It was always so hard for me to click on someone's screen name in their profile to open up an AIM window to use them.
Popular instant messaging systems be damned, we need another way to send our friends links to shock sites that doesn't work with any others! Don't say the new IM system developed in 2007 is not built on XMPP (aka Jabber).
I am afraid to check the degree of their stupidity.
I understood there could be some real life issues when changing file systems this way:
While I was experimenting with open source tools built from source, I figured the "case sensivity" really matters and the people doing a great job converting them (e.g. Fink) are all getting around these issues.
As I thought one day, I may have to hand-compile a large software from source and my Unix (grep etc) experience is horrible, while formatting my startup as a raid 0 striped, I also set "Case sensitive HFS+"
Now I know nothing from Apple will fail (I bet they work on UFS too) and I am using fairly new software on this workstation, I could do without "ancient" Carbon/OS 9 coded software if they failed.
Nothing from Carbon/OS 9 era failed! All the software having serious issues (one refused to launch from HFSX) are all modern, OS X Frameworks using and even Spotlight metadata using software.
I think Apple is thinking about 3rd party, their own stuff already runs on UFS or (future) ZFS.
An example: The language support scheme. Normally, you should be able to clean or remove each unneeded language from.app's/Resources and they should happily work. If you do this to Adobe Professional Applications, you may create a havoc which may even cost you money in some cases. These are the tools which are developed in modern times, using OS X Frameworks. Adobe simply refuses to use language support as intended on OS X and every single "language cleaner" has special work arounds to stay away from Adobe Professional apps.
I think I know the primary suspect companies which prevents Apple from changing filesystems. Imagine Leopard shipped with ZFS support, every professional switches to it (especially DTP) and some unpredicted horrible failure with Adobe and Quark apps happen. These are the tools which may actually fail when a basic issue with filename text encoding (coming from ancient times) happens.
You can disable Spotlight on a volume with sudo mdutil -i off/Volumes/foo (or simply/ for the root volume).
As has been commented above, ZFS already has support for the metadata stuff.
Yes it is really easy to stop a volume getting indexed. The hard part is adding per directories, e.g./opt/src
I wished I was a developer actually helping the source of those projects but I am not, all I get is a 200mb useless (for me) metadata which makes entire spotlight slow down as a crawl even on a very high speed HD running on a Quad G5 Mac.
I can't trust to stuff I read on web by NDA breaking people but I heard Leopard Spotlight won't have such problems and per Folder settings are really coming (without Privacy trick).
What I need is mdutil -i off/Volumes/foo/SRC . That is what realtime mpeg compressor people (e.g. El Gato EyeTV) needs too.
Does FreeBSD's implementation of DTrace makes it away from BSD? No, that tool is very critical and useful for their needs/focus and they implement it just like Apple planning sort of ZFS support for specific needs.
I don't think UFS using community would be happy about Spotlight anyway.
Spotlight in current form tries to index every single source file, huge framework headers and there is no practical way to stop it. I have tried the Privacy pane as suggested and no, it doesn't explain my 130 MB of spotlight metadata after installing Developer tools and couple of GNU libraries.
If they have checked the NeXT history, they would figure the UFS is the default,supported Filesystem on NeXT. As OS X is a mix of NeXT with FreeBSD and Cocoa/Carbon, it is pretty natural that UFS gets into it a bit lately but finally.
I can imagine what Apple needs for supporting ZFS on startup volumes. Complete metadata and resource support. They could be happy with their ext3 plain filesystem but Apple using professionals REALLY label their files, sometimes change their icons, sometimes has to FORCE OS to open a file with a different version of suite (e.g. Quark 7 vs 6), add comments to them and professional software developers like Adobe still stores critical data on resource forks.
If there is a way to make ZFS support all those features without huge hacks (like the ZIP _resource stuff), they would give up their HFS+. Another thing is, it must support every serious software (non hack) backwards. You may find yourself using a application from 2001 written in Carbon under OS X and only it can provide the tool you require.
I am saying these since some elitists think Apple is backwards and stupid still supporting resource forks and implement special features to OS X just to give minimum compatibility with old applications.
Before critising HFS+ and suggesting Apple to use plain, Unix filesystems, they should sit around in a professional environment such as a DTP house, Movie studio and see how all those "childish" "backwards" features are used by professionals in job.
This is not a post against ZFS, I am just trying to explain why Apple can't magically move to another filesystem just because it has better features. Not even mentioning the "overhead" required by ZFS and the fact that there are some 2k/4k (Cinema) edit environments which you can't even enable journaling let alone adding another layer of overhead.
Also while writing these, if I only used plain Unix tools without any "native Mac" Application, e.g. use OS X as Darwin with X11, UFS would be my choice of filesystem.
