But if you supply a firearm to an individual who is not allowed to posses one, and they commit a crime you can count on being brought up on charges. You can also face charges in some states for storing your firearms in a "negligent" manner.
The simple truth of this matter is, it is illegal to pirate copyrighted materials. The copyright holder has every right to enforce their rights to control the distribution of that material as they see fit. If they want to allow bootlegging, home-taping than that is their right. If they want to remove their material from a "service" such as Napster, then that is their right also. The purpose of Napster is to traffic in copyrighted works, anyone who believes differently is deluding themselves.
On another note. Who the hell gives a damn about the intellect of a drummer? Compared to some of the other drummers, I've heard in interviews Lars is the brightest with the exception of Neal Peart.
RMS and ESR don't have to answer to company shareholders if they say something stupid. Of course, he's going to be careful. If he comes out and says, "Linux is dead!" then there goes all their credibility as a Linux support vendor. We already know they don't have much with the OSS crowd and really needed to approach this carefully. On the flip side, if he comes out and says, "SCO Unix is dead!, long live Linux" their clueless shareholders and possibly some of their customers will go balistic. I think its clear that SCO is trying to play both sides of the fence. They're trying to cater to the "Open Source Sympathizers" and the "Business as Usual Crowd".
I'm skeptical of SCO's long term intentions, but I think he handled himself well. And I honestly got exactly what I expected from this article.
Did it ever occur to you that you could have suggested this as a helpful workaround, rather than insult someone who is technically correct. In fact, you are both right, but you don't have to be a dick about it.
It's obvious the original poster meant "row-level locking" which is not directly supported by mySQL. However, your tip can achieve a similar result. BUT! application side locking is not as efficient as server side locking and application performance for some types of applications, namely high volume DML, will suffer.
I'm sorry, you make a valid point, but so does HiQ. Using application code instead of internal server functions and features is expensive (in performance). In order for a database server to be competitive it needs to be able to handle certain things natively, like row-level locking, stored procedures, foreign keys, etc.
How fast a database performs is dependent on many things.
The number one factor in database performance is design and application efficiency. A poorly designed application or database structure will drag even the swiftest of database servers regardless of the RDBMS.
It's been well established throughout the posts that mySQL doesn't handle row level locking, constraints, stored procedures, and triggers. These features have a huge impact on database performance. There is no disputing mySQL's speed at reading, but that is only half of the equation. The fact of the matter is that mySQL has the potential to perform very poorly when taken outside of its core competency of decision support. Table level locking is a major limitation. Without row level locking, the table is going to experience contention, which could lead to some major performance loss depending on the amount of activity on one particular table. It is also important to note, that the absence of foreign key constraints, subqueries, stored procedures, and triggers can all negatively impact performance. The absence of those features means that application code must enforce data integrity. Constraints and procedures executed on the server hosting the database will always be faster than application code executed from a client machine or webpage.
And, I believe the author explained his position very clearly and even explained that his assessment was very clearly based on his particular needs.
MySQL in a DSS or Dynamic HTML environment is like racing a ferrari in Formula 1
MySQL in an OLTP environment is like driving a ferrari in Supercross.
Unfortunately, many of the developers I have to work with couldn't write a well written app if their life depended on it. There are a few that do a pretty good job and produce some pretty well written code, but I still don't think I'd want to put maintaining data integrity in their hands. Not to mention the inherent overhead of using applications to maintain integrity instead of foreign keys.
This is a pretty cool idea. Mail order catalogs could have bar codes for each item that would wisk you away to the online store to let you know if an item is in stock. Text books could put these bar codes in the bibliography when information was pulled from a web resource. Airline tickets could have a link to bring you to a page with information on that flight's schedule. There are a lot of benefits to this kind of technology. The question is will the companies employing this technology actually use it in a manner that isn't completely redundant and/or useless?
Try actually "reading" the article and understand the implications of a decision against Corley and the precedent it sets.
This is a dangerous case. This case could destroy the practice of reverse-engineering. A process that has given civilization countless innovations and advances. The MPAA could very easily pave the way for other industries to stifle competition and further shackle consumers.
What happens when the MPAA starts to extort CSS license holders with higher CSS license fees? The market would be broken and you can bet the companies that have an interest in the MPAA and the DVD player market (Sony & RCA) would certainly gain some market share. It may be a little far-fetched, but it would be completely legal, even under anti-trust laws.
What about the computer industry? Reverse- engineering is responsible for nearly all innovations in the industry. Many parts of DOS, Windows, and of course Linux were reverse engineered from previous operating systems and applications. Talk about having to reinvent the wheel.
