Mozilla Lightning
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
The one thing to consider with Linux is this: if it was a corporate effort, it would work a lot better. You wouldn't have the diversity, and you might have a lock-down scenario like with Apple, but it would work. Don't forget that Linux is being cooked up with very little vendor support by a rag-tag fugitive fleet.
According to the wags at Slashdot, Linux is a corporate effort. I have the feeling this is one of those "have it both ways" Linux arguments, where if you criticize Linux software people say "well it's all volunteer!" but if you say "it'll never be any good because it's all volunteer" people chime in with "but it's all done by corporations!"
Corporate or not, there's no excuse for shipping a broken piece of crap and calling it an OS, like those old releases of RedHat were doing. They were shipping an OS in 2000 that wasn't as functional as MacOS was in 1990.
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
Also, every feature is mandated by convention to have several splits and forks and many rivals, so the total workload needed to complete anything is greatly magnified, and that must do more harm than anything, as well as destroying all hope of consistency in the eyes of the public.
Get some order, some management, and interested hardware vendors. After all, had IBM created an OS, it would only need to support their own hardware!
I agree with that 100%. I was hoping Ubuntu would come in and do some of that work, but it's turned into Just Another Linux Distro.
-
@blakeyrat said:
According to the wags at Slashdot, Linux is a corporate effort. I have the feeling this is one of those "have it both ways" Linux arguments, where if you criticize Linux software people say "well it's all volunteer!" but if you say "it'll never be any good because it's all volunteer" people chime in with "but it's all done by corporations!"
IIRC, most of the people committing to the kernel do work for big corporations. A better description is probably decentralized, and certainly less guided by a single plan than either a Microsoft or Apple OS.
@blakeyrat said:
Corporate or not, there's no excuse for shipping a broken piece of crap and calling it an OS, like those old releases of RedHat were doing. They were shipping an OS in 2000 that wasn't as functional as MacOS was in 1990.
Yeah, desktop wise, that was a pretty dark era, although many had much more positive experiences, obviously.
@blakeyrat said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
Also, every feature is mandated by convention to have several splits and forks and many rivals, so the total workload needed to complete anything is greatly magnified, and that must do more harm than anything, as well as destroying all hope of consistency in the eyes of the public.
Get some order, some management, and interested hardware vendors. After all, had IBM created an OS, it would only need to support their own hardware!
I agree with that 100%. I was hoping Ubuntu would come in and do some of that work, but it's turned into Just Another Linux Distro.
The splits, etc, are in that sense a drawback to a decentralized model, although I think it's being exaggerated here. I can't imagine any particular distro doing whatever you hoped Ubuntu would do. It's pretty much a situation where you can't get the toothpaste back into the tube. In general, the hardware support on today's distros is pretty damn good.
-
I agree with Boomzilla here. Sure, Linux used to be a bit of a pain to use, I remember the first time I tried to use it many years ago and it had all sorts of trouble recognising my graphics, and as I didn't know then what I know now, I didn't know how to sort it, or if iteven was something I could sort easily. These days, things just work.
Today, I'm surprised when a distro doesn't work just fine straight from the live disc. Put it in, everything just works without actually installing anything, so I can be sure my hardware works. Last time I tried doing this with Windows (I can only speak from experience, I've never installed a Mac OS before) it took several restarts, various driver discs and a bit of patience to get everything working, and that's before any applications were installed. Windows doesn't do an official live disc (although I know some people have made one themselves) so it can't be compared like-for-like, but I know what's easier. One disc where everything works and a few clicks to install, or the multi-disc, multi-restart pain that is Windows
Blakeyrat, when exactly was the last time you tried installing Linux on a machine, and what distro? I ask, because from the sounds of it you keep referring to distros that are quite old, and I've just never had the problems you're talking about. I've tried all sorts of distros: Fedora, Mandriva, SuSe, Mint, Ubuntu, and have never had problems like you had. Either you've not tried anything recent, you're trolling really badly, or you're [i]really, really[/i] unlucky using Linux.
