this is a very good point, there is something seriously wrong with a EKG machine rebooting. however I would not blame MS as much as I would blame company that made such a faulty product, OS choices included. the product manager for leting this thing ship, and the hospital for buying and using something clearly defective.
Isn't VA Software's main business now sourceforge? I thought I remember that since they dropped the hardware business they decided that sourceforge was the future of the company, and therefor renamed the company to VA Software.
Now if thats gong to work out is entirely another story, and where i think you have a point.
I think you would be referring to an IPC, or Interprocess Procedure Call. Windows actually has a few different ways to do IPCs.
- Windows Messages - Named Pipes - Shared Memory, or Memory mapped file - Sockets
A lot of windows subsystems and programs use COM which is an abstraction above the above those transportation systems. COM can use any of those transports for its IPC communication. So my guess is that the RPC service is around to make sure all various kinds of COM communication will work.
Why they would need a port open for a consumer, like XP Home system is beyond me though.
Come on, you can't have it both ways. You're either pro government control or against it, you can't say "these people can't have freedom because i don't like them, but don't take away my freedom because people don't like me"
- Its new and yet very old, which makes it kina neat.
Cons:
- Games on a network can not use the current system settings, i.e. the correct network card is found and dhcp works. Or even better the phone number for the ISP has to be entered by hand
- Use of persistent media, either the app gets access to a current FAT, NTFS or ext2 partition or, well I don't know, but things as simple as saving games, game settings, network settings (see above) would not work.
- Auto updating - drivers or software without persistent media would be a bitch (see above)
Apple markets better, that's why I kind of love apple. Steve jobs can get up on stage and talk about a 800mhz computer and DVD burner likes it's the next coming of Christ. I'm not sure how he does it, but I think it has something to do with the idea that things are different in the apple world - that when you buy an apple you'll be different too, or at least be part of a crowd that's different, and that somehow makes it better.
It's been done before, and better. Pressplay, eMusic, MusicNow just to name a few have been around for a while. They offer high quality music downloads, the exact price and file format might be a little different, but a for-pay music download service this is nothing new.
It's only available on the Mac. Apple's current Market share is currently 2.1%, for comparison Dell's and HP's are 17.3% and 15.8% respectively. So what's the point? How does only offering a service to 2% of the possible customers seem like a good idea? The only reason that makes sense to me is not to sell songs for 99c, but rather sell people on the Mac, and the idea that you can do things you couldn't do before if you have Mac.
Why pay.99c when there are still p2p systems that let you download for free? The last nail on this services coffin is the fact that people can still download music for free very easily, and of perfectly good quality, often higher then what you'll pay for. Just before writing this post I downloaded three full cd's from soulseek at 192kbit at about 70k per second, why would I want to pay 30 dollars to do the same thing plus have to deal with DRM? I
Apple makes money selling Macs, not software. Apple is selling people on the idea that when you get a Mac you're joining an exclusive and therefore better world, that in some way your life will be better, even if that is the farthest thing from the truth.
Not to disagree with you, but to help clear something up, what do you mean when you say "Unix-style thread or process per client model". I've never seen any text that says it's a good idea to have 1-1 process/thread client model, whether on unix or windows. From my understanding its even worse to follow this modem on Linux as it threads are heavier.
While i think your tone is flaimbait, i agree that ogg isn't all that its made out to be. Two big problems with it is VBR only, this means you can't use make AVI's out of it easily as VFW (Video for windows) is CBR. The other is its lack of support for different bitrates and the generally low algorithm performance (it relies on large MDCTS).
P4 2.4Ghz/512mb DR/40GB/DVD/CDRW/USB 2.0/FireWire/56K/LAN/15" TFT for ~1200 No OS, no brand name. I have no idea if they are good are not, but they look decent.
Microsoft's security problems are going to destroy the company. The security problems are more important on the server end, because they customers will demand it, if not yet, soon.
Microsoft has been drudging uphill on the server market since the mid 90's with windows NT, since then they have only achieved a strong foothold in the mid-low end server market, which is now becoming seriously challenged by Linux.
While Linux may not be fundamentally more secure then NT it defiantly has the perception of being so because windows is a vastly larger target with there desktop dominance; every time one hears about a windows exploit that effects the perceived security of all windows, whether it was a client side IE exploit, or a server side only exploit.
I think Microsoft needs to put the fix on the security problem very quickly or suffer a serious erosion of people using Microsoft for critical applications, to do this I think that at a minimal they need to do the following:
Perception:
Put a hard line between the server and desktop market. i.e. drop the Windows name for the server end, call it something like TrustIx Enterprise, anything but windows, that was when there are security exploits for the desktop it doesn't go against the server end.
Make security the number feature requirement in all server products.
