Non-aero window drawing is also hardware-accelerated, just not 3D hardware accelerated. And it has been like that since Windows 9x or something.
Your computer isn't going to be more responsive by adding extra load on the GPU, only (possibly) prettier. Which is kind of subjective, I for one think Vista looks like multi-colored poo that gets in the way of working with the computer.
Wake me up when there's a mainstream language that has syntactic sugar for interface delegation to a class member to provide for the lack of implementation inheritance
Delphi has something resembling exactly that. Not only can you delegate reads/writes to member data using properties, but you can also delegate complete interfaces derived from IInterface to any implementing TObject (e.g. a composite of the class itself).
I hated those when I was still programming Delphi by the way, it opens an enormous can of worms if you get carried away and want to create (for instance) interface classes for abstract container objects (think something along the lines of a polymorphic TItem object). The way Delphi handles objects implementing IInterface is absolutely retarded (especially the completely opaque implicit reference counting automatically applied to all classes implementing IInterface).
But I guess you could implement similar functionality cleanly, and in that case it could be useful
So in fact I should feel sorry that here we have proper health care and education for everyone, protection against workplace accidents, unemployment, safety on the streets, low crime rates (especially for violent crimes), near-zero accidental gun-deaths and an economy that isn't completely built around debt?
Sure, I don't live in a castle or drive a 3-ton SUV with 23 inch rims, but I do pretty well in fact, even after my government burglarized me, all without subprime mortgages and cars and kitchens on loan.
I wasn't hoping you never had kids, friends or relatives, I meant to say that I hope you'll never lose someone because some retard with a gun thinks it's okay to use what you call 'necessary force' to 'make the world a better place' by taking things in his own hand so there's 'one less criminal out there'.
I think people who only see guns as a constitutional right or a way to 'defend themselves', and refuse to see that many more people are killed when everyone is able to carry guns (either on purpose, by accident or in some situation that escalated), are the ones that should revise there opinion on 'taking matters in their own hand' and 'taking one more criminal off the street'. There's more to reality than idealism and ethics.
Also I have yet to hear a convincing argument why I have to feel less safe in a country where guns are effectively unavailable to citizens. Like I said, people aren't getting shot or robbed over here, in fact, when someone innocent gets shot in a crime here it's big news. Maybe it's because 95% of the criminals are what I'd call 'petty criminals' that are only in it for the money and are not out to kill people and as such don't carry guns. In the US even this 95% percent is armed, because everyone else is, so every robbery is effectively an armed robbery.
I sincerely hope you never have kids, friends or relatives who (for whatever reason) decide or get tricked/suckered into doing stupid things that might get them shot by people who think like you, effectively saying anyone is in their right to shoot anyone else because property is sacred, criminals are all the same, so shooting them is justified.
What's so strange about insuring your property against theft? Almost all new cars are insured against theft, houses are insured against fire, people are insured against health problems, etc.
You should try not to see the fact that some people might come up with the idea to steal your stuff from the obvious ethical point of view that they just shouldn't, because that doesn't solve anything. Theft is just one of these nasty side-effects of society/living that you cannot control by shooting all criminals, so you might just as well try to reduce your economic risk by taking insurance and not risk your life trying to take matters in your own hand.
Fact of the matter is that there will always be burglary, arming yourself so you can shoot anyone entering your house is ridiculous no matter how you put it.
Anyway this whole discussion is moot anyway, apparently many people in the US have the false impression that in the rest of the world everybody gets their stuff stolen and people are regularly shot by thiefs because they are not allowed to have a gun, while this is completely opposite to reality. Nowhere in the civilized world so many people are killed by guns as in the US, and although I don't have any statistics on this I guess crime rate isn't lower in the US either.
Or you could just accept the fact that society creates (for whatever reason) a certain percentage of people with malicious intent, and focus your efforts on trying to get this percentage as low as possible. And insure yourself against burglary so you don't _have_ to shoot them or risk your own life for some materialist artifacts.