-
@boomzilla said:
I can't imagine any particular distro doing whatever you hoped Ubuntu would do. It's pretty much a situation where you can't get the toothpaste back into the tube.
Yeah, it was more a self-delusion than anything. I admit to that. I've long since given up on Linux-based OSes actually living up to their potential (and the potential is awesome.)
Now I see it as nothing more than a cheap web server, if you're willing to trade ease-of-use for price.
-
@ASheridan said:
Today, I'm surprised when a distro doesn't work just fine straight from the live disc. Put it in, everything just works without actually installing anything, so I can be sure my hardware works. Last time I tried doing this with Windows (I can only speak from experience, I've never installed a Mac OS before) it took several restarts, various driver discs and a bit of patience to get everything working, and that's before any applications were installed. Windows doesn't do an official live disc (although I know some people have made one themselves) so it can't be compared like-for-like, but I know what's easier. One disc where everything works and a few clicks to install, or the multi-disc, multi-restart pain that is Windows
@ASheridan said:
Blakeyrat, when exactly was the last time you tried installing Linux on a machine, and what distro? I ask, because from the sounds of it you keep referring to distros that are quite old, and I've just never had the problems you're talking about.
So you're referring to a version of Windows so old it came on "multiple disks", and yet I'm the one who's out of date?
To answer the question:
1) Either you're lying about your last Windows install, or
2) I've used Linux-based OSes a fuckload newer than whatever ancient Windows you were installingMore seriously, my progression has gone something like this:
* RedHat 6.2 (didn't fucking work at all)
* Corel Linux 1.0 (mostly worked, network card didn't do DHCP by default for some retarded reason and there was no GUI to turn that on, also the SoundBlaster card in it didn't work despite being on the "recommended hardware" list
* Some 2006 version of Ubuntu, because it was recommended to me to use as a basis for a DVR (MythTV.) Never worked right with my WinPVR 150 video capture card, despite that card being on the "recommended hardware" list.
* Some 2006 version of SUSE, for the same reason, with the exact same problem. In general, I think SUSE has been my most positive Linux experience, although the install was fucking useless or the purpose I installed it for
* Some 2008 version of Ubuntu I put on my convertible tablet because I had to shuttle its Windows license to another machine. Had zero tablet features that I could find, sleep didn't work, all of the media keys on the keyboard didn't work, plugging in external monitors didn't work without a reboot, it was pretty dire hardware support-wise. Especially compared to the Vista that was on the box before, which had excellent tablet features. This is what made me draw the line and say "no more".That's probably the most recent. At some point I installed some Linux on an old iBook, 14" to give you an idea of the approximate date, and I think it was the Mac version of Ubuntu... but it was only on there long enough to find out sleep didn't work. Also I've used it on servers from about 1997-on, although usually SSHed or FTPed in and not actually "using" it.
@ASheridan said:
Either you've not tried anything recent, you're trolling really badly, or you're really, really unlucky using Linux.
Actually, I think Linux users and Linux distros lie about how well it supports hardware.
And why the fuck should luck of all things be a factor? If I require luck to run your OS, maybe you have a shitty OS, eh?
-
@blakeyrat said:
So you're referring to a version of Windows so old it came on "multiple disks", and yet I'm the one who's out of date?
I think that at the very least, your lens prescription is out of date. He said [b]driver[/b] disks; inferring drivers, and not Windows itself.
-
The only old version of Windows I mentioned was Windows ME, whichI mentioned as it came out about the same time as Windows 2000, which [b]you[/b] mentioned, and [b]you[/b] said was better than the version of Linux you tried at the time. I've used all the versions of Windows since 3.11, and the best by far was definitely XP, followed by Windows 7. To borrow a leaf out of your dictionary, the usability of Vista was so piss-poor I would rather use a pen and paper.
