Thank you for Caldera Network Desktop, which made online package repositories work well. It was a groundbreaking product that could have been the dominant distribution today if you hadn't given in to the dark side of the force. Caldera Network Desktop was a wonderful Linux distro - for the time it was a well-polished distribution that worked, and was a lot less work to configure than Slackware or even Red Hat Linux.
Sadly, you let scumbags like Darl McBride steer you wrong. You became greedy and tried to reneg on the GPL, i.e., the code that you contributed to Linux kernel. You tried to steal UNIX from Novell and engaged in pump&dump schemes, ripping off your shareholders and your customers alike. By 2000, Redhat had long passed you by, because you lost your way, and by the time 2005 rolled around, every other distro grew in popularity and have been earning good returns for the respective disributions' sponsors and for integrators alike.
We will take the good - the code you released under the GPL, and leave the bad - that is, your total bullshit and your douchebag manner of doing business the last 10 years. Although you contributed a lot to Linux in your pre-McBride years, you will not be missed. I hope Darl McBride and any board and senior staff members who endorsed his pump & dump schemes are indicted for securities fraud and malfeasance, because through your actions it is self-evident that you ultimately did not have your shareholders' concerns at heart, but only extracting as much as you could into your own pockets. For that, and for trying to monopolize Linux and UNIX alike and contributing to Microsoft's FUD campaign which encouraged enterprises to avoid *nix and stick with the Windows malaise, fuck you very much.
), he's noticed that the AF is easily distracted by foreground clutter, and will also inexplicably refuse to confirm an AF lock (and thus shoot) in some situations you'd think are easy, like a bird on the end of a twig with a background distant enough to be a blur.
It's a mix of two issues: first is focus point size. The second issue is that AF algorithms generally select the closest subject to the AF sensor. It sounds like you need a body that has spot AF (basically, it's a feature that cuts an AF point down to 1/3 its size) - or learn old-school focus and recompose. Why does AF scare you? Learn the features. Right now Canon's AF in the 7D is best of breed. All 19 focus points are cross-type phase sensors, and each AF point can be switched to "point" mode (shrink the AF point down to ~1/3 its size) and it works very, very well. The "point AF" mode will often let you focus on a subject between two blades of grass, where the normal-size single point AF mode would focus on the grass (closer object) instead. The 500D has only nine points, and the center point is rather large.
Why did I mention the 7D when you were referring to the consumer-level bodies? Because you are referring to L-series glass (with one of them, the 70-200 f.2.8 being weather sealed, being a perfect match for the weather-sealed 7D), and because of the advanced AF. If you want the best AF out there and you already have access to excellent telephoto lens, you'll want a body that will get you the most out of it. The AF shouldn't scare you.
Considering that GP is discussing the EOS xD line, Zeiss lenses, and so on, I really doubt he's shopping for lenses at Best Buy.
However despite what you're saying, there are some hidden gems in Canon's cheaper lens offerings. I bought an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS may exhibit a bit of CA (easily corrected in post) as a throwaway lens (one just to use for an event and then replace it with better glass later) but I was surprised to find that is is wonderfully sharp and there are folks claim it compares favorably to wider L-series zoom lenses for contrast and sharpness. Likewise, the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is often referred to as a "hidden L" lens (I like mine but I wish I had an EF-70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM + 2x teleconverter instead). There are some decent lens options you can find even at Best Buy, if you do your research. No, you won't get a weather-sealed ruggedized, constant f/2.8 or f/1.2 lens at Best Buy, but if you can get by with a slow lens that isn't weatherproof or ruggedized you can find lenses that are perfectly suited for your child's birthday parties and soccer games.
Canon makes optically wonderful lenses in both their L series and lower end lines, but the L-series lens isn't just for optical quality, but use where you need a ruggedized lens, and many are even weather sealed. Likewise they make quite a few cheaper zooms and primes that are wonderfully sharp. They may be slower (higher f-number/smaller aperture) but may boast sharp focus with great contrast.
