I did the same just to see what it was like... I'll be upgrading to Ubuntu Compiz after the holidays settle down. The performance is just way to low on Vista to even think about keeping. it.
I don't see that much needing fixing actually. Incremental Improvements are a great way to go. Trying to fix all the problems all at once only results a lot of wasted effort.
Seems to me the W3C could learn something from some of the Agile Development Methodologies gaining popularity these days.
Doubleclick is not owned by Google. Doubleclick is in the process of being acquired by Google. There is a difference. Verify your facts before blurting them out next time.
Exactly!!! All the complaints are API specific not language specific. Maybe what should be going on is a better set of DOM API's and SVG and X-Form support that doesn't suck?
Seriously folks the problem isn't javascript. the problem is HTML and CSS. We don't need a new language we need a new way of making widgets in the webpage. Javascript can power that just as well as anything else. I fail to see the problem here. Heck half of mozilla is written in javascript so we know it can more. The limiting factor isn't javascript the language it's the DOM and CSS. Why are we talking about upgrading a language when what we really want are workable cross-platform implementations of X-Forms and SVG with and an API to them that isn't insane?
I really don't understand this whole Javascript is horrible attitude. Javascript is really quite useful and nice. It's approach to Object Oriented is, while different, very useful. It has all the features a basic language needs Branching Looping and variable storage. It is partially functional in nature so that may throw some people off a bit but once you get the whole idea it just flows naturally. Javascript is actually my second favourite language.
Implementations vary as to their usefullness of course. Mozilla's is by far the best and Venkman gives you as good a debugger as you could ask for. I don't even see what more Javascript needs. Maybe threading would be useful maybe not. The DOM functions need a lot of improvement but libraries like MochiKit and JQuery hide a lot of that pain and I see no reason why that should be a problem.
Microsoft's implementation is the least friendly but even it does most of what I need in a language. What exactly are the complaints to Javascript other than "I'm not used to thinking this way?"
there is absolutely no reason why Parrot couldn't target javascript. Whether it does or not I couldn't say right now. But nothing in it's implementation prohibits targetting javascript.
Actually at it's basest level Punishment is about two things. One is to make the person not want to do something again. The other is to make everyone else not want to do the same thing.
One of those is rehabilitation. The other is deterrence. Say what you will about the woman's innocence or apparent good nature. In order to satisfy the deterrence aspect you have to administer the punishment regardless of the the persons attitude, remorse, or insistence on innocence.
Actually Rehabilitation is the probably the least effective result of the Punishment administered by the justice system. I'm fairly confident that deterrence works pretty well though. As you said for precedence reasons and, to send the right message about justice for murder in America to the rest of the American populace, they had to administer punishment no matter how late it was.
I've several people say this and I have to respond... Like Flikr Youtube serves two different puposes. One is the social sharing of media. The other is free bandwidth and hosting of content. In all likelihood the second is what she was doing. Not everyone has their own site to host stuff like this on. And if a friend or family member sent me an email with a video attached they'd get a stern lecture from me about appropriate email etiquette. There are a lot of people who upload to sites like YouTube and Flikr because it's an easy way to show other people their photo's or home-videos. Making any kind of judgement about her motives based on the fact she uploaded it to youtube shows a bias you probably don't want advertised on slashdot. So you might want to think before posting next time.
And in any case, preinstalling Linux for geeks is a waste of time - they're the vocal minority who want preinstalled Linux because it increases mindshare but will tire of having a 6 month old distro on their laptop when they buy it, and install the latest development release anyway.
While it may be a reasonable assumption, you are still making an assumption. I am one of those vocal geeks linux geeks. Here is why I want preinstalled linux. I can buy boxes for my 5 kids and wife. Those don't have to be cutting edge. As for installing the 6 month distro release I usually upgrade. Which is fairly easy. And for hardware that Dell has already determined to be compatible is likely to be even easier. So I'm not going to be reinstalling. Which is pretty much the same as installing the latest Windows service pack or security update. The primary point is that there is a market that is larger than Dell may have previously thought and that Dell could make money at it if they wanted to.
