Except that if you look at the patch, you will see it's not just "a constant change". If it was this easy, it would have been done already.
The constant change was bundled with a reingineering of the groups structure into a dynamic array. NGROUPS_MAX was and is still a compile time constant that can be altered in either system. It can be debated whether the fixed size array or dynamic array is more appropriate based on memory and kernel cpu time considerations, but my point remains - Linux doesn't have some penguin hoodoo magic that makes it support more supplemental user groups than FreeBSD; its default limits are simply higher. If you don't believe me, open up Marshall Kirk McKusick's book, "The Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System" (p.68):
Historically, GIDs were implemented as one distinguished GID (the effective GID) and a supplementary array of GIDs, which was logically treated as one set of GIDs. In FreeBSD, the distinguished GID is the first entry in the array of GIDs. The supplementary array is of a fixed size (16 in FreeBSD), but may be changed by recompiling the kernel.
And couldn't you at least give me a chuckle on the play on the One Ring? I thought it was pretty funny myself.
Are you aware that Linux 2.6.3 is 5 years old? Linux increased the default group limit in the following release, 2.6.4, to 65536
I absolutely love this argument that "linux is better" because one constant in the kernel is bigger in the linux kernel (thus also causing certain kernel data structures to be necessarily larger) than on FreeBSD, neither are runtime configurable, both can be changed at kernel build time, and the common case is that a user belongs to well under 65K groups. I concede, linux has won the day, and is the One UNIX-like System To Rule Them All.
Three UNIX-like Systems for the mainframe users under the sky,
Seven for the RISC lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Open Source projects doomed to die,
One for the Penguin Lord on his dark throne,
In the land of Helsinki where the Penguins lie.
One UNIX-like System to rule them all, one UNIX-like system to find them,
One UNIX-like System to bring them all, and in the GPL legally bind them
In the land of Helsinki where the Penguins lie.
That is, until some pesky meddling halfling tosses it back into the fiery chasm from whence it came.
It appears they were well-acquainted with modern ideas like socialism and rejected them soundly as being a poor idea.
Non sequitur. None of them were opposed to taxation. There is a loooong way from providing some absolutely rudimentary societal benefits for those in dire need to "providing everything [everyone] needs".
Yes, as I recall from my high school U.S. History it was one first official acts of the U.S. Congress and President Washington to levy a tax on distilled spirits, and enforce it militarily. I don't really see any equivocation of taxation to socialism there. And in any case, socialism as a concept was not even contrived until the 1830's, a full 60 years after the revolution. The capitalist idea did not exist at the time either, the U.S. simply continued along the evolutionary road to capitalism that it shared with Britain in the mercantile system because that was the already established economy from the colonial period.
If my government procures a new car for Master Bob, I gain nothing except theft of my labor. I'm working not for my benefit, but to enrich somebody else. It's a human rights violation.
I'd really love to see this new car program, can you send me a link to the legislation?
An open source system BESIDES linux is releasing?!
on
FreeBSD 7.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
Cue variations of "linux is better", "who uses FreeBSD anyway?", "GPL FTW!", and "the installer makes me frowny face" from linux fanboys that are in no way adversely affected by the advances of other projects in 3... 2... 1...
I think you're missing my point, and from your tone, I suspect it's on purpose. I'm sure the submitter can make a good cable. But the boss doesn't know that. And should he put his own ass on the line just because the submitter CLAIMS he can make quality cables?
Look: when something goes wrong in a company, somebody gets blamed. They call it all sorts of things, like "root cause analysis" or some other jargon bullshit, but it's really sticking someone with the blame. If you're the boss, you really, really don't want the blame to land on you OR your department.
If a bought cable goes bad, the blame only goes to you if you made a bad choice of supplier, which is why you buy from ESTABLISHED companies. On the other hand, if a homemade cable goes bad, it's your subordinate's skills, and more importantly, YOUR JUDGMENT that's called into question.
You don't want that, and you know that nobody will ever question your decision to spend a little extra buying cables instead of making them. What decision would you make?
