If it will 'just work' in the future, we would see some of the 'just working' in Windows XP.
But noo....
But sometime you need to scroll down a list, no... the other list. Yeah, that one. Select 'properties'-- what? No, right click on the icon, and select 'properties'. And then... no wait it's not here. Click 'cancel'. Ok, now click 'cancel' again. Now, hit the 'x' in the upper right hand corner of the screen.
Now go to "start: settings: Control Panel", click on "Users Accounts", click on "change account", click on your username. What? No, I don't know why they have a.NET password in here. Yeah, it has something to do with that "Windows Messenger" that keeps poping up in then system tray. Now click on 'Change my name", and then change your name.
Then you need to take extra care to avoid power surges in the holographic matrix, because then you'll be stuck with some piano-playing hologram who won't go away.
Then you'll have to make a moral decision: Endure the wisecracking hologram as a poorly-needed comedic relief, or shut off the power and kill the poor dude.
Well, the Linux kernel is a different development model. For years, Linus was the 'benevolent dictator'/gatekeeper, and would allow or deny code into the Kernel.
Gnome has a governing commitee, which decides on the direction of the project, and which packages should be allowed or denied. Havok is one of the main developers, but he is not the soul gatekeeper.
I would also argue that Gnome is a much messier project then the Kernel. Does 'Gnome' include OpenOffice or not? Is every Gnome app coded in the same style of C?
Consider it akin to the old 2. numbering in the linux kernel.
If one of the lead kernel developers took the Linux Kernel, and created a new project called 'Linux 2.8', that wouldn't necessarily mean that the new project is 'Linux 2.8'.
There needs to be more then a single developer involved in the decision.
Just because Havoc says something doesn't mean it's true. Havoc doesn't own the Gnome project, and doesn't have the authority to make a big, sweeping change like this.
In the past, sometimes his plans for Gnome have been in conflict with other members of the team.
If Havoc wants to fork the project, fine. But don't call it 'Gnome 3' unless it has been designated the 'Gnome 3' project by the board.
Judges should only judge the law in question with respect to the US Constitution (or state constitution, for state laws) and NOTHING ELSE -
For my education, can you provide specific cases where judges made decisions based on foreign laws?
What about judges who refer to the non-constitutional sources, such as the Christian Bible, for the definition of marriage, when the word itself has many different historical meanings? I doubt you would call them 'activist judges'.
What if the answer cannot be found in the constitution?
When this country was young, many judges looked at the laws and conventions in other countries. Why? Because many of these other countries have similar legal systems & a similar moral context, and a similar decision made in another country may also work here.
I'll never understand why all those kiddie forums replace good, old-fashioned Hypertext with some lame-ass propietary [url=lameass] scheme. It only makes the forums harder to use.
Oh, and ditch the 2 inch deep graphical sigs while you're at it. They detract from the content if there is any content.
Outsourcing isn't inefficient simply because there's some law carved in stone that says it has to be inefficient. It's inefficient for reasons.
You are quite right. And if you come up with the magical fix to the problems, you'll be a bazillionaire.
I claim to be an expert in oursourcing, but I can see some problems with the model.
Poor communication is a big reason for some of the inefficiencies. It is hard enough for a decision maker to communicate the business needs to a technical staff when they are in the same room, same time zone, speak the same language and are writing stuff on the same whiteboard.
Now, add in a language barrier, cultural concepts (Grow up in a different culture, you think about things differently), an 8 hour lag in communication, and a lack of good tools to communicate ideas (online whiteboards are usually pretty crappy, communicating over the phone isn't good enough).
Outsourcing removes the ability to walk over to Jane's desk to quickly clarify something. And there is very little bonding between the participants-- I think people work better when they have lunch, drink a beer or take a coffee break together once in a while.
See, despite what some of the business people keep telling us-- a business is about more then just creating some business models and following those models. You can't just hand off a list of requirements and expect a perfect product to be returned to you. It's not that simple.
