Bad comma placement and sentence wording on my part. I wrote, So why do you support a Republican bill that stifles competition, in favor of giving ISPs more control over the content they deliver?
What I meant to convey was to ask why one favors stifling competition instead of being in favor of neutral access.
Right now we need better standards and more competition.
Yes, we do need more competition. So why do you support a Republican bill that stifles competition, in favor of giving ISPs more control over the content they deliver?
The article talks only about the number of programmers using embedded Linux. It fails to mention the percentage of shipped devices that use embedded Linux. It could be that the embedded world is more specialized, requiring more specialized function from an OS. The devices that can use a more general purpose OS (DVRs, webcams, ADSL routers, etc.) don't need many programmers, but ship a lot of units.
While Microsoft and Intel are looking to the project as little more than a means to increase their bottom line, Mr. Negroponte is steadfast to his vision of the education and benefit of children.
OpenBSD project. The Mozilla Foundation made a $10K donation to the OpenBSD project in support of development of OpenBSD, OpenSSH, and related activities. The OpenBSD project does great work in the area of creating a secure Unix-like operating system (which runs Firefox, of course) and developing related security technologies. In particular the Mozilla project uses SSH extensively for various purposes, including securing connections to the Mozilla CVS repository. The OpenBSD and OpenSSH projects have been experiencing some financial difficulties, and based on their importance to the Mozilla project and to the wider open source and free software world we felt that it was well worth showing our support for them.
A few years ago, a 500K file was routine and we were able to e-mail those. Now 500 MB files are pretty routine. My computer can handle it, the network can handle it, my memory stick (used to be floppies) can handle it. Why shouldn't my e-mail handle it too?
The email infrastructure can handle it. The problem with the large emails is that the users never clean them out of their inboxes, even though they've saved the attached file to their local drive.
Users seem to understand the fact that their disk drives get full, but do not seem to be able to understand the concept of the email server's disk drive getting full. That's the hurdle that needs to be crossed.
I like how Nature dodged the issue regarding the ethanol review. Notice how they did not say they added non-Britannica materials to the items being reviewed, Nature only said that the paragraphs cited by the reviewer were sourced from Britannica. This side-stepping of the actual issue raised by Britannica raises more concerns that it resolves.
Why was Nature mixing Britannica and non-Britannica materials together for the reviewer? Was the intent to place the Britannica materials in a certain, and erroneous, context so that the reviewers would be led to an incorrect interpretation?
The more that surfaces about Nature's tactics (and possibly strategy) here, the more suspicious Nature's intentions look.
Was there any coverage here on/. of Britannica's rebuttal a week or so ago? I must have missed it.
The theaters are threatened because a lot of people DO prefer watching movies at home, and they're losing their major advantage. If they don't like it, they should try to make their experience better, not bitch and moan about quick DVD releases.
The movie (and media) industry will do all it can to attribute all the evils they face to piracy, whether or not piracy has anything to do with the problem. The more the movie (and media) industry drills the word "piracy" into the general public's perception, the easier it will be for the movie (and media) industry to force Draconian DRM control (not piracy-protection, but control) measures onto the unsuspecting public.
Well now I get a sense of where the inability to know the market comes from. Get a clue Ballmer -- to best compete with your competition you get to know them intimately.
That will never work. Microsoft has been telling its customers what they want to buy for so long, Gates and Ballmer have forgotten how to listen.
Last I checked, you couldn't even get it to play the same audio on the computer and the Express at the same time - one or the other.
Check again. I can play the same audio on the computer and also on my stereo that the Airport Express feeds. There is an option on the menu to play the tunes on "Multiple Speakers". When you select it, you are presented with check boxes for each of your audio destinations. Simply check the places where you want to hear the tunes, and enjoy.
The article is little more than a plant to help Microsoft in its anti-trust troubles. When you see phrases like this,
And a crucial reason Microsoft holds more than 90 percent of the PC operating system market is that the company strains to make sure software and hardware that ran on previous versions of Windows will also work on the new one — compatibility, in computing terms.
it is a dead giveaway that the Microsoft spinmeisters are swarming around the reporters. Microsoft got and held the 90 percent marketshare through illegal business practices. Read the court documents for details.
What is illegal about having a monopoly? There is no law (in the US) against having a monopoly. The illegality begins with what you do with the monopoly, not having it.
Bundling in and of itself is not a bad thing. Having a monopoly in and of itself is legal. However, when you use your monopoly to gain leverage from bundled products in order to eliminate competition, that is a bad thing; and that is what Microsoft has been found guilty of doing.
It was one design decision: backwards compatibility.
"Integrating" applications into a monolithic operating system does not help at all. It may have helped Microsoft to win the browser battles, but it is causing Microsoft to lose the ability to keep Windows as an ongoing OS.
Sensor management means that you can never be completely away from your cellphone.
Sensor management means that you will be aware of problems as they are in the nascent stages of development, before they become a crisis. It provides you the time needed to research and repair, instead of the panicked "fix it now!" when systems stop working.
No joke. The spaghetti code and "make the ship date, even if it's vulnerable" approach has finally come home to roost.
It came home to roost a long time ago -- Microsoft's customers have been suffering from the poor code quality for years and years.
It's a sad state of affairs in Redmond if it took this long before Microsoft recognized and did something about the problem. A very sad state of affair in Redmond.
As a Software Engineer, I also know that you cannot architect quality software after the software has been written. So I see at least another four or five years before this latest "quality initiative" of Microsoft's has any real architectural benefit. Probably longer.
