If it's "Firefox inspired," why not just use Firefox in the first place?
If KDE incorporates a feature inspired in gnome, why not used gnome in the first place? If Linux borrowed the concept of preemptive multitasking from other OSes (it only became standard in the 2.6.x branch), why actually use linux and not one of the others? In fact, if someone ever has a neat idea that they implement in their product, why stick to your own hard work, and eventually some good ideas of your own, instead of adopting the other product?
Personally, I like it this way. Microsoft is feeling the competition, and is being forced to make IE evolve. Hopefully, it will evolve enough that the fine Mozilla and KHTML/WebCore people will feel the need to improve their own offers.
My girlfriend's university's electronic enrollment system is incompatible with Firefox (not sure about KHTML-based browsers). Since she takes about an hour there by public transports, not being able to enroll online is a pain. She was NOT happy when she found out, and we sent a complaint there, to no avail.
Or they might be musicians, writers, lawyers, or one from a number of other professions that don't REALLY need you to have a computer at all. As shocking as it may seem, not everyone actually needs computers, you know?
Or, perhaps, he means that he does have the financial means for it, but it comes quite late in the priority list. Kind of like saying "I can't afford to eat out every weekend". Well, I'd wager a pretty large slice of the population could, technically, eat out every weekend, but that would mean that other, perhaps more important, things would have to be sacrificed. Same deal.
If you can produce evidence that Media Player, or any other Microsoft product, has a set of items installed with it that effectively hide system/filesystem information from you, I suggest you actually do so. Because Windows, Media Player et al might have flaws, and might have vulnerabilities that allow arbitrary code execution, or even hijacking, but they do NOT, as far as I know, hide files of a specific form or deny me any other sort of information about my system that would've otherwise been available (and please refrain from witticisms regarding windows)
Forgive me, but this "problem" is a non-issue! This is not 1995. This is 2006. The internet is not a brand spanking new thing anymore, and access to it is a commodity rather than a luxury. A browser *IS* an important and central feature of what is expected a computer will have out of the box. In fact, you'd have to go through hoops to acquire firefox/camino/whatever for your new Mac/Windows PC if no browser came with the machine. In fact, I also found the de-coupling of Media Player from Windows that was mandated here in Europe completely preposterous. It's not like we're talking about bundling Office or anything. I just want to be able to play my music and films out of the box, and I can't find to be an unreasonable expectation.
Actually looking at the blog that was posted at some point here will make it painfully obvious even to the non-german-speaking audience (me included) that the contents of the doorway page were wildly different from the actual visibile page. Hence what was happening was NOT that they were trying to be search engine friendly, but rather that they wilfully made their page arbitrarily more relevant by filling it with crud, rather than a case of "oh no, my site is covered in flash and images! I'll just have a text-rendering of it as fallback for search engines/non-X-enabled browsers"
except that googling for bmw.com yields 1 result, and googling for bmw.de lists precisely 0. pagerank = 0 is virtual deletion. The page is as good as nonexistent. It's as relevant for that search as would be the wikipedia article on the bell pepper.
Or maybe some of them mentioned that they DID try the gimp, and pointed out reasons why it wasn't up to par. So perhaps the blokes that do it professionally DO know better.
That's DEFINITELY the sort of thing I'd personally do with image magick and bash. Right tool for the right job. But I'm more than slightly oriented towards programming, so I'm biased. It's for less automated, more visual tasks I do think that a visually oriented suite would be best.
When you have an all-windows shop, and truth is, most people do, portability is the least of your concerns. Python, despite some high-profile users (google, ilm, etc) is not really all too well known, and perl's infamy as impossible to debug (which, IMO, it truly is, if the coder isn't disciplined) makes it a less than popular choice when less informed people make choices. On the other hand,.NET and Java push the 'batteries included' concept of Python to a whole different level, and have very high profile backers.
