Um... My brain is working slowly today. I want to summarize your post.
The Mac server can't be rooted because... it has no root.
And there aren't any command line utilties because... it has no command line.
And... this means that the machine is secure.
Ok, some challanges for you (simple tasks to perform, that I do all the time).
1 - My server box is headless (no monitor/keyboard). That's because I am never PHYSICALLY there. Yet, I update web pages, email services, add new forms, etc. I can even update the OS remotely. Can you do this on the Mac? Serious question, I'd like to know the answer (I SUSPECT its NO, but I do want to know).
2 - I can provide additional services on my servers. (I run a simple collaboration server). If I need to, I can add additional services (again, remotely, because these machines DON'T have monitors/mice/keyboards).
3 - If I need more compute power (and I occasionally do), I use DHCP and TFTP to load OS's into diskless and headless boards. I can then control these nodes remotely as well (good for LAME, video transcoding, other stuff). Does Mac offer anything like this?
And, please restrict your answer to Mac OS prior to OS X. I am aware that OS X will do these things, which is why I may finally get a Mac.
Due to the nature of trying to offer services that can potentially be general across the I'net, I have to be careful about security. I could offer NO services, and be fully secure, but that wouldn't be anywhere near as useful.
If Mac OS (not OS X) can offer these services, and is as secure as you say, I WILL buy as many as I can get my hands on. Really. I haven't been shown how yet. I presume that either (1) I am ignorant, or (2) It's not possible. If it isn't possible, then the Mac "solution" isn't very useful. I don't want to have to run home to update web pages, open up MP3 playback from home to my work, add email filters, monitor collaboration services, or check on the system health.
You know, I don't see how this is bad. First, I have to deal with all of these "Kazakites" sucking up bandwidth to do mostly illegal stealing of copyrighted material. This causes my bandwidth supplier to freak, and therefore causes me grief. In exchange, the "Kazakites" are going to let me look at personal information; that I can possibly sell or use. Seems fair to me. Maybe I download their cache logs, emails, and personal correspondence, and sell the "family data". If only I had a low enough moral sense! I can't get my mind wrapped around the concept of actually installing Kaza (sp?) yet. Maybe I WILL install it, solely for the purpose of data mining.
What is interesting here (and this is something I find REALLY funny), is that using this Kaza thingy for mining personal information is actually legal, whereas using it to share music and videos isn't.
Its NOT ok for Microsoft, because MS has a monopoly. SUN doesn't have a monopoly. They may sell the most, but certainly IBM, HP, SGI, etc. make the playing field a whole lot more interesting.
This pisses me off. I have purchased copies of Led Zepplin on vinyl, and CDs, and have a collected CD box set.
Yes, I ripped it, and am now listening to LZ from work, from a private server I set up at home. I guess I could set up a stereo in my cube, but I have a functional computer. What does this save me? Having to drag records around. I could put a load of CDs and records into my car trunk, kind of silly though.
Practically, I *didn't* listen to the material at work *until* I was able to digitize it. And had broadband at home.
Now, explain how this is costing "artists and agents millions if not billions in lost revenue".
If this passes, I have NO NEED FOR BROADBAND. So I'll cancel that service. And I'll stop listening to music at work.
Not gonna fly without some additional support. I can BUILD an ADC from very simple components. Of course, *they* could remove the ability to write code for micro-controllers, make circuit design a restricted thing, make transistors restricted. And what about the lowly resistor?
I guess my hobby is about to become illegal, simply because it *could* be used to produce equipment that *could* be used to make an unauthorized copy of someones media.
Ah, well, if the ADC chip becomes *copy disabled*, I'll be delighted to post plans for your very own discrete ADC. As long as we have the processor chips...
Take the DAC. Even simpler. Just a high quality resistor network, and an amplifier. And what is Hollywood going to do about that? Let me guess -- transistors are going to have to have a COP in them as well...
But, more practically, I could build this, but if Microsoft keeps the OS monopoly, I expect that non-Microsoft certified drivers won't be allowed. Oh, the current Windows version already complains about non-authorized drivers?
If the OS won't load the driver, someone will try to run the software in "real" mode on those Intel processors. Can't have that, DOS mode will have to be curtailed. Oh, its already happened in the current Windows release?
I don't want this to be an anti-Microsoft rant, but the success of Hollywood's evil intention is based on an OS monopoly. And that's Microsoft now.
I guess the only answer is to stick to open software. Become a "pirate" and a "hacker". Insist on OS software where YOU have control. I don't care if its Linux, a DOS clone, or ShinyNewOS2000, as long as its open.
How the hell does Hollywood expect to stuff the Genie back into the bottle? Wouldn't this be like refusing to sell fertilizer because it *could* be used to make explosives that *could* be used to blow up a building? This shouldn't stand, but take no chances.
Fascinating... like looking at a disaster is hypnotizing for some...
Ok, let me get this straight - a school that (typically) NEVER upgrades the OS is now going to pay an additional $18US a year to Microsoft for the priviledge of not upgrading. And... students will get to use (drum roll) MS Office Pro to do reports for an additional fee of $24US a year. And (big drum roll) development tools are valued the same as "Magic School Bus".
