Actually, there is a PDF format that is an ISO standard, but there are other PDF formats that Acrobat uses that aren't based on the ISO standard. I just opened Acrobat 9 to check, and the PDF that complies to the ISO standard isn't even the default.
If you click PDF/A, for example, from the drop down list, you are then presented with a dialog to supply some options. Certainly the ISO standards are well-supported, but they're not user friendly, and I highly doubt most people will go through the hoops to use the ISO format unless they have a specific business need to use it.
So in reality, the PDF you're going to encounter 99% of the time is not exactly the one described in the ISO standard. That's not to say they hide the format, like it used to be with BIFF, but to herald Acrobat as example of open formats is not exactly true either.
Those who have XP probably shouldn't. They should wait until they buy new hardware, then get whatever Windows is out at that point in time. There is no joy to be had from trying to run the newest OS on a platform three or four generations in the past.
Neither Linux 2.4, nor Ubuntu 8.04 were known as major failures.
By what measure? If it's demand or market share, Vista has beaten the pants off linux.
Sure, they did what they intended to do, but so did Vista. The major failure with Vista was that people (and OEMs especially) were installing it on machines without enough RAM. It sucks with less than 2 GB. That's the long and short of the story. Microsoft should have made it clear not to install it on machines with less RAM than that. RAM was dirt cheap even with Vista first started shipping.
How is this any different from Windows 95 to Windows 98? Surely you wouldn't have said 98 was a worthless upgrade?
Most upgrades ought to be incremental. It's better to have a Windows incrementally better every two or three years than one completely different every six. This also means people with Vista won't need to rush out and buy Win7, they can just wait until they get a new PC.
I really don't see how it's terribly different from KDE's Konqurer. The web browser and file browser use the same engine. That's not especially wierd. Internet Explorer itself -- iexplorer.exe -- is, like someone else said, just a wrapper for the underlying engine, Trident.
As far as Windows Updates go -- the client that creates a tray notification (wuauclt.exe) is for automatic updates. wuauclt cannot do on-demand updates. The website is for on-demand updates only. One does not exist because the other sucks. As a matter of fact, it took me a lot to get used to the idea of only using wuauclt for updates, because it doesn't have any feedback. But if you're using WSUS to deploy updates, you HAVE to use wuauclt.
I did some extensive testing of Base a little while back. It's OK for very limited use, but let's be brutally honest... you don't create solid, complex systems on Base.
Have you looked at the state of many critical business "applications" that are in Access? I'm not saying it smart, but there is definitely a market for that kind of software out there.
Then again, I've only skimmed over Base. For all I know it might be worse than Access, but I'd find that very hard to believe.
The RIAA doesn't produce any products. They don't make any music or really contribute to music. They are, at best, useful for distribution, but that is even arguable.
Yet they take a very large potion of the earning from the music. So I ask this, who is ripping off whom?
The idea is that no one else is hiring. So if you lose your job, you are fucked over until the "storm" passes over. In this case, the storm is the recession.
Granted, people are still hiring, but let's be realistic: the unemployment rate is rising and layoffs are common. It's a lot harder to find another job in this environment, and even if you do find one, employers are wise to the situation and can probably get away with paying you less than they would in a healthy economy.
I thought the value of something like HIPPA wasn't necessarily so that you could protect you data so much as that you could sue the pants off of someone who didn't. That is the incentive people who control your records have to keep the secure.
I find Enchanting is the best. The mats have no cost to post on the Auction House. Now that you can make scrolls, it's even better. But expensive as hell to learn.
Or maybe they'll think you considered how suspicious it would look to have an "incriminating DVD" out in the open, but everything else encrypted. So in order to watch that DVD, you hid it in plain sight, so that you have some kind of defense against the claim that the DVD belonged to you. They'll think you're just trying to fool them, in other words. If what you suggested were a valid defense, people would be encrypting all but their most "incriminating" data, and then claiming that it wasn't theirs.
I have had to do this before. Flashing a new BIOS failed once, and the computer wouldn't boot. I had to have Asus mail me a chip flashed correctly.
In order to create myself a "backup" incase it ever happened again on that board, I booted using the chip Asus sent me, popped it out, put the mis-flashed one back in while the computer was running, and reflashed it.
Okay, maybe not really, but that's pretty much how I type. I'm very cautious about CTS, and I've never had any symptoms or warning signs. Of course, I've tried touch typing before, but it doesn't feel as comfortable or natural to me. I type in the way the feels like it's putting the least strain on my wrists.
You need to enumerate a list of every right marriage grants. Then the total cost to obtain them all.
THEN, write down every one of those same rights you can also get through other legal means. THEN the cost.
If the list of rights you can get through "other legal means", OR the total cost of obtaining those rights is higher through "other legal means" than through marriage, then you have a disparity between gay and straight relationships that is discriminatory.
I think you'd find it takes a lot more than a "modicum" of planning to emulate marriage rights.
