Sure. And as you can see I ran the numbers against a prius too. The point of the exercise was not to compare a brand new SUV to a brand new Prius. Rather it was to compare the cost of changing from an existing gas guzzler SUV to a new car, which addresses the point the OP made about his cost per mile of his car. My point is that his cost per mile is too low. And once you do factor in the entire cost, fuel economy really doesn't enter into the economics at all, for a significant portion of the car's lifetime. In fact on the Prius numbers, the cost per mile doesn't settle on the pure fuel cost until about 300,000 miles (that is not comparing it to any other vehicle).
My SUV certainly did cost $10,000. As I said I've put 30,000 miles on it since I bought it. And right now if you were in the market for a vehicle you probably could find a used one for that price still, though there is a run on used vehicles, so prices are a bit higher. I could have bought a $5000 car and reduced my costs. But going green and buying a hybrid is not likely to make economic sense for the length of time I'd drive it.
Hate to reply to my own post, but if I put the cost of continuing to drive my gas guzzler against a Prius at $26,000 and 50 MPG (if I had one I could never get that as my driving is mostly highway), it's about 80,000 miles before the Prius becomes more economical. It's fun and eye opening to crunch these numbers. And of course I'm not taking into account loans or maintenance costs, which could make the break-even point sooner or later. And obviously I'm pitting my used vehicle against a new one, which will always have a much higher initial cost per mile. To me, though, it also says it is rarely economical to buy a brand new vehicle.
Including the purchase of the car is very important in these calculations. For some reason people die of sticker shock at the pumps but have no problem paying at least that much per month in payments on their car. Having said all this, if we reduce it to numbers I don't think you'll find fuel economy factors into the cost as much as you say or would like it to. For example, spending $45,000 on a fuel efficient jetta vs $10,000 on a SUV gas guzzler. The SUV at 14 MPG will drive for 122,000 miles on the difference in cost alone. And actually it's far more than that as the actual cost of paying for the $45k car is going to be closer to $50 or even $60 depending on the interest rate and the length of the loan.
Let's play with some numbers. With car purchase cost in mind, at $4 a gallon (picking a number here), I drove my SUV about 30,000 miles since I bought it at say 14 MPG (a lot of highway miles) gives me a cost of about 61 cents a mile (2100 gallons or $8400 in gas). The cost of driving the same distance in the $45k car (40 MPG -- we'll be generous) is about $3000 in gas, which in total is about $1.60 a mile.
Eventually the car will obviously beat the SUV in terms of cost, but it will be quite a while. I was curious, and since my linear algebra skills are bad I chucked the numbers into LibreOffice and found that with these hypothetical numbers, the 40 MPG car will only become cheaper than the SUV in $/mile at the 200,000 mile mark. Really fascinating.
American oil supplies are only dependent on the Middle East for pricing. Most of US oil comes our socialist friends in Venezuela and also from Canada (who aren't socialist and have privatized everything including drivers licenses, but Americans still think they are socialist).
I can attest that not all German cars can safely go 100 mph even on the Autobahn! I got my rental car just barely up to 100 mph, and at that speed the steering was so sensitive that a bump to the steering wheel would have probably rolled the car. And there's no way it would have taken a curve at that speed. A short, wide sports car this rental car was definitely not! So despite the Autobahn being designed for speed (parts of it are, parts of it aren't), to routinely drive over 80 mph is probably unsafe for a lot of drivers and cars.
I was nowhere near Berlin where I've heard drivers are really fast; most cars were doing about 120-130 kph most of the time, which was completely comfortable. Despite the marginally higher average speed over an American freeway, I felt much safer because drivers didn't tailgate, they always passed on the left (it's illegal to pass on the right, and illegal to be driving such that someone has to pass you on the right). Also they strictly obeyed speed limits when they were in place, such as across bridges where the limit drops to 80 kph in a few places. Compared to drivers in America, it was very nice.
And one that knows gets modded down as an MS Shill for talking about how NTFS now supports DeDuplication.
Most of the posters seem to be confusing copy-on-write with DeDup. Rsync cannot dedup. Time Machine is not dedup. Dedup means different files (not just different *versions* of files) share links to the same block, written just once (or twice) to conserve space. Rsync with hard links and Time Machine are just copy-on-write mechanisms. Similar but different!