Sorry I think couldn't express myself. There are small companies who are tricked by PGP Inc. while open source and perfectly working GnuPGP exists.
Companies like Raytheon can't be tricked, they must be using PGP as a layer of security for special needs. The "really secure" stuff comes with specialised computers (even laptops) which does have dedicated security hardware/encyription on a chip. They wouldn't trust their data to something like PGP anyway.
They must be using military grade laptops on critical data.
I am a member of the general public and I have *NOT* accepted HD-DVD or Blueray as viable formats. I have been waiting for something else to come along that promises my ability to view HD movies that I buy on future players. Part of the DRM system incorporated into both standards will "bind" the discs to the players and play them at reduced resolution in any other player. What happens when my player wears out? Must I re-purchase my entire movie collection?
JSL
-- This space for rent. Well, I got something on my clipboard which I used against my Apple fanatic friends waiting for their master to ship HD movies on iTMS.:)
"Dear Ilgaz,
You have just purchased Sanctuary: E01 (HD) for $2.49 from Vuze."
It is open source Azureus based, file is non DRM and it is HD. The only issue (OK,not being picky) is the use of WMV format for some weird reason I can't understand.
If you are sick of Blu-Ray, HD-DVD the answer could be paying for HD content in digital form... I mean, what if the "Vuze" (or similar,non DRM) guys report 10x more sales of a comparable movie which is also shipped on DRM media? Imagine the suits face while they are staring at some 5 figure receipt by AACS or Macrovision.
Sadly, I don't think it will happen. There are people asking "Why should I pay if I get it via p2p protocol" even on tech sites. Paying for "information" or "arts" sounds stranger than paying for plastic and eventually I will be called "stupid".
Windows has the "Customer Experience Improvement Program," which asks the user this question precisely once after first boot-up. WGA, Windows Update, etc., aren't used to gather this data as part of some type of hidden conspiracy. This has been the case for quite some time. You're an idiot, and a troll. Windows update has to send the installed device profile from user in encyripted form (over HTTPS) to offer user, the WGA enabled user new drivers. There is no documentation of WGA data since they got DRM-like apology for it.
I think you may have mistaken me with ordinary, Mac only users who doesn't know how Windows and the spoiled dictator company MSFT works.
What about this method to stop idiotic trolls like me:
Use plain text XML for system profile, make it opt-in to send hardware profile without prompting user a single time about it, when user clicks "send my information", show them a box which is "Cancel" by DEFAULT, don't promise them things you won't be able to offer (better supporT!?!) and when guy/gal clicks "OK", save the file to/temp directory, use open source, documented bzip2 to compress THAT file, send it over standard HTTPS put file method. A fortune 500 listed, huge company does it. Not couple of geeks sitting in their basement with ultimate privacy utopia. It is named Apple Inc.
They get blacklisted and don't ever get mod points again. Trust me, I know. I committed the "sin" of upmodding something that was critical of Slashdot once, about 6 years ago, and haven't had a modpoint since. Are you sure about it? Once upon a time, a gang of a popular Linux IRC client guys didn't like the fact that I found out they were looking for my comments to moderate down (yes!) and bragging about it on IRC, they did another trick. They reported my IP as suspicious activity (e.g. massive flood etc) to Slashdot admins and the guy got tricked, preventing me to ever post again until I took time to say "some idiot must have tricked you, check my IP,you won't find it on any RBL even" and got fixed. If you are active on Slasdot or any site and you don't agree with popular opinion, any massive abuse may happen. I don't think there is a childish admin to "ban" you from moderating, I think there is an idiot or gang of idiots delibarately somehow reported you. Of course there is a chance of I am being naive...
Indeed. I was in no way saying that they "didn't" know how, but that perhaps they did not wish to reveal the secret to a screwdriver jockey. However, they also were a little clueless about it, but whether that was acting or just plain ignorance, we'll never know. Sad thing is, I would be surprised if any of their customers including privacy concerned (and tricked) home users will take such a scandal serious.
I bet their sales/hour rate didn't move only 1% percent as result of these news. They knew it so they backdoored it. They wouldn't dare to put such an obvious "bug" if they knew sales would get effected.
They should be sued for giving false sense of security to consumers and companies.
Of course, you'll need to get your SMS admin to agree to this. What is the point of not shipping Firefox packaged in MSI installer file? It is the native install method of Windows. Same goes for Apple OS X. They also refuse Installer.app method of installing and provide a non functional "Applications" link having drag drop file. What happens as result? OS X remote desktop having users/companies get hassle. In future, it will be a more hassle since Installer.app is evolving to become MSI like thing.
