I picked up one of these while I was working at Staples a few years back and have loved it ever since. The desk is designed so that it can be used either as a corner desk or a wall desk. It also 'ships flat' (i.e. unassebled), so you can customize the desk as you build it.
The desk naturally holds one or two CPUs (one on it's side) and one or two monitors (the lower can be up to 19", or 21" if loaded from behind - the moulding gets in the way from the front; the upper always holds up to 21"), but by leaving out a few pieces you can get it to hold 3 CPUs, two monitors, a switch, binder storage, CD storage, speakers and all manner of other handy things.
Check it out at O'Sullivan's web site - the second monitor goes where they have the printer, a second CPU can go under the right half of the desk, and if you leave the top flat, you can leave out the paper holder next to the monitor for a third. (The movable shelf they show the monitor sitting on needs removed for anything larger than 15")
HP's are more programmable. However, unless you intend to do the bulk of it yourself, the extra capacity goes to waste. Ever since a group of nerds discovered how to hack the TI-85 to run assembly code, there has simply been more available to TI users.
Similarly, all of your classmates will have TIs. TI-83s, actually. Most college courses only 'officially' support (i.e. the instuctions are written for) the TI-82 and 83, though some are also beginning to use the 85 and 86 as well. HPs are completely neglected.
There has also been considerably more effort put into learning how to more fully use TIs. If you go to the TI Calculator Project, you will find OSes, math and science tools, games, calendars, even plans for overclocking! The TI community has nearly bridged the gap between the Motorola 68000-based TI-89 and PDAs.
In conclusion, yes, I'm biased, but I think it's with good reason.
Now that the IPO period is over, what directions do you see VA Linux moving in? Are there projects that have been placed on the back burner until the IPO could 'make it possible'? If not, have projects been untertaken, or put into the planning stages, that wouldn't have been if the IPO hadn't taken place? Or is this just a calculated business move, with no plans beyond simple, steady growth as a company behind it?
Is it just me, or is it starting to seem as if opening the source to a high-profile project becoming a kind of status-symbol among commercial software vendors? I believe that anyone who has been watching/. over the past half year can see this trend - starting with companies close to the open-source community, like id and Netscape/Mozilla, we're now hearing open-source announcements from Wintel's largest [desktop] competitor! So does anyone else see this as a slightly worrying trend? If more and more companies open-source projects simply for the 'charity' associated with it, or simply as a snub to/distiction from Microsoft's now legally-defined anti-information policy regarding it's own software, with no intention of making use of open-source as a development tool, will it trivialize the projects and companies that have been open-source since their inception, that have driven the community forward? Call me paranoid if you like (it's probably justified), it just seems a little too convienent to me.
Firstly, who is going to be maintaining the code? If you're going to be the only programmer working on the project, the decision is easier, but if there are several people involved, you need to take overall effort into consideration. Secondly, which language is more familiar? To programmers who have worked primarily in strongly-typed languages (especially C/C++), trying to learn Perl is quite often a maddening process, whereas Java requires a much smaller mental shift. A Perl programmer trying to learn Java or C++, on the other hand, often finds it restrictive or unforgiving. Thridly, which do you prefer? Personal preference for one language or another can change the way you feel about a project, and how much time you're going to devote to making things 'just right' even if it's already 'good enough'. In fact, the only reason I've found to prefer one over the other on a purely funcional basis is that (IMHO, anyway) Java code is easier to share between programmers, because it tend to develop in better-defined blocks (let's hear it for OOP!).
And in the end, of course, trust your own experience above the opinions of others:)
On one level, I agree: if the sofware meets our expectations, should we really care what legalistic hoops the authors decided to jump through? On another level, however: GPL forever:)
Slashdot Mirror
I picked up one of these while I was working at Staples a few years back and have loved it ever since. The desk is designed so that it can be used either as a corner desk or a wall desk. It also 'ships flat' (i.e. unassebled), so you can customize the desk as you build it.
The desk naturally holds one or two CPUs (one on it's side) and one or two monitors (the lower can be up to 19", or 21" if loaded from behind - the moulding gets in the way from the front; the upper always holds up to 21"), but by leaving out a few pieces you can get it to hold 3 CPUs, two monitors, a switch, binder storage, CD storage, speakers and all manner of other handy things.
Check it out at O'Sullivan's web site - the second monitor goes where they have the printer, a second CPU can go under the right half of the desk, and if you leave the top flat, you can leave out the paper holder next to the monitor for a third. (The movable shelf they show the monitor sitting on needs removed for anything larger than 15")
HP's are more programmable. However, unless you intend to do the bulk of it yourself, the extra capacity goes to waste. Ever since a group of nerds discovered how to hack the TI-85 to run assembly code, there has simply been more available to TI users.
Similarly, all of your classmates will have TIs. TI-83s, actually. Most college courses only 'officially' support (i.e. the instuctions are written for) the TI-82 and 83, though some are also beginning to use the 85 and 86 as well. HPs are completely neglected.
There has also been considerably more effort put into learning how to more fully use TIs. If you go to the TI Calculator Project, you will find OSes, math and science tools, games, calendars, even plans for overclocking! The TI community has nearly bridged the gap between the Motorola 68000-based TI-89 and PDAs.
In conclusion, yes, I'm biased, but I think it's with good reason.
Well, I'll be. Looks like the son-of-a-bit finally gave up. Anyone belive this is the end of Billie's reign of terror? Anyone? I didn't think so.
At least he had the decency to inaugurate a puppet CEO...
Now that the IPO period is over, what directions do you see VA Linux moving in? Are there projects that have been placed on the back burner until the IPO could 'make it possible'? If not, have projects been untertaken, or put into the planning stages, that wouldn't have been if the IPO hadn't taken place? Or is this just a calculated business move, with no plans beyond simple, steady growth as a company behind it?
Is it just me, or is it starting to seem as if opening the source to a high-profile project becoming a kind of status-symbol among commercial software vendors? /. over the past half year can see this trend - starting with companies close to the open-source community, like id and Netscape/Mozilla, we're now hearing open-source announcements from Wintel's largest [desktop] competitor!
I believe that anyone who has been watching
So does anyone else see this as a slightly worrying trend? If more and more companies open-source projects simply for the 'charity' associated with it, or simply as a snub to/distiction from Microsoft's now legally-defined anti-information policy regarding it's own software, with no intention of making use of open-source as a development tool, will it trivialize the projects and companies that have been open-source since their inception, that have driven the community forward?
Call me paranoid if you like (it's probably justified), it just seems a little too convienent to me.
Firstly, who is going to be maintaining the code? If you're going to be the only programmer working on the project, the decision is easier, but if there are several people involved, you need to take overall effort into consideration.
:)
Secondly, which language is more familiar? To programmers who have worked primarily in strongly-typed languages (especially C/C++), trying to learn Perl is quite often a maddening process, whereas Java requires a much smaller mental shift. A Perl programmer trying to learn Java or C++, on the other hand, often finds it restrictive or unforgiving.
Thridly, which do you prefer? Personal preference for one language or another can change the way you feel about a project, and how much time you're going to devote to making things 'just right' even if it's already 'good enough'.
In fact, the only reason I've found to prefer one over the other on a purely funcional basis is that (IMHO, anyway) Java code is easier to share between programmers, because it tend to develop in better-defined blocks (let's hear it for OOP!).
And in the end, of course, trust your own experience above the opinions of others
On one level, I agree: if the sofware meets our expectations, should we really care what legalistic hoops the authors decided to jump through? On another level, however: GPL forever :)