I can confirm this. Or at least I could eleven years ago when I worked on QNX:)
Sad to hear that they have been acquired and dumbed down. QNX was a very cool system. I was involved in a beta program for their lightweight X-windows knockoff Photon, and I seem to remember the president of the company occasionally chiming in on the message boards. Good times.
Funny though. The world was supposed to be all microkernels and RISC processors by now. Just not the case. Linux on PowerPC is a pretty cool thing tho:)
Luc Besson directed the Fifth Element, not Terry Gilliam. TG directed Bruce Willis in Twelve Monkeys, maybe that's the confusion.
Re:This is not the traditional embedded market
on
Windows XP Embedded
·
· Score: 1
Hey, felt somebody oughta reply to this:).
At work a few years ago we tested out HP and Tek logic analyzers, and the Tek ones were running Win95 if I remember correctly, and the HP ones ran (as far as I could tell) some goofy fvwm in windows look alike mode.
We ended up going with HP. My favorite thing about the HPs is that I can xhost the LA at my desk and wait for it to trigger in the comfort of my own cube. I wonder if you can do the same with a Win95 box? Doubt it.
Sure hope not actually, as pricey as those damn HP (oh I'm sorry, Agilent) machines are.
I find it interesting that Netwolves runs FreeBSD and puts Linux in their literature. When I was looking for Linux jobs, Netwolves was one of the interested companies; a shame that _anyone_ would say that they run a Linux shop when they are really a FreeBSD shop.
Why? Not because FreeBSD is bad. But companies that want to attract Linux-type developers should understand that most of us would be just as excited to get our hands dirty on FreeBSD!
Most people who use Linux are the types that want to broaden their horizons, not leverage their skills...I hope the marketroids and human resources people of small companies can be made to understand that.
I agree with you that TV signals will be broadcast over the net. It would be super-groovy if all media started using the same lines...TV, internet, and phone service. I think this is the future, HUGE packet switched pipes that transmit everything to your home.
In fact, I would personally like to see ALL spectrum dedicated to personal communication. Cells all over the world could be connected to the big pipes, and send you your phone calls, your movies and TV shows, and your data to you over the air.
Of course, I DO have a vague idea about the infeasibility of using ALL the spectrum for this...obviously you can't divide lower frequencies into small cells, and the really high frequencies will just drift out into space (unless, I suppose, they could be directed AT you, via a GPS-type facility? Hmmm.) But still, I question the need for TV to be broadcast when it could just be piped all over the world via multicast to whomever is watching that channel.
First of all, I have to give props to ANYBODY who mentions Widespread Panic. Best damn live act I have ever seen (and as your post didn't quite alude to, they have PLENTY of their own material).
As far as the taping issue is concerned, I can't believe how record labels can't seem to grasp the concept of tape-trading. Back in the younger days of MP3, I downloaded about 200 meg of Dave Matthews bootleg MP3s. I wasn't a particularly big fan, but after listening to the bootlegs, I bought the rest of the albums in print at the time (including the 'Recently' EP), and the next three albums they released. A lot of their live stuff just has a lot more balls than the studio tracks, and I wanted to say thanks to the band for being so cool to tapers. A large portion of the bootlegs and shows were taped right off of the sound board.
The people who are in to tape trading are a lot different market than the usual pop fluff. I highly doubt that any boots of the Backstreet Boys or N'Sync will be hitting the market or the download sites anytime soon. Trading only increases the market for bands that can play and have some creativity in their live shows.
I've been thinking the past week or two that if Apple can keep up their lead on the processor market as they clearly plan to (of course I'm still confused as to why IBM and Motorla make chips for Apple),...
I'm confused as to what you are implying by this statement. Are you saying that Apple has _anything_ to do with the PowerPC development? The PowerPC is a Motorola/IBM design, Apple is just the biggest customer. I seriously doubt that Apple has the resources or the technical staff to design their own processor. Apple is not keeping the lead on the processor market, Mot is.
If you were referring to Apple's crippling of the G3 firmware, then I didn't figure that out from what you said.
But I think that supporting DVD video is really the key feature. If this comes out to the American public at under $300, this feature could be a Dad's last straw.
