Z
z
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
Terry said:Im sitting here with a group of guys (and one in CA, and one in england
thanks skype) working on an LED video screen. we got a laugh out of it
too
Joerg said:How's Skype for you in that respect? Can you share drawings and docs?
How about eaves-drop safety?
Frank said:Eavesdrop is easy in Skype. The company sells the backdoor:
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Spekulationen-um-Backdoor-in-Skype--/meldung/113281
Michael A. Terrell said:"Phil Allison jokes"? Isn't that an oxymoron?
z said:
Michael A. Terrell said:Phil? He tried that years ago, and got as good as he gave.
Speed hump? What kind of drugs are you on, or are you talking about
your production line hooker?
Blather all you want, then let me know when NASA puts your
electronics on the ISS.
David L. Jones said:http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2008/08/bread_circuit_board_blink.html
Brilliant!
Cue the Phil Allison jokes... :->
Dave.
Ok, I wouldn't worry too much about law enforcement dropping in since I
don't do any illegal stuff. But the rumors about selling are concerning.
Might be just rumors though. I am more concerned about schematics and
stuff that get shared during discussions. Not sure whether and how that
works though because there is only scant information on the Skype site,
and it only lists webcam style video.
Rich said:Not that I really have anybody I need to call, but this Skype looks pretty
interesting. So I went to their site, and they don't have a Slackware
package and I didn't see any links to source where I can compile it here.
Anybody heard of either of those anywhere?
What's slackware? Some kind of trousers?
<duck and run ...>
Rich said:[...]Skype looks pretty interesting
[...]they don't have a Slackware package
and I didn't see any links to source where I can compile it here.
Anybody heard of either of those anywhere?
Joerg said:What's slackware? Some kind of trousers?
<duck and run ...>
JeffM said:Rich said:[...]Skype looks pretty interesting
[...]they don't have a Slackware package
and I didn't see any links to source where I can compile it here.
Anybody heard of either of those anywhere?Joerg said:What's slackware? Some kind of trousers?
<duck and run ...>
Actually, it's the oldest extant distro.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...+SuSE.Linux+Slackware+text+text+Red.Hat.Linux
I've wondered what the world would be like
if a big rock had fallen out of the sky and
impacted the Redmond campus during business hours ~April 1, 1995
(before W95 and just before Red Hat's release).
Rich said:Actually, I had first heard of Linux in the 1995 era, so I decided to try
it. I was wondering which distro to d/l, and there were so many options,
with attributes and stuff that I had no clue about, so I picked Slackware
because I liked the name. Linux for slackers - what a perfect fit! ;-P
Mind you, it's not Aunt Tillie-Friendly at all - it's more of a techie's
Linux.
They simply didn't have the money.Phil said:Joerg said:JeffM wrote:
Rich Grise wrote:
[...]Skype looks pretty interesting
[...]they don't have a Slackware package
and I didn't see any links to source where I can compile it here.
Anybody heard of either of those anywhere?
Joerg wrote:
What's slackware? Some kind of trousers?
<duck and run ...>
Actually, it's the oldest extant distro.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...+SuSE.Linux+Slackware+text+text+Red.Hat.Linux
I've wondered what the world would be like
if a big rock had fallen out of the sky and
impacted the Redmond campus during business hours ~April 1, 1995
(before W95 and just before Red Hat's release).
Probably IBM would then still be in that biz because there wouldn't
have been Senor Gates eating their lunch.
OS/2 2.0 came out in April, 1992. A spectacular technical
success--multithreaded 32-bit OS, fully object-oriented GUI, a beautiful
object model (SOM)...I could go on...but a stupid marketing failure. I
still use OS/2 at least a few times a week, and I still love it.
Well, absolutely. I was sure hoping OS/2 would make it but they
blundered so badly in the marketing area that it's hard to believe.
Essentially they could have eaten Microsoft's lunch but instead simply
walked away from the table.
They simply didn't have the money.Phil said:Joerg wrote:
JeffM wrote:
Rich Grise wrote:
[...]Skype looks pretty interesting
[...]they don't have a Slackware package
and I didn't see any links to source where I can compile it here.
Anybody heard of either of those anywhere?
Joerg wrote:
What's slackware? Some kind of trousers?
<duck and run ...>
Actually, it's the oldest extant distro.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...+SuSE.Linux+Slackware+text+text+Red.Hat.Linux
I've wondered what the world would be like
if a big rock had fallen out of the sky and
impacted the Redmond campus during business hours ~April 1, 1995
(before W95 and just before Red Hat's release).
Probably IBM would then still be in that biz because there wouldn't
have been Senor Gates eating their lunch.
OS/2 2.0 came out in April, 1992. A spectacular technical
success--multithreaded 32-bit OS, fully object-oriented GUI, a beautiful
object model (SOM)...I could go on...but a stupid marketing failure. I
still use OS/2 at least a few times a week, and I still love it.
Well, absolutely. I was sure hoping OS/2 would make it but they
blundered so badly in the marketing area that it's hard to believe.
Essentially they could have eaten Microsoft's lunch but instead simply
walked away from the table.
They simply didn't have the money.Phil Hobbs wrote:
Joerg wrote:
JeffM wrote:
Rich Grise wrote:
[...]Skype looks pretty interesting
[...]they don't have a Slackware package
and I didn't see any links to source where I can compile it here.
Anybody heard of either of those anywhere?
Joerg wrote:
What's slackware? Some kind of trousers?
<duck and run ...>
Actually, it's the oldest extant distro.
http://www.google.com/search?q=cach...+SuSE.Linux+Slackware+text+text+Red.Hat.Linux
I've wondered what the world would be like
if a big rock had fallen out of the sky and
impacted the Redmond campus during business hours ~April 1, 1995
(before W95 and just before Red Hat's release).
Probably IBM would then still be in that biz because there wouldn't
have been Senor Gates eating their lunch.
OS/2 2.0 came out in April, 1992. A spectacular technical
success--multithreaded 32-bit OS, fully object-oriented GUI, a beautiful
object model (SOM)...I could go on...but a stupid marketing failure. I
still use OS/2 at least a few times a week, and I still love it.
Well, absolutely. I was sure hoping OS/2 would make it but they
blundered so badly in the marketing area that it's hard to believe.
Essentially they could have eaten Microsoft's lunch but instead simply
walked away from the table.
Back then the money ratio was still in IBM's favor. IBM turned away
because it would have eaten into their Power architecture 'nix
workstation line. One more instance of killing the golden egg laying
goose to save the lame duck product.