btfs is nice, but i like abstraction, lvm lets me run snapshots and re-sizable volumes over any filesytem format that linux supports (ntfs, reiserfs, ext4, etc). Unless btfs's snapshots offers major performance benefits over lvm's , ill always stick with the filesystem neutral solution.
Very reasonable, especially if you have to deal with a wide range of file systems in your network ecosystem.
XNU isn't a modified FreeBSD Kernel. It's a modified Mach Kernel with FreeBSD/netBSD/OpenBSD additions hybrid kernel. It's mach messaging is intact, yet it's no longer a true micro-kernel.
Hell the Wiki entry is even off describing it as a modified Mach 2.5. It's a modified Mach 3.0+ derived hybrid kernel.
The FCC can't regulate what apps Apple makes available in their store. However, they might be able to force Apple to open the platform to other stores. Then again, Apple is free to kill the platform to prevent that (would they? could they be forced to if AT&T's contract demands of restrictions can't be met?).
And if Apple gets off by saying a 3G network is not an Internet network but rather a digital telephony network through which the Internet can be tunneled, expect other providers like cable and DSL to make similar declarations to justify restricting what their users can put through their television delivery and wired analog telephony networks.
That's absolutely brain dead. First of all, Apple has no power to control the AT&T Network. Apple is not of interest, just the way AT&T has allowed or not allowed Skype to operate, on it's backbone.
Apple is bound to the contract they signed with AT&T.
OpenOffice? They do seem to have a few decent devs there...
Except that OpenOffice sucks at so many levels that I really can't understand why you're bringing it up as an example of what a few decent devs can do.
With a handle like TeXMaster I don't expect you to use OpenOffice Write to publish, nor do I use it--Kile/LyX/TeXMaker/TeXShop/ and other lesser known TeX Editors for endless capabilities ala TeXLive. I also use DTP programs [Scribus, InDesign, Quark and more for that stuff]. Yet, for a lot of stuff I sure as hell am starting to see major progress in the spreadsheet, presentation, draw and other aspects of OpenOffice. Now if they can get Opentype natively working with kernings and more then it'll be even more impressive. I'd prefer they use TeX/LaTeX for a lot of the publishing backend but that'll never happen.
To be fair, cellular bandwidth is fundamentally limited, and has been extremely costly to deploy. It's not particularly surprising that the carriers want to recoup their investment.
Although I'll gladly admit that there is price-gouging going on, if the carriers offer unlimited cheap bandwidth, their networks will be quickly overwhelmed. As it currently stands, the carriers can utilize a large percentage of their capacity by charging high rates; what incentive is there for them to lower prices?
As technology improves, and competing companies become more ambitious, we'll likely see prices slowly begin to fall. It's all a matter of economics.
If we want companies to become more ambitious, the government should take steps to prevent monopolies from forming, and ban the absurd contract schemes that the cellular companies force on their customers.
Last I checked they were given over $200 Billion to deploy their networks, by our taxpayer dollars. I want my ROI.
I don't see why it couldn't be a first choice for many developers. Objective-C might be used for more complex task while ruby is the main language used to develop applications.
Make it your first choice. Be my guest. ObjC is the choice of OS X since 1989. If Apple restores WebObjects to it's original language, ObjC [I hated that decision when I worked there] I for one would have one more reason to use Cocoa and ObjC besides just on OS X--the Appserver Market.
The gphone has always had a skype client. This makes me wonder how carriers can continue this type of control of the cell phone platforms. Openness seems to have more of an advantage on the cell phones because of the tight control the telcos seem to try to enforce there. Is apple repeating the same mistake they made with the original Mac (trying to control both the hardware and software) vs android (runs on multiple types of hardware)? Or will the telcos desire for control keep the software closed?
In hindsight, aren't you glad you were modded as insightful? I know I'd be ecstatic having a child poster point out how off my insight has become.
So, basically, a bunch of officially-included bookmark shortcuts.
