Slashdot Mirror

Using a mouse to make an online purchase .... Oops too late Amazon already did it... http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/ask_tim/2000/ amazon_patent.html

Automatically updating security software over the internet ... Sorry McAfee already got that one ... http://www.dotgnu.org/patent-analysis.html

Use of graphics and text to sell products over the internet... Darn too late again (see Pangea Intellectual Properties) http://www.chillingeffects.org/ecom/

Tabbed browsing... You might be thinking Mozilla or Opera... Nope Microsoft http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3 406551

Maybe "techniques for cleaning one's anus using rolls of soft paper"... I have not checked but I am sure that one's covered too.

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/asterisk/index.html

• Learning Debian GNU/Linux
  
• Linux Documentation Project: Guides. You may be interested in Introduction to Linux: Hands-On Guide
  
• Simply Linux
  
• RUTE Linux Textbook. This one is an advanced, comprehensive textbook.

Just because they're "bytecodes" doesn't tell us whether they're interpreted or compiled.

True, however in this interview with Anders (Chief C# Language Architect), he states that "I think one of the key differences between our IL design and Java byte code specifically, is that we made the decision up-front to not have interpreters". A bit further down he says "When you make the decision up-front to favor execution of native code over interpretation, you are making a decision that strongly influences design of the IL".

Certainly you CAN interpret it, but it was designed to be JITed.

I'm not sure of the wisdom of the site owners in posting a 166MB file onto Slashdot... Why don't people just use bittorrent for distributing content like this? A mirror (a 100MB quicktime movie) is available, though, at http://downloads.oreilly.com/make/howitismade.mov

A fascinating file though, conveniently formated for the ipod with video.

I think that Python will be replacing Perl. Take a look at O'Rielly's list of books sales by language. Perl is sucking muck off the bottom while PHP, Python and C# are fast movers up. http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/04/book_sal es_as_a.html

I pointed out that these had been addressed in the article

If you had posted based on what you have subsequently tried to imply you meant...

then I'd simply point out that trying to misapply standards meant for scientific results on material that is not presented as a scholarly article.

This is intellectual arrogance, simply designed to karma whore.

Assume that the editors of Nature were prepared to open themselves up to complaints of professional misconduct which may well threaten their standings on the editorial board on the basis of a trivial comparison between Wikipedia and the Britannica.

Then what motivation do you ascribe for them doing this?

I'm also amused that you assume that the editors of an extremely well-respected science journal wouldn't follow standard experimental design and methodological procedures reinforced ad nauseum from the first days of university training.

But then again, I don't have a superiority complex.

then I'm sure you emailed Nature asking for details of their methodology.

If you had and then posted their reponse, then that would have deserved an Insightful rating.....you didn't deserve an Insightful.

Leave physics and try law

Practical Development Environments http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/practicalde. This covers all manner of tools: version control, build tools, testing environments, bug tracking, documentation and release. Each chapter talks about general ideas, and then looks at specific tools (some open, some closed).

~Matt

(Disclaimer: I wrote it)

I noticed another post referring to RMS sharing his ideas with Noam Chomsky, while I admire both men as intellectuals, I'm afraid the greatest threat to liberals and democrates of all spots and stripes is that we are our greatest enemies. We don't jump to the conclusion that we are right, rather we tend to list to the left and circle ideologies and problems, canvassing them from all sides and in all lights. Come vote time we tend to fragment into camps warring as much with each other as with the neocons. Chomsky has in recent federal elections siphoned off votes that might have helped elect a Democratic President.

Maybe in America as in Canada we need to put aside our petty differences and vote en bloc to push the neocons out of power before the definition of facism RMS casts at America today becomes applicable in the U.S. and in Canada.

I'll now dismount my soapbox and return to fretting about the present Federal election at home.

I found CGI Programming with Perl really useful when I was learning, it goes over URL encoding and the acutal HTTP request/response. But after learning some perl, I prefer PHP. The syntax is clearer and the online manual is great...infact if you have any real programming experience (not html), you could just read the PHP manual and pick it up.

But, if you really wanna learn, you should buy a cheap box, and install some form of LAMP.

Parent is almost certainly referring to the recent upswing at O'Reilly, on the order of some thousands of percent, in the sale of Ruby and Ruby on Rails books, while Python remains flatish.

