No, it's not. The class is never instantiated, which means it doesn't exist, and thus the functions can't be part of it.
If you want a class-restrictive language to yelp about, do smalltalk. It's nice, but it's still all-OOP.
And what about Ruby?
Still, if people put the methodology before them like a weapon of mass-disapprovement, they're going to get disappointed. En masse.
The old icelandic saying "árinni kennir illur ræðari" (a bad rower blames his oar) fits this discussion perfectly - a bad programmer blames the language.
...which are very probably (given the right analysis and access to accounting data).
Look at the gaming market of the Commodore Amiga in the late A1200 years. Piracy was at such a height that the piracy scene often had the games in wide distribution before the gaming companies, and in one case (If I recall correctly the company affected was Psygnosis) a game was actually released in the piracy scene _before_ it was released to market by the company (which implies a disgruntled employee).
If you want proof for actual piracy damage, you must look at the early years. This is what every of the drones thinking up their fictional damages are using for base, and the Amiga gaming companies may be the ones actually able to shed some light on the matter - especially those which were UK based.
I've spent more than two years working as an Apple Tech (sic) and I tell ya' the designs are crap. Everything is looks, nothing is for functionality, durability or value.
Apple sells the thickest chocolate coating out there, and still it's just turds inside. The thicker coating is just to hide the fact that the turds are even fouler than those of Packard Bell...
No, I'm not an Apple tech anymore. Meteorology and Computer Science prove to be a better way to spend your time. And yes, I'm getting rid of my Apple shit. Never had an iPhone of iPad. Never will.
If your'e thinking about the time when compiling a (pretty much any at all) GNU app on HPUX or AIX too like three weeks of code modifications and Makefile manipulations, then long gone are those days:)
OpenSolaris is generally not any harder than your (randomly selected) Linux distribution.
What is with Linux developers/distributors that the absolutely must "create their own" ?
Nicholas Negroponte has already announced that he's going for a diet-Linux on his tablet.
The WePad ( http://wepad.mobi/ ) is already at point of mass distribution, mixing Android and Linux in an innovative way.
Others are already doing diet versions of Linux for tablets (lenovo springs to mind)
Why can't they just cut the crap, get their forces together and create that ONE diet-Linux monolith GUI distro that not just debunks the "Linux always comes third" myth, but destroys the iTampon ?
I mean... it's not that hard. Talk to each other. Use Google and see if anyone already started a project. Take off your shades! (They look dorky when sitting in front of a computer screen anyway!)
However, having seen what Navision is like on the inside, I can assure you that auditing a giganormous pile of dog poo would be of a much higher interest.
Navision should have been scrapped on day 1.
Microsoft Money (which was actually Microsoft's own) was of much higher quality, and would have had better chance of becoming a real accounting package.
Oh... you know WHY Dynamics/Navision/Fjölnir uses a database ?
Because it's cheaper than having a massive amount of plaintext files open at once.
Yup. They don't use the goodness of the database at all. No relations, no normalization, and if at all possible, duplicate all data everywhere. Makes you want to puke.
This is actually NOT a piece of Microsoft software.
Microsoft Dynamics is what used to be known as "Navision Financials", and before that "Fjölnir". It's a piece of extremely crappy software written in Denmark and is based on a Pascal engine where everything is loosely glued together.
Fjölnir was I think the first financial system Denmark exported. Much to the horror of a neighbour country - Iceland, where Fjölnir became mainstream on HPUX and DOS.
Navision (the Windows version) was not a rewrite or redesign of Fjölnir as much as it was placing an abhorrent GUI on top of a ghastly DOS program.
Microsoft however got interested when they realised that all of the nordic countries were using Navision.
So in effect, I think this vulnerability may be traced all the way back to Fjölnir in the mid 90-s, and as such, blame the security on a sixpack of Carlsberg and one lazy Dane who didn't take security classes at school...
I mean... really... Caesar cipher ?
Can I laugh out loud now ?
Oh... I know how to spell i-d-1-0-t. Wonder if the original authors do...
You are quite right in your nit-picking. My choice of words could have been better, as could yours have been.