Hire a bunch of top security guys, make a big splash about being "unbreakable" like oracle did.
Technology:
Implement the latest security technology, like the new stack protection ideas in OpenBSD.
Be much more aggressive with auto updating, so that unpatched machines get automatically patched, all of the big headline worms on NT exploited holes that had been patched for over 6 months. Any server on the internet should by default auto-update patches.
Patches must be 99.99 correct, meaning that when auto-patching happens it does not break anything. Microsoft should offer a guaranty that if a patch does break something they will fix it; i.e. send people out and fix it for the company. And pay for any lost revenue to the patch.
Lax security costs Microsoft more then they can imagine, with a total saturation of the desktop market there is no-where to go but down. Their only hope for continued growth is expanding in other markets, with so much already invested on the server side it is crucial that security is given a number one priority, otherwise they will lose all that they have done and pull the whole company down with it.
i ment dead as far as support, microsoft is abandoning it and it will eventually die, hopefully sooner then latter - of course i didn't mean that no one used it, thats stupid; i mean cobal's still a top language for fucking god.
But I doubt this is true anymore as the VB we know and love is pretty much dead, it's VB.NET now, which is little more then a node to BASIC syntax for a.NET CLR.
Wow that's a pretty short guide. I think it came be summarized as:
"Welcome to OSX, based on unix, which means you get protected memory, threads and other stuff. This is new to Macs, which is why we're even bothering to mention it.
Their are a poop-load of different ways to develop for the Mac; Cocoa, Carbon, Java, Classic and even old school bsd/posix, but since Carbon is the only one that resembles Win32 we will talk about that one.
I'm going to mention that Win32 message are a lot like the old school messages, doesn't this make it easy?, oh and we have some type of form/resource editor n' stuff.
Now to read more here are some other articles you'll absolutely need to read before you can anything... you know what.. Why don't you just come to the developer conference: Worldwide Developers Conference sessions on Mac OS X (available for purchase)
If Moz is half as powerfull as IE it shouldn't be a problem, I've done some pretty amazing client side app development with IE and so has MS - actually i did it for MS, but thats another story.
The only issue i can see is if one wants to get out of the sandbox that is the browser, in those cases we used ActiveX objects, i dont know how possible something like that would be in Moz, at least with any portablity.
god this got modded up? i swear, all someone has to do is mention freenet on slasdot, sigh..
It's not like freenet. freenet searches work just like gnutella, randomly. it's a completely retarded way to organize a network. A distributed hash table like Circle solves this by organizing the network in a logical, storable and efficient way.
Basically compare a binary search vs. a random search, where the random search is like O(n) except you may just miss something.
I don't think that is true, clearly Microsoft has improved enormously in the last year or so as there are far more bug fixes. It's not as if Microsoft, now concerned with security started producing software that was more defective then before.
I think there are two variables at play; one being that security is a larger field and more people are looking for defects in Microsoft's code, and not just Microsoft, you'll notice that there are not more exploits in other operating systems, such as Linux and even OpenBSD. Two, Microsoft has been MORE responsive to fixing the bugs, XP now comes with an auto updater and sends fixes out automatically (if configured to do so).
It seems clear that Microsoft is more focused on security now then ever before, this doesn't mean we'll be hearing more about bugs, it means will be hearing about them more!
Reading the responses to this question really makes me think what a bunch of aragont loud mouths we have here. It reminds me of when you ask your user base for new features for 2.0, "well, uh... I'd like this and that". They THINK they know what they want, but I bet what they want probably isn't a good idea, nor right for the product.
Slashdot people have no idea what marketing even means, I knew from the get-go they would say "leave us alone and make a good product, preferably for free and we'll use it". Ya right, how would they even know about it then? From "Crossing the Chasm" I would recommend you find a small niche of developers, like game dev's or embedded system dev's and market to them specifically, give them all the features they want and maybe some they don't even know they want, become and industry standard in that market segment, then move onto an adjacent market segment. In this example the game dev market would be a "beachhead" segment, where the troops would land, they you go ahead and invade the next town and so forth.
And forget 90% of what these people said, except the free demo thing, cuz I really dig that.
Slashdot Mirror
this is a very good point, there is something seriously wrong with a EKG machine rebooting. however I would not blame MS as much as I would blame company that made such a faulty product, OS choices included. the product manager for leting this thing ship, and the hospital for buying and using something clearly defective.
Isn't VA Software's main business now sourceforge? I thought I remember that since they dropped the hardware business they decided that sourceforge was the future of the company, and therefor renamed the company to VA Software.
Now if thats gong to work out is entirely another story, and where i think you have a point.
-Jon
I think you would be referring to an IPC, or Interprocess Procedure Call. Windows actually has a few different ways to do IPCs.