Opera has had this for ages. It is truly sweet to be able to type "g Argle Fargle" into the address-bar to do a google-search for "Argle Fargle" without ever touching my mouse. There is also 'z' for Amazon search, 'a' for Ask.com, 'b' for bittorrent, 'y' for Yahoo, etc. etc. And you can add your own.
Same goes for KDE's Konqueror. Just build your own and add them to the list.
You know. It was bad enough when we had multitudes of acronym collisions with 3-letter acronyms... but did anyone else associate LLVM with Linux Logical Volume Manager?
*sigh*
They don't have any particular antipathy to the GPL... Chriss Lattner proposed LLVM as a GCC successor after starting work at Apple. The FSF kicked him to the curb. I don't know if they underestimated his and Apple's commitment into turning the compiler into a true competitor or if they are simply stupid.
As LLVM gets better GCC will lose developers, this is unavoidable, it's EGCS all over again... but this time a merge doesn't seem on the cards. It wasn't LLVM but the FSF themselves who torpedoed one of the GPL flagships... and for very very poor reasons.
They kicked him proposal to the curb because certain devs in GCC, like all businesses [for profit or otherwise] don't like to lose the power of control.
It shows how truly dense the GCC group always was of NeXT and now of Apple Engineering.
Not really, it's neat but hardly new. You want to see a renaissance in compilers, look at TraceMonkey, LuaJIT, V8 and whatever the WebKit engine is called this week.
What the hell do you think WebKit will use to be built? LLVM.
Qt 4.5 already builds with LLVM. Same for the FreeBSD kernel.
The greatness of LLVM and Clang is that they replace the slow, rigid, crumbling GCC codebase. When the BSD-licensed Clang hits ready status, expect a massive switchover.
Well, if you ask me, I suspect that someday in a future version of the Mac OS, Ruby will be a first-class language for application development alongside or perhaps replacing Objective-C. I think Apple likes Ruby and its aesthetic. A lot of the Rails devs are Mac developers, and I think that's where it sparked.
First Class, maybe. Replacing ObjC? You're prediction makes LSD trips seem dull.
Hmmm. I loved 3.5. 4.0 was kinda sucky, so I switched to Gnome. Having read that KDE4.2 is the only desktop environment to make full use of hardware acceleration, I'm interested again - but info specific to acceleration is a bit hard to find. Do you have any leads?
With no technological infrastructure to maintain them, those ships would have fallen apart and become useless within a decade or so. I think a lot of people don't realize how much of the technological infrastructure that was "thrown away" required a large technological civilization to maintain it.
You've got to be joking. The Cylon Ship jumped away. Who the hell thought that was rational? The Galactica was broken, but wasn't dead. The systems to repair, create and mine for ores and produce infrastructure were all in the stored computer systems plans and much more. It's a big copout.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
The 'higher power' in Battlestar is probably not a divine entity, but a remnant of the ancient society of Kobal that wants to see humanity survive. This chessmaster knew what it was doing though, so it's origin and motives are never explicitly stated.
Clark may seem to get credit, but many far prior espoused this statement far more completely but seem to be overlooked. Nothing new.
The ending is just wrapping the series up for a respectful burial. Moore is telling us that this is where the story ends. No BSG: The Next Generation, no dredging up the story line 10-20 years from now and just picking up where things left off. They tied up the loose ends that they could and severed the rest.
Did you complain about all the lack of loose ends at the end of Harry Potter 7?
Wheel of Time or Dragonlance, sure, but Harry Potter? That's sad.
Read your history of the Americas. Lots and lots of white men and women "went native" and became part of local tribes.
Also, in many cases, in similar situations on Earth, with less of a technological gap, outsiders were at least initially seen as gods, or at least potential gods. Certainly in the Americas, where the natives were far more advanced then people 150k years ago and where the invaders were far less advanced than the Galactica crew, the invaders were often initially met with at least some friendliness.
We slaughtered millions because we outnumbered them. This 30,000+ is in the distinct minority, but more importantly, even Native Americans had language. These were Homo Neanderthals. They were carnivores and cannibals. Neanderthals existed as recent as 24,000 years ago, far more recent than these space shifts landing 150,000 years prior to present day.