My friend went to the Republican primaries in Utah in her district before the last midterm election and was told by party brass at the start of the meeting that the party wanted a certain kind of person there and that if they didn't fit the mold (Tea Party I presume), they were invited to leave and not participate. I guess they don't want a bunch of Democrats to join their party and try to change things from within, which makes sense in a twisted sort of way. I guess if we let people really be democratic they'd choose the wrong lizard. So no I don't see the primaries as in any way being helpful to getting a real person on the ballot.
Banning them outright is indeed silly. Incandescents work very well for things like ovens, outdoor porch lights in -40 weather. Also they really are more environmentally friendly in places like a closet that you only turn the light on a few times a day for maybe a minute or two, where a fluorescent bulb would never warm up and have its lifespan significantly shortened by frequent starts.
Now a room that is lit for an hour or more a day, yeah for sure I ditched all my incandescents a long time ago and haven't regretted it, even in fixtures with glass covers. The thing I like most about compact fluorescents is that I can get a much brighter bulb with less heat and watts. Where I'd have a 60 watt bulb in a lamp before (hate indirect lighting!), I can no put a 75 or 80 virtual watt CF. Little 25 apparent watt fluorescent bulbs are excellent in a reading lamp. This said, I'm not convinced they are actually cheaper and I can't say they've saved me money. They don't seem to significantly outlast incandescents, and while they do use less electricity, the savings are not that much compared to TVs, Computers, Fridges, Stoves, Furnaces, AC, etc.
My shop is lit with a row of fluorescent tubes and a bunch of very large (200 watt) incandescent bulbs. Winters are brutal on the fluorescent bulbs. They flicker a lot while the ballast warms up. As well we replace more fluorescent tubes each year in the shop than bulbs (why would cold affect the tubes?). Which is nice because the bulbs are 20 feet overhead. Getting reliable, energy-efficient replacements for these bulbs would be very nice but I haven't seen any yet.
Interesting. I wonder if talking to multiple systems, combined with an accuracy correction, can get the 100% 1 meter accuracy that ag desires. I guess the ag industry's needs is proof that GPS is somewhat inadequate, at least for their needs. Perhaps demand will drive a better overall positioning system.
Something I didn't realize until recently is that in the northern latitudes (Canada, northern US), GPS coverage has occasional small gaps in it. My John Deere dealer was saying that in some areas every few days about 6pm (happens to be that time in those areas) GPS coverage drops below 1 meter accuracy levels, and in those areas GPS guidance on farm machines becomes unusable for about an hour or so. As well sometimes a satellite goes offline for maintenance. As agriculture is becoming very reliant on GPS (hence John Deere lobbying in washington against LTE usage of adjacent frequencies), this is a problem. Because of this John Deere now uses GPS and GLONASS together to get better coverage. When Galileo provides coverage, it will use those signals too. The point is, more GPS systems simply improve reliability for everyone, if the Chinese allowed western use of their signals.
If you say so. Sounds like you haven't done too terribly much with python. I dislike a lot of things about a lot of languages, but I can't say that any of them (well maybe except PHP) are "horrible." I despise curly braces but I can't make the claim that Java is a "horrible" language. Some are more awkward than others sure. There are many things you can complain about in python but whitespace formatting falls pretty far down the list. Having a 1:1 correspondence between my psuedo-code on paper and python code is extremely nice and productive too. Broken web sites and e-mail clients do make cutting and pasting python code problematic, I'll grant you that. But my experience with python has been much the same as ESR's. (And he had the same initial reservation as you.)
I am bitter that Epiphany chose to tear out python and replace it with Javascript of all things. Sort of makes sense given that Javascript is an integral part of browsers. But still makes me sad. Python is such a good language for writing extensions in.
Very valid points. I have built Gnome with jhbuild before, but only in the 2.x series (I built parts of Gnome 3.2, only the GTK3 stack though). Won't disagree with that and stupid decisions in the dependency tree. And the Linux-only thing is becoming more and more prevalent and not just among Gnome. Any environment that implements FreeDesktop protocols, which let's be honest make things better and better for the end user, focuses first and foremost on Linux. KDE is focusing more on OS X and Windows (not quite what you're driving at though I realize), which is goo in my opinion. Gnome, well who knows. we shall see. Some Gnome apps sort of run on Windows now.
You've made a number of unsupported assertions there. And of course since you talk as if you know what you are talking about you've been modded up.
I can't disagree with your take on the politics. I do take issue with the technology. Gnome certainly has had problems with being over-designed and over-abstracted. And I won't argue with your assertion about stupid UI choices.