No, look , I said I agree and I mean it. If I had complained to the Outback Steakhouse management about my steak last night someone would have to have been blamed too, and since Outback's cooks didn't even touch the food I ate the manager can go point the finger at that established supplier and say "not it!" and never have to worry about whether or not he actually hired adequately prepared or trained staff. He can in good conscience pay salary and benefits to people whose skills he never intends on using, spend extra money on goods and services that those employees would otherwise be responsible for, and upper management will laud him for it and send him on company retreats to Switzerland. And the steak tastes GREAT like everything else on the McDonald's menu, truly the quality that one would expect at a fine dining experience like Outback Steakhouse.
This is a CYA issue. Your boss does not want to explain to HIS boss, when a cable goes bad and the company is losing $large_number per hour until it is diagnosed and fixed, that he authorized one of his tech guys to use "homemade" cables.
I absolutely agree. You can't trust an IT professional's "homemade" cables any more than you can trust a cook's "homemade" meal. That's why you should always buy your work instead of doing it yourself. I went to Outback Steakhouse yesterday and ate the best steak I ever had, and do you know why? It was because THEIR COOKS DIDN'T MAKE IT! They did the sensible thing and took my order across the street to McDonald's, returning to me (at a marginal reseller's markup) a quality steak from a trusted manufacturer. And if the steak had been bad, the cooks had done their duty to their job security and could just say to their boss, "Hey, it came from McDonald's! And I'm a valued employee that has skills you need, like being able to run across a busy street during a dinner rush and buy something from another company! So you should definitely just blame McDonald's and let me get back to flirting with the hostess!" Bingo! The boss is happy, the customer gets mediocre service and quality at insane profit, and the cooks don't have any value to the business at all! That's exactly how every business should operate! Because if you trust your workers to do the jobs you hired them for, you're just setting yourself up for disappointment. Because since you weren't able to purchase your employees at an employee store and instead had to choose them yourself, they obviously must be as unqualified for their jobs as you know you are.
I think you might go to the optometrist soon, because your eye-site may not be so good as you think. Oh, and your in-site on Linux is about as educated as an Ozark backwoods rumrunner.
That three-app limit isnâ(TM)t as cut and dried as it sounds... Windows Explorer windows donâ(TM)t count... basic Windows tools donâ(TM)t trigger the limit... Desktop gadgets are free... some system utilities get to bypass the three-app limit
So, basically, the three app limit is there to hinder the end user's use of products that compete with Windows' own components that are unhindered. Can't run Firefox, Thunderbird, Pidgin, and Openoffice all at the same time? No problem, just supplant one of those with a Windows component and buy a little of your freedom back with a little bit of soul crushing submission.
Oblig comment about how those $150 dollar/month heavy users will likely still be throttled anyway, regardless of any promises or assurances the company is going to make to the contrary.
Oblig comment about likely all unlimited users' information will make it into the hands of the MPAA/RIAA, who will conclude that the only way a user could use that much bandwidth is if they were pirating copyrighted content.
Microsoft is now primed to buy Uniloc to recover its lost $388 million dollars, continue using Uniloc's technology without license, and smite those who dare to obstruct its omnipotence.
Indeed. However, I can watch Hulu shows now without resorting to Qemu (which is too slow anyway for the task) or the family XP machine (*shudder*).
But now that everyone and their dog are producing flash content that refuses to operate if you don't have flash 10, and the linux flash 10 binary has declared ALSA as the One True Sound System, I no longer get sound in my nspluginwrapper'ed flash. I wonder if anyone out there was worked around this..
Personally I`m waiting for voice recognition to become practical. I think that's more the future of how we control our devices.
Yeah, the thing I want to do most while lying in bed watching TV with a half-open eye is to yell "TURN IT DOWN" and "TURN IT UP" at every commercial break. Finally ready to go to bed? Yell "POWER OFF" and go into a deep slumber knowing you woke up your whole house so you could go to sleep.
Anyone remember the terrorist Lite-Brite Toy Incident in Boston?
Do you mean the Aqua Teen Hunger Force Boston Bomb Scare? I got a chuckle out of that, followed by a sigh of disbelief at how retardedly inept this nation has become. We fail epically to keep a known terrorist from attacking the WTC not once but twice in no small fashion, but now when a panel of LEDs and four batteries shows up on the street one night we'll piss our pants, cordon off a two block radius, and blow it to hell with the bomb disposal unit. Our government and law enforcement just doesn't seem to have a grasp of proper response. We take serious threats too lightly and small perceived threats far too seriously.
