So... don't buy any HP, Gateway, Compaq, IBM or Dell notebooks. Most "brand-name" notebooks are built by Taiwanese companies like FIC, Compal and Acer.
RTF (Rich Text Format) could have been a sensible cross-platform, cross-application solution, were it not for Microsoft continually "enhancing" this format by globbing on new features in uncoordinated ways.
It sometimes does. With Windows 95/98/NT out of the box, WordPad only supports Winword 6.0.
As soon as you put Microsoft Office on your computer, the setup program installs all kinds of import and export filters. And, voilà, THEN they are available in WordPad as well.
Either the moderator doesn't understand what he's doing or he's on drugs or he's using a wheelmouse. (option 3 is what happened to me when moderating...)
This is a valid comment, especially wrt Mac users.
Another problem is that microsoft's own agreements agree to place the source at certain urls, at which teh source cannot be found. Breach of contract, mate
Maybe it's now Microsoft turn to claim that shrinkwrap agreements aren't enforceable anyway...
What they *wanted* to prohibit is people distributing their runtime libraries and header files (maybe even as part of another compiler).
Maybe they should have human beings (as opposed to lawyers) proofread their license agreements...
The last time Borland really scared the hell out of me was when they tried, by way of a shrinkwrap agreement, to prevent you from creating a word processor, a spreadsheet or a database program with their compilers.
*That* was shot down by angry customers in a couple of days and didn't even make it into their international versions.
Only problem is that what they publish is not even remotely close to the truth.
I know that because we are just finishing our Excel 95/97/2000 filter. The Gnumeric people know this (just look at their source code comments). And your new colleagues over at the StarCalc team surely know this as well.
You probably know this: Do at least the Word specs have some resemblance with reality?
www.wsj.com for example. Pay your monthly charge and read the news.
If you were to build a free gateway to wsj.com, handily passing your own username and password in the URL, thereby giving everybody else a free ride, THAT would get you in trouble...
First of all, this "invention" is not worth patenting. Couple of thoughts though...
1. Persistent cookies are much more a privacy issue than this. If you return to a site, all pages you visit can read the cookie again, whereas under this DNS manipulation scheme you get a new unique ID the next time you visit.
2. This is for e-commerce, right? Surely you jest. This collides with SSL. SSL certificates are for specific servers, for example www.softmaker.de but not *.softmaker.de. YES, you can get a certificate for *.softmaker.de, but Thawte and Verisign tell you it's NOT a good idea. Some browsers give security warnings and IIRC IE4 doesn't even let you access the page.
3. 302/Temporarily moved. Yeah, right, that's a REAL BAD thing to do. However, after burning down 7val's house for it, the next candidate will be the author of the CGI.pm library for Perl because he's doing the same! If you are using the -uri parameter in a redirect, CGI.pm outputs a 302 page.
I know this because it's the only way to combine a cookie and a redirect on some web servers...
Even if the system is abused badly a the moment, raising the cost of entering a patent would leave the field to big corporations.
We are already there here in Europe. To get a patent in a couple of European countries will set you back a cool US$40,000 to 50.000 because it will have to be translated into every single language.
No small-time inventor in their right mind can foot the bill for this.
Ha, that's a good one but certainly not uncommon for Verio: Their German subsidiary (otherwise nice people to deal with) own the domain name FAQ.DE, hosting _internal_ support documents for their customers.
I don't know about the technical merits of Crusoe (yet), but at least Transmeta exhibit fine typographic taste by using our Free Font of The Month in the creation of their company logo...
It's a nice informal font (that's why we are giving it away), but if they'd asked me I wouldn't have used it for a corporate logo.
Download the (free) PSION SDK and have a look yourself: they are already using GCC for cross-compiling to the StrongARM. It's only the NT-based emulator that you need Visual C++ for.
Even better, go ahead and create a Linux-based cross compiler for the PSION. Just ask Psion for the source code to the compiler. As I said, it's the GNU Compiler Collection, so they _must_ give you the source code.
I don't know the story behind them, but the following domain names look fishy to me:
- 2600.com
- x.org
- hp.com
I'd say that the people operating 2600.com deserve the domain name they have, but if I'm trying to check availability of 26002600.com, the NSI web pages go berserk (just try to check for *any* other domain after that), and it's a violation of the applicable RFCs.
And, at least here in Germany, you wouldn't be able to register a one-letter or two-letter domain, like x.org or hp.com. That's why Mr Hewlett and Mr Packard go by the name of hewlett-packard.de in the old world...
It's funny you mention this cause Slashdot rejected a story proposal of mine just two days ago regarding this Jesse Berst quote:
"Betting $5 on a 100-to-1 underdog can be fun. Betting $50,000 would be foolish. Yet some PC users are making similarly outrageous wagers on Linux, the underdog in the operating-system wars."
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, I own an Acer notebook. Works just fine.
-Martin
-Martin
Shouldn't that be "separate"?