Linus is posting exactly the same as he always had: He says what he thinks, and doesn't pull any punches when doing so. If you think this is "new" behaviour for Linus, you haven't been around long enough. You might want to read this little exchange from 1992:

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/ap pa.html

I'm a fan of the ACM http://www.acm.org/ which gives you both a books24x7 membership, and a Safari books membership http://safari.oreilly.com/. All for under $100/year, less if you are a student.

http://safari.oreilly.com/

Buy them a bookshelf there. You can't go wrong with these guys.

O'Reilly books are great, but when you run out of shelf space http://safari.oreilly.com/ works just as well.

I recommend a Safari subscription. It provides online access to everthing by O'Reilly and a number of other publishers. My subscription has saved me huge amounts of time, since I can search and find useful information on all sorts of topics without leaving my desk.

and give them a subscription to O'Reilly's Safari Bookshelf.

Seconded.

I'm reading Head First Design Patterns now and it is a joy to read.

I'm just a budding programmer, so my bookshelf is fairly skimpy (5-6 books -- mostly accumulated from class). However it seems to me that you're best to buy books that won't be dated as quickly, such as those that are more conceptual (e.g. design patterns, cookbooks, and Art of Programming type books). For everything else, O'Reilly Safari digital book collections are the way to go. I've found it has taken a little time to get used to not reading books on dead trees, but the convenience pays off.

I have studied the lost techniques of Knoppix burning.
Here is a good read on that: Knoppix Hacks by Kyle Rankin
If that is what you mean by "Knoppix burning".
The more you get into that, you begin to realize that indeed some of the techniques are "lost".
Just a sample: Getting the "logo.16" to produce colored text on the boot: prompt, rather than the hard-to-see pale grey color. It can be done.

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/unixnut4/index.html

Oh yes... Something good can come of it...

Feeling now empowered with a sense of ownership, code gurus everywhere (but mostly at fortune 500 companies) will actually improve the code, make java smaller, faster, and more easily deployable. Then they will really recommend it instead of pointing to http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html, and the adoption rate will increase even more.

Then, of course, the Sun version will become obsolete (too slow, too buggy, etc) and everybody will use GNUJava and the world will be a Much Happier Place.

Of course, at that point, a plethora of existing software will start getting into the language. Java will support XML-RPC, REST, and SOAP out-of-the-box. It will support a whole bunch of things that now Sun won't put in.

But best of all, the bugs will be cleaned out. Slava Pestov, the lead developer on jEdit (http://www.jedit.org/, which I use daily as my primary editor), will be able to write applications without feeling like this: http://www.jroller.com/page/slava?entry=java_1_5_w indow_focus.

You don't have to take my word for it. Just find out what real java programmers are saying. Also, take a look at http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/beyondjava/.

Sun is not currently able to maintain the level of language development to compete against python, ruby, smalltalk and a veritable army of smaller, nimbler tools. Java is fast becoming the COBOL of the internet age: yes, lots of companies use it for mission critical stuff, but newer technologies have gobbled up the geeks. It's only a matter of time before it's obsolete. See http://paulgraham.com/pypar.html.

I am not against Java. I am against Java staying the way it is today. I want java to grow. The hacker community at large will do a better job than Sun Microsystems. Period. Besides, Sun is going down. Larger companies have completely disappeared. I just went to their web site, priced a workstation, and priced an equivalent workstation at hp.com for $1K less. You tell me. They will probably remain at about 1/3 of their size today as a provider of high-end hardware. Like Cray.

I totally agree with your comments. Seems they're charging $24.95 for this dribble http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/159327064X/
If you truly an open source advocate, you will use the $24.95 and donate it to an open source project instead of winging about MS cooperate dominance and how they are the devil of IT.
(I myself have donated a fair bit to nagios/netsaint)
Ohh.. and check out this blue screen of death http://www.deakinlinux.com/images/host-screenshot- 1.png

Sorry, but this is the IT publshing company, not our friend Bill O'Idiot of Fox News.
http://weblogs.oreilly.com/

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/kerberos/

And even if they don't overlay ads over the ads, studies have shown that you still recall the ad content just the same. So much for fast forwarding through them, eh?

Or then there was the story about how Tivo lets you respond to ads with the thumbs up button, sending your email address to advertisers. What a great feature that users everywhere were waiting for!

Then there was the story about commercials on demand that you probably missed.

My series 2 tivo rotated ads and trailers into the main menu. How's that for catering to ads? They give their ad partners equal weight in their UI as "Watch Live TV." There's no slashdot link for that one, because it's so blatant.