As for the free speech argument, I don't see code=free speech, to be nearly as perilous as the implications of a journalist being dragged in to court for doing their job. What if a newspaper prints a list of auto inspection stations that were fined for passing unfit vehicles? What about a news expose on night clubs that are serving minors? What about an internet journalist who posts an article and links to websites that are distributing a software program that is NOT illegal yet? DeCSS maybe under fire, but only the courts can decide its fate now.
You can split your Explorer window in to various child windows and simultaneouly view web pages, image files, browse your home directory and download from ftp in one parent window. Cool! You can also type in an FTP address, and in Win2K Explorer images will preview to the left of the browse window, but they are a far cry from introducing anything nearly as flexible as Konqueror promises to be.
You are correct in that Microsoft is not completely to blame for getting "us" into this situation. In fact, Corel and Lotus didn't help much either. However, Microsoft eventually destroyed the product offerings of their rivals and established an "office document monopoly", rather than working with its rivals to establish a document standard, as any "responsible" business would have done.
However, you are obviously missing the point of this discussion. Many customers/users are completely unaware of their alternatives. A common document format helps everyone, not just the MS Office, Star Office, AbiWord, GO, or WordPerfect users. It gives people all over the world the ability to share information as they intended regardless of the application they use.
I'm sorry you can't get past the Windows/Linux posturing and realize the merits of a common document format.
I must say, I'm impressed. The interface looks clean. The program seems to have covered all the basics from file management, web browsing, ftp transfer, image viewing, and document previewing which are all things that should be hamdled by a.... hmmm?
What would you call it? The standard terms File Manager and Web Browser conjure completely different visions of applications functionality.
I wonder how long before MS does something similar and calls it an "Innovation"? And before some High Priest of Redmond jumps all over me saying that IE5 already does it, think again and read up on the app. It does a few things IE5 doesn't do very well or at all.
I find it very sad that ZDnet would allow such a story (even if it is an editorial) as misleading as this to be published. I know a number of people who read Ziff Davis publications and many of them are casual computer users, and worse still investors. There are a great many people that depend on ZD for "news" not "flamebait"!
The sad fact is, article's like this are a diservice to the IT industry. When someone goes to their IT manager with a strong case for open source software, the clueless manager will remember the "words" of this so called "expert". And another company will shell out big bucks to Redmond for something they don't really need.
It's too bad, that ZD would allow themselves to become the "Enquirer" of the computing news.
How about we give credit where credit is do. Apple did not come up with their OS all on their own. They ripped off many of their "ideas" from Xerox PARC. Microsoft's failings in GUI design are due to its focus on eye candy. Customizable toolbars, menus, sliders, etc. None of those features make Windows a good Interface. Rather than addressing the problems in their design, Microsoft chooses to overhaul their GUI's appearance rather than their outdated and clunky code. Hey, Bill try some real "innovation" instead of simply bundling a browser.
IMHO... a "good" user interface is a combination of five things. The primary requirement of any good interface is usefulness. The interface must give the user the ability to accomplish as many if not all the things the user wishes to do with that system. Stability is second only because a stable UI still needs to be able to do something. Performance and flexibiility are also very important. The interface must be swift enough to be usable and flexible enough to be extensible. The final requirement is "ease of use". The biggest failings of MacOS and Windows is that their GUI's put a premium on "ease of use" at the expense of stability, performance, flexibility, and usefulness. "Ease of use" comes after everything else. I believe that the largest faults with MacOS and Windows is that a premium was placed on ease of use and not on the other more fundamental requirements. While I
When the original K6 came out it had some compatibility issues. When the K6-2 & K6-3 came out there were very few, namely the problem with Windows 95 and chips over 350mhz, but AMD had a patch within days of the products release.
Although I represent a datapoint of 1, I have run into NO compatibility problems with my Athlon 500 in Windows 98,2000,NT, or Linux. And apparently nobody else has either based on the complete lack of reports to the contrary. If only we could say the same for Coppermine or the Camino chipsets from Intel.
If there was ever an argument to "know your ISP" this is it. Don't trust AOL, NetCom, Mindspring, etc. to do what is in the best interests of your privacy. Shop around for your ISP. I've found the smaller shops will be a lot more responsive to your concerns about your privacy/security/support issues. There are good ISP's out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but your analogy is a little weak.
But if you supply a firearm to an individual who is not allowed to posses one, and they commit a crime you can count on being brought up on charges. You can also face charges in some states for storing your firearms in a "negligent" manner.