Seriously, the 'when a burglar with a gun comes into your house' argument is laughable. If you think taking someone's life because he wants to take your flatscreen is ok, that's already a twisted way to 'deal' with such a situation in the almost infinitesimal chance it will happen to you. Thinking you can 'insure' yourself against such a thing by arming yourself is even more ridiculous.
Where I live (in Europe) we don't have more burglary or (armed or unarmed) robbery, and in my lifetime I can't even remember a case where someone got shot by a burglar. Burglars here don't carry guns because they don't need them, they might run into someone with a baseball bat or a big knife but when that happens they just run instead of shooting you.
I do remember innumerable incidents where people accidentaly got shot playing with guns, insane people shooting other people with legally obtained guns, but in most cases that was in the 'land of the free'...
Great, I'll remember that next time I buy a frozen pizza that doesn't even resemble the picture on the packaging...
Citroen has a commerical of one of there cars transforming into a robot, don't see many of those on the streets either. And in broadband commercials I see people downloading full HD movies in about 3 seconds over a 20Mbit connection.
There's nothing Apple about this, everything in marketing and advertisements is fake, exaggerated or just outright untrue and misleading.
Another gem is netcat (nc): it's like cat but over a TCP port. You can do cool things with it like catting a file to another machine, gzipping and unpacking it on the fly.
I don't know about any possible patent issues since these are pretty much irrelevant for OSS development outside the US anyway, but I know the H264 specs are fully open and free for download (and I guess implementation). I have them lying around here. Just go to I-TU and grab them...
So unless you have specific examples of I-TU chasing down people who implement their (publicly available) specifications, I consider H.264 to be free...
Not even sure where to begin. But I guess I should start my response by qualifying how I've used Perforce, so that we can at least agree that I'm qualified to comment on it (which you assert I am not qualified to do).
I use Perforce at a Fortune 500 company, with over 3000 developers on the system. My particular project spans Linux for the back end (approximately 5mm lines of code), and uses Windows on the front end (another 2mm lines of code). Our developers span the globe, from the West Coast of the USA, to New York, to London, to Hong Kong, Australia.
.
That's all very interesting but I already knew it is technically possible to use P4 for such things, but that doesn't make it a good system.
So I think we can agree that I'm qualified to comment on the platform.
I think we can agree I'm just as qualified since I also have to work with the thing on a daily basis.
Quite a few of the arguments I see you have above are the religious ones - you'd prefer that your files are read/write 100% of the time. Perforce's model is that if you don't have the file checked out, then you can't touch it or change it. The reason it does this is that it wants to know exactly when you _started_ editing a file, so that that it can keep track of any changes that might come after you. Timestamps in the filesystem are not able to do this, so you have to tell revision control when you start editing.
These points are religious for a reason, forcing read-only checkouts does not serve any purpose, and only leads to enormous local changelists which lead to conflict hell. The whole idea of having to 'open a file for editing' is ridiculous, because in practice working on software of even moderate complexity is almost never confined to files or directories but requires edits in multiple files. I don't even want to start giving use cases where the 'p4 open' system works against sensible software development and maintenance practices, just because there are so many of them.
Also I don't see other SCM systems have any problems using timestamps or MD5 sums to track changes, the supposed advantage of P4 completely eludes me.
100% of the IDE integrations just do this for you, so if you are on an IDE it's pretty seamless. If you are in VI or emacs, you have to check the file out before you touch it.
Yes, brilliant, except for situations where you don't have or want the IDE (e.g. scripting the SCM). Or are tracking a nasty bug which requires adding debug statements in 10 different files _that you don't ever want to check in_. P4 gives you the choice of either a) opening each file as you touch it, creating a huge mess of supposedly 'modified files', which you can only revert file-by-file or b) just writing through the read-only bit using w!, creating modifications that will be nullified without any warning and without a backup option on the next p4 sync. Even worse is, without the IDE you cant even see which files you opened or edited.
If you don't agree with that religion, p4 is not for you.
You're right about that one
Some of the commands you say are impossible are actually super simple, so let me clarify for anyone reading who wants to know how to do these things.
Well try adding a directory or listing all changed files. Or checking who changed a particular line of code. Or reverting to a different revision and merging with a branch version.