Wel,, possibly not. But no sort of F/OSS is being accused of monopolistic practices and being demanded to comply with court rulings. And F/OSS tends to follow standard protocols rather than come up with new ones (though that can and will happen, look at at freeBSD's firewall protocol thingy).
what sort of Christians DO you know? Most of the ones I know are perfectly ok with harry potter and LotR. I fact, I even know a catholic zealot (the sort that actually TEACHES Sunday school, but that's no exactly what makes me call him a zealot) that's very much into Harry Potter. You, sir, are over generalising!
and, regarding getting OS-of-the-day running on intel Macs, if someone needs to run both windows and osx for some reason (and there IS a set of people who need it badly enough to run windows on virtual pc), then I very much consider this work relevant to all those people. Hopefully, a VM sort of thing will crop up soon enough as well, allowing the OSs to run in parallel (kind of), but until then a dual boot solution on a mac allows you to have a pretty nifty machine to work with, with more than one OS.
this said, I do think that Linux support is less important than windows support, for the simplest reason ever: I'm running OSX. That's kind of like BSD, so I already have a full featured (if somewhat oddly structured) *NIX under the hood.
I'm pretty sure that this follows the spirit of minimum wage laws, if possibly not the letter
Re:Will it improve the quality of US anime?
on
Disney Buys Pixar
·
· Score: 1
anime being the japanese word for "cartoons", rather than the japanese word for "japanese cartoons", as most western people translate it, yes they have.
But with Pixar out of Disney they could be doing novel stuff at the same time disney was doing the almighty sequels. Whereas with pixar being inside disney, disney could make them do the sequels themselves, negating the chance for new stuff. This said, I don't really think this scenario is likely
Hmmm, I see a new NeXT being bought by apple thing happening. And that brought us OS X. And Jobs DID become the single largest shareholder for disney. I wonder if that will mean anything there? CEO of both Disney and Apple? Could it happen? Possibly. Would it avoid the "Milk Pixar's IP" scenario? Probably.
that's because no one who actually uses pornography calls it "pornography". "porn", "xxx" or some other juicier name is so much more effective that the sterile, detached "pornography", when you think of it
If a university lab result says "you can find the stuff" or "you can't find the stuff", there will always be people that say "well, it was a university study, no really the real thing, a bit contrived, yadda yadda". If google's logs say "you can('t) find the bad stuff", then that's a kind of like an authority on the subject speaking. The results carry a much bigger weight, especially because they are sound both from a theoretical (they ARE leaders in search engine research) and practical (seeing as they are THE leading search engine) standpoints. This said, I feel warm and comfy at night in the thought that google is refusing to give away the information.
because writing fat binaries for 2 architectures is one thing, while writing for umpteen is another. And because when Blizzard writes games that have simultaneous mac and windows releases, they'd really rather optimise their code for two architectures at most (I'm pretty sure they'll thank apple for removing even that extra step), instead of optimising for one processor in windows and ten in mac os. If you were a software vendor, and you were faced with having to support 10 processors on one, vaguely popular platform, or just one processor on a massively popular platform, which would you chose? I for one can't blame Steve Jobs for the choice (even if I bought what I assume is the last generation of PPC iBook)
I stand corrected on the (unfortunately) implied idea that OSX didn't have ACLs. Truth be told it was a jerk reaction to what sounded like yet another bit of NIX zealotry.
Well, they're still not exactly PCs, seeing as how PCs don't yet have EFI. But they're close, yeah. Still, I bought an iBook (my first mac) under 2 months ago, and it was because I wanted the user experience. I bought the bloody thing for the 1-button mouse (yes, I like it! And I'm proud of it!) and the operating system, processor be damned!
The difference between a PC and a Mac is one of philosophy, not one of processor. I believe the slogan "What is an intel processor doing in my Mac? A lot more than in any PC!" to be quite the accurate description (if you're a fan of the philosophy). The Mac experience is all about ease of use and general quality of product. Truth be told, the only path forwards in laptop performance seemed to be this way. The iMac is at a point where the internals are closer to a laptop than a desktop -- and the new hardware further shows this. All in all they changed to where the quality lies right now, and for the predictable future (in laptop processors).
All in all, I don't think the general idea of saying that the Mac is different from the PC even if the entrails are the same doesn't really bother me much
I've been using apple mail for the last 2 months, now. It is quite good, in an outlook express sort of category (NOT in an outlook express sort of WAY). It's just a simple, functional mail program. iCal and Address Book make the whole PIM suite come together quite nicely, and the way it integrates into spotlight is just beautiful. All in all, I don't regret leaving Outlook (the big one) and Evolution behind for Maill.App and iCal.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's "Firefox inspired," why not just use Firefox in the first place?
