"...but I really think that by abandoning the RHL line, RH caused a group of low- to mid-level techs to start considering other options, when RH had been our default."
Bang, hammer hits nail on head. When Redhat started the whole Fedora thing, they left the small/middle tier folks without an option. It was either spend the big bucks for Enterprise or roll the dice on Fedora. They didn't seem to realize that a lot of grassroots support depended on that small/middle tier.
Yeah yeah, they're running a business (and I'm a share holder, so what) but rule one of business would be don't piss off your customers unless you can afford to lose them. I think they undervalued what the grassroot support was worth. Novell seems to understand this, perhaps, but it could also be they are trying to see if they can bleed Redhat out of the market before upping their price for their distro. Time will tell.
Fedora was billed FROM THE START as a beta-level distro. It was never (nor is it still) intended to be a stable, rock solid platform.
Now, I could go into why this is a bad idea on Redhat's part, but never mind.
What would I recommend instead of Fedora? I wouldn't. You need to choose your own Linux path based on your experience, ability to learn and/or bank account.
Re:It ain't just the cell phone....
on
Life Interrupted
·
· Score: 1
I think the real issue is that driving is 99.9% mind numbing and.1% pay-attention-or-die. The very nature of this means the driver is generally unprepared when split second action is required.
I think it is convenient to blame certain things when an accident happens.
"Wow, nasty crash."
"Yeah, that guy over there was talking on his phone when it happened. He didn't have his seat beat on either."
"His study -- "Stressed Out on Four Continents: Time Crunch or Yuppie Kvetch?" -- found that the better off one is, the more he or she seems to complain about the time pinch. How can this be? Your opportunities and expectations grow as you grow wealthier, he theorizes, but time, which is finite, doesn't keep up."
The simplier explanation is that as one has more and more money, it's relative value goes down and one is willing to spend less time for the same amount of money, ie time becomes more valuable. Simple supply and demand.
I know I'd trade more time for money if I (or my family) were low on money.
One could also argue those who DON'T complain about having enough Time are complaining about not having enough Money instead.:)
It ain't just the cell phone....
on
Life Interrupted
·
· Score: 1
I love how people jump up and down about cell phone use while driving. What about eating? Tuning the radio? Talking to someone IN the car? Yelling at the kids in the back seat torturing the dog? No need to mention the INSANITY of women applying makeup while driving.
All these things distract as much if not more than a simple cell phone call, yet the black sheep is the phone. Strange, is it not?
You misunderstand. I certainly agree that I pay for content with commercials and as such I'm free to do what I want with them, including refusing to watch them, removing them, skipping them, what have you.
The parent was arguing that paying for cable is NOT paying for content, which I disagree with.
Strange, I would have sworn I tried the "blank page" and then rewrite the URL to what I wanted, didn't work (opened the page on start). Maybe that was an earlier build.
In either case, the issue seems to be the UI and dialogs not being clear. Guess I'd better go file a bug.
It's nice to know this can be done. Now, how is a person supposed to figure this out?
When comparing the two apps, my opinion is anything not accessible via the UI doesn't count (that would include extensions in my mind). Yes, it's nice that the flexibility is there and I'll probably use this feature (thanks!), but for comparision purposes, Firefox loses to Mozilla on this point.
Note: I'm a fan of Firefox, I just wish some of the dumbing down wasn't done.
> Urm.. yes you can - preferences -> privacy -> cookies check -accept check -ask every time (the advanced tab allows you to set preferences for individual cookie originators)
What version are you using? My 0.10.1 Mac OS X doesn't have an advanced tab for Cookies.
> Urm, yes (I think) i just opened an image from my hard disk then right-clicked "bookmark this page" and the bookmark was created. but you may be refering to something different here.
No, this feature is for opening the "save bookmark" dialog, so that I can choose the folder. However, I notice that this is actually the default behavior, score for Firefox, shame on me.
> firefox about:blank
I could also hack the source and make Firefox do whatever I want, that's not the point. Rather, if it isn't a UI choice, it doesn't count. Same for having to pick through about:config. Features only count if they are easily accessible.
1. Can't have firefox open on a blank page and have a "home page". This is handy in mozilla as a quick way to get to your favorite site (Home Key).
2. Cookie control is more coarse, I like being able to say which site gets to set a cookie when visiting, the new "for session only" in Moz is great. thinkgeek.com cookie? Ok. Hitbox cookie? NO! No cookie for you! cbsnew.com? Ok, but only this time.
