I'm sure all of us tech support geeks have had our share of winmodem problems. My favorite is when the LT Winmodems decide to play the "IRQ Disco" as I like to call it:) The game is simple: put the modem in, and watch is hop around on different IRQs every time you boot, with no pattern, and never the one that is free... thus pissing off every other component in your computer! This is why you cannot ever trust software to manage your hardware resources. I want manual control, dammit!
Re:Yeah, that whole 5-15% OOOOHHHHH!!!!
on
WinDSL Coming?
·
· Score: 1
Geeks aren't nearly as statistically insignificant when there's cool technology to be had. We are the early adopters, the people who jump on board new techology before it's popular. Therefore, any portion of the geek population is not a demographic to be ignored, especially not with this. Most of the Windows users will be perfectly happy with their AOL and MSN dialups for some time to come; it is the geeks who are wanting faster connections the most! If Moterola doesn't support Linux and other OS's, we will just have to reverse engineer it and make our own support. It's been done before. And I know most companies don't like the thought of people reverse engineering their stuff, but they'll have brought it on themselves. They don't have to support Linux, but it's not that hard to make it compatible with more than Windows. Basing it on a proprietary solution that only works for a part of the market is not smart business.
You're right, it would probably be stabler if they had less goals. Personally, I don't think they should have released a prerelease version at all to the public; they're just asking for people to judge it before it's ready.
I think I'll stick with my beta that works and works fucking sweet - IE 5.5
Oh, so an incremental improvement from an established codebase works better? *gasp* You obviously don't know enough about Mozilla to realize how stupid that post was. Mozilla is a total rewrite of the browser code. It took IE until 4.0 to be decent, and the 4.0 betas blew too. Hey, and since when was this a beta? I don't remember anyone saying beta. Netscape's site only says prerelease too, not beta. I know most Windows trolls wouldn't know anything earlier than beta (since they never see alpha software), so you probably just made an obvious mistake.
Do I need to point out how buggy Windows 98 Beta, and NT 2000 Betas were?
Oh, god. I actually have a copy of the Windows 2000 betas for Professional, Server and Advanced Server. I tried running Professional... honestly. But it crashed so much for no reason, all the time that it only spent about a week on my machine. Yuck. I'm sure the final versions are better, but I'm not shelling out the cash for it.
Bah, that's just maintanance. Mozilla is, after all, a rewrite of the browser from scratch, so you can't compare it to IE 5.5... try comparing to the IE 1.0 beta. IE was terrible until 4.0. And from what I've seen of Microsoft software, it's mostly a YMMV situation. I'm sure there's people cussing it out right now.
This is a useless law for two reasons. 1) very few telemarketers actually remove your name anyways (many a time I've been repeatedly harrassed by them even after I've told them several times to take me off their list) and 2) most people aren't nearly annoyed enough by telemarketers to find draining eight hours of their life in court over a pretty insignificant settlement worth it, especially when that's just one telemarketing firm out of hundreds.
I have my doubts that M$oft.com even runs on IIS because it isn't built to handle high amounts of traffic.
No, I'm sure it uses IIS. You see, you can overcome IIS's shortcomings, it just takes a crapload of redundancy. Microsoft.com is distributed across rows upon countless rows of NT boxes in order to handle the traffic.
If you're going to rant about somebody not knowing what they're talking about, you'd best read the post carefully lest you come off sounding like an idiot like you just did. Kidlinux didn't say anywhere that there were a million bugs in Windows. In fact, he mentioned the 64,000 bug estimation Microsoft themselves have reported.
It may be rare to hear about a Linux exploit, but is there really any way of proving it's because of duplicity and not actually less bugs? I realize all code is buggy, OSS code among them. But four years is rediculous, and would never happen in the OSS realm, period.
And if there really was never a back door, then why did they admit there was? I'm sorry, but this seems just as likely to be backpedaling to cover their arse as it could be an honest mistake. And honesty is not something Microsoft is particularily well known for.
I'm looking forward to see how Apple is going to make out with MacOS X. If it takes off, you have a business model that keeps the OS market alive as a commercial model for the masses and kicks Linux right in it's vulnerable UI guts.
After years of loathing Apple for their rediculously oversimplified OS, I am actually finding myself looking forward to OS X myself. Switching to an open-source UNIX backend is, in my opinion, the smartest thing they could've done. However, I am quite sure it won't do a damn thing to Linux in marketshare--these two OS's are at complete opposite ends of the OS spectrum. Linux is a server OS. Front-end UI improvements are nice for those of us hardcore geeks who demand server performance and utility on a desktop machine (I'm guilty:), but that makes no difference to the market where Linux really shines in--the server market. Putting it down because of a bad UI is comparing Apples to Oranges... er, Apples to Penguins... whatever:)
Man, you people can not stop slamming Microsoft, can you? You've said in the second paragraph why microsoft treats it's employees so well, something you snidely hinted at in the first paragraph as "they have to"
Well, that's kinda universally true of all companies that employ programmers, though. The demand is so much higher than the supply, that you can't really afford to treat them badly, or else they'll go find a better job quite easily.
You, sir, are an idiot if you think you can speak for the entire Slashdot community. I use free software because it's better. It's better because it's free, and I don't give a crap what you may think. I don't write code yet, but I'm in the process of learning. And I have every intention of releasing my projetcs under the GPL, because I've seen the good it can do.