Heck, sell a remote at a reasonable price ($35 or under), and I bet they could cash in on that in a hurry. The beauty here is that this doesn't have to have good performance DVD-wise at all, because this is a totally different market.
I haven't bought a console since 8-bit Nintendo, but I think I'll be biting the bullet on this baby.
ISI is the vendor we purchase our development system from, for use in a real-time audio processing system. The OS is pSOS, and bundled with compilers, tools for emulators, and performance processing tools. While speaking with other departments who use the development system for larger efforts, it was pretty clear to me that the tools and add-on developments (particularly profiling and code navigation tools) were feature rich and EXTREMELY bug-ridden, to the point were there is almost no useability. Feature-creep and glossy handout material.
pSOS seems a fairly capable OS, but we have hardly put it through its paces. I hope that if ISI is indeed attempting to come out with another embedded OS (and they have purchased the company that developed pSOS), that it will be that end of the company doing the development, not the hacks that are cranking out those sad tools.
ISI (IMHO) is basically a system integration vendor trying to move on to development, and doing it with a marketing-driven twist, instead of actually shipping code that works (shades of Micros~1?). I don't expect much to come of this, if they can't produce tools that work, they won't compete in a field that appears to be saturating.
Feel free to take this with a grain of salt, I've spent quite a few hours being jerked around by an ISI salesman trying to sell me tools I don't need that apparently don't work.
This was mentioned in a leaf, but I thought it was important enough to put at the top.
In my very limited opinion, the workplace shell was absolutely the best desktop environment ever. I think you could teach people what object-oriented really means by having them work and develop under the WPS. It took me quite a while to move from Win3.1 practices to using WPS, but once I did, it was intuitive to the point of overkill. When Win95 came out, I giggled at what a half-ass, underdesigned effort it was compared to WPS.
I've never seen a box, but I was under the impression that AIX runs some sort of workplace shell on top of X. I've been hoping that they would open source this code and maybe we could have a truly OO desktop environment to work with.
Toss all the work with CORBA and distributed computing, and we'd have an even more incredible working environment.
Hope this answer isn't too lame, but in the context of perl, I'd have to say I've hit every one except maybe wait for management.
Most people (I suspect) start using perl by hammering out a couple of scripts to get things done. Most people continue to use perl this way throughout. When you want to do bigger tasks, you start breaking it up into functions (top-down), and when you find yourself doing the same things again and again, you start designing modules (bottom-up, right?).
A strictly top-down approach would never work though. Perl needs to stay quick and dirty, even at the cost of maintainability and scalability, IMHO.
Off-topic, I'd appreciate some feedback on any particular collections of quick and dirty perl hacks, or just code in general. All I ever seem to find at CPAN is modules, and I'd like a place to just browse other people's code once and again. Suggestions?
Using an ATI input board, I can record over two hours of 352x240 video at 15 fps onto a blank 13 gig hd. I don't think that going faster than 15 fps does any good, the $80 board can't keep up.
The major pain in the ass is the 2 gig file limit of AVI.
I can then use an MPEG encoder and transfer the movie to VCD, which is viewable on my Sony DVD player.
BTW, I once downloaded 1/2 of a movie in VCD, supposedly a telesync. It was watchable, but only barely. It was only worth watching to see whether or not I wanted to see the movie in the theater.
The quality of VHS tapes is also not really good enough to warrant converting movies to VCD, the analog fuzziness combined with MPEG compression produces marginal results. Fun toy though.
A friend of mine was involved in testing and porting a Xenix app to Unixware for Y2k compliance. Whoever decided on Unixware should be taken out in the street and shot twice in the head (some marketing fop).
Unixware had terrible support for video cards and scsi cards, and SCO support wasn't particularly helpful.
I don't know where Michels gets the idea that selling Linux isn't going to work. I think that anyone selling a product that actually works is going to do a fair bit better.
Once the higher-ups figure out what a POS SCO sells and stop making these stupid decisions to go with their overpriced product, SCO will be in deep.