Heck, crossbreeding the galactica crew with neanderthal humans would probably have resulted in humans too unintelligent to use the galactica tech; add a few generations and the technology is gone from society; you could leave the rest of the storyline intact but explain the loss of technology.
The humans that they showed in the show were clearly not Neanderthals. They were too tall, too lean, and in the wrong spot (Africa vs Europe). That aside, most research indicates that Neanderthals weren't likely to be any less intelligent than modern humans. If they could mate with the members of the RTF, the offspring would be intellectually fine.
Networks are trying to please Intelligent Design and Evolution angles. It's a joke. Religion in this country is hanging on with sheer desperation and the pressure by power brokers in networks to capitalize on both sides is quite clear.
You would think people in the 1770s who showed the period of Enlightenment would expect to see their descendants more evolved than they, yet would be sorely mistaken.
First: if you actually paid attention, they weren't discarding "every scrap" of technology by any means. Adama kept a Raptor, for Gods' sakes! Most people brought "supplies". They were just discarding the large scale stuff.
Tell me which is more practical:
* Try to make a city out of remnants of technology that is falling apart and cannot be replaced without any real knowledge of agriculture, etc., hoping you can get enough crops in to feed 30k plus wherever you happen to settle before winter arrives.
* Have everyone split up into groups of 1-3 and join small tribes of natives who already know how to survive on the planet, and who will likely greet you as gods.
What was his justification for keeping one, but everyone else they are supposed to be transported around the globe, dropped off and left to fend for themselves. Ron Moore has no formal education regarding Anthropology, Archeology, World History and much, much more. If he does, he chose to ignore Facts.
White Men with guns couldn't merge with native tribes. Most tribes, back then were a mix of Hunter/Gatherer and Cannibalism. The bridge between language would create fear and the end of these "invaders."
Slashdot Mirror
Then you've got BSD Man pages in OS X 10.5.
http://www.manpagez.com/man/1/cat/osx-10.5.php
http://www.manpagez.com/man/1/hdiutil/
If these aren't robust enough for you nothing will help.
btfs is nice, but i like abstraction, lvm lets me run snapshots and re-sizable volumes over any filesytem format that linux supports (ntfs, reiserfs, ext4, etc). Unless btfs's snapshots offers major performance benefits over lvm's , ill always stick with the filesystem neutral solution.
Very reasonable, especially if you have to deal with a wide range of file systems in your network ecosystem.
XNU isn't a modified FreeBSD Kernel. It's a modified Mach Kernel with FreeBSD/netBSD/OpenBSD additions hybrid kernel. It's mach messaging is intact, yet it's no longer a true micro-kernel.
Hell the Wiki entry is even off describing it as a modified Mach 2.5. It's a modified Mach 3.0+ derived hybrid kernel.
Not LVM: Btrfs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs
Did you bid billions of dollars for bandwidth licensing to the FCC? No? Move along.
The FCC can't regulate what apps Apple makes available in their store. However, they might be able to force Apple to open the platform to other stores. Then again, Apple is free to kill the platform to prevent that (would they? could they be forced to if AT&T's contract demands of restrictions can't be met?).
And if Apple gets off by saying a 3G network is not an Internet network but rather a digital telephony network through which the Internet can be tunneled, expect other providers like cable and DSL to make similar declarations to justify restricting what their users can put through their television delivery and wired analog telephony networks.
That's absolutely brain dead. First of all, Apple has no power to control the AT&T Network. Apple is not of interest, just the way AT&T has allowed or not allowed Skype to operate, on it's backbone. Apple is bound to the contract they signed with AT&T.
OpenOffice? They do seem to have a few decent devs there...
Except that OpenOffice sucks at so many levels that I really can't understand why you're bringing it up as an example of what a few decent devs can do.
With a handle like TeXMaster I don't expect you to use OpenOffice Write to publish, nor do I use it--Kile/LyX/TeXMaker/TeXShop/ and other lesser known TeX Editors for endless capabilities ala TeXLive. I also use DTP programs [Scribus, InDesign, Quark and more for that stuff]. Yet, for a lot of stuff I sure as hell am starting to see major progress in the spreadsheet, presentation, draw and other aspects of OpenOffice. Now if they can get Opentype natively working with kernings and more then it'll be even more impressive. I'd prefer they use TeX/LaTeX for a lot of the publishing backend but that'll never happen.