Compiling Gnome, though, is pretty easy using but time consuming using jhbuild. Most users of course aren't affected in the least by the build process. Qt's build process is self-contained, but takes hours still. The end result is really the same for end users. Having every widget toolkit re-implement every wheel is fairly tiresome. Why not use lower-level libraries like libxml that already work well, and most importantly, are C-based.
As for the language, basing it on C was a wise choice. It's a far more portable language than C++ or Objective C, and *way* easier to bind other languages too. The GObject model works very well in other languages. Programming GTK+ in C++ is a joy (doesn't need moc either). GTK+ in Python is slick too, and actually manages to be fairly pythonic, unlike PyQt, which is really just C++ code in a python syntax.
Writing new GObject code is a chore, since there's a lot of boilerplate code to implement vtables, etc, but using GObject apis in regular C code is quite easy. I don't think Gobject is a BS OO extension anymore than C++ is. Functionally and under the hood they are fairly equivalent. No language support is a pain, but Vala is nice for providing that. I basically consume GObject code in other languages, and there has never been any issue there.
The tl;dr version of this post is that when you say that Gnome has made every mistake possible and that C and Gobject are responsible for Gnome being in a sorry state strikes me as being a rather baseless claim.
The Linux kernel is released under the GPLv2 only. Read the license. It does not have that clause in it. The license comes with every kernel source package.
As for the BSD thing I am not referring to that at all. I'm referring to the BSD kernel proper. Did Apple contribute HFS+ back to BSD? Offhand I can't think of any apple subsystem that made its way into BSD. Mach-O loader? no. HFS+? no sure. Userspace is an entirely different, and parts of it are easily replaceable by code under any license.
Sounds like you needed more competent lawyers then. Linux itself is GPLv2 only, and unlikely to ever change (unless you can simultaneously convince several thousand copyright holders). And any part of userspace that is GPLv3 can easily be replaced with BSD or even proprietary counterparts if you really wanted to.
If you're going to make a statement like "Any GPL v3 code used in the machine would force the maker to hand over to customers on request the CAD blueprints for the mechanisms, the timing involved, down to the color of the engineer farts when the thing is put together," you need to give us evidence. I've read the GPLv3 and I can't think of any clause that would support your statement. I am curious to know what parts fo the GPLv3 you are referring to.
On the other hand, the company stood to benefit from someone else's work without any monetary payment. Now they are paying for what they are using (Windows CE). In some ways the situation with Windows CE is now much more honest. Instead of trying to use linux and get away with it without complying with the license, they are now paying Microsoft for each and every unit shipped (essentially).
Hearing stories like this makes me very grateful that Torvalds had the foresight to use the GPL. Things aren't all well (tivoization), but they could be much much worse. I firmly believe that Linux is what it is because of the GPL. If not for the GPL IBM would never have invested so heavily in it. The GPL ensures that IBM's contributions cannot be used against it, while at the same time mutually benefiting the whole project. Apple chose a different way by blending parts of the BSD kernel with Mach. Has that helped BSD much? Only in exposure. I don't know of any Apple subsystems that have made their way back into BSD.
Not true. Please stop spreading these kind of lies. The GPL cannot force anything else to be GPL. Plain and simple. If you use code that is licensed under the GPL and find yourself in violation, you have 3 choices:
1. Make your own code that touches the GPL code GPL too so that you are compliant with the license. 2. Negotiate an acceptable license with the copyright holders. 3. Write your own damn code. In other words, remove the infringing code from your project, or your operating system, or your hosting system.
It's your choice. Nothing is forced on you, though if you knowing violate the GPL you are liable for cash damages as per copyright law. But certainly the GPL cannot "infect" code. That it can is a lie plain and simple. Pleas stop spreading it. It's bad enough that MS is spreading this lie.
The only possible way you can run afoul of the GPL is if you get greedy. Just because code is offered freely on the internet doesn't grant you a right to use it however you want. The GPL is no different than any source code license. If you are unsure of your ability to use it in a commercial setting, consult a lawyer. This should be no different than if you are using code licensed from Microsoft or any other proprietary company or source. Seems to me that the recent problems with GPL violations come from companies that have, for all intents and purposes, knowingly stole code and hoped to get away with it. Unlike proprietary code theft (which I am sure is as rampant), open source code theft is sometimes easier to spot.
If you say so, but if MS used PGO for things like MS Office, IE, or even the windows explorer shell I'm sure they'd quickly run out of RAM as well.
So no, Firefox is not more bloated than "*ANY* component within Windows."
