People coding shitty SQL is independent of their database of choice. MySQL is (IMHO) easier to install, configure, and use than postgres which just makes it more common to use, but MySQL is not responsible for shitty SQL in poorly written PHP apps.
Whoosh. MySQL != SQL Server. The point (which you missed) is that the only OS that can run SQL Server is Windows. Oracle / MySQL and PostgreSQL can run on damn near any OS giving you choice / flexibility.
Nah - they are competitors even in the eyes of the courts / law, but that doesn't meant that MS isn't a monopoly for legal reasons...
Remember, a dictionary definition of "monopoly" is not the same thing as the legal definition as far as anti-trust laws are concerned. MS's 95%+ of the desktop market is "good enough" for them to still be considered a monopoly in the marketplace even though they are not the "exclusive" provider of operating systems.
Clueless users can not be trained, and HR insists on hiring the clueless. So while 99% of your users will get the memo, only 50% will read it, and only 50% of those will actually understand what they are reading. 25% of those that understand will abide by your new "email rules." What are we down to now???
That solution does tend to work, and IMHO is fine. The problem isn't Visual Basic or Word itself, it's the fscking email client that auto executes everything, and clueless users that will open every single email attachment no matter who it's from.
Clueless users can't be trained. IT people have been trying to train them for years, but the malware problem keeps getting worse because these users can't grasp very simplistic concepts. What amazes me is that companies continue to hire people like this that need to use computers constantly as part of their job, yet don't have even the most basic computer skills.
You're one of the.000000001% of people who ever used a X11 application on a mac
Have a source for that statistic? Didn't think so.
As for your other rant, it's without merit. As I have stated in another post, it would be easy for Apple to split-sensor the single huge-assed button so that it COULD be identified as three buttons, but by default act like a single button. A simple configuration option could solve one of the largest complaints about this issue that has gone on for as many years as Apple has been making laptops. Somehow you seem to think that giving others the option to have more than one button will somehow cause instant death for mac GUI design traditionalists. Trust me, you would be just fine.
If people didn't want more than one mouse button, then why is it that every replacement mouse for a mac have at least 3? Hell, even the mighty mouse has more than one.
Out of curiosity, why don't you like Terminal.app?
Because it didn't behave correctly. Exactly how, I can't say because I haven't used it in years since I always use xterm along with other X apps.
Also, have you ever seen a three button built in mouse in any notebook?
Yes. IBM / Lenovo has had them for MANY MANY years, and there are others.
I know a lot of people don't like it, but tapping the track pad works perfectly for me. With the addition of two-finger tapping for a right mouse button I'm perfectly happy.
And as I already stated, that doesn't work for a click-drag operation.
I have 3 macs in the house. Apple offers a "family pack" 5 user $199 version which cuts the price to me to $66 per upgrade per machine. I also have 3 windows machines. All I can say is HOLY SHIT it's expensive to upgrade windows. Of course my 5 Linux machines cost NOTHING to upgrade.
I'm quite happy with Apple's pricing thankyouverymuch. And no fscking activation either.
I work multi-platform. I use Linux, Windows, and OS X. The differences can be very frustrating, and OS X is the least like the other two. I really don't care if Apple wants to continue to use and encourage a certain UI design, but please PLEASE give us configurable options to change the default behavior to be more like the other guys.
OK, then make it a configurable option, but give me the option. The same thing can be said for including three mouse buttons on the macbooks - make them all act like a single mouse button by default, but give me the option of making them act independently (can even make it mighty-mouse like so it doesn't look like three buttons.)
It's hard for users when companies dictate how users are allowed to use their product. What is user-friendly for one person is a total PITA for another.
An example of this is trying to use your macbook while waiting for a flight (or on a flight). I use a number of X11 applications (xterm being the most common, because the apple terminal app is horrible) which really wants a 3 button mouse. You frequently don't have room (or a surface) to break out a separate mouse, and the keyboard shortcuts SUCK. Try a middle-button dragging operation sometime for a horrible user experience.
This means that all over the world, trades are made in US dollars, including in countries where $20 per month is a good wage.
Most transactions are STILL going to be electronic and not physical cash. For example: I can buy a product from Australia (where they don't have pennies either) in US dollars with my credit card and have it shipped to me in the US (did this last month in fact.)