But what do I know? English ain't my native tongue anyway ...
-Martin
It sometimes does. With Windows 95/98/NT out of the box, WordPad only supports Winword 6.0.
As soon as you put Microsoft Office on your computer, the setup program installs all kinds of import and export filters. And, voilà, THEN they are available in WordPad as well.
-Martin
WordPad calls upon the text import filters installed by Windows and Microsoft Office to convert .DOC files to RTF and then reads the RTF file.
-Martin
1. Physically reading a storage file is not the problem. Making sense out of the streams in the file much more so ...
2. The Word 97 *was* on the MSDN CDs. Microsoft has pulled it about two years ago. (So much for keeping hundreds of old MSDN CDs around ...)
3. The Word 2000 additions have never been documented in public.
4. The MSDN documentation is vague and sometimes plain wrong.
You get about 85% of a Word converter from coding along the Microsoft docs. It's the remaining 15% that's the hard thing.
-Martin
This is a valid comment, especially wrt Mac users.
-Martin
You didn't place your sarcasm tags correctly. This line should go outside those tags.
The compilers for Windows CE 3.0 now really cost just US$14.95 to cover s&h.
Microsoft is so desperate to get anyone to develop for Windows CE that they are now giving away the compilers basically for free...
-Martin
Maybe it's now Microsoft turn to claim that shrinkwrap agreements aren't enforceable anyway ...
-Martin
Please post again with the correct number.
-Martin
The weather is much nicer, they are still within NAFTA, and if problems arise, they can bribe some officials ...
-Martin
So, that name wasn't available then.
Later, they used Open32 to port Smartsuite to OS/2. Took them "only" forever ...
Also, they abandoned Win32-OS/2.
Go watch Battlefield Earth and THEN make up your mind again ...
Maybe they should have human beings (as opposed to lawyers) proofread their license agreements ...
The last time Borland really scared the hell out of me was when they tried, by way of a shrinkwrap agreement, to prevent you from creating a word processor, a spreadsheet or a database program with their compilers.
*That* was shot down by angry customers in a couple of days and didn't even make it into their international versions.
-Martin
I know that because we are just finishing our Excel 95/97/2000 filter. The Gnumeric people know this (just look at their source code comments). And your new colleagues over at the StarCalc team surely know this as well.
You probably know this: Do at least the Word specs have some resemblance with reality?
-Martin
www.wsj.com for example. Pay your monthly charge and read the news.
If you were to build a free gateway to wsj.com, handily passing your own username and password in the URL, thereby giving everybody else a free ride, THAT would get you in trouble ...
1. Persistent cookies are much more a privacy issue than this. If you return to a site, all pages you visit can read the cookie again, whereas under this DNS manipulation scheme you get a new unique ID the next time you visit.
2. This is for e-commerce, right? Surely you jest. This collides with SSL. SSL certificates are for specific servers, for example www.softmaker.de but not *.softmaker.de. YES, you can get a certificate for *.softmaker.de, but Thawte and Verisign tell you it's NOT a good idea. Some browsers give security warnings and IIRC IE4 doesn't even let you access the page.
3. 302/Temporarily moved. Yeah, right, that's a REAL BAD thing to do. However, after burning down 7val's house for it, the next candidate will be the author of the CGI.pm library for Perl because he's doing the same! If you are using the -uri parameter in a redirect, CGI.pm outputs a 302 page.
I know this because it's the only way to combine a cookie and a redirect on some web servers ...
-Martin
We are already there here in Europe. To get a patent in a couple of European countries will set you back a cool US$40,000 to 50.000 because it will have to be translated into every single language.
No small-time inventor in their right mind can foot the bill for this.
Next, they'll register INTERNET.COM. Ah well, that's already taken. Never mind.
It's a nice informal font (that's why we are giving it away), but if they'd asked me I wouldn't have used it for a corporate logo.
-Martin
Even better, go ahead and create a Linux-based cross compiler for the PSION. Just ask Psion for the source code to the compiler. As I said, it's the GNU Compiler Collection, so they _must_ give you the source code.
- 2600.com
- x.org
- hp.com
I'd say that the people operating 2600.com deserve the domain name they have, but if I'm trying to check availability of 26002600.com, the NSI web pages go berserk (just try to check for *any* other domain after that), and it's a violation of the applicable RFCs.
And, at least here in Germany, you wouldn't be able to register a one-letter or two-letter domain, like x.org or hp.com. That's why Mr Hewlett and Mr Packard go by the name of hewlett-packard.de in the old world...
"Betting $5 on a 100-to-1 underdog can be fun. Betting $50,000 would be foolish. Yet some PC users are making similarly outrageous wagers on Linux, the underdog in the operating-system wars."
Exactly _how many_ Jesse Bersts are out there?
here's the link...
The taped Yeltsin statement was slated for release December 31, 2099.
Due to lack of Y2K preparations in Russia, it has been released prematurely.
SCNR...