Seriously, anyone with the "slightest clue" about what the article is talking about would understand that this issue is not about "deep-rooted problems" in Firefox. And as the other poster mentions, MS knows about this problem and now has 64-bit binaries of the compiler and linker now so this is less a problem. However it only addresses the issue for 64-bit apps; the 64-bit binaries don't appear capable of compiling and linking 32-bit apps, if I read this correctly.
Sure but you're confusing the issues here. Firefox still is produced as a collection of DLLs (modular design as you say). That's not the problem. The problem is that for PGO to work, it has to load all the objects and dlls into memory at once in order to do the optimizations and analyze the interactions between them. Nothing to do with "Rich user experience" as you say. Firefox builds just fine without PGO, but it might be a bit slower.
I kind of doubt whether Microsoft uses PGO themselves for anything. Certainly a large project like MS Office would require several times the amount of RAM to to PGO than Firefox does.
But the law makes exceptions for hands free devices. In my experience such devices are as bad as direct cell phone use, or even worse. I've watched people stare off into space as they talk to their hands free devices. I agree that driving should take someone's full attention. But laws like this aren't going to do it. They are well-intentioned, of course.
I will be very suprised if the overall accident rate, and death rate (the only rates I care about) go down. If the deaths attributed to cell phone distraction go down, that's nice, but insignificant if the overall rate is unchanged, then one cannot argue that the law saves lives. As I said, deaths caused by drunk drivers exceed distracted driving by fair amount. And that's something we already all know is bad, with laws against it, and I believe something could still be done about it, which much greater effect than this silly law. Also as I said the law would be better served enhancing penalties for situations where distracted driving played a role.
From an address space POV, 64-bits vs 32-bits is 4294967296 times greater. The short answer is, not in your lifetime will it overflow the container. That said PGO looks to have reached the limit of it's current incarnation. Eventually it will just get too slow to be workable. If it really is valuable as an optimization tool, MS will have to fix it, true enough.
Folks are crawling all over each other to show how ignorant they are. "I ditched firefox for Chrome cause it's lighter!" only to ignore the fact that Chrome also has the same problem with the PGO thing running out of RAM so they don't even bother with trying those optimizations anymore. "Geez Firefox needs more RAM than the kernel to compile? Something's wrong!" Yes if the Linux kernel was built with PGO on VS 32-bit it probably would run out of RAM there too. Then there's the guy that claims this PGO problem is evidence that the Firefox devs need to go back to remedial school. I'm sure he could do it far better (and avoid the PGO linking optimization running out of memory too!).
Hilarious reading. At least I choose to laugh rather than cry at people's inability to read and understand the issues here.
Alberta recently passed a very broad, almost draconian anti-distracted driver law. Cell phone use, device of any kind use is strictly prohibited while driving, except hands-free devices and the car's built-in controls. Now instead of distracted drivers talking on cell phones we have distracted drivers trying to work their hands free devices. Even saying "answer" to the hands free device is very distracting. I know as I almost hit someone while saying "answer." Or texting with the phone down low out of sight, which is far far worse for driving.
As with many things, this is terribly misguided legislation. Yes cell phones can and do cause accidents. Yes distracted driving is bad. But if they would have passed a draconian anti-drunk driving law that would save far more lives than any cell phone ban. Judging by the beer cans in the ditch around here, I'd say driving drunk is a problem of epidemic proportions still.
Since cell phones were introduced and their use increased exponentially, you'd think that deaths on the highway would increase at a same rate. The fact is that they haven't. People are dying at about the same rate in traffic accidents proportionally to the number of cars at about the same rate as they always have. Yes it's tragic that your aunt Rosy was killed by a driver texting. Tragic, but statistically less significant than other problems.
I've heard of accidents where it was revealed that the person was texting while driving. That crosses a line obviously. But the best way to deal with this is to instead legislate mandatory penalties if you are involved in an accident and it can be shown you were texting while driving. License suspension, fines, and even jail time, depending on the circumstances.
But to ban "distracted driving" is ineffectual and a waste of money and time.
Who said anything about militarized police? No really. The Predators used in border patrol are not armed. Maybe if the tea party has their way they will be.
It wasn't so long ago that cattle rustling was a capital offense. Many a hanging in the old west was the punishment for this (with or without the support of the law!). Heck it might still be on the books in Texas.