I just tried reverting a complete tree to the depot version by deleting all the files and syncing (reverting recursively is, again, not possible from the CLI). This works ok with P4, if you now you first have to edit your client and put a bogus path in it, then syncing, then editing the client again, reverting to the right path and doing another sync. There is no other way to do this, since p4 does not see your directories are empty, and will keep insisting 'all files are up-to-date. Nice going
Making a client spec is super easy. Type "p4 client" and map the revision control directory to somewhere on your local machine.
Make sure you don't mess up free-form editing the file, don't misspell the (sometimes over 200 characters long) directory mapping, don't forget to change the word 'locked' to unlock in the spec, don't forget to unset the environment variable 'P4CLIENT' before you do, and yes, it's pretty easy. Now try changing hosts if you're doing cross-platform development and presto, you can do it all again. And again if you go back to the previous host.
I've worked with 5,000,000 line source trees in perforce and it is extraordinarily fast.
Until you go home or try to work off-site and are bound by a 10Mbit connection.
It integrates to virtually every IDE and Editor out there, and it has a fantastic command line if that is your tool of choice.
Fantastic command line?? You actually just made me laugh. Yeah it's fantastic the CLI cannot add directories, cannot move files in a single command, cannot branch or merge with less than 5 distinct commands, tries to use a different naming convention for everything all other SCM systems already have (the same) names for etc.
Just to check which files have been changed on the server... Brilliant...
It works on many many platforms, including the usuals (Window$, Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X, BSD, etc.)
So does almost every other SCM on earth.
Perforce's strength is that it makes it really easy to branch and then merge.
Again, this makes me laugh, If anything, branching and merging is one of the worst things about perforce, because it offers 100 different ways to screw up.
So if you work with a lot of developers, and you need to do parallel projects, Perforce is incredible at this.
Incredible at marking all your source files in conflict that is, even when you only p4-opened them to quickly test a fix.
Again, please mod this guy down, he's definitely an astroturfer
Seriously, I know it works for projects with 1 developer or less, but for any collaborative effort perforce is the worst SCM system I've ever used. I'd even prefer CVS over it if I had the choice. I'd even go as far as saying P4 is possibly the worst SCM system on earth, it has absolutely zero advantages over SVN (granted, it has some over CVS but thats 20 years old), but at the same time it has multiple disadvantages _for every simple SCM task you can think of_.
To summarize: - Cannot sensibly work offline because even p4 help requires a network connection - Checks out files read-only which evokes chaos if you want do check some small hack fast - Need to p4 open to be able to edit the file, if you forget and changed the code without opening it, perforce will happily send all your work to/dev/null and update to the depot version - Even the most simple operations require either a) several distinct p4 commands or b) gobbles of shell commands (try adding a directory full of files: 'find . -type file | xargs p4 add', what did I get an SCM for again??). Command-line use without the visual client (which is pretty much ok for what it does btw) will take so much time and specialist p4 knowledge you might just as well do all your SCM by hand. - The brain-dead idea of having host-bound 'client workspaces'. Why the fsck do I have to recreate and/or switch client workspaces on every machine all the time, by hand, by free-form editing some file the perforce server apparently needs to store somewhere for me to work locally - All state on the server, after a good month's work every developer will have 10 different clients, half of which are dangling and created by accident (and are near impossible to delete) - Branching and merging: don't even try to do this (p4 calls it 'integration') because you are guaranteed to screw up, you need 20 different commands to merge from one branch to another - Every file that was opened by another developer while you were also working on it will be marked as a conflict, even if you didn't change a single character. In practice this means every time you submit code that has been under development you will be resolving half of the source files you edited. - There is no way to easily see which files have changed from the CLI. Even from the visual client it is impossible to see which files have local modifications but aren't 'p4 open'-ed. Major headaches if you tried doing some work offline and changed files you want to check-in later. - P4 is agonizingly slow, don't believe a single word of the performance statistics you'll find on the p4 site, if you're working off a LAN or WAN, the network latency will kill p4 performance if you have a large tree - It already screwed up and nullified changes I made on multiple occasions, and typical SCM tasks that take me 5 to 10 seconds in CVS or SVN sometimes take 10 minutes on P4, just because _it sucks so much_. - You have to shell out good money to use is commercially, while literally 10s of better, faster, portable, interoperable systems are readily available for free.