If they are boycotting (?) Windows, they should boycott alltogether. They are just harming their own programs popularity and enterprise acceptance via not using MSI or Installer.app. MSI also has some handy functions for users which may prevent certain "IE install" accidents (!!) too. E.g. one may auto-repair Firefox installation if some Microsoft tool "accidentally" deleted some parts in future.
If an OS has a native installer facility, it should be chosen. It is even funnier on OS X, I keep hearing some nightmare scenarios with Installer.app and yet Apple happily ships monster sized OS updates using that architecture.
Wouldnt that mean IE7 should have had no WGA requirement, then the WGA requirement added.. rather than the other way around? As a current OS X and ex Windows user, I know the scheme. You can check this comment later in months about it.
Somehow, some programmer made a huge mistake in current version of IE 7 and it creates a huge security issue. The update covering that issue may/will require WGA (later version) for applying.
With WGA enabled you have all your legitimate Windows users using IE7 (or at least having it installed, remember IE7's browser components are used throughout XP - help files, embedded in other apps..) but everyone pirating it still uses the previous versions with no security updates installed.
Not necessarily. My home machine is 100% legal and always has been, but I have declined to install IE7 for the simple reason that I maintain a web site and more of my visitors run IE6, so that's my default testing ground. Someone mentioned this thing about standards and problems with not following them, but I can't remember what it was...
(I use other browsers for my personal browsing, and just fire up IE for testing things. Since I haven't yet found a way to have both IE6 and IE7 installed on the same machine, and I have only one machine available, IE7 loses out for the reason above.)
I purchased MS VPC and XP Home edition just because I got sick of people's complaints about the sites I maintain. It was cheap here...
I refused to give any (unique identifier style) data to MSFT while using paid XP Home on a complete weird setup (Quad G5 running it) so I didn't update to WGA.
I heard the news so I updated. You must be glad you (still) refuse to install IE 7 since you would have figured MS is basically lying about "better W3C compatibility" without any shame.
One site misses a huge, important announcement announcement on front page under IE 7. That site is also W3C Compliant down to "zero warning" level along with valid CSS. For all this time, that announcement was missing from site when viewed by IE and I naively thought "IE 7 is more compliant so it should render that basic standard page".
Their "phishing protection" is also a scheme to make user nervous and enable it, effectively allowing MS to watch whatever site they visit. Hope Firefox guys doesn't make same mistake with version 3.
The "tab" implementation is a complete joke, a badly coded junk. How can I figure it? Easy! Because I am emulating a X86 PC, I can see _any_ horrible programming mistake in slow motion.;) It looks like they "plugged" the "tabs.c" after starting the code.
The point is- IE 7 is not standards compliant and I better replace that announcement with a gif. There we go...
Now none of us are gonna be able to get windows updates for our WINE!
sheeesh
PS: IE4Linux is pretty awesome, that was the selling point to get the wife on Linux. You know what? If they kept maintaining and updating that closed source evil junk, they would be very comfortable against various EU courts and perhaps even to webmasters who doesn't touch anything they produce.
They are so childishly "competing" with other operating systems so they even abandoned Mac IE which was ages ahead of Windows one. It is like "you don't use my OS? There you go, browse my exclusive partner sites now!"
Just imagine IE 7 shipped for Linux/FreeBSD/OS X right at same time with same feature set.
Of course we must be glad that they are so childish so other browsers could take off... Today, making a site Win IE only means giving up those rich OS X people using Safari/Firefox/Camino which can afford some real expensive laptops. (posted with karma since called Mac laptops expensive:)
I will sound horribly outdated,old fashioned but did you try cleaning your cache? Browsers cache mechanisms really lost it after the recent "speed race" and they tend to cache anything which doesn't say "do not cache me". In case of IE, it would simply ignore it, it is the IE you know...
Was WGA holding back a tide of potential upgrades, or did it just send people over to alternative browsers? Not only alternative browsers, but also alternative systems. OS X and Ubuntu are gaining grounds. And Vista is a serious reason to consider those alternatives! Funny is, some people and of course MS thinks people who refuses WGA must be pirates. No, some people aren't comfortable sending encyripted (God knows what included) data to a company they don't trust.
I know many people who basically stays away from WGA because of their serious concerns about their privacy. Same people also chooses Opera and flames Firefox for their future plans with "anti phishing with Google".
Trust is a thing to gain. E.g. Apple puts "Send system profile to Apple" to their "System Profiler" and when I buy a weird device which works with my Quad G5, I use that option for future support guarantee, stats, whatever.
Imagine MS puts the same option to their own system profiler (near exact copy). They seem to know nobody would click that menu item and some may even sue them if they accidentally click so they don't even bother.
