There's an 'I hate dailies' train, and I can see you jumped right on it. How can you, on the one hand, be upset that there are so many daily quests available, and on the other, say that having all of them available to you is boring?
They certainly aren't essential either. The gear might have been relevant before raiding started, but if you're in a hardcore raiding guild, you've outgeared all the rewards by now anyway. If you're in a hardcore guild, then what are you complaining about? You should be used to running the same content 100 times during farm to be ready for the next tier anyway.
Since dual-spec went in, you hardly have any basis to complain that they're too hard for a tank/healer, as a DPS spec is readily available to you. Better yet, it's a MULTIPLAYER game, get some friends and tear through the dailies in minutes, they'll appreciate having a tank or healer.
I'm personally quite happy with the balance between casual questing content and other endgame stuff. I can do 30-60 minutes of stuff a day, or not. It's usually something different from the previous day, and it still results in some feeling of progress for my toon.
MS has some clear advantages over linux. The unix authentication and authorization model is antiquated and very coarse compared to windows. Also, MS produces a much better integrated and more functional development environment that anything available in the FOSS world.
They're nowhere near the level of depth in the HPC world that linux has, but if they can do for parallel programming what VB did for programming generally (make is accesible to non-programmer domain experts) then it could be a compelling alternative.
Windows is probably the best host for workstation, mostly because the current state of video drivers makes windows better for any app that needs graphical output. I haven't run GSX/server, but given my experience with ESX I would assume that linux is superior for those kinds of workloads.
LDAP is a protocol for accessing directories, it works just as well for the Internet as for smaller networks. I wish there was a recognized Internet-wide LDAP direcrory, maybe then people would stop trying to shoehorn DNS into performing what LDAP is meant for.
I agree. DNS is for name->address mapping, _not_ for finding what you are looking for. LDAP is for searching through and accessing categorized directories.
I'd rather see a lossless option, like monkey's audio, than 320 MP3. That way I could re-sample it to whatever size I need but still have a pristine CD-quality master.
*ugh* I've been trying to use OS X for a year now (currently at v10.1.5) and is is still too frustratingly slow for real work.
My x86 box with windowmaker and XFree 4.2 however is smoooooth, functional and looks awesome. Mad props out to all the l33t coderz responsible for mozilla, nautilus, Xfree, windowmaker, linux kernel, debian and all the rest.
You are being pedantic:), so I will join you. The http started life at CERN but http requires tcp for reliable transport which requires ip for routing which requires layer-2 technologies ilke ethernet and token ring...
All of these things, more or less, came out of an environment of learning and experimentation that I sweeplingly generalized to 'A bunch of college kids'. It may not be accurate, but I think it accurately conveys what the general sentiment of I2 is.
IPV6 and Internet2 are orthogonal. Internet2 is a high-speed network interconnecting mostly educational intitutions. I believe the general idea is this: "10 years ago we gave a bunch of colleged kids arapnet, and we got the web. Let's give them next-generation networks and let them do the R&D to develop next-gen apps."
I2 is generally served by the same campus routers as erverything else. if the best path from you to your destination is over I2 your packets will get routed that wat. I can get 5 Megabit per second transfers between my I2 connected site and the public FTP server at the U of Michigan, over I2 links.
No, you are wrong, sysocmgr.exe is a shipped part of windows XP. sysoc.inf is a configuration file that ships with XP and specifies, among other thigns, which optional components should be hidden.
The point isn't that Microsoft is hiding the ability to remove these components, the point is that they are denying the ability exists.
Try a google search for sysocmgr.exe or sysoc.inf. O.C. in both cases stands for 'Optional Components'. IE, Windows messenger etc are removeable using the windows components dialog, Microsoft has just hidden them.
In fact, one of the top hits for the sysocmgr.exe search is from the MS knowedge base and titled "How to Add or Remove Windows Components with Sysocmgr.exe"
The original experiment in medical informatics was MUMPS which originated at the Massachusetts General Hospital in the '70. It became a FIPS later in its life, and enjoyed widespread use as an environment for medical and governmental programming.
