>IE 9 throws a MAJOR wobbly and won't execute it, or any of the other command meta tags. And will still run the controls wrongly.
Shouldn't that be expected if the page is to be compatible with some other version of IE? I mean, if you specified some arbitrary number of meta tags, and THEN said, "Oh, by the way, use the compatibility view for IE7", wouldn't that just throw a wrench into things? It suggests that IE is actively parsing the page as it arrives well, probably for the sake of performance.
The site also uses the facebook API, so if you're one of the bagillions of unwary people out there and are always logged in to facebook, they could now have your name to go with the IP...
But it's still Linux. It's the linux Kernel, and many linux utilities. It has a few propreitary bits, but at least is a chance for a successful desktop linux for once. It's actually easier to use than Windows, and has a large quantity of quality applications being made for it.
Microsoft isn't going away, nor is Apple. We'll have a competitive marketplace, I can guarantee it.
MS hasn't been doing very badly in the security department as of late. In fact, they are giving Linux a run for it's money. The types of attacks against Windows 7 have been the same types of exploits used to attack Linux - local priviledge escalation.
I'm sitting at a custom built, dual 6 core 2.66 Ghz Xeon system with 48 GB of RAM and 2x 2TB HDDs. It cost $3200, and is a custom-built machine. It handily beats this Mac Pro have I have sitting right over here with dual 4 core 2.4 Ghz Xeons and 6 GB of RAM that cost $3600, as you would expect. Do you think there is something magical about Mac hardware which somehow makes it have high Ghz and GeeBees?
If you're buying server grade hardware from HP, Dell, or Levnovo, you're in much the same boat as buying a Mac Pro. It's all overpriced and underperforms.
I've seen no data to suggest that macs have the lowest defect rate in the industry. I've had 2 mac pros and one macbook. I've ordered just over a dozen for work-related thing. I've had issues about 20% of the time - much the same as I've had ordering from any other vendor. What's interesting is that I've had far fewer issues with custom built systems by far. Of the probably 20 or so custom builds I"ve ordered, I've had one bad motherboard (because I ordered the parts unassembled, hence untested), and one failed memtest86 because the ram had become somewhat unseated during shipping. If you truely want a reliable system, you go to a system builder and have them assemble it. It gets put together and tested, by hand, before it ever reaches you.
So OOTB there is not sufficient adjustment to adjust mouse speed. I always thought Mac owners were so big on their OOTB features. There is the other problem that not everyone can use a fast mouse.
I'm talking about the file properties dialog the Finder pops up. It always pops up a few hundred pixels from the left edge of the desktop, often far away from where the Finder because in order to take advantage of the global menu, the main working application is parked on the leftmost monitor.
Now that menubar... I know exactly why it's there. It's there because the claim is that according to Fitt's Law one can select a menu more quickly in that position. Believe me, this isn't the way it works on large format displays. Not only do you have to move the mouse twice or three times just to get it over there, the menu at the top of the screen only helps menu selection accuracy, but doesn't help anymore once you need an item from the menu. Also, people have a harder time with the modal interface the global menu requires. It's just plain bad design to physically separate application functions.
The issue is not 'plug it in and everything sets itself automagically' - that happens on Windows as well. We use dual 30" monitors on our workstations, and OSX's global menu in combination with an oddly slow maximum speed on the mouse renders every application that isn't on the primary monitor very cumbersome to use. Other little annoyances are OSX's insistence of showing properties dialogs on the main window, often far away from the finder window you're using at the time. OSX is based on a UI that worked ok on the small format monitors of yesterday, and perhaps on small netbook/notebook monitors today, but it doesn't scale well to a workstation. Linux and Windows keep application functions (ie. Application menus) close to the running application, which means they are more effortless to use on large format displays.
> Macs are very competitively priced now, and anyone that says otherwise is either
Only one mac is competitvely priced: The 27" base iMac. Unfortunately it is unmaintainable, so if the video card fails, you throw away the whole motherboard at least, and likely will have to have an apple store employee do it. The Mac Mini is extremely underpowered: It's $300 worth of parts sold for $600. The Mac Pro is $1700 sold for $2700. Start adding RAM or other upgrades from the Apple store and you might as well throw that money in the fire, because it sure as hell doesn't come back to you in the resale.
