Compatibility is the largest problem I had with linux when I used it and it still is. Sigh, things haven't changed in 5 years?
I've been using it for five years and never had any compatibility issues that I can think of. I switched to Gentoo both at home and work a couple of years ago and it's been pretty smooth sailing.
What this story is about is the fact that Debian is a dead distro and some people are no longer waiting for it to rise from the dead. Not surprisingly, they're not bothering to support it anymore.
But that's only a compatibility issue if you're one of the four people still hanging around in the hope that Debian is coming back. A bit like saying the new VW Beetle creates compatibility issues with the 1937 model. Who cares?
Only an ideological fool would run linux on a "new" mac as a desktop system.
I would. I don't like OS/X, and there's nothing which is available exclusively for the Mac that I want. But I love the PowerPC chip, it's beautiful and I want to write assembly language porgrams for it (and call it George). And I want a silent desktop machine that takes up very little space.
I have no reason to bother booting into OS/X even once. I have friends with Macs and I work with people with Macs occasionally and all I hear from them is how much they'd like to switch to x86 machines if they could spare the time to learn how to use Windows. But they're not programmers, they're designers and artists trying to get their work done on expensive machines that they feel, rightly or wrongly, are outstripped by similar priced Windows boxes which will run all the same software that they use every day.
The sane thing to do would be to dual boot between OS X and another OS like linux if need be.
That would be a waste of HD space; just delete the OSX stuff and keep the installation CD in case you want to sell it some day.
What Tridge did, by reverse engineering an open source version of Bitkeeper, was break a business arrangement which was profitable for everyone.
How? Tridge was not involved in that business agreement. He was working on the project in his own time. He was not using Bitkeeper nor was he being paid to reverse-engineer the protocol (not the product, just the protocol). So, he's not broken anything. Larry has cried his lamps out and taken his ball away because someone that uses BK employs someone that might one day produce a simplified version, or set of utilities for compatibility. There just is no real defense for his actions. I agree with you that it was going to happen eventually, but only because Larry insisted on being a prick about the whole thing. I also agree that it will be good for OS in the long run and I wish that some effort had been put into improving the OS version control systems instead of waiting until now and panicking because the crutch has finally snapped.
At the end of the day, Larry is cutting his own throat. He could easily have worked on a support licence basis for a product like this, but he has never understood that OS works only because it offers the users something more than the proprietary way; Larry wanted to support OS as long as it was only working for him. This crap about it costing $500000 to support the free version is just that: bullshit pie-in-the-sky figures. Most of that would have been spent on the non-free version anyway. And bollocks too, to the idea that the free version couldn't have been frozen because of "future compatibility issues". What the hell does that mean in a discontinued app?
Oh, well. At least it's over at last. Three years of Larry telling everyone that the world has to play by his rules and that he is allowed to change them as often as he likes has been tedious in the extreme.
Essentially, what is happening here is that McVoy is spending money to provide a free version that is actively being used to create an open source competitor to his product.
No, Tridge was not using Bitkeeper and so was, as he says, not under its licence.
What was, essentially, happening was that Larry is a megalomanic who can't stand the heat so he trys to ban people from the kitchen. A licence which says that you, or people you employ can't work on certain types of programs, in their spare time is not simply a matter of fine detail and holy wars over minutia, it is simply odious and immoral. Larry is an asshole. He may be a brilliant asshole that's written a great source code manager, but he's still an asshole with a totally unacceptable approach to licencing.
ICANN is run by morons. The legal mess made by squeezing the world's companies into one namespace apparently wasn't enough of a lesson for them. What sort of madness causes people to do this sort of crap?!?
By all accounts (opinions of course) Larry is a complete asshole and is doing this out of spite.
I think the first point is right, but I don't think he's doing it out of spite, he simply genuinely can't grasp that he is being unreasonable by trying to force employment restrictions on his users.
With all of that, it was hurting the bottom line now that they werent getting enough return on the investment.
Except that every copy sold is a return on the investment in the early stages, which will continue into the future. What he's actually saying is that there isn't enough of an *increase* in the return on the investment.
Put it this way: is Larry going to take out all the improvements due to bug-hunting and suggestions now that the Kernel is leaving? I don't think so.
Nothing was preventing them from forking the product and just saying "Free version now bug-fixes only, guys", but old Larry wanted his cake and eat it too: free publicity, free testing, free design ideas, and a no-compete clause. Great if you can get it.