Exactly what I was going to ask. My mouth watered when the ORB drive news came down the pipe, but DVD-RAM is available NOW for ~$500. Do I have a drive? Hell no, I don't have $500 do spend on any one thing ('cept my car). But the thing about DVD-RAM is that the standard should be backwards compatible for the next 5 years at least; every new DVD-RAM drive that comes out, even if it has more advanced features etc. will still have the ability to at least read the first/second generation discs in their firmware. So by that rational, if I get a new 'puter with a DVD-RAM drive on it, I don't have to have it networked with the box with an ORB drive on it to get at the files.
Having said that, I still might buy an ORB if they crank the SCSI drive out anytime soon. 2 gig for $30-$40 is just too mouth-watering. I would probably regret it after a year or so though...I have upwards of 50 zip disks just sitting around collecting dust and the occasional MP3 album because 100 mb used to be the right size, and now just doesn't always cut it.
I am lazy. It affects my career movement if left unchecked. I admit this:).
BUT, on another note, I spend the majority of my time cranking out design documentation and reviewing other people's work vs. coding. This way, we put out code that is pretty rock solid.
On my last project, I worked with a European group on different facets of an entire system, fairly equal amounts of development time. When we were just finishing up design reviews and starting coding, they mentioned that they were requesting our code to begin testing. We came close to missing our deadline, but got it out on time. I had perhaps one major issue that was my bad, and I fixed it in about two days after shipping it.
I then spent the next TWO MONTHS getting bug reports from them that they had this or that error in the system, and could I please take a look at it. EVERY time, the bug turned out to be in their code. They cranked out their code faster, but it was completely bug-ridden, and worse yet, they were nearly incapable of debugging the system effectively because they didn't spend enough time understanding the design. At the end of it all, we started examining their code for them (which was very painful, because it was not written well at all), which is a total violation of the black-box paradigm and quite frankly not my job.
BTW, the extra delay between when they asked for our code and when we sent it to them was a matter of two weeks or so, not the two months it took to get their code workable.
Of course, all the time I spent fixing their bugs could have been spent cranking out more code:).
This is certainly not meant to shed a bad light on European developers in general, just a description of the ideas of spending time designing and reviewing your code vs. crank-it-out and fix the bugs on a half-ass implementation. Friends of mine have had quite a few similar experiences with American groups.
I do suspect though, that American firms are trying to design a little more than our overseas friends.
The most hilarious part of it all, though, was that the other group we were working with was supposedly an SEI level 5 shop, meaning that they have a full-featured design process, whereas we are only SEI 3. I suppose it all depends on how you present the info to the auditors.
OK, this is a little late in the game here (as far as I am posting a day late) but the guy did get some good feedback if you look at the thread of comp.os.linux.networking. There was a request for more info which he did not honor.
I've always noticed that help using Linux is very iterative...seldom is anything fixed on the first post.
Also notice that there was no mention of Samba, which it seems to me is where they could have used the most help.
At least his posts were semi-informative of the problem though.
Apparently they were smart enough to de-tune Samba, but not smart enough to tweak the rest of the Linux box. I would suspect that Microsoft said "Hey, Mindcraft, see what it takes to make NT whoop Linux! If it works out, we'll publish it."
But, in all fairness, SMP and RAID are probably pretty weak points for Linux right now, so besides the untweak they did with Samba, they did pick the right part of linux to tear apart.
Of course, what really matters, is when NT 2000 ships, will it be able to compete with Linux then? It should be interesting to see who can actually tweak their systems more in the year (or two, or three...) to come.
Check out one of the links on that page: "Unix trounces NT" http://news.com/News/Item/0,4,29416,00.html?st.ne. ni.rel
Judging from the two articles, it seems DH Brown is a big fan of old school unix. So yeah, if your company can afford AIX/Solaris/etc, they seem to be suggesting you should pay for the reliability and scalability. I don't mind linux not matching up to the big boys yet...in fact, I'd rather see that at this point, this way Sun can ship Linux and help improve it while maintaining a high-end product that still rakes in the bucks. That way linux is seen as a great entry-level product going up against NT, and the cadillac is there when you start making money.