I'm seriously suspecting you either never used P4, only used it for a single-developer project or are actually employed by perforce.
Disclaimer: I've been working as a professional software engineer for over 10 years, and in the mean time used CVS, SVN and now (sadly) perforce (which I'm forced to use by my employer). My
There is no formal definition of a continent, I for one was always taught the continents are defined the tectonic landmasses as they drifted apart from Pangea, in which case you would have the America's, Eurasia, Africa, Australia and Antarctica (ie: 5 continents)
Well, not to be an ass, but technically, asia and/or south america are generally not referred to as continents. Also, I don't see any mention of australia in the summary but I guess this thing also covers the australian continent.
Anyway, the PP was intended as a joke, you know, funny, laugh.
I bought 2 of my 3 macs second-hand, all were a bargain, and still I'd gladly pay the 'mac tax' on a new macbook if I needed a new laptop. However, at the moment I can still manage with the $600 iBook G4 I bought like 4 years ago or something. This isn't Windows, you don't _need_ to upgrade your hardware every 2 years (which already more than offsets the 'mac tax').
Anyway this should disprove your argument, at least in my case. It's not so much 'us mac users' feel we need to 'justify our money spent', but instead 'we' feel the product was 'worth the extra money'. I have to concur with the guy somewhere above here: I don't really get why ppl need to piss over Apple's pricing strategy (you don't _have_ to buy it) but have no problem whatsoever with other high-end products which cost more, but also provide better value.
and perhaps explain why sales of the Prius and other green cars are slow to take off with average consumers
Uhmm, last time I was in the US (CA), a 2nd-hand Prius with low mileage was actually _more expensive_ than a new one, because everyone wants to have one but Toyota can't keep up with the demand.
Calling Prius sales 'slow to take off' sounds a bit like... Opposite reality?
It'd be interesting to see what the distribution of web servers between Windows & the rest is when you completely take out the uptime. I'd guess Windows' share of the web server market is a lot bigger than 2/50 = 4%. Maybe the 2 windows servers listed are just administered by brilliant admins, have zero load or run on a hardware/software combo that has been untouched since Windows 2003 was actually released... Or they're just spoofing the server response, something that has been brought up before when netcraft stats where involved...
Windows 2003 probably isn't all that bad, but I still wouldn't want to have it on my server...
Being an avid Peugeot 205 Rallye & GTI fan, I feel a bit sad I have to agree... The time French cars where fun to drive has been lost since the 6 series (had a 206 GTI aswell, which was alright but not nearly as good as the 205 GTI). Never liked Renaults at all, except for the Renault 5 GT Alpine (which I never had btw).
But anyway, it's no different with affordable cars from other manufacturers. For fun cars you now have to go up on class of cars, to the 200+ bhp models (which PSA doesn't have and Renault only with the Clio V6). German cars are good but expensive and big, US cars suck big time in general, Asian cars are great but we don't get the really cool ones over here...
It's not about only fab's, it's also about R&D on the production technology, the machines that perform the 'deep magic' also need to be developed, tested and put into production.
I'm working for ASML myself, which makes more than half of the lithography gear on the market, and I can attest that a surprisingly LARGE number of people on-site here know all the ins and outs of ASML scanner technology, both the stuff already on the market as well as the bleeding-edge stuff that no-one outside is supposed to know about.
ASML has 6500+ employees, so it's a pretty safe bet knowledge leaks out. I don't see why this would be different for IBM.
I don't know much about US air traffic, but where I come from (Europe) most of the time you don't have much of a choice when you have to fly to a certain destination. It's either fly directly from the closest airport to your destination, or add hours or even days to your trip to drive to another airport, changing planes etc. I hardly believe someone will drive from Amsterdam to Dusseldorf to catch a BA flight that first goes to Heathrow to change planes for a direct flight to LA, when they can also catch a direct KLM flight from Schiphol, Amsterdam, just to prevent sitting next to someone calling from the plane the entire flight.