Larry goes on about how pro-open source he is but anyone that licences products with a restriction on what the users can do in their own free time is an arsehole. If MS had produced an EULA for Word that said it can't be used by people who use Acrobat Distiller, they would have rightly been scorned. Same goes for Larry and his odious BitKeeper restrictions.
That I browse with plugins switched off unless I absolutely HAVE to use a site's Flash.
I have the Register to thank for this as their story pages are unreadable with Flash enabled due to haveing THREE flaming animations running at a time.
But really what I think is most important is that we should never pass up the opportunity to investigate and learn about anything. Ignorance certainly has less application to humanity than this kind of science. Ignorance only serves the propagation of uninformed and unfounded beliefs and ideas in absence of fact.
Finally, except for a couple of points, you've reduced yourself to unsubstantiated allegations.
Since you have taken the stance that all sense is a challenge to your delutions, there is little point in substatiating anything, since you will simply wave your magic wand and say that the voices in your head say that it's not so, regardless of any amount of evidence.
Exceptional care was taken in most Biblical transcription
I assume this is a joke given how many contradictions, missing chapters and later add ons in support of theological fads that it contains.
The Hebrew transcribers even used a version of checksumming.
Worthless since they left the vowels out.
In the experience of millions of others, including mine, he lives.
Well, so what? There are millions of other people whose "word of god" says that he didn't and couldn't. When several people say that the voices in their heads contradict both what the others' voices say, and common sense, the only reasonable conclusion is that they are ALL mad or lying. At best, if one is telling the truth, you can only say that there is no way of knowing which it is.
You cannot disprove what you know nothing about.
I know a lot about it; certainly more than you. The problem is that I can not disprove something that is a figment of your imagination. If you say "the sky is green with yellow dots", which is more or less what you are saying, then I am at a loss to do anything about it if you persist even after being shown a grey winter sky. You are beyond proof and disproof and that's not due to any failing in me, I can assure you.
I think someone would have noticed if the radiation at the centre of the galaxy was at that wavelength, rather than a distribution of wavelengths in the way you would expect from a very hot object
But couldn't that distribution be due to secondary radiation from gas heated to plasma by the radiation from the +/- anihilation? There's a lot of gas between here and the galactic core.
In light of this, why is science with no application for the betterment of humanity, industry or anyone else living or dead funded so heavily?
Define "betterment". The question of whether atoms existed was once as abstract as the question of whether black holes exist; once upon a time the existance of molecules was not even suspected. Science works by asking questions and the hard questions tend to generate answers which are useful even when they don't give a complete solution to the initial problem.
Do you want artificial gravity? Well, black holes cover the sorts of issues that will one day be listed as landmarks on the road to that problem. It might take multiple lifetimes to get there so what's so wrong about getting started now?
Disney owns the right to Peter Pan? This is news to me, I thought the book (written by J.M. Barrie) was in the public domain...
It's a play and the copyright is held by Great Ormand Street Children's Hospital in London, by special provision for that specific work under British copyright law.
What is the law now, that a person with a patent gets to enjoy the benifits of that patent for life?
No, that's copyright. Patents vary slightly around the world but 20 years seems to be the norm.
Do we really want only one company making medicines for a specific disease because they patented a gene sequence?
No, which is indeed one of many reasons the USPO should be shot for allowing things it was never meant to allow, including discoveries instead of inventions.
Customer: But Joe Bloggs says his company can do it for $x/2 in 3 weeks!
Us: That's simply not possible.
Customer: Well, for that sort of savings we're going to give them a try.
11 months later and $x^2 later they're still waiting for Bloggs to finish but by then we're on the dole and Bloggs is laughing all the way to the bank.
I'd say in my mind, the only actors typecast as Doctor Who are Pertwee and Tom Baker. I hear Troughton suffered for being typecast but he was way before my time. No idea how Hartnell was received and Richard Hurndal was at the end of his life when he played Doctor number 1.
I've no idea who Hurnal is. Pertwee was a bit typecast but Baker was only typecast as Baker, he seems to have generally played himself in everything he's been in. Troughton seems not to have had any trouble finding work (he was in the Omen, for example) and neither have any of the others. I think Hartnell was near the end of his career when he played the Dr, having been a big star in British movies long before that.
Dr Who is actually hard to be typecast as because the part actually has built into it the fact that there is no such thing as "THE" Doctor: he changes.
Richard E. Grant should have been the next TV Dr, having played him on radio, and I think they should go for him to replace Mr Typecasto, or Eddie Izzard.
I've got the same RAM, and I don't see swap file thrashing under Firefox so I don't think that's the issue. It's weird.