The simple truth of this matter is, it is illegal to pirate copyrighted materials. The copyright holder has every right to enforce their rights to control the distribution of that material as they see fit. If they want to allow bootlegging, home-taping than that is their right. If they want to remove their material from a "service" such as Napster, then that is their right also. The purpose of Napster is to traffic in copyrighted works, anyone who believes differently is deluding themselves.
On another note. Who the hell gives a damn about the intellect of a drummer? Compared to some of the other drummers, I've heard in interviews Lars is the brightest with the exception of Neal Peart.
RMS and ESR don't have to answer to company shareholders if they say something stupid. Of course, he's going to be careful. If he comes out and says, "Linux is dead!" then there goes all their credibility as a Linux support vendor. We already know they don't have much with the OSS crowd and really needed to approach this carefully. On the flip side, if he comes out and says, "SCO Unix is dead!, long live Linux" their clueless shareholders and possibly some of their customers will go balistic. I think its clear that SCO is trying to play both sides of the fence. They're trying to cater to the "Open Source Sympathizers" and the "Business as Usual Crowd".
I'm skeptical of SCO's long term intentions, but I think he handled himself well. And I honestly got exactly what I expected from this article.
Did it ever occur to you that you could have suggested this as a helpful workaround, rather than insult someone who is technically correct. In fact, you are both right, but you don't have to be a dick about it.
It's obvious the original poster meant "row-level locking" which is not directly supported by mySQL. However, your tip can achieve a similar result. BUT! application side locking is not as efficient as server side locking and application performance for some types of applications, namely high volume DML, will suffer.
I'm sorry, you make a valid point, but so does HiQ. Using application code instead of internal server functions and features is expensive (in performance). In order for a database server to be competitive it needs to be able to handle certain things natively, like row-level locking, stored procedures, foreign keys, etc.
How fast a database performs is dependent on many things.
The number one factor in database performance is design and application efficiency. A poorly designed application or database structure will drag even the swiftest of database servers regardless of the RDBMS.
It's been well established throughout the posts that mySQL doesn't handle row level locking, constraints, stored procedures, and triggers. These features have a huge impact on database performance. There is no disputing mySQL's speed at reading, but that is only half of the equation. The fact of the matter is that mySQL has the potential to perform very poorly when taken outside of its core competency of decision support. Table level locking is a major limitation. Without row level locking, the table is going to experience contention, which could lead to some major performance loss depending on the amount of activity on one particular table. It is also important to note, that the absence of foreign key constraints, subqueries, stored procedures, and triggers can all negatively impact performance. The absence of those features means that application code must enforce data integrity. Constraints and procedures executed on the server hosting the database will always be faster than application code executed from a client machine or webpage.
And, I believe the author explained his position very clearly and even explained that his assessment was very clearly based on his particular needs.
MySQL in a DSS or Dynamic HTML environment is like racing a ferrari in Formula 1
MySQL in an OLTP environment is like driving a ferrari in Supercross.
Unfortunately, many of the developers I have to work with couldn't write a well written app if their life depended on it. There are a few that do a pretty good job and produce some pretty well written code, but I still don't think I'd want to put maintaining data integrity in their hands. Not to mention the inherent overhead of using applications to maintain integrity instead of foreign keys.
This is a pretty cool idea. Mail order catalogs could have bar codes for each item that would wisk you away to the online store to let you know if an item is in stock. Text books could put these bar codes in the bibliography when information was pulled from a web resource. Airline tickets could have a link to bring you to a page with information on that flight's schedule. There are a lot of benefits to this kind of technology. The question is will the companies employing this technology actually use it in a manner that isn't completely redundant and/or useless?
Try actually "reading" the article and understand the implications of a decision against Corley and the precedent it sets.
This is a dangerous case. This case could destroy the practice of reverse-engineering. A process that has given civilization countless innovations and advances. The MPAA could very easily pave the way for other industries to stifle competition and further shackle consumers.
What happens when the MPAA starts to extort CSS license holders with higher CSS license fees? The market would be broken and you can bet the companies that have an interest in the MPAA and the DVD player market (Sony & RCA) would certainly gain some market share. It may be a little far-fetched, but it would be completely legal, even under anti-trust laws.
What about the computer industry? Reverse- engineering is responsible for nearly all innovations in the industry. Many parts of DOS, Windows, and of course Linux were reverse engineered from previous operating systems and applications. Talk about having to reinvent the wheel.