I could stand to my machines 7 fans full speed for 5 minutes while trying Ubuntu, it asked me politely about sending my hardware profile to Ubuntu guys, I clicked "yes" without question too.
MS knows nobody trusts them so they prefer to trick users sending their profile information with schemes like "Windows update", "new hardware wizard" and now Windows Genunine Advantage junk. Other guys simply, politely "ask" or in case of Apple, put a complete opt-in menu item.
Having replaced laptop motherboards for Raytheon that had the pgp whole disk encryption and asking them if there was a way around it to check the os and their response being there is no way around it, I wonder "who" the unnamed customer was? Like Raytheon will say "Oh no worries, there is an undocumented feature in PGP and we will use it."
Such companies are involved with projects which only 4-5 guys of entire World population knows about.
How much do you want to bet that "unnamed customers" are synonymous with "various federal and state police agencies, DOD, and NSA"?
Takers?
I can't believe one would believe they are free from eyes of huge , billion dollar super computers and mainframes just because they coughed $100 to some company and installed a windows application.
Call me paranoid, I just care about the local network security and do whatever I can against my stupid ISP such as buying SSL enabled IMAP mail services, use password generator token for my bank.
Imagine NSA is really after you, will they say "OMG, guys, back off, stop that Cray command, he bought PGP!"
boo hoo, go buy something commercial if you need something for your obviously enterprise level active directory. Or you could just use LUKS, you know the full disk (including root) encryption system thats part of most linux distros already....
Or, use bitlocker. I fail to see what your problem is, other than being mad at truecrypt for no valid reason. Why are you sending the guy to buy commercial software? Shouldn't there be Active Directory function if GPGP is offered as an alternative to commercial PGP? Shouldn't we argue about WHY it is not offered? Is it GNU's attitude again?
Well guess what? Nobody buys this attitude and they pay $10.000 sometimes to that junk because it serves their enterprise. It is not like they magically move to GNU OS because GnuPG doesn't offer active directory.
Guys problem is perhaps the thousands of Active Directory clients on his corporate network and the issue of managing them if the GNU one doesn't offer it.
This also is against their product description so report them to trading standards and demand refunds.
What about Seagate Momentus FDE drives? DO they have a bypass also? People don't choose a different product. That is the problem. Usability, native SDK, whatever must be done and GPGP must be a real alternative to companies.
They may choose it just like they have chosen Mozilla over IE.
For example GnuPG Mac binary maintainers do a great job of making it end user usable product even with Apple Mail.app plugin, I just checked the download numbers on versiontracker and guess what? PGP Desktop Home, a $100 product which _does_ create OS wide problems in some versions is more downloaded than GnuPG.
There must be a reason why people choose a $100 (home version!) non functional (as story tells) junk over a freely available one. That reason must be fixed.
Well, Enlightenment DR16 is very stable and mature now (as it better be), and.17 should be out of pre-alpha by the time Duke Nukem Forever runs on Linux. "YDL" comes with E17 on Sony PS3 and PPC as default window manager.
I want to see this guy modded troll for once:D If you search (or pay for history?) enough, there are many comments of CmdrTaco got modded down. I don't know what happened to those moderators though;)
A good thing happened to those hopeful $3000 gambling consumers which I'd rather call cult members.
People who know smart phones a bit warned them, said it is not a real smart phone without 3rd party support/SDK, it should have Java at least Mini Edition (J2ME) like all high end phones and what happened? We got "dugg down", "flamebaited", was called "anti Apple" while we type those messages on high end Apple workstations.
I got Nokia 9300 here which runs every 3rd party application I need including anti spam, a Sony PSP here too. I use PSP as a multimedia device and a small N800 like browser. Did I ever "hack" PSP or demanded Sony to open it up to third party apps? No. I knew the deal with PSP while buying it. I didn't buy it with hopes of "hacks" which are already there but I keep my firmware updated instead.
Apple is a company which removed input manager functionality just because they were bugged with people changing how their OS looks (yes, themes!) or change its behaviour. Of course, they used some idiot coded lame "trojan" as excuse. Doesn't these people, some of them at least, run OS X? Don't they know the company they deal with?
If you aren't using OS X, check the download/fix sites when they update iTunes or OS X. Couple of commercial sound plugins gets disabled while there are people who still use their winamp 2 plugins in winamp 5. For OS X scene, it is "perfectly normal." You know, you didn't use their own lame "equaliser" and you were looking for it.
Is there any OS you can't theme without memory hacking (unsanity, for safety) or overwriting system files? You can't even theme OS X Desktop or change the mouse pointer without hacking it and Apple removed functionality making it possible on 10.5. Now, that company will "open" their device because people asked for it. It won't happen; there was zero chance for it to happen.