Wow, I wish I had thought of this. $42US a year per seat for NOTHING. Every year. Even if the machines aren't touched. Ok, here's the deal, send ME $100 a year FOR YOUR ENTIRE SCHOOL, and I'll see to it that the value of PI doesn't change. Ok?
Hey, if you are actually into Java or Visual Studio.NET, great.
Me, I'm into writing documents, um... that's words, with (maybe) a bit of formatting, um...
Actually, CPM/80 with WordStar is about all I really need, and BOY is it fast on my current 'puter. Only thing is, everyone else seems to like *ffice style products.
Me, I'm content with WordStart, vi on unix, I use troff (runoff under CP/M). Works good. Fast, _and_ Cheap.
Upgrades? Maybe not in this lifetime (I could care less). Standards? Sure, every is ASCII or close to it. WSWG? Nope, but if I go so far as to ASK for (say) Centuury Schoolbook, 11pt on 12pt lead, I EXPECT that it will be delivered.
Of course I have a "legal right" to play a DVD that I purchased wherever I want to.
I ALSO have the right to (1) sell it to someone else (2) break it into little pieces, (3) use it as a window decoration. (3) ANYTHING I WANT TO, EXCEPT FOR COPYING IT.
Got that? We are NOT talking about "fair use" here, just MY use. Different topic.
DMCA wants to REMOVE my rights to (and I am not talking "fair use" here) do WHATEVER THE F* I want with the material. For myself.
Personally, I buy books -- not to read them, oh no, I put them under a microscope to look at the intricate patterns in the paper. That's MY right fer f*sakes. Of course, that is COMPLETELY illegal in the US of A now, when we are talking about DVDs.
The airwaves are a public commons. If you put it there, and I take it, well, you had NO expectation of privacy.
Cable wants to be a common carrier. And, where I live anyway, its a monopoly. Certain rules apply.
So you wake the fuck up, it is legal. Of COURSE the "networks" want to control how, what, and where I watch the feed. They would love to feed advertising. But... my cable company pays for programming, and some is supplied for a cost of $0. If that model doesn't work, ITS NOT MY FAULT.
Remember, I pay $20 a month for cable tv, and $40 a month for broadband. The gov takes around 8 bucks in taxes. I PAY FOR THIS. And, "copying" notwithstanding (no, I don't share copyrighted material with anybody), I HAVE PURCHASED THE MATERIAL AND I WANT TO USE IT WHEN I WANT TO. This isn't a question of "fair use", by the way. Fair use means I copy material for others, breaking copyright, but am allowed. Not happening, I don't do that. Read my lips: I BOUGHT THE MATERIAL, AND AM USING IT MYSELF.
Now, the cable provider charges between $20 and ?? for the service. "Basic" cable (the so-called "free" networks, plus some specialty stations) is at the bottom, then you can add "premium" content for an additional amount. Given that the delivery cost is the same for ANY of the content, the additional cost must be going for the content. Got it?
So, people are paying for the content. Given that fact, why is there still advertising? Because the networks think the "free with advertising" sponsorship model works?
And that's it. Now, I don't live in the good 'ole US of A, but most of this applies there as well.
If the "free" tv advertising model ain't working, well then, fix that.
Alternatives:
1 - make commercials compelling 2 - fund raising drives 3 - sell the material to cable providers 4 - get out of the business 5 - product placement
Making templates to speed up code seems like a marvelous thing. Of course, if you REALLY need this for performance, you are probably targetting embedded systems, where the code bloat and testing become prohibitive. So, what's the real difference between C++/STL and C/M4? Not a hell of a lot, really (really, truly, equivalent "type checking" can be done in M4). The syntax is just as ugly, and the tools are worse.
Of course, templates (STL) are ANTI-object oriented programming. No factoring, and I must regenerate code. Wait a minute, if the language actually supported types as objects, then it wouldn't matter, the OOP system would take care of this for me... and it would, except that C++ programmers (generally) seem far too concerned about "performance".
Another strike against C++ is the SIZE of the language. A good programming language reference manual should be expressible in 12 to 20 pages. That's it. Anything more cannot be reasonably used. C, Smalltalk, Eiffel, good. C++, ADA, Perl, bad. If I can't read it, I can't make use of it, and its probably easier to rewrite.
If you like C and want OOP, use Objective C. If you like C and want templates/STL, use M4.
And -- your experience with M4 can be leveraged. Get this concept: learning M4 (TRAC or one of the general macro/string languages) leverages BETWEEN languages. I recommend M4, not because its better, but because its everywhere. And, you can use it with C, Assembler, C++, etc.
What about the GPL drives the cost of software to 0?
Yes, I can look at cheapbytes, etc. but I still don't get it...
I can make a modification to GPL software, or put software under GPL, and sell it -- and I am then obligated to pass certain rights to the buyer. The buyer must have the source, and must have the right to redistribute as the buyer sees fit. Now, if the buyer has a stake in ME (say, to provide upgrades and service), the buyer will NOT use those rights.
Example: I sell a modified GNU tool chain for an embedded process for 10,000. Now, the customer wants me to continue the support. That customer certainly has the RIGHT to do ANYTHING the GPL allows with the code, but can be convinced not to (so they don't loose the business advantage that the code gave them). The customer is PROTECTED in case I go out of business, but as long as we have a relationship, everything works.