I never implied that existing sources were in any way closed. You may however by the BSD license choose to redistribute the software totally rebranded as "yours", and take full credit for it except for that footnote well hidden away, mentioning its true origin. And if you hanve no ethics, there's nothing at all stopping you, legally or otherwise.
On the other hand, to answer what YOU said:
"...confusing the new code with the one WE talk about" (capitalization mine). We ? New code ? YOUR selectivity in this discussion is only fit to create further confusion and spread even more of the U in FUD. There was no specific code being discussed. There was a mention of "Open Source" and its merits vs. "Closed Source". That a specific code was the issue is the fabrication of your mind.
So, for calling me dishonest (which is a new one), I'm not going tell you what I think of you. I'm just going to thank you for your ad-hominem and bid you a good (better?) day.
The BSD license allows you to take whatever *open* source that is bound by the license an make it closed.
What you are referring to is GPL, which by definition goes further than open source per se. Unlike BSD and other similar licenses, in GPL the "openness" is mandatory, and thus a restriction on your freedom. BSD poses no restictions other than the requirement of including the original authors license, and the mention in documentation that it was used.
This is by the way what Microsoft did with the BSD IP stack in Windows.
A decade ago I abandoned Oracle for PostgreSQL mostly because of their inherently stupid pricing policy and horrible scare-tactics. It seems that Oracle is going to keep crapping all over my thang. Only have I recently decided to give OpenSolaris a fighting chance in our company, patiently waiting for 2010.03, when Oracle takes a dump on all my ideas once again.
Gotta love it. They are getting there. As my "Nemesis".
True, but I considered two points before answering:
a) the sheer number of machines that I have serviced (professionally) and owned in the past 30 years (I won't count my childhood;-))
b) The fact that shit is exponentially more likely to hit the fan with your brand new computer than one of these old geezers, that is unless you can spot corrosion on the casing.
On the other hand, I did say the same thing in another reply in this thread - that is, use the serial port. Not because it's safer for the hardware in any way (it isn't - you may wire the serial cable incorrectly since it's almost certain that its wiring is non-standard as per RS-232C, there may be a substandard capacitor in the machine that blows when powered up... plenty of risk factors available) but mostly because he's S.O.L. when it comes to reading MFM/RLL hard drives on his modern whatchamacallit.
The latest MFM/RLL interface cards were ISA bus (not used anymore), EISA bus (not used either) and there were a very few PS/2 bus as well. I don't recall a single PCI MFM/RLL card.
(and yes.. the hard drive is most certainly not an IDE drive since the IDE standard was only concieved 3 years after the Altos 586 was marketed)
Actually, the floppy drive has a higher probability of working than the hard drive, although it will need some cleaning:)
The floppies can be anything... hard sector, soft sector... You'll have to verify it (xref the floppy mfg number to the manuals).
Given patience, you may even make hard sector floppies from old softsector ones.
The hard drive however is NOT an IDE drive. IDE wasn't designed until 1986, and wasn't widely marketed until a year or two later. The drive is either an MFM or RLL drive. Fifteen years ago you might have found an abundance of controllers that could handle these drives, but you'd still be hard pressed reading the data.
I recommend that you get the Altos up and running, and transfer via the serial port to another machine. You should be able to get 9600 baud, and with any luck (although I'd doubt it) you might be able to push it to 19200.
You must be an anonymous moron making such a claim.
#1) Linux _doesn't_ have all the best and greatest technology built in.
#2) It even does have some really crappy technology in between.
#3) guess what the "-/+ buffers/cache" line in the output of "free" means
#4) guess what the "buffers" and "cached" columns of "free" means
#5) guess what prefetch/preload is.
Sheez... anyone gets access to a keyboard these days:-|
I wish the original poster (and everyone else using these terms) would stop doing so.
There are no such thing as "bugs". There are programming errors and programmer mistakes.
And "bugs" (aka. programming errors) do absolutely not "creep into the code"!
This terminology has made for a bunch of apologetic imbecile programmers that blame their errors on the position of the stars or the foulness of their neighbours farts. They do by no means convey the reality of the situation.
I am a computer scientist, and I stand by every programming mistake I make.