MUMPS is an interpreted language with some interesting similarities to perl, in particular its data structures, persistant sparse arrays with arbitray indexes.
MUMPS contuinues ot be very important today, in fact the large health care provider I work for implemted its own EMR system in the great-grandchild of MUMPS called cache. Cache is the commerical product from Intersystems. Cache is an integrated MUMPS environment with the data structures implemented in a high-performant object-oriented database. Cache is available for Linux, and since MUMPS is an interpreted language, any experienced medical informatics programmer with a MUMPS background (thats all of them) should be able to implement a custom EMR for you pretty speedily.
I am aware of a text-based MUMPS EMR called CoStar, but I am not sure who wrote it, or if it is still commerically avalilable.
I agree, it is related to my comfort level with Debian. There was a time when I had spent roughly equal amounts of time with Debian and RedHat (5.something, I think). At that time my comfort level with Debian was already much higher, even though I had started with RH. The internal mechanics of the OS are much more clearly exposed in Debian. A case in point would be the printing set up: On debian it is very straightforward BSD style printcap, with a front end perl scripts that configures it. This was very easy for me to understand, after reading some docs and man pages. RedHat has a monolithic print filter script that I feel is poorly commented, and difficult to understand. It also has a graphical config front end, with no clear indication of where the config is stored.
My opinion: Debian is much more friendly to any user who wants to 'get under the hood.'
Debian never seems to do well in these sorts of reviews. Debian is difficult to install, but once its set up and running, it is the easiest Linux to maintain, administer and tweak. The runlevel/init configuration is very easy to understand, and all of the administration scripts are clearly written and commented. The system 'feels' very stable, and dpkg make it difficult to create package conflicts. I get the feeling that comparisons of Linux distributions don't get a lot of time or effort invested in them. This comarison in particular didn't seem to go much further that installing the distro and reading the check lists on the side of the box. Personally, I would be/very/ hesitant to implement a server on RedHat, as I don't feel I have very good control over it.
Microsoft's wealth is different than that of other monopolies, it is almost entirely intellectual property and market share. With that in mind, what potential actions do you forsee being taken against Microsoft?
Openness and free exchange of ideas are central to the free software movement. A monopoly in the software market centered around a closed prodcut is antithesis to the ideals of the movement. How might the actions against microsoft affect the free software movement?
From my experience: Support for software RAID is almost irrelevant, as most serious platforms perform RAID in the SCSI controller. Support for harware RAID controllers seems very good under Linux today. The driver for the Compaq SMART series works very well (for me.) RedHat 6.0 installs *very* smoothly on multiprocessor, RAID compaq hardware. Debian was much more difficult, including patching the kernel and lilo, and re-comiling. These steps were well documented and mostly straightforward. Compaq hardware costs as much as Sun hardware (so I have heard) but you get more for the money. At the 20,000-30,000 US$ level you can get 2 to 4 processors, hardware RAID, hot swappable HDD's, rack mount, dual redundant power supplies, dual PCI busses etc.
Totoro - my new work desktop Catbus - my work laptop Golem - my server at work that was built from spare parts Phoenix - The linux machine that was reborn/rebuilt after the hard drive crashed, and had to be replaced. Angus - the encient 486 HP Netserver, bigger than any two other computers at home. DingBang - home desktop
Slashdot Mirror
There's an 'I hate dailies' train, and I can see you jumped right on it. How can you, on the one hand, be upset that there are so many daily quests available, and on the other, say that having all of them available to you is boring?
They certainly aren't essential either. The gear might have been relevant before raiding started, but if you're in a hardcore raiding guild, you've outgeared all the rewards by now anyway. If you're in a hardcore guild, then what are you complaining about? You should be used to running the same content 100 times during farm to be ready for the next tier anyway.