But GP is right. Even the current 7D's pixel density (18MP on an APS-C size sensor) out-resolves a lot of older lens models. Try putting the 100-300mm USM on the 7D sometime; you won't get a sharp image. The 70-300mm IS USM, known for being extremely good optically, still looks a little soft on such a high pixel density. Canon has to start thinking about improving their lens offerings before they consider pushing the megapixel envelope any more. Besides, once you get to 12MP, for most uses, how is higher resolution a benefit? All you're going to do is eat up storage and spend more time downscaling images, and post will take longer.
Pixel densities of Canon's current pro DSLR offerings (source: dpreview):
EOS 1D mk IV APS-H 3.1 MP/cm pixel density 16.1 MP EOS 1Ds mk III FF 2.4 MP/cm pixel density 21.1 MP EOS 5D mk II FF 2.4 MP/cm pixel density 21 MP EOS 7D APS-C 5.4 MP/cm pixel density 18 MP EOS 50D APS-C 4.5 MP/cm pixel density 15.1 MP
With the higher pixel densities, focus sharpness and image stabilization become far more important. Imagine the effect of camera shake on a 120MP sensor? How about a lens that an 18MP APS-C outresolves? 18MP and 21MP are already enough - at least for me. I'd like to see sharper lenses please!
Frigging slashdot: "Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters." Sorry about the lack of formatting on the table I typed up. With characters separating the columns slashdot was bitching about "junk characters" so I had to undo all the time I spent formatting the table. Stupid slashcode.
According to aftonbladet.se both girls _willingly had sex with him_ but said he had a skewed view on women. They also said they are not afraid of him and he was non-violent. I wonder what kind of actions he did that constitutes rape then?
My guess would be they changed their minds after having sex? Men in the US have supposedly been charged with rape on that basis. It's one of those things that make you say "WTF" when it comes to the American justice system. But then again, this is a country where urinating outdoors behind a bush or a peeping tom seeing you in the buff inside your own home can land you on a sex offender list.
I try buy hardware that works. In the case of video cards on non-Xen kernels, Nvidia always works. Sure, there is the annoying issue of having to recompile the modules when updating the kernel, but they otherwise work perfectly on video cards I have in various machines dating all the way back to 1998, and brand-new models (quadro on my notebook and in some appliance PCs, GTxxx cards, etc.) and everything in between.
ATI sunsets drivers a lot quicker than nVidia.
I try to go open source where and when possible, but sometimes the big flippin' hammer isn't the right tool. Sometimes you need to choose a screwdriver instead.
Right now I am wrestling with a Highpoint RocketRAID 1740 card because I had to run a PCI card in a box. Components on the motherboard prevented the use of a PCI-X card as PCI, so I chose Highpoint based on the promise of Linux support. Well, two days later I am just starting to make headway. They advertised an open source driver but as it turns out it's open source for "glue" to a binary driver, plus the code is broken. So, I had to patch their source and compile it, and got the card enabled. Now I need to remake initrd, copy over the partition to the RAID volume and hope and pray that grub will be able to find the initrd and boot from the array, then blacklist the kernel from updating so no one updates it without very deliberate action. Fun stuff.
Were I able to fit a PCI-X card, I would have gone with LSI (or 3ware/LSI) and would have been done two days ago since their drivers are included in the kernel and work, plus their cards are true hardware RAID not RocketRAID's crappy "fakeraid"
If they do this then iPhone owners will be able to press charges for unauthorized access to computers (the iPhone). I own an iPhone. First sale doctrine says I can do what I like with it. I jailbroke it. If Crapple remotely disables my phone I'll be taking them to court.
Having said that, I really don't think this is about jailbreaking and that the summary is just knee-jerk sensationalism. I think this is more about what the article says: protecting their customers when someone steals the device and tries to get into it, and/or remotely wiping a device if the legitimate owner requests it after reporting it lost or stolen. If this were about jailbreaking, Apple and AT&T would already have taken measures to block access to a slew of domain names.
If Apple were to remotely disable phones for the rightful owners having jailbroken them, they would be committing a felony and could be risking a loss of six and seven figure awards in each and every case the owners pursue.