Would people be happy if they had Dapper Xubuntu installed just because it has a 10-year support cycle and Dell think that's better for customers, or do Dell take the risk and put Feisty on it?
RedHat or SuSE? Ubuntu or Debian? Think of problems like Fedora where preinstalling it on a system is against their charter (and preinstalling it and calling it Fedora even worse. The trademark licensing is atrocious. Would they bother with a Fedora-based Dell Linux?)
And the Licensing for windows is better? No matter what OS they choose Licensing is a headache. At least with Linux they have options. Ubuntu and Debian might be a better choice than Redhat or Suse for trademark licensing. And if they really wanted to they could fork debian and like ubuntu did and have Dell Linux with community support and input into what hardware gets supported. The options give them something they don't have with MS. The idea here is that they could should they desire make money in this sector. No one is saying the have to just that they could.
That's all true. It doesn't change however the fact that people have demonstrated the market. It may not be as big as the windows preinstalled market. It may not be their target market. But it does exist and now they can't deny it's existence. They are still free to leave that market to someone else, but the market does exist.
Great Rhetoric. You missed the point though. What about the guy/gal who wants to run the latest cutting edge release of Inkscape but doesn't want to upgrade her whole OS to do so. He/She is also an artist and doesn't know thing one about compiling an app from source. What should he/she do? Live with it? Learn how to use make and manage libraries? Switch to windows?
Thank goodness Inkscape has an autopackage release. He/She can one click install the latest and greatness without polluting her repositories in YUM or APT. You talk about choice and limiting freedom with one breath and with the next you effectively limit his/hers choices/freedom to use software.
Said hypothetical person may also want to install Cinelerra to do video? What are his/her options then? add a repository? switch to a different distro? compile from source? Too bad Cinelerra doesn't have an autopackage release. She could just double click the file and install it no fuss no muss.
The thing about sounding Elitist is that you sound like you want to limit other people's right to use good free and cutting edge software unless they meet your standards. That's called prejudice from where I'm standing.
And before you ask yes I do compile from source when I need to or want to tweak an app. But I also really enjoy having the convenience of autopackage and APT and YUM when I just want to get to work. I can't bill a customer for compile time.
That's great and all but it throws the baby out with the bathwater. I design perfectly legitimate sites that use ajax to do certain things. This will break them. Unless it is somehow able to detect bad vs good javascript. That of course depends on using a signature or some kind of heuristics which reduces it's effectiveness.
Or Maybe it relies on a white list/black list approach. Does this mean we have to add sites to our "trusted security zone"? We all know how that turns out. We get so used to clicking on OK that the software becomes totally useless.
Or maybe they have done the impossible and looked into the future and know every single piece of malware that will be thought up for the life of their product. Then it might work.
The Genie is out of the bottle folks. People need and want javascript. You can't just strip it out of webpages all willy nilly and not expect people to get ticked. Identifying problem code is just about impossible on a consistent basis. If you really want to live without javascript you can already turn it off in your browser. How is this different? Sure it lets you supposedly see what the site would look like with it enabled on the first load, but none of the dynamic stuff that happens when you click something or the javascript timer runs, will work which is the whole point of doing javascript. So why exactly is this helpful again?
Re:Publicly traded companies and their spam
on
Buy Low, Spam High
·
· Score: 1
While it is indeed against SEC regulations. Those regulations do not fall under the category of Federal Law. They are just a bunch of beauratic rules for doing business in the American stock market. Federal Law is voted on by elected representatives of government.
There are some OSS ones that already do. And by and large all the Commercial SIS software sucks here in Illinois. I for one wouldn't mind seeing one of the 30+ schools I help manage switch to the OSS SIS software so my workload would go down.
Myspace is nothing like Geocities. Geocities let people design decent web sites. Myspace just forces people to use crappy web technology giving them no choice but to have crappy websites unless they send a significant portion of their life hacking the system. That comparison is an insult to geocities.
Wow, somone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. Google Spreadsheets are cool. And innovative, and they work. Google isn't trying to compete with MS on anything but search. This other stuff really just serves two purposes. It keeps their smart people happy, and it keeps their rep up. Both of which are extremely important in a web technology company. You mentioned Gmail, Earth, News, Calendar, And Search as products which rock. All of those projects except search started as google labs projects. Not all of the Lab stuff has to take off. But if only a tenth of them do then Google has recouped it's investment.
