Run, subject, run.
Run, subject, run.
The 2005 reboot is what got my wife interested in Doctor Who at first. Once we ran out of new ones between seasons, I started with "An Unearthly Child" and we've watched pretty much everything but the reconstructed episodes (and even a few of those). We just finished the Season 16 "Key to Time" series, and we'll probably watch all the way through Baker, Davison, C Baker, Sylvester McCoy, and the McGann special, then start again with "Rose" and watch the new reboot with a different context and from a different perspective.
As a side effect, she's starting to learn basic database stuff and her geek card is on its way. (grin) Love ya, honey.
Microsoft IE uses an SSL library that is part of the OS. The advantage of that is that any fixes affect all applications that choose to use that library, like SSH tools and some web browsers (Safari tends to use MS libraries). The disadvantage is that any vulnerabilities in the browser can easily translate into OS-level vulnerabilities due to the deep interoperability between them.
Windows Update is a package manager, it's just limited to Microsoft product. I tend to prefer the Linux approach where you have a central repository and get updates for ALL your software in one place, which is why I run that, but Windows Update works perfectly well as a package manager. There are plenty of IE (and Excel) software updates that come down through Windows Update, so I really fail to see any point other than trollage for your entire post.
Ah, I see what you mean now. Sorry, I'm a bit dense today.
Yup, you're right. Clearing browsing history should have nothing whatsoever to do with opened tabs.
Click on "I have this problem too!" to vote to fix it (I just did). Enough votes and they might throw it into the bugtracker.
These are the revocation lists. They're being updated.
3.6.16 of Firefox (for example) merely adds the new certs to the blacklist. Microsoft issued a Windows Update that updates the blacklist at the operating system level.
I'm not completely sure what you mean by "wipe your session history on exit", I'm assuming you are referring to the "clear history when Firefox Closes" settings. So, for that...
I turned on wiping of the following on exit:
- Download History
- Active Logins
I left the following unchecked (because these are three things I like to keep around):
- Browsing History
- Form and Search History
No matter how many "regular" tabs I have open, the only "regular" tab that comes open when I start Firefox is my home tab.
All of my "app" tabs come up, even if I tell Firefox not to open my "home" tabs on startup.
So it appears to me that they are being handled as two very separate things, but maybe I'm misunderstanding the setting you're referring to.
Right-click on the tabs, un-check "Tabs on Top".
To move the buttons around, right-click on any button and click "customize". Drag them around to your heart's content.
A lot of that problem was the "bit off more than they could chew" nature of FF4 development. Hopefully, as the FF team starts working on smaller iterations like everyone else, they'll start coming out with newer features at a more rapid pace and not stuck with massive amounts of regression testing because they're changing damned near everything all at once.
We'll see. FF4 development really set them back, and they may or may not catch up quickly (or ever). But at least with FF4 they are back in the race as a solid contender.
They should work the way pinned apps work in a Windows 7 taskbar or OS X dock, namely when you restart your session the app tabs should be there.
That's exactly how they do work for me. I have several Intranet apps that I've got "pinned" as "app tabs", and when I start Firefox 4 those tabs start right up with it. None of the other tabs auto-restore themselves; I have to open them manually (or set them up as home page(s) and have them set up to open when Firefox does).
There's an add-on called "is it compatible" that shows what Firefox versions your add-ons are compatible with. I haven't installed it, but it is supposed to list compatibility right in the add-ons page so you can look for things that don't go "up to 4".
AdBlock Plus, Ghostery, and NoScript are three add-ons I won't run Firefox without, and they've all been compatible since the early days of the beta.
In addition to the "Tabs on Top" change mentioned in the other reply to your post, you can easily move the buttons around to your liking. Right-click on any of the buttons, click "Customize", and drag buttons around to your heart's content. I have mine set up as Back/Forward, Home, Reload, Shortcuts, Stop, URL/AwesomeBar, Google Search, then the buttons for AdblockPlus and NoScript, and finally Feedback. Took me a lot less time to change them than it took me to list them in this post.
Here we have an extra conversion loss but somehow it's better.
The systems are on a UPS. UPSes use batteries. Batteries are DC. So, if you want to use a UPS, you have AC coming in that has to be converted to DC (to charge the batteries) and the AC power goes through the UPS to the computer, which converts it to DC. When the power goes out, the DC is taken from the battery, converted to AC, sent to the computer, then the power supply converts it to DC to run the computer.
With a DC computer, you need one conversion, AC to DC. The same DC can be used to charge the batteries and run the computer, and when the power goes out the battery can run the computer directly with no additional conversion.
So if anything the exact opposite of your assertion is true. There are either the same number of conversions (done through a central converter so you can afford a really efficient one) if you're on street power, or there are two fewer conversions and almost no loss when you're running on battery.
As for a Prius, the efficiency in those is in the fact that you can have a much smaller engine (since the electric motor and the gasoline engine can "team up" when you need a lot of acceleration) and the gasoline motor doesn't need to run when the car is moving slowly or sitting still (the battery can drive the car most of the time, and regenerative braking can reclaim a good percentage of momentum and turn it back into battery charge, so the gas motor only comes on when the battery gets low or when more acceleration than the battery can provide is needed). It's more complicated, certainly, but the whole point is to use what power the gasoline engine is generating more efficiently by storing what's not immediately used and using it later.
I wonder how much carbon was released refining all the lead in all those batteries...
You mean the batteries they'd need if they were running the thing off an AC-based UPS, only they need fewer of them because the power stored in them can be used directly by the computers rather than running it though a DC-to-AC conversion then back through an AC-to-DC conversion in order to power the computers?
The point here is increased efficiency, not some magical faerie dust that makes the system 100% efficient.
If you have a UPS, you're going to need to change battery packs on the same interval regardless. The point here is that the computers could use the DC battery pretty much directly in a backup power situation, as opposed to the additional complexity of an AC-to-DC to charge the battery, a DC-to-AC to power the 120VAC power plug into the computer, and an additional AC-to-DC inside the computer itself. That's a whole lot of inefficient conversions, and a whole lot of extra bits that could go wrong.
Putting fewer bits in the system almost always increases reliability. Once you've converted to DC, you have battery charge and computer usage all on the DC side. It's not only more efficient, it's probably going to be more reliable.
Arwen and Aragorn were a love interest in the original books, it just wasn't hammered into the reader every page or two like the movies felt it necessary to do in nearly every scene. It was actually kinda important to the theme, but cutting half the "mystical connection through the crystal faerie" dream sequences could have left room for Bombadil or the enslavement of the Shire.
There was also the love interest between Sam and Rosie, which I think was handled pretty well in the movies (though in the books it was an additional bit of suspense in the enslavement of the Shire, so there wasn't a whole lot of point covering it except to give Sam a strong reason not to want to leave, and demonstrate how strong his character is).
But no, I don't recall any love interest in The Hobbit other than maybe something about Bard (the archer who kills Smaug). I think he was either married or had the village women mooning over him or something. But it was not a major plot device. If nothing else, that archer could have a love interest created for him out of whole cloth without mucking up the central plot too terribly much, as long as they don't make it too important (his wife is imprisoned by Smaug or something?).
Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.