You say you think I'm lying about my last Windows install? I admit it's been just under a year since I last did one, but it followed the same format as all Windows installs:
1) Install the basic Windows, making sure to select British English in the many menus it appears in (location, language, clock, keyboard, etc) (Microsoft doesn't cater well for non-American users by default)
2) Install the various drivers one at a time: advanced chipset drivers for any onboard elements, graphics, sound, network, etc, rebooting after each one
3) Install the latest service packs if applicable (this depends on the particular version of Windows, so isn't always applicable)
4) Install antivirus because you're being attacked every second you're online without protection
Did I leave anything out? Does that sound like an easy install process? Linux by far is much easier to install, but hey, I know you'll disagree, after all, your rants/opinions are worth far more than mine aren't they?!
My last point wasn't saying you needed luck to run Linux, it was a tongue in cheek redundant answer to show that you haven't used a recent Linux distro (3 years ago does not count as recent when there is a major distro update every few months from one of the major distro vendors) or that you were a troll. I'll amend my last point; you are a troll, I just can't decide whether it's all deliberate or some of it is genuine ignorance.
Lastly, some users may lie about their experiences, I can't claim to speak for them all, but it goes both ways. For every liar about Linux, you'll find one about another OS, so in actuality it all evens out. Personally, I've had a great experience with hardware, with the exception of webcams, but that's not exactly crucial hardware, and the same webcams have trouble on Macs as well (I know because I tested the ones I had trouble with)
-
@dohpaz42 said:
@blakeyrat said:
So you're referring to a version of Windows so old it came on "multiple disks", and yet I'm the one who's out of date?
I think that at the very least, your lens prescription is out of date. He said driver disks; inferring drivers, and not Windows itself.
That still places it before January 2007, when Vista was released. You're right, though, I misread him slightly.
-
@ASheridan said:
To borrow a leaf out of your dictionary, the usability of Vista was so piss-poor I would rather use a pen and paper.
But Windows 7 is the same thing, and you have it in your "second best" list.
Also kudos for listing XP as the best. The typical Linux user thing would be to berate XP for having a "Fisher Price" color scheme and requiring evil activation. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that Vista was better than XP, and Windows 7 is better than Vista.
@ASheridan said:
1) Install the basic Windows, making sure to select British English in the many menus it appears in (location, language, clock, keyboard, etc) (Microsoft doesn't cater well for non-American users by default)
Maybe if you Euro-weenies were actually building your own computers and OSes during the 70s instead of sitting on your thumbs, or whatever the fuck you were doing, you'd have the default language now. (/nationalist trolling)
@ASheridan said:
2) Install the various drivers one at a time: advanced chipset drivers for any onboard elements, graphics, sound, network, etc, rebooting after each one
If you were doing this last year, then you were using a version of Windows significantly older than the one that was current last year.
If that's fair game, why don't I break out a 2001 copy of a Linux OS and installer that sucker, then bitch about how awful it is? Oh wait, because that wouldn't be a fair comparison? Yeah.
@ASheridan said:
3) Install the latest service packs if applicable (this depends on the particular version of Windows, so isn't always applicable)
That doesn't involve actually doing anything at all. You just leave it on overnight and it happens as if by magic.
@ASheridan said:
4) Install antivirus because you're being attacked every second you're online without protection
I'll give you that one.
@ASheridan said:
Did I leave anything out?
No, but you weren't comparing a current version of Windows to a current version of a Linux distribution, so it's not a fair comparison. Vista has been out now for 4 years, Windows 7 for almost 2. You're not allowed to cherry-pick versions; if you're comparing OSes in 2011 you have to use the 2011 version of each OS.
@ASheridan said:
My last point wasn't saying you needed luck to run Linux, it was a tongue in cheek redundant answer to show that you haven't used a recent Linux distro (3 years ago does not count as recent when there is a major distro update every few months from one of the major distro vendors)
But here's the point:
1) Whenever you have a bad Linux experience, Linux users always say, "oh but things are so much better now!"