I'd rather see linux grow as a desktop OS, and hopefully the big companies will start to filter up some of the linux gifts that make it a better desktop OS (ie improvements in gnome/KDE, word processors and PIMs etc.) and maybe toss some money that way.
Ed would never lie to me. Never, never, never. Ed good. Microsoft good. Linux? Linux bad.
I love Ed.
Is there an Ed Muth stuffed toy forsale, one that would keep me safe at night from the awful linux boogeymen running rampant in the night. Shudder. Evil linux.
I work with digital (speech) audio, and believe me, decoding to PCM (.wav) and then compressing it again will not sound nearly as good as the original.ra. You won't escape this by looping the line-in to the line-out, because all you are doing there is adding error introduced by the D/A and then A/D codecs on top of the errors introduced by the encode engines, not to mention line noise.
This process is similar to editting a jpeg and then saving it again in jpeg format. The end product may be very useable (and artifacts almost unnoticeable), but keep in mind that it still isn't the ideal situation.
Of course, anyone coming up with a direct.ra to.mp3 convertor that cuts down on the mathematical errors probably has some research money waiting for them at the college of their choice.
To my knowledge, 32-bit Unix rolls over in 2038. January 19, 2038, to be exact ('Twas reading the postgreSQL time/date format page when I read this).
Actually though, I would suspect that we won't be in such big trouble in 2038, because it shouldn't be THAT hard to move to 64-bit systems and use an 8-byte date, especially given the fact that we will have over 30 years warning.
On top of that, it's a lot easier to attach impending doom to a number like 2000 than 2038:).
BTW, Mr. 2001 is the new millenium, is 2000 a leap year? was 1900?:)
EJECTED? I find that a little hard to believe, most seminars I would suspect (even mickeysoft) are fairly friendly. They want you to buy their product and continue to use it, and those seminars usually ain't free.
I guess personally it would be bigger news to me that Microsoft is "ejecting" people from its conferences than Microsoft making uneven comparisons.
(Correct me if I'm wrong Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers won't they lock me up and throw away the key?)
Slashdot Mirror
I can confirm this. Or at least I could eleven years ago when I worked on QNX :)
:)
Sad to hear that they have been acquired and dumbed down. QNX was a very cool system. I was involved in a beta program for their lightweight X-windows knockoff Photon, and I seem to remember the president of the company occasionally chiming in on the message boards. Good times.
Funny though. The world was supposed to be all microkernels and RISC processors by now. Just not the case. Linux on PowerPC is a pretty cool thing tho
Luc Besson directed the Fifth Element, not Terry Gilliam. TG directed Bruce Willis in Twelve Monkeys, maybe that's the confusion.
Hey, felt somebody oughta reply to this :).
At work a few years ago we tested out HP and Tek logic analyzers, and the Tek ones were running Win95 if I remember correctly, and the HP ones ran (as far as I could tell) some goofy fvwm in windows look alike mode.
We ended up going with HP. My favorite thing about the HPs is that I can xhost the LA at my desk and wait for it to trigger in the comfort of my own cube. I wonder if you can do the same with a Win95 box? Doubt it.
Sure hope not actually, as pricey as those damn HP (oh I'm sorry, Agilent) machines are.
I find it interesting that Netwolves runs FreeBSD and puts Linux in their literature. When I was looking for Linux jobs, Netwolves was one of the interested companies; a shame that _anyone_ would say that they run a Linux shop when they are really a FreeBSD shop.
Why? Not because FreeBSD is bad. But companies that want to attract Linux-type developers should understand that most of us would be just as excited to get our hands dirty on FreeBSD!
Most people who use Linux are the types that want to broaden their horizons, not leverage their skills...I hope the marketroids and human resources people of small companies can be made to understand that.
I agree with you that TV signals will be broadcast over the net. It would be super-groovy if all media started using the same lines...TV, internet, and phone service. I think this is the future, HUGE packet switched pipes that transmit everything to your home.
In fact, I would personally like to see ALL spectrum dedicated to personal communication. Cells all over the world could be connected to the big pipes, and send you your phone calls, your movies and TV shows, and your data to you over the air.