A boat may try to solve some of these issues (But will the residents really be able to come to shore?), but they are going to have a big problem with morale.
I've always felt that the SCO of the 90's is a very different organization then the SCO of today.
Different officers, different headquarters, different staff. They kept the most of the IP, and spun off a huge chunk of their business into Tarantella. Although, I find SCO's history to be very confusing.
It's really really sad, because if there was one company in the 90s that had the expertise to really expand in the Linux market, it was SCO. They had so many great ideas back then. Other vendors are only now just releasing those same ideas.
Just remember, when you see businesses going out of business after outsourcing their workers, make sure you hammer in the point by saying something like "I TOLD YOU SO DUMBASS!" and humilating the corporate officers in public.
Outsourcing is a numbers game: It appear that you are saving money because the labor is cheaper, and the cost of labor is written down in the corporate financials. However, you LOSE money because of the inefficiency, which is harder to pin down.
Fine. Then don't buy it. You're not really their target market anyways.
Ubuntu is too unstable. Fedora is a moving target. If you're lucky, people won't yell at you if you ask for support in the IRC channels.
With most Linux distros, people spend way too much time getting shit to work. SuSE Pro tends to work better then the free distros, and it comes with polished versions of Evolution, OpenOffice, Samba, Xen, etc.
Some of us need to spend our time USING the software, not playing around.
If he's like most people, he doesn't earn $1000000000 a year. If he's like most HDTV owners, he probably earns $50K, and still spent too much on television, hasn't maxed out his 401K, IRA or savings. Hopefully he didn't put it on his creditcard.
You seem more like a jealous fuck, then anything else.
I call this the GodTVWin's law: If you complain about consumerism, your opponent tries to make you appear jealous as an attempt to end the conversation. It's like Godwin's law.
Although, if he does make $1,000,000,000 , then I am jealous. I just want a small piece of that.
Spending $950 to watch television is a sad, sad sign of your addiction. How much did you pay to get those extra pixels in the HDTV? How much do you pay per year for cable?
Is it worth it? It's all the same crap, with commercials, just in a higher resolution. Watching TV is fine once in a while, but I can't believe people spend so much money to have shit shoveled at them.
For $950, I could take a nice vacation, take some good classes, save up for retirement (It'll be $4000 by the time I retire), put money in my kids college fund (It'll be $3000).
I'd like to use Gmail as my mail client, but I don't want to use my @gmail.com email address.
I have my own domains, with my own email addresses. I can bring them with me if I chose a different email provider.
I forward the mail from the email address to my Yahoo account. Yahoo allows me to set the "From:" line to any email address that I control.
Gmail does not offer me the option of sending email any of my other email domains.
With Gmail, I can put my address in the 'Reply-To:' line, but many people & mail clients ignore that line. And having a "From:" line an a "Reply-To:" line looks like crap.
Slashdot Mirror
If it will 'just work' in the future, we would see some of the 'just working' in Windows XP.
.NET password in here. Yeah, it has something to do with that "Windows Messenger" that keeps poping up in then system tray. Now click on 'Change my name", and then change your name.
But noo....
But sometime you need to scroll down a list, no... the other list. Yeah, that one. Select 'properties'-- what? No, right click on the icon, and select 'properties'. And then... no wait it's not here. Click 'cancel'. Ok, now click 'cancel' again. Now, hit the 'x' in the upper right hand corner of the screen.
Now go to "start: settings: Control Panel", click on "Users Accounts", click on "change account", click on your username. What? No, I don't know why they have a
Sometimes it just works.
I don't get it.
There are several of these on eBay.
Is there something extra special about this one issue found under the floorboards?
Oh what fun.
So when installing Oracle 9 on RedHat Enterprise, guess which compiler you need?
2.96 , and the installer still uses the Java 1.1 GUI...
Then you need to take extra care to avoid power surges in the holographic matrix, because then you'll be stuck with some piano-playing hologram who won't go away.