2) and that's true, but the problem is that OS X and Windows are also so much better now, and
3) since Linux OSes are coming from behind in a huge way (like I said above, the 2000 version of RedHat couildn't compete with the 1990 version of MacOS on the desktop) they have to change faster than Windows and OS X are
4) and they ain't doing that at all.@ASheridan said:
or that you were a troll. I'll amend my last point; you are a troll, I just can't decide whether it's all deliberate or some of it is genuine ignorance.
Well obviously I'm a troll. Are you just out of the womb?
@ASheridan said:
Lastly, some users may lie about their experiences, I can't claim to speak for them all, but it goes both ways. For every liar about Linux, you'll find one about another OS, so in actuality it all evens out.
And to be fair, a lot of the lying isn't intentional. The Linux laptop user who says, "all of the features of my hardware work fine!" actually means to say, "all of the features of my hardware that I know about and care about work fine!" The problem is that they say the first version, and when you quiz them you invariably learn that, no, their laptop has features that do not work. (Common problems: ask about hot-swapping external monitors, ask about keyboard media keys, ask about CPU/GPU stepping.)
But a lot of the lying is. Corel Linux listed the SoundBlaster 128 in its compatible hardware list. The SoundBlaster 128 was not compatible with the OS. This is inexcusable. Maybe that doesn't happen now in 2011 (I doubt it), but first impressions are the strongest.
@ASheridan said:
Personally, I've had a great experience with hardware, with the exception of webcams, but that's not exactly crucial hardware, and the same webcams have trouble on Macs as well (I know because I tested the ones I had trouble with)
That's great, but the things you do with your computer are not the same as the things I do with my computer, and you shouldn't say "Linux works with all hardware" until you know that Linux works with all hardware. Otherwise, you're just setting up potential users for disappointment, as was done for me.
-
@ASheridan said:
The only old version of Windows I mentioned was Windows ME, whichI mentioned as it came out about the same time as Windows 2000, which you mentioned, and you said was better than the version of Linux you tried at the time. I've used all the versions of Windows since 3.11, and the best by far was definitely XP, followed by Windows 7. To borrow a leaf out of your dictionary, the usability of Vista was so piss-poor I would rather use a pen and paper.
You say you think I'm lying about my last Windows install? I admit it's been just under a year since I last did one, but it followed the same format as all Windows installs:
1) Install the basic Windows, making sure to select British English in the many menus it appears in (location, language, clock, keyboard, etc) (Microsoft doesn't cater well for non-American users by default)
Last I checked, any OS presents multiple choices for i18n: location, language, clock, keyboard, etc). Even Linux.@ASheridan said:
2) Install the various drivers one at a time: advanced chipset drivers for any onboard elements, graphics, sound, network, etc, rebooting after each one
This is not much different than having to recompile your kernel, or install additional packages for <insert favorite distro here>. Though, you don't always have to reboot.@ASheridan said:
3) Install the latest service packs if applicable (this depends on the particular version of Windows, so isn't always applicable)
Every OS has some form of updates to download and install. With Linux, it varies more than others because of the umpteen billion distros that are available.@ASheridan said:
4) Install antivirus because you're being attacked every second you're online without protection
Microsoft does seem to have the monopoly on this one. But, to be fair, the same can be said for rootkits on Linux, or just leaving certain ports open and unprotected by a firewall.Let's all think about this for one second: there is not one OS that doesn't have it's problems, and/or idiosyncrasy. Sure, you love your OS; that's great. You should. But this whole OS war thing is nothing more than a waste of time and makes everybody involved (myself included) look like an ass for falling for the flame bait. Just sayin'. :)
-
@blakeyrat said:
@ASheridan said:
3) Install the latest service packs if applicable (this depends on the particular version of Windows, so isn't always applicable)
That doesn't involve actually doing anything at all. You just leave it on overnight and it happens as if by magic.Yikes! Are you saying that you should leave your computer unpatched and connected to the internet untill the magic happens (3am seems to be the default), or that an install should take up to 24 hours to complete?
