IT is not engineering. The two fields are not analogous
Bravo! I'm so sick of liberal arts majors, fellow CS majors and much more who don't have an actual engineering degree [M.E. here] and always bitching that they aren't recognized as Engineers. A fellow colleague at NeXT conveyed how he never got the respect of his father about the title Senior Software Engineer--his father called him a Senior Software Programmer. I couldn't help placate his ego. I agreed with his father who held and EE masters from MIT. I basically told him to either accept that his biology degree doesn't transfer no matter how many years he's employed with the title Software Engineer or he could actually study and get a degree in engineering. Bill Joy was famously cited for saying he hopes one day that CS eventually can be like Mechanical Engineering. He's right.
How they concluded that playing massive hours of games where you're focus in on the game and not shoveling crap in your mouth is the problem is rather myopic. How about the end of grade school recess, mandatory exercises during school and the crappy food you eat there and the even crappier fast food you eat at home?
Somebody is going to make around $3 billion on this, but it isn't going to be eBay, who sold Skype last year for $2 billion, which was less than what they paid for the company when they bought it.
eBay didn't sell Skype outright. They will be making a profit in this transaction.
NoSQL is not really about scalability, it is about modelling your data the same way your application does.
There is a strong disconnect between the way SQL represents data and the way traditional programming languages do. While we've come up with some clever solutions like ORM to alleviate the problem, why not just store the data directly without any mapping?
I am not suggesting that SQL is never the right tool for the job, but it most certainly is not the right tool for every job. It is good to have many different kinds of hammers, and perhaps even a screwdriver or two.
"Programming requires long nights staring blankly at mind-muddling objective languages."
Actually, no, it doesn't. I have never done this and never will. And yet I'm gainfully imployed as a programmer and my bosses (including the owners of the company) constantly tell me they value my contributions to the company.
What are you developing? More specifically, what area of development do you focus on? And if you tell me web development and not something in the applied engineering sciences, physics, mathematics, theoretical artificial intelligence, etc., then it explains how come you aren't having to spend a lot of time.
It's 1994 all over again. NeXT and it's dynamic language being so backwards compared to C++ and now how many of these dynamic languages are all the rage, today? Seriously, it shows a real shallow pool of experience when people are claiming a revolution with Ruby and Python or EcmaScript when it comes to dynamic run-times and dynamic typing. I'm just glad Apple finally dumped Carbon for Objective-C and Cocoa.
``Go Xerox that for me.'' Xerox hated that phrase as well. They lost their case. That's the price you pay when your service brand name rolls off the tongue easily as the main action of what mainly made your service famous.
Not really, it's just good common sense security, which all us IT geeks should have at least a passing knowledge of.
I especially liked the distinction he made between secrecy and access, which really is the crux of the matter. It's trivial to secure anything against anyone if you really want to (chuck in a waterproof safe then drop into the Mariana Trench for example), but the problem is there's always at least one person who needs access, and that's where security gets complicated.
If it wree common it wouldn't need to be said. It's called good sense or just experience, but not common sense.
Now when you have a ~5% devaluation rate on your paper, due to the Private Central Bank running the printing presses like mad. $150,000 today... $142,000 next year... $135,000 the following year... and so on.
By 2020 your mattress or shoebox stash will be worth just $89,000. You're better off to put the paper in the bank where the 5% devaluation can be offset by a 1-2% interest rate.
I know it was a humorous exercise, but until the printed bills [year stamp specific and regionally stamped] are no longer valid to exchange for goods, the value doesn't depreciate. It's still $150,000. You would have made more of an impact with the simple fact that your mattress isn't FDIC insured and even.5% is better than 0%.
Forgive me, but can you indeed copyright a recipe? I thought you couldn't copyright a fact (e.g. the mix of ingredients), but only the process (mix for 30 seconds, then rest). I mean come on, recipes are ripped off constantly....
I'd like some references please, for my own education.
I have a question. Roughly, how old are you? I ask, because you aren't alone in thinking Chemistry is some how not patentable, nor copyright able. I'm going to assume you're = 30 then I will consider you naive. If you are 40 crowd grew up knowing Nabisco, etc., product formulas are all legally protected.
Forgive me, but can you indeed copyright a recipe? I thought you couldn't copyright a fact (e.g. the mix of ingredients), but only the process (mix for 30 seconds, then rest). I mean come on, recipes are ripped off constantly....
I'd like some references please, for my own education.
You think all those commercially purchased cookies aren't protected? Get real. Famous Amos cookies come to mind.
Oh please. Apple has been stuck at OpenGL 2.1 for years with only preliminary OpenGL 3 support this year. Doesn't even have shader support. Hardly what I'd call 'phenomenal' support.