It's irrelevant that some countries have crappy wages - they use local currency for paying people. Once you get enough local currency, you can trade it in for US dollars if that is your thing...
Only if the government continues to print money and run up huge debts with abandon.
And by looking at history, you somehow have come to the conclusion that they won't????
First, getting rid of the penny would not affect electronic / check transactions. The only change would be cash transactions, which would be rounded (probably up) to the nearest nickel.
When the half-cent was abolished in 1857 it was worth more than eight cents in today's currency. It's time for the penny to go, along with the paper dollar. In another 20 years or so, they may as well get rid of the nickel too.
And in fact, he has stated in the past that he picked GPL more out of convenience and "general agreement" than as a political statement that he fiercely encouraged. At this point, the license can't be changed due to the number of authors and inability to get ALL of them to agree to any change (or even FIND them. Some are dead.)
From your "proof", it's clear that you don't know what you are talking about.
Oracle is not open source and therefore totally fails as an example in this case. This is about supporting open source products - not closed source.
First, you don't need a dedicated developer. A senior sysadmin has all the developer skills needed. Competent senior sysadmins can recompile and patch the linux kernel in their sleep, and a good many are skilled enough to even write device drivers. In fact, the best system administrators actually write a lot of code, and were former developers who wanted more of a challenge. They are generally compensated better than developers to reflect their level of knowledge (and the more non-traditional work hours.)
A support contract from RedHat or MySQL isn't going to get you a temporary sysadmin (or developer) to work the holidays / weekends. If you think RedHat is going to pull in Alan Cox on Christmas eve to write a patch for you just because you have a support contract, you are out of your tree. A support contract is no guarantee that you will actually get your problem FIXED on a weekend / holiday.
If you run a 24x7 shop like I do, you need coverage at all times. This means a staff of at LEAST 4, or if you are REALLY cheap and overwork your people, you can get by with 2. When you have a problem, you are going to have one of those sysadmins working WITH the company (Sun, Oracle, RedHat, or MySQL) ANYWAY until the problem is solved (remember, you have to repeat your troubleshooting steps that you already did all over again for the first-level support person who won't be able to solve your problem anyway, and finally passes you off to second level. Been there, done that.)
Consider a largish infrastructure of HUNDREDS of servers - your licensing costs for RedHat (for example, as their quantity discounts are near zero) will cost you upwards of $500K / year (that was a quote we got.) For about 1/3rd of that, you can hire another top-notch sysadmin who can be the dedicated internal support person. Chances are that you won't NEED another dedicated person as you hire competent people that can solve the problems on their own anyway, and you save your company $500K - $500K that can be used for something else (thus destroying your tax savings argument.) Now with smaller companies (as I stated,) it may make sense because the cost of support is so low.
Clearly, you don't understand the issue as you haven't lived it. You seem to think that it costs more to internally support MySQL and Linux (RedHat) than a support contract costs because you don't have any experience to the contrary. I do.
As a final nail in your baseless "theory", do you really think Google would be better off buying support for MySQL and Redhat than rolling their own as they do? Not a chance.
If you need a support contract for Linux, it's because you have A) incompetent system administrators or B) insufficient sys admin staff. Now that is not necessarily a BAD thing... "Incompetent" doesn't mean that you are an idiot, it just means you don't have the required level of skills needed to to what you are doing. Small businesses for example may not have the budget for a "Real" senior system administrator who has the skills / time to solve more difficult problems. But hey, everyone needs to start somewhere... You don't become a senior sys admin overnight.
This is a big "ditto" for MySQL. No point in buying a license unless you NEED that certain level of support, and dropping support for Debian won't mean a thing in the grand scheme of things. Most people that use Debian use Debian packages and not MySQL versions anyway. Debian has their own support channel, and who says that it's worse than what you get directly from MySQL?
If your IT department is staffed by monkeys, I suggest you get a non-zoo job and work at a REAL company. While I do know an unfortunately large number of incompetent IT people that shouldn't be working with computers or networks at all, none are monkeys.
Slashdot Mirror
People coding shitty SQL is independent of their database of choice. MySQL is (IMHO) easier to install, configure, and use than postgres which just makes it more common to use, but MySQL is not responsible for shitty SQL in poorly written PHP apps.
Whoosh. MySQL != SQL Server. The point (which you missed) is that the only OS that can run SQL Server is Windows. Oracle / MySQL and PostgreSQL can run on damn near any OS giving you choice / flexibility.
