That's not a good analogy; almost everybody would complain if those calculations were slow, but car companies spend tons of time and resources making sure that the throttle response is as quick as possible.
Also, I disagree with your statement; I think it would be true if you were talking about booting up the computer, but once things are showing, the computer doesn't really need most services or processes to display things to the user; responding to a user action could be instantaneous is almost all circumstances, but the problem is partly that the GUI will wait for the information synchronously (instead of showing some reaction and then load the data once it's ready), loading everything before starting to render the results, and also resource starvation due to low priority of the UI part (specially when running other things in the background, or when booting up).
While the actual decision was definitely agreed with the board, I'm sure that the famous "burning platform" memo pressured them. I think that the biggest problem was his certainty that he knew what was wrong and was sure how to fix it.
Elop should have been fired, and probably sued, as soon as he published that memo; even if he was convinced that Nokia's products were crap, he should have kept that information to himself and Nokia's "inner" circle, because that's the only thing they had at that moment; after they had a new, shiny product out there, feel free to talk about how bad the old product was and how great the new product is, but his actions have no rational explanation. Even someone as passionate and perfectionist as Steve Jobs tried his best to sell products he considered sub-par, like the Mac OS in the first iMacs.
The decision to go for an unproven platform like Windows Mobile was a bold, extremely risky move, which is why Microsoft had to pay that kind of money to have Nokia use it exclusively. For me, the biggest mistake wasn't to use Windows Mobile, but to put all of their chips into it, after completely dismissing their own products. They could have kept developing their own products, and also Windows Phone and Android devices, and let the market decide. I'm convinced that the Android phone would have sold a lot better than it's Windows counterpart, and Nokia would have had their own OS out there to compare.
Now it may be too late for Nokia to react; not only because of time and money, but because of the dismissal of the engineering teams that took care of Nokia's new software developments (specially the Linux-based Series 40 platform successor Meltemi), the damage to the Nokia brand, and the dependency of Nokia to a soon-to-be-competitor like Microsoft, when they release their rumored Surface phone. It looks like they're betting everything on Windows Mobile 8, and it will probably work as well as it did with 7.
In my opinion, the best thing Nokia can do is to find some kind of credit line that can sustain them for a few more years, negotiate the removal of the exclusivity clause with Microsoft, and add some Android phones in their portfolio, to try to recover some of the market share that went to Samsung; then, invest as much as possible in the development of what works (the only good news lately come from the success of the Asha line), and make the only thing that can distinguish Nokia from the other vendors: innovate, innovate more, and then some!
Things like the PureView are a good example of the innovation that may help them survive, but only if they don't keep screwing up in the marketing department, like when they mentioned in the announcement that the megapixels were interpolated (which wasn't true), or using the "PureView" name for different things (for image stabilization or large number of megapixels).
7 pounds in 12 weeks isn't a bad result; experts recommend a weight loss of half a pound per week, so they were in the range.
Still, a good explanation for the relatively small weight loss is that they were developing muscle while loosing fat, as they moved from a sedentary lifestyle to working out 5 times a week; it would have been nice to see the body fat percentage before and after the 12 week period.
The title of this post is completely misleading. From Wikipedia cybersquatting is "registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else". There's no trademark, not even a business... the submitter just saw a domain name he liked and that was already taken. That domain name could have been acquired by a multitude of reasons, some of which include just keeping it for future use.
When I've an idea for a personal project, and think of a good name for it, I check if it's available; if it is, I register it, and while I'm not using it, why not placing some domain parking page? It's gonna pay peanuts, but everything helps in crisis times. I want to clarify that I'm against mistyped domain or inadequate (popups, casinos, etc) advertising like most internet users.
When you see a domain name you like, just make an offer or ask for a price. Those prices are usually unreasonable, so just find an alternative. Also, always keep in mind that a good product is leaps and bounds better than a good name:)
In my system I also have the "Java Quick Starter" (from Sun), and I already removed the Skype add-on.
As a Firefox extension developer, I've received several complaints about disappearing toolbar buttons, and the answer is always the same: check for the Skype extension that was installed without your consent, and uninstall it. Plus, navigating the browser history was a lot slower, and removing that add-on solved the problem (the Skype extension will scan the page contents to substitute phone numbers by Skype actions).
This is not limited to Firefox, as this stuff has been happening in Internet Explorer for a long, long time. Still, it would be nice if Firefox would protect its users from non-authorized extensions, warning of what was installed, and providing a easy way to uninstall/disable it.