It was a nice kneejerk reaction but like most kneejerk reactions it was totally off base.
Speaking to the newspapers as a citizen about abuses at the D.A's office would have been protected free speech. Speaking as a lawyer and sharing details of your office's case to the opposition in a manner that hurts your office's case under the official capacity as a representative of that office is not. He didn't blow the whistle, he undermined the D.A.'s case as a D.A. employee. The question of whether the D.A. was correct has nothing to do with the employee's free speech right. The fact is that within the framework of his position he is required as a lawyer to support his case not undermine it.
It's similar to the principle of Attorney client privilege really. A Lawyer for defense may know facts that prove his client is guilty but he is not allowed to repeat them. It's a matter of his job. His job requires that he keep silent about them. Free speech doesn't apply in that instance. Free speech is not a globally applicable right. There are a number of instances where it has no business being applied.
I won't tell you you should have used a different distribution. But I will say that that scenario could happen on any OS whether it's the mac, Windows, or SuSE. Someone or something changed her default mail client. You may not know what but nothing says it can't happen again no matter what you get her.
In fact most likely she is the one who changed the setting on accident. In which case she is just as likely to do something accidental again on whatever you get for her. This can hardly be blamed on OSS difficult to use.
Come on.. The title and summary make it sound like Google is actually buying these sites and plastering ads all over them. Google can hardly be responsible for what people use their service for. They don't even necessarily know it's a domain/typo squatting page. Don't put this on Google, put it on the people who own and operate the sites. This is google bashing on a laughable level.
Seems to me if I recall correctly that even before the DMCA came out you weren't allowed to just download whatever you wanted just because it was on the web. The DMCA didn't make it suddenly illegal. It didn't even make it particularly more difficult. Perhaps you should consider a different argument? For the record I'm pretty sure that Copywrite is a seperate issue from the DMCA.
That's easy to explain. You see windows actually views Piracy as one potential entrypoint to their software. Sort of like shareware. If you get sufficiently annoyed by the nagging and missing functionality then they figure you will buy. What they don't want is for some fool to download it have it not work and switch to a different OS.
To Microsoft Piracy is just another Try Before You Buy approach.
Slashdot Mirror
I did the same just to see what it was like... I'll be upgrading to Ubuntu Compiz after the holidays settle down. The performance is just way to low on Vista to even think about keeping. it.
Amen...
I don't see that much needing fixing actually. Incremental Improvements are a great way to go. Trying to fix all the problems all at once only results a lot of wasted effort.
Seems to me the W3C could learn something from some of the Agile Development Methodologies gaining popularity these days.
Doubleclick is not owned by Google. Doubleclick is in the process of being acquired by Google. There is a difference. Verify your facts before blurting them out next time.
Exactly!!! All the complaints are API specific not language specific. Maybe what should be going on is a better set of DOM API's and SVG and X-Form support that doesn't suck?
Seriously folks the problem isn't javascript. the problem is HTML and CSS. We don't need a new language we need a new way of making widgets in the webpage. Javascript can power that just as well as anything else. I fail to see the problem here. Heck half of mozilla is written in javascript so we know it can more. The limiting factor isn't javascript the language it's the DOM and CSS. Why are we talking about upgrading a language when what we really want are workable cross-platform implementations of X-Forms and SVG with and an API to them that isn't insane?
I really don't understand this whole Javascript is horrible attitude. Javascript is really quite useful and nice. It's approach to Object Oriented is, while different, very useful. It has all the features a basic language needs Branching Looping and variable storage. It is partially functional in nature so that may throw some people off a bit but once you get the whole idea it just flows naturally. Javascript is actually my second favourite language.
Implementations vary as to their usefullness of course. Mozilla's is by far the best and Venkman gives you as good a debugger as you could ask for. I don't even see what more Javascript needs. Maybe threading would be useful maybe not. The DOM functions need a lot of improvement but libraries like MochiKit and JQuery hide a lot of that pain and I see no reason why that should be a problem.
