Posts by Michael Greenhill 31 publicly visible posts • joined 4 Sep 2007
"Actually by default ubuntu uses your country-selected mirror (us.archive.ubuntu.com for example) to download normal updates, but security.ubuntu.com for security updates. I assume this is to speed deployment, but it also makes everyone dependent on one server for security updates."
Dunno about you, but every copy of Ubuntu server that I've installed has the default "archive.ubuntu.com" in sources.list - I know this because it (along with the AU mirror) never bloody works. AFAIK it's only the desktop versions that change the mirror to a localised one.
And all you knobheads claiming that Windows update restarts your PC after every update and thus can't have 100% update, RTFA - it's about the availability of update servers. And to those moaning about load balancing being the reason MS can have 100% uptime, so what? If Ubuntu (and thus Canonical) are better than MS in every way that you freetards keep saying, why aren't they able to put in a simple load balancing setup, yet the slow, stupid giant can?
"However, the ACCC believes that consumers are in the best position to decide which payment method is most suitable for them"
Consumers don't know squat. While the ACCC finally got its act together and actually did its job for once (unlike the Toll / Pacific National fiasco), saying that consumers know what's best in this case is rubbish.
Yet another example of how the ACCC is run by a mob of mentally retarded chimpanzees.
Ahh, I remember the fun times at my old job. I pretty much documented all the bullshit that was going on that particular day - my boss's paycheque bouncing, and him then calling the beancounters and senior management"a bunch of useless tossers" was a frequent occurance.
I used to have conversations with our other devs in comment form. Most of them revolved around which torrents we should choke off the net connection with on that particular day, or which manager/beancounter was giving us the shits.
It was a very hostile workplace - devs + engineers vs senior managers + beancounters - which resulted in all the devs resigning on the same day, racking up a ginormous tab at the pub senior management favourited and leaving them to pay the bill.
Ahh...
"Have you ever tried any recent Linux distro? Gnome is intuitive, flexible and uncrufted. It's *kind of* a a crossing between XP and OSX and can be customized (easily) to look and feel as either of them... or better : like Vista. And the result is very surprising."
Yes, maybe it's intuitive for people with quick brains. But for the average Joe Luser , Gnome would scare the pants off them. "Where's the Start menu gone?!" is just the first question I can think of.
If somebody is unable to cope with the UI changes between XP and Vista, how are they going to handle a new UI with completely different usability concepts?
"And the recent competition where the MacBook Air was famously "owned" - it was only owned because the operator let it be. If he hadn't clicked on whatever it was, the machine would still be on the stand"
So you operate under the assumption that PC/Mac users _know_ what they're doing? The overwhelming majority of computer users don't know squat the implications of clicking "Yes" to an unknown dialogue box.
So, to be fair the MacBook was won fairly, as in the real-world someone somewhere would've allowed that action to happen - ergo, security issue.
But that's beside the point, though. Safari looks like bollocks, especially on Windows, and does exactly the same things as the other leading browsers, but without the fugly-ness. Hell, I own several Macs and I don't even use it.
You've missed the point of what the author was saying; MS create and release x bug patches per month, each month. Apple on the other hand, things "damn, we should fix that" and throws some resources at it.
At the end of the day, who cares about the mechanics behind the patching as long as it gets done.
Hang on, you yourself said that you were impressed with the speed of Vista when you first bought your laptop, and that it wasn't until after four months of use that it started performing like rubbish.
Then you go on to say that after what, a day? a week? of a fresh XP installation, you're blown away by the speed?
Funny, I seem to recall my old 98, 2k and XP installs running like bollocks four months after installation, right until I re-installed the OS.
And another thing - I'm sick of these "Vista sucks!111onetyoeonnetwo" comments. Yes, it sucks if you run it on inadequate hardware. That's been the case for every Windows OS. More to the point though, SHUT UP about it! Nobody cares that XP runs better than Vista on a 3ghz wankfest, or that Ubuntu runs even faster. Or any other freetard version of *nix, for that matter. We already know. So shut up.
I run Vista on a 2ghz Athlon, with 1.2gb RAM and a 120gb SATA HDD. It runs fine. I do gobs of RAW image manipulation in Photoshop, and it's fine.
The thing is though, it's easy to spot those type of dungeon-dwelling IT goblins a mile off. The wide eyes and foaming mouth are a pretty big giveaway, as is the 24 hour game of pocket billiards they play.
I don't really care who I work with - male or female, black or white - as long as I enjoy working with them and more importantly, they're good at what they do.
In terms of what Trent was trying to achieve (grease up and fsck the music industry), an article in a mass-distrubuted paper like the SMH is better than telling a few hundred/thousand people at a gig - especially when half of them would either be too drunk or stoned to comprehend what he was saying.
Hooray for sweeping generalisations!
Hooray for lack of understanding on music file types, and how different types soak up different amounts of space!
While I don't see the point in lossless audio for consumer use, I DO see the point in high-kbps mp3s. The difference in quality over a mid-range stereo between a 192kbps mp3 and a 320kbps mp3 is amazing. My CDs are all ripped to 320kbps, and sound pretty spot-on through the PA setup at a theatre.
I will agree with you on one thing though - most of the music coming out these days IS crap. RnB, Pop, etc etc - there's no skill required, only the ability to look like a gang member, or a princess.
So because I think "social networking" is a pile of bollocks that makes me a middle-aged fisherman?
I was born in the mid-late 80s, and have never been fishing :)
I'm not disputing that Facebook etc are useful for finding old friends - what I despise is how they're becoming an alternative to, as I said, going down the pub and socialising _face to face_.
While I appreciate the effort the author has gone into writing the article, who the hell cares about Facebook? Just another outlet for emos to cry about how nobody likes them. "Wahhhhh, Daddy disowned me, waaahhhh, I'm gonna go listen to some Hawthorne Heights and write in my diary about how dark and mysterious I am, and how nobody understands me...
...
...wahhh"
"Social networking"...what the hell is wrong with going down the pub?
What a load of crock.
Bands like Slayer have not changed their music style in the 20+ years they've been together. The only thing that's really changed is the recording quality.
What about Iron Maiden's latest tour? The whole point of the tour is to play songs from the 80s that fans haven't heard live in 15-20 years. Do you think they'd put music from their latest album on the advertising? Hell no. They'd want to emphasise the point that they're playing _old_ music.
"...Office for the Mac has always been behind the windows version..."
No kidding, sport. That wouldn't have anything to do with the marginal market share of Office for Mac, would it? Because prioritising development resources onto a marginal product instead of one of their biggest income streams makes complete financial sense...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