This may not be a good idea, anyways. About a month ago, I booted into my Windows 7 partition for the first time since last August (yeah, yeah, TRWTF, etc). First thing I did was to start updates. It found 50+ things, so I told it to go. After downloading a bunch of stuff, and then trying to start the updates, it gave me some cryptic error message in a message box. After consulting google, I found a page on msdn about what it meant:
My version of windows update was out of date or something, and I had to install some hotfix (300+MB !!) before I could even do any actual windows updating! WTF!? It locked up a couple of times after that during the update process, but a few hours later it was finally done with all of the updates (including a few reboots). That's one of the really weird (and annoying) things about windows updates....having to reboot in the middle of updating.
-
@ASheridan said:
1) Install the basic Windows, making sure to select British English in the many menus it appears in (location, language, clock, keyboard, etc)
What the …? You serious? Yes XP was that stupid, and yes it was annoying, but Windows 7 has a single panel with three easy to understand dropdown menus, and that's it as far as localisation is concerned, at least for the UK.
XP is OLD! I seem to recall that Vista's installer is the same as 7, in other words, a complete piece of cake.
Compare Windows 7 to Debian Smurfy or whatever stupid toy it's named after now: Debian rakes you over the coals with senseless questions during the installation including an interrogation on hard drive partitioning. Given that I'm installing it on servers, that's fine – I would hope Ubuntu and MEPIS are significantly more forgiving.
In terms of recognising every single piece of hardware on the planet during installation: yes that's nice, but think of the logistics nightmare of that for Microsoft. It's not actually their job to supply every driver for every obscure piece of hardware on the planet, although they do try pretty hard and you can't knock them for that. I used to wish they'd try less hard, firstly to reduce the amount of crap dumped on the hard drive (not an issue any more given drive size) and because their phoney Matrox drivers just crashed my PC (two different cards), so I had to obtain the proper ones anyway.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
In terms of recognising every single piece of hardware on the planet during installation: yes that's nice, but think of the logistics nightmare of that for Microsoft.
There can be a lot of silliness, though. I plugged a Microsoft mouse into a Win7 machine, and it went off to the Internet for a driver.
-
@boomzilla said:
There can be a lot of silliness, though. I plugged a Microsoft mouse into a Win7 machine, and it went off to the Internet for a driver.
I find that Windows 7 likes installing IntelliPoint when you connect a mouse. Snag is, under XP at least, IntelliPoint blocks a middle click directly following a wheel scroll event. Since I often use this sequence to switch then close tab in Firefox, no IntelliPoint for me. Too bad, as it has the closest you'll get to usable accelerated wheel scrolling in XP. I tried ScrollNavigator, but I had to give up because of how many programs assume three lines per notch instead of reading the global setting (programs I'll never get fixed) and his own refusal to implement a simple workaround to help deal with this. [Edit: my Windows 7 machine is a laptop so I don't have a mouse connected, so I've never checked to see if IntelliPoint still does this in 7.]
Wheel scrolling is a WTF.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
Get some order, some management, and interested hardware vendors.
See, here's the problem. Linux already has corporate entities trying to give it support and direction. Canonical, RedHat, Dell, HP, IBM, etc. The problem isn't with lack of direction - it's that the developer culture ensures that said direction is of merely tertiary concern.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
I said UNIX. Just the path to the target would be sufficient, which as far as I know, that's all a symlink is -- a text file with a target path in it.
That is a symlink - but it's not what a (Windows) shortcut is.
-
@ender said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
I said UNIX. Just the path to the target would be sufficient, which as far as I know, that's all a symlink is -- a text file with a target path in it.
