Pragmatically speaking, IE has become the de facto standard. The w3c can write all the specifications they want, but as of right now, if IE doesn't support it, they might as well not bother.
That will hopefully change in the future (I'm a long-term Netscape/Mozilla user, I've never used IE out of choice), but right now it's the reality. If you're creating a website for public use, you code to Mozilla/Opera/etc *and* IE, or to IE *only*. Even for private intra/extranet use, you at least code to IE as well, or plan to deal with support calls from users as they adapt to using another browser (assuming you offer support, as we generally do).
Don't get me wrong, I long for the day when the OS/browser/etc that you use is essentially irrelevant from a technical point of view, but those days are a long way off yet.
No, *computer* geeks hate decimal. *Science* geeks love decimal.
Re:Where is SP2...
on
Latest SP2 News
·
· Score: 3, Informative
They're probably trying to spread the load, and avoid having their servers bogged down by lots of people all trying to download it at once. I read somewhere that they're going to do a geographically-targetted rollout via automatic updates, eg one country will get it, then a couple of days later another, and so on.
Also, for modem users, getting it via automatic updates is a much better idea, as that can (I believe) handle resuming downloads, which using windows update probably can't do.
Is a country-by-country study of this kind. I say that, because I read lots of comments here and on similar sites about all the probes and other unwanted network activity that people see, and yet my machine is usually on every waking moment, and is connected to the net via ADSL, yet I see almost no activity. Once every few days my software firewall (Sygate Personal Firewall) will tell me that a small handful of ports have been scanned. For example, I've actually had the machine on and connected for almost 3 days now, and my firewall is showing no unusual activity.
Now, either I'm just not logging enough (entirely possible), or I'm sat on a very, very quiet part of the net. I have to wonder how much one's country of residence influences this sort of thing, given that I'm in the UK and I'm guessing most people here are in the US.
Well, make up your mind - either slashdot is (at least partially) about advocacy, or it can afford to be immature. Immaturity can only hurt advocacy, unless you're advocating to the immature.
Sure, you can rely on other, better known sources to advocate Linux for you, but when they mention slashdot, and the managers and other people you really have to convince follow the link and see what it's like, how many influential people do you think would be put off by exactly that immaturity that you seek to excuse?
Perhaps they can read tax forms, but a simple Windows dialog? Forget it.
Well, that tax form could very well directly affect them financially, with penalties for late completion, the chance of money back if they do it right and have underpaid, etc. The Windows dialogue? That's just boring computery stuff, I wanna play my game/read my email/surf some porn!
so every dollar saved creates more jobs than a $ going to Microsoft.
You're assuming that money saved directly translates to jobs increased, rather than just profits increased or shareholder dividends increased, or even board members salaries/bonuses increased. IANAE, but I don't think it necessarily follows that any company saving money is going to turn that money directly into new jobs. Higher profits seems likely to take the lion's share of it.
Insert arguments of IIS vs Apache marketshare and exploits ratio discussion
They are remote exploits. I am talking about a clueless user sat at the keyboard with the admin/root password and clicking "yes, I would like to install your software [and associated malware you're burying the details of way down in the EULA no-one ever reads]".
Please, tell me how the Unix security model protects against this situation, where you effectively have a rogue admin using the machine.
If she buys an Apple Mac computer next time, she will have a computer that functions better, works better, and breaks much more rarely than her current Windows computer.
In this context, I'm having a hard time seeing how "works" and "functions" aren't synonyms. Also, what you're essentially saying is "buy a new Mac, it'll work better than your 6 year old PC!"
Well, duh. And buying a new PC with XP would give her a computer that works better and breaks less often, with the added bonus that most if not all of her current software will work on it too.
that whether you blame the creators of Gator, Microsoft, or worm writers, she would have a better experience on a Mac.
True enough. But any operating system that has a significant market share is going to be targetted by virus, spyware and other malware writers, and the truth is that the vast majority require user intervention to install and spread. All that would happen, if the user didn't just run as root/whatever, is that they'd enter their root password when prompted. Malware will still masquerade as system utilities, or piggy-back on legitimate installs (Kazaa, etc). Then, once OS X/Linux/whatever is little or no safer than Windows, what then? Everyone move to a BSD?