Since dual-spec went in, you hardly have any basis to complain that they're too hard for a tank/healer, as a DPS spec is readily available to you. Better yet, it's a MULTIPLAYER game, get some friends and tear through the dailies in minutes, they'll appreciate having a tank or healer.
I'm personally quite happy with the balance between casual questing content and other endgame stuff. I can do 30-60 minutes of stuff a day, or not. It's usually something different from the previous day, and it still results in some feeling of progress for my toon.
MS has some clear advantages over linux. The unix authentication and authorization model is antiquated and very coarse compared to windows. Also, MS produces a much better integrated and more functional development environment that anything available in the FOSS world.
They're nowhere near the level of depth in the HPC world that linux has, but if they can do for parallel programming what VB did for programming generally (make is accesible to non-programmer domain experts) then it could be a compelling alternative.
Windows is probably the best host for workstation, mostly because the current state of video drivers makes windows better for any app that needs graphical output. I haven't run GSX/server, but given my experience with ESX I would assume that linux is superior for those kinds of workloads.
We have almost 100,000 active IP addresses managed in QIP, and we're pretty happy with it.
It doesn't suck, which is about the best endorsement I'm willing to give commercial software.
Boot software 1 of 2 and choose Full distribution plus OEM?
Just remember to manual disk layout, the auto layout is kinda sucky.
is actually quite strong. The Tech-Report did an in-depth review of Nvidia and ATI digital-video software and picked ATI.
LDAP is a protocol for accessing directories, it works just as well for the Internet as for smaller networks. I wish there was a recognized Internet-wide LDAP direcrory, maybe then people would stop trying to shoehorn DNS into performing what LDAP is meant for.
I agree.
DNS is for name->address mapping, _not_ for finding what you are looking for. LDAP is for searching through and accessing categorized directories.
I'd rather see a lossless option, like monkey's audio, than 320 MP3. That way I could re-sample it to whatever size I need but still have a pristine CD-quality master.
*ugh*
I've been trying to use OS X for a year now (currently at v10.1.5) and is is still too frustratingly slow for real work.
My x86 box with windowmaker and XFree 4.2 however is smoooooth, functional and looks awesome. Mad props out to all the l33t coderz responsible for mozilla, nautilus, Xfree, windowmaker, linux kernel, debian and all the rest.
I've since deleted my SunPCI's HD image but I once installed three spyware laden P2P file stealing programs on it in one day.
Nothing like a hardware sandbox for programs you don't trust.
At least a few important features were left out as well. XP Home does not support logging in to an NT4 domain or ActiveDirectory.
You are being pedantic :), so I will join you.
The http started life at CERN but http requires tcp for reliable transport which requires ip for routing which requires layer-2 technologies ilke ethernet and token ring...
All of these things, more or less, came out of an environment of learning and experimentation that I sweeplingly generalized to 'A bunch of college kids'. It may not be accurate, but I think it accurately conveys what the general sentiment of I2 is.
IPV6 and Internet2 are orthogonal. Internet2 is a high-speed network interconnecting mostly educational intitutions. I believe the general idea is this: "10 years ago we gave a bunch of colleged kids arapnet, and we got the web. Let's give them next-generation networks and let them do the R&D to develop next-gen apps."
I2 is generally served by the same campus routers as erverything else. if the best path from you to your destination is over I2 your packets will get routed that wat. I can get 5 Megabit per second transfers between my I2 connected site and the public FTP server at the U of Michigan, over I2 links.
No, you are wrong, sysocmgr.exe is a shipped part of windows XP. sysoc.inf is a configuration file that ships with XP and specifies, among other thigns, which optional components should be hidden.
The point isn't that Microsoft is hiding the ability to remove these components, the point is that they are denying the ability exists.
Try a google search for sysocmgr.exe or sysoc.inf. O.C. in both cases stands for 'Optional Components'. IE, Windows messenger etc are removeable using the windows components dialog, Microsoft has just hidden them.