3. File bookmark is a good thing. Firefox? No.
4. Themes, what themes? Sure, Firefox is still a moving target, this will change in time.
The parent said "space", not an air-filled environment with zero gravity.
You are correct,however, one should be able to swim in air at zero gravity, though I would imagine the effort to get going would be pretty high. Turning would be very interesting!
I read his "yes" were he defends Real's position and the iPod. Of course he would rather they license to Apple, but I don't think it would lead to a legal challenge, since any judgement would apply to Real as well.
Personally, I'd rather BOTH of them go away along with DRM, but hey.
They are consistent in targetting the iPod (popular) and discarding the Mac (so so popular). Notice Linux is in that discard pile as well, unless we're willing to help them develop the stuff in the first place.
Now, I don't support the decision, but to call 'hypocrite' is just wrong.
You sure you're not a fanboy? Then try to think for a second.
Real approached Apple to license their IP, Apple refused. Real worked around that.
Rob said: We'd be happy to license to Apple. I'm sure he would have boo to say if they refused and worked around Real, as he seems to think the law allows the workaround. Real may be a screwy app, but Rob sounds like his head is screwed on right.
If you're running older small UPSes, you're probably running more that one machine as well. To allow networked machines to get UPS status info and shutdown when the going gets rough, look at NUT.
Can be a chore to setup, but works with a variety of equipment and some good info there as well.
Slashdot Mirror
"...but I really think that by abandoning the RHL line, RH caused a group of low- to mid-level techs to start considering other options, when RH had been our default."
Bang, hammer hits nail on head. When Redhat started the whole Fedora thing, they left the small/middle tier folks without an option. It was either spend the big bucks for Enterprise or roll the dice on Fedora. They didn't seem to realize that a lot of grassroots support depended on that small/middle tier.
Yeah yeah, they're running a business (and I'm a share holder, so what) but rule one of business would be don't piss off your customers unless you can afford to lose them. I think they undervalued what the grassroot support was worth. Novell seems to understand this, perhaps, but it could also be they are trying to see if they can bleed Redhat out of the market before upping their price for their distro. Time will tell.
Fedora was billed FROM THE START as a beta-level distro. It was never (nor is it still) intended to be a stable, rock solid platform.
Now, I could go into why this is a bad idea on Redhat's part, but never mind.
What would I recommend instead of Fedora? I wouldn't. You need to choose your own Linux path based on your experience, ability to learn and/or bank account.
I think the real issue is that driving is 99.9% mind numbing and .1% pay-attention-or-die. The very nature of this means the driver is generally unprepared when split second action is required.
I think it is convenient to blame certain things when an accident happens.
"Wow, nasty crash."
"Yeah, that guy over there was talking on his phone when it happened. He didn't have his seat beat on either."
"F**ing jerk!"
"His study -- "Stressed Out on Four Continents: Time Crunch or Yuppie Kvetch?" -- found that the better off one is, the more he or she seems to complain about the time pinch. How can this be? Your opportunities and expectations grow as you grow wealthier, he theorizes, but time, which is finite, doesn't keep up."
:)
The simplier explanation is that as one has more and more money, it's relative value goes down and one is willing to spend less time for the same amount of money, ie time becomes more valuable. Simple supply and demand.
I know I'd trade more time for money if I (or my family) were low on money.
One could also argue those who DON'T complain about having enough Time are complaining about not having enough Money instead.
I love how people jump up and down about cell phone use while driving. What about eating? Tuning the radio? Talking to someone IN the car? Yelling at the kids in the back seat torturing the dog? No need to mention the INSANITY of women applying makeup while driving.
All these things distract as much if not more than a simple cell phone call, yet the black sheep is the phone. Strange, is it not?
Begin the arms race, expand your noise-making capacity and take the fight to your cube mates.
Remember, in the cubes everyone can hear you scream.
You forgot:
Apple OS X user: My mac is sad, it just isn't working right. Oh well, time to buy a new one.
Windows XP user: XP sucks, now which of the dozen MS OS's are I supposed to upgrade too?
Linux user: Hmmm, system sluggish. Time for new CPU/motherboard. Ah, much better.
Not a database, but worth checking.
http://freshmeat.net/projects/sql-ledger/
Check around the local clubs and such, there might be cheap education-type tourneys.
The local American Legion in my area runs two tournaments a week for $10 buy in. Worth it if you ever consider playing live poker.
"While luck plays a factor, in the long run a good poker player comes out ahead."