Or the story about how Tivo usage info is collected for advertising agencies. That was a monday, so i can understand if you were too busy to catch that one.

Sure, but it can't be all that bad, right? I mean, with all of these moves that are so blatantly anti-viewer and pro-advertiser, they must be making up for it in other areas, right?

Right! They have a 30 second skip feature that allows users to skip right over the unwanted ads. Cool, right? Except it's an easter egg that doesn't persist across reboots, is unadvertised by tivo, and could be taken out at any update without your knowledge. Oh...right.

But you can use TivoToGo to download your movies and do whatever you want with them, right? Not if you're a mac user, and even if you're on a PC you're encumbered with DRM. So no hope of editing out the commercials yourself unless you want to break the law. Thanks Tivo!

Tell me again how Tivo does anything to help the viewer get away from ads? Making advertising obsolete, you say? Shit, they're literally revolutionizing the way ads are delivered into your home.

With all due respect, you seem to be letting your dislike of economic markets prevent you from seeing the metaphore. You like science, you don't like free markets, so they can't be similar.

Metaphores with Linux work the same way. Linux is often said to be similar to communism, and in many cases this is a good analogy. In other cases a market (or bazaar) makes more sense. Michael Tiemann even quotes Adam Smith as part of the philosophy that makes Lunux possible.

I guess I just want you to know that it's a good analogy, and that by dismissing it, you're losing out on a chance to see something from a different perspective. If I had blown off the first post I responded to as angry anti-capitalistic trash, I never would have gotten to understand your perspective.

China is doing well because 1) they have influx of foreign investment and 2) the communist party kept political control.

So pre-communism does well if it can 2) maintain power and 1) return a profit for investors. That sounds just like your description of the "capitalist elite"!

I should have been more specific, I wasn't talking about international business, I was talking about poor, rural farmers. By the mid-70s, some areas weren't producing enough food on their collective farms to feed the farmers themselves. The government started allowing people to grow food on personal plots and let the farmers trade or sell the excess above their quotas, as part of "New Communism". All of the sudden, they have excess food production. Similar things apparently happened in Russia, where small, personal gardens produced more food than large, collective farms.

In between voluntary communist cooperation makes more sense than free markets. ... improving lifes of people today is also important.

As long as people are free to disagree, that's fine with me. May the best ideas on the "market" win! :)

Some time ago I bought a book of copyright free images. I was surprised to find that most of the O'Reilly animal images were part of it.

O'Reilly acknowledges that they are public domain in this page:

While looking for imagery, she came across the Dover Pictorial Archives, a series of books (and now CD-ROMs) containing copyright-free collections of 18th- and 19th-century wood and copperplate engravings of animals. She encountered a pair of slender lorises and had an epiphany. "That's sed and awk!"

One more piece of trivia: the cover page woodcut animals featuring in front of the OReilly books are from the Dover Pictorial Archives. It is a collection of 18th to 19th century wood and copperplate engravings of animals, ie no copyright issue to care about... In fact, the students in my former research group get used to choose one from the archive as well as a decoration for their own thesis. Many university/art school libraries have that collection. Feel free to use them when need a drawing of some cute animal.

http://www.oreilly.com/news/lejeune_0400.html

Why not choose the tiger from this O'reailly book??
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/mactigerpg/index.ht ml

Would have made more sense to me anyway.

Right now I'm more concerned about trying to set up coding standards, so that any developer can jump into any part of a project and be able to figure out what's going on, without wasting a couple hours just to figure out the code

I've got no problem learning the "how", but I really need to know the "why" before I will spend the valuable time re-learning my way around an OS.

Wow! You're a born Unix person. Really. Windows was made for people who don't care how it works, Unix was made for people who do. You're a perfect fit.

Unfortunately, the current crop of Unix advocates are too busy trying to shield the potential newbie from the "why" to realize how important it really is. If the "why" scares the newbie, then they're not a good fit for Unix, so we shouldn't be trying to fit them into an OS that they won't like.

Does anyone know any books that address the "how it all works together" part?

Someone else mentioned "Design and Implementation of *BSD", but that's too hardcore for your needs (unless you're a developer and are keenly interested in the inner workings of kernel data structures). I'm going to point you in other directions instead.