So having 'market forces' decide will most likely result in people getting excessively annoyed by voice conversations on a plane...
Slashdot Mirror
Non-aero window drawing is also hardware-accelerated, just not 3D hardware accelerated. And it has been like that since Windows 9x or something.
Your computer isn't going to be more responsive by adding extra load on the GPU, only (possibly) prettier. Which is kind of subjective, I for one think Vista looks like multi-colored poo that gets in the way of working with the computer.
Wake me up when there's a mainstream language that has syntactic sugar for interface delegation to a class member to provide for the lack of implementation inheritance
Delphi has something resembling exactly that. Not only can you delegate reads/writes to member data using properties, but you can also delegate complete interfaces derived from IInterface to any implementing TObject (e.g. a composite of the class itself).
I hated those when I was still programming Delphi by the way, it opens an enormous can of worms if you get carried away and want to create (for instance) interface classes for abstract container objects (think something along the lines of a polymorphic TItem object). The way Delphi handles objects implementing IInterface is absolutely retarded (especially the completely opaque implicit reference counting automatically applied to all classes implementing IInterface).
But I guess you could implement similar functionality cleanly, and in that case it could be useful
So in fact I should feel sorry that here we have proper health care and education for everyone, protection against workplace accidents, unemployment, safety on the streets, low crime rates (especially for violent crimes), near-zero accidental gun-deaths and an economy that isn't completely built around debt?
Sure, I don't live in a castle or drive a 3-ton SUV with 23 inch rims, but I do pretty well in fact, even after my government burglarized me, all without subprime mortgages and cars and kitchens on loan.
I wasn't hoping you never had kids, friends or relatives, I meant to say that I hope you'll never lose someone because some retard with a gun thinks it's okay to use what you call 'necessary force' to 'make the world a better place' by taking things in his own hand so there's 'one less criminal out there'.
I think people who only see guns as a constitutional right or a way to 'defend themselves', and refuse to see that many more people are killed when everyone is able to carry guns (either on purpose, by accident or in some situation that escalated), are the ones that should revise there opinion on 'taking matters in their own hand' and 'taking one more criminal off the street'. There's more to reality than idealism and ethics.
Also I have yet to hear a convincing argument why I have to feel less safe in a country where guns are effectively unavailable to citizens. Like I said, people aren't getting shot or robbed over here, in fact, when someone innocent gets shot in a crime here it's big news. Maybe it's because 95% of the criminals are what I'd call 'petty criminals' that are only in it for the money and are not out to kill people and as such don't carry guns. In the US even this 95% percent is armed, because everyone else is, so every robbery is effectively an armed robbery.
Thanks for your prehistoric insights...
I sincerely hope you never have kids, friends or relatives who (for whatever reason) decide or get tricked/suckered into doing stupid things that might get them shot by people who think like you, effectively saying anyone is in their right to shoot anyone else because property is sacred, criminals are all the same, so shooting them is justified.
What's so strange about insuring your property against theft? Almost all new cars are insured against theft, houses are insured against fire, people are insured against health problems, etc.
You should try not to see the fact that some people might come up with the idea to steal your stuff from the obvious ethical point of view that they just shouldn't, because that doesn't solve anything. Theft is just one of these nasty side-effects of society/living that you cannot control by shooting all criminals, so you might just as well try to reduce your economic risk by taking insurance and not risk your life trying to take matters in your own hand.
Fact of the matter is that there will always be burglary, arming yourself so you can shoot anyone entering your house is ridiculous no matter how you put it.
Anyway this whole discussion is moot anyway, apparently many people in the US have the false impression that in the rest of the world everybody gets their stuff stolen and people are regularly shot by thiefs because they are not allowed to have a gun, while this is completely opposite to reality. Nowhere in the civilized world so many people are killed by guns as in the US, and although I don't have any statistics on this I guess crime rate isn't lower in the US either.
Or you could just accept the fact that society creates (for whatever reason) a certain percentage of people with malicious intent, and focus your efforts on trying to get this percentage as low as possible. And insure yourself against burglary so you don't _have_ to shoot them or risk your own life for some materialist artifacts.
