Well, what else was it about then? A priest, a psychic and a bunch of hillbilliy space people following frontier space justice? This is just FOX living up to it's low standards.
This isn't SciFi, it's just dumb demographically planned programming or worse (i.e. FOX's ultra-conservative bent.) Star Trek is much better SciFi because it at least it occasionally deals with or includes scientific ideas. Where was the science in this show? Isn't that an important part of SciFi? A train robery? Give me a break. A train robbery is what you come up with when you're in your fifth season and you can't think of anything new. Too bad, but I'm canceling my TiVo Season's Pass for this show though I probably will watch a few more episodes to see if it gets better.
_That_ would be an antitrust suit that would sail through the courts.
Yeah! Just look at how effective the last major aniti-trust trial was!
The sad truth is that the vast majority of people who use Windows do not care if a CPU is prevented from running a different OS. They probably don't even understand what that means.
iSCSI? Yes. I have a friend who works for a company developing iSCSI devices. He uses Linux exclusively and claims that Linux has the most robust support for iSCSI.
I agree with you that Java in a browser is not good at all, I don't consider it a viable platform really. However this is mostly (if not completely) the fault of Netscape and Microsoft. It's a problem with their implementation, not the language or JDK. Sorry if there was confusion about that, I consider client-side Java applications those that start in main().
I do think Java as a language for non-browser based GUI client applications is still a fine choice for many applications. Yes, you often have to include or require a specific JRE. I don't think this is too horrible, but I do agree that it's regretable. Consider that you often have to supply your own versions of common C/C++ libraries for C/C++ applications to ensure that the correct ones are installed on the system.
As far as Swing being buggy in its initial manifestations, that's been true for every widget library I've ever worked with, including Windows. I don't see why Java should be held to a higher standard. If you'd tried to do anything unusual with tables or trees in early Windows, you'd consider Java's trees and tables a holiday at a beach resort.
"I wasn't using my civil liberties, anyway"
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Bumper sticker suggested by a friend of mine. Says it all, really.
One more thing, Emacs is the development tool in use by many, many excellent "professional" software developers. You may be confusing us with people who need a handholding IDE to understand their language.
Part of my work involves the development of a large client side Java application. Clients of our company run this product on Windows, AIX, Solaris, and HPUX. I develop the code on Linux. About once a year I borrow someone's Windows laptop or HPUX machine to fix a platform specific bug. I'd hardly call that a cross-platfor failure for Java.
I think you're wrong on all accounts. We've used java since the beginning. Sure, there were some changes but nothing that required more than an insignificant amount of time to change.
I don't know what kinds of programmers you're comparing to Java programmers, but in my experience we get the same compensation as C/C++ programmers (which I used to be).
My experience with Java is compeltely opposite yours.
The founder of the Java Lobby is not in a position to tell me or anyone else that Java is dead on the client. But that aside, your statement assumed that software written in a particular language must be available in a retail store for the language to be alive. That simply isn't so.
repeated incompatible upgrades Example? The only thing I can imagine you're referring to is the Swing classes that replace or enhance AWT. That was a welcome change by just about anyone's standards.
costly support requirements What are you talking about, this is pure FUD
and expensive development tools They never billed me for emacs, I thought it was free?
Hello ObliviousGuy, and welcome to the world where not all software is sold through retail stores. Where in fact much software is written for specific business needs and which is not intended to be used by people such as yourself.
because gcc2.95 was nicer about allowing illegal constructs
That's not a very convincing argument, IMHO. The idea of a compiler allowing illegal constructs that may or may not work under different optimization levels does not sound to me like anything other than a compiler bug (or misfeature at best.)
Re:Finally, ABI stabilization. Now about optimizat
on
GCC 3.2 Released
·
· Score: 1
There are some types of bugs that are exposed by higher levels of optimization.
Readable code is no substitute for comments. Even if you can easily see what a method does, it doesn't follow that you know why it does it.
Re:Must be lots of poets out there
on
Hacker Survey
·
· Score: 2
I was a music composition student at school and did some composition work before changing to computers full time. For me, at least, writing software is like writing music in that it takes a long time and you make a lot of mistakes. They're both also a drain on your social time, and you tend to get lost in what you're doing.
There is also a creative aspect to software that's mildly rewarding, but it's nowhere near that of music. Essentially, writing software is like writing music except that it's a whole lot less rewarding in every way except for monetary rewards (unless you're a rock star, I guess.)
I have plenty of memory on the machine, but it's only a 333Mhz pentium II processor. I'm sure it's a combination of bloat, aged hardware, and poor code generation from gcc.
I also use and am generally happy with Mozilla on my 600Mhz iBook and my dual 800Mhz PIII Linux machine.
My company is short on cash, so it looks like I'll be stuck with the 333Mhz machine at work for the forseable future.
After reading through the replys to this article I decided to try out Galeon. I like it, it's much faster and I like the UI better than Opera.