I can predict what will happen to that device soon though. It is a trojan writer's dream.
It depends upon how you define 'open' - does open also mean you need to request an 'All Files' cert from Nokia just to get access to the file system? (A certificate they don't give out by the way, ever)
Nokia is full of shit, symbian might allow 3rd party apps, though as long as they force the use of their certificate based crap for ALL applications and themes, then the platform is not open at all. They can and have blocked access to new users at symbian signed. Hypocrites is all I have to say. Who forces what? You can install everything ignoring certificate. Since Symbian is widely used in business scene and it is a open, documented OS, it also have some trojans/viruses so they started to ask for a certificate to allow program unrestricted access.
Symbian is at version 9 or something now. It is number 1 smart device operating system, it is perfectly normal to ask for some security from developers. It is not iPhone or something, there are many mission critical applications in use on Symbian platform. iPhone would stop playing music and freeze, on Symbian , some may die because of it.
You seem to forget that the certificate is _free_ to open source developers and could get a bit expensive for commercial code. Doesn't they sell small shareware utilities for $20? Let them cough couple of dollars to certificate company. It won't hurt them.
If I upgrade my Nokia 9300, it will be another Nokia because everyone can code freely for it and there is software I can buy/install without breaking any kind of guarantee. It is not like they opened up Symbian yesterday, it is MSFT which had to open WinCE because industry treated it like a joke. See how important and respected OS it has become after opening up the source?
I don't understand why are you mad against Nokia when they ask for code review when you want such super access to device. It is better than running everything as UID 0 on a Unix based OS like some music player making company.
Slashdot Mirror
Popular instant messaging systems be damned, we need another way to send our friends links to shock sites that doesn't work with any others! Don't say the new IM system developed in 2007 is not built on XMPP (aka Jabber).
I am afraid to check the degree of their stupidity.
I understood there could be some real life issues when changing file systems this way:
.app's /Resources and they should happily work. If you do this to Adobe Professional Applications, you may create a havoc which may even cost you money in some cases. These are the tools which are developed in modern times, using OS X Frameworks. Adobe simply refuses to use language support as intended on OS X and every single "language cleaner" has special work arounds to stay away from Adobe Professional apps.
While I was experimenting with open source tools built from source, I figured the "case sensivity" really matters and the people doing a great job converting them (e.g. Fink) are all getting around these issues.
As I thought one day, I may have to hand-compile a large software from source and my Unix (grep etc) experience is horrible, while formatting my startup as a raid 0 striped, I also set "Case sensitive HFS+"
Now I know nothing from Apple will fail (I bet they work on UFS too) and I am using fairly new software on this workstation, I could do without "ancient" Carbon/OS 9 coded software if they failed.
Nothing from Carbon/OS 9 era failed! All the software having serious issues (one refused to launch from HFSX) are all modern, OS X Frameworks using and even Spotlight metadata using software.
I think Apple is thinking about 3rd party, their own stuff already runs on UFS or (future) ZFS.
An example: The language support scheme. Normally, you should be able to clean or remove each unneeded language from
I think I know the primary suspect companies which prevents Apple from changing filesystems. Imagine Leopard shipped with ZFS support, every professional switches to it (especially DTP) and some unpredicted horrible failure with Adobe and Quark apps happen. These are the tools which may actually fail when a basic issue with filename text encoding (coming from ancient times) happens.
You can disable Spotlight on a volume with sudo mdutil -i off /Volumes/foo (or simply / for the root volume).
As has been commented above, ZFS already has support for the metadata stuff.
Yes it is really easy to stop a volume getting indexed. The hard part is adding per directories, e.g.I wished I was a developer actually helping the source of those projects but I am not, all I get is a 200mb useless (for me) metadata which makes entire spotlight slow down as a crawl even on a very high speed HD running on a Quad G5 Mac.
I can't trust to stuff I read on web by NDA breaking people but I heard Leopard Spotlight won't have such problems and per Folder settings are really coming (without Privacy trick).
What I need is mdutil -i off
Does FreeBSD's implementation of DTrace makes it away from BSD? No, that tool is very critical and useful for their needs/focus and they implement it just like Apple planning sort of ZFS support for specific needs.
I don't think UFS using community would be happy about Spotlight anyway.
Spotlight in current form tries to index every single source file, huge framework headers and there is no practical way to stop it. I have tried the Privacy pane as suggested and no, it doesn't explain my 130 MB of spotlight metadata after installing Developer tools and couple of GNU libraries.
If they have checked the NeXT history, they would figure the UFS is the default,supported Filesystem on NeXT. As OS X is a mix of NeXT with FreeBSD and Cocoa/Carbon, it is pretty natural that UFS gets into it a bit lately but finally.