Microsoft's implementation is the least friendly but even it does most of what I need in a language. What exactly are the complaints to Javascript other than "I'm not used to thinking this way?"
there is absolutely no reason why Parrot couldn't target javascript. Whether it does or not I couldn't say right now. But nothing in it's implementation prohibits targetting javascript.
Actually at it's basest level Punishment is about two things. One is to make the person not want to do something again. The other is to make everyone else not want to do the same thing.
One of those is rehabilitation. The other is deterrence. Say what you will about the woman's innocence or apparent good nature. In order to satisfy the deterrence aspect you have to administer the punishment regardless of the the persons attitude, remorse, or insistence on innocence.
Actually Rehabilitation is the probably the least effective result of the Punishment administered by the justice system. I'm fairly confident that deterrence works pretty well though. As you said for precedence reasons and, to send the right message about justice for murder in America to the rest of the American populace, they had to administer punishment no matter how late it was.
I've several people say this and I have to respond... Like Flikr Youtube serves two different puposes. One is the social sharing of media. The other is free bandwidth and hosting of content. In all likelihood the second is what she was doing. Not everyone has their own site to host stuff like this on. And if a friend or family member sent me an email with a video attached they'd get a stern lecture from me about appropriate email etiquette. There are a lot of people who upload to sites like YouTube and Flikr because it's an easy way to show other people their photo's or home-videos. Making any kind of judgement about her motives based on the fact she uploaded it to youtube shows a bias you probably don't want advertised on slashdot. So you might want to think before posting next time.
While it may be a reasonable assumption, you are still making an assumption. I am one of those vocal geeks linux geeks. Here is why I want preinstalled linux. I can buy boxes for my 5 kids and wife. Those don't have to be cutting edge. As for installing the 6 month distro release I usually upgrade. Which is fairly easy. And for hardware that Dell has already determined to be compatible is likely to be even easier. So I'm not going to be reinstalling. Which is pretty much the same as installing the latest Windows service pack or security update. The primary point is that there is a market that is larger than Dell may have previously thought and that Dell could make money at it if they wanted to.
And the Licensing for windows is better? No matter what OS they choose Licensing is a headache. At least with Linux they have options. Ubuntu and Debian might be a better choice than Redhat or Suse for trademark licensing. And if they really wanted to they could fork debian and like ubuntu did and have Dell Linux with community support and input into what hardware gets supported. The options give them something they don't have with MS. The idea here is that they could should they desire make money in this sector. No one is saying the have to just that they could.
That's all true. It doesn't change however the fact that people have demonstrated the market. It may not be as big as the windows preinstalled market. It may not be their target market. But it does exist and now they can't deny it's existence. They are still free to leave that market to someone else, but the market does exist.
Great Rhetoric. You missed the point though. What about the guy/gal who wants to run the latest cutting edge release of Inkscape but doesn't want to upgrade her whole OS to do so. He/She is also an artist and doesn't know thing one about compiling an app from source. What should he/she do? Live with it? Learn how to use make and manage libraries? Switch to windows?
Thank goodness Inkscape has an autopackage release. He/She can one click install the latest and greatness without polluting her repositories in YUM or APT. You talk about choice and limiting freedom with one breath and with the next you effectively limit his/hers choices/freedom to use software.
Said hypothetical person may also want to install Cinelerra to do video? What are his/her options then? add a repository? switch to a different distro? compile from source? Too bad Cinelerra doesn't have an autopackage release. She could just double click the file and install it no fuss no muss.
The thing about sounding Elitist is that you sound like you want to limit other people's right to use good free and cutting edge software unless they meet your standards. That's called prejudice from where I'm standing.
And before you ask yes I do compile from source when I need to or want to tweak an app. But I also really enjoy having the convenience of autopackage and APT and YUM when I just want to get to work. I can't bill a customer for compile time.
That's an awful lot of statements of fact with nothing to back it up. How about some proof for what your spouting off?
your next action will be to give me a million dollars. email me for my address :-)
That's great and all but it throws the baby out with the bathwater. I design perfectly legitimate sites that use ajax to do certain things. This will break them. Unless it is somehow able to detect bad vs good javascript. That of course depends on using a signature or some kind of heuristics which reduces it's effectiveness.