So please, knock it off with the sensationalist summaries and RTFA before slamming Apple. Apple may have a stick up their ass about controlling the app marketplace, but they don't pull Microsoft-style asshattery-- Much.
Something as distinctive and ripe for improvement as video delivery is the ideal place for open-source development. Bugs and misfeatures won't survive, while improvements will be implemented continuously.
Really?
See: gimp GUI. The continued dumbing down of Gnome. Firefox becoming more and more of a CPU+RAM hog. OpenOffice is a mass of spaghetti code that takes 1,000 times longer than Excel does to open a moderate-size.xls with a lot of formatted fields. The stagnation of Inkscape. The lack of good admin tools for administering LVM. Crappy to nonexistent documentation.
PDF? Widespread in UNIX land, and considering it is a container for Postscript and WYSIWYG, it's pretty darn good for its intended purpose.
Acrobat? For editing already-rendered PDF files, it is hands down the best tool out there. PDFEdit is a steaming pile of crap in comparison.
Photoshop? Show me gimp when it gets a macro recorder and droplets, layer effects, nested layers, a decent UI (as complex as Photoshop's UI is, it is more navigable for most users than Gimp is), vector support, reasonable undo/redo, integrated HDR, edit text in place without losing effects/filters/etc (see: vector support), proper support for higher color depths than Gimp (don't even mention Cinepaint - Cinepaint is so outdated it may as well not exist).
Flash? It makes things possible on the web that a web browser cannot otherwise do - at least without a ginormous CPU manufactured of unobtanium. Say what you will but there is no denying that flash games and other apps perform better than the equivalent HTML+Javascript can do at this time.
Now, I have Adobe CS. I use PDFEdit, Gimp and Inkscape instead, whenever possible. I like the open source tools, but Photoshop is most definitely not bloated. That a program offers features I use and you don't, and vice versa, does not equate to bloat. It's a matter of picking the right tool for a job.
If I have a complex image where layer effects would make sense, I'd launch Photoshop and Illustrator to make the task go faster. What takes 30-some-odd steps to create in Gimp, and then re-doing the "effect" with slight variations requiring undoing and redoing the same steps with slight tweaks can often be done in literally 2-3 clicks in the Adobe suite.
Now, if all you want to do is take an image shot with a crappy Kodak P&S camera and remove red-eye and resize the image to post on social network sites, sure. Photoshop is overkill and Photoshop Elements or even Paint.net would be more appropriate. But, if you need the capabilities of Photoshop, it certainly is not bloated.
You're right they are largely the same. But he went and fiddled with something that didn't need to be fiddled with. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That's a good motto. One George should have pounded into his head.
Wasn't it George Lucas who was very outspoken against the colorization of The Three Stooges shorts for the DVD release a few years ago? Isn't he the one who was outraged and said that great works of art should be left untouched and be preserved in their original form - and this was DESPITE the fact that BOTH the colorized AND as-shot B&W versions would be available side on the DVD?
He is a frigging hypocrite.
George, give us the original release on Blu-Ray please, alongside the molested version. And, please give us the deleted scenes that appeared in the "storybook" and novelized versions. Then, everybody wins. Thanks.
I love Hogan's Heroes, but I hate the day-for-night scenes. Even when I watched afternoon reruns when I was five, the day-for-night technique bugged me. "It's night, but I see shadows."
"The film was originally released as Star Wars, without Episode IV or the subtitle A New Hope. The 1980 sequel, Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, featured an episode number and subtitle in the opening crawl. When the original film was re-released in 1981, Episode IV: A New Hope was added above the original opening crawl. Although Lucas claims that only six films were ever planned, representatives of Lucasfilm discussed plans for nine or twelve possible films in early interviews.[66] The film was re-released theatrically in 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982, and with additional scenes and enhanced special effects in 1997. CBS was host to the film's world broadcast premiere in 1984."
So recent Jags no longer have the "off-dim-flicker" settings on the headlight switch, but due to Ford's influence there is just an increased risk of catching on fire?