Agreed.
http://www.crestron.com/solutions/integration_with_apple_mac_iphone/
To be fair, cellular bandwidth is fundamentally limited, and has been extremely costly to deploy. It's not particularly surprising that the carriers want to recoup their investment.
Although I'll gladly admit that there is price-gouging going on, if the carriers offer unlimited cheap bandwidth, their networks will be quickly overwhelmed. As it currently stands, the carriers can utilize a large percentage of their capacity by charging high rates; what incentive is there for them to lower prices?
As technology improves, and competing companies become more ambitious, we'll likely see prices slowly begin to fall. It's all a matter of economics.
If we want companies to become more ambitious, the government should take steps to prevent monopolies from forming, and ban the absurd contract schemes that the cellular companies force on their customers.
Last I checked they were given over $200 Billion to deploy their networks, by our taxpayer dollars. I want my ROI.
I don't see why it couldn't be a first choice for many developers. Objective-C might be used for more complex task while ruby is the main language used to develop applications.
Make it your first choice. Be my guest. ObjC is the choice of OS X since 1989. If Apple restores WebObjects to it's original language, ObjC [I hated that decision when I worked there] I for one would have one more reason to use Cocoa and ObjC besides just on OS X--the Appserver Market.
The gphone has always had a skype client. This makes me wonder how carriers can continue this type of control of the cell phone platforms. Openness seems to have more of an advantage on the cell phones because of the tight control the telcos seem to try to enforce there. Is apple repeating the same mistake they made with the original Mac (trying to control both the hardware and software) vs android (runs on multiple types of hardware)? Or will the telcos desire for control keep the software closed?
In hindsight, aren't you glad you were modded as insightful? I know I'd be ecstatic having a child poster point out how off my insight has become.
Opera has had this for ages. It is truly sweet to be able to type "g Argle Fargle" into the address-bar to do a google-search for "Argle Fargle" without ever touching my mouse. There is also 'z' for Amazon search, 'a' for Ask.com, 'b' for bittorrent, 'y' for Yahoo, etc. etc. And you can add your own.
Same goes for KDE's Konqueror. Just build your own and add them to the list.
You know. It was bad enough when we had multitudes of acronym collisions with 3-letter acronyms... but did anyone else associate LLVM with Linux Logical Volume Manager? *sigh*
No.
They don't have any particular antipathy to the GPL ... Chriss Lattner proposed LLVM as a GCC successor after starting work at Apple. The FSF kicked him to the curb. I don't know if they underestimated his and Apple's commitment into turning the compiler into a true competitor or if they are simply stupid.
As LLVM gets better GCC will lose developers, this is unavoidable, it's EGCS all over again ... but this time a merge doesn't seem on the cards. It wasn't LLVM but the FSF themselves who torpedoed one of the GPL flagships ... and for very very poor reasons.
They kicked him proposal to the curb because certain devs in GCC, like all businesses [for profit or otherwise] don't like to lose the power of control.
It shows how truly dense the GCC group always was of NeXT and now of Apple Engineering.
Not really, it's neat but hardly new. You want to see a renaissance in compilers, look at TraceMonkey, LuaJIT, V8 and whatever the WebKit engine is called this week.
What the hell do you think WebKit will use to be built? LLVM.
Qt 4.5 already builds with LLVM. Same for the FreeBSD kernel.
The greatness of LLVM and Clang is that they replace the slow, rigid, crumbling GCC codebase. When the BSD-licensed Clang hits ready status, expect a massive switchover.
Precisely.
Well, if you ask me, I suspect that someday in a future version of the Mac OS, Ruby will be a first-class language for application development alongside or perhaps replacing Objective-C. I think Apple likes Ruby and its aesthetic. A lot of the Rails devs are Mac developers, and I think that's where it sparked.