I can imagine what Apple needs for supporting ZFS on startup volumes. Complete metadata and resource support. They could be happy with their ext3 plain filesystem but Apple using professionals REALLY label their files, sometimes change their icons, sometimes has to FORCE OS to open a file with a different version of suite (e.g. Quark 7 vs 6), add comments to them and professional software developers like Adobe still stores critical data on resource forks.
If there is a way to make ZFS support all those features without huge hacks (like the ZIP _resource stuff), they would give up their HFS+. Another thing is, it must support every serious software (non hack) backwards. You may find yourself using a application from 2001 written in Carbon under OS X and only it can provide the tool you require.
I am saying these since some elitists think Apple is backwards and stupid still supporting resource forks and implement special features to OS X just to give minimum compatibility with old applications.
Before critising HFS+ and suggesting Apple to use plain, Unix filesystems, they should sit around in a professional environment such as a DTP house, Movie studio and see how all those "childish" "backwards" features are used by professionals in job.
This is not a post against ZFS, I am just trying to explain why Apple can't magically move to another filesystem just because it has better features. Not even mentioning the "overhead" required by ZFS and the fact that there are some 2k/4k (Cinema) edit environments which you can't even enable journaling let alone adding another layer of overhead.
Also while writing these, if I only used plain Unix tools without any "native Mac" Application, e.g. use OS X as Darwin with X11, UFS would be my choice of filesystem.
Sorry I think couldn't express myself. There are small companies who are tricked by PGP Inc. while open source and perfectly working GnuPGP exists.
Companies like Raytheon can't be tricked, they must be using PGP as a layer of security for special needs. The "really secure" stuff comes with specialised computers (even laptops) which does have dedicated security hardware/encyription on a chip. They wouldn't trust their data to something like PGP anyway.
They must be using military grade laptops on critical data.
JSL
--
This space for rent. Well, I got something on my clipboard which I used against my Apple fanatic friends waiting for their master to ship HD movies on iTMS.
"Dear Ilgaz,
You have just purchased Sanctuary: E01 (HD) for $2.49 from Vuze."
It is open source Azureus based, file is non DRM and it is HD. The only issue (OK,not being picky) is the use of WMV format for some weird reason I can't understand.
If you are sick of Blu-Ray, HD-DVD the answer could be paying for HD content in digital form... I mean, what if the "Vuze" (or similar,non DRM) guys report 10x more sales of a comparable movie which is also shipped on DRM media? Imagine the suits face while they are staring at some 5 figure receipt by AACS or Macrovision.
Sadly, I don't think it will happen. There are people asking "Why should I pay if I get it via p2p protocol" even on tech sites. Paying for "information" or "arts" sounds stranger than paying for plastic and eventually I will be called "stupid".
I think you may have mistaken me with ordinary, Mac only users who doesn't know how Windows and the spoiled dictator company MSFT works.
What about this method to stop idiotic trolls like me:
Use plain text XML for system profile, make it opt-in to send hardware profile without prompting user a single time about it, when user clicks "send my information", show them a box which is "Cancel" by DEFAULT, don't promise them things you won't be able to offer (better supporT!?!) and when guy/gal clicks "OK", save the file to
was critical of Slashdot once, about 6 years ago, and haven't had a modpoint since. Are you sure about it? Once upon a time, a gang of a popular Linux IRC client guys didn't like the fact that I found out they were looking for my comments to moderate down (yes!) and bragging about it on IRC, they did another trick.
They reported my IP as suspicious activity (e.g. massive flood etc) to Slashdot admins and the guy got tricked, preventing me to ever post again until I took time to say "some idiot must have tricked you, check my IP,you won't find it on any RBL even" and got fixed.
If you are active on Slasdot or any site and you don't agree with popular opinion, any massive abuse may happen.
I don't think there is a childish admin to "ban" you from moderating, I think there is an idiot or gang of idiots delibarately somehow reported you.
Of course there is a chance of I am being naive...
Sorry for any confusion, I am speaking about the orphaned IE for Unix. Yes, MS had such thing.
I bet their sales/hour rate didn't move only 1% percent as result of these news. They knew it so they backdoored it. They wouldn't dare to put such an obvious "bug" if they knew sales would get effected.
They should be sued for giving false sense of security to consumers and companies.
They're configurable with Group Policy, or at least that's what the website says.
Of course, you'll need to get your SMS admin to agree to this. What is the point of not shipping Firefox packaged in MSI installer file? It is the native install method of Windows. Same goes for Apple OS X. They also refuse Installer.app method of installing and provide a non functional "Applications" link having drag drop file. What happens as result? OS X remote desktop having users/companies get hassle. In future, it will be a more hassle since Installer.app is evolving to become MSI like thing.