That's pretty amazing considering the innards of Mac are the same commodity hardware you get in every other computer you buy. It's pretty easy to build your own system to last too, and still cheaper/more powerful than a Mac.
> And now you see why the imbalance of malware exploits these days has little to do with "market share".
No, it likely has to do with how many people out there are still running a 10 year old OS (WinXP). 3 years ago Windows 7 came out, and it is a tough nut to crack in the malware department - there have been more potential exploits on OSX than on Windows 7 over the last few years, such as this one http://robrohan.com/2008/06/19/nasty-mac-os-x-exploit/.
Nowadays, you don't run as an administrator anymore on Windows. You must elevate permissions, even if your user has administrative capabilities. The true, 'root' user of the system is called "Administrator", and that account is not accessible by default. In effect, the main user can sudo, and that's the way windows gets set up.
Windows has a firewall that is auto-configured by default when you connect to a network. It will prompt you and ask what type of network it is: Home, Work, or Public, and adjusts the firewall accordingly.
Java is not install on windows by default.
MSE is not installed by default, but you actually get prompted and it is offered as a suggestion. I think it is pretty obvious why MS can't bundle it yet - you know, antitrust and all.
This is pretty overblown. You install MSE, you disable browser plugins you don't need (or run Chrome, which is the majority browser now), you don't do stupid things like download and install random software, which is hardly a windows-only problem (hello, MacDefender anyone)?
The two methods listed above have had me run and set up about a dozen systems that are still fast and virus-free. As far as potential exploits go, remember that OSX always falls first a pwn2own. Window 7 was about as hard to crack as Linux.
> A functionally better UI *and* all the CLI tools I could ever want. That's why I stick with OS X.
Until you try and use multiple monitors. Then you find the only way to use it effectively is the CLI, which is okay, but nowhere near as useful as Linux. The best OSX CLI experience to be had seems to be about the same as using Cygwin on windows: Almost there... almost.
> In this time and age, for a working person, stay-at-home mom, or granny looking for online pumpkin pie recipes, to put more than 3-4 hours in building anything, that's just wasteful. Time is money.
Sure time *can be* money, but not for the examples you just specified. How much money does said mom or granny waste watch soaps? If you find building computers enjoyable, which fortunately a large enough segment of people do which helps keep the open part of the industry open, it is neither a waste of time or money.
Actually his post was quite reasonable. Yours, on the otherhand, reeks of troll.
BTW, I've supported mixed mac/pc departments, and when it really came down to it, no one really needed much support. Mind you, that's probably what you get when you have a group of software developers. Lately there are a ton of Win7 PC and Macs, and the only time I've spent on support is ordering new systems for new hires, or other equipment we need.
You do realize that the video card memory is mapped onto physical RAM, right? If you have a 1 GB video card, you'll need to have 1 GB of RAM available for the memory mapped IO system these cards use. XP can only recognize 4 GB of RAM (XP 64bit doesn't count as a common or usable OS). That means you can't have a 4 GB 6990 in your system and expect to make good use of it. A big part of game system requirements actually comes from the video card requirements.
All that aside, 8 GB of ram is dirt cheap these days, and no games I've seen even comes close to making use of it all, so it might as well go to functions that make the system run faster such as services and cache.
This is more informative than just a 4 - I hope it gets another point soon.
Resource monitor, right now, is showing that I have 10% RAM free (of 12 GB). 4 GB are on standby (Cached data and code), 5.5 GB are in use, and 1 GB is for hardware (I/O map of the 1 GB of video RAM, no doubt).
Slashdot Mirror
>IE 9 throws a MAJOR wobbly and won't execute it, or any of the other command meta tags. And will still run the controls wrongly.
Shouldn't that be expected if the page is to be compatible with some other version of IE? I mean, if you specified some arbitrary number of meta tags, and THEN said, "Oh, by the way, use the compatibility view for IE7", wouldn't that just throw a wrench into things? It suggests that IE is actively parsing the page as it arrives well, probably for the sake of performance.