Of course the product cannot be a commodity. If it is, then I must sell service instead. Microsoft's main code base is commodity level, and most GPL software is as well (eg. Windows, Linux, MS Office, KOffice, etc.). I think the GPL is VERY painful to MS, simply because they don't have a service model. And they don't want to open up their products to allow the addition of specific, valuable utility.
The quote was that to be pure OO, everything must be an object, and derived from one single base type.
"Class" was not mentioned at all! You don't need classes to have OOP. Primitive types *are* a problem, because they cannot be re-defined.
Classic example:
What is the result of
x = 1 / 3
y = x + x + x
print x
in a pseudo-code format. Note that the variables are not declared here...
In C, the answer given would be either 0, or 0.99999... both of which are wrong!
You compile this code, and then later someone discovers this bug. A replacement for the type ("class" or behaviour) of variables is made, putting in something which behaves like a number, but does things using rational arithmetic. Now the answer is 1, which is expected. You shouldn't have to redo the original software.
Now, I am a stickler, and I like smalltalk, because I can make the substitution WITHOUT recompiling the original code. This is important if I am working with someone elses code. But, I am willing to recompile. But if native types are inserted, it becomes difficult to modify the code. And for what? A bit of performance?
No, the idea of "class" isn't needed, but the ability to override EVERYTHING is important.
You can do more with your PC now than you could with a 486dx2 w/ 8meg RAM?
Ok, what do you do now, and what did you do then (let's have the goods here, I DON'T actually believe you).
Next, you argue that Windows is imposing HIGHER requirements (to run, I assume), thus making PCs faster... How about ignoring the upgrades, and utilizing the system for your own needs? Now... DOS 5.0 (Microsoft) starts in under 3 seconds on a Pentium 150 (lets use this here ANTIQUE POS laptop as a reference). Windows 3.1 starts in 3 seconds. Hows that for efficiency? I bet I FINISH my letter BEFORE you BEGIN yours. (get this, we are both using Microsoft s'ware!).
Better not give the students email, or they may discover a web/email gateway.
Better stay on top of the sites with banner ads... the students may be able to click offsite.
Better disable everything...
Oh, hell, just don't provide the internet as a resource at all. The kids are smarter than we are, and will find a way. We'ed better cut off everything.
I _never_ said "LUser", or made the claims that people are "stupid or that they don't want to learn". Really. I have made posts that refer to "Windows" as "Windoze", because it is my professional opinion that Windows (up to Windows 98) is a piss-poor f*cked up excuse for an Operating System. However, my wife uses Windows 98, and I _do_ administer for her. Yes, my wife has _complete_ control over what her computer can or cannot do. My job is merely to facilitate.
And, you just provided evidence for my case. _You_ administer your parents computer. And why is that? [A small hint -- computers are more complicated than cars, and we generally defer to auto mechanics].
And if you have the role of administrator, it is _your_ responsibility to ensure that computer services are delivered appropriately.
Did you configure your parents computer to encrypt email? If not, why not? And, what about attacks on your parents computer system to aquire the private key sets? Other security issues? [see second paragraph].
First, repeat the phrase "It is _not_ the user's job to administrate". Over and over until it sinks home.
So who's job is it? It's either the "geeks" job, or its the software designers job.
If the task is left to the software designer, we end up with "bloat-ware". The designer had to _anticipate_ every possible usage and interconnection, and then had to present that as "user-friendly". Not an easy task, and (in my humble opinion) not very doable.
If its left to the "geek", you want a set of small tools that can be assembled for the user to accomplish the desired function. A set of "cookbook" recipies for handling administration.
This is the crux of the Windows/Unix philosophy difference. I am one of those "geeks" and I do administer for other people. I find it difficult to administer if they insist on running Windows, but I do it anyway. It's my role. Others in the group are far better at gardening, auto mechanics, etc., but I am the technology guy.
And yes, I update, de-spam, automatically encrypt emails, for my clients, and all they have is a pleasant computer experience. The "lots of switches" problem doesn't affect my clients, but a proliferation of slightly different GUI programs on Windows would drive *me* completely nuts. The hardware and OS are merely an means to an end and as such shouldn't interfere with the USE of the computer.
One such use is PRIVATE communication. The programs are available, and they can be hooked up to accomplish this goal. My clients do understand "physical security", either of the system, or some media. And that's _all_ they have to understand. If they ask, I am willing to disclose details, but generally the only question (after trust has been established), is "does it work?".
Linux is _more_ ready for the home user than
Windows is...
Each user does need a "sysadmin" or a person
who does "sysadmin" duties. Attempting to
administer your own box without knowledge is
not a terrifically good idea. If there are
people in the neighbourhood who can help with
the administration of a Windows system, Windows
may be a good choice. If the "sysadmin" is remote,
Linux is a better choice.
Many users do _not_ play the latest whiz-bang
games (certainly my grandma doesn't). My grandma
needs a reliable information appliance that:
1 - works reliably
2 - is easy to use
3 - is crash resiliant
4 - software shouldn't cost more than hardware.
Linux fits the bill nicely. Point 1: Linux 2.2
is stable, Windows XP may be stable. 2: Windows
is point and click; so is KDE. I can configure
KDE to "protect" grandma from herself, I can't
do this with Windows 9x, maybe with XP... 3:
Linux offers logging file systems. Last time I
checked (Windows 98), the check-disk procedure
for a 60GB drive took in excess of 1/2 hour.
