And you avoid learning GOTO. I don't care how easy it makes initial learning, it's building bad habits that you're going to spend years killing.
Now what's wrong with goto? It's a perfectly valid statement when used appropriately, just like any other statement. What's wrong is this old dogma that tell young people to not think for themselves and instead just repeat what everyone else says.
Sure, that may not be an important feature right now when most people don't even know what it is. But imagine that a few distributions picked it up and actually uses it, then what the current developers don't want to do isn't really important.
Is it completely impossible to get something similar into Wayland? It doesn't do it right now, but if it get enough momentum I can't think that someone isn't going to add it.
Rolling releases probably work just fine when you're only running it on your personal laptop or desktop. It's a very different matter when you have a site installation on a large number of machines where installations and upgrades are a bit more complex than to insert the CD and click next a few times. It is in those environments you appreciate that you can come in one day and things still work consistently with what they did yesterday.
Of course there are benefits of using the software provided by the distribution such as the automatic updates but you are in no way limited to only use that. I'm mainly using CentOS 5 right now and it is far from bleeding-edge. If I want the latest version of something I go onto their website and see if they have a package, if they don't I download the source code and build it myself.
Quite a lot of universities actually provide mirrors explicitly for use by people off-campus. Just look at the main mirrors for major Linux distributions, Mozilla and other popular projects. Many of them will be universities and other educational institutions.
Nope. Mac programs are still "packages". Even before OS X, you had the data fork and resource fork that held different parts of the app.
Right click any Mac app -- you'll get a context-menu item called "Show Package Contents".
Well, not exactly. There are a lot of differences between what is called a package (really it's called a bundle) in Mac OS X and the use of resource forks. The package mechanism is a generic way of making a folder structure look like a regular file while resource forks only made it possible to separate a file into two parts.
The concept of packages was actually backported to Mac OS 9 in order to ease the transition for developers over to Mac OS X. You would rarely see them in use as Mac OS X is compatible with the older CFM-style PEF applications anyway.
Its biggest shortcomings, however, are the lack of support and that it can fall pretty far behind RHEL in terms of updates and patches, even critical ones.
Critical patches are usually out within hours, this is usually not a problem.
I used Ubuntu for many years on my desktops and laptops but eventually switched to CentOS because I wanted something that worked and continued to work well for a few years rather than having to redo everything twice every year because someone came up with yet another way of doing things. I tried sticking to LTS versions, they were a lot better but not really enough.
Java on the Mac have always been maintained by Apple, they licensed it about fifteen years ago from Sun. There has never been a Sun Java for Macs. I don't know how much code is going back to Sun/Oracle but in worst case that may be nothing at all.
The main problem is that Java by itself has no support for things like the Mac Aqua UI, that's all additions made by Apple. In the late 90's when the Mac wasn't going well Apple decided to license Java and fix those things since Sun wasn't likely to put much time and effort on it. It's actually really good and well done.
I use RHEL5 at work. I hate it with the fiery passion of a million supernovas. It doesn't help that rhel5 is like six years old, and 5.4 isn't much better. Who else likes using a version of gedit so old it doesn't even have syntax highlighting? My hobbyist Linux development environment at home should not far outshine my professional Linux development environment at work.
You know, you can actually install software yourself in Linux. You are not restricted to only use your distro's repository.
Then they need to drop the childish name. "The Pirate Party" makes it sound like they are a bunch of rebellious kids flaunting how they like to break the law and get away with it.
...
Seriously, I attended one of their meetings recently and it was a bunch of rebellious kids flaunting how they like to break the law and get away with it.
Well obviously the Oracle software worked properly and noticed that the customer had not payed their license to include the extra unlicensed second of operation.
Slashdot Mirror
And you avoid learning GOTO. I don't care how easy it makes initial learning, it's building bad habits that you're going to spend years killing.
Now what's wrong with goto? It's a perfectly valid statement when used appropriately, just like any other statement. What's wrong is this old dogma that tell young people to not think for themselves and instead just repeat what everyone else says.
Last time I checked YouTube used Linux servers, therefore, GNU/YouTube to be exact.
Just put it on the front page and be done with it.
Why would it matter if you have the same phone number you've had for several years? What's wrong with switching to a different one?