Backing up your kindle purchases and storing them in a way that Amazon cannot control is easy I've been told, and doesn't depend on any particular Kindle.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure. And as you can see I ran the numbers against a prius too. The point of the exercise was not to compare a brand new SUV to a brand new Prius. Rather it was to compare the cost of changing from an existing gas guzzler SUV to a new car, which addresses the point the OP made about his cost per mile of his car. My point is that his cost per mile is too low. And once you do factor in the entire cost, fuel economy really doesn't enter into the economics at all, for a significant portion of the car's lifetime. In fact on the Prius numbers, the cost per mile doesn't settle on the pure fuel cost until about 300,000 miles (that is not comparing it to any other vehicle).
My SUV certainly did cost $10,000. As I said I've put 30,000 miles on it since I bought it. And right now if you were in the market for a vehicle you probably could find a used one for that price still, though there is a run on used vehicles, so prices are a bit higher. I could have bought a $5000 car and reduced my costs. But going green and buying a hybrid is not likely to make economic sense for the length of time I'd drive it.
Hate to reply to my own post, but if I put the cost of continuing to drive my gas guzzler against a Prius at $26,000 and 50 MPG (if I had one I could never get that as my driving is mostly highway), it's about 80,000 miles before the Prius becomes more economical. It's fun and eye opening to crunch these numbers. And of course I'm not taking into account loans or maintenance costs, which could make the break-even point sooner or later. And obviously I'm pitting my used vehicle against a new one, which will always have a much higher initial cost per mile. To me, though, it also says it is rarely economical to buy a brand new vehicle.
Including the purchase of the car is very important in these calculations. For some reason people die of sticker shock at the pumps but have no problem paying at least that much per month in payments on their car. Having said all this, if we reduce it to numbers I don't think you'll find fuel economy factors into the cost as much as you say or would like it to. For example, spending $45,000 on a fuel efficient jetta vs $10,000 on a SUV gas guzzler. The SUV at 14 MPG will drive for 122,000 miles on the difference in cost alone. And actually it's far more than that as the actual cost of paying for the $45k car is going to be closer to $50 or even $60 depending on the interest rate and the length of the loan.
Let's play with some numbers. With car purchase cost in mind, at $4 a gallon (picking a number here), I drove my SUV about 30,000 miles since I bought it at say 14 MPG (a lot of highway miles) gives me a cost of about 61 cents a mile (2100 gallons or $8400 in gas). The cost of driving the same distance in the $45k car (40 MPG -- we'll be generous) is about $3000 in gas, which in total is about $1.60 a mile.
Eventually the car will obviously beat the SUV in terms of cost, but it will be quite a while. I was curious, and since my linear algebra skills are bad I chucked the numbers into LibreOffice and found that with these hypothetical numbers, the 40 MPG car will only become cheaper than the SUV in $/mile at the 200,000 mile mark. Really fascinating.
American oil supplies are only dependent on the Middle East for pricing. Most of US oil comes our socialist friends in Venezuela and also from Canada (who aren't socialist and have privatized everything including drivers licenses, but Americans still think they are socialist).
I can attest that not all German cars can safely go 100 mph even on the Autobahn! I got my rental car just barely up to 100 mph, and at that speed the steering was so sensitive that a bump to the steering wheel would have probably rolled the car. And there's no way it would have taken a curve at that speed. A short, wide sports car this rental car was definitely not! So despite the Autobahn being designed for speed (parts of it are, parts of it aren't), to routinely drive over 80 mph is probably unsafe for a lot of drivers and cars.
I was nowhere near Berlin where I've heard drivers are really fast; most cars were doing about 120-130 kph most of the time, which was completely comfortable. Despite the marginally higher average speed over an American freeway, I felt much safer because drivers didn't tailgate, they always passed on the left (it's illegal to pass on the right, and illegal to be driving such that someone has to pass you on the right). Also they strictly obeyed speed limits when they were in place, such as across bridges where the limit drops to 80 kph in a few places. Compared to drivers in America, it was very nice.
Yeah! Just as soon as I'm finished watching the latest Mission Impossible installment. Oh wait you said Hollywood?
And one that knows gets modded down as an MS Shill for talking about how NTFS now supports DeDuplication.
Most of the posters seem to be confusing copy-on-write with DeDup. Rsync cannot dedup. Time Machine is not dedup. Dedup means different files (not just different *versions* of files) share links to the same block, written just once (or twice) to conserve space. Rsync with hard links and Time Machine are just copy-on-write mechanisms. Similar but different!