Maybe XP solves this... Also, Linux handles
application crashes more gracefully than Windows
9x. 4: Here is the big item. Grandma uses a
Pentium 266, purchased second hand, _without_
a Windows license. Putting on Windows 9x (XP)
would run around $200CDN, Office would be another
chunk of money. The entire machine is worth
$600CDN. Can't really justify the cost of Windows
here, given Linux does a _better_ job than
Windows 9x (not sure about XP though).
I remotely administer this box on behalf of
Grandma, and she is quite happy with the result.
Yes, the "why not Windows/Office" question has
come up, because that's what the neighbours use,
and that's what the grandkids _want_ to use
(for those shiny games), but the cost issue put
the kibosh on the idea.
Reproduced below is the relevant part of your Comcast service agreement. It explains that Comcast typically doesn't monitor for abuse. Not only is NAT not allowed (no sharing of service), but also you are not allowed to telnet or ssh back to your computer as well. For any of the prohibited activities, you need to have permission in writing. Comcast does reserve the right to pry at your packets to look for such abuses.
Ratboy
-----
Comcast High-Speed Internet Service network residential customers may not resell, share, or otherwise distribute the Services or any portion thereof to any third party without the written consent of Comcast High-Speed Internet Service. For example, you cannot provide Internet access to others through a dial up connection, host shell accounts over the Internet, provide email or news service, or send a news feed. You may not use the Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service for commercial purposes. The Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service offering is a consumer product designed for your personal use of the Internet. For example, the service does not provide the type of security, upstream performance and total downstream throughput capability typically associated with commercial use.
You may not run a server in connection with the Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service, nor may you provide network services to others via the Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service. The Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service includes personal WebSpace accounts for publishing personal Web pages. Examples of prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, running servers for mail, http, ftp, irc, and dhcp, and multi-user interactive forums. For information about @Work products for commercial or network services purposes, including commercial-grade remote LAN access, please see http://work.home.net.
Violation of Acceptable Use Policy
Comcast High-Speed Internet Service does not routinely monitor the activity of accounts for violation of this Policy. However, in our efforts to promote good citizenship within the Internet community, we will respond appropriately if we become aware of inappropriate use of our Services. Although Comcast High-Speed Internet Service has no obligation to monitor the Services and/or the network, Comcast High-Speed Internet Service and it various affiliates and partners reserve the right to monitor bandwidth, usage, and content from time to time to operate the Services; to identify violations of this Policy; and/or to protect the network and Comcast High-Speed Internet Service users.
No, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to use
such dead code? All of its ideas, innovations,
and advances are now beyond anyones use for this
lifetime, possibly the next. Bow your head in
silence for the loss.
Of COURSE the world is bigger
than computer science, but there will be no
contribution to that science from proprietary
software. You loose. And what does Linux have
to do with this? What does programming have to
do with this?
Linux (the OS) HAS design. The purpose of an
OS is to manage resources. Linux does this,
and doesn't have much else. And, its design
is the fairly elegant one from the Multics/Unix
tradition.
Of course *Linux* doesn't have "a coherent
set of features that are based on a sober
evulation (sic) of the average user's needs."
By god, it is an Operating System. Since an
Operating System manages resources, what does
a "user OS" do? Manage users? Thank you, I
prefer NOT to be managed by my tools.
So, is the Word Processor part of the OS?
What about my needs (queueing theory, modeling).
Of course Linux (Unix) HAS consistency in the
Operating System. A lot more than MS, or
Apple MAC OS. Haven't you heard of standards?
(POSIX, etc.). How about peer review? I have
Of course Linux has predictability. We are
NOT talking about applications here.
And then you go off on a "free software" rant.
"Most free software is designed by programmers
who, on the whole, have little empathy for the
average user.". No shit sherlock.
IF YOU WANT ME TO GUSSY UP SOME "FREE" SOFTWARE,
PAY ME. Well, then its no longer free, is it?
If you can get 50 of your chums together, and
each can pony up $1000 CDN, please see me
(that is the price of Windows and MS Office,
and some utilities). I would be absolutely
DELIGHTED to make a Linux box for you, with
applications, to EXACTLY your specification.
Now, these programmers how produce free
software are a LOT more empathetic to you
that you seem to be. The are GIVING you
a software base. If you want to gussy it
up, they are ALLOWING you to do that. Please
explain how this is NOT good for the user.
Hell, that's why you BUY commercial software,
isn't it?
How the hell did this post get mod'd up to
5? Grumble...
Slashdot Mirror
Um... My brain is working slowly today. I want to summarize your post.
The Mac server can't be rooted because... it has no root.
And there aren't any command line utilties because... it has no command line.
And... this means that the machine is secure.
Ok, some challanges for you (simple tasks to
perform, that I do all the time).
1 - My server box is headless (no monitor/keyboard). That's because I am never PHYSICALLY there. Yet, I update web pages, email services, add new forms, etc. I can even update the OS remotely. Can you do this on the Mac? Serious question, I'd like to know the answer (I SUSPECT its NO, but I do want to know).
2 - I can provide additional services on my servers. (I run a simple collaboration server). If I need to, I can add additional services (again, remotely, because these machines DON'T have monitors/mice/keyboards).
