but I'm a Linux fan. i just got a bit enthusiastic, that's all. you really showed them netbsd users how good linux is. What say we have a group mass masturbation session?
"The ATRAC support may also be a flaw, since I don't give a damn about SONY's propritary crap, but it isn't a flaw, because you don't have to use it, MP3s work just fine."
Unless something has drastically changed, you _can't just ignore ATRAC_.
The MP3 support you refer to, doesn't store the MP3's directly on the minidisk. But rather, you use the OpenJukebox software provided by Sony, to convert the MP3 files to ATRAC format, before transfering them to the minidisk player, which in turn writes them to the disk.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm not too sure that I would describe this article as an examination of an "Enterprise application" on Linux. Enterprise applications are many things to many people, but rarely are they web servers. Enterprise servers are generally run complex applications running many complex operations. While I'm sure IBM's web server is very good, I don't think that it would be typical of an "Enterprise application".
My point is, while I'm sure this is a fantastic article examining performance improvements between Linux kernel versions, let's not pretend it's something that it isn't.
I beg to differ. Given the context of the original question, being the "Enterprise", I would argue that "thousands to tens of thousands for licensing" is actually fairly cheap. This isn't big big bucks by enterprise standards at all. It's chicken feed. For a third party company to provide a supported solution which keeps you in compliance, I'd bet Enterprise companies would pay far more.
I'm surprised someone hasn't pointed this out already. NetBSD's rc.d.has had support for dependencies for sometime. http://www.netbsd.org/guide/en/chap-rc. html
Additionally, there's an article here. http://www.daemonnews.org/200108/rcdsystem.html
I think that it is quite easy to take for granted something as good as freshmeat.net It is a pity that I am guilty though, as I didn't post a comment expressing how cool I thought it was, and that only the people who didn't like it got together and expressed their distaste. As for the person stating 'IF you can't take the heat...', obviously you are the worst type of hypocrite, for I certainly don't see your email address or any type of contact information for you to take responsibility for such a message.
Slashdot Mirror
I hear you brother. I've been working with Solaris, Tru64 and Linux since about 99. Solaris patching is painful.
Naughty, naughty.
Hasn't Mother told you before that swearing is rude?
You'll get a spanking when she finds out, you will.
but I'm a Linux fan.
i just got a bit enthusiastic, that's all.
you really showed them netbsd users how good linux is.
What say we have a group mass masturbation session?
You were trolling? Nnooooo
Well you got me, I've been trolled.
Man, you're just tooooooooo good.
Actually, I was trying to be funny and point out how ridiculous certain elements of that article were. :)
I promise not do it again
Obviously you didn't read the article very well.
It says that you need to rebuild your machine from scratch or buy a whole new computer.
What, you mean you didn't read the article?
"The ATRAC support may also be a flaw, since I don't give a damn about SONY's propritary crap, but it isn't a flaw, because you don't have to use it, MP3s work just fine."
Unless something has drastically changed, you _can't just ignore ATRAC_.
The MP3 support you refer to, doesn't store the MP3's directly on the minidisk. But rather, you use the OpenJukebox software provided by Sony, to convert the MP3 files to ATRAC format, before transfering them to the minidisk player, which in turn writes them to the disk.
I don't know about you guys, but I'm not too sure that I would describe this article as an examination of an "Enterprise application" on Linux.
Enterprise applications are many things to many people, but rarely are they web servers.
Enterprise servers are generally run complex applications running many complex operations.
While I'm sure IBM's web server is very good, I don't think that it would be typical of an "Enterprise application".
My point is, while I'm sure this is a fantastic article examining performance improvements between Linux kernel versions, let's not pretend it's something that it isn't.
I beg to differ.
Given the context of the original question, being the "Enterprise", I would argue that "thousands to tens of thousands for licensing" is actually fairly cheap. This isn't big big bucks by enterprise standards at all. It's chicken feed.
For a third party company to provide a supported solution which keeps you in compliance, I'd bet Enterprise companies would pay far more.
I'm surprised someone hasn't pointed this out already. NetBSD's rc.d.has had support for dependencies for sometime.. html
http://www.netbsd.org/guide/en/chap-rc
Additionally, there's an article here. http://www.daemonnews.org/200108/rcdsystem.html
I think that it is quite easy to take for granted something as good as freshmeat.net It is a pity that I am guilty though, as I didn't post a comment expressing how cool I thought it was, and that only the people who didn't like it got together and expressed their distaste. As for the person stating 'IF you can't take the heat...', obviously you are the worst type of hypocrite, for I certainly don't see your email address or any type of contact information for you to take responsibility for such a message.