And there are those that also don't know that/. once didn't have karma.
I actually remember those days, before Karma and Mods and such. I seem to remember there being a lot less stories per day, but they were usually more interesting.
Part of his problem with deadlines was because he was never ever totally happy with his work.
Part of it was because he was writing as it was being recorded so it has a very random, stream of concious feel to it. The third and later books were much more cohesive.
>And all you have to do is make sure you don't suck (at least, less than stuff on the radio).
Well, that's not to hard:)
Actually, performance is usually not a problem, it's production quality. But the other side of the industry is making producing pretty good quality recordings cheaper, is changing that
>you get a large number of vendors using the "closed" format, the original vendor now has to consider very carefully additional changes to the format for fear of breaking competitor's products.
This is Microsoft we're talking about...that's not a risk, that's part of the plan
> It's not a matter of which is better, it's a question of familiarity.
Win95 did not look like Win3.1. Even Microsoft realized that just imitating what was popular wasn't really needed if you could give enough else that was improved.
Ironically, Win95 bore a stronger resemblance to other, less popular, GUIs at the time (Mac and OS/2) than it did to what was already accepted
What they provided in Win95 was a much better product that was worth the changes in Look/Feel for people to adapt
My wife, who likes using Windows, didn't like using KDE at all when I was trying to get her to Linux. It looked 'too much' like Windows and yet not completely there that she found it annoying. She acctually didn't better with Gnome and Enlightenment as she wasn't constantly trying to do 'windoisms' that didn't really work. She just accepted it as 'different' and moved on.
> (well, "uncloseable" because there's no way he knows how to use ALT+F4).
I use Windows at work and Linux at home...I manage at least once a day to hit "Alt-F4" and get a start as my screen blanks before I realize I just went to an "unused" desktop rather than closing an application
> Ironic that the only virus on that first page relates to Microsoft technology?
I've wondered about OSX security with MS Office apps running on it... I've also wondered about the future of Linux security with so many groups bending over backwards to get Linux to act like Windows for it's users
> macs and linux are only safe for nw from this as they're not popular enough to be worth it
As I said in another post, I'm not sure I agree with this.
Windows and linux have such different histories and design philosophies in terms of security, multiple users, and networking that I don't think it can be said that the two are just as inherently exploitable as each other and the only difference in actual numbers of exploits is simply attention due to numbers
>macs don't get virii fo the same eason Linux doesn't. its not really common enough as a desktop OS to be worth it. but if macs ever become more popular than windows, we'll have the same thing over again.
This seems to be said so often that's it's taken as a truism but I do't buy it
Linux and Windows have completely different histories and and came from completely different design philosophies in terms of security, multiple users, networking, etc.. *perhaps* if there is a concentrated effort to exploit OSX and Linux things will be as bad, but until that actually happens, I'm not so sure it can be taken for granted that this would actually happen. It could also be that hte reason windows is exploited more often is simply that it's more easily exploited?
I keep reading articles about how much trouble spyware, adware and virii are and yet these are predominantly delieverd through a combiantion of MS Outlook, MS Explorer and indeed MS Windows.
Surely the transition to Mozilla, Firefoxx, Linux, etc...has got to be cheaper than continuing to service these kinds of problems?
I think the problem is that some people simply don't know any other way so take these problems as 'evil necessities' when they really don' thave to be.
Slashdot Mirror
well, they don't anymore
I'm willing to risk it
Scott Bakula ("Quantum Leap")
I always wanted an evil alien to appear or something and here him say "Oh...boy"
So it's become a Soap Opera for lonely geeks?
And there are those that also don't know that /. once didn't have karma.
I actually remember those days, before Karma and Mods and such. I seem to remember there being a lot less stories per day, but they were usually more interesting.
One bad sign, this is the design for Marvin. Ick.
Nice to see Warwick Davis get some work, though
Part of his problem with deadlines was because he was never ever totally happy with his work.