- Windows Messages
- Named Pipes
- Shared Memory, or Memory mapped file
- Sockets
A lot of windows subsystems and programs use COM which is an abstraction above the above those transportation systems. COM can use any of those transports for its IPC communication. So my guess is that the RPC service is around to make sure all various kinds of COM communication will work.
Why they would need a port open for a consumer, like XP Home system is beyond me though.
-Jon
I think the legs are more like props then support. Judging from the video the dinosaur is really supported by the large cart it's carrying around.
it's still pretty slick looking though, but it would be much cooler if it really walked on its own.
-Jon
totally offtopic, but whats with the profanity filter? and how do i turn it off!
Come on, you can't have it both ways. You're either pro government control or against it, you can't say "these people can't have freedom because i don't like them, but don't take away my freedom because people don't like me"
-Jon
link to the Offical site, movies, about etc..
looks awesome IMO.
-Jon
Ok, I have some to add:
Pros:
- Its new and yet very old, which makes it kina neat.
Cons:
- Games on a network can not use the current system settings, i.e. the correct network card is found and dhcp works. Or even better the phone number for the ISP has to be entered by hand
- Use of persistent media, either the app gets access to a current FAT, NTFS or ext2 partition or, well I don't know, but things as simple as saving games, game settings, network settings (see above) would not work.
- Auto updating - drivers or software without persistent media would be a bitch (see above)
-Jon
Apple markets better, that's why I kind of love apple. Steve jobs can get up on stage and talk about a 800mhz computer and DVD burner likes it's the next coming of Christ. I'm not sure how he does it, but I think it has something to do with the idea that things are different in the apple world - that when you buy an apple you'll be different too, or at least be part of a crowd that's different, and that somehow makes it better.
.99c when there are still p2p systems that let you download for free? The last nail on this services coffin is the fact that people can still download music for free very easily, and of perfectly good quality, often higher then what you'll pay for. Just before writing this post I downloaded three full cd's from soulseek at 192kbit at about 70k per second, why would I want to pay 30 dollars to do the same thing plus have to deal with DRM? I
It's been done before, and better. Pressplay, eMusic, MusicNow just to name a few have been around for a while. They offer high quality music downloads, the exact price and file format might be a little different, but a for-pay music download service this is nothing new.
It's only available on the Mac. Apple's current Market share is currently 2.1%, for comparison Dell's and HP's are 17.3% and 15.8% respectively. So what's the point? How does only offering a service to 2% of the possible customers seem like a good idea? The only reason that makes sense to me is not to sell songs for 99c, but rather sell people on the Mac, and the idea that you can do things you couldn't do before if you have Mac.
Why pay
Apple makes money selling Macs, not software. Apple is selling people on the idea that when you get a Mac you're joining an exclusive and therefore better world, that in some way your life will be better, even if that is the farthest thing from the truth.
-Jon
Not to disagree with you, but to help clear something up, what do you mean when you say "Unix-style thread or process per client model". I've never seen any text that says it's a good idea to have 1-1 process/thread client model, whether on unix or windows. From my understanding its even worse to follow this modem on Linux as it threads are heavier.
-Jon
While i think your tone is flaimbait, i agree that ogg isn't all that its made out to be. Two big problems with it is VBR only, this means you can't use make AVI's out of it easily as VFW (Video for windows) is CBR. The other is its lack of support for different bitrates and the generally low algorithm performance (it relies on large MDCTS).
-Jon
I've seen this laptop on half.com, it's one hell of a deal:
P4 2.4Ghz/512mb DR/40GB/DVD/CDRW/USB 2.0/FireWire/56K/LAN/15" TFT for ~1200
No OS, no brand name. I have no idea if they are good are not, but they look decent.
-Jon
Microsoft has been drudging uphill on the server market since the mid 90's with windows NT, since then they have only achieved a strong foothold in the mid-low end server market, which is now becoming seriously challenged by Linux.
While Linux may not be fundamentally more secure then NT it defiantly has the perception of being so because windows is a vastly larger target with there desktop dominance; every time one hears about a windows exploit that effects the perceived security of all windows, whether it was a client side IE exploit, or a server side only exploit.
I think Microsoft needs to put the fix on the security problem very quickly or suffer a serious erosion of people using Microsoft for critical applications, to do this I think that at a minimal they need to do the following:
Perception:
Put a hard line between the server and desktop market. i.e. drop the Windows name for the server end, call it something like TrustIx Enterprise, anything but windows, that was when there are security exploits for the desktop it doesn't go against the server end.
Make security the number feature requirement in all server products.
Hire a bunch of top security guys, make a big splash about being "unbreakable" like oracle did.