If they are boycotting (?) Windows, they should boycott alltogether. They are just harming their own programs popularity and enterprise acceptance via not using MSI or Installer.app. MSI also has some handy functions for users which may prevent certain "IE install" accidents (!!) too. E.g. one may auto-repair Firefox installation if some Microsoft tool "accidentally" deleted some parts in future.
If an OS has a native installer facility, it should be chosen. It is even funnier on OS X, I keep hearing some nightmare scenarios with Installer.app and yet Apple happily ships monster sized OS updates using that architecture.
Somehow, some programmer made a huge mistake in current version of IE 7 and it creates a huge security issue. The update covering that issue may/will require WGA (later version) for applying.
With WGA enabled you have all your legitimate Windows users using IE7 (or at least having it installed, remember IE7's browser components are used throughout XP - help files, embedded in other apps..) but everyone pirating it still uses the previous versions with no security updates installed.
Not necessarily. My home machine is 100% legal and always has been, but I have declined to install IE7 for the simple reason that I maintain a web site and more of my visitors run IE6, so that's my default testing ground. Someone mentioned this thing about standards and problems with not following them, but I can't remember what it was...
(I use other browsers for my personal browsing, and just fire up IE for testing things. Since I haven't yet found a way to have both IE6 and IE7 installed on the same machine, and I have only one machine available, IE7 loses out for the reason above.)
I purchased MS VPC and XP Home edition just because I got sick of people's complaints about the sites I maintain. It was cheap here...I refused to give any (unique identifier style) data to MSFT while using paid XP Home on a complete weird setup (Quad G5 running it) so I didn't update to WGA.
I heard the news so I updated. You must be glad you (still) refuse to install IE 7 since you would have figured MS is basically lying about "better W3C compatibility" without any shame.
One site misses a huge, important announcement announcement on front page under IE 7. That site is also W3C Compliant down to "zero warning" level along with valid CSS. For all this time, that announcement was missing from site when viewed by IE and I naively thought "IE 7 is more compliant so it should render that basic standard page".
Their "phishing protection" is also a scheme to make user nervous and enable it, effectively allowing MS to watch whatever site they visit. Hope Firefox guys doesn't make same mistake with version 3.
The "tab" implementation is a complete joke, a badly coded junk. How can I figure it? Easy! Because I am emulating a X86 PC, I can see _any_ horrible programming mistake in slow motion.
The point is- IE 7 is not standards compliant and I better replace that announcement with a gif. There we go...
sheeesh
PS: IE4Linux is pretty awesome, that was the selling point to get the wife on Linux. You know what? If they kept maintaining and updating that closed source evil junk, they would be very comfortable against various EU courts and perhaps even to webmasters who doesn't touch anything they produce.
They are so childishly "competing" with other operating systems so they even abandoned Mac IE which was ages ahead of Windows one. It is like "you don't use my OS? There you go, browse my exclusive partner sites now!"
Just imagine IE 7 shipped for Linux/FreeBSD/OS X right at same time with same feature set.
Of course we must be glad that they are so childish so other browsers could take off... Today, making a site Win IE only means giving up those rich OS X people using Safari/Firefox/Camino which can afford some real expensive laptops.
(posted with karma since called Mac laptops expensive
I will sound horribly outdated,old fashioned but did you try cleaning your cache? Browsers cache mechanisms really lost it after the recent "speed race" and they tend to cache anything which doesn't say "do not cache me". In case of IE, it would simply ignore it, it is the IE you know...
I know many people who basically stays away from WGA because of their serious concerns about their privacy. Same people also chooses Opera and flames Firefox for their future plans with "anti phishing with Google".
Trust is a thing to gain. E.g. Apple puts "Send system profile to Apple" to their "System Profiler" and when I buy a weird device which works with my Quad G5, I use that option for future support guarantee, stats, whatever.
Imagine MS puts the same option to their own system profiler (near exact copy). They seem to know nobody would click that menu item and some may even sue them if they accidentally click so they don't even bother.
I could stand to my machines 7 fans full speed for 5 minutes while trying Ubuntu, it asked me politely about sending my hardware profile to Ubuntu guys, I clicked "yes" without question too.
MS knows nobody trusts them so they prefer to trick users sending their profile information with schemes like "Windows update", "new hardware wizard" and now Windows Genunine Advantage junk. Other guys simply, politely "ask" or in case of Apple, put a complete opt-in menu item.
Such companies are involved with projects which only 4-5 guys of entire World population knows about.
How much do you want to bet that "unnamed customers" are synonymous with "various federal and state police agencies, DOD, and NSA"?
Takers?