The only solution is to educate the users. Switching platform is a temporary solution at best.
There you go - I can get a very good 19" CRT for around that, that will do higher resolutions and cope with games just fine.
Don't get me wrong, one day I will have a TFT, but as I code on that machine too, I need to be able to go up to high resolutions for that, but drop down for those times when my crappy GPU can't cope with the latest games:-)
As an aside, my CRT is still firmly wedded to my desktop, and won't budge until flat screen technology has caught up.
Agreed. I have a 21" TFT at work that does 1600x1200, and don't get me wrong, it's gorgeous. I'm currently looking at getting a new monitor for my home machine, though, and I'm not even considering a TFT:
* they're so much more expensive - I can get a decent 19" CRT for less than the price of a 17" TFT * I do a lot of gaming, and I'm not convinced that any TFT I can afford is up to the task
A pity, really, as the smaller footprint, sleeker looks and reduced energy consumption do make TFTs attractive.
So, do you believe that there is a point at which a certain number of accidental deaths (which are inevitable in war) are as bad as a given number of purposefully-inflicted ones?
That is, will the US actions in Afghanistan and Iraq be, *in your eyes*, as bad as the WTC attack? After all, without the US/allied presence, there would be no crossfire to be caught in.
Firstly, you can't claim the bloat is perceived if at the same time you list relatively hefty machine requirements.
I didn't list requirements, I listed typical specs of an entry level machine. By which, I mean the sort of machine that you can walk into a high street shop and buy off the shelf, spending relatively little compared to the price of the computers on offer.
I've done web-based Java development using JBuilder on a 400MHz machine with 512meg of RAM. It was slow, but doable, and that includes running the servlet container (resin).
Java really brings nothing new or technically interesting; you've been duped the Sun marketing department.
Clearly your experience differs from mine. I came to Java from C/C++. What Java gave me over my previous environment was a proper IDE, interactive debugging, much reduced compile times, no complicated makefiles, etc. The first project I used it on quite literally would not have gone live on time had we done it in C++.
Now, sure, none of that is unique to Java or necessarily missing from C/C++, but my current preference for Java is based on my experience, not on anything Sun's marketing department may have spewed out.
My point was that my web browser is using 2.5 times as much RAM as my Java LDAP explorer app.
So, we have a memory-hogging Java app and a memory-hogging C/C++ app, both running on a machine that is nowhere near having to swap due to memory usage. Also, RAM is cheap, especially compared to the price of a lot of software.
I was both disputing your apparent claim that Java apps necesarily force excessive swapping, and pointing out that even when that is the case, adding RAM is generally very cheap.
Geez. I guess you've never tried running a non-trivial web application on a webserver where your Tomcat only gets allocated 64mb RAM (and where every extra mb costs you $$$ per month).
No, I haven't - why would I? The company I work for charges by the box, not the megabyte. If a client buys a server, that's exactly what they get.
If RAM was really that tight, then I'd look at using something other than Java if possible (I've done web development in C, C++, perl and ASP as well); the right tool for the right job, and all that.
Oh, I proved nothing, I just presented some real-world numbers, which is a hell of a lot more than most people spouting about Java's RAM footprint usually do.
Yeah - it's what my company has standardised on, and as we've recently been bought JB X Enterprise, the chances of them springing for anything else are remote. Not that we *wanted* X, of course, we were fine with 7, and would have prefered to wait at least until JDK 1.5 is out.
As for using Eclipse, a friend swears by (and ocassionally, at) it, but I've not had time to really look at it. The deadline on my current project is such that I can't afford to waste time learning a new IDE (heh - or posting to slashdot...)