If you really don't think that someone who lived in a jurisdiction where their marriage was legal, and all the rights of marriage was available to them at the low, low price of a marriage license wouldn't SERIOUSLY think twice about moving to a place where all that was throw out the window -- just for a job -- then maybe you should be huh'ing yourself.
Were the shoe on the other foot, and Google operated where straight marriages were void, then no one would be thinking twice about this, because no one (straight) would want to move to where their marriage was void.
Classic "in a perfect world" argument. Sure, what you're saying would be absolutely true in a perfect world. But in reality, corporations make the most successful lobbyists, and have the most influence over government.
So I agree with you, but UNTIL THE DAY COMES that corporations don't lobby anymore, you can't fault Google for playing by the current rules.
In other words, if the bad guys are going to lobby for bad stuff, then the good guys ought to be able to lobby for good stuff, until we can just end lobbying all together. It's the idea of fighting fire with fire, also; if you can't be 'em, join 'em.
Of course, a lot of people who are against gay marriage are ALSO against the separation of church and state. They'd like to see the government force others to comply with christian teachings.
Biblically, we all are worthy of death because of the sin of Adam and Eve:
Genesis 1
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."
20 Adam [c] named his wife Eve, [d] because she would become the mother of all the living.
21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
Furthermore, we all have sinned:
Romans 3
23 for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God
And only he without sin may cast the first stone:
John 8
7 But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, âoeHe who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
I don't see how that one passage particularly condemns homosexuality.
The bottom line is, Google wants the best people. If they're gay, Google doesn't want to have to say, "Hey, we really want you to come work here, but oh by the way, your marriage is going to be null and void if you do."
They're thinking ahead. They see the trend that gay marriages and civil unions are becoming reality. And don't be so US-centric: A lot of other nations allow gay marriages/unions, and Google probably hires internationally. It would be a shame to have some of the brightest folks turn Google down because if they accepted, they'd lose some of their basic rights.
Even if you aren't gay, what if you have or will have children? They could turn out to be gay, and you wouldn't want to have moved to a place where they are specifically discriminated against in the laws. Just a thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, there is a PDF format that is an ISO standard, but there are other PDF formats that Acrobat uses that aren't based on the ISO standard. I just opened Acrobat 9 to check, and the PDF that complies to the ISO standard isn't even the default.
If you click PDF/A, for example, from the drop down list, you are then presented with a dialog to supply some options. Certainly the ISO standards are well-supported, but they're not user friendly, and I highly doubt most people will go through the hoops to use the ISO format unless they have a specific business need to use it.
So in reality, the PDF you're going to encounter 99% of the time is not exactly the one described in the ISO standard. That's not to say they hide the format, like it used to be with BIFF, but to herald Acrobat as example of open formats is not exactly true either.
Those who have XP probably shouldn't. They should wait until they buy new hardware, then get whatever Windows is out at that point in time. There is no joy to be had from trying to run the newest OS on a platform three or four generations in the past.
Also Wordpad. (Which is actually a worthwhile inclusion in Win7, as it will open ODF and OOXML files.)
Are you sure that's not a hockey mom? Or a pitbull?
Oh bother. I've just gone and confused myself.
Neither Linux 2.4, nor Ubuntu 8.04 were known as major failures.
By what measure? If it's demand or market share, Vista has beaten the pants off linux.
Sure, they did what they intended to do, but so did Vista. The major failure with Vista was that people (and OEMs especially) were installing it on machines without enough RAM. It sucks with less than 2 GB. That's the long and short of the story. Microsoft should have made it clear not to install it on machines with less RAM than that. RAM was dirt cheap even with Vista first started shipping.
How is this any different from Windows 95 to Windows 98? Surely you wouldn't have said 98 was a worthless upgrade?
Most upgrades ought to be incremental. It's better to have a Windows incrementally better every two or three years than one completely different every six. This also means people with Vista won't need to rush out and buy Win7, they can just wait until they get a new PC.
Using more resources doesn't necessarily mean degraded performance, though. It can often mean remarkably better performance.
I really don't see how it's terribly different from KDE's Konqurer. The web browser and file browser use the same engine. That's not especially wierd. Internet Explorer itself -- iexplorer.exe -- is, like someone else said, just a wrapper for the underlying engine, Trident.
As far as Windows Updates go -- the client that creates a tray notification (wuauclt.exe) is for automatic updates. wuauclt cannot do on-demand updates. The website is for on-demand updates only. One does not exist because the other sucks. As a matter of fact, it took me a lot to get used to the idea of only using wuauclt for updates, because it doesn't have any feedback. But if you're using WSUS to deploy updates, you HAVE to use wuauclt.
Macro support in Base? Hmmm.
I did some extensive testing of Base a little while back. It's OK for very limited use, but let's be brutally honest ... you don't create solid, complex systems on Base.
Have you looked at the state of many critical business "applications" that are in Access? I'm not saying it smart, but there is definitely a market for that kind of software out there.