Technology:
Implement the latest security technology, like the new stack protection ideas in OpenBSD.
Be much more aggressive with auto updating, so that unpatched machines get automatically patched, all of the big headline worms on NT exploited holes that had been patched for over 6 months. Any server on the internet should by default auto-update patches.
Patches must be 99.99 correct, meaning that when auto-patching happens it does not break anything. Microsoft should offer a guaranty that if a patch does break something they will fix it; i.e. send people out and fix it for the company. And pay for any lost revenue to the patch.
Lax security costs Microsoft more then they can imagine, with a total saturation of the desktop market there is no-where to go but down. Their only hope for continued growth is expanding in other markets, with so much already invested on the server side it is crucial that security is given a number one priority, otherwise they will lose all that they have done and pull the whole company down with it.
-Jon
i ment dead as far as support, microsoft is abandoning it and it will eventually die, hopefully sooner then latter - of course i didn't mean that no one used it, thats stupid; i mean cobal's still a top language for fucking god.
-Jon
But I doubt this is true anymore as the VB we know and love is pretty much dead, it's VB.NET now, which is little more then a node to BASIC syntax for a .NET CLR.
-Jon
Wow that's a pretty short guide. I think it came be summarized as:
"Welcome to OSX, based on unix, which means you get protected memory, threads and other stuff. This is new to Macs, which is why we're even bothering to mention it.
Their are a poop-load of different ways to develop for the Mac; Cocoa, Carbon, Java, Classic and even old school bsd/posix, but since Carbon is the only one that resembles Win32 we will talk about that one.
I'm going to mention that Win32 message are a lot like the old school messages, doesn't this make it easy?, oh and we have some type of form/resource editor n' stuff.
Now to read more here are some other articles you'll absolutely need to read before you can anything... you know what.. Why don't you just come to the developer conference: Worldwide Developers Conference sessions on Mac OS X (available for purchase)
-Jon
they don't offer it for free, and it's based of debian, which is all about being gpl.
-Jon
If Moz is half as powerfull as IE it shouldn't be a problem, I've done some pretty amazing client side app development with IE and so has MS - actually i did it for MS, but thats another story.
The only issue i can see is if one wants to get out of the sandbox that is the browser, in those cases we used ActiveX objects, i dont know how possible something like that would be in Moz, at least with any portablity.
-Jon
just to fill ya in, the new XP GUI is about 10% slower then the older 2k one. so aprox 500x faster then a top of the line OSX box.
god this got modded up? i swear, all someone has to do is mention freenet on slasdot, sigh..
It's not like freenet. freenet searches work just like gnutella, randomly. it's a completely retarded way to organize a network. A distributed hash table like Circle solves this by organizing the network in a logical, storable and efficient way.
Basically compare a binary search vs. a random search, where the random search is like O(n) except you may just miss something.
-Jon
I don't think that is true, clearly Microsoft has improved enormously in the last year or so as there are far more bug fixes. It's not as if Microsoft, now concerned with security started producing software that was more defective then before.
I think there are two variables at play; one being that security is a larger field and more people are looking for defects in Microsoft's code, and not just Microsoft, you'll notice that there are not more exploits in other operating systems, such as Linux and even OpenBSD. Two, Microsoft has been MORE responsive to fixing the bugs, XP now comes with an auto updater and sends fixes out automatically (if configured to do so).
It seems clear that Microsoft is more focused on security now then ever before, this doesn't mean we'll be hearing more about bugs, it means will be hearing about them more!
-Jon
You say that now, but when people talk about the merits of 'Linux', you'll talk about apache and openssh like it was all the same thing.
-Jon
Though i'm not sure how they got those numbers it does show an interesting trend. PHP has been on the decline this year.
Also this doesn't relate well to other non-apache based tech's like ASP or ColdFusion.
-Jon
Quick poll, is how relevant is PHP in the world of web development today?
Reading the responses to this question really makes me think what a bunch of aragont loud mouths we have here. It reminds me of when you ask your user base for new features for 2.0, "well, uh... I'd like this and that". They THINK they know what they want, but I bet what they want probably isn't a good idea, nor right for the product.
Slashdot people have no idea what marketing even means, I knew from the get-go they would say "leave us alone and make a good product, preferably for free and we'll use it". Ya right, how would they even know about it then? From "Crossing the Chasm" I would recommend you find a small niche of developers, like game dev's or embedded system dev's and market to them specifically, give them all the features they want and maybe some they don't even know they want, become and industry standard in that market segment, then move onto an adjacent market segment. In this example the game dev market would be a "beachhead" segment, where the troops would land, they you go ahead and invade the next town and so forth.
And forget 90% of what these people said, except the free demo thing, cuz I really dig that.
-Jon