Has no JS exploits... for now. This is the same type of argument that Apple uses for their products. Is Mac OS X more secure? It's more like there's not as much people trying to crack it out than M$ platforms. It's all a matter of market share: once Opera achieves a good percentage of the browser market, it will attract the attention of phishers, virus makers, or even worse, security advisers!
Also, seems that Morse is actually quite faster than regular text messaging. An article about it can be found at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2- 1571664,00.html, and there was a "competition" between two text messengers and two Morse coders in Jay Leno's show some time ago, where Morse coders where MUCH faster than their text message writers counterparts.
QWERTY was designed to reduce the jamming of keys, so it allowed fast typists go faster, not slowing them down! That it was designed to reduce the efficiency of typists is a very common (and wrong) myth.
Of course, to power the big screen and the wireless connection long enough, this device needs a big battery, so it highly probable that it will be thick and heavy... about the price, maybe they'll decide to loose money over it, like they did with the first Xbox. They'll wait and see how the people reacts to it, and then decide the pricing strategy.
Seems that Firefox 1.5 is a lot more aggressive at caching pages than previous versions... Also, the ammount of memory that will be used for this purpose depends on the total memory of your system.
Also, if you were using extensions (you already said you don't, but I'm adding this for reference) a good way to detect memory leaks is to use the Leak Monitor Extension.
If you take a look at the FAQ, "How will our names be included in Firefox 2?", it seems that there will be an option to display all the names... then, I assume that the name list will be distributed with Firefox 2.0 (hopefully in a data file, not into the code!).
I own a G81-3000 myself (great keyboard, by the way). Although the shape and proportions are very similar, the leds panel is different, and the F and J keys are regular ones.
It works for me! Seems that you might have problems to access those pages using non-Firefox browsers. Well, you may visit that extension's website: http://showcase.uworks.net/
As both Reveal and Showcase descriptions say, you can use the KeyConfig extension to rebind the keys. Also, both extension don't share the same key shortcut. I think Reveal uses F2, and Showcase, F12.
One is a ripoff of OS X Expose. The other is a copy of an IE 7.0 feature.
Reveal is composed by 3 different features, and one of them is tab previewing, but you have search bar where you can "filter" thumbnails by their characteristics, and also show thumbnails of the history of that tab. Really, not similar to Expose or IE 7.
Showcase (which is the extension I developed) is not a copy of IE 7. The idea behind it was to be able to see tabs from windows other than the current one, so you can access them in a fast way. From OS X Expose I took the idea to fit all thumbnails in a single window (without scrolling), and from IE 7 Quick Tabs I took the idea to put a close button to each thumbnail, since it was requested by some users. I finished the first version of this extension quite long before I learnt about Quick Tabs.
Calling this "stealing" is really harsh language. Microsoft Windows copied lots of stuff from Mac OS, Mac OS copied a lot of stuff from Xerox Star... So you see, open source is not really different to closed source in that sense.
As others said, you can install that extension, and also you can change the app.extensions.version in about:config to 1.0+ , so you can install all extensions.
Well, I'm one of those winners! The focus of the contest was to use new Firefox 1.5 features, and I guess that's why there are 4 winning extensions that make use of the window thumbnails. Anyways, I was really sure IE Tab would get some prize, since it's an extension I really like...
About Web Developer, I thought it wouldn't get one of the grand prize because it's has no "wow" factor, but I wanted it to win, since it's really great extension.
It looks like the cached copy on Google will be the copy submitted in court. I just bought a new ATI card, one of the reasons was because they claimed to support this feature.
This situation reminds me of the Compaq ATI 9000/9200 fiasco, when lots of people complained that they felt cheated, although both graphic chips performed exactly the same! So, when something like this happens, thousands of people claim that they only bought the product for what is failing! Please, grow up...
Slashdot Mirror
Finally! It will be amusing to hear what Microsoft execs have to say once they sell more Android phones than Windows Mobile ones.
One would think that using an OS created by a Finn in a phone from a Finnish company is a no-brainer; took them a long, long time.
That's not a good analogy; almost everybody would complain if those calculations were slow, but car companies spend tons of time and resources making sure that the throttle response is as quick as possible.
Also, I disagree with your statement; I think it would be true if you were talking about booting up the computer, but once things are showing, the computer doesn't really need most services or processes to display things to the user; responding to a user action could be instantaneous is almost all circumstances, but the problem is partly that the GUI will wait for the information synchronously (instead of showing some reaction and then load the data once it's ready), loading everything before starting to render the results, and also resource starvation due to low priority of the UI part (specially when running other things in the background, or when booting up).