TWW
Why is it so slow?
on
Firefox Hacks
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm using an old 400Mhz machine here and it runs Opera fine. But, I think I'd rather use Firefox or at least try it long enough to decide which is better. But Firefox is so slow that it simply isn't an option. It takes literally a second (that's 1000ms, folks) or more to draw a drop-down menu after clicking on it. Everything is like that - it's like using a computer in slow-motion.
Is there some known issue with Firefox that can cause this? I can't believe anyone is using the browser if it's like this for them, so I assume that it's not like this for other people. Or have I just been spoilt by Opera's speed?
Hillary believes it's ok for a teenage girl to have the right to have an abortion without parental consent, but she can't play a video game with simulated sex and violence.
Perhaps she thinks that less of the latter will mean less of the former?
I can't understand where people that say this sort of thing has no effect think children learn their morality. Do they think it's just instinctive? Morals are learned by example, good and bad. Most children spend more time with TV, video games and other children who watch TV and play video games than they do with their parents (by a long way). How could violence in the media not affect them?
Slashdot Mirror
I've been using it for five years and never had any compatibility issues that I can think of. I switched to Gentoo both at home and work a couple of years ago and it's been pretty smooth sailing.
What this story is about is the fact that Debian is a dead distro and some people are no longer waiting for it to rise from the dead. Not surprisingly, they're not bothering to support it anymore.
But that's only a compatibility issue if you're one of the four people still hanging around in the hope that Debian is coming back. A bit like saying the new VW Beetle creates compatibility issues with the 1937 model. Who cares?
TWW
I would. I don't like OS/X, and there's nothing which is available exclusively for the Mac that I want. But I love the PowerPC chip, it's beautiful and I want to write assembly language porgrams for it (and call it George). And I want a silent desktop machine that takes up very little space.
I have no reason to bother booting into OS/X even once. I have friends with Macs and I work with people with Macs occasionally and all I hear from them is how much they'd like to switch to x86 machines if they could spare the time to learn how to use Windows. But they're not programmers, they're designers and artists trying to get their work done on expensive machines that they feel, rightly or wrongly, are outstripped by similar priced Windows boxes which will run all the same software that they use every day.
The sane thing to do would be to dual boot between OS X and another OS like linux if need be.
That would be a waste of HD space; just delete the OSX stuff and keep the installation CD in case you want to sell it some day.
TWW
How? Tridge was not involved in that business agreement. He was working on the project in his own time. He was not using Bitkeeper nor was he being paid to reverse-engineer the protocol (not the product, just the protocol). So, he's not broken anything. Larry has cried his lamps out and taken his ball away because someone that uses BK employs someone that might one day produce a simplified version, or set of utilities for compatibility. There just is no real defense for his actions. I agree with you that it was going to happen eventually, but only because Larry insisted on being a prick about the whole thing. I also agree that it will be good for OS in the long run and I wish that some effort had been put into improving the OS version control systems instead of waiting until now and panicking because the crutch has finally snapped.
At the end of the day, Larry is cutting his own throat. He could easily have worked on a support licence basis for a product like this, but he has never understood that OS works only because it offers the users something more than the proprietary way; Larry wanted to support OS as long as it was only working for him. This crap about it costing $500000 to support the free version is just that: bullshit pie-in-the-sky figures. Most of that would have been spent on the non-free version anyway. And bollocks too, to the idea that the free version couldn't have been frozen because of "future compatibility issues". What the hell does that mean in a discontinued app?
Oh, well. At least it's over at last. Three years of Larry telling everyone that the world has to play by his rules and that he is allowed to change them as often as he likes has been tedious in the extreme.
TWW
No, Tridge was not using Bitkeeper and so was, as he says, not under its licence.
What was, essentially, happening was that Larry is a megalomanic who can't stand the heat so he trys to ban people from the kitchen. A licence which says that you, or people you employ can't work on certain types of programs, in their spare time is not simply a matter of fine detail and holy wars over minutia, it is simply odious and immoral. Larry is an asshole. He may be a brilliant asshole that's written a great source code manager, but he's still an asshole with a totally unacceptable approach to licencing.
TWW
TWW
TWW
I think the first point is right, but I don't think he's doing it out of spite, he simply genuinely can't grasp that he is being unreasonable by trying to force employment restrictions on his users.
TWW
Except that every copy sold is a return on the investment in the early stages, which will continue into the future. What he's actually saying is that there isn't enough of an *increase* in the return on the investment.
Put it this way: is Larry going to take out all the improvements due to bug-hunting and suggestions now that the Kernel is leaving? I don't think so.