Of course, I DO have a vague idea about the infeasibility of using ALL the spectrum for this...obviously you can't divide lower frequencies into small cells, and the really high frequencies will just drift out into space (unless, I suppose, they could be directed AT you, via a GPS-type facility? Hmmm.) But still, I question the need for TV to be broadcast when it could just be piped all over the world via multicast to whomever is watching that channel.
First of all, I have to give props to ANYBODY who mentions Widespread Panic. Best damn live act I have ever seen (and as your post didn't quite alude to, they have PLENTY of their own material).
As far as the taping issue is concerned, I can't believe how record labels can't seem to grasp the concept of tape-trading. Back in the younger days of MP3, I downloaded about 200 meg of Dave Matthews bootleg MP3s. I wasn't a particularly big fan, but after listening to the bootlegs, I bought the rest of the albums in print at the time (including the 'Recently' EP), and the next three albums they released. A lot of their live stuff just has a lot more balls than the studio tracks, and I wanted to say thanks to the band for being so cool to tapers. A large portion of the bootlegs and shows were taped right off of the sound board.
The people who are in to tape trading are a lot different market than the usual pop fluff. I highly doubt that any boots of the Backstreet Boys or N'Sync will be hitting the market or the download sites anytime soon. Trading only increases the market for bands that can play and have some creativity in their live shows.
I'm confused as to what you are implying by this statement. Are you saying that Apple has _anything_ to do with the PowerPC development? The PowerPC is a Motorola/IBM design, Apple is just the biggest customer. I seriously doubt that Apple has the resources or the technical staff to design their own processor. Apple is not keeping the lead on the processor market, Mot is.
If you were referring to Apple's crippling of the G3 firmware, then I didn't figure that out from what you said.
But I think that supporting DVD video is really the key feature. If this comes out to the American public at under $300, this feature could be a Dad's last straw.
Heck, sell a remote at a reasonable price ($35 or under), and I bet they could cash in on that in a hurry. The beauty here is that this doesn't have to have good performance DVD-wise at all, because this is a totally different market.
I haven't bought a console since 8-bit Nintendo, but I think I'll be biting the bullet on this baby.
ISI is the vendor we purchase our development system from, for use in a real-time audio processing system. The OS is pSOS, and bundled with compilers, tools for emulators, and performance processing tools. While speaking with other departments who use the development system for larger efforts, it was pretty clear to me that the tools and add-on developments (particularly profiling and code navigation tools) were feature rich and EXTREMELY bug-ridden, to the point were there is almost no useability. Feature-creep and glossy handout material.
pSOS seems a fairly capable OS, but we have hardly put it through its paces. I hope that if ISI is indeed attempting to come out with another embedded OS (and they have purchased the company that developed pSOS), that it will be that end of the company doing the development, not the hacks that are cranking out those sad tools.
ISI (IMHO) is basically a system integration vendor trying to move on to development, and doing it with a marketing-driven twist, instead of actually shipping code that works (shades of Micros~1?). I don't expect much to come of this, if they can't produce tools that work, they won't compete in a field that appears to be saturating.
Feel free to take this with a grain of salt, I've spent quite a few hours being jerked around by an ISI salesman trying to sell me tools I don't need that apparently don't work.
This was mentioned in a leaf, but I thought it was important enough to put at the top.
In my very limited opinion, the workplace shell was absolutely the best desktop environment ever. I think you could teach people what object-oriented really means by having them work and develop under the WPS. It took me quite a while to move from Win3.1 practices to using WPS, but once I did, it was intuitive to the point of overkill. When Win95 came out, I giggled at what a half-ass, underdesigned effort it was compared to WPS.
I've never seen a box, but I was under the impression that AIX runs some sort of workplace shell on top of X. I've been hoping that they would open source this code and maybe we could have a truly OO desktop environment to work with.
Toss all the work with CORBA and distributed computing, and we'd have an even more incredible working environment.
I'm sure Jar Jar will get his just due soon enough.
Hope this answer isn't too lame, but in the context of perl, I'd have to say I've hit every one except maybe wait for management.