While the actual decision was definitely agreed with the board, I'm sure that the famous "burning platform" memo pressured them. I think that the biggest problem was his certainty that he knew what was wrong and was sure how to fix it.
Elop should have been fired, and probably sued, as soon as he published that memo; even if he was convinced that Nokia's products were crap, he should have kept that information to himself and Nokia's "inner" circle, because that's the only thing they had at that moment; after they had a new, shiny product out there, feel free to talk about how bad the old product was and how great the new product is, but his actions have no rational explanation. Even someone as passionate and perfectionist as Steve Jobs tried his best to sell products he considered sub-par, like the Mac OS in the first iMacs.
The decision to go for an unproven platform like Windows Mobile was a bold, extremely risky move, which is why Microsoft had to pay that kind of money to have Nokia use it exclusively. For me, the biggest mistake wasn't to use Windows Mobile, but to put all of their chips into it, after completely dismissing their own products. They could have kept developing their own products, and also Windows Phone and Android devices, and let the market decide. I'm convinced that the Android phone would have sold a lot better than it's Windows counterpart, and Nokia would have had their own OS out there to compare.
Now it may be too late for Nokia to react; not only because of time and money, but because of the dismissal of the engineering teams that took care of Nokia's new software developments (specially the Linux-based Series 40 platform successor Meltemi), the damage to the Nokia brand, and the dependency of Nokia to a soon-to-be-competitor like Microsoft, when they release their rumored Surface phone. It looks like they're betting everything on Windows Mobile 8, and it will probably work as well as it did with 7.
In my opinion, the best thing Nokia can do is to find some kind of credit line that can sustain them for a few more years, negotiate the removal of the exclusivity clause with Microsoft, and add some Android phones in their portfolio, to try to recover some of the market share that went to Samsung; then, invest as much as possible in the development of what works (the only good news lately come from the success of the Asha line), and make the only thing that can distinguish Nokia from the other vendors: innovate, innovate more, and then some!
Things like the PureView are a good example of the innovation that may help them survive, but only if they don't keep screwing up in the marketing department, like when they mentioned in the announcement that the megapixels were interpolated (which wasn't true), or using the "PureView" name for different things (for image stabilization or large number of megapixels).
7 pounds in 12 weeks isn't a bad result; experts recommend a weight loss of half a pound per week, so they were in the range.
Still, a good explanation for the relatively small weight loss is that they were developing muscle while loosing fat, as they moved from a sedentary lifestyle to working out 5 times a week; it would have been nice to see the body fat percentage before and after the 12 week period.
The title of this post is completely misleading. From Wikipedia cybersquatting is "registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else". There's no trademark, not even a business... the submitter just saw a domain name he liked and that was already taken. That domain name could have been acquired by a multitude of reasons, some of which include just keeping it for future use.
:)
When I've an idea for a personal project, and think of a good name for it, I check if it's available; if it is, I register it, and while I'm not using it, why not placing some domain parking page? It's gonna pay peanuts, but everything helps in crisis times. I want to clarify that I'm against mistyped domain or inadequate (popups, casinos, etc) advertising like most internet users.
When you see a domain name you like, just make an offer or ask for a price. Those prices are usually unreasonable, so just find an alternative. Also, always keep in mind that a good product is leaps and bounds better than a good name
In my system I also have the "Java Quick Starter" (from Sun), and I already removed the Skype add-on.
As a Firefox extension developer, I've received several complaints about disappearing toolbar buttons, and the answer is always the same: check for the Skype extension that was installed without your consent, and uninstall it. Plus, navigating the browser history was a lot slower, and removing that add-on solved the problem (the Skype extension will scan the page contents to substitute phone numbers by Skype actions).
This is not limited to Firefox, as this stuff has been happening in Internet Explorer for a long, long time. Still, it would be nice if Firefox would protect its users from non-authorized extensions, warning of what was installed, and providing a easy way to uninstall/disable it.
Has no JS exploits... for now. This is the same type of argument that Apple uses for their products. Is Mac OS X more secure? It's more like there's not as much people trying to crack it out than M$ platforms. It's all a matter of market share: once Opera achieves a good percentage of the browser market, it will attract the attention of phishers, virus makers, or even worse, security advisers!
Indeed, there are some applications that allow you to send SMS messages wrote in Morse code, like Morse Texter (http://laivakoira.typepad.com/blog/2005/05/morse_ texter.html).