My friend went to the Republican primaries in Utah in her district before the last midterm election and was told by party brass at the start of the meeting that the party wanted a certain kind of person there and that if they didn't fit the mold (Tea Party I presume), they were invited to leave and not participate. I guess they don't want a bunch of Democrats to join their party and try to change things from within, which makes sense in a twisted sort of way. I guess if we let people really be democratic they'd choose the wrong lizard. So no I don't see the primaries as in any way being helpful to getting a real person on the ballot.
Banning them outright is indeed silly. Incandescents work very well for things like ovens, outdoor porch lights in -40 weather. Also they really are more environmentally friendly in places like a closet that you only turn the light on a few times a day for maybe a minute or two, where a fluorescent bulb would never warm up and have its lifespan significantly shortened by frequent starts.
Now a room that is lit for an hour or more a day, yeah for sure I ditched all my incandescents a long time ago and haven't regretted it, even in fixtures with glass covers. The thing I like most about compact fluorescents is that I can get a much brighter bulb with less heat and watts. Where I'd have a 60 watt bulb in a lamp before (hate indirect lighting!), I can no put a 75 or 80 virtual watt CF. Little 25 apparent watt fluorescent bulbs are excellent in a reading lamp. This said, I'm not convinced they are actually cheaper and I can't say they've saved me money. They don't seem to significantly outlast incandescents, and while they do use less electricity, the savings are not that much compared to TVs, Computers, Fridges, Stoves, Furnaces, AC, etc.
My shop is lit with a row of fluorescent tubes and a bunch of very large (200 watt) incandescent bulbs. Winters are brutal on the fluorescent bulbs. They flicker a lot while the ballast warms up. As well we replace more fluorescent tubes each year in the shop than bulbs (why would cold affect the tubes?). Which is nice because the bulbs are 20 feet overhead. Getting reliable, energy-efficient replacements for these bulbs would be very nice but I haven't seen any yet.
Interesting. I wonder if talking to multiple systems, combined with an accuracy correction, can get the 100% 1 meter accuracy that ag desires. I guess the ag industry's needs is proof that GPS is somewhat inadequate, at least for their needs. Perhaps demand will drive a better overall positioning system.
Something I didn't realize until recently is that in the northern latitudes (Canada, northern US), GPS coverage has occasional small gaps in it. My John Deere dealer was saying that in some areas every few days about 6pm (happens to be that time in those areas) GPS coverage drops below 1 meter accuracy levels, and in those areas GPS guidance on farm machines becomes unusable for about an hour or so. As well sometimes a satellite goes offline for maintenance. As agriculture is becoming very reliant on GPS (hence John Deere lobbying in washington against LTE usage of adjacent frequencies), this is a problem. Because of this John Deere now uses GPS and GLONASS together to get better coverage. When Galileo provides coverage, it will use those signals too. The point is, more GPS systems simply improve reliability for everyone, if the Chinese allowed western use of their signals.
If you say so. Sounds like you haven't done too terribly much with python. I dislike a lot of things about a lot of languages, but I can't say that any of them (well maybe except PHP) are "horrible." I despise curly braces but I can't make the claim that Java is a "horrible" language. Some are more awkward than others sure. There are many things you can complain about in python but whitespace formatting falls pretty far down the list. Having a 1:1 correspondence between my psuedo-code on paper and python code is extremely nice and productive too. Broken web sites and e-mail clients do make cutting and pasting python code problematic, I'll grant you that. But my experience with python has been much the same as ESR's. (And he had the same initial reservation as you.)
I am bitter that Epiphany chose to tear out python and replace it with Javascript of all things. Sort of makes sense given that Javascript is an integral part of browsers. But still makes me sad. Python is such a good language for writing extensions in.
Very valid points. I have built Gnome with jhbuild before, but only in the 2.x series (I built parts of Gnome 3.2, only the GTK3 stack though). Won't disagree with that and stupid decisions in the dependency tree. And the Linux-only thing is becoming more and more prevalent and not just among Gnome. Any environment that implements FreeDesktop protocols, which let's be honest make things better and better for the end user, focuses first and foremost on Linux. KDE is focusing more on OS X and Windows (not quite what you're driving at though I realize), which is goo in my opinion. Gnome, well who knows. we shall see. Some Gnome apps sort of run on Windows now.
Good points, thanks for sharing your experiences.
You've made a number of unsupported assertions there. And of course since you talk as if you know what you are talking about you've been modded up.
I can't disagree with your take on the politics. I do take issue with the technology. Gnome certainly has had problems with being over-designed and over-abstracted. And I won't argue with your assertion about stupid UI choices.