Circuit City cut their own throat in a series of dreadful missteps(culminating in their brilliant "Hey, let's sack all the halfway competent salespeople and attempt to hire them back at downright insulting newb wages" scheme), their demise is well deserved. Even in death, their prices are high and their service lousy. Why is their death sad?
The ineptitude started to become visible to me two years ago when I went to purchase a TV stand they had. It was listed both on the website and it was on the floor of a local store. The web ordering wouldn't work, and the store had none of them in stock and the sales person tried for a half hour to no avail (despite his cursing under his breath repeatedly) to order the item through the in-store system (which actually turns out to be the broken web site, surprise).
They were generous enough to offer to sell me the dinged-up and fingerprint-laden floor model at the retail price plus an extra $75 fee for their expert assembly - which resulted in the side panels being installed backwards (exposed particle board in the front) and the doors upside-down. I passed on the generosity of their offer and took my business elsewhere. It simply became clear to me in that moment that Circuit City was doomed to fail, for its absurd dysfunctionality.
Politicians have to be the stupidist creatures on earth.
Maybe we'd have less terrorism if we banned politcians.
Hey, terrorist were *reading* maps to plan terrorist attacks. Let's outlaw reading!
But if you dare say "Maybe we shouldn't put automatic assault rifles into the hands of anyone with a driver's license", then the gun freaks go ape-shit.
That's a nice straw man you've built. May I please shoot it with my assault weapon?
Its sounds like, if anything, someone transfered the data to a non-secure machine.
What sounds a LOT more plausible is that this is all an attempt to further demonize P2P. And, I say this with my tinfoil hat still on the hat rack.
I agree. This national story hits at the same time as a story that aired this weekend on my local news about P2P software being a gateway for "hackers" to steal your identity, as one local asshole's entire disk was shared by his daughters on Limewire - to download mp3s - and someone nabbed and filed his 2009 taxes to get his refund. What triggered my spidey-sense is that the story nonchalantly tiptoed around the typical music-stealing-is-bad angle instill a fear not of the RIAA or MPAA, but of some malicious ghost hacker somewhere in teh intarweb that's going to steal your IRS refund and get a credit card in your name and buy an RV. It smells to me like this 'leak' of the Marine One blueprints and my local news story of P2P devilry are being pushed as a new tactic to get John Q. Public to stop enjoying peer-to-peer networking.
And we should also not forget that "Marine One" is only a call sign and could refer to any of several particular vehicles that had at some point carried the designation that were built from several different airframes - H-13, H-34, VH-3A, VH-3D or VH-60N - that span over half a decade. I wouldn't be surprised if a journalist made the leap from "VH-3A" to "Marine One" after doing a quick google, and figure that his story would be so much more dramatic if the leak might entail a danger to the president, regardless of whether it is true or that the design is over 40 years old. The story simply makes no attempt to detail what the journalist identifies as "Marine One."
Heck, Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X happened in what, 2001? OK that was a major breaker for software and hardware alike, but we haven't had to suffer it in 8 years and there's no threat looming in the future.
And on that note, although the MacOS to OS X transition completely wrecked ABI compatibility, the engineers still saw fit to provide a MacOS compat layer to support legacy applications on PowerPC Macs all the way up until 10.5 was released in 2007 - 6 years after the initial release of OS X.
MPAA/RIAA lawsuits against anyone who buys these devices, because obviously you can't afford to fill that device with legitimately purchased content or you'd be as bankrupt as they're going to make you with the lawsuit.
I'm constantly reminded of the scene in Caesar's Palace in Monty Python The Life of Brian. You know, where Brian tries to separate the People's Front of Judea and the Campaign to Free Galilee.
""This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis," she wrote. "
Isn't that exactly like most private health insurance?