I agree with you with some reservations. It's easy to use the native widgets for OSs such as MacOS and Windows, but what do you do on UNIX? GNOME/KDE/CDE/Athena?
As a Java UI developer I do appreciate Swing because I encounter far fewer platform dependent bugs. But the most important reason to prefer Swing over AWT is the programming interface to the UI widgets, not their non-native implementation. The AWT event system was ugly as hell.
The most important thing I was looking forward with Mozilla was having something at least as fast and modern (standards support) on Linux as IE seems to be on DOS. Well, it's modern but its so slow I can't use it (I don't have a P-2.4 bazillionHz lying about.) So now I use Opera. I don't like the interface as well, but at least it can load a page in under 15 seconds or start up in less than 30 seconds.
The last thing I wanted to see in Mozilla was skins. Skins are for kids, and as the article points out, they restrict usability and accessability rather than inhance it. Just as bad, Mozilla's skinds contribute to its sluggishness through bloat.
Sigh, it's baffoons like this one that made me glad the US separated from the UK in the first place. --Bob
Amen, brother! I hate bafoons. It's so good to live in this here bafoon-free country! Whenever I go abroad I just can't help thinking, "man there are so many buffoons here, I can't wait to get home to where we don't have any buffoons! YEEEE HAAAWA!"
Yes, I did try it back when we were having severe performance problems and decided it was too slow. I'll have to try it again now that we've solved those problems.
I'd love to get the emacs integration, that'd be perfect. I'm glad to hear you're working on it. Do you expect that it'll appear on the perforce supplemental tools link or if not, where should I be looking for it once it's available?
I agree, iTools is one of the benefits that convinced me to shell out what I did for my iBook ($1600 US), when I could have had a more powerful Intel type laptop for the same amount of money.
Still, the iBook is exactly what I wanted. Small and easy to transport, my wife can use it and it runs *NIX.
We also had some performance problems with perforce. They've made a few updates to their software on our reccomendation and things generally seem a lot better. I'm not an expert, but here are a few things to keep in mind:
Avoid 'p4 dirs//*'.
Avoid remote depots. Perforce's implementation may slow down commands such as "p4 dirs"
Do not create clientspecs or branchspecs with "//someProduct/*/main/..." or a similar file spec.It may block all update access (p4 edit and p4 submit) to all of Perforce for all users for five to fifteen minues. Explicitly list depot, project, and codeline in all branch specs.
That's a short list, our release engineering dept. has a long page of things not to do with perforce. I have to say, we've gotten it to run pretty quickly now, after several months of getting used to it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, what else was it about then? A priest, a psychic and a bunch of hillbilliy space people following frontier space justice? This is just FOX living up to it's low standards.
This isn't SciFi, it's just dumb demographically planned programming or worse (i.e. FOX's ultra-conservative bent.) Star Trek is much better SciFi because it at least it occasionally deals with or includes scientific ideas. Where was the science in this show? Isn't that an important part of SciFi? A train robery? Give me a break. A train robbery is what you come up with when you're in your fifth season and you can't think of anything new. Too bad, but I'm canceling my TiVo Season's Pass for this show though I probably will watch a few more episodes to see if it gets better.
Actually, I think the saying had to do with a scam involving the sale of the Brooklyn bridge. A bridge which was not actually for sale.
I think you're confusing Open Source with secure data. There's no reason open software cannot securely manage keys. Think OpenSSH and IPSec.
_That_ would be an antitrust suit that would sail through the courts.
Yeah! Just look at how effective the last major aniti-trust trial was!
The sad truth is that the vast majority of people who use Windows do not care if a CPU is prevented from running a different OS. They probably don't even understand what that means.
iSCSI? Yes. I have a friend who works for a company developing iSCSI devices. He uses Linux exclusively and claims that Linux has the most robust support for iSCSI.
I agree with you that Java in a browser is not good at all, I don't consider it a viable platform really. However this is mostly (if not completely) the fault of Netscape and Microsoft. It's a problem with their implementation, not the language or JDK. Sorry if there was confusion about that, I consider client-side Java applications those that start in main().
I do think Java as a language for non-browser based GUI client applications is still a fine choice for many applications. Yes, you often have to include or require a specific JRE. I don't think this is too horrible, but I do agree that it's regretable. Consider that you often have to supply your own versions of common C/C++ libraries for C/C++ applications to ensure that the correct ones are installed on the system.
As far as Swing being buggy in its initial manifestations, that's been true for every widget library I've ever worked with, including Windows. I don't see why Java should be held to a higher standard. If you'd tried to do anything unusual with tables or trees in early Windows, you'd consider Java's trees and tables a holiday at a beach resort.
Bumper sticker suggested by a friend of mine. Says it all, really.
One more thing, Emacs is the development tool in use by many, many excellent "professional" software developers. You may be confusing us with people who need a handholding IDE to understand their language.
