You do have a choice. Tune funny modifier to -5 and you'll not have to deal with moderators' sense of humor anymore.
I did this when I read a post about some tragedy on Slashdot (I really don't remember what it was) and there was a silly geek joke from an arcade title. It was moderated as funny.
Don't get me wrong. But this is a geek forum and passion for algorithmic excellence does not allow for statements such as "crashing bugs are not a reason not to switch" especially when there is a version that still works and still serves.
But I think my statement was harsher than it should have been and thus I apologize.
It doesn't have to be GNU/Linux (although it is better) -- Windows has fine NAT software products too.
BTW, I was using software NAT on a very clean BNC cable-based ethernet and it was very stable and very configurable. All printers and shared devices were connected to the "server", no extra cables no extra boxes, no problems.
Staying away from MS networking solutions is always a safe choice.
1). The theme: so he doesn't like the theme. That's why themes were invented for, go grab one which you like. Crap.
No, it's not crap. This will be an important reason for many people to avoid 2.0
Yes, there are themes and I immediately installed one of them after I set up Firefox. But you can't ask this from the user base Firefox is aiming at.
3). Confusing Options dialog: hell, have you ever really gone through IE's Tools->Internet options ? Thought so. Anyway, it's really hard to spot well designed dialogs these days. Not a reason for not using the browser. Crap.
It seems you agree on his point and yet call it crap. The options dialog DOES suck. And yes, it's really easy to spot well designed option dialogs, take a look at Microsoft Office.
4). Compatible extensions: man, people need some time for updating their extensions, but they are quick, e.g. all my extensions have been upgraded in a few days. But, if you're willing, in most cases you can fix them on your own.
The cited article is about reasons for NOT upgrading from the good and working 1.5.x. Indeed my most needed extension is not working with 2.0 yet. His objection is solid, yours lacks in more aspects than style.
7). Freezes: yes, they occur. But hello, restore session. I don't say it's no problem, I'm saying it's no reason not to switch.
So you say that it's ok to upgrade to a buggy new version. I really don't think you are entitled to an opinion on Slashdot.
These days, the designated North Korean domain suffix, ".kp" remains dormant
The Internet, as it is, isn't really free. Since the US is currently Korea's #1 enemy on the planet, and the US has a proven record of meddling with the TLD registry (Iraq), the North Koreans are right in not using it.
most evident in a simple satellite image over the shoulder of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld during an Oct. 11 briefing. The image showed the two Koreas -- North and South -- photographed at night. The South was illuminated from coast to coast, suggesting that not just lights, but that other, arguably more bedrock utility of the modern age -- information -- was pulsating through the population. The North was black.
Espionage taken for granted. This article is a disgrace for the New York Times.
Yes, but the problem with mobsters is that they have conflicting interests. Virii rarely do. I really don't think installing Kaspersky would be a very wise move from a mobster's point of view; Kaspersky could easily alter their update system in order to remove the installer virus too.
That's why testing for standards compliance is important: if your site adheres to standards, then it should display reasonably in any browser that supports the standards.
That's absolutely correct. Marvellously written. I agree.
The standards are Google, the Mozilla Foundation, Microsoft, Opera and a few others. So, if your site adheres to the standards, then it should display reasonably in any browser that supports the standards.
What role W3C plays in all that? Well, W3C can help with its online validator, here is how: Sit down, and write an SGML document type definition that covers all the elements that are supported uniformly supported by the standards I've mentioned then have it declared in every (X)HTML document you serve. The W3C will happily accept your DTD and validate your document against the REAL standards.
but you do what you can and hope for the best
You don't have to hope. All you need is, as you said, documents that validate against the standards.
I have used Prime95 in the past to identify problematic configurations. It's a tool whose main goal is to find prime numbers, but it can be used as an excellent stress test for the processor and memory units.
Could Prime95 be used to identify those AMD chips?
Can you imagine the feelings of a person who suddently gets to see....?
The question I would like to such a person is, now that you can see, how would you define black in regards to your previous state ? Did you see black ? Or did you see nothing and you simply cannot describe it ?
Slashdot Mirror
You do have a choice. Tune funny modifier to -5 and you'll not have to deal with moderators' sense of humor anymore.
I did this when I read a post about some tragedy on Slashdot (I really don't remember what it was) and there was a silly geek joke from an arcade title. It was moderated as funny.
Please read parent and consider moderating it positively.
all that Linus did was to get help
This is precisely what heroes do.
Also why is it I find Linux far simpler than Windows
In which appliance?
And don't say "all".
Don't get me wrong. But this is a geek forum and passion for algorithmic excellence does not allow for statements such as "crashing bugs are not a reason not to switch" especially when there is a version that still works and still serves.
But I think my statement was harsher than it should have been and thus I apologize.
Yes, FFDshow and codec packs are nice, but the reliance on DirectShow is still disturbing.
The best solution is to avoid DirectShow and Media Player (or Windows Media) completely.
