While China-bashing is really popular these days, I wouldn't be so quick to say "they'll just copy Android". There are a LOT of phones in China that run Linux. Most of the Linux distributions used are homegrown by the manufacturer and have little consistency between them. I wouldn't be surprised if Baidu just bought one of the dev teams from a phone manufacturer and had them slap "Baidu" all over everything.
It would be a Good Thing if they could get it used phones from multiple manufacturers - there might be some hope of writing an app that would run on more than one brand of phone!
"Writing DSLs has been done for many years, but was largely an undocumented process until just recently."
Not to discount the review, but that's a bit misleading. There are plenty of books dealing with lex/flex and yacc/bison, which have been used for years to do the same things in a precompiled manner..Net and Java "just recently" discovered this and have popularized the term DSL for it.
Re:Still no volume control
on
Safari 5 Released
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Yeah, you can use JackOSX - but that doesn't give you per-app volume out of the box. You'd have to have another tool also communicating with jack to do the amplification/attenuation. (I use Ardour but that's a little heady for a typical user - and no, I don't just use it as a fancy volume control)
The real deal-killer is that audio in Flash videos doesn't work properly through Jack. (On Snow Leopard at least) It's a known problem with no fix in sight. Oddly enough, HTML5 videos work flawlessly...
It's not just the SEC - a lot of very large companies and governmental agencies have policies against the use of any Open Source Software without an exhaustive legal review. After that review, the single piece of software reviewed, at the exact version reviewed, may be allowed for use. Personally, it seems like an organization's legal department could review a license and allow use of software governed by that license, but IANAL.
Part of the problem is that the legal review costs money. Likely, more money than the cost of purchasing a comparable product from the proprietary software world.
I'm not here to doubt your experience, but I've got a Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro (2.16, 2gb) and run Parallels constantly. I develop in Visual Studio 2005, host a SQL Server 2005 database, and use it for my development hosting environment for an ASP.Net application. I also use it to play music (I still haven't found a suitable OS X foobar2000 replacement) and test pages in Windows Firefox and IE7. I have NEVER had a kernel panic.
I have run this setup for about 3 months, with Parallels running for 8 hours of every workday in that span.
The only bug I've found is that if a Coherence Windows window has focus, and I choose a "Recent" smb:// fileshare from the Apple menu, it'll freeze Parallels and I have to Force Quit, reboot Parallels. I still forget and shoot myself in the foot sometimes with that one.
I bought an ATI Radeon X1300, which said on the box "Vista ready". In fact, I bought it the day I installed Vista (sometime mid-December) because I knew the onboard video would be inadequate to get the "full Vista experience."
The driver download page has *just* lost the disclaimer (I can't remember the exact words, something like "don't use this on any system expected to provide any sort of productivity at all"). I am downloading the new drivers right now, but every release up to this one has had pretty major issues - not what I'd call stable.
I place the blame on Microsoft for their "shoved out the door" release rather than the hardware manufacturers.
Well, just because you don't see the work doesn't mean it's not being done. I'm not a classically trained scientist, but it seems that producing a desired waveform (data out) from a generated square wave (clock pulse) is definitely work. To be sure, the desired waveform doesn't just happen by itself.
To try a different tack on it, consider the work to be flipping the polarity of electrical domains. It's definitely physical work, but the things moving are tiny, not composed of matter, and don't move in space. However, a spinning flywheel in a closed box doesn't appear to be doing any physical work either, but it is if you measure its rotation. So in a cpu, do you measure "electronic potential flips per second"? I don't know, but I disagree with "no acutual physical work is done".
Slashdot Mirror
While China-bashing is really popular these days, I wouldn't be so quick to say "they'll just copy Android". There are a LOT of phones in China that run Linux. Most of the Linux distributions used are homegrown by the manufacturer and have little consistency between them. I wouldn't be surprised if Baidu just bought one of the dev teams from a phone manufacturer and had them slap "Baidu" all over everything.
It would be a Good Thing if they could get it used phones from multiple manufacturers - there might be some hope of writing an app that would run on more than one brand of phone!
"Writing DSLs has been done for many years, but was largely an undocumented process until just recently."
Not to discount the review, but that's a bit misleading. There are plenty of books dealing with lex/flex and yacc/bison, which have been used for years to do the same things in a precompiled manner. .Net and Java "just recently" discovered this and have popularized the term DSL for it.
Yeah, you can use JackOSX - but that doesn't give you per-app volume out of the box. You'd have to have another tool also communicating with jack to do the amplification/attenuation. (I use Ardour but that's a little heady for a typical user - and no, I don't just use it as a fancy volume control)
The real deal-killer is that audio in Flash videos doesn't work properly through Jack. (On Snow Leopard at least) It's a known problem with no fix in sight. Oddly enough, HTML5 videos work flawlessly...
It's not just the SEC - a lot of very large companies and governmental agencies have policies against the use of any Open Source Software without an exhaustive legal review. After that review, the single piece of software reviewed, at the exact version reviewed, may be allowed for use. Personally, it seems like an organization's legal department could review a license and allow use of software governed by that license, but IANAL.
Part of the problem is that the legal review costs money. Likely, more money than the cost of purchasing a comparable product from the proprietary software world.
http://www.altiris.com/Products/SoftwareVirtualiza tionSolution.aspx
Microsoft attacking Symantec on another front?
I'm not here to doubt your experience, but I've got a Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro (2.16, 2gb) and run Parallels constantly. I develop in Visual Studio 2005, host a SQL Server 2005 database, and use it for my development hosting environment for an ASP.Net application. I also use it to play music (I still haven't found a suitable OS X foobar2000 replacement) and test pages in Windows Firefox and IE7. I have NEVER had a kernel panic.
I have run this setup for about 3 months, with Parallels running for 8 hours of every workday in that span.
The only bug I've found is that if a Coherence Windows window has focus, and I choose a "Recent" smb:// fileshare from the Apple menu, it'll freeze Parallels and I have to Force Quit, reboot Parallels. I still forget and shoot myself in the foot sometimes with that one.
I bought an ATI Radeon X1300, which said on the box "Vista ready". In fact, I bought it the day I installed Vista (sometime mid-December) because I knew the onboard video would be inadequate to get the "full Vista experience."
The driver download page has *just* lost the disclaimer (I can't remember the exact words, something like "don't use this on any system expected to provide any sort of productivity at all"). I am downloading the new drivers right now, but every release up to this one has had pretty major issues - not what I'd call stable.
I place the blame on Microsoft for their "shoved out the door" release rather than the hardware manufacturers.
Well, just because you don't see the work doesn't mean it's not being done. I'm not a classically trained scientist, but it seems that producing a desired waveform (data out) from a generated square wave (clock pulse) is definitely work. To be sure, the desired waveform doesn't just happen by itself.
To try a different tack on it, consider the work to be flipping the polarity of electrical domains. It's definitely physical work, but the things moving are tiny, not composed of matter, and don't move in space. However, a spinning flywheel in a closed box doesn't appear to be doing any physical work either, but it is if you measure its rotation. So in a cpu, do you measure "electronic potential flips per second"? I don't know, but I disagree with "no acutual physical work is done".