Sure, that may not be an important feature right now when most people don't even know what it is. But imagine that a few distributions picked it up and actually uses it, then what the current developers don't want to do isn't really important.
You know, you can change the appearance in Ubuntu if you want to.
Is it completely impossible to get something similar into Wayland? It doesn't do it right now, but if it get enough momentum I can't think that someone isn't going to add it.
From what I've heard at least they'll wait until it's ready before they decide if they should make the switch or not.
Rolling releases probably work just fine when you're only running it on your personal laptop or desktop. It's a very different matter when you have a site installation on a large number of machines where installations and upgrades are a bit more complex than to insert the CD and click next a few times. It is in those environments you appreciate that you can come in one day and things still work consistently with what they did yesterday.
Of course there are benefits of using the software provided by the distribution such as the automatic updates but you are in no way limited to only use that. I'm mainly using CentOS 5 right now and it is far from bleeding-edge. If I want the latest version of something I go onto their website and see if they have a package, if they don't I download the source code and build it myself.
Hope you're encrypting your super secret stuff.
I always encrypt sensitive data no matter if it routes through China, Sweden, the USA or any other country that may tap it.
Quite a lot of universities actually provide mirrors explicitly for use by people off-campus. Just look at the main mirrors for major Linux distributions, Mozilla and other popular projects. Many of them will be universities and other educational institutions.
Nope. Mac programs are still "packages". Even before OS X, you had the data fork and resource fork that held different parts of the app.
Right click any Mac app -- you'll get a context-menu item called "Show Package Contents".
Well, not exactly. There are a lot of differences between what is called a package (really it's called a bundle) in Mac OS X and the use of resource forks. The package mechanism is a generic way of making a folder structure look like a regular file while resource forks only made it possible to separate a file into two parts.
The concept of packages was actually backported to Mac OS 9 in order to ease the transition for developers over to Mac OS X. You would rarely see them in use as Mac OS X is compatible with the older CFM-style PEF applications anyway.
Its biggest shortcomings, however, are the lack of support and that it can fall pretty far behind RHEL in terms of updates and patches, even critical ones.
Critical patches are usually out within hours, this is usually not a problem.
I used Ubuntu for many years on my desktops and laptops but eventually switched to CentOS because I wanted something that worked and continued to work well for a few years rather than having to redo everything twice every year because someone came up with yet another way of doing things. I tried sticking to LTS versions, they were a lot better but not really enough.
So there needs to be a specification for a language to be open? Guess Perl haven't been open until Perl 6 then.
Apple have their GCC based compiler. GCC have their compiler. None of them is "more" Objective-C, just two different implementations.
Objective-C is not a 'corporate' language. Some frameworks written in it is proprietary but the language itself is very much open.
No no, that's not the computer. You see that's the locomotive they use when moving the computer.
Java on the Mac have always been maintained by Apple, they licensed it about fifteen years ago from Sun. There has never been a Sun Java for Macs. I don't know how much code is going back to Sun/Oracle but in worst case that may be nothing at all. The main problem is that Java by itself has no support for things like the Mac Aqua UI, that's all additions made by Apple. In the late 90's when the Mac wasn't going well Apple decided to license Java and fix those things since Sun wasn't likely to put much time and effort on it. It's actually really good and well done.
I use RHEL5 at work. I hate it with the fiery passion of a million supernovas. It doesn't help that rhel5 is like six years old, and 5.4 isn't much better. Who else likes using a version of gedit so old it doesn't even have syntax highlighting? My hobbyist Linux development environment at home should not far outshine my professional Linux development environment at work.
You know, you can actually install software yourself in Linux. You are not restricted to only use your distro's repository.
Now how is the system supposed to work if one party apparently cheats, didn't think of that huh!
I told you this would happen.
Then they need to drop the childish name. "The Pirate Party" makes it sound like they are a bunch of rebellious kids flaunting how they like to break the law and get away with it.
...
Seriously, I attended one of their meetings recently and it was a bunch of rebellious kids flaunting how they like to break the law and get away with it.
Well obviously the Oracle software worked properly and noticed that the customer had not payed their license to include the extra unlicensed second of operation.
There are no "cool guys" when it comes no nuclear weapons. Not Iran, not North Korea, not Russia, not the USA.