As for music, I support musicians not the music industry. I can't in good conscience buy CDs when I know that 95% or more of that goes to a greedy monopolistic company and the real artist gets only pennies from each sale. Therefore, I support independant music, and it's just as good as any of the crap you hear repeated endlessly on the radio. Napster is good for one thing: showing the music industry that we're fed up with their outdated, unfair system and we want a new one. People will pay for music, but not if the producers make it so fricking difficult. We want online distribution, and if they won't give it to us, we'll do it ourselves. All in all, I think Napster has served as a very good wakeup call.
I think Napster is good, but not in the way you might think. I don't think it's a good thing to be listening to music not not compensating the artist. But Napster is a good thing because it's forcing the industry to actually pay attention to the idea of online distribution. It's obvious they're trying to cling to the old format of hard-copy CD's that they can price gouge at will and pay the artist pennies. But if we were to switch to the Internet for distribution, no one would control it. They could no longer decide who gets recorded and who doesn't. Independant artists would be just as easy to get as popular ones (mp3.com--which is why the RIAA has filed lawsuits against them.) Like so many other big businesses, they won't admit the Internet is the future without being dragged into it kicking and screaming. I, for one, won't miss them.
Does slashdot deserve a webby? Is it revolutionary in design or concept?
Perhaps not in design, but they have some pretty interesting concepts. Slashdot has the most developed moderation system I've ever seen on a website forum, and the idea of letting the community do the interviews was deffinately a step in the right direction. The interviewing system allows the people to ask questions about things they really care about, and the moderation system works to select the most interesting of questions based on the community as well. Even if it is lazy, it's still pretty revolutionary:)
Re:What exactly is the "parrot sketch"?
on
80 Proof Quickies
·
· Score: 1
Ah, the Parrot Sketch: one of really classic Monty Python sketches. John Cleese is a customer who just bought a parrot at a pet store, and returns to complain that it is dead. The pet store clerk is played by Eric Idle, I think. If I'm wrong, I'm sure someone will correct me. Anyway, he stands there and argues constantly that it is not dead, just resting. It really loses a lot in the translation, you're much better off seeing it for yourself, but that is the gist of it.
Yes, yes, I know it's a decentralized, distributed network and all that. But I'm saying that problem is occuring on every single mp3 I try to download, no matter what user it's from.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Oh, so an incremental improvement from an established codebase works better? *gasp* You obviously don't know enough about Mozilla to realize how stupid that post was. Mozilla is a total rewrite of the browser code. It took IE until 4.0 to be decent, and the 4.0 betas blew too. Hey, and since when was this a beta? I don't remember anyone saying beta. Netscape's site only says prerelease too, not beta. I know most Windows trolls wouldn't know anything earlier than beta (since they never see alpha software), so you probably just made an obvious mistake.
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Oh, god. I actually have a copy of the Windows 2000 betas for Professional, Server and Advanced Server. I tried running Professional... honestly. But it crashed so much for no reason, all the time that it only spent about a week on my machine. Yuck. I'm sure the final versions are better, but I'm not shelling out the cash for it.
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
No, I'm sure it uses IIS. You see, you can overcome IIS's shortcomings, it just takes a crapload of redundancy. Microsoft.com is distributed across rows upon countless rows of NT boxes in order to handle the traffic.
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
And if there really was never a back door, then why did they admit there was? I'm sorry, but this seems just as likely to be backpedaling to cover their arse as it could be an honest mistake. And honesty is not something Microsoft is particularily well known for.
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
After years of loathing Apple for their rediculously oversimplified OS, I am actually finding myself looking forward to OS X myself. Switching to an open-source UNIX backend is, in my opinion, the smartest thing they could've done. However, I am quite sure it won't do a damn thing to Linux in marketshare--these two OS's are at complete opposite ends of the OS spectrum. Linux is a server OS. Front-end UI improvements are nice for those of us hardcore geeks who demand server performance and utility on a desktop machine (I'm guilty :), but that makes no difference to the market where Linux really shines in--the server market. Putting it down because of a bad UI is comparing Apples to Oranges... er, Apples to Penguins... whatever :)
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
If they're advocating cross-platform standards not dominated by Microsoft, wouldn't it be a bit of a faux paux using FrontPage for their website? :)
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Well, that's kinda universally true of all companies that employ programmers, though. The demand is so much higher than the supply, that you can't really afford to treat them badly, or else they'll go find a better job quite easily.
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
As for music, I support musicians not the music industry. I can't in good conscience buy CDs when I know that 95% or more of that goes to a greedy monopolistic company and the real artist gets only pennies from each sale. Therefore, I support independant music, and it's just as good as any of the crap you hear repeated endlessly on the radio. Napster is good for one thing: showing the music industry that we're fed up with their outdated, unfair system and we want a new one. People will pay for music, but not if the producers make it so fricking difficult. We want online distribution, and if they won't give it to us, we'll do it ourselves. All in all, I think Napster has served as a very good wakeup call.
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Perhaps not in design, but they have some pretty interesting concepts. Slashdot has the most developed moderation system I've ever seen on a website forum, and the idea of letting the community do the interviews was deffinately a step in the right direction. The interviewing system allows the people to ask questions about things they really care about, and the moderation system works to select the most interesting of questions based on the community as well. Even if it is lazy, it's still pretty revolutionary :)
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Oh well, thanks anyway. Maybe it's been /.'ed
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?
Here's my DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?