Nah - they are competitors even in the eyes of the courts / law, but that doesn't meant that MS isn't a monopoly for legal reasons...
Remember, a dictionary definition of "monopoly" is not the same thing as the legal definition as far as anti-trust laws are concerned. MS's 95%+ of the desktop market is "good enough" for them to still be considered a monopoly in the marketplace even though they are not the "exclusive" provider of operating systems.
Clueless users can not be trained, and HR insists on hiring the clueless. So while 99% of your users will get the memo, only 50% will read it, and only 50% of those will actually understand what they are reading. 25% of those that understand will abide by your new "email rules." What are we down to now???
Welcome to corporate, employee number 877346...
That solution does tend to work, and IMHO is fine. The problem isn't Visual Basic or Word itself, it's the fscking email client that auto executes everything, and clueless users that will open every single email attachment no matter who it's from.
Clueless users can't be trained. IT people have been trying to train them for years, but the malware problem keeps getting worse because these users can't grasp very simplistic concepts. What amazes me is that companies continue to hire people like this that need to use computers constantly as part of their job, yet don't have even the most basic computer skills.
Organizing the 1000 or so word documents in any kind of reasonable fashion is a nightmare.
I much prefer a wiki.
You're one of the .000000001% of people who ever used a X11 application on a mac
Have a source for that statistic? Didn't think so.
As for your other rant, it's without merit. As I have stated in another post, it would be easy for Apple to split-sensor the single huge-assed button so that it COULD be identified as three buttons, but by default act like a single button. A simple configuration option could solve one of the largest complaints about this issue that has gone on for as many years as Apple has been making laptops. Somehow you seem to think that giving others the option to have more than one button will somehow cause instant death for mac GUI design traditionalists. Trust me, you would be just fine.
If people didn't want more than one mouse button, then why is it that every replacement mouse for a mac have at least 3? Hell, even the mighty mouse has more than one.
Out of curiosity, why don't you like Terminal.app?
Because it didn't behave correctly. Exactly how, I can't say because I haven't used it in years since I always use xterm along with other X apps.
Also, have you ever seen a three button built in mouse in any notebook?
Yes. IBM / Lenovo has had them for MANY MANY years, and there are others.
I know a lot of people don't like it, but tapping the track pad works perfectly for me. With the addition of two-finger tapping for a right mouse button I'm perfectly happy.
And as I already stated, that doesn't work for a click-drag operation.
I have 3 macs in the house. Apple offers a "family pack" 5 user $199 version which cuts the price to me to $66 per upgrade per machine. I also have 3 windows machines. All I can say is HOLY SHIT it's expensive to upgrade windows.
Of course my 5 Linux machines cost NOTHING to upgrade.
I'm quite happy with Apple's pricing thankyouverymuch. And no fscking activation either.
I work multi-platform. I use Linux, Windows, and OS X. The differences can be very frustrating, and OS X is the least like the other two. I really don't care if Apple wants to continue to use and encourage a certain UI design, but please PLEASE give us configurable options to change the default behavior to be more like the other guys.
OK, then make it a configurable option, but give me the option. The same thing can be said for including three mouse buttons on the macbooks - make them all act like a single mouse button by default, but give me the option of making them act independently (can even make it mighty-mouse like so it doesn't look like three buttons.)
It's hard for users when companies dictate how users are allowed to use their product. What is user-friendly for one person is a total PITA for another.
An example of this is trying to use your macbook while waiting for a flight (or on a flight). I use a number of X11 applications (xterm being the most common, because the apple terminal app is horrible) which really wants a 3 button mouse. You frequently don't have room (or a surface) to break out a separate mouse, and the keyboard shortcuts SUCK.
Try a middle-button dragging operation sometime for a horrible user experience.
Is that REALLY the genuine actual real solution, or perhaps there was a reason why most every government dropped that idea... Hmm.
This means that all over the world, trades are made in US dollars, including in countries where $20 per month is a good wage.
Most transactions are STILL going to be electronic and not physical cash. For example: I can buy a product from Australia (where they don't have pennies either) in US dollars with my credit card and have it shipped to me in the US (did this last month in fact.)
It's irrelevant that some countries have crappy wages - they use local currency for paying people. Once you get enough local currency, you can trade it in for US dollars if that is your thing...