As for the free speech argument, I don't see code=free speech, to be nearly as perilous as the implications of a journalist being dragged in to court for doing their job. What if a newspaper prints a list of auto inspection stations that were fined for passing unfit vehicles? What about a news expose on night clubs that are serving minors? What about an internet journalist who posts an article and links to websites that are distributing a software program that is NOT illegal yet? DeCSS maybe under fire, but only the courts can decide its fate now.
I would have to agree that #20 is a huge cop-out. Love 'em or hate 'em, plastics truly deserve their own spot on the list.
You can split your Explorer window in to various child windows and simultaneouly view web pages, image files, browse your home directory and download from ftp in one parent window. Cool! You can also type in an FTP address, and in Win2K Explorer images will preview to the left of the browse window, but they are a far cry from introducing anything nearly as flexible as Konqueror promises to be.
You are correct in that Microsoft is not completely to blame for getting "us" into this situation. In fact, Corel and Lotus didn't help much either. However, Microsoft eventually destroyed the product offerings of their rivals and established an "office document monopoly", rather than working with its rivals to establish a document standard, as any "responsible" business would have done.
However, you are obviously missing the point of this discussion. Many customers/users are completely unaware of their alternatives. A common document format helps everyone, not just the MS Office, Star Office, AbiWord, GO, or WordPerfect users. It gives people all over the world the ability to share information as they intended regardless of the application they use.
I'm sorry you can't get past the Windows/Linux posturing and realize the merits of a common document format.
I must say, I'm impressed. The interface looks clean. The program seems to have covered all the basics from file management, web browsing, ftp transfer, image viewing, and document previewing which are all things that should be hamdled by a.... hmmm?
What would you call it? The standard terms File Manager and Web Browser conjure completely different visions of applications functionality.
I wonder how long before MS does something similar and calls it an "Innovation"? And before some High Priest of Redmond jumps all over me saying that IE5 already does it, think again and read up on the app. It does a few things IE5 doesn't do very well or at all.
Ok, so maybe ZDnet never had it.
I find it very sad that ZDnet would allow such a story (even if it is an editorial) as misleading as this to be published. I know a number of people who read Ziff Davis publications and many of them are casual computer users, and worse still investors. There are a great many people that depend on ZD for "news" not "flamebait"!
The sad fact is, article's like this are a diservice to the IT industry. When someone goes to their IT manager with a strong case for open source software, the clueless manager will remember the "words" of this so called "expert". And another company will shell out big bucks to Redmond for something they don't really need.
It's too bad, that ZD would allow themselves to become the "Enquirer" of the computing news.
How about we give credit where credit is do. Apple did not come up with their OS all on their own. They ripped off many of their "ideas" from Xerox PARC. Microsoft's failings in GUI design are due to its focus on eye candy. Customizable toolbars, menus, sliders, etc. None of those features make Windows a good Interface. Rather than addressing the problems in their design, Microsoft chooses to overhaul their GUI's appearance rather than their outdated and clunky code. Hey, Bill try some real "innovation" instead of simply bundling a browser.
IMHO... a "good" user interface is a combination of five things. The primary requirement of any good interface is usefulness. The interface must give the user the ability to accomplish as many if not all the things the user wishes to do with that system. Stability is second only because a stable UI still needs to be able to do something. Performance and flexibiility are also very important. The interface must be swift enough to be usable and flexible enough to be extensible. The final requirement is "ease of use". The biggest failings of MacOS and Windows is that their GUI's put a premium on "ease of use" at the expense of stability, performance, flexibility, and usefulness. "Ease of use" comes after everything else. I believe that the largest faults with MacOS and Windows is that a premium was placed on ease of use and not on the other more fundamental requirements. While I
Why not roll back the clock a little further when it was Digital or IBM's way or the highway.
Given those two choices........I'll take death.
When the original K6 came out it had some compatibility issues. When the K6-2 & K6-3 came out there were very few, namely the problem with Windows 95 and chips over 350mhz, but AMD had a patch within days of the products release.
Although I represent a datapoint of 1, I have run into NO compatibility problems with my Athlon 500 in Windows 98,2000,NT, or Linux. And apparently nobody else has either based on the complete lack of reports to the contrary. If only we could say the same for Coppermine or the Camino chipsets from Intel.
If there was ever an argument to "know your ISP" this is it. Don't trust AOL, NetCom, Mindspring, etc. to do what is in the best interests of your privacy. Shop around for your ISP. I've found the smaller shops will be a lot more responsive to your concerns about your privacy/security/support issues. There are good ISP's out there.