Seriously, the 'when a burglar with a gun comes into your house' argument is laughable. If you think taking someone's life because he wants to take your flatscreen is ok, that's already a twisted way to 'deal' with such a situation in the almost infinitesimal chance it will happen to you. Thinking you can 'insure' yourself against such a thing by arming yourself is even more ridiculous.
Where I live (in Europe) we don't have more burglary or (armed or unarmed) robbery, and in my lifetime I can't even remember a case where someone got shot by a burglar. Burglars here don't carry guns because they don't need them, they might run into someone with a baseball bat or a big knife but when that happens they just run instead of shooting you.
I do remember innumerable incidents where people accidentaly got shot playing with guns, insane people shooting other people with legally obtained guns, but in most cases that was in the 'land of the free'...
Great, I'll remember that next time I buy a frozen pizza that doesn't even resemble the picture on the packaging...
Citroen has a commerical of one of there cars transforming into a robot, don't see many of those on the streets either. And in broadband commercials I see people downloading full HD movies in about 3 seconds over a 20Mbit connection.
There's nothing Apple about this, everything in marketing and advertisements is fake, exaggerated or just outright untrue and misleading.
Another gem is netcat (nc): it's like cat but over a TCP port. You can do cool things with it like catting a file to another machine, gzipping and unpacking it on the fly.
I don't know about any possible patent issues since these are pretty much irrelevant for OSS development outside the US anyway, but I know the H264 specs are fully open and free for download (and I guess implementation). I have them lying around here. Just go to I-TU and grab them...
So unless you have specific examples of I-TU chasing down people who implement their (publicly available) specifications, I consider H.264 to be free...
Not even sure where to begin. But I guess I should start my response by qualifying how I've used Perforce, so that we can at least agree that I'm qualified to comment on it (which you assert I am not qualified to do).
I use Perforce at a Fortune 500 company, with over 3000 developers on the system. My particular project spans Linux for the back end (approximately 5mm lines of code), and uses Windows on the front end (another 2mm lines of code). Our developers span the globe, from the West Coast of the USA, to New York, to London, to Hong Kong, Australia.
.
That's all very interesting but I already knew it is technically possible to use P4 for such things, but that doesn't make it a good system.
So I think we can agree that I'm qualified to comment on the platform.
I think we can agree I'm just as qualified since I also have to work with the thing on a daily basis.
Quite a few of the arguments I see you have above are the religious ones - you'd prefer that your files are read/write 100% of the time. Perforce's model is that if you don't have the file checked out, then you can't touch it or change it. The reason it does this is that it wants to know exactly when you _started_ editing a file, so that that it can keep track of any changes that might come after you. Timestamps in the filesystem are not able to do this, so you have to tell revision control when you start editing.
These points are religious for a reason, forcing read-only checkouts does not serve any purpose, and only leads to enormous local changelists which lead to conflict hell. The whole idea of having to 'open a file for editing' is ridiculous, because in practice working on software of even moderate complexity is almost never confined to files or directories but requires edits in multiple files. I don't even want to start giving use cases where the 'p4 open' system works against sensible software development and maintenance practices, just because there are so many of them.
Also I don't see other SCM systems have any problems using timestamps or MD5 sums to track changes, the supposed advantage of P4 completely eludes me.
100% of the IDE integrations just do this for you, so if you are on an IDE it's pretty seamless. If you are in VI or emacs, you have to check the file out before you touch it.
Yes, brilliant, except for situations where you don't have or want the IDE (e.g. scripting the SCM). Or are tracking a nasty bug which requires adding debug statements in 10 different files _that you don't ever want to check in_. P4 gives you the choice of either a) opening each file as you touch it, creating a huge mess of supposedly 'modified files', which you can only revert file-by-file or b) just writing through the read-only bit using w!, creating modifications that will be nullified without any warning and without a backup option on the next p4 sync. Even worse is, without the IDE you cant even see which files you opened or edited.
If you don't agree with that religion, p4 is not for you.