You can use the VideoLan client. It is faster than DirectShow and does not rely on codecs. And it will never download executable code.
It doesn't have to be GNU/Linux (although it is better) -- Windows has fine NAT software products too.
BTW, I was using software NAT on a very clean BNC cable-based ethernet and it was very stable and very configurable. All printers and shared devices were connected to the "server", no extra cables no extra boxes, no problems.
Staying away from MS networking solutions is always a safe choice.
I knew some Anonymous Coward would pop up to say something about MS Office.
However, unlike the clueless guy who said crashes are not reason for upgrading, you ~are~ allowed to disparage MS on Slashdot (-:
1). The theme: so he doesn't like the theme. That's why themes were invented for, go grab one which you like. Crap.
No, it's not crap. This will be an important reason for many people to avoid 2.0
Yes, there are themes and I immediately installed one of them after I set up Firefox. But you can't ask this from the user base Firefox is aiming at.
3). Confusing Options dialog: hell, have you ever really gone through IE's Tools->Internet options ? Thought so. Anyway, it's really hard to spot well designed dialogs these days. Not a reason for not using the browser. Crap.
It seems you agree on his point and yet call it crap. The options dialog DOES suck. And yes, it's really easy to spot well designed option dialogs, take a look at Microsoft Office.
4). Compatible extensions: man, people need some time for updating their extensions, but they are quick, e.g. all my extensions have been upgraded in a few days. But, if you're willing, in most cases you can fix them on your own.
The cited article is about reasons for NOT upgrading from the good and working 1.5.x. Indeed my most needed extension is not working with 2.0 yet. His objection is solid, yours lacks in more aspects than style.
7). Freezes: yes, they occur. But hello, restore session. I don't say it's no problem, I'm saying it's no reason not to switch.
So you say that it's ok to upgrade to a buggy new version. I really don't think you are entitled to an opinion on Slashdot.
Nah, the secretary of Defense would be just interested in the view.
These days, the designated North Korean domain suffix, ".kp" remains dormant
The Internet, as it is, isn't really free. Since the US is currently Korea's #1 enemy on the planet, and the US has a proven record of meddling with the TLD registry (Iraq), the North Koreans are right in not using it.
most evident in a simple satellite image over the shoulder of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld during an Oct. 11 briefing. The image showed the two Koreas -- North and South -- photographed at night. The South was illuminated from coast to coast, suggesting that not just lights, but that other, arguably more bedrock utility of the modern age -- information -- was pulsating through the population. The North was black.
Espionage taken for granted. This article is a disgrace for the New York Times.
Yes, but the problem with mobsters is that they have conflicting interests. Virii rarely do. I really don't think installing Kaspersky would be a very wise move from a mobster's point of view; Kaspersky could easily alter their update system in order to remove the installer virus too.
But in theory I agree.
That's why testing for standards compliance is important: if your site adheres to standards, then it should display reasonably in any browser that supports the standards.
That's absolutely correct. Marvellously written. I agree.
The standards are Google, the Mozilla Foundation, Microsoft, Opera and a few others. So, if your site adheres to the standards, then it should display reasonably in any browser that supports the standards.
What role W3C plays in all that? Well, W3C can help with its online validator, here is how: Sit down, and write an SGML document type definition that covers all the elements that are supported uniformly supported by the standards I've mentioned then have it declared in every (X)HTML document you serve. The W3C will happily accept your DTD and validate your document against the REAL standards.
but you do what you can and hope for the best
You don't have to hope. All you need is, as you said, documents that validate against the standards.
If it still breaks, well... then the browser is marginal and broken, who cares?
None important, just the customer and the visitors.
Crawl back to CIWAH you moron!
What the fuck does Microsoft have to do with this?
This "Packard Bell" brand seems to be some kind of ping pong ball... everyone wants to pass it on someone else. It was NEC's before, wasn't it?
Could you comment on THAT ?
r es_on_the_rampage/xvid.png
r es_on_the_rampage/multi_1.png
r es_on_the_rampage/ogg.png
r es_on_the_rampage/3dm06-cpu.png
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/08/31/four_co
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/08/31/four_co
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/08/31/four_co
http://images.tomshardware.com/2006/08/31/four_co
The list should have included treeloot.com, one of the oldest scams on the Internet.
To mod him up or down?
I think we all concluded that the kid was right and did not deserve to become a target for ridicule, hadn't we ?
I have used Prime95 in the past to identify problematic configurations. It's a tool whose main goal is to find prime numbers, but it can be used as an excellent stress test for the processor and memory units.
Could Prime95 be used to identify those AMD chips?
and you have been moderated as INSIGHTFUL for that posting???
on SLASHDOT??????
"easy to describe, much harder to imagine"
I wish I could moderate up for insightfulness.
Can you imagine the feelings of a person who suddently gets to see....?
The question I would like to such a person is, now that you can see, how would you define black in regards to your previous state ? Did you see black ? Or did you see nothing and you simply cannot describe it ?
What happens when you use both?