I see the Redmond shill machine is in full swing now. First it gobbles up MSZD.Net. Now another publication is releasing "features" on how "performant" and "fantastic" Windows 7 is.
Bull Fraking Shit.
Windows 2000 and NT 4 was as lean as it got! Want a reminder? Load up Windows NT Server 4.0 in a virtual machine and see how much resources are being used.
20 fraking MB!
Even XP is bloated! Ever wonder why Windows Explorer sometimes takes a few seconds to create a folder on a Quad Core 3.0GHZ 4GB machine? A second on this machine has probably 1000 times more processing power than the Voyager probe and the Apollo 11 Moon lander (if you believe in all that). Yet I have to wait and twiddle my thumbs...
Its been downhill since Windows 2000. That OS ran gorgeously on my dual Pentium III 350 (250MB). XP pigged that machine in the space of time it took to install XP.
I company I worked at recently still used NT 4 to run SQL Server... and it ran like the wind... until a US company took us over and due to Sarbanes Oxley (read "license to print money" from a Redmon/corporate friendly regime) we had to upgrade to SQL Server 2099 (which sucked and was oh so.Net slow), Exchange 3059 (which sucked and was oh so.Net bloated) and a Server OS that gobbled up about 15 gig RAM just on startup.
OK. I exaggerate... but you get the picture.
I was tempted to pull out my old faithful PIII 350 (which happily runs Linux now) and install Windows 7... but why bother?
These days I console myself by liberating PCs from Windows and getting refunds for bundled Vista + Works licenses (thats £120 + vat in Blighty) on all PC purchases.
Are Magazines/Tech review sites/Editorials real anymore or are they just industry backed reviews (aka advertisements)? Is advertisement driven content real journalism?
I remember almost every tech journal I picked up a couple years ago reviewed Vista as the "New Coming". Yet, a year later these journals are bemoaning how Vista "sucks" (which it does btw).
Excuse me for being cynical but I will take this review with a pinch of salt as other reports show that, at least benchmark wise, there is absolutely no difference between Vista and Windows 7.
As for Windows 7 feeling "so much more responsive".. well, depends who is paying you to write that review innit?
The MPL is a soft copyleft whilst the GPL is a hard copyleft. infact s hard as them come
In simplest terms:
MPL: suitable for OSS libraries or components that can be compiled into and used in applications, without inheriting the MPL license.
GPL is like herpes. An example: if you use a GPL library with one line of code (LOC) in it and compile it into your one billion LOC application then your bigger application gets the GPL herpes virus and will then have to be released as GPL (if and when you choose to release it).
Once you get herpes you can never get rid of it.
So GPL is mainly used for full blown applications whilst MPL is generally employed by libraries.
Not too sure what M$ is pushing here. A ruby interpreter running in your browser? MRI Ruby isn't exactly shit hot on performance. I imagine this would run on IronRuny. If so, IR's performace is much slower than MRI's.
I think MS has missed the boat again. Gone is the era of doubling CPU speed every x months. Moore's law will no longer save their bloated, vendor locked, single platform.net cruft.
>are there good reasons for sticking with CVS or SVN or is GIT now The One True Way
The more I work with Git standalone or as a front end to SVN the more I think is is "The One True Way".
The new batch SCMs (ie Git, Hg, Darcs, Bzr...) have definitely made things more interesting. Makes you wonder why several corporate clients insist on just or still using VSS...
You are correct in that Git does not support partial checkouts. This has been the biggest hurdle in my SVN to Git transition.
Yes it is a pain but the benefits I gain (disconnected development from my SVN respository whilst off the network) makes up for this.
Slashdot Mirror
.. which will be fixed come shipping time.
NT Server 4.0 just works.. only faster and for longer.
"It's by Microsoft? So its easy to use, right?"
I see the Redmond shill machine is in full swing now. First it gobbles up MSZD.Net. Now another publication is releasing "features" on how "performant" and "fantastic" Windows 7 is.
Bull Fraking Shit.
Windows 2000 and NT 4 was as lean as it got! Want a reminder? Load up Windows NT Server 4.0 in a virtual machine and see how much resources are being used.
20 fraking MB!