Part of my work involves the development of a large client side Java application. Clients of our company run this product on Windows, AIX, Solaris, and HPUX. I develop the code on Linux. About once a year I borrow someone's Windows laptop or HPUX machine to fix a platform specific bug. I'd hardly call that a cross-platfor failure for Java.
I think you're wrong on all accounts. We've used java since the beginning. Sure, there were some changes but nothing that required more than an insignificant amount of time to change.
I don't know what kinds of programmers you're comparing to Java programmers, but in my experience we get the same compensation as C/C++ programmers (which I used to be).
My experience with Java is compeltely opposite yours.
The founder of the Java Lobby is not in a position to tell me or anyone else that Java is dead on the client. But that aside, your statement assumed that software written in a particular language must be available in a retail store for the language to be alive. That simply isn't so.
confusing procedures
For example?
poor performance
Have you used it recently?
repeated incompatible upgrades
Example? The only thing I can imagine you're referring to is the Swing classes that replace or enhance AWT. That was a welcome change by just about anyone's standards.
costly support requirements
What are you talking about, this is pure FUD
and expensive development tools
They never billed me for emacs, I thought it was free?
Hello ObliviousGuy, and welcome to the world where not all software is sold through retail stores. Where in fact much software is written for specific business needs and which is not intended to be used by people such as yourself.
Shouldn't it be ?
That's not a very convincing argument, IMHO. The idea of a compiler allowing illegal constructs that may or may not work under different optimization levels does not sound to me like anything other than a compiler bug (or misfeature at best.)
Yes, compiler bugs specifically.
Readable code is no substitute for comments. Even if you can easily see what a method does, it doesn't follow that you know why it does it.
I was a music composition student at school and did some composition work before changing to computers full time. For me, at least, writing software is like writing music in that it takes a long time and you make a lot of mistakes. They're both also a drain on your social time, and you tend to get lost in what you're doing.
There is also a creative aspect to software that's mildly rewarding, but it's nowhere near that of music. Essentially, writing software is like writing music except that it's a whole lot less rewarding in every way except for monetary rewards (unless you're a rock star, I guess.)
I have plenty of memory on the machine, but it's only a 333Mhz pentium II processor. I'm sure it's a combination of bloat, aged hardware, and poor code generation from gcc.
I also use and am generally happy with Mozilla on my 600Mhz iBook and my dual 800Mhz PIII Linux machine.
My company is short on cash, so it looks like I'll be stuck with the 333Mhz machine at work for the forseable future.
After reading through the replys to this article I decided to try out Galeon. I like it, it's much faster and I like the UI better than Opera.
I agree with you with some reservations. It's easy to use the native widgets for OSs such as MacOS and Windows, but what do you do on UNIX? GNOME/KDE/CDE/Athena?
As a Java UI developer I do appreciate Swing because I encounter far fewer platform dependent bugs. But the most important reason to prefer Swing over AWT is the programming interface to the UI widgets, not their non-native implementation. The AWT event system was ugly as hell.
The most important thing I was looking forward with Mozilla was having something at least as fast and modern (standards support) on Linux as IE seems to be on DOS. Well, it's modern but its so slow I can't use it (I don't have a P-2.4 bazillionHz lying about.) So now I use Opera. I don't like the interface as well, but at least it can load a page in under 15 seconds or start up in less than 30 seconds.
The last thing I wanted to see in Mozilla was skins. Skins are for kids, and as the article points out, they restrict usability and accessability rather than inhance it. Just as bad, Mozilla's skinds contribute to its sluggishness through bloat.
Amen, brother! I hate bafoons. It's so good to live in this here bafoon-free country! Whenever I go abroad I just can't help thinking, "man there are so many buffoons here, I can't wait to get home to where we don't have any buffoons! YEEEE HAAAWA!"
Yes, I did try it back when we were having severe performance problems and decided it was too slow. I'll have to try it again now that we've solved those problems.
I'd love to get the emacs integration, that'd be perfect. I'm glad to hear you're working on it. Do you expect that it'll appear on the perforce supplemental tools link or if not, where should I be looking for it once it's available?
Thanks!
I agree, iTools is one of the benefits that convinced me to shell out what I did for my iBook ($1600 US), when I could have had a more powerful Intel type laptop for the same amount of money.
Still, the iBook is exactly what I wanted. Small and easy to transport, my wife can use it and it runs *NIX.
We also had some performance problems with perforce. They've made a few updates to their software on our reccomendation and things generally seem a lot better. I'm not an expert, but here are a few things to keep in mind:
//*'.
Avoid 'p4 dirs
Avoid remote depots. Perforce's implementation may slow down commands such as "p4 dirs"
Do not create clientspecs or branchspecs with "//someProduct/*/main/..." or a similar file spec.It may block all update access (p4 edit and p4 submit) to all of Perforce for all users for five to fifteen minues. Explicitly list depot, project, and codeline in all branch specs.
That's a short list, our release engineering dept. has a long page of things not to do with perforce. I have to say, we've gotten it to run pretty quickly now, after several months of getting used to it.