First Class, maybe. Replacing ObjC? You're prediction makes LSD trips seem dull.
Hmmm. I loved 3.5. 4.0 was kinda sucky, so I switched to Gnome. Having read that KDE4.2 is the only desktop environment to make full use of hardware acceleration, I'm interested again - but info specific to acceleration is a bit hard to find. Do you have any leads?
Here is the 4.3 feature plan:
http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.3_Feature_Plan
With no technological infrastructure to maintain them, those ships would have fallen apart and become useless within a decade or so. I think a lot of people don't realize how much of the technological infrastructure that was "thrown away" required a large technological civilization to maintain it.
You've got to be joking. The Cylon Ship jumped away. Who the hell thought that was rational? The Galactica was broken, but wasn't dead. The systems to repair, create and mine for ores and produce infrastructure were all in the stored computer systems plans and much more. It's a big copout.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." The 'higher power' in Battlestar is probably not a divine entity, but a remnant of the ancient society of Kobal that wants to see humanity survive. This chessmaster knew what it was doing though, so it's origin and motives are never explicitly stated.
Clark may seem to get credit, but many far prior espoused this statement far more completely but seem to be overlooked. Nothing new.
The ending is just wrapping the series up for a respectful burial. Moore is telling us that this is where the story ends. No BSG: The Next Generation, no dredging up the story line 10-20 years from now and just picking up where things left off. They tied up the loose ends that they could and severed the rest.
Did you complain about all the lack of loose ends at the end of Harry Potter 7?
Wheel of Time or Dragonlance, sure, but Harry Potter? That's sad.
Read your history of the Americas. Lots and lots of white men and women "went native" and became part of local tribes.
Also, in many cases, in similar situations on Earth, with less of a technological gap, outsiders were at least initially seen as gods, or at least potential gods. Certainly in the Americas, where the natives were far more advanced then people 150k years ago and where the invaders were far less advanced than the Galactica crew, the invaders were often initially met with at least some friendliness.
We slaughtered millions because we outnumbered them. This 30,000+ is in the distinct minority, but more importantly, even Native Americans had language. These were Homo Neanderthals. They were carnivores and cannibals. Neanderthals existed as recent as 24,000 years ago, far more recent than these space shifts landing 150,000 years prior to present day.
Heck, crossbreeding the galactica crew with neanderthal humans would probably have resulted in humans too unintelligent to use the galactica tech; add a few generations and the technology is gone from society; you could leave the rest of the storyline intact but explain the loss of technology.
The humans that they showed in the show were clearly not Neanderthals. They were too tall, too lean, and in the wrong spot (Africa vs Europe). That aside, most research indicates that Neanderthals weren't likely to be any less intelligent than modern humans. If they could mate with the members of the RTF, the offspring would be intellectually fine.
Wanna bet? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal
Networks are trying to please Intelligent Design and Evolution angles. It's a joke. Religion in this country is hanging on with sheer desperation and the pressure by power brokers in networks to capitalize on both sides is quite clear.
You would think people in the 1770s who showed the period of Enlightenment would expect to see their descendants more evolved than they, yet would be sorely mistaken.
First: if you actually paid attention, they weren't discarding "every scrap" of technology by any means. Adama kept a Raptor, for Gods' sakes! Most people brought "supplies". They were just discarding the large scale stuff.
Tell me which is more practical:
* Try to make a city out of remnants of technology that is falling apart and cannot be replaced without any real knowledge of agriculture, etc., hoping you can get enough crops in to feed 30k plus wherever you happen to settle before winter arrives.
* Have everyone split up into groups of 1-3 and join small tribes of natives who already know how to survive on the planet, and who will likely greet you as gods.
What was his justification for keeping one, but everyone else they are supposed to be transported around the globe, dropped off and left to fend for themselves. Ron Moore has no formal education regarding Anthropology, Archeology, World History and much, much more. If he does, he chose to ignore Facts.
White Men with guns couldn't merge with native tribes. Most tribes, back then were a mix of Hunter/Gatherer and Cannibalism. The bridge between language would create fear and the end of these "invaders."