Apple has been stuck at OpenGL 2.1 because the entire OS is OpenGL 2.1 leveraged. Soon the entire OS will be OpenGL 3.x leveraged and KDE or GNOME are OpenGL 1.x leveraged [yes they have OpenGL 3.x drivers for specific application development but not the Desktop Environment, all it's windows, etc.,] only and aren't discussing the concept of 3.x until several years from now.
These days, I pretty much only buy motherboards with intel graphics, simply because I don't want to have to deal with the hassle of installing NVidia's closed drivers, and for the life of me I can't figure out what I am supposed to do with an ATI card. There seems to be half a dozen open source driver projects always on the go, with no clear indication of what cards work and what cards don't. Add to that the constant complaints I see over their own closed source drivers, and that's another brand I simply won't consider. Someone tell me I'm wrong and point me to something that can clarify the situation.
So difficult. $ sudo apt-get install nvidia-....amd64.deb. The torture is unbearable.
'unauthorized usage' means a lot of things. It *could* mean jailbroken, but - to those with a brain - it means the ability to remote wipe your phone, find it if it is stolen, etc. Remote wipe is crucial on the enterprise. While I question the validity of the patent (how long has RIM had remote wipe?), the actions are valid. Jailbreaking is legal, there is nothing Apple can do to that, so get over it.
You're asking this group to having reading comprehension skills and even more the willingness to read, before decrying it illegal.
They applied for a patent, they weren't granted one. I'm sure there is plenty of prior art on this type of thing (the cable monopolies come to mind with disabling set-top boxes or the like).
It's about the implementation for a specific device, application, etc. This is specific to Apple hardware.
Wine snobs usually have their opinions backed up by double-blind tests. The taste buds of good sommelier really can tell the type, vintage, and what kind of wood was used in the barrel that aged the wine. It was a blind test that proved that France wasn't the best in the world after all.
They might be snobs, but they do have some Scientific backing behind them. Audiophiles, not so much.
Written like a piss water Bud Lite/Keystone/Budweiser [all brands]/Miller Time kind of critic. Next you're going to tell us that Micro-brewed beers are all the same, or Micro-distilled whisky/bourbon/vokda/gin are just like Monarch, eh?
XNU is a hybrid kernel. It's part microkernel part monolithic. The big difference is how memory allocation is handled. XNU does use message passing for system calls so that aspect still exists.
As for commercial operating systems, there are several that use microkernel or hybrid kernels besides Mac OS including Windows and QNX.
I can't believe it took 5 comments to get the progression of Mach Microkernel [NeXT] to Mach Hybrid XNU Kernel. Seriously, this place as a technically competent lot has moved on.
Infobox_Software
name = XNU kernel
caption =
developer = Apple Inc.
latest_release_version =
latest_release_date =
operating_system = Darwin & Mac OS X
genre = Kernel
kernel_type = Hybrid
license = Apple Public Source License 2.0
working_state = In production / development
website = http://kernel.macosforge.org/
XNU is the computer operating system kernel that Apple Inc. acquired and developed for use in the Mac OS X operating system and released as free and open source software as part of the Darwin operating system. "XNU" is an acronym for "X is Not Unix" [cite web | year=2005 | url=http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Porting/Conceptual/PortingUnix/glossary/chapter_998_section_1.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002859-DontLinkElementID_38 | title=Porting UNIX/Linux Applications to Mac OS X: Glossary | publisher=Apple Computer | accessdate=2005-12-13]
Originally developed by NeXT for the NEXTSTEP operating system, XNU was a hybrid kernel combining version 2.5 of the Mach kernel developed at Carnegie Mellon University with components from 4.3BSD and an object-oriented API for writing drivers called Driver Kit.
After Apple acquired NeXT, the Mach component was upgraded to 3.0, the BSD components were upgraded with code from the FreeBSD project and the Driver Kit was replaced with a C++ API for writing drivers called I/O Kit.
Kernel design
Like some other modern kernels, XNU is a hybrid, containing features of both monolithic and microkernels, attempting to make the best use of both technologies, such as the message passing capability of microkernels enabling greater modularity and larger portions of the OS to benefit from protected memory, as well as retaining the speed of monolithic kernels for certain critical tasks.
Currently, XNU runs on ARM [ [http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/01/iphone-processor-found-620mhz-arm/ iPhone processor found: 620MHz ARM CPU] (2007-07-01 accessdate|2008-01-06] , x86, x86-64 and PowerPC based processors, both single processor and SMP models.
