Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Obsolete? (Score 2) 142

will become obsolete worldwide on the same date.

I have a 2006 MacMini. With iMovie '06 it's still the best front end to a Firewire camcorder I've found. The latest kdenlive dropped Firewire import.

For basic video editing it still works rather well. Transcoding is slow so I export everything in .dv and convert it on a faster machine.

Doesn't seem very obsolete to me.

That's fine--it's just not what Apple means when a product becomes "obsolete," which is a term they use to denote hardware for which they will no longer supply official parts for repair, generally those that were discontinued more than 7 years ago (or 5 for "vintage" products, which means almost the same thing except that there are still parts available in certain circumstances). In many cases their software/OS updates still support these machines, and you're obviously welcome to keep using them as long as you want in any case (though I'd personally avoid putting anything without recent updates on the Internet).

Comment Re:Convenience. (Score 1) 168

I sort of wanted one at work. I have a Thunderbolt (2.0) hub, that has thunderbolt in, with thunderbolt, gigabit ethernet, usb 3.0, audio, mini display port, and hdmi out. The hope was that one cable was all I would need to plug in whenever I dock my laptop at work, which has two monitors. Turns out that the only way to get two monitors with fed from one thunderbolt cable is if one monitor takes thunderbolt directly. So while one thunderbolt cable can do one 4K monitor, it can't do two 1920 monitors. Oh well, at least it's only two cables I have to plug in.

This was disappointing for me, as well, though I knew it before I bought my Thunderbolt dock. I'm pretty sure you could technically make it work with only one cable in the laptop if you bought another Thunderbolt dock and plugged it in to your existing Thunderbolt dock, but I didn't want to spend twice as much money as the already expensive dock cost. (Every once in a while, I'll think about replacing my dual displays with a single larger one of 27" or more, but I'm still not sure about that.)

Comment Re: And, of course. . . . (Score 1) 119

You can apply policy templates to the local security policy. So yeah. .home people could also do this. ..although having a ui to manage this would work better in the home use case. (I haven't checked if there will be a preference ui update to match though)

I don't think any editions of Office 2016 apart from Professional Plus and up will read group policy. Most home users don't buy (rent?) those editions.

Comment Re:And, of course. . . . (Score 2) 119

The summary is full of shit. Macros have been disabled by default for a decade now. Seriously, Office 2007 on my work PC requires me to manually enable macros every time I open a document. That's the default setting.

The only change seems to be that this policy can be altered and enforced by Group Policy.

This is about blocking macros that connect to the Internet, not macros themselves. You are correct that macros have been disabled by default for documents that come from locations that are not marked in Office as "trusted," with a notification that allows you to enable them if desired. This is different, as it affects only a subset of macros and does not allow the user to un-block them. (Also, being able to control macro settings via Group Policy is not new.)

This sounds like a good move to me. I can't recall ever seeing a macro that had a legitimate need to connect to the Internet.

Comment Re:Too late (Score 1) 156

I've never understood why IoT devices don't move to a hub/spoke model. A hardened, central hub that does the Internet communicating, and the devices use Bluetooth and are paired with the hub (or hubs).

Many do: Philips Hue, SmartThings, Iris (Lowes), VeraLite, and others do, except it's Z-Wave and/or ZigBee rather than Bluetooth that does the communicating. (Low-energy Bluetooth wasn't around when these standards were created, and Z-Wave and ZigBee also have the ability to form a mesh network rather than each needing to connect to the central bridge/hub.) WeMo is a notable one that doesn't work like this, as are Nest and several AppleHome Kit-capable products that connect directly to WiFi. I don't like those products.

Comment Re:Holy Cow (Score 1) 249

[...] Can't anybody build anything that will last more than a few weeks? Am I that old to believe long tern stability is a good thing?

Good thing Mozilla does just that, eh? They pick one of about every seven major-version Firefox release to make an ESR (extended support release) version, and they have been doing this since 2012. The ESR release is supported for one full year, plus another couple months or so (specifically, the time it takes to release the next major version of Firefox after that on which the last point release of the ESR version is based--they add critical fixes from major versions to ESR versions during the year of support but avoid major feature or UI changes).