Just as you would be charged with "filing a false report" the attorneys filing these suits AND THEIR BOSSES (the execs, the promoter, etc.) should be charged with that crime.
Yes, updates are voluntary and you have to select to force an update.
Updates are technically voluntary, but if you sync to Windows rather than OS X it is ALL TOO EASY to accidentally upgrade the phone's OS due to focus stealing if you're touch typing.
So, voluntary it may be, but sometimes some involuntarily update due to focus stealing. Microsoft may consider that type of call a feature, but I consider it a bug. At least X window managers allow me to allow or disallow focus stealing, and on OS X it hasn't been a problem for me either.
We (Swiffer USA) are the owner of trademark registration no. 349r84735987349. Details of this registration are set out on the attached schedule, marked "A".
Widespread use of the Swiffer(R) trade mark has been made, to the extent that this trademark has acquired an extensive reputation and goodwill. The Swiffer trademark is, accordingly, also a well-known mark for all relevant purposes of trademark law.
It has come to our attention that you are using and/or have applied to use and publicize the Swiffer trademark.
This trademark is an infringement on our Swiffer trademark and also constitutes a reproduction or imitation thereof.
In the circumstances, your use of the Swiffer trademark will constitute an infringement of our registered and common law rights.
In the circumstances, we demand that you immediately:
1. cease all use of the trademark Swiffer;
2. deliver-up for destruction all material to which the Swiffer trademark or any other mark confusingly or deceptively similar to our trademark has been applied;
3. withdraw, cancel and/or delete any corporate names, domain names, trademark applications and/or trademark registrations for or including the Swiffer trademark;
4. undertake, in writing, never in future to make any use of the Swiffer trademark without prior written authority from us, whether within any corporate name, trading name, trading style, domain name or otherwise.
We await to hear from you by no later than close of business on Septober 32, 4921.
This is written without prejudice to our rights, all of which are hereby expressly reserved.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for Caldera Network Desktop, which made online package repositories work well. It was a groundbreaking product that could have been the dominant distribution today if you hadn't given in to the dark side of the force. Caldera Network Desktop was a wonderful Linux distro - for the time it was a well-polished distribution that worked, and was a lot less work to configure than Slackware or even Red Hat Linux.
Sadly, you let scumbags like Darl McBride steer you wrong. You became greedy and tried to reneg on the GPL, i.e., the code that you contributed to Linux kernel. You tried to steal UNIX from Novell and engaged in pump&dump schemes, ripping off your shareholders and your customers alike. By 2000, Redhat had long passed you by, because you lost your way, and by the time 2005 rolled around, every other distro grew in popularity and have been earning good returns for the respective disributions' sponsors and for integrators alike.
We will take the good - the code you released under the GPL, and leave the bad - that is, your total bullshit and your douchebag manner of doing business the last 10 years. Although you contributed a lot to Linux in your pre-McBride years, you will not be missed. I hope Darl McBride and any board and senior staff members who endorsed his pump & dump schemes are indicted for securities fraud and malfeasance, because through your actions it is self-evident that you ultimately did not have your shareholders' concerns at heart, but only extracting as much as you could into your own pockets. For that, and for trying to monopolize Linux and UNIX alike and contributing to Microsoft's FUD campaign which encouraged enterprises to avoid *nix and stick with the Windows malaise, fuck you very much.
Zarf wrote:
Apple did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueType
Of course not. Mel Brooks dropped it. Didn't you see the movie?
Swallows could have carried them. . .
It's a mix of two issues: first is focus point size. The second issue is that AF algorithms generally select the closest subject to the AF sensor. It sounds like you need a body that has spot AF (basically, it's a feature that cuts an AF point down to 1/3 its size) - or learn old-school focus and recompose. Why does AF scare you? Learn the features. Right now Canon's AF in the 7D is best of breed. All 19 focus points are cross-type phase sensors, and each AF point can be switched to "point" mode (shrink the AF point down to ~1/3 its size) and it works very, very well. The "point AF" mode will often let you focus on a subject between two blades of grass, where the normal-size single point AF mode would focus on the grass (closer object) instead. The 500D has only nine points, and the center point is rather large.