Most people (I suspect) start using perl by hammering out a couple of scripts to get things done. Most people continue to use perl this way throughout. When you want to do bigger tasks, you start breaking it up into functions (top-down), and when you find yourself doing the same things again and again, you start designing modules (bottom-up, right?).
A strictly top-down approach would never work though. Perl needs to stay quick and dirty, even at the cost of maintainability and scalability, IMHO.
Off-topic, I'd appreciate some feedback on any particular collections of quick and dirty perl hacks, or just code in general. All I ever seem to find at CPAN is modules, and I'd like a place to just browse other people's code once and again. Suggestions?
Using an ATI input board, I can record over two hours of 352x240 video at 15 fps onto a blank 13 gig hd. I don't think that going faster than 15 fps does any good, the $80 board can't keep up.
The major pain in the ass is the 2 gig file limit of AVI.
I can then use an MPEG encoder and transfer the movie to VCD, which is viewable on my Sony DVD player.
BTW, I once downloaded 1/2 of a movie in VCD, supposedly a telesync. It was watchable, but only barely. It was only worth watching to see whether or not I wanted to see the movie in the theater.
The quality of VHS tapes is also not really good enough to warrant converting movies to VCD, the analog fuzziness combined with MPEG compression produces marginal results. Fun toy though.
A friend of mine was involved in testing and porting a Xenix app to Unixware for Y2k compliance. Whoever decided on Unixware should be taken out in the street and shot twice in the head (some marketing fop).
Unixware had terrible support for video cards and scsi cards, and SCO support wasn't particularly helpful.
I don't know where Michels gets the idea that selling Linux isn't going to work. I think that anyone selling a product that actually works is going to do a fair bit better.
Once the higher-ups figure out what a POS SCO sells and stop making these stupid decisions to go with their overpriced product, SCO will be in deep.
Exactly what I was going to ask. My mouth watered when the ORB drive news came down the pipe, but DVD-RAM is available NOW for ~$500. Do I have a drive? Hell no, I don't have $500 do spend on any one thing ('cept my car). But the thing about DVD-RAM is that the standard should be backwards compatible for the next 5 years at least; every new DVD-RAM drive that comes out, even if it has more advanced features etc. will still have the ability to at least read the first/second generation discs in their firmware. So by that rational, if I get a new 'puter with a DVD-RAM drive on it, I don't have to have it networked with the box with an ORB drive on it to get at the files.
Having said that, I still might buy an ORB if they crank the SCSI drive out anytime soon. 2 gig for $30-$40 is just too mouth-watering. I would probably regret it after a year or so though...I have upwards of 50 zip disks just sitting around collecting dust and the occasional MP3 album because 100 mb used to be the right size, and now just doesn't always cut it.
I am lazy. It affects my career movement if left unchecked. I admit this :).
:).
BUT, on another note, I spend the majority of my time cranking out design documentation and reviewing other people's work vs. coding. This way, we put out code that is pretty rock solid.
On my last project, I worked with a European group on different facets of an entire system, fairly equal amounts of development time. When we were just finishing up design reviews and starting coding, they mentioned that they were requesting our code to begin testing. We came close to missing our deadline, but got it out on time. I had perhaps one major issue that was my bad, and I fixed it in about two days after shipping it.
I then spent the next TWO MONTHS getting bug reports from them that they had this or that error in the system, and could I please take a look at it. EVERY time, the bug turned out to be in their code. They cranked out their code faster, but it was completely bug-ridden, and worse yet, they were nearly incapable of debugging the system effectively because they didn't spend enough time understanding the design. At the end of it all, we started examining their code for them (which was very painful, because it was not written well at all), which is a total violation of the black-box paradigm and quite frankly not my job.
BTW, the extra delay between when they asked for our code and when we sent it to them was a matter of two weeks or so, not the two months it took to get their code workable.
Of course, all the time I spent fixing their bugs could have been spent cranking out more code
This is certainly not meant to shed a bad light on European developers in general, just a description of the ideas of spending time designing and reviewing your code vs. crank-it-out and fix the bugs on a half-ass implementation. Friends of mine have had quite a few similar experiences with American groups.
I do suspect though, that American firms are trying to design a little more than our overseas friends.