Nothing was preventing them from forking the product and just saying "Free version now bug-fixes only, guys", but old Larry wanted his cake and eat it too: free publicity, free testing, free design ideas, and a no-compete clause. Great if you can get it.
TWW
TWW
I have the Register to thank for this as their story pages are unreadable with Flash enabled due to haveing THREE flaming animations running at a time.
TWW
You'll get a real kick out of this thread then!
Since you have taken the stance that all sense is a challenge to your delutions, there is little point in substatiating anything, since you will simply wave your magic wand and say that the voices in your head say that it's not so, regardless of any amount of evidence.
Exceptional care was taken in most Biblical transcription
I assume this is a joke given how many contradictions, missing chapters and later add ons in support of theological fads that it contains.
The Hebrew transcribers even used a version of checksumming.
Worthless since they left the vowels out.
In the experience of millions of others, including mine, he lives.
Well, so what? There are millions of other people whose "word of god" says that he didn't and couldn't. When several people say that the voices in their heads contradict both what the others' voices say, and common sense, the only reasonable conclusion is that they are ALL mad or lying. At best, if one is telling the truth, you can only say that there is no way of knowing which it is.
You cannot disprove what you know nothing about.
I know a lot about it; certainly more than you. The problem is that I can not disprove something that is a figment of your imagination. If you say "the sky is green with yellow dots", which is more or less what you are saying, then I am at a loss to do anything about it if you persist even after being shown a grey winter sky. You are beyond proof and disproof and that's not due to any failing in me, I can assure you.
TWW
But couldn't that distribution be due to secondary radiation from gas heated to plasma by the radiation from the +/- anihilation? There's a lot of gas between here and the galactic core.
TWW
Define "betterment". The question of whether atoms existed was once as abstract as the question of whether black holes exist; once upon a time the existance of molecules was not even suspected. Science works by asking questions and the hard questions tend to generate answers which are useful even when they don't give a complete solution to the initial problem.
Do you want artificial gravity? Well, black holes cover the sorts of issues that will one day be listed as landmarks on the road to that problem. It might take multiple lifetimes to get there so what's so wrong about getting started now?
TWW
It's a play and the copyright is held by Great Ormand Street Children's Hospital in London, by special provision for that specific work under British copyright law.
TWW
No, that's copyright. Patents vary slightly around the world but 20 years seems to be the norm.
Do we really want only one company making medicines for a specific disease because they patented a gene sequence?
No, which is indeed one of many reasons the USPO should be shot for allowing things it was never meant to allow, including discoveries instead of inventions.
TWW
Another story that sounds great for an instant until you relise it's US only.
And April 1st.
TWW
Given that Microsoft's is worthless, perhaps everyone should shut up about it.
TWW
Us: We can do that for $x in 12 months.
Customer: But Joe Bloggs says his company can do it for $x/2 in 3 weeks!
Us: That's simply not possible.
Customer: Well, for that sort of savings we're going to give them a try.
11 months later and $x^2 later they're still waiting for Bloggs to finish but by then we're on the dole and Bloggs is laughing all the way to the bank.
TWW
Sorry, should have said: Gentoo Linux.
TWW
I've no idea who Hurnal is. Pertwee was a bit typecast but Baker was only typecast as Baker, he seems to have generally played himself in everything he's been in. Troughton seems not to have had any trouble finding work (he was in the Omen, for example) and neither have any of the others. I think Hartnell was near the end of his career when he played the Dr, having been a big star in British movies long before that.
Dr Who is actually hard to be typecast as because the part actually has built into it the fact that there is no such thing as "THE" Doctor: he changes.
Richard E. Grant should have been the next TV Dr, having played him on radio, and I think they should go for him to replace Mr Typecasto, or Eddie Izzard.
TWW
I've got the same RAM, and I don't see swap file thrashing under Firefox so I don't think that's the issue. It's weird.
TWW
Is there some known issue with Firefox that can cause this? I can't believe anyone is using the browser if it's like this for them, so I assume that it's not like this for other people. Or have I just been spoilt by Opera's speed?
TWW
Because they had to wait for the ten years to be up, of course, you idiot!
TWW
Perhaps she thinks that less of the latter will mean less of the former?
I can't understand where people that say this sort of thing has no effect think children learn their morality. Do they think it's just instinctive? Morals are learned by example, good and bad. Most children spend more time with TV, video games and other children who watch TV and play video games than they do with their parents (by a long way). How could violence in the media not affect them?
TWW