Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
Preferences -> Under the Hood -> Uncheck "Use a suggestion service to help complete searches and URLs typed in the address bar"
That's what I don't understand. I mean a large number of games aren't marketed to any major extent. They send out copies to be reviewed and maybe buy some banner ads, but they don't do TV spots or anything. Of those that are marketed in a larger fashion, most seem to be marketed as, well, games. There isn't a gender bias I can see. It is just "Here is a game where you can do X. Look at the pretty graphics. Buy it."
I guess I don't see what is needed here. Do women need things specifically targeted at them? Must the ad say "Hey ladies, this is a game for you,"? That doesn't seem to be useful because it only acts to segregate. It says "You girls aren't good enough for most games, here's a special one for you." To me it seems that the message needs to be that games are for everyone, all games. Your gender doesn't determine what you can do for fun.
I'm honestly interested in what you think they need to do to market to women. What about current game marketing fails? What sort of thing is needed to attract women?
Your second point isn't 100% right, modern tape drives have two features that more or less eliminate "shoe-shining". The first is that the tape drive can usually run at multiple speeds, sometimes as low as 1/3 of it's headline speed so if you can't keep up it adjusts. But the most important feature is a huge buffer, several seconds of write time between the OS and the tape surface. With both of these in place the "shoe-shining" is minimal. (eg: a quarter second backtrack every 5 seconds; as compared to the old QIC drives where you could easily end up with the equivalent of twenty passes.)
PS: If you happen to have an old tape drive that doesn't have a huge buffer it can easily be done in software.
gigabit-equipment is dirt-cheap nowadays.
Gigabit cabling isn't. Or to be more precise, ripping up the carpets and skirting boards in the living room and bedroom without the wife noticeing and complaining isn't an option.
So, no gigabit for me, until the wife discovers something that she wants to do that saturates the network. And I don't think that's going to happen in the foreseeable future - I think we'll move to a different country first and I'll cable in gigabit or 10gig directly.
To be honest though - I've not encountered anything apart from backing up the file server where 100-base-T is a limitation. And the file server I backup by hooking the USB drives to it, then telnetting in and running the process natively on the box itself.
(Wireless? Meh. Tempest isn't a worry; wireless security holes are a worry; and I have to maintain explosives compatibility on my machines. Who needs it?
True, I have had zero problems with Windows XP / ntfs and Linux in recent years. But what about Windows 7's ntfs? I've upgraded from XP to Windows 7 and I have found that Ubunut Karmic has problems accessing *some* of the directories on the ntfs-filesystems.
Another thing, will windows 7 "enhance" my external HD's ntfs so that I won't be able to acccess it from Linux? The external HD is mostly a storage/backup disk but I use it occasionally to transfer files to Windows 7.
RHEL5, released March 14, 2007, uses Python 2.4.3, which was released March 29, 2006. Given a reasonable package-freeze/testing/bugfix cycle, using this version seems about right. Also, Python 2.5.0 was released September 19, 2006 -- I know I wouldn't want to make a potentially major jump for all my system tools before publishing a major distro release.
Perhaps you should rethink the presentation of your point next time -- given what you've said already concerning RHEL5 and Python2.4, you should also be saying "RHEL5 uses Linux 2.6! That was released back in 2003!!!! ZOMG!!!"
In re: Python 3 migration, moving to the Python 3 series presents FAR bigger issues than addon-distribution, namely the changing and/or removal of some particularly widely-used items from Python 2.
I will agree with you that distribution of third-party modules can be annoying in Python, but that's not necessarily the Python developers' problem. Why should they be implicitly responsible for something that is third-party? Just because another platform is doing it? C'mon, that's a flimsy argument at best.
You've spent years learning Windows. What's a week to learn Linux?
Buddhist cultures like Thailand or Cambodia, the reincarnation religions combined with life being cheap, easy for them to justify what we westerns consider absolutely stupid behaviour (Driving is the first thing that comes to mind) with "it OK, I come back, next life".
I guess that depends on an individual's perspective, but the general consensus among Buddhists I've spoken to is that one should consider themselves very fortunate to be born a human, as it is in this form we have one of the rare opportunities to achieve enlightenment and break the perpetual cycle of rebirth and suffering. Depending on how you lived your life, the chances of just "coming back" next life are very slim.
Optional Xserve RAID Card with 256MB cache and 72-hour cache battery backup; support for RAID 0, 1, and 5
I have been given the task to asses the feasibility of incorporating an off-the shelf, free content management system (budget constraints!) to essentially replace the static content and perhaps some of the dynamic content too. My manager has shortlisted a selection of CMS packages based what he perceived to be market leaders which includes: Drupal, Joomla! and WordPress. And our final selection of probables includes these three leasers and also eZpublish. My manager cites the source of this information as cmscritic.com.
Neither myself or my manager have a massive amount of experience with free CMS systems, however I have had to use Wordpress in the past; and from my little experience, doubts arise when thinking about having to maintain custom versions of these CMS packages. I'm also concerned about over/undershooting the mark so far as requirements go.
Our main motivations are to reduce the amount of changes in our weekly releases, and also to push content responsibility to the people who actually want the changes (and make the time consuming mistakes that our development team has to rush to fix). The system will have to integrate in to our current legacy PHP scripts, so there will probably need to be a mix of dynamic CMS pages along with our already dynamic "customer account" related pages.
I would like to know if there are any obvious choices we have failed to include in our short-list and if there is any slash-doters here that have fallen in to similar circumstances and can offer any sage advice?
We have already attempted to trim a little fat and our list of essential (must-have) features includes:
* Document Management (aka Versioning): The Cms maintains a version history and audit trail for all content.
* Content Virtualization (aka Sandbox): Content providers can view the final results of their changes without having to publish and without affecting other users who may also be making similar changes.
* Searchable Content Back-end: Content providers and administrators can search the content repository.
* Shopping Cart
* Support for small screen devices
* Meta-tag Support: Setting up page titles, descriptions & keyword tags is a user interface operation, not coding.
* Wysiwyg Content Editor: The integrated editor, if it exists, does not display mark-up tags.
* Rtf/.doc support (aka Word import): Content can be created/edited in Microsoft Word and imported into the Cms.
* Workflow/Event Messaging (aka Content Approval): Before an item of content can be published it must pass through a series of pre-defined steps. At each step the system will notify those responsible for progressing the work.
* Role-based permissioning (aka Granular Privileges): Content providers can be allocated roles (eg. author, reviewer, editor) and the functionality available to them is constrained by the role under which they have logged in.
* Browser-based Content Provider UI
* Browser-based Administration UI
* Expandability (aka plug-ins)
* Integrates with non-Cms applications i.e. a logical separation of Cms controlled files and those of other applications
* Ldap Integration
* Adherence to Web Standards
* Cheap (aka Open Source)
We also are looking specifically at LAMP infrastructure to save too much re-skilling of our development team (but we remain open minded).