was, and that was good to be so. The same goes with JPEG-2000. Since the appearance of it there have been many attempts to make it better, and there have been some good results achieved (even I have read and sometimes even reviewed papers dealing with the subject).
It's really no question whether one can make an X% better compression to JPEG with the same quality (expecially today, when JPEG is so old that every joe and his dog had time to develop better ways). The question is, has it enough practical usability to justify its presence ? Is there a well-justified reason why we should use it ? Does it deliver
- better compression rates (smaller size with the same objective & subjective quality) ?
- lower compression times ?
- compatibility ?
- is it any better for hardware implementation purposes (same or lower computation times) ?
If it's just a "better" compression for the compression's own sake and not for our sakes, then this is even less news than me cleaning my room.
I don't know, please tell me, is there any reasonable justification for posting direct links to a joe sixpack's web server (be it a frying pan, a flying saucer, a lawn mower or else) ?
Slashdot-ing my a$$, let's call this Slashdot/DoS.
Gee, now that's wierd :) maybe should've played Leisure S. Larry to exhaustion, then you both would've thought out more ... well, better ideas :)
Via has been offering very - if not the most - stable chipset drivers for Linux for ages. There were many occasions in the past when I specifically chose via chipset brand boards with amd cpus because good experience in the past with Linux. And I never had any bad experience. That doesn't mean I don't have and/or use other chipsets/boards/cpus with Linux on them, I do - but mostly @ work. It's just I never see much sane reason in arguing like I-went-intel-because-of-better-linux-drivers.
/* I'm going to be foftopic again, nevermind.*/ /. over the last months ? For God's sake, we really don't have anything else to talk about ?
./ users could come up with dozens of ways to rescue data with or without Knoppix, and most of us have some kind of rescue CD's. Do we really need Y.A.K.A. (Yet Another Knoppix Article) ?
I don't know, tell me, am I alone in feeling there were just one too many Knoppix-rescue articles on
I'm sure many hundreds of
[...]they leaved it unpatched? Why?[...]
Questions, questions. Patching doesn't bring money fast you know, like buying up an antispyware company, giving away their/our software then charge for the updates.
Microsoft brains doesn't work like our humble ones. We seek logic, practicality, usability, security, they seek revenue. These don't always overlap.
Also, please keep in mind that Firefox has had more high/critical security vulnerabilties in the last year than IE has
:) At least FFox users are out of that ass, while those with IE... well use your imagination :D :P
Uhmm, without checking, just remember that most of the holes IE has are years old. Who cares whether Firefox had more bugs in a time period, if those get damn quickly corrected, and btw most of last years' FFox holes are only pre-1.0.
And one more thing: the dogs ass, maybe that's not the worst place one can be
First the Windows anti-spyware outperforms ad-aware and spybot s&d now you're saying this thing looks like a stable OS?
:D
Maybe this is also made by Giant ?
Yes, many news sources tell something like this will be going to happen in the future [i.e. charge for updates, good ol' MS way]. Which is really funny, you know, it's like: We suck at security, so you pay us to give you some third party app to help you stay sane while we sill don't give you a safer app/os.
step MS has taken in order to help the common user avert infection by malicious developers
:) Medicine has evolved pretty much in the last couple of hundred years you know, so you can easily get pills for your delusions :)
conspiracy to degrade MS software
Good heavens
Well, the ignorance part is harder to cure, 'cause it's more up to you then doctors.
Well, you shall by now know, that this "new" tool wasn't developed by Microsoft in any imaginable way. Hell, if you look close enough you can even find Giant written all over the place after installing.
However, Giant's stuff works ok, that's good. The problem mainly is, that you don't solve a problem by dropping blankets on the stuff sdo you don't see it. If you know the houses you're building keep burning down by themselves every now and then, the solution is not to give away free fire extinguishers. Just build damn good houses.
And what would be wrong with that one ? :) There are many many of us who know both (be that algo or adders wiring). Thing is, you have to keep a clear head and recognize the situations where you are ok to use 1). your implementations 2). libraries like stl. On time pressure, libraries can save your a$$, that's for sure :) Otherwise, always consider all your options.
:)) story regarding library use. It happened on an interview for a coder's job. I had to complete some test before anything else. I had a pretty good score, then in one of the verbal interviews a coder guy asked me what I knew about STL. Well, I told him all about STL, then I said I don't really use it (which was quite true). He looked a bit shocked to say the least :) when I explained I trust my code better :) when I have the time for it. Well, times have changed since then - not regarding my trust in my code :) - (btw, the job was offered, but I declined because of another) and I use everything that can save me time these days.
I have a bit offtopic but still amusing (in a peculiar way
I find it sad though that most greenhorn coders think the word "optimization" is just an archaism associated with commodores and z80's, with hacking and scene quarters.
I mean please let us give -10 "junk" "yesterday's news" "no sane human being interested" "FUD" "poster is an analphabet [i.e. can't read the news, just post]" whatever.
First, most of said "bugs" were fixed the day before last blue moon. Second, there are "bugs" mentioned which are the fault of 1). windows 2). user (which means they can't freaking configure the darn Thunderbird to store the mails where they know it's most safe). This last one is as saying an applciation is faulty and buggy because it has a default store directory option which it uses if nothing else is specified. Come on. Whatever. To the malformed URL "bug": you can do that on every and each browser, huw is that a sw bug. Get lost.
Get a life, post news. Junk we have a'plenty already.
/* Note: this is going to be off topic, so I don't mind if it gets modded that way */ I read the damn thing at least 3 times... not that I didn't understand for first (I know about it all over, and the linked stuff) but for the plain reason that I just couldn't believe my eyes someone could put together a paragraph which sounds so totally out of language non-human gibberish all over. My head just hurts. Indeed.
Gee, so that's why my friends in the CFD group have been running flow solving codes using MPI and Windows 2000 machines!
So the ability of using a message handling library for parallel programming does indeed make Windows the tool for parallel computing. Now that's the point where I usually wake up laughing my a** off.
Microsoft leads in software innovation.
And that shall be carved on their gravestone (and Seattle Computer Products also should be notified, just so they know).
What I would like to see happen is to virtually equal out the financial situation of MS to the level of FOSS developers, and see how they could perform that way. For the ignorant masses out there, it would be a huge lesson to see how MS could perform without the trackloads of cash they posess, unable to spend on brainwashing marketing, FUD campaigns, and senseless discussions like this one.
Old games were just great. You didn't need almost photorealistic quality to imagine your in-game enemies, or to be excited during gameplay. Graphics were simple, control was fairly easy, and still, you could just forget anything and dive into one of these games for hours long a day, for many days in a row.
:) but come on, for me playing games like willow pattern for a few hours (I know, I know :) was just damn close to heaven.
:)
:)
:] And it was FUN, all with capitals.
I won't list titles here, many of you probably would know most or all of them anyways
Ehh, you just all know this, so why am I even telling all this ? Because it makes me feel very positively nostalgic, and I like that
Ok, just one example for counter-examples: my little sister was really little, when she ever could've seen me fool around with my C64. But she later remembered how Flimbo's Quest looked like and it happened just 1-2 years ago (she was/is a teenager now) on some weekend afternoon when she asked whether I still had my old computer somewhere. Of course I had, and she played about 2 hours long of Flimbo's Quest
After she finished playing I couldn't help but play the darn thing all night long !
I played Doom 3 during an afternoon, and I felt no desire to play it again after that. It was nice to be able to see what Carmack has put together again, but that's it, just another braindead slashing, never felt excited about it longer than a few minutes.