Look up "race to sleep". If the 4-s can get the same work done in less time due to the higher IPC on the new CPU, it could beat the iphone 4 in some circumstances. obviously, running 100% load it will use more power, but it typically won't be doing that.
Oh, they should have "acknowledged the problem sooner". So, basically rather than confirm what is going on, simply shoot from the hip and hope for the best, eh?
Yup, you could even say the same of Windows to an extent.
Conversely, it also works against the mac a bit because people use a mac for 5 minutes, see that it looks like it has a few "dumbed down" features in the GUI, but if you never scratch the surface you don't find the "wow that's so cool" features that enable you to do so much without a lot of time or effort expended.
Automator, applescript, pervasive drag and drop, the services menu, self contained app bundles, time machine and spotlight are all huge wins, and nothing on any other platform i've used so far comes close.
Sure, knock-off look-alike tools may exist on other platforms but none are as well integrated or easy to use.
There's a lot more to OS X than the GUI and in fact IMHO the GUI has a lot of design decisions (especially pre-lion) that really piss me off. The good stuff is underneath - and I use OS X despite the Aqua UI, not because of it.
Yes, i believe there was also updates with Vista SP2 or Win7 as well. However arguing that NTFS was regularly updated when pointing to Windows XP is pretty stupid.
The thing is, a mac is fine if you're a power user. Unfortunately Gnome and KDE are trying to replicate bits of OS X without getting the foundations laid properly first to make such pieces actually work
No it doesn't. Open a terminal and its all there. If you aren't comfortable with the terminal, you probably shouldn' be fucking with those directories.
I'm a power user / unix admin of 15 years, and I've yet to find a reason to go poking around the unix filesystem on my mac, other than to edit the default apache configuration on my little lion server mac mini. If you're running desktop OS X, there is pretty much ZERO reason to be poking around in those directories.
No, what you really want is block level de-dupe. Having your FS randomly try to guess at how to best compress your files, when they are typically already compressed using highly specialized codecs = fail.
Yup. Its all about de-dupe. Files are already compressed as CPU speed has outstripped IO by a large margin - compressing your file format gets you better IO speed. Thus, having the FS try and compress your already compressed data with some generic algorithm = LOSE.
Block level de-dupe on the other hand, can save you HEAPS of space on a typical system. Like, cut your disk utilization by 50-60% on a typical file share storing end-user files.
What you probably really want is de-dupe. Run ZFS. ohwait...
IMHO, this effort is pointless. If you're poking around in the file system you want it to be like any other Linux so that you don't piss off admins any more than redhat already does due to being different. If you're an idiot who can't RTFM to find out where files are, then you probably shouldn't be poking around the filesystem outside of ~/.
If you want to make linux user friendly, get rid of the need for users to go poking around in the filesystem.
Store all your credentials in a keychain that you can protect with a private key, and then keep the private key (or copy of it) in a safe. Put the combination to the safe in your will.
Centos are only using GPL software. Or do you think things that have been released under the GPL are somehow patent-protected or sacred because redhat had a hand in their development? Redhat are doing just fine thanks. And if they are not able to differentiate themselves sufficiently to make money, then perhaps supporting the GPL is a failure as a business model. However, evidence suggests otherwise.
Good luck getting vendor support for running your typical Windows apps in WINE. And support is valuable to an enterprise.
Sure, you may be able to fix issues with the app running in WINE, but if you leave, want to take a holiday, get hit by a bus, etc the company wants the minimum hassle possible. Running Windows apps in Windows in a fairly secure manner is not hard if you do it properly. However, trying to use linux everywhere or Windows everywhere or Mac everywhere is like hammering nails with your smartphone because thats the only tool you know. It might get the job done, but the cost and performance may be worse than optimal.
There are plenty of "tools" available. Trying to use 1 tool for every job is selling yourself short. If you don't know how to run both *NIX and Windows (and OS X for that matter) in a secure and supportable manner (and are aware of the ACTUAL limitations of both, not just the FUD from both sides), learn. You'll make yourself far more valuable to a prospective employer, and have far more options when you start doing consulting work for yourself.
lol. if you look at MY posting history, you could think i am an anti-foss troll. however i call it like i see it, and have gone from being a linux-freak (back in the mid-late 90s through to the early 00s) to more of a pragmatist. if you've got a unix app, run bsd or linux. if the app runs on Windows (or Mac), run that. its all about the apps.
If (cost of downtime per day) (cost of RHEL support) and (app is trivial/simple/non-mission critical) then perhaps the value of support is not worth the $.
People who suggest ubuntu over RHEL on mission critical enterprise servers because of the lack of non-security related updates are clueless noobs who are going to be severely burned one day by dependency hell on some random piece of shitware that is not required for the operation of your server.
Mission critical servers are installed and then maintained with the bare minimum of patches required to ensure continued secure operation. You install new pieces of random shitware in TEST, and upgrade software in TEST then roll out as a major upgrade after a few years - not every 2 weeks.
People still buy red hat for the support. If the pay ware stuff in red hat was worth money, then people would pay money for it. Whining about red hat getting fucked when this is exactly the type of behaviour expected and encouraged by the GPL is disingenuous.
Slashdot Mirror
Cheaply made and badly engineered hardware has high failure rate and low durability.
Look up "race to sleep". If the 4-s can get the same work done in less time due to the higher IPC on the new CPU, it could beat the iphone 4 in some circumstances. obviously, running 100% load it will use more power, but it typically won't be doing that.