Even XP is bloated! Ever wonder why Windows Explorer sometimes takes a few seconds to create a folder on a Quad Core 3.0GHZ 4GB machine? A second on this machine has probably 1000 times more processing power than the Voyager probe and the Apollo 11 Moon lander (if you believe in all that). Yet I have to wait and twiddle my thumbs...
Its been downhill since Windows 2000. That OS ran gorgeously on my dual Pentium III 350 (250MB). XP pigged that machine in the space of time it took to install XP.
I company I worked at recently still used NT 4 to run SQL Server... and it ran like the wind... until a US company took us over and due to Sarbanes Oxley (read "license to print money" from a Redmon/corporate friendly regime) we had to upgrade to SQL Server 2099 (which sucked and was oh so .Net slow), Exchange 3059 (which sucked and was oh so .Net bloated) and a Server OS that gobbled up about 15 gig RAM just on startup.
OK. I exaggerate... but you get the picture.
I was tempted to pull out my old faithful PIII 350 (which happily runs Linux now) and install Windows 7... but why bother?
These days I console myself by liberating PCs from Windows and getting refunds for bundled Vista + Works licenses (thats £120 + vat in Blighty) on all PC purchases.
Are Magazines/Tech review sites/Editorials real anymore or are they just industry backed reviews (aka advertisements)? Is advertisement driven content real journalism?
I remember almost every tech journal I picked up a couple years ago reviewed Vista as the "New Coming". Yet, a year later these journals are bemoaning how Vista "sucks" (which it does btw).
Excuse me for being cynical but I will take this review with a pinch of salt as other reports show that, at least benchmark wise, there is absolutely no difference between Vista and Windows 7.
As for Windows 7 feeling "so much more responsive".. well, depends who is paying you to write that review innit?
I, for one, welcome our new finger smudged screen overlords...
More Windows 7 useless features bullshit... not too dissimilar from saying, "Windows 7 already runs faster than Vista and XP".
yes.. yes.... but does it run Linux?
.. does it run Linux?
The MPL is a soft copyleft whilst the GPL is a hard copyleft. infact s hard as them come
In simplest terms:
MPL: suitable for OSS libraries or components that can be compiled into and used in applications, without inheriting the MPL license.
GPL is like herpes. An example: if you use a GPL library with one line of code (LOC) in it and compile it into your one billion LOC application then your bigger application gets the GPL herpes virus and will then have to be released as GPL (if and when you choose to release it).
Once you get herpes you can never get rid of it.
So GPL is mainly used for full blown applications whilst MPL is generally employed by libraries.
Not too sure what M$ is pushing here. A ruby interpreter running in your browser? MRI Ruby isn't exactly shit hot on performance. I imagine this would run on IronRuny. If so, IR's performace is much slower than MRI's.
I think MS has missed the boat again. Gone is the era of doubling CPU speed every x months. Moore's law will no longer save their bloated, vendor locked, single platform .net cruft.
I had no choice but to "buy" Vista when ordering my laptop from Dell UK.
I did manage to return the Vista + Office works to Dell for a refund (as stated in the Vista licensing agreement) and received £120 for my troubles.
I encourage everyone who has been forced to buy Vista to do this.
Just downloaded setupwwt.exe from http://www.worldwidetelescope.org./
Launching setupwwt.exe brings up the Cygwin Net Release Setup Program on my system!
I don't see the astronomy link in Cygwin... but I've just had a little play with Cygwin and I am amazed but what I have been missing.
If Linux is just a tiny bit like Cygwin then here I come!
Thanks again Microsoft.
Wine Is Not an Emulator!!!!
>are there good reasons for sticking with CVS or SVN or is GIT now The One True Way The more I work with Git standalone or as a front end to SVN the more I think is is "The One True Way". The new batch SCMs (ie Git, Hg, Darcs, Bzr...) have definitely made things more interesting. Makes you wonder why several corporate clients insist on just or still using VSS...
You are correct in that Git does not support partial checkouts. This has been the biggest hurdle in my SVN to Git transition. Yes it is a pain but the benefits I gain (disconnected development from my SVN respository whilst off the network) makes up for this.
Its a very informative and quite funny talk actually. Google Video host another GIT video here.