Close, but the formula for modern health care is more like dividing the cost of the treatment by the years the patient is likely to benefit as a ratio to the profitability of the patient in regards to the number of years of premiums they have left in them
Wasn't the "Mojave Experiment" done to show people's bias against "Vista" was due mostly to bad hype? Bad hype spread by "knowledgeable" computer geeks, that had mostly not used Vista themselves? They asked people what they felt/heard about "Vista" beforehand, then showed them Vista under a different name to demonstrate this.
Why was this begging for a response, was there something about Vista that you felt was uncovered? Something not shown, questions not asked? Oh, no, instead we show random people off the street a new computer interface and smugly lie about it being a different new computer interface!
What is this video's message? Microsoft should take out full page ads with vista desktop screenshots? Two minutes of TV commercial pointing and clicking on a desktop?
Really, what is the point man? I know you didn't make this video, but I'm curious what makes you think this was a worthwhile experiment, or even related to the "Mojave Experiment" marketing.
I could pick random people off the street and dupe most of them into thinking a C-130 is a DC-10, or a KC-135, or probably any large aircraft for that matter. What would that prove? That people who had never seen one before can't infer from the name what it is? HAH!
I think you really agree with my opinion, but not in a way you anticipate. The Mojave campaign was a knee-jerk reaction to abysmal Vista adoption because of Vista's very real problems and lack of value to consumers. The commercial was a stitch of people saying "wow", "that's neat", and "oh I like that" while sitting in front of a computer screen. What were they seeing? Benchmarks? A DVD? A dancing baby? We don't know. They don't show us so much as a screenshot. So in that spirit, the ZDNet video shows that this sort of ad doesn't say anything of value. If you watched the whole thing, the guys ask themselves at the end of the video, "what did we learn? nothing." Showing a pretty computer screen to people and recording them saying "oooh" and "aaah" says nothing about the product in question because the audience doesn't even identify what the product is. In the Mojave commercials, they hid Vista under the monicker of a "new" Windows to elicit that reaction. The ZDNet video showed you could do the same thing with a KDE desktop and people would still ooh and aaah because that is not a real measure of quality. You tell them it's new hotness and they'll agree with you and tell you it's awesome because they want to be cool too. For clarification, I think the ZDNet video is an appropriate response because it's equally trite and uninformative.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that if you look at the patch, you will see it's not just "a constant change". If it was this easy, it would have been done already.
The constant change was bundled with a reingineering of the groups structure into a dynamic array. NGROUPS_MAX was and is still a compile time constant that can be altered in either system. It can be debated whether the fixed size array or dynamic array is more appropriate based on memory and kernel cpu time considerations, but my point remains - Linux doesn't have some penguin hoodoo magic that makes it support more supplemental user groups than FreeBSD; its default limits are simply higher. If you don't believe me, open up Marshall Kirk McKusick's book, "The Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD Operating System" (p.68):
And couldn't you at least give me a chuckle on the play on the One Ring? I thought it was pretty funny myself.
Are you aware that Linux 2.6.3 is 5 years old? Linux increased the default group limit in the following release, 2.6.4, to 65536
I absolutely love this argument that "linux is better" because one constant in the kernel is bigger in the linux kernel (thus also causing certain kernel data structures to be necessarily larger) than on FreeBSD, neither are runtime configurable, both can be changed at kernel build time, and the common case is that a user belongs to well under 65K groups. I concede, linux has won the day, and is the One UNIX-like System To Rule Them All.
Three UNIX-like Systems for the mainframe users under the sky,
Seven for the RISC lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Open Source projects doomed to die,
One for the Penguin Lord on his dark throne,
In the land of Helsinki where the Penguins lie.
One UNIX-like System to rule them all, one UNIX-like system to find them,
One UNIX-like System to bring them all, and in the GPL legally bind them
In the land of Helsinki where the Penguins lie.
That is, until some pesky meddling halfling tosses it back into the fiery chasm from whence it came.
Non sequitur. None of them were opposed to taxation. There is a loooong way from providing some absolutely rudimentary societal benefits for those in dire need to "providing everything [everyone] needs".
Yes, as I recall from my high school U.S. History it was one first official acts of the U.S. Congress and President Washington to levy a tax on distilled spirits, and enforce it militarily. I don't really see any equivocation of taxation to socialism there. And in any case, socialism as a concept was not even contrived until the 1830's, a full 60 years after the revolution. The capitalist idea did not exist at the time either, the U.S. simply continued along the evolutionary road to capitalism that it shared with Britain in the mercantile system because that was the already established economy from the colonial period.