Top 4 processes on my XP Pro machine at the moment, according to "Mem Usage" column in Task Manager:
1) JBuilderW.exe at 173,700K 2) mozilla.exe at 84,480K 3) java.exe (JXplorer, an LDAP client app) at 37,252K 4) WINWORD.EXE at 33,636K
So, with the exception of JBuilder (which is very heavyweight, there's no denying), java by no means has a "huge" footprint compared with other typical applications I use. Of course, given that I have a gig of RAM in this machine, and that RAM goes for a little more per 512MB stick than I spend on a typical Saturday night out, it really doesn't matter to me at all. But then, I do server-side stuff in Java, not client side; for that, I'd probably use C#.
despite entry level PCs now having specs along the lines of 2.5GHz processor and 256MB of RAM, lots of people on such sites are obssessed with perceived bloat
lots of (but by no means all) people dissing Java are actually sysadmins, rather than programmers, and do all of the coding that they do do in perl, shell script, and similar
It always amuses me when I read "Java is teh suck because it's so slow and bloated!" comments. I've been doing server-side Java development for a little over 4 years now, and we've never had a performance problem. I use a number of client-side Java apps everyday, too, and they're perfectly responsive and usable. Sure, the same thing written in C or C++ probably would be faster - but when you literally can't tell the difference, who cares? A modern PC spends almost all its time waiting on user input or IO bound anyway.
XP (Home) definitely runs in 128MB of RAM. True, once you start adding in third-party stuff like a software firewall and virus checker, etc, then you're looking at needing 256MB, but XP itself runs just fine in 128. Failing that, 95/98 could run in 16MB, although 32 was better. 128? A rather expensive luxury when they were released.
For what it's worth, a modern Linux distro running KDE or gnome generally needs at least 256MB too.
Re:Join the Revolution
on
Linux vs. Windows
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You don't defeat one enemy by siding with another, worse one. MS may be gunning for software domination, but WalMart is gunning for complete retail domination.
Believe me, WalMart cares nothing for your "revolution". It's seen a way to make a bit more profit, and it's going for it. It doesn't care who or what gets squashed in the process - MS, you, me, open source, anything, as long as it can maximise its profits.
Just like any other business, it's doing what currently best serves its own interests. Right now they happen to coincide with your wishes; be ready to move out of the way should that change.
By which you mean that UT2k4, Sacred, Thief 3, Far Cry, etc are not recent games. In fact, I've not seen a single game or demo *ever* that has required at least 1024x768, while I have seen a number of older ones that won't allow resolutions above 800x600.
Slashdot Mirror
Pragmatically speaking, IE has become the de facto standard. The w3c can write all the specifications they want, but as of right now, if IE doesn't support it, they might as well not bother.
That will hopefully change in the future (I'm a long-term Netscape/Mozilla user, I've never used IE out of choice), but right now it's the reality. If you're creating a website for public use, you code to Mozilla/Opera/etc *and* IE, or to IE *only*. Even for private intra/extranet use, you at least code to IE as well, or plan to deal with support calls from users as they adapt to using another browser (assuming you offer support, as we generally do).
Don't get me wrong, I long for the day when the OS/browser/etc that you use is essentially irrelevant from a technical point of view, but those days are a long way off yet.
No, *computer* geeks hate decimal. *Science* geeks love decimal.
They're probably trying to spread the load, and avoid having their servers bogged down by lots of people all trying to download it at once. I read somewhere that they're going to do a geographically-targetted rollout via automatic updates, eg one country will get it, then a couple of days later another, and so on.
Also, for modem users, getting it via automatic updates is a much better idea, as that can (I believe) handle resuming downloads, which using windows update probably can't do.
Is a country-by-country study of this kind. I say that, because I read lots of comments here and on similar sites about all the probes and other unwanted network activity that people see, and yet my machine is usually on every waking moment, and is connected to the net via ADSL, yet I see almost no activity. Once every few days my software firewall (Sygate Personal Firewall) will tell me that a small handful of ports have been scanned. For example, I've actually had the machine on and connected for almost 3 days now, and my firewall is showing no unusual activity.
Now, either I'm just not logging enough (entirely possible), or I'm sat on a very, very quiet part of the net. I have to wonder how much one's country of residence influences this sort of thing, given that I'm in the UK and I'm guessing most people here are in the US.
Well, make up your mind - either slashdot is (at least partially) about advocacy, or it can afford to be immature. Immaturity can only hurt advocacy, unless you're advocating to the immature.
Sure, you can rely on other, better known sources to advocate Linux for you, but when they mention slashdot, and the managers and other people you really have to convince follow the link and see what it's like, how many influential people do you think would be put off by exactly that immaturity that you seek to excuse?
Perhaps they can read tax forms, but a simple Windows dialog? Forget it.
