I'm sure you're talking.DSKs or.NIBs, but for the less informed, that's kind of what the "volumes" in my comment do. That's how DOS 3.3 handled hard drives. Normally, DOS 3.3 fills up a disk at 140K, but there are normally unused bits in the data structure where you can enable more.
That still only gets you to 400K.
To enable more, they used the fact that you can issue a command like:
LOAD HELLO,V117
And the "V117" tells it to barf unless the disk in the drive is volume 117. Hard drives used that to make V1 (V0 was reserved) as the first chunk of disk, V2 as the second, etc.
A CD-ROM would be a huge waste in Apple DOS 3.3, without nearly a full re-write of the FileManager layer, which would break most legacy software.
Even if you enabled all 200 possible VTOC bytes, creating 50 32 sector tracks per volume and used all 254 volumes (2 were reserved), that's only a little under 100Meg.
[...] get taught by themselves or in small groups because they are a special case. I would say the same should be available to gifted children. Do they not do this anymore? When I was in school they had special accelerated classes for more advanced kids. They called them "K" classes....
[...] Linux and Google won't kill off the version everyone prefers to the newest bleeding-edge train wreck just to force upgrades. Oh, you don't do Fedora, then?
While I'm not a proponent of straight C, jumping over C++ to Java et al is just silly. One definition of insanity is having both a hammer and a screwdriver and pounding in nails with the screwdriver.
Java is just a resource pig. Look at Eclipse/RAD performance on any slightly aging hardware, and it's obvious. It's great for cross-platform GUI stuff where you're largely waiting on the user to click something anyway or other low-performance skunkworx that you need to throw together quickly.
C++ for anything that needs even an ounce of performance.
ksh (or.bat, if you must) for anything that would be almost completely system() calls anyway.
The right tool for the right job.
Which is the whole reason for calling it the "War on Terrorism" or the "War on Drugs". It basically gives them the power to do whatever they want, as they can claim that they are in a state of war. No it doesn't. It's not a real war.
Only Congress can declare war, and it hasn't.
Why would I trade one tyrant, my boss, for another, the union leadership? If I don't like my boss, I can work somewhere else, with a union I am a slave to the whims of the slobbering horde. That sounds like a good plan.
Except the one thing you fail to grasp is your employer has a financial incentive to screw you for every penny s/he can to further their bottom line. They get paid by the stockholders, who's incentive is to give you as little for as much as possible.
The union, by contrast, is paid by you to get as much for as little as possible.
Don't they have their salary regulated in contract? Or is it accept-or-be-fired (article doesn't tell)? I am not really familiar with US labour market. Is this legal? In many countries, you can only be fired for misconduct or lack of availible work. (The discussion about race-to-the-bottom and trying or not take part in it will probably take place somewhere else in the threads...)
I've rarely seen the salary of an IT or programmer level person (which these apparently are) in a contract. Larger companies will usually document your initial salary in an "offer letter," but where it goes, up or down, from there is completely up to them and you can like it or hit monster.com.
Hourly and manual labor types usually have a union behind them to stop this kind of idiocy, but for reasons beyond me, my white collar cohorts refuse to stand up for themselves and unionize, so continue to have to accept crap like this, or worse, have their jobs summarily shipped overseas.
And before someone puts a political bent on it, it was like this even when the Democrats were in power.
"In Soviet Amerika, programmers don't have unions, and without unions, the company own YOU!"
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure you're talking .DSKs or .NIBs, but for the less informed, that's kind of what the "volumes" in my comment do. That's how DOS 3.3 handled hard drives. Normally, DOS 3.3 fills up a disk at 140K, but there are normally unused bits in the data structure where you can enable more.
That still only gets you to 400K.
To enable more, they used the fact that you can issue a command like:
LOAD HELLO,V117
And the "V117" tells it to barf unless the disk in the drive is volume 117. Hard drives used that to make V1 (V0 was reserved) as the first chunk of disk, V2 as the second, etc.
A CD-ROM would be a huge waste in Apple DOS 3.3, without nearly a full re-write of the FileManager layer, which would break most legacy software. Even if you enabled all 200 possible VTOC bytes, creating 50 32 sector tracks per volume and used all 254 volumes (2 were reserved), that's only a little under 100Meg.
Who buys stuff they don't need?
In this case, I would guess, people wanting to try out Linux who are still on slow dialup.
Hahahaha!! You quack me up!
While I'm not a proponent of straight C, jumping over C++ to Java et al is just silly. One definition of insanity is having both a hammer and a screwdriver and pounding in nails with the screwdriver. Java is just a resource pig. Look at Eclipse/RAD performance on any slightly aging hardware, and it's obvious. It's great for cross-platform GUI stuff where you're largely waiting on the user to click something anyway or other low-performance skunkworx that you need to throw together quickly. C++ for anything that needs even an ounce of performance. ksh (or .bat, if you must) for anything that would be almost completely system() calls anyway.
The right tool for the right job.
I still have one mod point left, you insensitive clod!
Better get some Robot Insurance [jt.org]
The union, by contrast, is paid by you to get as much for as little as possible.
Hourly and manual labor types usually have a union behind them to stop this kind of idiocy, but for reasons beyond me, my white collar cohorts refuse to stand up for themselves and unionize, so continue to have to accept crap like this, or worse, have their jobs summarily shipped overseas.
And before someone puts a political bent on it, it was like this even when the Democrats were in power.
"In Soviet Amerika, programmers don't have unions, and without unions, the company own YOU!"