The most hilarious part of it all, though, was that the other group we were working with was supposedly an SEI level 5 shop, meaning that they have a full-featured design process, whereas we are only SEI 3. I suppose it all depends on how you present the info to the auditors.
OK, this is a little late in the game here (as far as I am posting a day late) but the guy did get some good feedback if you look at the thread of comp.os.linux.networking. There was a request for more info which he did not honor.
I've always noticed that help using Linux is very iterative...seldom is anything fixed on the first post.
Also notice that there was no mention of Samba, which it seems to me is where they could have used the most help.
At least his posts were semi-informative of the problem though.
Apparently they were smart enough to de-tune Samba, but not smart enough to tweak the rest of the Linux box. I would suspect that Microsoft said "Hey, Mindcraft, see what it takes to make NT whoop Linux! If it works out, we'll publish it."
But, in all fairness, SMP and RAID are probably pretty weak points for Linux right now, so besides the untweak they did with Samba, they did pick the right part of linux to tear apart.
Of course, what really matters, is when NT 2000 ships, will it be able to compete with Linux then?
It should be interesting to see who can actually tweak their systems more in the year (or two, or three...) to come.
Check out one of the links on that page:. ni.rel
"Unix trounces NT" http://news.com/News/Item/0,4,29416,00.html?st.ne
Judging from the two articles, it seems DH Brown is a big fan of old school unix. So yeah, if your company can afford AIX/Solaris/etc, they seem to be suggesting you should pay for the reliability and scalability. I don't mind linux not matching up to the big boys yet...in fact, I'd rather see that at this point, this way Sun can ship Linux and help improve it while maintaining a high-end product that still rakes in the bucks. That way linux is seen as a great entry-level product going up against NT, and the cadillac is there when you start making money.
I'd rather see linux grow as a desktop OS, and hopefully the big companies will start to filter up some of the linux gifts that make it a better desktop OS (ie improvements in gnome/KDE, word processors and PIMs etc.) and maybe toss some money that way.
'Scuse me if you have tried this, but from the user page you can request that slashdot send you the password to the email you signed up with.
-Redwraith
Ed would never lie to me. Never, never, never. Ed good. Microsoft good. Linux? Linux bad.
I love Ed.
Is there an Ed Muth stuffed toy forsale, one that would keep me safe at night from the awful linux boogeymen running rampant in the night. Shudder. Evil linux.
Wow. This is simply amazing to me, he's really strapping them on. Nice to see that Linux users aren't the only passionate people around.
Where can I pick up a copy of Be? It would probably be worth it just to support their efforts.
I work with digital (speech) audio, and believe me, decoding to PCM (.wav) and then compressing it again will not sound nearly as good as the original .ra. You won't escape this by looping the line-in to the line-out, because all you are doing there is adding error introduced by the D/A and then A/D codecs on top of the errors introduced by the encode engines, not to mention line noise.
.ra to .mp3 convertor that cuts down on the mathematical errors probably has some research money waiting for them at the college of their choice.
This process is similar to editting a jpeg and then saving it again in jpeg format. The end product may be very useable (and artifacts almost unnoticeable), but keep in mind that it still isn't the ideal situation.
Of course, anyone coming up with a direct
Care to explain 2048?
:).
:)
To my knowledge, 32-bit Unix rolls over in 2038.
January 19, 2038, to be exact ('Twas reading the postgreSQL time/date format page when I read this).
Actually though, I would suspect that we won't be in such big trouble in 2038, because it shouldn't be THAT hard to move to 64-bit systems and use an 8-byte date, especially given the fact that we will have over 30 years warning.
On top of that, it's a lot easier to attach impending doom to a number like 2000 than 2038
BTW, Mr. 2001 is the new millenium, is 2000 a leap year? was 1900?
EJECTED? I find that a little hard to believe, most seminars I would suspect (even mickeysoft) are fairly friendly. They want you to buy their product and continue to use it, and those seminars usually ain't free.
I guess personally it would be bigger news to me that Microsoft is "ejecting" people from its conferences than Microsoft making uneven comparisons.
(Correct me if I'm wrong Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers won't they lock me up and throw away the key?)