Or Maybe it relies on a white list/black list approach. Does this mean we have to add sites to our "trusted security zone"? We all know how that turns out. We get so used to clicking on OK that the software becomes totally useless.
Or maybe they have done the impossible and looked into the future and know every single piece of malware that will be thought up for the life of their product. Then it might work.
The Genie is out of the bottle folks. People need and want javascript. You can't just strip it out of webpages all willy nilly and not expect people to get ticked. Identifying problem code is just about impossible on a consistent basis. If you really want to live without javascript you can already turn it off in your browser. How is this different? Sure it lets you supposedly see what the site would look like with it enabled on the first load, but none of the dynamic stuff that happens when you click something or the javascript timer runs, will work which is the whole point of doing javascript. So why exactly is this helpful again?
While it is indeed against SEC regulations. Those regulations do not fall under the category of Federal Law. They are just a bunch of beauratic rules for doing business in the American stock market. Federal Law is voted on by elected representatives of government.
There are some OSS ones that already do. And by and large all the Commercial SIS software sucks here in Illinois. I for one wouldn't mind seeing one of the 30+ schools I help manage switch to the OSS SIS software so my workload would go down.
Myspace is nothing like Geocities. Geocities let people design decent web sites. Myspace just forces people to use crappy web technology giving them no choice but to have crappy websites unless they send a significant portion of their life hacking the system. That comparison is an insult to geocities.
Wow, somone woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. Google Spreadsheets are cool. And innovative, and they work. Google isn't trying to compete with MS on anything but search. This other stuff really just serves two purposes. It keeps their smart people happy, and it keeps their rep up. Both of which are extremely important in a web technology company. You mentioned Gmail, Earth, News, Calendar, And Search as products which rock. All of those projects except search started as google labs projects. Not all of the Lab stuff has to take off. But if only a tenth of them do then Google has recouped it's investment.
It was a nice kneejerk reaction but like most kneejerk reactions it was totally off base.
Speaking to the newspapers as a citizen about abuses at the D.A's office would have been protected free speech. Speaking as a lawyer and sharing details of your office's case to the opposition in a manner that hurts your office's case under the official capacity as a representative of that office is not. He didn't blow the whistle, he undermined the D.A.'s case as a D.A. employee. The question of whether the D.A. was correct has nothing to do with the employee's free speech right. The fact is that within the framework of his position he is required as a lawyer to support his case not undermine it.
It's similar to the principle of Attorney client privilege really. A Lawyer for defense may know facts that prove his client is guilty but he is not allowed to repeat them. It's a matter of his job. His job requires that he keep silent about them. Free speech doesn't apply in that instance. Free speech is not a globally applicable right. There are a number of instances where it has no business being applied.
I won't tell you you should have used a different distribution. But I will say that that scenario could happen on any OS whether it's the mac, Windows, or SuSE. Someone or something changed her default mail client. You may not know what but nothing says it can't happen again no matter what you get her.
In fact most likely she is the one who changed the setting on accident. In which case she is just as likely to do something accidental again on whatever you get for her. This can hardly be blamed on OSS difficult to use.
Come on.. The title and summary make it sound like Google is actually buying these sites and plastering ads all over them. Google can hardly be responsible for what people use their service for. They don't even necessarily know it's a domain/typo squatting page. Don't put this on Google, put it on the people who own and operate the sites. This is google bashing on a laughable level.
A browser is only a JEE environment if Java is installed. Browser does not equal JEE in any sense of the word.
Seems to me if I recall correctly that even before the DMCA came out you weren't allowed to just download whatever you wanted just because it was on the web. The DMCA didn't make it suddenly illegal. It didn't even make it particularly more difficult. Perhaps you should consider a different argument? For the record I'm pretty sure that Copywrite is a seperate issue from the DMCA.
That's easy to explain. You see windows actually views Piracy as one potential entrypoint to their software. Sort of like shareware. If you get sufficiently annoyed by the nagging and missing functionality then they figure you will buy. What they don't want is for some fool to download it have it not work and switch to a different OS.
To Microsoft Piracy is just another Try Before You Buy approach.