Then you'll have to make a moral decision: Endure the wisecracking hologram as a poorly-needed comedic relief, or shut off the power and kill the poor dude.
Well, the Linux kernel is a different development model. For years, Linus was the 'benevolent dictator'/gatekeeper, and would allow or deny code into the Kernel.
Gnome has a governing commitee, which decides on the direction of the project, and which packages should be allowed or denied. Havok is one of the main developers, but he is not the soul gatekeeper.
I would also argue that Gnome is a much messier project then the Kernel. Does 'Gnome' include OpenOffice or not? Is every Gnome app coded in the same style of C?
And I have no problem with that, because the new project was called 'Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox'.
They didn't call it 'Mozilla Browser 2', because it wasn't always clear that Firefox would eventually be merged back into the Mozilla project.
I think the same thing should happen here.
Consider it akin to the old 2. numbering in the linux kernel.
If one of the lead kernel developers took the Linux Kernel, and created a new project called 'Linux 2.8', that wouldn't necessarily mean that the new project is 'Linux 2.8'.
There needs to be more then a single developer involved in the decision.
Just because Havoc says something doesn't mean it's true. Havoc doesn't own the Gnome project, and doesn't have the authority to make a big, sweeping change like this.
In the past, sometimes his plans for Gnome have been in conflict with other members of the team.
If Havoc wants to fork the project, fine. But don't call it 'Gnome 3' unless it has been designated the 'Gnome 3' project by the board.
Now, if this was a message from the Gnome Board of Directors, I would feel differently.
The name 'Gnome 3' is reserved for the core Gnome product.
If you're going to fork the core product and possibly make an incompatable branch, please give it another name.
Since the US Constitution does not define marriage, then if a law is passed that defines it, then it can not possibly be unconstitutional,
Yes it can, if it infringes on one of the other laws in the Constitution (or other founding documents).
Most laws don't always have such a clear scope, unfortunately.
Judges should only judge the law in question with respect to the US Constitution (or state constitution, for state laws) and NOTHING ELSE -
For my education, can you provide specific cases where judges made decisions based on foreign laws?
What about judges who refer to the non-constitutional sources, such as the Christian Bible, for the definition of marriage, when the word itself has many different historical meanings? I doubt you would call them 'activist judges'.
What if the answer cannot be found in the constitution?
When this country was young, many judges looked at the laws and conventions in other countries. Why? Because many of these other countries have similar legal systems & a similar moral context, and a similar decision made in another country may also work here.
Well done sir. Good job.
I'll never understand why all those kiddie forums replace good, old-fashioned Hypertext with some lame-ass propietary [url=lameass] scheme. It only makes the forums harder to use.
Oh, and ditch the 2 inch deep graphical sigs while you're at it. They detract from the content if there is any content.
*bump*
Outsourcing isn't inefficient simply because there's some law carved in stone that says it has to be inefficient. It's inefficient for reasons.
You are quite right. And if you come up with the magical fix to the problems, you'll be a bazillionaire.
I claim to be an expert in oursourcing, but I can see some problems with the model.
Poor communication is a big reason for some of the inefficiencies. It is hard enough for a decision maker to communicate the business needs to a technical staff when they are in the same room, same time zone, speak the same language and are writing stuff on the same whiteboard.
Now, add in a language barrier, cultural concepts (Grow up in a different culture, you think about things differently), an 8 hour lag in communication, and a lack of good tools to communicate ideas (online whiteboards are usually pretty crappy, communicating over the phone isn't good enough).
Outsourcing removes the ability to walk over to Jane's desk to quickly clarify something. And there is very little bonding between the participants-- I think people work better when they have lunch, drink a beer or take a coffee break together once in a while.
See, despite what some of the business people keep telling us-- a business is about more then just creating some business models and following those models. You can't just hand off a list of requirements and expect a perfect product to be returned to you. It's not that simple.