Also, seems that Morse is actually quite faster than regular text messaging. An article about it can be found at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-2- 1571664,00.html, and there was a "competition" between two text messengers and two Morse coders in Jay Leno's show some time ago, where Morse coders where MUCH faster than their text message writers counterparts.
QWERTY was designed to reduce the jamming of keys, so it allowed fast typists go faster, not slowing them down! That it was designed to reduce the efficiency of typists is a very common (and wrong) myth.
And what about size, specially the thickness? Well, just my opinion, but by the photos looks like they're trying to hide something: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/zune/ default.mspx
Instead, check the iPod photos. Apple is always making sure to show how slim it is! http://www.apple.com/ipod/ipod.html
Of course, to power the big screen and the wireless connection long enough, this device needs a big battery, so it highly probable that it will be thick and heavy... about the price, maybe they'll decide to loose money over it, like they did with the first Xbox. They'll wait and see how the people reacts to it, and then decide the pricing strategy.
Seems that Firefox 1.5 is a lot more aggressive at caching pages than previous versions... Also, the ammount of memory that will be used for this purpose depends on the total memory of your system.
You can find ways to configure that here.
Also, if you were using extensions (you already said you don't, but I'm adding this for reference) a good way to detect memory leaks is to use the Leak Monitor Extension.
If you take a look at the FAQ, "How will our names be included in Firefox 2?", it seems that there will be an option to display all the names... then, I assume that the name list will be distributed with Firefox 2.0 (hopefully in a data file, not into the code!).
I own a G81-3000 myself (great keyboard, by the way). Although the shape and proportions are very similar, the leds panel is different, and the F and J keys are regular ones.
A link with photo: http://www.cherrycorp.com/english/classic-line/key board-standard-g81-3000.htm
It works for me! Seems that you might have problems to access those pages using non-Firefox browsers. Well, you may visit that extension's website: http://showcase.uworks.net/
The Grand Prize, an Alienware computer, runs Windows
Well, that computer will run Windows XP and/or Ubuntu Linux. You can read about the complete specifications here.
Then there's the Vertigo extension. It's not a sidebar, but it's having the tab list at the left side of the screen.
Good news, that is already done! It's called Tab Sidebar.
As both Reveal and Showcase descriptions say, you can use the KeyConfig extension to rebind the keys. Also, both extension don't share the same key shortcut. I think Reveal uses F2, and Showcase, F12.
Okay, does the plush toy [mozilla.org] they're giving away look more like a fox [wikipedia.org] or a racoon [wikipedia.org]?
I don't think they're giving that plush toy, but just a t-shirt, a cap and a laptop bag.
One is a ripoff of OS X Expose. The other is a copy of an IE 7.0 feature.
Reveal is composed by 3 different features, and one of them is tab previewing, but you have search bar where you can "filter" thumbnails by their characteristics, and also show thumbnails of the history of that tab. Really, not similar to Expose or IE 7.
Showcase (which is the extension I developed) is not a copy of IE 7. The idea behind it was to be able to see tabs from windows other than the current one, so you can access them in a fast way. From OS X Expose I took the idea to fit all thumbnails in a single window (without scrolling), and from IE 7 Quick Tabs I took the idea to put a close button to each thumbnail, since it was requested by some users. I finished the first version of this extension quite long before I learnt about Quick Tabs.
Calling this "stealing" is really harsh language. Microsoft Windows copied lots of stuff from Mac OS, Mac OS copied a lot of stuff from Xerox Star... So you see, open source is not really different to closed source in that sense.
As others said, you can install that extension, and also you can change the app.extensions.version in about:config to 1.0+ , so you can install all extensions.
Well, I'm one of those winners! The focus of the contest was to use new Firefox 1.5 features, and I guess that's why there are 4 winning extensions that make use of the window thumbnails. Anyways, I was really sure IE Tab would get some prize, since it's an extension I really like...
About Web Developer, I thought it wouldn't get one of the grand prize because it's has no "wow" factor, but I wanted it to win, since it's really great extension.
It looks like the cached copy on Google will be the copy submitted in court. I just bought a new ATI card, one of the reasons was because they claimed to support this feature. This situation reminds me of the Compaq ATI 9000/9200 fiasco, when lots of people complained that they felt cheated, although both graphic chips performed exactly the same! So, when something like this happens, thousands of people claim that they only bought the product for what is failing! Please, grow up...