If the game has a predefined mission (most FPS) a good measurement is if you can play through the game without losing your temper or caving in. One game that promised high playability was Tomb Raider Anniversary - but at one point (elevator before lava caves) it becomes tough and complex enough that only the best could finish it. So if you manage to actually finish the game, that's a good measurement of quality since finisheing a game gives the player a sense of accomplishment. Unlike the sense of utter failure he experiences if unable to finish (which should give a healthy negative score).
An example of a game with a very high h/$ score must be Unreal Tournament 2004. I still play the bugger, still try out new maps and still burn a couple of hours a week playing a relaxing onslought against the bots. I'd say the $/h ratio is somewhere in the area:)
1) The table UI relied on a stylus up to the point when the UMPC was introduced. At that point, Microsoft changed their guidelines about the TPC platform, allowinf for low-resolution screens (e.g. 800x600) and touch-panels instead of digitizers.
2) Correct - this has always been the fallacy of the TPC platform. To implement a groundbreaking hardware interface and accompany it with a interface built around a model 1968 input method is like incorporating the Ford Edsel into the space shuttle replacement program.
Your addressing of points:
1) No, they would be going for a hybrid. A touch-only interface renders the device half-useless, as you won't write much or draw using your finger, regardless of how much you use that pencil-sharpener on it. If you go with touch-only, you will have an oversized iPhone that will be the biggest flop since the square wheel.
2) You are just fishing here.
Your uses for a tablet:
1) Yes and no - depending on the resolution, colour gamut and amount of reflection, the device might range from piss poor to fairly good. It will however never match reading from a matte surface like e-paper (or regular paper).
2) No. As a PMP, a tablet will be way too big. Most people I know wouldn't even go with a iPod Touch, but rather with a nano. Size matters, and a PMP shouldn't be noticed, only heard.
3) You don't need a tablet for a browser - you can already do that with almost any home appliance that has an ethernet interface. To recreate the tablet as some über-browser is daft. And pricey.
And a little research wouldn't have hurt. The Dell XT2 XFR starts at $3599. The Lenovo X-series tablet starts at $1879 ($1509 with rebate). The Electrovaya Scribbler slate is at $2049. The Motion Computing J3400 starts at $2299.
So your $1000 mark is way off.
I do however expect Apple to price their iSlate/iTablet/iWhatever well below $1000. Apple, unlike Microsoft, hasn't just got the task of winning new ground, they also have the task of catching up where Microsoft actually was ahead. And in handwriting recognition, Microsoft is way ahead of Apple, and unless Apple recently acquired ParaGraph, Paragon or any other HWR software developer, I'd say they have a challenge to meet they didn't even foresee.
But, that's just speculation, and will be revealed at the end of the month.
Personally, I look forward to see what Microsoft has in store.
Um... and you think the parts just happen to exist in their usable form in the earths crust, eh?
We just dig up a usable wind turbine ?
Not so.
The carbon footprint of making one 60m high wind turbine is approximately the same as the carbon footprint said wind turbine will save in fossil fuel in its lifetime. The addition of pollutants like solvents, heavy metals and other bi-products adds insult to injury.
Best of all is that these products are all finite resources as well.
And with 2 bugs per line on average, your simple watchamacallit-program of 10000 lines still contains 200 severe bugs....
Oh, and by the way - valgrind doesn't find all memory leaks, so grow up, put your hand in front of your mouth, slap face, and stop calling people idiots.
Slashdot Mirror
First it was Facebook, then it was Twitter and finally YouTube.
Guess the guy's not going to have much of an on-line life...
No, it's not. The class is never instantiated, which means it doesn't exist, and thus the functions can't be part of it.
If you want a class-restrictive language to yelp about, do smalltalk. It's nice, but it's still all-OOP.
And what about Ruby?
Still, if people put the methodology before them like a weapon of mass-disapprovement, they're going to get disappointed. En masse.
The old icelandic saying "árinni kennir illur ræðari" (a bad rower blames his oar) fits this discussion perfectly - a bad programmer blames the language.
No you don't.
You only need a wrapper class.
public class Somestuff {
public static void doStuff() { doMoreStuff(); }
public static void doMoreStuff() { System.out.println("mo stuff!"); }
public static void main(String[] args) { doStuff(); }
}
Yes, ugly code. Yes, perfect sample. Zero class instantiations.