Why did I mention the 7D when you were referring to the consumer-level bodies? Because you are referring to L-series glass (with one of them, the 70-200 f.2.8 being weather sealed, being a perfect match for the weather-sealed 7D), and because of the advanced AF. If you want the best AF out there and you already have access to excellent telephoto lens, you'll want a body that will get you the most out of it. The AF shouldn't scare you.
Considering that GP is discussing the EOS xD line, Zeiss lenses, and so on, I really doubt he's shopping for lenses at Best Buy.
However despite what you're saying, there are some hidden gems in Canon's cheaper lens offerings. I bought an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS may exhibit a bit of CA (easily corrected in post) as a throwaway lens (one just to use for an event and then replace it with better glass later) but I was surprised to find that is is wonderfully sharp and there are folks claim it compares favorably to wider L-series zoom lenses for contrast and sharpness. Likewise, the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is often referred to as a "hidden L" lens (I like mine but I wish I had an EF-70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM + 2x teleconverter instead). There are some decent lens options you can find even at Best Buy, if you do your research. No, you won't get a weather-sealed ruggedized, constant f/2.8 or f/1.2 lens at Best Buy, but if you can get by with a slow lens that isn't weatherproof or ruggedized you can find lenses that are perfectly suited for your child's birthday parties and soccer games.
Canon makes optically wonderful lenses in both their L series and lower end lines, but the L-series lens isn't just for optical quality, but use where you need a ruggedized lens, and many are even weather sealed. Likewise they make quite a few cheaper zooms and primes that are wonderfully sharp. They may be slower (higher f-number/smaller aperture) but may boast sharp focus with great contrast.
But GP is right. Even the current 7D's pixel density (18MP on an APS-C size sensor) out-resolves a lot of older lens models. Try putting the 100-300mm USM on the 7D sometime; you won't get a sharp image. The 70-300mm IS USM, known for being extremely good optically, still looks a little soft on such a high pixel density. Canon has to start thinking about improving their lens offerings before they consider pushing the megapixel envelope any more. Besides, once you get to 12MP, for most uses, how is higher resolution a benefit? All you're going to do is eat up storage and spend more time downscaling images, and post will take longer.
Pixel densities of Canon's current pro DSLR offerings (source: dpreview):
EOS 1D mk IV APS-H 3.1 MP/cm pixel density 16.1 MP
EOS 1Ds mk III FF 2.4 MP/cm pixel density 21.1 MP
EOS 5D mk II FF 2.4 MP/cm pixel density 21 MP
EOS 7D APS-C 5.4 MP/cm pixel density 18 MP
EOS 50D APS-C 4.5 MP/cm pixel density 15.1 MP
With the higher pixel densities, focus sharpness and image stabilization become far more important. Imagine the effect of camera shake on a 120MP sensor? How about a lens that an 18MP APS-C outresolves? 18MP and 21MP are already enough - at least for me. I'd like to see sharper lenses please!
Frigging slashdot: "Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters." Sorry about the lack of formatting on the table I typed up. With characters separating the columns slashdot was bitching about "junk characters" so I had to undo all the time I spent formatting the table. Stupid slashcode.
. . . when they are in a deep economic crisis? Isn't California broke?
Well, I have seen Keanu Reeves films. I think that's a fairly close comparison. ;)
I think you're confusing Trademark Law with Copyright Law.
Swedish women are hotter than average, so they are clearly asking for it, looking like that?
My guess would be they changed their minds after having sex? Men in the US have supposedly been charged with rape on that basis. It's one of those things that make you say "WTF" when it comes to the American justice system. But then again, this is a country where urinating outdoors behind a bush or a peeping tom seeing you in the buff inside your own home can land you on a sex offender list.
I try buy hardware that works. In the case of video cards on non-Xen kernels, Nvidia always works. Sure, there is the annoying issue of having to recompile the modules when updating the kernel, but they otherwise work perfectly on video cards I have in various machines dating all the way back to 1998, and brand-new models (quadro on my notebook and in some appliance PCs, GTxxx cards, etc.) and everything in between.