If my government procures a new car for Master Bob, I gain nothing except theft of my labor. I'm working not for my benefit, but to enrich somebody else. It's a human rights violation.
I'd really love to see this new car program, can you send me a link to the legislation?
Cue variations of "linux is better", "who uses FreeBSD anyway?", "GPL FTW!", and "the installer makes me frowny face" from linux fanboys that are in no way adversely affected by the advances of other projects in 3... 2... 1...
I think you're missing my point, and from your tone, I suspect it's on purpose. I'm sure the submitter can make a good cable. But the boss doesn't know that. And should he put his own ass on the line just because the submitter CLAIMS he can make quality cables?
Look: when something goes wrong in a company, somebody gets blamed. They call it all sorts of things, like "root cause analysis" or some other jargon bullshit, but it's really sticking someone with the blame. If you're the boss, you really, really don't want the blame to land on you OR your department.
If a bought cable goes bad, the blame only goes to you if you made a bad choice of supplier, which is why you buy from ESTABLISHED companies. On the other hand, if a homemade cable goes bad, it's your subordinate's skills, and more importantly, YOUR JUDGMENT that's called into question.
You don't want that, and you know that nobody will ever question your decision to spend a little extra buying cables instead of making them. What decision would you make?
No, look , I said I agree and I mean it. If I had complained to the Outback Steakhouse management about my steak last night someone would have to have been blamed too, and since Outback's cooks didn't even touch the food I ate the manager can go point the finger at that established supplier and say "not it!" and never have to worry about whether or not he actually hired adequately prepared or trained staff. He can in good conscience pay salary and benefits to people whose skills he never intends on using, spend extra money on goods and services that those employees would otherwise be responsible for, and upper management will laud him for it and send him on company retreats to Switzerland. And the steak tastes GREAT like everything else on the McDonald's menu, truly the quality that one would expect at a fine dining experience like Outback Steakhouse.
This is a CYA issue. Your boss does not want to explain to HIS boss, when a cable goes bad and the company is losing $large_number per hour until it is diagnosed and fixed, that he authorized one of his tech guys to use "homemade" cables.
I absolutely agree. You can't trust an IT professional's "homemade" cables any more than you can trust a cook's "homemade" meal. That's why you should always buy your work instead of doing it yourself. I went to Outback Steakhouse yesterday and ate the best steak I ever had, and do you know why? It was because THEIR COOKS DIDN'T MAKE IT! They did the sensible thing and took my order across the street to McDonald's, returning to me (at a marginal reseller's markup) a quality steak from a trusted manufacturer. And if the steak had been bad, the cooks had done their duty to their job security and could just say to their boss, "Hey, it came from McDonald's! And I'm a valued employee that has skills you need, like being able to run across a busy street during a dinner rush and buy something from another company! So you should definitely just blame McDonald's and let me get back to flirting with the hostess!" Bingo! The boss is happy, the customer gets mediocre service and quality at insane profit, and the cooks don't have any value to the business at all! That's exactly how every business should operate! Because if you trust your workers to do the jobs you hired them for, you're just setting yourself up for disappointment. Because since you weren't able to purchase your employees at an employee store and instead had to choose them yourself, they obviously must be as unqualified for their jobs as you know you are.
Should definitely be the name of the forked project. East it, Oracle.
I think you might go to the optometrist soon, because your eye-site may not be so good as you think. Oh, and your in-site on Linux is about as educated as an Ozark backwoods rumrunner.
That three-app limit isnâ(TM)t as cut and dried as it sounds ... Windows Explorer windows donâ(TM)t count ... basic Windows tools donâ(TM)t trigger the limit ... Desktop gadgets are free ... some system utilities get to bypass the three-app limit
So, basically, the three app limit is there to hinder the end user's use of products that compete with Windows' own components that are unhindered. Can't run Firefox, Thunderbird, Pidgin, and Openoffice all at the same time? No problem, just supplant one of those with a Windows component and buy a little of your freedom back with a little bit of soul crushing submission.