In fact, one of the top hits for the sysocmgr.exe search is from the MS knowedge base and titled "How to Add or Remove Windows Components with Sysocmgr.exe"
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
--Mahatma Ghandi
welcome to phase 3.
The original experiment in medical informatics was MUMPS which originated at the Massachusetts General Hospital in the '70. It became a FIPS later in its life, and enjoyed widespread use as an environment for medical and governmental programming.
MUMPS is an interpreted language with some interesting similarities to perl, in particular its data structures, persistant sparse arrays with arbitray indexes.
MUMPS contuinues ot be very important today, in fact the large health care provider I work for implemted its own EMR system in the great-grandchild of MUMPS called cache. Cache is the commerical product from Intersystems. Cache is an integrated MUMPS environment with the data structures implemented in a high-performant object-oriented database. Cache is available for Linux, and since MUMPS is an interpreted language, any experienced medical informatics programmer with a MUMPS background (thats all of them) should be able to implement a custom EMR for you pretty speedily.
I am aware of a text-based MUMPS EMR called CoStar, but I am not sure who wrote it, or if it is still commerically avalilable.
-Steve R (sroylance@partners.org)
I agree, it is related to my comfort level with Debian. There was a time when I had spent roughly equal amounts of time with Debian and RedHat (5.something, I think). At that time my comfort level with Debian was already much higher, even though I had started with RH. The internal mechanics of the OS are much more clearly exposed in Debian.
A case in point would be the printing set up: On debian it is very straightforward BSD style printcap, with a front end perl scripts that configures it. This was very easy for me to understand, after reading some docs and man pages.
RedHat has a monolithic print filter script that I feel is poorly commented, and difficult to understand. It also has a graphical config front end, with no clear indication of where the config is stored.
My opinion: Debian is much more friendly to any user who wants to 'get under the hood.'
Debian never seems to do well in these sorts of reviews. Debian is difficult to install, but once its set up and running, it is the easiest Linux to maintain, administer and tweak. The runlevel/init configuration is very easy to understand, and all of the administration scripts are clearly written and commented. The system 'feels' very stable, and dpkg make it difficult to create package conflicts. /very/ hesitant to implement a server on RedHat, as I don't feel I have very good control over it.
I get the feeling that comparisons of Linux distributions don't get a lot of time or effort invested in them. This comarison in particular didn't seem to go much further that installing the distro and reading the check lists on the side of the box.
Personally, I would be
Do you have an extra serial port? Why not just use a serial-port mouse?
Microsoft's wealth is different than that of other monopolies, it is almost entirely intellectual property and market share. With that in mind, what potential actions do you forsee being taken against Microsoft?
Openness and free exchange of ideas are central to the free software movement. A monopoly in the software market centered around a closed prodcut is antithesis to the ideals of the movement. How might the actions against microsoft affect the free software movement?
Ok, what does HDL stand for?
From my experience:
Support for software RAID is almost irrelevant, as most serious platforms perform RAID in the SCSI controller.
Support for harware RAID controllers seems very good under Linux today. The driver for the Compaq SMART series works very well (for me.)
RedHat 6.0 installs *very* smoothly on multiprocessor, RAID compaq hardware.
Debian was much more difficult, including patching the kernel and lilo, and re-comiling. These steps were well documented and mostly straightforward.
Compaq hardware costs as much as Sun hardware (so I have heard) but you get more for the money. At the 20,000-30,000 US$ level you can get 2 to 4 processors, hardware RAID, hot swappable HDD's, rack mount, dual redundant power supplies, dual PCI busses etc.
...Just some thoughts on the matter.
Totoro - my new work desktop
Catbus - my work laptop
Golem - my server at work that was built from spare parts
Phoenix - The linux machine that was reborn/rebuilt after the hard drive crashed, and had to be replaced.
Angus - the encient 486 HP Netserver, bigger than any two other computers at home.
DingBang - home desktop