3 - If I need more compute power (and I occasionally do), I use DHCP and TFTP to load OS's into diskless and headless boards. I can then control these nodes remotely as well (good for LAME, video transcoding, other stuff). Does Mac offer anything like this?
And, please restrict your answer to Mac OS prior to OS X. I am aware that OS X will do these things, which is why I may finally get a Mac.
Due to the nature of trying to offer services that can potentially be general across the I'net, I have to be careful about security. I could offer NO services, and be fully secure, but that wouldn't be anywhere near as useful.
If Mac OS (not OS X) can offer these services, and is as secure as you say, I WILL buy as many as I can get my hands on. Really. I haven't been shown how yet. I presume that either (1) I am ignorant, or (2) It's not possible. If it isn't possible, then the Mac "solution" isn't very useful. I don't want to have to run home to update web pages, open up MP3 playback from home to my work, add email filters, monitor collaboration services, or check on the system health.
I am looking forward to being educated here.
Ratboy.
You know, I don't see how this is bad. First, I have to deal with all of these "Kazakites" sucking up bandwidth to do mostly illegal stealing of copyrighted material. This causes my bandwidth supplier to freak, and therefore causes me grief. In exchange, the "Kazakites" are going to let me look at personal information; that I can possibly sell or use. Seems fair to me. Maybe I download their cache logs, emails, and personal correspondence, and sell the "family data". If only I had a low enough moral sense! I can't get my mind wrapped around the concept of actually installing Kaza (sp?) yet. Maybe I WILL install it, solely for the purpose of data mining.
What is interesting here (and this is something I find REALLY funny), is that using this Kaza thingy for mining personal information is actually legal, whereas using it to share music and videos isn't.
Ratboy.
Its NOT ok for Microsoft, because MS has a monopoly. SUN doesn't have a monopoly. They may sell the most, but certainly IBM, HP, SGI, etc. make the playing field a whole lot more interesting.
Ratboy.
This pisses me off. I have purchased copies of Led Zepplin on vinyl, and CDs, and have a collected CD box set.
Yes, I ripped it, and am now listening to LZ from work, from a private server I set up at home. I guess I could set up a stereo in my cube, but I have a functional computer. What does this save me? Having to drag records around. I could put a load of CDs and records into my car trunk, kind of silly though.
Practically, I *didn't* listen to the material at work *until* I was able to digitize it. And had broadband at home.
Now, explain how this is costing "artists and agents millions if not billions in lost revenue".
If this passes, I have NO NEED FOR BROADBAND. So I'll cancel that service. And I'll stop listening to music at work.
Stop assuming that I am a criminal.
Ratboy.
Not gonna fly without some additional support. I can BUILD an ADC from very simple components. Of course, *they* could remove the ability to write code for micro-controllers, make circuit design a restricted thing, make transistors restricted. And what about the lowly resistor?
I guess my hobby is about to become illegal, simply because it *could* be used to produce equipment that *could* be used to make an unauthorized copy of someones media.
Ah, well, if the ADC chip becomes *copy disabled*, I'll be delighted to post plans for your very own discrete ADC. As long as we have the processor chips...
Take the DAC. Even simpler. Just a high quality
resistor network, and an amplifier. And what is Hollywood going to do about that? Let me guess -- transistors are going to have to have a COP in them as well...
But, more practically, I could build this, but if Microsoft keeps the OS monopoly, I expect that non-Microsoft certified drivers won't be allowed. Oh, the current Windows version already complains about non-authorized drivers?
If the OS won't load the driver, someone will try to run the software in "real" mode on those Intel processors. Can't have that, DOS mode will have to be curtailed. Oh, its already happened in the current Windows release?
I don't want this to be an anti-Microsoft rant, but the success of Hollywood's evil intention is based on an OS monopoly. And that's Microsoft now.
I guess the only answer is to stick to open software. Become a "pirate" and a "hacker". Insist on OS software where YOU have control. I don't care if its Linux, a DOS clone, or ShinyNewOS2000, as long as its open.
How the hell does Hollywood expect to stuff the Genie back into the bottle? Wouldn't this be like refusing to sell fertilizer because it *could* be used to make explosives that *could* be used to blow up a building? This shouldn't stand, but take no chances.
Ratboy.
If you want to know how Solaris VM works, get
the book:
SOLARIS Internals,
Core Kernel Architecture
Mauro and McDougall
published by Prentice Hall, 2001
Fascinating... like looking at a disaster is
hypnotizing for some...
Ok, let me get this straight - a school that
(typically) NEVER upgrades the OS is now going
to pay an additional $18US a year to Microsoft
for the priviledge of not upgrading. And...
students will get to use (drum roll) MS Office
Pro to do reports for an additional fee of
$24US a year. And (big drum roll) development
tools are valued the same as "Magic School Bus".
Wow, I wish I had thought of this. $42US a year
per seat for NOTHING. Every year. Even if the
machines aren't touched. Ok, here's the deal,
send ME $100 a year FOR YOUR ENTIRE SCHOOL,
and I'll see to it that the value of PI doesn't
change. Ok?
Ratboy.
Hey, if you are actually into Java or Visual
Studio.NET, great.
Me, I'm into writing documents, um... that's
words, with (maybe) a bit of formatting, um...