Compiling Gnome, though, is pretty easy using but time consuming using jhbuild. Most users of course aren't affected in the least by the build process. Qt's build process is self-contained, but takes hours still. The end result is really the same for end users. Having every widget toolkit re-implement every wheel is fairly tiresome. Why not use lower-level libraries like libxml that already work well, and most importantly, are C-based.
As for the language, basing it on C was a wise choice. It's a far more portable language than C++ or Objective C, and *way* easier to bind other languages too. The GObject model works very well in other languages. Programming GTK+ in C++ is a joy (doesn't need moc either). GTK+ in Python is slick too, and actually manages to be fairly pythonic, unlike PyQt, which is really just C++ code in a python syntax.
Writing new GObject code is a chore, since there's a lot of boilerplate code to implement vtables, etc, but using GObject apis in regular C code is quite easy. I don't think Gobject is a BS OO extension anymore than C++ is. Functionally and under the hood they are fairly equivalent. No language support is a pain, but Vala is nice for providing that. I basically consume GObject code in other languages, and there has never been any issue there.
The tl;dr version of this post is that when you say that Gnome has made every mistake possible and that C and Gobject are responsible for Gnome being in a sorry state strikes me as being a rather baseless claim.
The Linux kernel is released under the GPLv2 only. Read the license. It does not have that clause in it. The license comes with every kernel source package.
As for the BSD thing I am not referring to that at all. I'm referring to the BSD kernel proper. Did Apple contribute HFS+ back to BSD? Offhand I can't think of any apple subsystem that made its way into BSD. Mach-O loader? no. HFS+? no sure. Userspace is an entirely different, and parts of it are easily replaceable by code under any license.
Sounds like you needed more competent lawyers then. Linux itself is GPLv2 only, and unlikely to ever change (unless you can simultaneously convince several thousand copyright holders). And any part of userspace that is GPLv3 can easily be replaced with BSD or even proprietary counterparts if you really wanted to.
If you're going to make a statement like "Any GPL v3 code used in the machine would force the maker to hand over to customers on request the CAD blueprints for the mechanisms, the timing involved, down to the color of the engineer farts when the thing is put together," you need to give us evidence. I've read the GPLv3 and I can't think of any clause that would support your statement. I am curious to know what parts fo the GPLv3 you are referring to.
On the other hand, the company stood to benefit from someone else's work without any monetary payment. Now they are paying for what they are using (Windows CE). In some ways the situation with Windows CE is now much more honest. Instead of trying to use linux and get away with it without complying with the license, they are now paying Microsoft for each and every unit shipped (essentially).
Hearing stories like this makes me very grateful that Torvalds had the foresight to use the GPL. Things aren't all well (tivoization), but they could be much much worse. I firmly believe that Linux is what it is because of the GPL. If not for the GPL IBM would never have invested so heavily in it. The GPL ensures that IBM's contributions cannot be used against it, while at the same time mutually benefiting the whole project. Apple chose a different way by blending parts of the BSD kernel with Mach. Has that helped BSD much? Only in exposure. I don't know of any Apple subsystems that have made their way back into BSD.
Not true. Please stop spreading these kind of lies. The GPL cannot force anything else to be GPL. Plain and simple. If you use code that is licensed under the GPL and find yourself in violation, you have 3 choices:
2. Negotiate an acceptable license with the copyright holders.
3. Write your own damn code. In other words, remove the infringing code from your project, or your operating system, or your hosting system.
It's your choice. Nothing is forced on you, though if you knowing violate the GPL you are liable for cash damages as per copyright law. But certainly the GPL cannot "infect" code. That it can is a lie plain and simple. Pleas stop spreading it. It's bad enough that MS is spreading this lie.
The only possible way you can run afoul of the GPL is if you get greedy. Just because code is offered freely on the internet doesn't grant you a right to use it however you want. The GPL is no different than any source code license. If you are unsure of your ability to use it in a commercial setting, consult a lawyer. This should be no different than if you are using code licensed from Microsoft or any other proprietary company or source. Seems to me that the recent problems with GPL violations come from companies that have, for all intents and purposes, knowingly stole code and hoped to get away with it. Unlike proprietary code theft (which I am sure is as rampant), open source code theft is sometimes easier to spot.
If you say so, but if MS used PGO for things like MS Office, IE, or even the windows explorer shell I'm sure they'd quickly run out of RAM as well.
So no, Firefox is not more bloated than "*ANY* component within Windows."