Microsoft has apparently done a major re-engineering of their entire software production process, with a "fix it *before* we run the test" and an actual "regression test the whole shmear" process.
You're joking, right? How long has Microsoft been developing operating systems and other critical software? You're saying that Microsoft only now is starting to move from developer chaos to a software process? That is one of the funniest things I've heard on/. in a long, long time.
If it is even remotely true, it no longer is funny, but downright scary; especially when I read about military operations being run by an OS that has not been properly tested in the past.
Slashdot Mirror
Bad comma placement and sentence wording on my part. I wrote, So why do you support a Republican bill that stifles competition, in favor of giving ISPs more control over the content they deliver? What I meant to convey was to ask why one favors stifling competition instead of being in favor of neutral access.
Yes, we do need more competition. So why do you support a Republican bill that stifles competition, in favor of giving ISPs more control over the content they deliver?
The article talks only about the number of programmers using embedded Linux. It fails to mention the percentage of shipped devices that use embedded Linux. It could be that the embedded world is more specialized, requiring more specialized function from an OS. The devices that can use a more general purpose OS (DVRs, webcams, ADSL routers, etc.) don't need many programmers, but ship a lot of units.
While Microsoft and Intel are looking to the project as little more than a means to increase their bottom line, Mr. Negroponte is steadfast to his vision of the education and benefit of children.
Yup. FreeBSD is the free (as in beer) version. NetBSD is the distributed version. Welcome to /.
OpenBSD project. The Mozilla Foundation made a $10K donation to the OpenBSD project in support of development of OpenBSD, OpenSSH, and related activities. The OpenBSD project does great work in the area of creating a secure Unix-like operating system (which runs Firefox, of course) and developing related security technologies. In particular the Mozilla project uses SSH extensively for various purposes, including securing connections to the Mozilla CVS repository. The OpenBSD and OpenSSH projects have been experiencing some financial difficulties, and based on their importance to the Mozilla project and to the wider open source and free software world we felt that it was well worth showing our support for them.
Remove attachment works the same in Outlook 2002 (XP).
The email infrastructure can handle it. The problem with the large emails is that the users never clean them out of their inboxes, even though they've saved the attached file to their local drive.
Users seem to understand the fact that their disk drives get full, but do not seem to be able to understand the concept of the email server's disk drive getting full. That's the hurdle that needs to be crossed.
Noting like burying the opposing viewpoints. :)
Thanks for validating what I've said.
I submitted that story also, and it was rejected as well.
It seems that those who are so in favor of WikiPedia are also in favor of suppressing any articles here that say anything but WikiPedia is wonderful.
That alone should cast a long shadow of concern upon WikiPedia and its supporters.
Why was Nature mixing Britannica and non-Britannica materials together for the reviewer? Was the intent to place the Britannica materials in a certain, and erroneous, context so that the reviewers would be led to an incorrect interpretation?
The more that surfaces about Nature's tactics (and possibly strategy) here, the more suspicious Nature's intentions look.
Was there any coverage here on /. of Britannica's rebuttal a week or so ago? I must have missed it.
Is this really such a slow news day that this is news?
So I guess all those downloads where I routinely get 700kBytes/sec throughput on Comcast's service are a figment of my imagination?
The movie (and media) industry will do all it can to attribute all the evils they face to piracy, whether or not piracy has anything to do with the problem. The more the movie (and media) industry drills the word "piracy" into the general public's perception, the easier it will be for the movie (and media) industry to force Draconian DRM control (not piracy-protection, but control) measures onto the unsuspecting public.
That will never work. Microsoft has been telling its customers what they want to buy for so long, Gates and Ballmer have forgotten how to listen.
Check again. I can play the same audio on the computer and also on my stereo that the Airport Express feeds. There is an option on the menu to play the tunes on "Multiple Speakers". When you select it, you are presented with check boxes for each of your audio destinations. Simply check the places where you want to hear the tunes, and enjoy.
Of course, Microsoft and other vendors always get their patches correct the first time.
Doesn't Apple's Airport Express do this already for audio, with video capability soon to be released?
What is illegal about having a monopoly? There is no law (in the US) against having a monopoly. The illegality begins with what you do with the monopoly, not having it.
Bundling in and of itself is not a bad thing. Having a monopoly in and of itself is legal. However, when you use your monopoly to gain leverage from bundled products in order to eliminate competition, that is a bad thing; and that is what Microsoft has been found guilty of doing.
"Integrating" applications into a monolithic operating system does not help at all. It may have helped Microsoft to win the browser battles, but it is causing Microsoft to lose the ability to keep Windows as an ongoing OS.
Sensor management means that you will be aware of problems as they are in the nascent stages of development, before they become a crisis. It provides you the time needed to research and repair, instead of the panicked "fix it now!" when systems stop working.
It came home to roost a long time ago -- Microsoft's customers have been suffering from the poor code quality for years and years.
It's a sad state of affairs in Redmond if it took this long before Microsoft recognized and did something about the problem. A very sad state of affair in Redmond.
As a Software Engineer, I also know that you cannot architect quality software after the software has been written. So I see at least another four or five years before this latest "quality initiative" of Microsoft's has any real architectural benefit. Probably longer.
You're joking, right? How long has Microsoft been developing operating systems and other critical software? You're saying that Microsoft only now is starting to move from developer chaos to a software process? That is one of the funniest things I've heard on /. in a long, long time.
If it is even remotely true, it no longer is funny, but downright scary; especially when I read about military operations being run by an OS that has not been properly tested in the past.