ATI sunsets drivers a lot quicker than nVidia.
I try to go open source where and when possible, but sometimes the big flippin' hammer isn't the right tool. Sometimes you need to choose a screwdriver instead.
Right now I am wrestling with a Highpoint RocketRAID 1740 card because I had to run a PCI card in a box. Components on the motherboard prevented the use of a PCI-X card as PCI, so I chose Highpoint based on the promise of Linux support. Well, two days later I am just starting to make headway. They advertised an open source driver but as it turns out it's open source for "glue" to a binary driver, plus the code is broken. So, I had to patch their source and compile it, and got the card enabled. Now I need to remake initrd, copy over the partition to the RAID volume and hope and pray that grub will be able to find the initrd and boot from the array, then blacklist the kernel from updating so no one updates it without very deliberate action. Fun stuff.
Were I able to fit a PCI-X card, I would have gone with LSI (or 3ware/LSI) and would have been done two days ago since their drivers are included in the kernel and work, plus their cards are true hardware RAID not RocketRAID's crappy "fakeraid"
If they do this then iPhone owners will be able to press charges for unauthorized access to computers (the iPhone). I own an iPhone. First sale doctrine says I can do what I like with it. I jailbroke it. If Crapple remotely disables my phone I'll be taking them to court.
Having said that, I really don't think this is about jailbreaking and that the summary is just knee-jerk sensationalism. I think this is more about what the article says: protecting their customers when someone steals the device and tries to get into it, and/or remotely wiping a device if the legitimate owner requests it after reporting it lost or stolen. If this were about jailbreaking, Apple and AT&T would already have taken measures to block access to a slew of domain names.
If Apple were to remotely disable phones for the rightful owners having jailbroken them, they would be committing a felony and could be risking a loss of six and seven figure awards in each and every case the owners pursue.
So please, knock it off with the sensationalist summaries and RTFA before slamming Apple. Apple may have a stick up their ass about controlling the app marketplace, but they don't pull Microsoft-style asshattery-- Much.
I'm on my own "choose your adventure" story. It is sometimes called "real life." ;)
Really?
See: gimp GUI. The continued dumbing down of Gnome. Firefox becoming more and more of a CPU+RAM hog. OpenOffice is a mass of spaghetti code that takes 1,000 times longer than Excel does to open a moderate-size .xls with a lot of formatted fields. The stagnation of Inkscape. The lack of good admin tools for administering LVM. Crappy to nonexistent documentation.
PDF? Widespread in UNIX land, and considering it is a container for Postscript and WYSIWYG, it's pretty darn good for its intended purpose.
Acrobat? For editing already-rendered PDF files, it is hands down the best tool out there. PDFEdit is a steaming pile of crap in comparison.
Photoshop? Show me gimp when it gets a macro recorder and droplets, layer effects, nested layers, a decent UI (as complex as Photoshop's UI is, it is more navigable for most users than Gimp is), vector support, reasonable undo/redo, integrated HDR, edit text in place without losing effects/filters/etc (see: vector support), proper support for higher color depths than Gimp (don't even mention Cinepaint - Cinepaint is so outdated it may as well not exist).
Flash? It makes things possible on the web that a web browser cannot otherwise do - at least without a ginormous CPU manufactured of unobtanium. Say what you will but there is no denying that flash games and other apps perform better than the equivalent HTML+Javascript can do at this time.
Now, I have Adobe CS. I use PDFEdit, Gimp and Inkscape instead, whenever possible. I like the open source tools, but Photoshop is most definitely not bloated. That a program offers features I use and you don't, and vice versa, does not equate to bloat. It's a matter of picking the right tool for a job.
If I have a complex image where layer effects would make sense, I'd launch Photoshop and Illustrator to make the task go faster. What takes 30-some-odd steps to create in Gimp, and then re-doing the "effect" with slight variations requiring undoing and redoing the same steps with slight tweaks can often be done in literally 2-3 clicks in the Adobe suite.