Mach
The core of the XNU kernel, Mach, was originally conceived as a simple microkernel. As such, it is able to run the core of an operating system as separated processes, which allows a great flexibility (one could run several operating systems in parallel above the Mach core), but this often reduced performance because of time consuming kernel/user mode context switches and overhead stemming from mapping or copying messages between the address spaces of the microkernel and that of the service daemons. With Mac OS X, the designers have attempted to streamline certain tasks and thus BSD functionalities were built into the core with Mach. The result is a combination of Mach and a classical BSD kernel, with some advantages and disadvantages of both.
Mach provides kernel threads, processes, pre-emptive multitasking, message-passing (used in inter-process communication), protected memory, virtual memory management, very soft real-time support, kernel debugging support, and console I/O. The Mach component also allows the OS to host binaries for multiple distinct CPU architectures within a single file (such as x86 and PowerPC) due to its use of the Mach-O binary
Slashdot Mirror
IT is not engineering. The two fields are not analogous
Bravo! I'm so sick of liberal arts majors, fellow CS majors and much more who don't have an actual engineering degree [M.E. here] and always bitching that they aren't recognized as Engineers. A fellow colleague at NeXT conveyed how he never got the respect of his father about the title Senior Software Engineer--his father called him a Senior Software Programmer. I couldn't help placate his ego. I agreed with his father who held and EE masters from MIT. I basically told him to either accept that his biology degree doesn't transfer no matter how many years he's employed with the title Software Engineer or he could actually study and get a degree in engineering. Bill Joy was famously cited for saying he hopes one day that CS eventually can be like Mechanical Engineering. He's right.
How they concluded that playing massive hours of games where you're focus in on the game and not shoveling crap in your mouth is the problem is rather myopic. How about the end of grade school recess, mandatory exercises during school and the crappy food you eat there and the even crappier fast food you eat at home?
Somebody is going to make around $3 billion on this, but it isn't going to be eBay, who sold Skype last year for $2 billion, which was less than what they paid for the company when they bought it.
eBay didn't sell Skype outright. They will be making a profit in this transaction.
NoSQL is not really about scalability, it is about modelling your data the same way your application does.
There is a strong disconnect between the way SQL represents data and the way traditional programming languages do. While we've come up with some clever solutions like ORM to alleviate the problem, why not just store the data directly without any mapping?
I am not suggesting that SQL is never the right tool for the job, but it most certainly is not the right tool for every job. It is good to have many different kinds of hammers, and perhaps even a screwdriver or two.
In short, NeXT/Apple Enterprise Objects Framework. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_Objects_Framework
"Programming requires long nights staring blankly at mind-muddling objective languages."
Actually, no, it doesn't. I have never done this and never will. And yet I'm gainfully imployed as a programmer and my bosses (including the owners of the company) constantly tell me they value my contributions to the company.
What are you developing? More specifically, what area of development do you focus on? And if you tell me web development and not something in the applied engineering sciences, physics, mathematics, theoretical artificial intelligence, etc., then it explains how come you aren't having to spend a lot of time.
It's 1994 all over again. NeXT and it's dynamic language being so backwards compared to C++ and now how many of these dynamic languages are all the rage, today? Seriously, it shows a real shallow pool of experience when people are claiming a revolution with Ruby and Python or EcmaScript when it comes to dynamic run-times and dynamic typing. I'm just glad Apple finally dumped Carbon for Objective-C and Cocoa.
Sometimes its cheaper to buy innovation than to do it yourself, depending on what you're innovating.
Sometimes is correct. Yet, Google rarely develops and designs products. That sometime is basically reserved for something they can't buy.
Ironically, they'll get their Trademark claim, after they lose this case, modified as now this claim has brought direct attention to it.
Huh? What?
I believe its a reference from, ``The Long Kiss Goodnight,'' where Geena Davis is agent Baltimore and Samuel Jackson is a former cop.
``Go Xerox that for me.'' Xerox hated that phrase as well. They lost their case. That's the price you pay when your service brand name rolls off the tongue easily as the main action of what mainly made your service famous.
Not really, it's just good common sense security, which all us IT geeks should have at least a passing knowledge of. I especially liked the distinction he made between secrecy and access, which really is the crux of the matter. It's trivial to secure anything against anyone if you really want to (chuck in a waterproof safe then drop into the Mariana Trench for example), but the problem is there's always at least one person who needs access, and that's where security gets complicated.
If it wree common it wouldn't need to be said. It's called good sense or just experience, but not common sense.
Now when you have a ~5% devaluation rate on your paper, due to the Private Central Bank running the printing presses like mad. $150,000 today... $142,000 next year... $135,000 the following year... and so on.
By 2020 your mattress or shoebox stash will be worth just $89,000. You're better off to put the paper in the bank where the 5% devaluation can be offset by a 1-2% interest rate.