That is a symlink - but it's not what a (Windows) shortcut is.I hope I didn't imply that I felt that there was any validity to Microsoft having overcomplicated the hell out of shortcuts.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
I've tried to recreate this in Perl using a pipe to 7-Zip's 7z.exe to read the archive contents (in order to figure out if I need an enclosing folder; this method lets me support any archive format that 7-Zip does), and
Win32::SetChildShowWindow(Win32::SW_HIDE)to stop the pipe opening up a console window briefly. I thought that was working, but it stopped working – I can't make it work without the stupid console window opening.Wouldn't it be easier to use 7z.dll directly?
-
See this cute little Unreal mod featuring hamster? I was gonna download and install it. I didn't. Know why? The installer's a .rar file.
That mod, desperately trying to get attention from anybody, was just passed-over because they choose a bad compression format. It matters, people.
-
@blakeyrat said:
See this cute little Unreal mod featuring hamster? I was gonna download and install it. I didn't. Know why? The installer's a .rar file.
That mod, desperately trying to get attention from anybody, was just passed-over because they choose a bad compression format. It matters, people.
No, it really doesn't matter. In-fact I'd go so far as to say that the creator of that mod is better off without you as a user, because you'd just complain anyway.
-
Linux People Problems:
Promote diversity.
Rant over a compression format.
-
-
@ASheridan said:
No, it really doesn't matter. In-fact I'd go so far as to say that the creator of that mod is better off without you as a user, because you'd just complain anyway.
QFT.
I'm compression format agnostic – 7-Zip covers pretty much everything I need anyway including GZip, BZip2, RAR and Zip.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
@ASheridan said:
No, it really doesn't matter. In-fact I'd go so far as to say that the creator of that mod is better off without you as a user, because you'd just complain anyway.
QFT.
I'm compression format agnostic – 7-Zip covers pretty much everything I need anyway including GZip, BZip2, RAR and Zip.
Trying to explain human factors to a Linux user is like trying to explain Mozart to a pig. Except the pig has better hygiene.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Trying to explain human factors to a
Linux userprogrammer is like trying to explain Mozart to a pig. Except the pig has better hygiene.FTFY
-
@boomzilla said:
@blakeyrat said:
Trying to explain human factors to a
Linux userprogrammer is like trying to explain Mozart to a pig. Except the pig has better hygiene.FTFY
QFT. This is why they have design/UI/UX people. :)
-
@boomzilla said:
@blakeyrat said:
Trying to explain human factors to a
Linux userprogrammer is like trying to explain Mozart to a pig. Except the pig has better hygiene.I don't know what you're talking about, I had a bath just the other week!
-
@ASheridan said:
@boomzilla said:
@blakeyrat said:
Trying to explain human factors to a
Linux userprogrammer is like trying to explain Mozart to a pig. Except the pig has better hygiene.I don't know what you're talking about, I had a bath just the other week!
There seriously used to be a Slashdot poster who would go on about how bathing is a "myth", and he hadn't bathed in like 3 months and everything in his life was so much better for it. He was 100% sincere. I should look those posts up, they were fucking hilarious.
-
@blakeyrat said:
There seriously used to be a Slashdot poster who would go on about how bathing is a "myth", and he hadn't bathed in like 3 months and everything in his life was so much better for it. He was 100% sincere. I should look those posts up, they were fucking hilarious.
One of the things that continues to amaze me about slashdot is that no matter the topic, there is some commenter who (appears to) sincerely believes the most outlandish things, and absolutely cannot understand why no one else agrees with him.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
@ASheridan said:
No, it really doesn't matter. In-fact I'd go so far as to say that the creator of that mod is better off without you as a user, because you'd just complain anyway.
QFT.
I'm compression format agnostic – 7-Zip covers pretty much everything I need anyway including GZip, BZip2, RAR and Zip.
Trying to explain human factors to a Linux user is like trying to explain Mozart to a pig. Except the pig has better hygiene.
You do realise we're talking about a game mod, right? Someone who's going to mess around with computer game behaviour is probably not that fazed by installing a semi-decent compression program, and odds are already uses WinRAR anyway (I even see it installed on Windows servers). Either way, you can't really bury your head in the sand – different compression formats exist and sooner or later, anyone half-technical will need to address opening them all.