This is intended for organizations that deploy Firefox and need some stability (e.g., to test something before deployment and ensure support longer than 6-8 weeks), but you can use it at home, too, if you want.

Comment Re:What is the best choice for Open Source lights? (Score 1) 358

Nobody's done this? Heh...

GE has. It's called Wink and it's got the most stunning range of interoperability on the market. ZB HA, ZB LL, Z-Wave, Lutron's protocol.
Insteon's working on theirs.

Everything I've seen says that Wink still requires the Philips Hue hub (just like SmartThings still requires it)--see, for example, It certainly should be possible, however, and since GE's own Link bulbs clearly support ZB LL, this was surprising to me.

Comment Re:What is the best choice for Open Source lights? (Score 4, Informative) 358

Philips Hue. I'm not kidding. The ZigBee Light Link protocol that it uses is an open standard. The API that the Bridge uses to communicate via HTTP is also open, published by Philips. A few third parties have even made LightLink-compatible bulbs. They did not reverse-engineer anything. This summary is a little misleading in several ways: first, any third-party devices already joined will stay that way (unless you reset your bridge to defaults with the new firmware on it); second, there actually are problems with some bulbs that were exposed with the new firmware; and third, it's not that they aren't allowing third-party devices but rather that they just want them to be "Friends of Hue" certified first--though in fairness, even though that program has been around for a couple years I don't think anyone besides Philips has created products for it.

Someone could create an open-source ZigBee LightLink "bridge" compatible with Hue that lets you join whatever bulbs you want. It's just that nobody's done this, possibly because Philips' own product has historically been so good. I suspect some third party may create a compatible "bridge" soon, maybe SmartThings since their hub already has a ZigBee-capable radio, if they ever decide its' a good idea, but who knows. You'd probably also lose the Web-based functionality the Philips bridge enables, like scene syncing across devices, control when you're away from your home network (without needing to VPN in), and the ability to also use the website to control your lights.

Comment Re:OS X (Score 4, Insightful) 405

Now if only OS X would was allowed to work on my 3 year old system which is more than powerful enough for it based on hacked installs, and if only all the software wasn't updated so it won't work on the last OS. Thanks Apple!

Meanwhile I can install Windows 10 on a 10 year old system and play a 16 year old game just fine. Boo Microsoft for being horrible people that don't give away your amazing product for free and don't have a penguin or a fruit as a logo.

What three-year-old Mac doesn't support the latest version of OS X? OS X 10.10 "Yosemite" officially supports Macs dating as far back as 2007 (or 2008 or 2009, depending on the system), and I believe El Capitan will support the same.

Comment Re:There are always options. (Score 1) 628

Make the entire folder read-only. Done.

And exactly what folder would that be in Windows? I'm guessing they download to some sort of temporary folder, then install to places largely in %windir%, particularly %windir%/system32 (and the WoW64 equivalent). But good luck with that--and even if that's right and doesn't break regular usage, updates are going to install elevated anyway and can do whatever they want, including turning off a read only flag.

But this begs the question: what kind of anal retentive asshole would not want to receive Windows security updates? Why is this even an issue? If I upgrade to Windows 10, I want every security update the second it comes out. Sooner, if possible.

Security updates, sure. But Microsoft has traditionally divided Windows Updates into two categories: required and optional. The former is primarily security updates, while the second may include minor bug fixes (traditionally ones that were targeted for presumably better testing inside a later service pack but made available sooner for those affected) or updates to optional components, like new versions (non-security updates) of the .NET Framework, new drivers, and whatnot. I'll take the first but would rather have the opportunity to test the second myself and roll back if needed.

Comment But is v2 useful for Chat? (Score 2) 63

Facebook's API description says about v2: "In v2.0, the friends API endpoint returns the list of a person's friends who are also using your app. In v1.0, the response included all of a person's friends." This doesn't sound like it will be a useful replacement for their XMPP chat interface unless everybody is using the same third-party app, or maybe I'm missing something.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature... Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." -- Helen Keller