If KDE incorporates a feature inspired in gnome, why not used gnome in the first place? If Linux borrowed the concept of preemptive multitasking from other OSes (it only became standard in the 2.6.x branch), why actually use linux and not one of the others? In fact, if someone ever has a neat idea that they implement in their product, why stick to your own hard work, and eventually some good ideas of your own, instead of adopting the other product?
Personally, I like it this way. Microsoft is feeling the competition, and is being forced to make IE evolve. Hopefully, it will evolve enough that the fine Mozilla and KHTML/WebCore people will feel the need to improve their own offers.
My girlfriend's university's electronic enrollment system is incompatible with Firefox (not sure about KHTML-based browsers). Since she takes about an hour there by public transports, not being able to enroll online is a pain. She was NOT happy when she found out, and we sent a complaint there, to no avail.
Or they might be musicians, writers, lawyers, or one from a number of other professions that don't REALLY need you to have a computer at all. As shocking as it may seem, not everyone actually needs computers, you know?
Or, perhaps, he means that he does have the financial means for it, but it comes quite late in the priority list. Kind of like saying "I can't afford to eat out every weekend". Well, I'd wager a pretty large slice of the population could, technically, eat out every weekend, but that would mean that other, perhaps more important, things would have to be sacrificed. Same deal.
If you can produce evidence that Media Player, or any other Microsoft product, has a set of items installed with it that effectively hide system/filesystem information from you, I suggest you actually do so. Because Windows, Media Player et al might have flaws, and might have vulnerabilities that allow arbitrary code execution, or even hijacking, but they do NOT, as far as I know, hide files of a specific form or deny me any other sort of information about my system that would've otherwise been available (and please refrain from witticisms regarding windows)
Forgive me, but this "problem" is a non-issue! This is not 1995. This is 2006. The internet is not a brand spanking new thing anymore, and access to it is a commodity rather than a luxury. A browser *IS* an important and central feature of what is expected a computer will have out of the box. In fact, you'd have to go through hoops to acquire firefox/camino/whatever for your new Mac/Windows PC if no browser came with the machine. In fact, I also found the de-coupling of Media Player from Windows that was mandated here in Europe completely preposterous. It's not like we're talking about bundling Office or anything. I just want to be able to play my music and films out of the box, and I can't find to be an unreasonable expectation.
Actually looking at the blog that was posted at some point here will make it painfully obvious even to the non-german-speaking audience (me included) that the contents of the doorway page were wildly different from the actual visibile page. Hence what was happening was NOT that they were trying to be search engine friendly, but rather that they wilfully made their page arbitrarily more relevant by filling it with crud, rather than a case of "oh no, my site is covered in flash and images! I'll just have a text-rendering of it as fallback for search engines/non-X-enabled browsers"
except that googling for bmw.com yields 1 result, and googling for bmw.de lists precisely 0. pagerank = 0 is virtual deletion. The page is as good as nonexistent. It's as relevant for that search as would be the wikipedia article on the bell pepper.
Or maybe some of them mentioned that they DID try the gimp, and pointed out reasons why it wasn't up to par. So perhaps the blokes that do it professionally DO know better.
That's DEFINITELY the sort of thing I'd personally do with image magick and bash. Right tool for the right job. But I'm more than slightly oriented towards programming, so I'm biased. It's for less automated, more visual tasks I do think that a visually oriented suite would be best.
When you have an all-windows shop, and truth is, most people do, portability is the least of your concerns. Python, despite some high-profile users (google, ilm, etc) is not really all too well known, and perl's infamy as impossible to debug (which, IMO, it truly is, if the coder isn't disciplined) makes it a less than popular choice when less informed people make choices. On the other hand, .NET and Java push the 'batteries included' concept of Python to a whole different level, and have very high profile backers.