I know it was a humorous exercise, but until the printed bills [year stamp specific and regionally stamped] are no longer valid to exchange for goods, the value doesn't depreciate. It's still $150,000. You would have made more of an impact with the simple fact that your mattress isn't FDIC insured and even .5% is better than 0%.
Forgive me, but can you indeed copyright a recipe? I thought you couldn't copyright a fact (e.g. the mix of ingredients), but only the process (mix for 30 seconds, then rest). I mean come on, recipes are ripped off constantly.... I'd like some references please, for my own education.
I have a question. Roughly, how old are you? I ask, because you aren't alone in thinking Chemistry is some how not patentable, nor copyright able. I'm going to assume you're = 30 then I will consider you naive. If you are 40 crowd grew up knowing Nabisco, etc., product formulas are all legally protected.
Forgive me, but can you indeed copyright a recipe? I thought you couldn't copyright a fact (e.g. the mix of ingredients), but only the process (mix for 30 seconds, then rest). I mean come on, recipes are ripped off constantly.... I'd like some references please, for my own education.
You think all those commercially purchased cookies aren't protected? Get real. Famous Amos cookies come to mind.
Oh please. Apple has been stuck at OpenGL 2.1 for years with only preliminary OpenGL 3 support this year. Doesn't even have shader support. Hardly what I'd call 'phenomenal' support.
Apple has been stuck at OpenGL 2.1 because the entire OS is OpenGL 2.1 leveraged. Soon the entire OS will be OpenGL 3.x leveraged and KDE or GNOME are OpenGL 1.x leveraged [yes they have OpenGL 3.x drivers for specific application development but not the Desktop Environment, all it's windows, etc.,] only and aren't discussing the concept of 3.x until several years from now.
I bet you're mad that 'gay' used to mean 'happy'.
Being mad is pretty gay, dude...
Gay stay means `happy.' There is a reason words have multiple definitions for the same word, in English. It's all in the context.
Wacko 101. : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royce_C._Lamberth
These days, I pretty much only buy motherboards with intel graphics, simply because I don't want to have to deal with the hassle of installing NVidia's closed drivers, and for the life of me I can't figure out what I am supposed to do with an ATI card. There seems to be half a dozen open source driver projects always on the go, with no clear indication of what cards work and what cards don't. Add to that the constant complaints I see over their own closed source drivers, and that's another brand I simply won't consider. Someone tell me I'm wrong and point me to something that can clarify the situation.
So difficult. $ sudo apt-get install nvidia-....amd64.deb. The torture is unbearable.
Why? Unless the resulting drivers are actually better which remains to be seen, just the fact that they are open source is meaningless.
Now if someone can fix ATIs shitty OpenGL support, then I'd be all over it. But for right now this makes no difference.
They have phenomenal OpenGL support, just not for Linux.
That's why I got an ati card for my ubuntu 10.04 64 bit. I didn't see any other choice!
Than what? Buying the nvidia and just installing the binary driver they produce? Oh the horror!
'unauthorized usage' means a lot of things. It *could* mean jailbroken, but - to those with a brain - it means the ability to remote wipe your phone, find it if it is stolen, etc. Remote wipe is crucial on the enterprise. While I question the validity of the patent (how long has RIM had remote wipe?), the actions are valid. Jailbreaking is legal, there is nothing Apple can do to that, so get over it.
You're asking this group to having reading comprehension skills and even more the willingness to read, before decrying it illegal.
They applied for a patent, they weren't granted one. I'm sure there is plenty of prior art on this type of thing (the cable monopolies come to mind with disabling set-top boxes or the like).
It's about the implementation for a specific device, application, etc. This is specific to Apple hardware.
Wine snobs usually have their opinions backed up by double-blind tests. The taste buds of good sommelier really can tell the type, vintage, and what kind of wood was used in the barrel that aged the wine. It was a blind test that proved that France wasn't the best in the world after all.
They might be snobs, but they do have some Scientific backing behind them. Audiophiles, not so much.
Written like a piss water Bud Lite/Keystone/Budweiser [all brands]/Miller Time kind of critic. Next you're going to tell us that Micro-brewed beers are all the same, or Micro-distilled whisky/bourbon/vokda/gin are just like Monarch, eh?
Besides the point. Mac OS X (nor BSD) doesn't use Mach (anymore), though it retains two of its features (though not BSD).
that mach-o is just for looks.
XNU is a hybrid kernel. It's part microkernel part monolithic. The big difference is how memory allocation is handled. XNU does use message passing for system calls so that aspect still exists.
As for commercial operating systems, there are several that use microkernel or hybrid kernels besides Mac OS including Windows and QNX.
I can't believe it took 5 comments to get the progression of Mach Microkernel [NeXT] to Mach Hybrid XNU Kernel. Seriously, this place as a technically competent lot has moved on.
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/331902