Well, that tax form could very well directly affect them financially, with penalties for late completion, the chance of money back if they do it right and have underpaid, etc. The Windows dialogue? That's just boring computery stuff, I wanna play my game/read my email/surf some porn!
so every dollar saved creates more jobs than a $ going to Microsoft.
You're assuming that money saved directly translates to jobs increased, rather than just profits increased or shareholder dividends increased, or even board members salaries/bonuses increased. IANAE, but I don't think it necessarily follows that any company saving money is going to turn that money directly into new jobs. Higher profits seems likely to take the lion's share of it.
Insert arguments of IIS vs Apache marketshare and exploits ratio discussion
They are remote exploits. I am talking about a clueless user sat at the keyboard with the admin/root password and clicking "yes, I would like to install your software [and associated malware you're burying the details of way down in the EULA no-one ever reads]".
Please, tell me how the Unix security model protects against this situation, where you effectively have a rogue admin using the machine.
If she buys an Apple Mac computer next time, she will have a computer that functions better, works better, and breaks much more rarely than her current Windows computer.
In this context, I'm having a hard time seeing how "works" and "functions" aren't synonyms. Also, what you're essentially saying is "buy a new Mac, it'll work better than your 6 year old PC!"
Well, duh. And buying a new PC with XP would give her a computer that works better and breaks less often, with the added bonus that most if not all of her current software will work on it too.
that whether you blame the creators of Gator, Microsoft, or worm writers, she would have a better experience on a Mac.
True enough. But any operating system that has a significant market share is going to be targetted by virus, spyware and other malware writers, and the truth is that the vast majority require user intervention to install and spread. All that would happen, if the user didn't just run as root/whatever, is that they'd enter their root password when prompted. Malware will still masquerade as system utilities, or piggy-back on legitimate installs (Kazaa, etc). Then, once OS X/Linux/whatever is little or no safer than Windows, what then? Everyone move to a BSD?
The only solution is to educate the users. Switching platform is a temporary solution at best.
There you go - I can get a very good 19" CRT for around that, that will do higher resolutions and cope with games just fine.
:-)
Don't get me wrong, one day I will have a TFT, but as I code on that machine too, I need to be able to go up to high resolutions for that, but drop down for those times when my crappy GPU can't cope with the latest games
As an aside, my CRT is still firmly wedded to my desktop, and won't budge until flat screen technology has caught up.
Agreed. I have a 21" TFT at work that does 1600x1200, and don't get me wrong, it's gorgeous. I'm currently looking at getting a new monitor for my home machine, though, and I'm not even considering a TFT:
* they're so much more expensive - I can get a decent 19" CRT for less than the price of a 17" TFT
* I do a lot of gaming, and I'm not convinced that any TFT I can afford is up to the task
A pity, really, as the smaller footprint, sleeker looks and reduced energy consumption do make TFTs attractive.
So, do you believe that there is a point at which a certain number of accidental deaths (which are inevitable in war) are as bad as a given number of purposefully-inflicted ones?
That is, will the US actions in Afghanistan and Iraq be, *in your eyes*, as bad as the WTC attack? After all, without the US/allied presence, there would be no crossfire to be caught in.
Panic everyone. Good fun.
You certainly have a strange definition of fun...
He said "I'd have PCI Express" - ie, "I would have PCI Express"
He doesn't have it now, he's looking for a decent AMD motherboard that supports it.
Firstly, you can't claim the bloat is perceived if at the same time you list relatively hefty machine requirements.
I didn't list requirements, I listed typical specs of an entry level machine. By which, I mean the sort of machine that you can walk into a high street shop and buy off the shelf, spending relatively little compared to the price of the computers on offer.
I've done web-based Java development using JBuilder on a 400MHz machine with 512meg of RAM. It was slow, but doable, and that includes running the servlet container (resin).
Java really brings nothing new or technically interesting; you've been duped the Sun marketing department.
Clearly your experience differs from mine. I came to Java from C/C++. What Java gave me over my previous environment was a proper IDE, interactive debugging, much reduced compile times, no complicated makefiles, etc. The first project I used it on quite literally would not have gone live on time had we done it in C++.
Now, sure, none of that is unique to Java or necessarily missing from C/C++, but my current preference for Java is based on my experience, not on anything Sun's marketing department may have spewed out.