If you want something completely retarded: DropBox. It's an exe -- that's good. I like exe. Except if you log into the PC as Administrator it installs to Administrator's Application Data. Srsly wtf? Right, so it's one of these programs that's designed to sidestep those mean and nasty network admins who have nothing better to do than lock down all your PCs and stop you having fun or being productive. Except if you try to install it as a regular user, you're asked for administrator credentials. Apparently (and I didn't see this explained anywhere, this was just trial and error) it installs into Application Data and the start menu of the user who's interactively logged in, regardless of the credentials used to install it. But there's no MSI. So they recognise that admins need to install it, but make it a bitch to install as an administrator. If you're going to do something stupid, at least document it! There isn't even a choice of installation directory, so you have to figure out where it went to.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
If you want something completely retarded: DropBox.
The real WTF is the new terms and conditions for DropBox. Anything you store using their service, they own. You sign away your rights to the content you share on there when you upload it.
-
There's another Mozilla WTF ... the new mail notification toaster appears on top of full-screen programs ... OK, back to Worms :)
-
@ASheridan said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
This dropbox?If you want something completely retarded: DropBox.
The real WTF is the new terms and conditions for DropBox. Anything you store using their service, they own. You sign away your rights to the content you share on there when you upload it.
Well there's an easy way around both the vulnerability linked above and that T&C; encrypt the stuff before uploading it. Or simply don't use the service.
-
Isn't that like saying if someone steals your password to an online backup site they can access your data remotely? I'd say a great deal of users let their software store the username and password, so if the file containing such is stolen, its just the same as having your dropbox hash stolen. Well, worse, as the dropbox hash will only give you access to dropbox, where as a username and password may work on other sites too.
I do use dropbox, but the only file I store there is a 1GB Truecrypt volume. I mount the volume if I want any of the files and upon unmounting any changes are automatically uploaded.
-
@ASheridan said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
If you want something completely retarded: DropBox.
The real WTF is the new terms and conditions for DropBox. Anything you store using their service, they own. You sign away your rights to the content you share on there when you upload it.
What? I just looked this up on their site:
Your Stuff & Your Privacy
By using our Services you provide us with information, files, and folders that you submit to Dropbox (together, “your stuff”). You retain full ownership to your stuff. We don’t claim any ownership to any of it. These Terms do not grant us any rights to your stuff or intellectual property except for the limited rights that are needed to run the Services, as explained below.
We may need your permission to do things you ask us to do with your stuff, for example, hosting your files, or sharing them at your direction. This includes product features visible to you, for example, image thumbnails or document previews. It also includes design choices we make to technically administer our Services, for example, how we redundantly backup data to keep it safe. You give us the permissions we need to do those things solely to provide the Services. This permission also extends to trusted third parties we work with to provide the Services, for example Amazon, which provides our storage space (again, only to provide the Services).
-
@tOmcOlins said:
@ASheridan said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
If you want something completely retarded: DropBox.
The real WTF is the new terms and conditions for DropBox. Anything you store using their service, they own. You sign away your rights to the content you share on there when you upload it.
What? I just looked this up on their site:
ASheridan is a troll, in case you haven't noticed yet.
-
Back on topic, it looks like the reminder popup windows don't work properly in Lightning any more. Sometimes when I wake my PC from hibernation, the window popups up, squeaks and vanishes. However, it didn't appear for an actual appointment. Useless thing. Lightning makes Outlook look reliable.
toH. After restarting Thunderbird, there's my reminder. Good thing I was there to remind Lighting to remind me of what I needed to do, eh.
-
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
toH. After restarting Thunderbird, there's my reminder. Good thing I was there to remind Lighting to remind me of what I needed to do, eh.
You could set up a reminder in Lightning that will remind you once an hour to restart Thunderbird so that Lightning can remind you of what you need to do. Oh wait...