Actually, CPM/80 with WordStar is about all
I really need, and BOY is it fast on my
current 'puter. Only thing is, everyone
else seems to like *ffice style products.
Me, I'm content with WordStart, vi on unix,
I use troff (runoff under CP/M). Works good.
Fast, _and_ Cheap.
Upgrades? Maybe not in this lifetime (I could
care less). Standards? Sure, every is ASCII
or close to it. WSWG? Nope, but if I go so
far as to ASK for (say) Centuury Schoolbook, 11pt
on 12pt lead, I EXPECT that it will be delivered.
Ratboy.
Of course I have a "legal right" to play
a DVD that I purchased wherever I want to.
I ALSO have the right to (1) sell it to
someone else (2) break it into little pieces,
(3) use it as a window decoration. (3) ANYTHING
I WANT TO, EXCEPT FOR COPYING IT.
Got that? We are NOT talking about "fair use"
here, just MY use. Different topic.
DMCA wants to REMOVE my rights to (and I am not
talking "fair use" here) do WHATEVER THE F*
I want with the material. For myself.
Personally, I buy books -- not to read them,
oh no, I put them under a microscope to look
at the intricate patterns in the paper. That's
MY right fer f*sakes. Of course, that is
COMPLETELY illegal in the US of A now, when
we are talking about DVDs.
Keep your RIGHTS clear, ok?
Ratboy.
The airwaves are a public commons. If you
put it there, and I take it, well, you had
NO expectation of privacy.
Cable wants to be a common carrier. And,
where I live anyway, its a monopoly. Certain
rules apply.
So you wake the fuck up, it is legal.
Of COURSE the "networks" want to control
how, what, and where I watch the feed.
They would love to feed advertising.
But... my cable company pays for programming,
and some is supplied for a cost of $0. If that
model doesn't work, ITS NOT MY FAULT.
Remember, I pay $20 a month for cable tv,
and $40 a month for broadband. The gov
takes around 8 bucks in taxes. I PAY FOR THIS.
And, "copying" notwithstanding (no, I don't
share copyrighted material with anybody), I
HAVE PURCHASED THE MATERIAL AND I WANT TO
USE IT WHEN I WANT TO. This isn't a question
of "fair use", by the way. Fair use means
I copy material for others, breaking copyright,
but am allowed. Not happening, I don't do that.
Read my lips: I BOUGHT THE MATERIAL, AND AM
USING IT MYSELF.
Now, the cable provider charges between $20
and ?? for the service. "Basic" cable (the
so-called "free" networks, plus some specialty
stations) is at the bottom, then you can
add "premium" content for an additional amount.
Given that the delivery cost is the same for
ANY of the content, the additional cost must
be going for the content. Got it?
So, people are paying for the content. Given
that fact, why is there still advertising?
Because the networks think the "free with
advertising" sponsorship model works?
And that's it. Now, I don't live in the
good 'ole US of A, but most of this applies
there as well.
If the "free" tv advertising model ain't
working, well then, fix that.
Alternatives:
1 - make commercials compelling
2 - fund raising drives
3 - sell the material to cable providers
4 - get out of the business
5 - product placement
And I haven't even really thought about it!
Ratboy.
Making templates to speed up code seems like a
marvelous thing. Of course, if you REALLY need
this for performance, you are probably targetting
embedded systems, where the code bloat and testing
become prohibitive. So, what's the real difference
between C++/STL and C/M4? Not a hell of a lot,
really (really, truly, equivalent "type checking"
can be done in M4). The syntax is just as ugly,
and the tools are worse.
Of course, templates (STL) are ANTI-object
oriented programming. No factoring, and I must
regenerate code. Wait a minute, if the language
actually supported types as objects, then it
wouldn't matter, the OOP system would take care
of this for me... and it would, except that
C++ programmers (generally) seem far too
concerned about "performance".
Another strike against C++ is the SIZE of the
language. A good programming language reference
manual should be expressible in 12 to 20 pages.
That's it. Anything more cannot be reasonably
used. C, Smalltalk, Eiffel, good. C++, ADA,
Perl, bad. If I can't read it, I can't make
use of it, and its probably easier to rewrite.
If you like C and want OOP, use Objective C.
If you like C and want templates/STL, use M4.
And -- your experience with M4 can be leveraged.
Get this concept: learning M4 (TRAC or one
of the general macro/string languages) leverages
BETWEEN languages. I recommend M4, not because
its better, but because its everywhere. And, you
can use it with C, Assembler, C++, etc.
Ratboy.
What about the GPL drives the cost of software
to 0?
Yes, I can look at cheapbytes, etc. but I still
don't get it...
I can make a modification to GPL software,
or put software under GPL, and sell it -- and
I am then obligated to pass certain rights
to the buyer. The buyer must have the source,
and must have the right to redistribute as the
buyer sees fit. Now, if the buyer has a stake
in ME (say, to provide upgrades and service),
the buyer will NOT use those rights.
Example: I sell a modified GNU tool chain
for an embedded process for 10,000. Now, the
customer wants me to continue the support.
That customer certainly has the RIGHT to
do ANYTHING the GPL allows with the code, but
can be convinced not to (so they don't loose
the business advantage that the code gave them).
The customer is PROTECTED in case I go out
of business, but as long as we have a
relationship, everything works.
Of course the product cannot be a commodity.