Actually, a large part of a system I wrote in Java does just this because I couldn't spare the overhead of object creation.
...which are very probably (given the right analysis and access to accounting data).
Look at the gaming market of the Commodore Amiga in the late A1200 years. Piracy was at such a height that the piracy scene often had the games in wide distribution before the gaming companies, and in one case (If I recall correctly the company affected was Psygnosis) a game was actually released in the piracy scene _before_ it was released to market by the company (which implies a disgruntled employee).
If you want proof for actual piracy damage, you must look at the early years. This is what every of the drones thinking up their fictional damages are using for base, and the Amiga gaming companies may be the ones actually able to shed some light on the matter - especially those which were UK based.
really has nothing to do with it?
I've spent more than two years working as an Apple Tech (sic) and I tell ya' the designs are crap. Everything is looks, nothing is for functionality, durability or value.
Apple sells the thickest chocolate coating out there, and still it's just turds inside. The thicker coating is just to hide the fact that the turds are even fouler than those of Packard Bell...
No, I'm not an Apple tech anymore. Meteorology and Computer Science prove to be a better way to spend your time. And yes, I'm getting rid of my Apple shit. Never had an iPhone of iPad. Never will.
If your'e thinking about the time when compiling a (pretty much any at all) GNU app on HPUX or AIX too like three weeks of code modifications and Makefile manipulations, then long gone are those days :)
OpenSolaris is generally not any harder than your (randomly selected) Linux distribution.
And yes, ZFS and Zones are... THE thing.
Period.
What is with Linux developers/distributors that the absolutely must "create their own" ?
Nicholas Negroponte has already announced that he's going for a diet-Linux on his tablet.
The WePad ( http://wepad.mobi/ ) is already at point of mass distribution, mixing Android and Linux in an innovative way.
Others are already doing diet versions of Linux for tablets (lenovo springs to mind)
Why can't they just cut the crap, get their forces together and create that ONE diet-Linux monolith GUI distro that not just debunks the "Linux always comes third" myth, but destroys the iTampon ?
I mean... it's not that hard. Talk to each other. Use Google and see if anyone already started a project. Take off your shades! (They look dorky when sitting in front of a computer screen anyway!)
covers all the bases this could ever touch...
*sigh* I'll end up with no hope for humanity.
True, a security audit was truly in order.
However, having seen what Navision is like on the inside, I can assure you that auditing a giganormous pile of dog poo would be of a much higher interest.
Navision should have been scrapped on day 1.
Microsoft Money (which was actually Microsoft's own) was of much higher quality, and would have had better chance of becoming a real accounting package.
Oh... you know WHY Dynamics/Navision/Fjölnir uses a database ?
Because it's cheaper than having a massive amount of plaintext files open at once.
Yup. They don't use the goodness of the database at all. No relations, no normalization, and if at all possible, duplicate all data everywhere. Makes you want to puke.
But then, so does Danish cheese...
This is actually NOT a piece of Microsoft software.
Microsoft Dynamics is what used to be known as "Navision Financials", and before that "Fjölnir". It's a piece of extremely crappy software written in Denmark and is based on a Pascal engine where everything is loosely glued together.
Fjölnir was I think the first financial system Denmark exported. Much to the horror of a neighbour country - Iceland, where Fjölnir became mainstream on HPUX and DOS.
http://www.snerta.is/images/stories/products/fjolnir.gif
Navision (the Windows version) was not a rewrite or redesign of Fjölnir as much as it was placing an abhorrent GUI on top of a ghastly DOS program.
Microsoft however got interested when they realised that all of the nordic countries were using Navision.
So in effect, I think this vulnerability may be traced all the way back to Fjölnir in the mid 90-s, and as such, blame the security on a sixpack of Carlsberg and one lazy Dane who didn't take security classes at school...
I mean... really... Caesar cipher ?
Can I laugh out loud now ?
Oh... I know how to spell i-d-1-0-t. Wonder if the original authors do...
You are quite right in your nit-picking. My choice of words could have been better, as could yours have been.