You're right about that one
Some of the commands you say are impossible are actually super simple, so let me clarify for anyone reading who wants to know how to do these things.
Well try adding a directory or listing all changed files. Or checking who changed a particular line of code. Or reverting to a different revision and merging with a branch version.
I just tried reverting a complete tree to the depot version by deleting all the files and syncing (reverting recursively is, again, not possible from the CLI). This works ok with P4, if you now you first have to edit your client and put a bogus path in it, then syncing, then editing the client again, reverting to the right path and doing another sync. There is no other way to do this, since p4 does not see your directories are empty, and will keep insisting 'all files are up-to-date. Nice going
- Host bound "clie
Astroturfer...
Making a client spec is super easy. Type "p4 client" and map the revision control directory to somewhere on your local machine.
Make sure you don't mess up free-form editing the file, don't misspell the (sometimes over 200 characters long) directory mapping, don't forget to change the word 'locked' to unlock in the spec, don't forget to unset the environment variable 'P4CLIENT' before you do, and yes, it's pretty easy. Now try changing hosts if you're doing cross-platform development and presto, you can do it all again. And again if you go back to the previous host.
I've worked with 5,000,000 line source trees in perforce and it is extraordinarily fast.
Until you go home or try to work off-site and are bound by a 10Mbit connection.
It integrates to virtually every IDE and Editor out there, and it has a fantastic command line if that is your tool of choice.
Fantastic command line?? You actually just made me laugh. Yeah it's fantastic the CLI cannot add directories, cannot move files in a single command, cannot branch or merge with less than 5 distinct commands, tries to use a different naming convention for everything all other SCM systems already have (the same) names for etc.
Right now my P4 visual clients repeatedly does a
p4 change -o
p4 client -o jbijlsma-krypton-brion-vhv
p4 changes -s pending -l -u jbijlsma -c jbijlsma-krypton-brion-vhv
p4 fstat -P {15 items}
p4 depots
Just to check which files have been changed on the server... Brilliant...
It works on many many platforms, including the usuals (Window$, Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X, BSD, etc.)
So does almost every other SCM on earth.
Perforce's strength is that it makes it really easy to branch and then merge.
Again, this makes me laugh, If anything, branching and merging is one of the worst things about perforce, because it offers 100 different ways to screw up.
So if you work with a lot of developers, and you need to do parallel projects, Perforce is incredible at this.
Incredible at marking all your source files in conflict that is, even when you only p4-opened them to quickly test a fix.
Again, please mod this guy down, he's definitely an astroturfer
Seriously, I know it works for projects with 1 developer or less, but for any collaborative effort perforce is the worst SCM system I've ever used. I'd even prefer CVS over it if I had the choice. I'd even go as far as saying P4 is possibly the worst SCM system on earth, it has absolutely zero advantages over SVN (granted, it has some over CVS but thats 20 years old), but at the same time it has multiple disadvantages _for every simple SCM task you can think of_.
To summarize: /dev/null and update to the depot version
- Cannot sensibly work offline because even p4 help requires a network connection
- Checks out files read-only which evokes chaos if you want do check some small hack fast
- Need to p4 open to be able to edit the file, if you forget and changed the code without opening it, perforce will happily send all your work to
- Even the most simple operations require either a) several distinct p4 commands or b) gobbles of shell commands (try adding a directory full of files: 'find . -type file | xargs p4 add', what did I get an SCM for again??). Command-line use without the visual client (which is pretty much ok for what it does btw) will take so much time and specialist p4 knowledge you might just as well do all your SCM by hand.
- The brain-dead idea of having host-bound 'client workspaces'. Why the fsck do I have to recreate and/or switch client workspaces on every machine all the time, by hand, by free-form editing some file the perforce server apparently needs to store somewhere for me to work locally
- All state on the server, after a good month's work every developer will have 10 different clients, half of which are dangling and created by accident (and are near impossible to delete)
- Branching and merging: don't even try to do this (p4 calls it 'integration') because you are guaranteed to screw up, you need 20 different commands to merge from one branch to another
- Every file that was opened by another developer while you were also working on it will be marked as a conflict, even if you didn't change a single character. In practice this means every time you submit code that has been under development you will be resolving half of the source files you edited.