I can't believe one would believe they are free from eyes of huge , billion dollar super computers and mainframes just because they coughed $100 to some company and installed a windows application.Call me paranoid, I just care about the local network security and do whatever I can against my stupid ISP such as buying SSL enabled IMAP mail services, use password generator token for my bank.
Imagine NSA is really after you, will they say "OMG, guys, back off, stop that Cray command, he bought PGP!"
Sounds funny to me really.
Or, use bitlocker. I fail to see what your problem is, other than being mad at truecrypt for no valid reason. Why are you sending the guy to buy commercial software? Shouldn't there be Active Directory function if GPGP is offered as an alternative to commercial PGP? Shouldn't we argue about WHY it is not offered? Is it GNU's attitude again?
Well guess what? Nobody buys this attitude and they pay $10.000 sometimes to that junk because it serves their enterprise. It is not like they magically move to GNU OS because GnuPG doesn't offer active directory.
Guys problem is perhaps the thousands of Active Directory clients on his corporate network and the issue of managing them if the GNU one doesn't offer it.
... choose a different product.This also is against their product description so report them to trading standards and demand refunds.
What about Seagate Momentus FDE drives? DO they have a bypass also? People don't choose a different product. That is the problem. Usability, native SDK, whatever must be done and GPGP must be a real alternative to companies.
They may choose it just like they have chosen Mozilla over IE.
For example GnuPG Mac binary maintainers do a great job of making it end user usable product even with Apple Mail.app plugin, I just checked the download numbers on versiontracker and guess what? PGP Desktop Home, a $100 product which _does_ create OS wide problems in some versions is more downloaded than GnuPG.
There must be a reason why people choose a $100 (home version!) non functional (as story tells) junk over a freely available one. That reason must be fixed.
http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com/products/ydl/
Classy selection from Terra Soft
A good thing happened to those hopeful $3000 gambling consumers which I'd rather call cult members.
People who know smart phones a bit warned them, said it is not a real smart phone without 3rd party support/SDK, it should have Java at least Mini Edition (J2ME) like all high end phones and what happened? We got "dugg down", "flamebaited", was called "anti Apple" while we type those messages on high end Apple workstations.
I got Nokia 9300 here which runs every 3rd party application I need including anti spam, a Sony PSP here too. I use PSP as a multimedia device and a small N800 like browser. Did I ever "hack" PSP or demanded Sony to open it up to third party apps? No. I knew the deal with PSP while buying it. I didn't buy it with hopes of "hacks" which are already there but I keep my firmware updated instead.
Apple is a company which removed input manager functionality just because they were bugged with people changing how their OS looks (yes, themes!) or change its behaviour. Of course, they used some idiot coded lame "trojan" as excuse. Doesn't these people, some of them at least, run OS X? Don't they know the company they deal with?
If you aren't using OS X, check the download/fix sites when they update iTunes or OS X. Couple of commercial sound plugins gets disabled while there are people who still use their winamp 2 plugins in winamp 5. For OS X scene, it is "perfectly normal." You know, you didn't use their own lame "equaliser" and you were looking for it.
Is there any OS you can't theme without memory hacking (unsanity, for safety) or overwriting system files? You can't even theme OS X Desktop or change the mouse pointer without hacking it and Apple removed functionality making it possible on 10.5. Now, that company will "open" their device because people asked for it. It won't happen; there was zero chance for it to happen.
I can predict what will happen to that device soon though. It is a trojan writer's dream.
Nokia is full of shit, symbian might allow 3rd party apps, though as long as they force the use of their certificate based crap for ALL applications and themes, then the platform is not open at all. They can and have blocked access to new users at symbian signed. Hypocrites is all I have to say. Who forces what? You can install everything ignoring certificate. Since Symbian is widely used in business scene and it is a open, documented OS, it also have some trojans/viruses so they started to ask for a certificate to allow program unrestricted access.
Symbian is at version 9 or something now. It is number 1 smart device operating system, it is perfectly normal to ask for some security from developers. It is not iPhone or something, there are many mission critical applications in use on Symbian platform. iPhone would stop playing music and freeze, on Symbian , some may die because of it.
You seem to forget that the certificate is _free_ to open source developers and could get a bit expensive for commercial code. Doesn't they sell small shareware utilities for $20? Let them cough couple of dollars to certificate company. It won't hurt them.
If I upgrade my Nokia 9300, it will be another Nokia because everyone can code freely for it and there is software I can buy/install without breaking any kind of guarantee. It is not like they opened up Symbian yesterday, it is MSFT which had to open WinCE because industry treated it like a joke. See how important and respected OS it has become after opening up the source?
I don't understand why are you mad against Nokia when they ask for code review when you want such super access to device. It is better than running everything as UID 0 on a Unix based OS like some music player making company.