I never implied that existing sources were in any way closed. You may however by the BSD license choose to redistribute the software totally rebranded as "yours", and take full credit for it except for that footnote well hidden away, mentioning its true origin. And if you hanve no ethics, there's nothing at all stopping you, legally or otherwise.
On the other hand, to answer what YOU said:
"...confusing the new code with the one WE talk about" (capitalization mine). We ? New code ? YOUR selectivity in this discussion is only fit to create further confusion and spread even more of the U in FUD. There was no specific code being discussed. There was a mention of "Open Source" and its merits vs. "Closed Source". That a specific code was the issue is the fabrication of your mind.
So, for calling me dishonest (which is a new one), I'm not going tell you what I think of you. I'm just going to thank you for your ad-hominem and bid you a good (better?) day.
Thank you :-)
That was the comparison I was thinking of.
Apple makes you mentally obese.
(Yes, I use a Mac. Two of them actually. But I prefer OpenSolaris, Ubuntu, and for some tasks, Windows whatever).
Your third point is invalid.
The BSD license allows you to take whatever *open* source that is bound by the license an make it closed.
What you are referring to is GPL, which by definition goes further than open source per se. Unlike BSD and other similar licenses, in GPL the "openness" is mandatory, and thus a restriction on your freedom. BSD poses no restictions other than the requirement of including the original authors license, and the mention in documentation that it was used.
This is by the way what Microsoft did with the BSD IP stack in Windows.
Vaðlaheiðarvegavinnnuverkamannaskúrshliðarhurðarhengilásalyklakippuhringsvörumerkjaskinnpjatla.
Perfectly valid.
Arduino assisted mind-controlling television
and thought "Oh crap. We're there already?"
A decade ago I abandoned Oracle for PostgreSQL mostly because of their inherently stupid pricing policy and horrible scare-tactics. It seems that Oracle is going to keep crapping all over my thang. Only have I recently decided to give OpenSolaris a fighting chance in our company, patiently waiting for 2010.03, when Oracle takes a dump on all my ideas once again.
Gotta love it. They are getting there. As my "Nemesis".
True, but I considered two points before answering:
a) the sheer number of machines that I have serviced (professionally) and owned in the past 30 years (I won't count my childhood ;-))
b) The fact that shit is exponentially more likely to hit the fan with your brand new computer than one of these old geezers, that is unless you can spot corrosion on the casing.
On the other hand, I did say the same thing in another reply in this thread - that is, use the serial port. Not because it's safer for the hardware in any way (it isn't - you may wire the serial cable incorrectly since it's almost certain that its wiring is non-standard as per RS-232C, there may be a substandard capacitor in the machine that blows when powered up... plenty of risk factors available) but mostly because he's S.O.L. when it comes to reading MFM/RLL hard drives on his modern whatchamacallit.
The latest MFM/RLL interface cards were ISA bus (not used anymore), EISA bus (not used either) and there were a very few PS/2 bus as well. I don't recall a single PCI MFM/RLL card.
(and yes.. the hard drive is most certainly not an IDE drive since the IDE standard was only concieved 3 years after the Altos 586 was marketed)
Enough with the scaremongering. I have several computers older than the Altos that still perform, look and behave like new.
Actually, the floppy drive has a higher probability of working than the hard drive, although it will need some cleaning :)
The floppies can be anything... hard sector, soft sector... You'll have to verify it (xref the floppy mfg number to the manuals).
Given patience, you may even make hard sector floppies from old softsector ones.
The hard drive however is NOT an IDE drive. IDE wasn't designed until 1986, and wasn't widely marketed until a year or two later. The drive is either an MFM or RLL drive. Fifteen years ago you might have found an abundance of controllers that could handle these drives, but you'd still be hard pressed reading the data.
I recommend that you get the Altos up and running, and transfer via the serial port to another machine. You should be able to get 9600 baud, and with any luck (although I'd doubt it) you might be able to push it to 19200.
You must be an anonymous moron making such a claim.
:-|
#1) Linux _doesn't_ have all the best and greatest technology built in.
#2) It even does have some really crappy technology in between.