First, check out the set of newbie documents for FreeBSD, http://www.freebsd.org/projects/newbies.html. More technical, but much less so than the Design book, is the FreeBSD Architecture Handbook, http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/a rch-handbook/index.html. Finally, "Learning the Unix Operating System", http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/lunix5/, is a very good introduction to Unix that doesn't hide away the "why" nearly as much as other introductory books do.

Essential System Administration is a good overview of unix in general.

Guardian Unlimited (2002): Bezos counters that Amazon has made numerous innovations in web commerce that have been widely copied which it didn't patent, such as...customer reviews. oreilly.com (2000): Jeff countered that Amazon has made countless other innovations in Web commerce that it didn't patent, and that have been widely copied.

Egads. Either this is a troll (good job - had me fooled), or yet another example of the bizarre lengths folks go when using .NET and don't know any better. Hey! Since you've got all your business logic in you db, simply switch to J2EE!

Bah, damn typos. I need to use preview more often.... Here's the correct link to Safari Bookshelf.

---I think you are speaking without sufficient knowledge---

Really? Well, as an editor with a major publishing firm, and as an author of a textbook, this is a subject to which I've paid a great deal of attention. Let's take a look at your statements:

---Google is agreeing to compensate the publishers (based on a "percentage of profits", as you put it)---

No, they are not. Google is not offering compensation for the inclusion of material. Google is not offering the copyright holders any percentage of ad sale revenue.

---and is also agreeing to allow authors and publishers to opt out.---

Yes, and this is exactly the problem that the publishers are suing over. They feel it should be strictly opt in. Which is ironic, because (in the case of the Author's Guild), participation in their lawsuit is stricly opt out. Since search engines all function on an opt out basis, any ruling that says that opt in is required would affect them as well.

---The last discussion I read about it even said that Google was offering to exclude advertising from this project so that they would not be making any direct profits.---

There are two projects involved here, Google Library, and Google Print. Google Library will be done in conjunction with university libraries and will not feature ads. Google Print will feature ads.

---The people who are most upset by the coming changes are the ones who stand to lose the most, which is clearly the publishers in this case. They have an existing business model which has worked quite well, to the tune of billions of dollars.---

Clearly you do not understand the motivation behind these lawsuits. Take a look at this set of links, showing a nice balance of arguments on both sides, from people within the publishing industry. You'll note that every single one of them, including those arguing against Google, admit that the issue comes down to the use of content without compensation, not some fear that this will harm book sales. This is not about messing with the business model, this is about wanting a piece of the action, a cut of the money Google stands to make from ad sales. They all know that this service means higher book sales, but that's not enough for them.

--- If it was at all possible, they would like to stop the clock at the moment of maximum cash flow.---

If that was the case, they would have stopped things years and years ago, as book sales continue to plummet.

Doing anything like, oh... buying the book?

While O'Reilly Books are seriously cool people, they aren't publishing just for the fun of it. They're out to make some money (although they're not completely averse to having fun while doing it). They're also, judging by bookshelves in local geek circles and by the cover prices I've been paying, doing a decent job of it.

So why does O'Reilly Books have the entire (conventional) index of a HELL of a lot of their books available on the web? Free. No charge. Google searchable even. Why? Well, they might be trying to drum up interest in the Safari on-line library, but I don't think that's it. I think that, like Baen's Free Library, they "expect this to make us money by selling books".

I would also suggest you (and Schroeder and Barr) play with Google Scholar before sounding off. Google is already indexing copyrighted materials, many of which are in journals that cost a couple hundred bucks a year to subscribe to. However, they don't show the full text of the article in many cases (unless the publisher wants to). You will see the usual two lines worth of context, and there's usually a link to an abstract. If you search from a .edu IP address, your school may have a electronic subscription that Google will link to. Otherwise... get up off your lazy backside and get thee to a library. When Schroeder and Barr are wondering what Google may mean by "Snippets", this ought to give them a clue about what Google plans to do. Google's lawyers are not stupid; I'd be suprised if even full paragraphs show up on material not yet lasped to the public domain.

I'll also note that Google Scholar has a distinct lack of ads on it. The Google Library might not be ad-free, but it will probably be limited to ads trying to sell books or related materials. Gee, what might that do for the publishing industry?

Doing anything like, oh... buying the book?

While O'Reilly Books are seriously cool people, they aren't publishing just for the fun of it. They're out to make some money (although they're not completely averse to having fun while doing it). They're also, judging by bookshelves in local geek circles and by the cover prices I've been paying, doing a decent job of it.