A boat may try to solve some of these issues (But will the residents really be able to come to shore?), but they are going to have a big problem with morale.
I've always felt that the SCO of the 90's is a very different organization then the SCO of today.
Different officers, different headquarters, different staff. They kept the most of the IP, and spun off a huge chunk of their business into Tarantella. Although, I find SCO's history to be very confusing.
It's really really sad, because if there was one company in the 90s that had the expertise to really expand in the Linux market, it was SCO. They had so many great ideas back then. Other vendors are only now just releasing those same ideas.
SuSE might already have such a mechanism available, and it may cost less then you setting up your own repository.
If you're talking about 10 copies at $99 each, I'd have a hard time justifying any sort of home grown solution.
Time is money.
I smell another crash of DotCom proportions...
So do we my friend.
Just remember, when you see businesses going out of business after outsourcing their workers, make sure you hammer in the point by saying something like "I TOLD YOU SO DUMBASS!" and humilating the corporate officers in public.
Outsourcing is a numbers game: It appear that you are saving money because the labor is cheaper, and the cost of labor is written down in the corporate financials. However, you LOSE money because of the inefficiency, which is harder to pin down.
Fine. Then don't buy it. You're not really their target market anyways.
Ubuntu is too unstable. Fedora is a moving target. If you're lucky, people won't yell at you if you ask for support in the IRC channels.
With most Linux distros, people spend way too much time getting shit to work. SuSE Pro tends to work better then the free distros, and it comes with polished versions of Evolution, OpenOffice, Samba, Xen, etc.
Some of us need to spend our time USING the software, not playing around.
But, if they use cookies or the like, then they don't have it
Why do you make that assumption?
If anything, a cookie makes it easier to associate an individual with an entry in the database.
Who the heck didn't alredy know this?
Google uses cookies with a unique identifier.
A unique identifier allows you to you build a profile of the person(s) who are associated with that cookie.
Google sells advertisements based partially on your profile. It's called "Know your audience".
If he's like most people, he doesn't earn $1000000000 a year. If he's like most HDTV owners, he probably earns $50K, and still spent too much on television, hasn't maxed out his 401K, IRA or savings. Hopefully he didn't put it on his creditcard.
You seem more like a jealous fuck, then anything else.
I call this the GodTVWin's law: If you complain about consumerism, your opponent tries to make you appear jealous as an attempt to end the conversation. It's like Godwin's law.
Although, if he does make $1,000,000,000 , then I am jealous. I just want a small piece of that.
But Seth, I don't want POP. POP sucks if you check email from multiple locations.
Now, if they had IMAP, I'd be very happy. But IMAP has it's own problems I hear.
Really, I should just run my own server at home. But I don't have the time...
You're's truly,
Richard.
Spending $950 to watch television is a sad, sad sign of your addiction. How much did you pay to get those extra pixels in the HDTV? How much do you pay per year for cable?
Is it worth it? It's all the same crap, with commercials, just in a higher resolution. Watching TV is fine once in a while, but I can't believe people spend so much money to have shit shoveled at them.
For $950, I could take a nice vacation, take some good classes, save up for retirement (It'll be $4000 by the time I retire), put money in my kids college fund (It'll be $3000).
I think there was a Who windows in the works, but the project was later assigned to third base.
Mac Mini 1.42MHz: $599
EyeTV 500: $349
That's $950, without any upgrades. Holy crap, how can you afford that?
Somehow I'm guessing that that an Xbox/PVR combo will cost far less.
I'd like to use Gmail as my mail client, but I don't want to use my @gmail.com email address.
I have my own domains, with my own email addresses. I can bring them with me if I chose a different email provider.
I forward the mail from the email address to my Yahoo account. Yahoo allows me to set the "From:" line to any email address that I control.
Gmail does not offer me the option of sending email any of my other email domains.
With Gmail, I can put my address in the 'Reply-To:' line, but many people & mail clients ignore that line. And having a "From:" line an a "Reply-To:" line looks like crap.