And if you're not coming out ahead, you're not a good poker player.
You misunderstand. I certainly agree that I pay for content with commercials and as such I'm free to do what I want with them, including refusing to watch them, removing them, skipping them, what have you.
The parent was arguing that paying for cable is NOT paying for content, which I disagree with.
Dish better not even THINK about pulling that kind of stunt.
Grrrr. Maybe no TV is the way to go.
"Perhaps we should adopt a wait-and-see approach before we break out the torches and pitchforks."
You don't understand. This is the first step (actually second or third) toward removing you FF. Or should I say the ability to ignore ads.
Soon the ads will run continously under the content (like they already do sometimes) and in the content as well (product placement).
You can complain now or later I guess. I prefer now.
The fuck I'm not, that's EXACTLY what I'm paying for!!
If the cable company/networks/whatever wants to suppliment their income by adverts, that's none of my business. BUT, my contract is for said content.
You're saying if I buy a hamburger, I'm not really paying for the cow, just the cooking process. No sir, don't think so.
Strange, I would have sworn I tried the "blank page" and then rewrite the URL to what I wanted, didn't work (opened the page on start). Maybe that was an earlier build.
In either case, the issue seems to be the UI and dialogs not being clear. Guess I'd better go file a bug.
It's nice to know this can be done. Now, how is a person supposed to figure this out?
When comparing the two apps, my opinion is anything not accessible via the UI doesn't count (that would include extensions in my mind). Yes, it's nice that the flexibility is there and I'll probably use this feature (thanks!), but for comparision purposes, Firefox loses to Mozilla on this point.
Note: I'm a fan of Firefox, I just wish some of the dumbing down wasn't done.
> Urm .. yes you can - preferences -> privacy -> cookies check -accept check -ask every time
(the advanced tab allows you to set preferences for individual cookie originators)
What version are you using? My 0.10.1 Mac OS X doesn't have an advanced tab for Cookies.
> Urm, yes (I think) i just opened an image from my hard disk then right-clicked "bookmark this page" and the bookmark was created. but you may be refering to something different here.
No, this feature is for opening the "save bookmark" dialog, so that I can choose the folder. However, I notice that this is actually the default behavior, score for Firefox, shame on me.
> firefox about:blank
I could also hack the source and make Firefox do whatever I want, that's not the point. Rather, if it isn't a UI choice, it doesn't count. Same for having to pick through about:config. Features only count if they are easily accessible.
Also:
1. Can't have firefox open on a blank page and have a "home page". This is handy in mozilla as a quick way to get to your favorite site (Home Key).
2. Cookie control is more coarse, I like being able to say which site gets to set a cookie when visiting, the new "for session only" in Moz is great. thinkgeek.com cookie? Ok. Hitbox cookie? NO! No cookie for you! cbsnew.com? Ok, but only this time.
3. File bookmark is a good thing. Firefox? No.
4. Themes, what themes? Sure, Firefox is still a moving target, this will change in time.
The parent said "space", not an air-filled environment with zero gravity.
You are correct,however, one should be able to swim in air at zero gravity, though I would imagine the effort to get going would be pretty high. Turning would be very interesting!
I read his "yes" were he defends Real's position and the iPod. Of course he would rather they license to Apple, but I don't think it would lead to a legal challenge, since any judgement would apply to Real as well.
Personally, I'd rather BOTH of them go away along with DRM, but hey.
I don't support Real, I do however support the Truth and Logic.
:)
Now what the hell am I doing on Slashdot?
Responding to an AC, what will my mother think?
Think:
Real/Rob says: We support the popular platforms.
They are consistent in targetting the iPod (popular) and discarding the Mac (so so popular). Notice Linux is in that discard pile as well, unless we're willing to help them develop the stuff in the first place.
Now, I don't support the decision, but to call 'hypocrite' is just wrong.
You sure you're not a fanboy? Then try to think for a second.
Real approached Apple to license their IP, Apple refused. Real worked around that.
Rob said: We'd be happy to license to Apple. I'm sure he would have boo to say if they refused and worked around Real, as he seems to think the law allows the workaround. Real may be a screwy app, but Rob sounds like his head is screwed on right.
I wouldn't call it stealing in any case.
"Compare how our software works to Microsoft's. Have you ever tried to "uninstall" Windows Media Player?"
Comparing something to a turd does not make it smell like roses.
Can be a chore to setup, but works with a variety of equipment and some good info there as well.