Then again, I've only skimmed over Base. For all I know it might be worse than Access, but I'd find that very hard to believe.
The RIAA doesn't produce any products. They don't make any music or really contribute to music. They are, at best, useful for distribution, but that is even arguable.
Yet they take a very large potion of the earning from the music. So I ask this, who is ripping off whom?
The same way the conservatives credit Bush, Bush Sr., and Regan for all the good that's happened, and blame anything bad on Clinton?
The idea is that no one else is hiring. So if you lose your job, you are fucked over until the "storm" passes over. In this case, the storm is the recession.
Granted, people are still hiring, but let's be realistic: the unemployment rate is rising and layoffs are common. It's a lot harder to find another job in this environment, and even if you do find one, employers are wise to the situation and can probably get away with paying you less than they would in a healthy economy.
I thought the value of something like HIPPA wasn't necessarily so that you could protect you data so much as that you could sue the pants off of someone who didn't. That is the incentive people who control your records have to keep the secure.
I find Enchanting is the best. The mats have no cost to post on the Auction House. Now that you can make scrolls, it's even better. But expensive as hell to learn.
Or maybe they'll think you considered how suspicious it would look to have an "incriminating DVD" out in the open, but everything else encrypted. So in order to watch that DVD, you hid it in plain sight, so that you have some kind of defense against the claim that the DVD belonged to you. They'll think you're just trying to fool them, in other words. If what you suggested were a valid defense, people would be encrypting all but their most "incriminating" data, and then claiming that it wasn't theirs.
Are they revoking HIPPA along with this, or what? AFAIK, it will still be confidential information.
I have had to do this before. Flashing a new BIOS failed once, and the computer wouldn't boot. I had to have Asus mail me a chip flashed correctly.
In order to create myself a "backup" incase it ever happened again on that board, I booted using the chip Asus sent me, popped it out, put the mis-flashed one back in while the computer was running, and reflashed it.
That was me, you insensitive clod!
Okay, maybe not really, but that's pretty much how I type. I'm very cautious about CTS, and I've never had any symptoms or warning signs. Of course, I've tried touch typing before, but it doesn't feel as comfortable or natural to me. I type in the way the feels like it's putting the least strain on my wrists.
You're not thinking about it fairly.
You need to enumerate a list of every right marriage grants. Then the total cost to obtain them all.
THEN, write down every one of those same rights you can also get through other legal means. THEN the cost.
If the list of rights you can get through "other legal means", OR the total cost of obtaining those rights is higher through "other legal means" than through marriage, then you have a disparity between gay and straight relationships that is discriminatory.
I think you'd find it takes a lot more than a "modicum" of planning to emulate marriage rights.
If you really don't think that someone who lived in a jurisdiction where their marriage was legal, and all the rights of marriage was available to them at the low, low price of a marriage license wouldn't SERIOUSLY think twice about moving to a place where all that was throw out the window -- just for a job -- then maybe you should be huh'ing yourself.
Were the shoe on the other foot, and Google operated where straight marriages were void, then no one would be thinking twice about this, because no one (straight) would want to move to where their marriage was void.
Classic "in a perfect world" argument. Sure, what you're saying would be absolutely true in a perfect world. But in reality, corporations make the most successful lobbyists, and have the most influence over government.
So I agree with you, but UNTIL THE DAY COMES that corporations don't lobby anymore, you can't fault Google for playing by the current rules.
In other words, if the bad guys are going to lobby for bad stuff, then the good guys ought to be able to lobby for good stuff, until we can just end lobbying all together. It's the idea of fighting fire with fire, also; if you can't be 'em, join 'em.
Of course, a lot of people who are against gay marriage are ALSO against the separation of church and state. They'd like to see the government force others to comply with christian teachings.
It's more like,
"Hi, this is the Government. We were wrong for butting into your religions rites, and have decided to back out. Have a nice day."
Biblically, we all are worthy of death because of the sin of Adam and Eve:
Genesis 1
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."
20 Adam [c] named his wife Eve, [d] because she would become the mother of all the living.
21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them. 22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
Furthermore, we all have sinned:
Romans 3
23 for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God
And only he without sin may cast the first stone:
John 8
7 But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, âoeHe who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."
I don't see how that one passage particularly condemns homosexuality.
The bottom line is, Google wants the best people. If they're gay, Google doesn't want to have to say, "Hey, we really want you to come work here, but oh by the way, your marriage is going to be null and void if you do."
They're thinking ahead. They see the trend that gay marriages and civil unions are becoming reality. And don't be so US-centric: A lot of other nations allow gay marriages/unions, and Google probably hires internationally. It would be a shame to have some of the brightest folks turn Google down because if they accepted, they'd lose some of their basic rights.
Even if you aren't gay, what if you have or will have children? They could turn out to be gay, and you wouldn't want to have moved to a place where they are specifically discriminated against in the laws. Just a thought.
Remember, Alan Turing was gay.
And I have my suspicions about Ada Lovelace. Have you seen a picture of her?