Seriously, anyone with the "slightest clue" about what the article is talking about would understand that this issue is not about "deep-rooted problems" in Firefox. And as the other poster mentions, MS knows about this problem and now has 64-bit binaries of the compiler and linker now so this is less a problem. However it only addresses the issue for 64-bit apps; the 64-bit binaries don't appear capable of compiling and linking 32-bit apps, if I read this correctly.
Sure but you're confusing the issues here. Firefox still is produced as a collection of DLLs (modular design as you say). That's not the problem. The problem is that for PGO to work, it has to load all the objects and dlls into memory at once in order to do the optimizations and analyze the interactions between them. Nothing to do with "Rich user experience" as you say. Firefox builds just fine without PGO, but it might be a bit slower.
I kind of doubt whether Microsoft uses PGO themselves for anything. Certainly a large project like MS Office would require several times the amount of RAM to to PGO than Firefox does.
But the law makes exceptions for hands free devices. In my experience such devices are as bad as direct cell phone use, or even worse. I've watched people stare off into space as they talk to their hands free devices. I agree that driving should take someone's full attention. But laws like this aren't going to do it. They are well-intentioned, of course.
I will be very suprised if the overall accident rate, and death rate (the only rates I care about) go down. If the deaths attributed to cell phone distraction go down, that's nice, but insignificant if the overall rate is unchanged, then one cannot argue that the law saves lives. As I said, deaths caused by drunk drivers exceed distracted driving by fair amount. And that's something we already all know is bad, with laws against it, and I believe something could still be done about it, which much greater effect than this silly law. Also as I said the law would be better served enhancing penalties for situations where distracted driving played a role.
From an address space POV, 64-bits vs 32-bits is 4294967296 times greater. The short answer is, not in your lifetime will it overflow the container. That said PGO looks to have reached the limit of it's current incarnation. Eventually it will just get too slow to be workable. If it really is valuable as an optimization tool, MS will have to fix it, true enough.
Folks are crawling all over each other to show how ignorant they are. "I ditched firefox for Chrome cause it's lighter!" only to ignore the fact that Chrome also has the same problem with the PGO thing running out of RAM so they don't even bother with trying those optimizations anymore. "Geez Firefox needs more RAM than the kernel to compile? Something's wrong!" Yes if the Linux kernel was built with PGO on VS 32-bit it probably would run out of RAM there too. Then there's the guy that claims this PGO problem is evidence that the Firefox devs need to go back to remedial school. I'm sure he could do it far better (and avoid the PGO linking optimization running out of memory too!).
Hilarious reading. At least I choose to laugh rather than cry at people's inability to read and understand the issues here.
Alberta recently passed a very broad, almost draconian anti-distracted driver law. Cell phone use, device of any kind use is strictly prohibited while driving, except hands-free devices and the car's built-in controls. Now instead of distracted drivers talking on cell phones we have distracted drivers trying to work their hands free devices. Even saying "answer" to the hands free device is very distracting. I know as I almost hit someone while saying "answer." Or texting with the phone down low out of sight, which is far far worse for driving.
As with many things, this is terribly misguided legislation. Yes cell phones can and do cause accidents. Yes distracted driving is bad. But if they would have passed a draconian anti-drunk driving law that would save far more lives than any cell phone ban. Judging by the beer cans in the ditch around here, I'd say driving drunk is a problem of epidemic proportions still.
Since cell phones were introduced and their use increased exponentially, you'd think that deaths on the highway would increase at a same rate. The fact is that they haven't. People are dying at about the same rate in traffic accidents proportionally to the number of cars at about the same rate as they always have. Yes it's tragic that your aunt Rosy was killed by a driver texting. Tragic, but statistically less significant than other problems.
I've heard of accidents where it was revealed that the person was texting while driving. That crosses a line obviously. But the best way to deal with this is to instead legislate mandatory penalties if you are involved in an accident and it can be shown you were texting while driving. License suspension, fines, and even jail time, depending on the circumstances.
But to ban "distracted driving" is ineffectual and a waste of money and time.
Who said anything about militarized police? No really. The Predators used in border patrol are not armed. Maybe if the tea party has their way they will be.
It wasn't so long ago that cattle rustling was a capital offense. Many a hanging in the old west was the punishment for this (with or without the support of the law!). Heck it might still be on the books in Texas.
Backing up your kindle purchases and storing them in a way that Amazon cannot control is easy I've been told, and doesn't depend on any particular Kindle.