So why does O'Reilly Books have the entire (conventional) index of a HELL of a lot of their books available on the web? Free. No charge. Google searchable even. Why? Well, they might be trying to drum up interest in the Safari on-line library, but I don't think that's it. I think that, like Baen's Free Library, they "expect this to make us money by selling books".

I would also suggest you (and Schroeder and Barr) play with Google Scholar before sounding off. Google is already indexing copyrighted materials, many of which are in journals that cost a couple hundred bucks a year to subscribe to. However, they don't show the full text of the article in many cases (unless the publisher wants to). You will see the usual two lines worth of context, and there's usually a link to an abstract. If you search from a .edu IP address, your school may have a electronic subscription that Google will link to. Otherwise... get up off your lazy backside and get thee to a library. When Schroeder and Barr are wondering what Google may mean by "Snippets", this ought to give them a clue about what Google plans to do. Google's lawyers are not stupid; I'd be suprised if even full paragraphs show up on material not yet lasped to the public domain.

I'll also note that Google Scholar has a distinct lack of ads on it. The Google Library might not be ad-free, but it will probably be limited to ads trying to sell books or related materials. Gee, what might that do for the publishing industry?

It was interesting to read this article after just last night hearing a short news blurb on my local CBS affiliate about the porn industry is "embracing" the new iPod with man on the street interviews with people who don't like the idea of having the "guy sitting next to them in class looking at porn," and overarching implications that parents should be alarmed and ready to take up arms to defend their kids' innocence.

Other perspectives:
Pornographers embracing iPod
Will iPod Be Eye for Porn?
Harness iPod's dollar power -- porn on the go
How do you know Apple's new device will succeed? iPod Porn
Apple iPod delivers "iPorno" revolution

I hear that a large objection to Evolution is that it is "just a theory". Unforturnately, the people making that objection do not seem to know just what the scientific definition of Theory really is. In science, if you make a guess regarding something-or-other, the official terminology of "guess" is "Hypothesis". A hypothesis is always supposed to include ways of testing it, to determine its accuracy. So tests are made and evidence is gathered, and IF the hypothesis holds up as proven accurate, then it graduates to "Theory" status. Evolution is a Theory because we have an overwhelming amount of supporting evidence for it. Creationism, by comparison, is still only a mere Hypothesis. In all scientific truth, Isaac Newton's "Laws" of Motion and Gravitation are actually ALSO "only Theories" --but extremely well supported by evidence (and, nevertheless, superceded by the MORE ACCURATE Theories of Special Relativity and General Relativity, as it happens). The lack of supporting evidence for Creationism is its ultimate downfall, as far as the scientific community is concerned.

Here are two specific examples in which Evolution explains what Creationism cannot. First, consider Vitamin C. Lack of this in the diet causes the deficiency-disease known as "scurvy". All primates (monkeys, apes, humans) require Vitamin C in their diets. But various "lesser" animals, such as rats, can manufacture Vitamin C within their bodies, and so don't need any in their diet. The Evolutionary explanation is that as ancestors of the primates took to the trees and gradually became the primates, they found plentiful supplies of fruits rich in Vitamin C. Animals with defective genes (or missing genes) for making Vitamin C did not suffer scurvy and die; they survived and passed the inability to make Vitamin C onto their descendants. In terms of "biological energy", an organism that can save a little by using environmental availability instead of of internal manufacturing, has a slight evolutionary advantage -- as long as the environment maintains the availability of the nutrient, of course. In the tropics, where primates evolved, fruits with Vitamin C are available year-round. And so, over millions of years, primates became utterly dependent on Vitamin C in their diets -- and humans, of course, when described as evolved primates, continue the tradition. (Possibly to be FIXED, once Genetic Engineering gains wide acceptance, heh!) OK, NOW, The Creationism explanation, for why a loving God blessed us with the potential for scurvy instead of the dietary independence that rats have, is what, exactly?