If it is, then I must sell service instead.
Microsoft's main code base is commodity level,
and most GPL software is as well (eg. Windows,
Linux, MS Office, KOffice, etc.). I think the
GPL is VERY painful to MS, simply because they
don't have a service model. And they don't want
to open up their products to allow the addition
of specific, valuable utility.
Ratboy.
The quote was that to be pure OO, everything
must be an object, and derived from one single
base type.
"Class" was not mentioned at all! You don't
need classes to have OOP. Primitive types
*are* a problem, because they cannot be
re-defined.
Classic example:
What is the result of
x = 1 / 3
y = x + x + x
print x
in a pseudo-code format. Note that the variables
are not declared here...
In C, the answer given would be either 0, or
0.99999... both of which are wrong!
You compile this code, and then later someone
discovers this bug. A replacement for the
type ("class" or behaviour) of variables is made,
putting in something which behaves like a number,
but does things using rational arithmetic.
Now the answer is 1, which is expected. You
shouldn't have to redo the original software.
Now, I am a stickler, and I like smalltalk,
because I can make the substitution WITHOUT
recompiling the original code. This is important
if I am working with someone elses code. But, I
am willing to recompile. But if native types
are inserted, it becomes difficult to modify the
code. And for what? A bit of performance?
No, the idea of "class" isn't needed, but the
ability to override EVERYTHING is important.
Ratboy.
You can do more with your PC now than you
could with a 486dx2 w/ 8meg RAM?
Ok, what do you do now, and what did you do
then (let's have the goods here, I DON'T
actually believe you).
Next, you argue that Windows is imposing
HIGHER requirements (to run, I assume), thus
making PCs faster... How about ignoring
the upgrades, and utilizing the system for your
own needs? Now... DOS 5.0 (Microsoft) starts
in under 3 seconds on a Pentium 150 (lets use
this here ANTIQUE POS laptop as a reference).
Windows 3.1 starts in 3 seconds. Hows that for
efficiency? I bet I FINISH my letter BEFORE you
BEGIN yours. (get this, we are both using
Microsoft s'ware!).
Ratboy666
Better not give the students email, or they
may discover a web/email gateway.
Better stay on top of the sites with banner
ads... the students may be able to click
offsite.
Better disable everything...
Oh, hell, just don't provide the internet as
a resource at all. The kids are smarter than
we are, and will find a way. We'ed better
cut off everything.
Now for a good book-burning.
Ratboy.
Mr. Microsoft, I expect you to die.
Apologies where they are due...
I _never_ said "LUser", or made the claims
that people are "stupid or that they don't want
to learn". Really. I have made posts that
refer to "Windows" as "Windoze", because it
is my professional opinion that Windows (up to
Windows 98) is a piss-poor f*cked up excuse
for an Operating System. However, my wife
uses Windows 98, and I _do_ administer for
her. Yes, my wife has _complete_ control over
what her computer can or cannot do. My job
is merely to facilitate.
And, you just provided evidence for my case.
_You_ administer your parents computer.
And why is that? [A small hint -- computers
are more complicated than cars, and we
generally defer to auto mechanics].
And if you have the role of administrator,
it is _your_ responsibility to ensure that
computer services are delivered appropriately.
Did you configure your parents computer to
encrypt email? If not, why not? And, what about
attacks on your parents computer system to
aquire the private key sets? Other security
issues? [see second paragraph].
Ratboy.
Where do I begin?
First, repeat the phrase "It is _not_ the user's
job to administrate". Over and over until it
sinks home.
So who's job is it? It's either the "geeks" job,
or its the software designers job.
If the task is left to the software designer,
we end up with "bloat-ware". The designer had
to _anticipate_ every possible usage and
interconnection, and then had to present that
as "user-friendly". Not an easy task, and
(in my humble opinion) not very doable.
If its left to the "geek", you want a set of
small tools that can be assembled for the user
to accomplish the desired function. A set of
"cookbook" recipies for handling administration.
This is the crux of the Windows/Unix philosophy
difference. I am one of those "geeks" and I do
administer for other people. I find it difficult
to administer if they insist on running Windows,
but I do it anyway. It's my role. Others in the
group are far better at gardening, auto mechanics,
etc., but I am the technology guy.
And yes, I update, de-spam, automatically encrypt
emails, for my clients, and all they have is a
pleasant computer experience. The "lots of
switches" problem doesn't affect my clients,
but a proliferation of slightly different GUI
programs on Windows would drive *me* completely
nuts. The hardware and OS are merely an means
to an end and as such shouldn't interfere with
the USE of the computer.
One such use is PRIVATE communication. The
programs are available, and they can be hooked
up to accomplish this goal. My clients do
understand "physical security", either of the
system, or some media. And that's _all_ they
have to understand. If they ask, I am willing
to disclose details, but generally the only
question (after trust has been established),
is "does it work?".
Ratboy.
Linux is _more_ ready for the home user than
Windows is...
Each user does need a "sysadmin" or a person
who does "sysadmin" duties. Attempting to
administer your own box without knowledge is
not a terrifically good idea. If there are
people in the neighbourhood who can help with
the administration of a Windows system, Windows
may be a good choice. If the "sysadmin" is remote,
Linux is a better choice.