My point was that my web browser is using 2.5 times as much RAM as my Java LDAP explorer app.
So, we have a memory-hogging Java app and a memory-hogging C/C++ app, both running on a machine that is nowhere near having to swap due to memory usage. Also, RAM is cheap, especially compared to the price of a lot of software.
I was both disputing your apparent claim that Java apps necesarily force excessive swapping, and pointing out that even when that is the case, adding RAM is generally very cheap.
Geez. I guess you've never tried running a non-trivial web application on a webserver where your Tomcat only gets allocated 64mb RAM (and where every extra mb costs you $$$ per month).
No, I haven't - why would I? The company I work for charges by the box, not the megabyte. If a client buys a server, that's exactly what they get.
If RAM was really that tight, then I'd look at using something other than Java if possible (I've done web development in C, C++, perl and ASP as well); the right tool for the right job, and all that.
Oh, I proved nothing, I just presented some real-world numbers, which is a hell of a lot more than most people spouting about Java's RAM footprint usually do.
Yeah - it's what my company has standardised on, and as we've recently been bought JB X Enterprise, the chances of them springing for anything else are remote. Not that we *wanted* X, of course, we were fine with 7, and would have prefered to wait at least until JDK 1.5 is out.
As for using Eclipse, a friend swears by (and ocassionally, at) it, but I've not had time to really look at it. The deadline on my current project is such that I can't afford to waste time learning a new IDE (heh - or posting to slashdot...)
I had very few problems making a medium sized app (~4000 lines)
With all due respect, I've worked with application config files that were larger than that. In the grand scheme of things, 4000 loc is pretty small.
the huge footprint which triggers swap activity
Top 4 processes on my XP Pro machine at the moment, according to "Mem Usage" column in Task Manager:
1) JBuilderW.exe at 173,700K
2) mozilla.exe at 84,480K
3) java.exe (JXplorer, an LDAP client app) at 37,252K
4) WINWORD.EXE at 33,636K
So, with the exception of JBuilder (which is very heavyweight, there's no denying), java by no means has a "huge" footprint compared with other typical applications I use. Of course, given that I have a gig of RAM in this machine, and that RAM goes for a little more per 512MB stick than I spend on a typical Saturday night out, it really doesn't matter to me at all. But then, I do server-side stuff in Java, not client side; for that, I'd probably use C#.
- despite entry level PCs now having specs along the lines of 2.5GHz processor and 256MB of RAM, lots of people on such sites are obssessed with perceived bloat
- lots of (but by no means all) people dissing Java are actually sysadmins, rather than programmers, and do all of the coding that they do do in perl, shell script, and similar
It always amuses me when I read "Java is teh suck because it's so slow and bloated!" comments. I've been doing server-side Java development for a little over 4 years now, and we've never had a performance problem. I use a number of client-side Java apps everyday, too, and they're perfectly responsive and usable. Sure, the same thing written in C or C++ probably would be faster - but when you literally can't tell the difference, who cares? A modern PC spends almost all its time waiting on user input or IO bound anyway.Then gain XP won't run on this. 128mb? HAHA
XP (Home) definitely runs in 128MB of RAM. True, once you start adding in third-party stuff like a software firewall and virus checker, etc, then you're looking at needing 256MB, but XP itself runs just fine in 128. Failing that, 95/98 could run in 16MB, although 32 was better. 128? A rather expensive luxury when they were released.
For what it's worth, a modern Linux distro running KDE or gnome generally needs at least 256MB too.
You don't defeat one enemy by siding with another, worse one. MS may be gunning for software domination, but WalMart is gunning for complete retail domination.
Believe me, WalMart cares nothing for your "revolution". It's seen a way to make a bit more profit, and it's going for it. It doesn't care who or what gets squashed in the process - MS, you, me, open source, anything, as long as it can maximise its profits.
Just like any other business, it's doing what currently best serves its own interests. Right now they happen to coincide with your wishes; be ready to move out of the way should that change.
all the recent games require at least 1024x768
By which you mean that UT2k4, Sacred, Thief 3, Far Cry, etc are not recent games. In fact, I've not seen a single game or demo *ever* that has required at least 1024x768, while I have seen a number of older ones that won't allow resolutions above 800x600.