The issue, it transpires, is that although the full lossless/lossy hybrid MP3 file is transferred to players, only the lossy element can be played back.
This will be true only until players begin supporting the lossless format.
Of course, with the way multicore architecture has come to the forefront, I kind of wish Be OS had survived since it was designed to be multicore from day one. I have a feeling it's pervasively multithreaded nature would kick Apple and Microsoft's ass on modern hardware.
I feel the same way. I loved BeOS back in its heyday. Maybe you should check out Haiku. It is supposed to be an open-source re-implementation of BeOS in such a way that provides source and binary compatibility with the last commercial version of BeOS, and then to proceed from there with new research. It finally has GCC 4, as of January, which means that it's not stuck in the "classic" 2.95 days of GCC anymore. This will help speed along development considerably. I hope to see a great comeback!
Nono, it only finds exploits in open-source code. Microsoft code is safe from this evil tool. It's just another way they are attacking open source!
You know what's incredibly funny? If they did use an evil tool to uncover every exploit in open source code, to make the FOSS community look bad, they'd be shooting themselves in the foot because the bugs would get fixed at warp speed. Beyond the initial "bad" publicity they'd generate for FOSS (there's no such thing as bad publicity), the joke would be on them because they'd still be stuck with their bugs but we'd be free of ours.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Friends do assist M$ addicted friends in upgrading to Ubuntu.
Heh heh... my favorite Linux distro.
Or is that a senseless question anyway since it runs under Windows?
SVN runs under Windows. GCC runs under Windows. Gimp runs under Windows. Apache runs under Windows. Hell, just about any project with a configure script will either compile for Windows as-is, or will after slight modifications. FOSS has nothing to do with whether it runs under Windows or not.
I am not an astronomer, obviously, but it there any merit in this?
Yes, it has merit. That is, it has merit if you're the one who somehow convinced the government (or other rich organization) to give you millions of dollars in research grants. You get a nice house, a nice car, send your kids to a nice private school, take a glance at the sky, and tell us that you're getting closer by the day to finding a twin planet.
Face it, the real reason that Windows 7 is leaner than Vista is that Vista was a market flop because it tried to do all sorts of things that Windows users were simply not ready for.
You're right that 7 is leaner because Vista was a market flop. However I disagree that it flopped because it tried to do things people aren't ready for. People are ready for everything it was supposed to do. No. It flopped because of two reasons. First, it did not work properly. Second, it was painfully slow even on bad ass hardware. Vista flopped for these two reasons so 7 is a big focus shift to making things actually work and making the OS as a whole make more efficient use of resources. Nobody wants to sit around and wait endlessly while their Core 9 Septuagint with 50 exabytes of RAM chugs away to repaint a window because you had the audacity to move the mouse while it was processing something. That is why Vista flopped. That is why 7 is being made leaner. Netbooks have something to do with it, but not a whole hell of a lot.
Because they don't really believe and haven't had time to consider and come to terms with their own mortality.
Dude, you totally miss the point. In the Christian and Jewish religions, human life is THE most sacred and holy thing and when human life is in danger, whether from old age or from some other danger, you are supposed to do everything in your power to try to save that life. It has nothing to do with how much you really believe or don't believe, and everything to do with a deep-down-inside knowledge that life is so holy that every effort must be made to create life, hence religious families with many children and the aversion to abortion, and to prolong life as much as possible. Yes, when your time comes, it comes, but you're supposed to fight for your life to the very end. There is another factor: In both religions, there is the saying that God helps those who help themselves. If you're told you don't have too much longer to live and you say, "Oh well, I'm done for," then you can expect to die pretty soon because you've given up. It's like being in a race and giving up just because the odds are against you. But if you fight to the very end, then with your strong will to live and your strong belief that God will help you because you help yourself, you MIGHT get to live, but you DEFINITELY get the knowledge that if you die anyway, at least you tried. At least you don't die a coward. No such religious person will lie on their death bed and suddenly think, "Oh my God, maybe there's no God." On the contrary. As you get older, you'll have a tendency to believe in God, unless you're just plain dumb.
There's a billboard next to a highway nearby that reads, "ATHEIST: Someone who believes that nothing made everything. A scientific impossibility!"
You think about that now.
...
Oh, wait.
Fast, cheap, good: pick two.