Part of it was because he was writing as it was being recorded so it has a very random, stream of concious feel to it. The third and later books were much more cohesive.
And to think John Carmack is competing for the X-prize on the side.
He's trying to get of the planet...I think he knows something we don't and his games are an attempt at a warning
Probably, as speced now, but it's going to take two or three generations for it to be released.
Or more likely, the requirements will be dropped just to get it out the door.
Longhorn itself doesn't exactly seem to be in much of a hurry to get out the door
>And all you have to do is make sure you don't suck (at least, less than stuff on the radio).
:)
Well, that's not to hard
Actually, performance is usually not a problem, it's production quality. But the other side of the industry is making producing pretty good quality recordings cheaper, is changing that
>you get a large number of vendors using the "closed" format, the original vendor now has to consider very carefully additional changes to the format for fear of breaking competitor's products.
This is Microsoft we're talking about...that's not a risk, that's part of the plan
> It's not a matter of which is better, it's a question of familiarity.
Win95 did not look like Win3.1. Even Microsoft realized that just imitating what was popular wasn't really needed if you could give enough else that was improved.
Ironically, Win95 bore a stronger resemblance to other, less popular, GUIs at the time (Mac and OS/2) than it did to what was already accepted
What they provided in Win95 was a much better product that was worth the changes in Look/Feel for people to adapt
Windows 95 did not look like Windows 3.1. Even MS knows that they way to user acceptance is not imitation of what everyone is already using.
(Ironically, Win95 looked more like other, less popular,desktops)
My wife, who likes using Windows, didn't like using KDE at all when I was trying to get her to Linux. It looked 'too much' like Windows and yet not completely there that she found it annoying. She acctually didn't better with Gnome and Enlightenment as she wasn't constantly trying to do 'windoisms' that didn't really work. She just accepted it as 'different' and moved on.
> (well, "uncloseable" because there's no way he knows how to use ALT+F4).
I use Windows at work and Linux at home...I manage at least once a day to hit "Alt-F4" and get a start as my screen blanks before I realize I just went to an "unused" desktop rather than closing an application
> Ironic that the only virus on that first page relates to Microsoft technology?
I've wondered about OSX security with MS Office apps running on it... I've also wondered about the future of Linux security with so many groups bending over backwards to get Linux to act like Windows for it's users
> macs and linux are only safe for nw from this as they're not popular enough to be worth it
As I said in another post, I'm not sure I agree with this.
Windows and linux have such different histories and design philosophies in terms of security, multiple users, and networking that I don't think it can be said that the two are just as inherently exploitable as each other and the only difference in actual numbers of exploits is simply attention due to numbers
>macs don't get virii fo the same eason Linux doesn't. its not really common enough as a desktop OS to be worth it. but if macs ever become more popular than windows, we'll have the same thing over again.
This seems to be said so often that's it's taken as a truism but I do't buy it
Linux and Windows have completely different histories and and came from completely different design philosophies in terms of security, multiple users, networking, etc.. *perhaps* if there is a concentrated effort to exploit OSX and Linux things will be as bad, but until that actually happens, I'm not so sure it can be taken for granted that this would actually happen. It could also be that hte reason windows is exploited more often is simply that it's more easily exploited?
> They are no more interested in learning how to maintain a computer than they are in learning auto maintenance.
Most drivers also have driver training, a driver's license, insurance, and know at least that the car needs gas and occasional maintenance
I keep reading articles about how much trouble spyware, adware and virii are and yet these are predominantly delieverd through a combiantion of MS Outlook, MS Explorer and indeed MS Windows.
Surely the transition to Mozilla, Firefoxx, Linux, etc...has got to be cheaper than continuing to service these kinds of problems?
I think the problem is that some people simply don't know any other way so take these problems as 'evil necessities' when they really don' thave to be.
Milk?
God does not play dice with the universe... ...He plays billiards
So...will this throw off the Gravity B measurements?
>(LOC)
Yeah, but LOC count really doesn't mean much.
How many function points big is the city?