#3) guess what the "-/+ buffers/cache" line in the output of "free" means
#4) guess what the "buffers" and "cached" columns of "free" means
#5) guess what prefetch/preload is.
Sheez... anyone gets access to a keyboard these days
I wish the original poster (and everyone else using these terms) would stop doing so.
There are no such thing as "bugs". There are programming errors and programmer mistakes.
And "bugs" (aka. programming errors) do absolutely not "creep into the code"!
This terminology has made for a bunch of apologetic imbecile programmers that blame their errors on the position of the stars or the foulness of their neighbours farts. They do by no means convey the reality of the situation.
I am a computer scientist, and I stand by every programming mistake I make.
Hours per dollar is an excellent measurement.
If the game has a predefined mission (most FPS) a good measurement is if you can play through the game without losing your temper or caving in. One game that promised high playability was Tomb Raider Anniversary - but at one point (elevator before lava caves) it becomes tough and complex enough that only the best could finish it. So if you manage to actually finish the game, that's a good measurement of quality since finisheing a game gives the player a sense of accomplishment. Unlike the sense of utter failure he experiences if unable to finish (which should give a healthy negative score).
An example of a game with a very high h/$ score must be Unreal Tournament 2004. I still play the bugger, still try out new maps and still burn a couple of hours a week playing a relaxing onslought against the bots. I'd say the $/h ratio is somewhere in the area :)
You are both right and wrong there.
1) The table UI relied on a stylus up to the point when the UMPC was introduced. At that point, Microsoft changed their guidelines about the TPC platform, allowinf for low-resolution screens (e.g. 800x600) and touch-panels instead of digitizers.
2) Correct - this has always been the fallacy of the TPC platform. To implement a groundbreaking hardware interface and accompany it with a interface built around a model 1968 input method is like incorporating the Ford Edsel into the space shuttle replacement program.
Your addressing of points:
1) No, they would be going for a hybrid. A touch-only interface renders the device half-useless, as you won't write much or draw using your finger, regardless of how much you use that pencil-sharpener on it. If you go with touch-only, you will have an oversized iPhone that will be the biggest flop since the square wheel.
2) You are just fishing here.
Your uses for a tablet:
1) Yes and no - depending on the resolution, colour gamut and amount of reflection, the device might range from piss poor to fairly good. It will however never match reading from a matte surface like e-paper (or regular paper).
2) No. As a PMP, a tablet will be way too big. Most people I know wouldn't even go with a iPod Touch, but rather with a nano. Size matters, and a PMP shouldn't be noticed, only heard.
3) You don't need a tablet for a browser - you can already do that with almost any home appliance that has an ethernet interface. To recreate the tablet as some über-browser is daft. And pricey.
And a little research wouldn't have hurt. The Dell XT2 XFR starts at $3599. The Lenovo X-series tablet starts at $1879 ($1509 with rebate). The Electrovaya Scribbler slate is at $2049. The Motion Computing J3400 starts at $2299.
So your $1000 mark is way off.
I do however expect Apple to price their iSlate/iTablet/iWhatever well below $1000. Apple, unlike Microsoft, hasn't just got the task of winning new ground, they also have the task of catching up where Microsoft actually was ahead. And in handwriting recognition, Microsoft is way ahead of Apple, and unless Apple recently acquired ParaGraph, Paragon or any other HWR software developer, I'd say they have a challenge to meet they didn't even foresee.
But, that's just speculation, and will be revealed at the end of the month.
Personally, I look forward to see what Microsoft has in store.
Um... and you think the parts just happen to exist in their usable form in the earths crust, eh?
We just dig up a usable wind turbine ?
Not so.
The carbon footprint of making one 60m high wind turbine is approximately the same as the carbon footprint said wind turbine will save in fossil fuel in its lifetime. The addition of pollutants like solvents, heavy metals and other bi-products adds insult to injury.
Best of all is that these products are all finite resources as well.
So which heap do you want to dig from ?
And with 2 bugs per line on average, your simple watchamacallit-program of 10000 lines still contains 200 severe bugs....
Oh, and by the way - valgrind doesn't find all memory leaks, so grow up, put your hand in front of your mouth, slap face, and stop calling people idiots.