Oh, they should have "acknowledged the problem sooner". So, basically rather than confirm what is going on, simply shoot from the hip and hope for the best, eh?
meanwhile, in reality land, i can still install a custom kernel if i like...
Yup, you could even say the same of Windows to an extent.
Conversely, it also works against the mac a bit because people use a mac for 5 minutes, see that it looks like it has a few "dumbed down" features in the GUI, but if you never scratch the surface you don't find the "wow that's so cool" features that enable you to do so much without a lot of time or effort expended.
Automator, applescript, pervasive drag and drop, the services menu, self contained app bundles, time machine and spotlight are all huge wins, and nothing on any other platform i've used so far comes close.
Sure, knock-off look-alike tools may exist on other platforms but none are as well integrated or easy to use.
There's a lot more to OS X than the GUI and in fact IMHO the GUI has a lot of design decisions (especially pre-lion) that really piss me off. The good stuff is underneath - and I use OS X despite the Aqua UI, not because of it.
Yes, i believe there was also updates with Vista SP2 or Win7 as well. However arguing that NTFS was regularly updated when pointing to Windows XP is pretty stupid.
The thing is, a mac is fine if you're a power user. Unfortunately Gnome and KDE are trying to replicate bits of OS X without getting the foundations laid properly first to make such pieces actually work
No it doesn't. Open a terminal and its all there. If you aren't comfortable with the terminal, you probably shouldn' be fucking with those directories.
I'm a power user / unix admin of 15 years, and I've yet to find a reason to go poking around the unix filesystem on my mac, other than to edit the default apache configuration on my little lion server mac mini. If you're running desktop OS X, there is pretty much ZERO reason to be poking around in those directories.
Newsflash: XP (and thus, the version of NTFS with it) came out 10 years ago.
No, what you really want is block level de-dupe. Having your FS randomly try to guess at how to best compress your files, when they are typically already compressed using highly specialized codecs = fail.
Yup. Its all about de-dupe. Files are already compressed as CPU speed has outstripped IO by a large margin - compressing your file format gets you better IO speed. Thus, having the FS try and compress your already compressed data with some generic algorithm = LOSE.
Block level de-dupe on the other hand, can save you HEAPS of space on a typical system. Like, cut your disk utilization by 50-60% on a typical file share storing end-user files.
What you probably really want is de-dupe. Run ZFS. ohwait...
IMHO, this effort is pointless. If you're poking around in the file system you want it to be like any other Linux so that you don't piss off admins any more than redhat already does due to being different. If you're an idiot who can't RTFM to find out where files are, then you probably shouldn't be poking around the filesystem outside of ~/.
If you want to make linux user friendly, get rid of the need for users to go poking around in the filesystem.
Store all your credentials in a keychain that you can protect with a private key, and then keep the private key (or copy of it) in a safe. Put the combination to the safe in your will.
Mostly iDevices, yes. The rest are mostly samsungs.
I've seen only 2 HTCs in the wild.
uh, i meant to reply to the parent of the post i replied to... sorry...
Centos are only using GPL software. Or do you think things that have been released under the GPL are somehow patent-protected or sacred because redhat had a hand in their development? Redhat are doing just fine thanks. And if they are not able to differentiate themselves sufficiently to make money, then perhaps supporting the GPL is a failure as a business model. However, evidence suggests otherwise.
Good luck getting vendor support for running your typical Windows apps in WINE. And support is valuable to an enterprise.
Sure, you may be able to fix issues with the app running in WINE, but if you leave, want to take a holiday, get hit by a bus, etc the company wants the minimum hassle possible. Running Windows apps in Windows in a fairly secure manner is not hard if you do it properly. However, trying to use linux everywhere or Windows everywhere or Mac everywhere is like hammering nails with your smartphone because thats the only tool you know. It might get the job done, but the cost and performance may be worse than optimal.
There are plenty of "tools" available. Trying to use 1 tool for every job is selling yourself short. If you don't know how to run both *NIX and Windows (and OS X for that matter) in a secure and supportable manner (and are aware of the ACTUAL limitations of both, not just the FUD from both sides), learn. You'll make yourself far more valuable to a prospective employer, and have far more options when you start doing consulting work for yourself.
lol. if you look at MY posting history, you could think i am an anti-foss troll. however i call it like i see it, and have gone from being a linux-freak (back in the mid-late 90s through to the early 00s) to more of a pragmatist. if you've got a unix app, run bsd or linux. if the app runs on Windows (or Mac), run that. its all about the apps.
Are apple good or evil today. Wait, what am i saying, this is slashdot....
If (cost of downtime per day) (cost of RHEL support) and (app is trivial/simple/non-mission critical) then perhaps the value of support is not worth the $.
People who suggest ubuntu over RHEL on mission critical enterprise servers because of the lack of non-security related updates are clueless noobs who are going to be severely burned one day by dependency hell on some random piece of shitware that is not required for the operation of your server.
Mission critical servers are installed and then maintained with the bare minimum of patches required to ensure continued secure operation. You install new pieces of random shitware in TEST, and upgrade software in TEST then roll out as a major upgrade after a few years - not every 2 weeks.
People still buy red hat for the support. If the pay ware stuff in red hat was worth money, then people would pay money for it. Whining about red hat getting fucked when this is exactly the type of behaviour expected and encouraged by the GPL is disingenuous.
If you need support you buy red hat. If you don't need support you download Centos, or some other free for download Linux variant. It's not that hard.
OK so where's the CPU at parity with a high end mobile core i7?