Oblig comment about how those $150 dollar/month heavy users will likely still be throttled anyway, regardless of any promises or assurances the company is going to make to the contrary.
Oblig comment about likely all unlimited users' information will make it into the hands of the MPAA/RIAA, who will conclude that the only way a user could use that much bandwidth is if they were pirating copyrighted content.
Microsoft is now primed to buy Uniloc to recover its lost $388 million dollars, continue using Uniloc's technology without license, and smite those who dare to obstruct its omnipotence.
Indeed. However, I can watch Hulu shows now without resorting to Qemu (which is too slow anyway for the task) or the family XP machine (*shudder*).
But now that everyone and their dog are producing flash content that refuses to operate if you don't have flash 10, and the linux flash 10 binary has declared ALSA as the One True Sound System, I no longer get sound in my nspluginwrapper'ed flash. I wonder if anyone out there was worked around this..
This technology was originally patented by Atypical Peripheral Recognition Intelligence Laboratories as "Facial Orientation Observation Language".
Personally I`m waiting for voice recognition to become practical. I think that's more the future of how we control our devices.
Yeah, the thing I want to do most while lying in bed watching TV with a half-open eye is to yell "TURN IT DOWN" and "TURN IT UP" at every commercial break. Finally ready to go to bed? Yell "POWER OFF" and go into a deep slumber knowing you woke up your whole house so you could go to sleep.
Anyone remember the terrorist Lite-Brite Toy Incident in Boston?
Do you mean the Aqua Teen Hunger Force Boston Bomb Scare? I got a chuckle out of that, followed by a sigh of disbelief at how retardedly inept this nation has become. We fail epically to keep a known terrorist from attacking the WTC not once but twice in no small fashion, but now when a panel of LEDs and four batteries shows up on the street one night we'll piss our pants, cordon off a two block radius, and blow it to hell with the bomb disposal unit. Our government and law enforcement just doesn't seem to have a grasp of proper response. We take serious threats too lightly and small perceived threats far too seriously.
Circuit City cut their own throat in a series of dreadful missteps(culminating in their brilliant "Hey, let's sack all the halfway competent salespeople and attempt to hire them back at downright insulting newb wages" scheme), their demise is well deserved. Even in death, their prices are high and their service lousy. Why is their death sad?
The ineptitude started to become visible to me two years ago when I went to purchase a TV stand they had. It was listed both on the website and it was on the floor of a local store. The web ordering wouldn't work, and the store had none of them in stock and the sales person tried for a half hour to no avail (despite his cursing under his breath repeatedly) to order the item through the in-store system (which actually turns out to be the broken web site, surprise).
They were generous enough to offer to sell me the dinged-up and fingerprint-laden floor model at the retail price plus an extra $75 fee for their expert assembly - which resulted in the side panels being installed backwards (exposed particle board in the front) and the doors upside-down. I passed on the generosity of their offer and took my business elsewhere. It simply became clear to me in that moment that Circuit City was doomed to fail, for its absurd dysfunctionality.
Politicians have to be the stupidist creatures on earth. Maybe we'd have less terrorism if we banned politcians.
Hey, terrorist were *reading* maps to plan terrorist attacks. Let's outlaw reading!
But if you dare say "Maybe we shouldn't put automatic assault rifles into the hands of anyone with a driver's license", then the gun freaks go ape-shit.
That's a nice straw man you've built. May I please shoot it with my assault weapon?
Its sounds like, if anything, someone transfered the data to a non-secure machine.
What sounds a LOT more plausible is that this is all an attempt to further demonize P2P. And, I say this with my tinfoil hat still on the hat rack.
I agree. This national story hits at the same time as a story that aired this weekend on my local news about P2P software being a gateway for "hackers" to steal your identity, as one local asshole's entire disk was shared by his daughters on Limewire - to download mp3s - and someone nabbed and filed his 2009 taxes to get his refund. What triggered my spidey-sense is that the story nonchalantly tiptoed around the typical music-stealing-is-bad angle instill a fear not of the RIAA or MPAA, but of some malicious ghost hacker somewhere in teh intarweb that's going to steal your IRS refund and get a credit card in your name and buy an RV. It smells to me like this 'leak' of the Marine One blueprints and my local news story of P2P devilry are being pushed as a new tactic to get John Q. Public to stop enjoying peer-to-peer networking.