Second example: Eyes have evolved in different ways among different branches of the animal kingdom. In the fish/amphibian/reptile/mammal line of evolution, the human eyeball has various superior traits to many precursor animals. Color vision, for example. Nevertheless, the human eye, like those of its precursors, share certain particular overall architectural features, which are: The back wall of the eyeball is covered with retinal cells. The nerves that transmit retinal signals are between the iris and the retina (the nerves are pretty transparent, but do reduce impinging light a little). At one place on the back of the eyball, all the nerve-strands bundle together to plunge through the eyeball, to connect to the brain. There are no retinal cells in this part of the eyeball, so every amphibian/reptile/mammal has a "blind spot" in the vision. You can prove it to yourself; just print this out and follow the instructions: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/mindh...ter/hack16. pdf One of the other branches of the animal kingdom, the molluscs, includes clams, snails, slugs, cuttlefish, octopi, and squid. They branched off from the other evolutionary lines so far back that the development of the eyeball (most well-known in the octopus, which also has color vision) took a different route. In this architectural design, the nerve-signal cells are behind the retinal cells,

The fact of the matter is that C# will never be able to erode Java's dominance since it is not cross platform.

bull-SHIT.

here's the source for a C# compiler made available from MICROSOFT that compiles out of the box on FreeBSD and OS X. http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/sscli. Its called ROTOR.

Remember our favorite tech-book publisher? Here's an O'Reilly article explaining how to compile and begin using ROTOR: http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/03/27/ge ttingstarted.html

Here's an O'Reilly book on how to use the Shared Source CLI: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/sscliess/

Any bearded terminal hacker will tell you, when asked about the book they learned from, that while they went from one book to another in their early days, the most productive thing they ever did was learn how to read the documentation already available to them.

While the available documentation (man pages usually) are nice, there are a few books out there that quitte simply are great references and provide better material than the standard documentation. My personal favourite is UNIX Power Tools. It is mostly just a vast, vast collection of tips, tricks and cunning insights into the finer points of UNIX, its shells, and the various command line tools you can expect to find from some exeptionally experienced long time UNIX hackers. It's not a book you sit and read cover to cover, it's the sort of book where you go "I wonder how I could do [obscure thing]?" look it up in the index (another great feature is that the book has one of the most comprehensive and impressive indexes - finding out how to do what you want to do is easy), flip to the relevant section and start reading. Each section is heavily (and well!) cross referenced so in the middle of reading how to do [obscure thing] you read a comment about [other thing you hadn't realised you could do] and have to go and read that section too. An hour or so later you realise that you really need to get back to work and do [obscure thing], but you now also know many cunning ways to exploit UNIX that you would never have thought of yourself, and certainly wouldn't have realised you could do just from reading man pages.

Jedidiah.

FYI, the entire original book Open Sources is available here online:

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/to c.html

Oops, the blog link is here:

http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/08/not_20.h tml

*Snort* - web 2.0 my ass...

It's like learning a spoken language. You can study all you want about nouns and verbs and tenses, but until you actually learn some vocabulary, it's all meaningless. Your first step in programming is to learn a language, because the principles are pointless without a language.

p.s. I also second the Qt recommendation. To learn C++, I would recommend Practical C++ Programming. This is one of the very few C++ books suitable for a programming newbie.

The Full Description is available. Haha, I really get a kick out of the section titled Read the Source, Luke. Then there's quotes such as, In the web server space, Microsoft's complete denial of the Open Source phenomenon is almost amusing. The Apache web server has, at the time of writing, more than 50% of the web serving market according the Netcraft survey ( http://www.netcraft.com/survey). When you look at advertisements for Microsoft's Internet Information Server (IIS) you see them tout that they own over half the market in web serving--over half the commercial server market, that is. from the Introduction of the original. This is something I'll definitely be reading and adding to my Bookmarks Toolbar Folder!

The Full Description is available. Haha, I really get a kick out of the section titled Read the Source, Luke. Then there's quotes such as, In the web server space, Microsoft's complete denial of the Open Source phenomenon is almost amusing. The Apache web server has, at the time of writing, more than 50% of the web serving market according the Netcraft survey ( http://www.netcraft.com/survey). When you look at advertisements for Microsoft's Internet Information Server (IIS) you see them tout that they own over half the market in web serving--over half the commercial server market, that is. from the Introduction of the original. This is something I'll definitely be reading and adding to my Bookmarks Toolbar Folder!

Wow, I was just reading "Just For Fun" for the second time, mainly because of the lack of other books and today I was wondering what happened to Minix. In his book, Linus describes what is wrong with Minix and microkernels in general.

The Tanenbaum-Torvalds Debate

Tim O'Reilly made an excellent point in support of Google Print when he
pointed out that the biggest threat to authors is not piracy, but obscurity.