The site also uses the facebook API, so if you're one of the bagillions of unwary people out there and are always logged in to facebook, they could now have your name to go with the IP...
'gravitational effects' also doesn't explain the amount of gravitational lensing galaxies can cause.
But it's still Linux. It's the linux Kernel, and many linux utilities. It has a few propreitary bits, but at least is a chance for a successful desktop linux for once. It's actually easier to use than Windows, and has a large quantity of quality applications being made for it.
Microsoft isn't going away, nor is Apple. We'll have a competitive marketplace, I can guarantee it.
It's funny how reasonable answers like yours get modded to 0.
It's pretty clear that /. isn't as reasonable as it used to be... even though it has always (rightly) had a hate-on for Microsoft.
> Microsoft should know better then this and actually do something about the structural security problems in windows (which are myriad).
Perhaps, but I doubt you know. Can you cite an example?
MS hasn't been doing very badly in the security department as of late. In fact, they are giving Linux a run for it's money. The types of attacks against Windows 7 have been the same types of exploits used to attack Linux - local priviledge escalation.
Much like Apple I guess...
I'm sitting at a custom built, dual 6 core 2.66 Ghz Xeon system with 48 GB of RAM and 2x 2TB HDDs. It cost $3200, and is a custom-built machine. It handily beats this Mac Pro have I have sitting right over here with dual 4 core 2.4 Ghz Xeons and 6 GB of RAM that cost $3600, as you would expect. Do you think there is something magical about Mac hardware which somehow makes it have high Ghz and GeeBees?
If you're buying server grade hardware from HP, Dell, or Levnovo, you're in much the same boat as buying a Mac Pro. It's all overpriced and underperforms.
I've seen no data to suggest that macs have the lowest defect rate in the industry. I've had 2 mac pros and one macbook. I've ordered just over a dozen for work-related thing. I've had issues about 20% of the time - much the same as I've had ordering from any other vendor. What's interesting is that I've had far fewer issues with custom built systems by far. Of the probably 20 or so custom builds I"ve ordered, I've had one bad motherboard (because I ordered the parts unassembled, hence untested), and one failed memtest86 because the ram had become somewhat unseated during shipping. If you truely want a reliable system, you go to a system builder and have them assemble it. It gets put together and tested, by hand, before it ever reaches you.
So OOTB there is not sufficient adjustment to adjust mouse speed. I always thought Mac owners were so big on their OOTB features. There is the other problem that not everyone can use a fast mouse.
I'm talking about the file properties dialog the Finder pops up. It always pops up a few hundred pixels from the left edge of the desktop, often far away from where the Finder because in order to take advantage of the global menu, the main working application is parked on the leftmost monitor.
Now that menubar... I know exactly why it's there. It's there because the claim is that according to Fitt's Law one can select a menu more quickly in that position. Believe me, this isn't the way it works on large format displays. Not only do you have to move the mouse twice or three times just to get it over there, the menu at the top of the screen only helps menu selection accuracy, but doesn't help anymore once you need an item from the menu. Also, people have a harder time with the modal interface the global menu requires. It's just plain bad design to physically separate application functions.
The issue is not 'plug it in and everything sets itself automagically' - that happens on Windows as well. We use dual 30" monitors on our workstations, and OSX's global menu in combination with an oddly slow maximum speed on the mouse renders every application that isn't on the primary monitor very cumbersome to use. Other little annoyances are OSX's insistence of showing properties dialogs on the main window, often far away from the finder window you're using at the time. OSX is based on a UI that worked ok on the small format monitors of yesterday, and perhaps on small netbook/notebook monitors today, but it doesn't scale well to a workstation. Linux and Windows keep application functions (ie. Application menus) close to the running application, which means they are more effortless to use on large format displays.
> Macs are very competitively priced now, and anyone that says otherwise is either
Only one mac is competitvely priced: The 27" base iMac. Unfortunately it is unmaintainable, so if the video card fails, you throw away the whole motherboard at least, and likely will have to have an apple store employee do it. The Mac Mini is extremely underpowered: It's $300 worth of parts sold for $600. The Mac Pro is $1700 sold for $2700. Start adding RAM or other upgrades from the Apple store and you might as well throw that money in the fire, because it sure as hell doesn't come back to you in the resale.