And we should also not forget that "Marine One" is only a call sign and could refer to any of several particular vehicles that had at some point carried the designation that were built from several different airframes - H-13, H-34, VH-3A, VH-3D or VH-60N - that span over half a decade. I wouldn't be surprised if a journalist made the leap from "VH-3A" to "Marine One" after doing a quick google, and figure that his story would be so much more dramatic if the leak might entail a danger to the president, regardless of whether it is true or that the design is over 40 years old. The story simply makes no attempt to detail what the journalist identifies as "Marine One."
Heck, Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X happened in what, 2001? OK that was a major breaker for software and hardware alike, but we haven't had to suffer it in 8 years and there's no threat looming in the future.
And on that note, although the MacOS to OS X transition completely wrecked ABI compatibility, the engineers still saw fit to provide a MacOS compat layer to support legacy applications on PowerPC Macs all the way up until 10.5 was released in 2007 - 6 years after the initial release of OS X.
MPAA/RIAA lawsuits against anyone who buys these devices, because obviously you can't afford to fill that device with legitimately purchased content or you'd be as bankrupt as they're going to make you with the lawsuit.
I'm constantly reminded of the scene in Caesar's Palace in Monty Python The Life of Brian. You know, where Brian tries to separate the People's Front of Judea and the Campaign to Free Galilee.
And the Judean Popular People's Front. Splitters.
""This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis," she wrote. " Isn't that exactly like most private health insurance?
Close, but the formula for modern health care is more like dividing the cost of the treatment by the years the patient is likely to benefit as a ratio to the profitability of the patient in regards to the number of years of premiums they have left in them
Why not both? This is chump change compared to the bailout, and hey! It might actually work!!! :D
Hey, you're not using my tax dollars to create jobs for alien workers...
Wasn't the "Mojave Experiment" done to show people's bias against "Vista" was due mostly to bad hype? Bad hype spread by "knowledgeable" computer geeks, that had mostly not used Vista themselves? They asked people what they felt/heard about "Vista" beforehand, then showed them Vista under a different name to demonstrate this.
Why was this begging for a response, was there something about Vista that you felt was uncovered? Something not shown, questions not asked? Oh, no, instead we show random people off the street a new computer interface and smugly lie about it being a different new computer interface!
What is this video's message? Microsoft should take out full page ads with vista desktop screenshots? Two minutes of TV commercial pointing and clicking on a desktop? Really, what is the point man? I know you didn't make this video, but I'm curious what makes you think this was a worthwhile experiment, or even related to the "Mojave Experiment" marketing.
I could pick random people off the street and dupe most of them into thinking a C-130 is a DC-10, or a KC-135, or probably any large aircraft for that matter. What would that prove? That people who had never seen one before can't infer from the name what it is? HAH!
I think you really agree with my opinion, but not in a way you anticipate. The Mojave campaign was a knee-jerk reaction to abysmal Vista adoption because of Vista's very real problems and lack of value to consumers. The commercial was a stitch of people saying "wow", "that's neat", and "oh I like that" while sitting in front of a computer screen. What were they seeing? Benchmarks? A DVD? A dancing baby? We don't know. They don't show us so much as a screenshot. So in that spirit, the ZDNet video shows that this sort of ad doesn't say anything of value. If you watched the whole thing, the guys ask themselves at the end of the video, "what did we learn? nothing." Showing a pretty computer screen to people and recording them saying "oooh" and "aaah" says nothing about the product in question because the audience doesn't even identify what the product is. In the Mojave commercials, they hid Vista under the monicker of a "new" Windows to elicit that reaction. The ZDNet video showed you could do the same thing with a KDE desktop and people would still ooh and aaah because that is not a real measure of quality. You tell them it's new hotness and they'll agree with you and tell you it's awesome because they want to be cool too. For clarification, I think the ZDNet video is an appropriate response because it's equally trite and uninformative.
All these years OSS is still a giant circle-jerk.
I'd love to hear an explanation of that one.