Now, if all you want to do is take an image shot with a crappy Kodak P&S camera and remove red-eye and resize the image to post on social network sites, sure. Photoshop is overkill and Photoshop Elements or even Paint.net would be more appropriate. But, if you need the capabilities of Photoshop, it certainly is not bloated.
Wasn't it George Lucas who was very outspoken against the colorization of The Three Stooges shorts for the DVD release a few years ago? Isn't he the one who was outraged and said that great works of art should be left untouched and be preserved in their original form - and this was DESPITE the fact that BOTH the colorized AND as-shot B&W versions would be available side on the DVD?
He is a frigging hypocrite.
George, give us the original release on Blu-Ray please, alongside the molested version. And, please give us the deleted scenes that appeared in the "storybook" and novelized versions. Then, everybody wins. Thanks.
I love Hogan's Heroes, but I hate the day-for-night scenes. Even when I watched afternoon reruns when I was five, the day-for-night technique bugged me. "It's night, but I see shadows."
Wrong. It was referred to as "A New hope" in the 1980s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_IV:_A_New_Hope
"The film was originally released as Star Wars, without Episode IV or the subtitle A New Hope. The 1980 sequel, Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, featured an episode number and subtitle in the opening crawl. When the original film was re-released in 1981, Episode IV: A New Hope was added above the original opening crawl. Although Lucas claims that only six films were ever planned, representatives of Lucasfilm discussed plans for nine or twelve possible films in early interviews.[66] The film was re-released theatrically in 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982, and with additional scenes and enhanced special effects in 1997. CBS was host to the film's world broadcast premiere in 1984."
"Lucas went defunct in 1996."
So recent Jags no longer have the "off-dim-flicker" settings on the headlight switch, but due to Ford's influence there is just an increased risk of catching on fire?
Just as you would be charged with "filing a false report" the attorneys filing these suits AND THEIR BOSSES (the execs, the promoter, etc.) should be charged with that crime.
Right, if you notice it. Easy to miss if you are touch typing a long document and you get 30mbps downstream.
If Rupert Murdoch is on Hurd's side, Hurd must be a dirtbag. Rupert Murdoch has time and again proven himself to be the slimiest of the slime.
Updates are technically voluntary, but if you sync to Windows rather than OS X it is ALL TOO EASY to accidentally upgrade the phone's OS due to focus stealing if you're touch typing.
So, voluntary it may be, but sometimes some involuntarily update due to focus stealing. Microsoft may consider that type of call a feature, but I consider it a bug. At least X window managers allow me to allow or disallow focus stealing, and on OS X it hasn't been a problem for me either.
Fake cameras look fake unless you invest in real camera dome housings.
Typical "dummy cameras" will not fool a pro.
Dear uglyMood
We (Swiffer USA) are the owner of trademark registration no. 349r84735987349. Details of this registration are set out on the attached schedule, marked "A".
Widespread use of the Swiffer(R) trade mark has been made, to the extent that this trademark has acquired an extensive reputation and goodwill. The Swiffer trademark is, accordingly, also a well-known mark for all relevant purposes of trademark law.
It has come to our attention that you are using and/or have applied to use and publicize the Swiffer trademark.
This trademark is an infringement on our Swiffer trademark and also constitutes a reproduction or imitation thereof.
In the circumstances, your use of the Swiffer trademark will constitute an infringement of our registered and common law rights.
In the circumstances, we demand that you immediately:
1. cease all use of the trademark Swiffer;
2. deliver-up for destruction all material to which the Swiffer trademark or any other mark confusingly or deceptively similar to our trademark has been applied;
3. withdraw, cancel and/or delete any corporate names, domain names, trademark applications and/or trademark registrations for or including the Swiffer trademark;
4. undertake, in writing, never in future to make any use of the Swiffer trademark without prior written authority from us, whether within any corporate name, trading name, trading style, domain name or otherwise.
We await to hear from you by no later than close of business on Septober 32, 4921.
This is written without prejudice to our rights, all of which are hereby expressly reserved.
Yours faithfully,
Swiffer USA shark department.