Many users do _not_ play the latest whiz-bang
games (certainly my grandma doesn't). My grandma
needs a reliable information appliance that:
1 - works reliably
2 - is easy to use
3 - is crash resiliant
4 - software shouldn't cost more than hardware.
Linux fits the bill nicely. Point 1: Linux 2.2
is stable, Windows XP may be stable. 2: Windows
is point and click; so is KDE. I can configure
KDE to "protect" grandma from herself, I can't
do this with Windows 9x, maybe with XP... 3:
Linux offers logging file systems. Last time I
checked (Windows 98), the check-disk procedure
for a 60GB drive took in excess of 1/2 hour.
Maybe XP solves this... Also, Linux handles
application crashes more gracefully than Windows
9x. 4: Here is the big item. Grandma uses a
Pentium 266, purchased second hand, _without_
a Windows license. Putting on Windows 9x (XP)
would run around $200CDN, Office would be another
chunk of money. The entire machine is worth
$600CDN. Can't really justify the cost of Windows
here, given Linux does a _better_ job than
Windows 9x (not sure about XP though).
I remotely administer this box on behalf of
Grandma, and she is quite happy with the result.
Yes, the "why not Windows/Office" question has
come up, because that's what the neighbours use,
and that's what the grandkids _want_ to use
(for those shiny games), but the cost issue put
the kibosh on the idea.
Yes, Linux is READY for mass consumption.
Ratboy
Reproduced below is the relevant part of your Comcast service agreement. It explains that Comcast typically doesn't monitor for abuse. Not only is NAT not allowed (no sharing of service), but also you are not allowed to telnet or ssh back to your computer as well. For any of the prohibited activities, you need to have permission in writing. Comcast does reserve the right to pry at your packets to look for such abuses.
Ratboy
-----
Comcast High-Speed Internet Service network residential customers may not resell, share, or otherwise distribute the Services or any portion thereof to any third party without the written consent of Comcast High-Speed Internet Service. For example, you cannot provide Internet access to others through a dial up connection, host shell accounts over the Internet, provide email or news service, or send a news feed. You may not use the Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service for commercial purposes. The Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service offering is a consumer product designed for your personal use of the Internet. For example, the service does not provide the type of security, upstream performance and total downstream throughput capability typically associated with commercial use.
You may not run a server in connection with the Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service, nor may you provide network services to others via the Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service. The Comcast High-Speed Internet Service residential service includes personal WebSpace accounts for publishing personal Web pages. Examples of prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, running servers for mail, http, ftp, irc, and dhcp, and multi-user interactive forums. For information about @Work products for commercial or network services purposes, including commercial-grade remote LAN access, please see http://work.home.net.
Violation of Acceptable Use Policy
Comcast High-Speed Internet Service does not routinely monitor the activity of accounts for violation of this Policy. However, in our efforts to promote good citizenship within the Internet community, we will respond appropriately if we become aware of inappropriate use of our Services. Although Comcast High-Speed Internet Service has no obligation to monitor the Services and/or the network, Comcast High-Speed Internet Service and it various affiliates and partners reserve the right to monitor bandwidth, usage, and content from time to time to operate the Services; to identify violations of this Policy; and/or to protect the network and Comcast High-Speed Internet Service users.
No, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to use
such dead code? All of its ideas, innovations,
and advances are now beyond anyones use for this
lifetime, possibly the next. Bow your head in
silence for the loss.
Of COURSE the world is bigger
than computer science, but there will be no
contribution to that science from proprietary
software. You loose. And what does Linux have
to do with this? What does programming have to
do with this?
Hey, they are GUI toolkits. Who cares what
the underlying window system is anyway?
ratboy.
Yes, she is referring to Microsoft Windows.
WTF?
Linux (the OS) HAS design. The purpose of an
OS is to manage resources. Linux does this,
and doesn't have much else. And, its design
is the fairly elegant one from the Multics/Unix
tradition.
Of course *Linux* doesn't have "a coherent
set of features that are based on a sober
evulation (sic) of the average user's needs."
By god, it is an Operating System. Since an
Operating System manages resources, what does
a "user OS" do? Manage users? Thank you, I
prefer NOT to be managed by my tools.
So, is the Word Processor part of the OS?
What about my needs (queueing theory, modeling).
Of course Linux (Unix) HAS consistency in the
Operating System. A lot more than MS, or
Apple MAC OS. Haven't you heard of standards?
(POSIX, etc.). How about peer review? I have
Of course Linux has predictability. We are
NOT talking about applications here.
And then you go off on a "free software" rant.
"Most free software is designed by programmers
who, on the whole, have little empathy for the
average user.". No shit sherlock.
IF YOU WANT ME TO GUSSY UP SOME "FREE" SOFTWARE,
PAY ME. Well, then its no longer free, is it?
If you can get 50 of your chums together, and
each can pony up $1000 CDN, please see me
(that is the price of Windows and MS Office,
and some utilities). I would be absolutely
DELIGHTED to make a Linux box for you, with
applications, to EXACTLY your specification.
Now, these programmers how produce free
software are a LOT more empathetic to you
that you seem to be. The are GIVING you
a software base. If you want to gussy it
up, they are ALLOWING you to do that. Please
explain how this is NOT good for the user.
Hell, that's why you BUY commercial software,
isn't it?
How the hell did this post get mod'd up to
5? Grumble...
Rayboy