Wel,, possibly not. But no sort of F/OSS is being accused of monopolistic practices and being demanded to comply with court rulings. And F/OSS tends to follow standard protocols rather than come up with new ones (though that can and will happen, look at at freeBSD's firewall protocol thingy).
what sort of Christians DO you know? Most of the ones I know are perfectly ok with harry potter and LotR. I fact, I even know a catholic zealot (the sort that actually TEACHES Sunday school, but that's no exactly what makes me call him a zealot) that's very much into Harry Potter. You, sir, are over generalising!
well, the nano still has the wheel interface.
and, regarding getting OS-of-the-day running on intel Macs, if someone needs to run both windows and osx for some reason (and there IS a set of people who need it badly enough to run windows on virtual pc), then I very much consider this work relevant to all those people. Hopefully, a VM sort of thing will crop up soon enough as well, allowing the OSs to run in parallel (kind of), but until then a dual boot solution on a mac allows you to have a pretty nifty machine to work with, with more than one OS.
this said, I do think that Linux support is less important than windows support, for the simplest reason ever: I'm running OSX. That's kind of like BSD, so I already have a full featured (if somewhat oddly structured) *NIX under the hood.
It's a joke. laugh.
I'm pretty sure that this follows the spirit of minimum wage laws, if possibly not the letter
anime being the japanese word for "cartoons", rather than the japanese word for "japanese cartoons", as most western people translate it, yes they have.
But with Pixar out of Disney they could be doing novel stuff at the same time disney was doing the almighty sequels. Whereas with pixar being inside disney, disney could make them do the sequels themselves, negating the chance for new stuff. This said, I don't really think this scenario is likely
Hmmm, I see a new NeXT being bought by apple thing happening. And that brought us OS X. And Jobs DID become the single largest shareholder for disney. I wonder if that will mean anything there? CEO of both Disney and Apple? Could it happen? Possibly. Would it avoid the "Milk Pixar's IP" scenario? Probably.
that's because no one who actually uses pornography calls it "pornography". "porn", "xxx" or some other juicier name is so much more effective that the sterile, detached "pornography", when you think of it
If a university lab result says "you can find the stuff" or "you can't find the stuff", there will always be people that say "well, it was a university study, no really the real thing, a bit contrived, yadda yadda". If google's logs say "you can('t) find the bad stuff", then that's a kind of like an authority on the subject speaking. The results carry a much bigger weight, especially because they are sound both from a theoretical (they ARE leaders in search engine research) and practical (seeing as they are THE leading search engine) standpoints. This said, I feel warm and comfy at night in the thought that google is refusing to give away the information.
because writing fat binaries for 2 architectures is one thing, while writing for umpteen is another. And because when Blizzard writes games that have simultaneous mac and windows releases, they'd really rather optimise their code for two architectures at most (I'm pretty sure they'll thank apple for removing even that extra step), instead of optimising for one processor in windows and ten in mac os. If you were a software vendor, and you were faced with having to support 10 processors on one, vaguely popular platform, or just one processor on a massively popular platform, which would you chose? I for one can't blame Steve Jobs for the choice (even if I bought what I assume is the last generation of PPC iBook)
I stand corrected on the (unfortunately) implied idea that OSX didn't have ACLs. Truth be told it was a jerk reaction to what sounded like yet another bit of NIX zealotry.
Well, they're still not exactly PCs, seeing as how PCs don't yet have EFI. But they're close, yeah. Still, I bought an iBook (my first mac) under 2 months ago, and it was because I wanted the user experience. I bought the bloody thing for the 1-button mouse (yes, I like it! And I'm proud of it!) and the operating system, processor be damned!
The difference between a PC and a Mac is one of philosophy, not one of processor. I believe the slogan "What is an intel processor doing in my Mac? A lot more than in any PC!" to be quite the accurate description (if you're a fan of the philosophy). The Mac experience is all about ease of use and general quality of product. Truth be told, the only path forwards in laptop performance seemed to be this way. The iMac is at a point where the internals are closer to a laptop than a desktop -- and the new hardware further shows this. All in all they changed to where the quality lies right now, and for the predictable future (in laptop processors).
All in all, I don't think the general idea of saying that the Mac is different from the PC even if the entrails are the same doesn't really bother me much
I've been using apple mail for the last 2 months, now. It is quite good, in an outlook express sort of category (NOT in an outlook express sort of WAY). It's just a simple, functional mail program. iCal and Address Book make the whole PIM suite come together quite nicely, and the way it integrates into spotlight is just beautiful. All in all, I don't regret leaving Outlook (the big one) and Evolution behind for Maill.App and iCal.