Only if the government continues to print money and run up huge debts with abandon.
And by looking at history, you somehow have come to the conclusion that they won't????
First, getting rid of the penny would not affect electronic / check transactions.
The only change would be cash transactions, which would be rounded (probably up) to the nearest nickel.
When the half-cent was abolished in 1857 it was worth more than eight cents in today's currency. It's time for the penny to go, along with the paper dollar. In another 20 years or so, they may as well get rid of the nickel too.
Bingo.
Whoops - I'm wrong and the other responder is right. It's life + 70 years (I misread the article.)
The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 says that copyright exists for life of the author plus 50 years. For more info see this article.
Maybe because these are not so much rants, as someone putting their foot down. Hey, at least he is not throwing chairs.
And in fact, he has stated in the past that he picked GPL more out of convenience and "general agreement" than as a political statement that he fiercely encouraged. At this point, the license can't be changed due to the number of authors and inability to get ALL of them to agree to any change (or even FIND them. Some are dead.)
I think he was wrong at simply /I realize nobody is likely going to listen to me/
I think he was referring to the RMS crowd, who won't.
From your "proof", it's clear that you don't know what you are talking about.
Oracle is not open source and therefore totally fails as an example in this case. This is about supporting open source products - not closed source.
First, you don't need a dedicated developer. A senior sysadmin has all the developer skills needed. Competent senior sysadmins can recompile and patch the linux kernel in their sleep, and a good many are skilled enough to even write device drivers. In fact, the best system administrators actually write a lot of code, and were former developers who wanted more of a challenge. They are generally compensated better than developers to reflect their level of knowledge (and the more non-traditional work hours.)
A support contract from RedHat or MySQL isn't going to get you a temporary sysadmin (or developer) to work the holidays / weekends. If you think RedHat is going to pull in Alan Cox on Christmas eve to write a patch for you just because you have a support contract, you are out of your tree. A support contract is no guarantee that you will actually get your problem FIXED on a weekend / holiday.
If you run a 24x7 shop like I do, you need coverage at all times. This means a staff of at LEAST 4, or if you are REALLY cheap and overwork your people, you can get by with 2. When you have a problem, you are going to have one of those sysadmins working WITH the company (Sun, Oracle, RedHat, or MySQL) ANYWAY until the problem is solved (remember, you have to repeat your troubleshooting steps that you already did all over again for the first-level support person who won't be able to solve your problem anyway, and finally passes you off to second level. Been there, done that.)
Consider a largish infrastructure of HUNDREDS of servers - your licensing costs for RedHat (for example, as their quantity discounts are near zero) will cost you upwards of $500K / year (that was a quote we got.) For about 1/3rd of that, you can hire another top-notch sysadmin who can be the dedicated internal support person. Chances are that you won't NEED another dedicated person as you hire competent people that can solve the problems on their own anyway, and you save your company $500K - $500K that can be used for something else (thus destroying your tax savings argument.) Now with smaller companies (as I stated,) it may make sense because the cost of support is so low.
Clearly, you don't understand the issue as you haven't lived it. You seem to think that it costs more to internally support MySQL and Linux (RedHat) than a support contract costs because you don't have any experience to the contrary. I do.
As a final nail in your baseless "theory", do you really think Google would be better off buying support for MySQL and Redhat than rolling their own as they do? Not a chance.
Please provide proof to backup that statement.
If you need a support contract for Linux, it's because you have A) incompetent system administrators or B) insufficient sys admin staff. Now that is not necessarily a BAD thing... "Incompetent" doesn't mean that you are an idiot, it just means you don't have the required level of skills needed to to what you are doing. Small businesses for example may not have the budget for a "Real" senior system administrator who has the skills / time to solve more difficult problems. But hey, everyone needs to start somewhere... You don't become a senior sys admin overnight.
This is a big "ditto" for MySQL. No point in buying a license unless you NEED that certain level of support, and dropping support for Debian won't mean a thing in the grand scheme of things. Most people that use Debian use Debian packages and not MySQL versions anyway. Debian has their own support channel, and who says that it's worse than what you get directly from MySQL?
If your IT department is staffed by monkeys, I suggest you get a non-zoo job and work at a REAL company. While I do know an unfortunately large number of incompetent IT people that shouldn't be working with computers or networks at all, none are monkeys.