That's pretty amazing considering the innards of Mac are the same commodity hardware you get in every other computer you buy. It's pretty easy to build your own system to last too, and still cheaper/more powerful than a Mac.
Cygwin has sshd on Windows.
> And now you see why the imbalance of malware exploits these days has little to do with "market share".
No, it likely has to do with how many people out there are still running a 10 year old OS (WinXP). 3 years ago Windows 7 came out, and it is a tough nut to crack in the malware department - there have been more potential exploits on OSX than on Windows 7 over the last few years, such as this one http://robrohan.com/2008/06/19/nasty-mac-os-x-exploit/.
Nowadays, you don't run as an administrator anymore on Windows. You must elevate permissions, even if your user has administrative capabilities. The true, 'root' user of the system is called "Administrator", and that account is not accessible by default. In effect, the main user can sudo, and that's the way windows gets set up.
Windows has a firewall that is auto-configured by default when you connect to a network. It will prompt you and ask what type of network it is: Home, Work, or Public, and adjusts the firewall accordingly.
Java is not install on windows by default.
MSE is not installed by default, but you actually get prompted and it is offered as a suggestion. I think it is pretty obvious why MS can't bundle it yet - you know, antitrust and all.
This is pretty overblown. You install MSE, you disable browser plugins you don't need (or run Chrome, which is the majority browser now), you don't do stupid things like download and install random software, which is hardly a windows-only problem (hello, MacDefender anyone)?
The two methods listed above have had me run and set up about a dozen systems that are still fast and virus-free. As far as potential exploits go, remember that OSX always falls first a pwn2own. Window 7 was about as hard to crack as Linux.
> A functionally better UI *and* all the CLI tools I could ever want. That's why I stick with OS X.
Until you try and use multiple monitors. Then you find the only way to use it effectively is the CLI, which is okay, but nowhere near as useful as Linux. The best OSX CLI experience to be had seems to be about the same as using Cygwin on windows: Almost there... almost.
You could always develop for iOS using adobe AIR on Windows or Linux now - no need for a Mac Mini or having to use weak tools like xcode.
> In this time and age, for a working person, stay-at-home mom, or granny looking for online pumpkin pie recipes, to put more than 3-4 hours in building anything, that's just wasteful. Time is money.
Sure time *can be* money, but not for the examples you just specified. How much money does said mom or granny waste watch soaps? If you find building computers enjoyable, which fortunately a large enough segment of people do which helps keep the open part of the industry open, it is neither a waste of time or money.
> The difference is OS X kicks WIndows' ass for navigation and integration with software.
What does this mean?
Actually his post was quite reasonable. Yours, on the otherhand, reeks of troll.
BTW, I've supported mixed mac/pc departments, and when it really came down to it, no one really needed much support. Mind you, that's probably what you get when you have a group of software developers. Lately there are a ton of Win7 PC and Macs, and the only time I've spent on support is ordering new systems for new hires, or other equipment we need.
It just so happens that many android based phones are better than iPhones in this case, and those that aren't are generally much cheaper.
You do realize that the video card memory is mapped onto physical RAM, right? If you have a 1 GB video card, you'll need to have 1 GB of RAM available for the memory mapped IO system these cards use. XP can only recognize 4 GB of RAM (XP 64bit doesn't count as a common or usable OS). That means you can't have a 4 GB 6990 in your system and expect to make good use of it. A big part of game system requirements actually comes from the video card requirements.
All that aside, 8 GB of ram is dirt cheap these days, and no games I've seen even comes close to making use of it all, so it might as well go to functions that make the system run faster such as services and cache.
This is more informative than just a 4 - I hope it gets another point soon.
Resource monitor, right now, is showing that I have 10% RAM free (of 12 GB). 4 GB are on standby (Cached data and code), 5.5 GB are in use, and 1 GB is for hardware (I/O map of the 1 GB of video RAM, no doubt).
Resource monitor is a very good tool.