- There is no way to easily see which files have changed from the CLI. Even from the visual client it is impossible to see which files have local modifications but aren't 'p4 open'-ed. Major headaches if you tried doing some work offline and changed files you want to check-in later.
- P4 is agonizingly slow, don't believe a single word of the performance statistics you'll find on the p4 site, if you're working off a LAN or WAN, the network latency will kill p4 performance if you have a large tree
- It already screwed up and nullified changes I made on multiple occasions, and typical SCM tasks that take me 5 to 10 seconds in CVS or SVN sometimes take 10 minutes on P4, just because _it sucks so much_.
- You have to shell out good money to use is commercially, while literally 10s of better, faster, portable, interoperable systems are readily available for free.
I'm seriously suspecting you either never used P4, only used it for a single-developer project or are actually employed by perforce.
Disclaimer: I've been working as a professional software engineer for over 10 years, and in the mean time used CVS, SVN and now (sadly) perforce (which I'm forced to use by my employer). My
in which case you would have the America's, Eurasia, Africa, Australia and Antarctica (ie: 5 continents)
Which is why there are 5 olympic rings by the way, to illustrate my point.
Please, PLEASE, post a single reference that says Asia or South America are not continents.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent#Number_of_continents
There is no formal definition of a continent, I for one was always taught the continents are defined the tectonic landmasses as they drifted apart from Pangea, in which case you would have the America's, Eurasia, Africa, Australia and Antarctica (ie: 5 continents)
Well, not to be an ass, but technically, asia and/or south america are generally not referred to as continents. Also, I don't see any mention of australia in the summary but I guess this thing also covers the australian continent.
Anyway, the PP was intended as a joke, you know, funny, laugh.
I bought 2 of my 3 macs second-hand, all were a bargain, and still I'd gladly pay the 'mac tax' on a new macbook if I needed a new laptop. However, at the moment I can still manage with the $600 iBook G4 I bought like 4 years ago or something. This isn't Windows, you don't _need_ to upgrade your hardware every 2 years (which already more than offsets the 'mac tax').
Anyway this should disprove your argument, at least in my case. It's not so much 'us mac users' feel we need to 'justify our money spent', but instead 'we' feel the product was 'worth the extra money'. I have to concur with the guy somewhere above here: I don't really get why ppl need to piss over Apple's pricing strategy (you don't _have_ to buy it) but have no problem whatsoever with other high-end products which cost more, but also provide better value.
Substitute 'Mohammed' for 'Jezus' and your comment would have been modded +5 Fatwa.
and perhaps explain why sales of the Prius and other green cars are slow to take off with average consumers
Uhmm, last time I was in the US (CA), a 2nd-hand Prius with low mileage was actually _more expensive_ than a new one, because everyone wants to have one but Toyota can't keep up with the demand.
Calling Prius sales 'slow to take off' sounds a bit like... Opposite reality?
I never said anything about Linux, did I?
It'd be interesting to see what the distribution of web servers between Windows & the rest is when you completely take out the uptime. I'd guess Windows' share of the web server market is a lot bigger than 2/50 = 4%. Maybe the 2 windows servers listed are just administered by brilliant admins, have zero load or run on a hardware/software combo that has been untouched since Windows 2003 was actually released... Or they're just spoofing the server response, something that has been brought up before when netcraft stats where involved...
Windows 2003 probably isn't all that bad, but I still wouldn't want to have it on my server...
Being an avid Peugeot 205 Rallye & GTI fan, I feel a bit sad I have to agree... The time French cars where fun to drive has been lost since the 6 series (had a 206 GTI aswell, which was alright but not nearly as good as the 205 GTI). Never liked Renaults at all, except for the Renault 5 GT Alpine (which I never had btw).
But anyway, it's no different with affordable cars from other manufacturers. For fun cars you now have to go up on class of cars, to the 200+ bhp models (which PSA doesn't have and Renault only with the Clio V6). German cars are good but expensive and big, US cars suck big time in general, Asian cars are great but we don't get the really cool ones over here...
It's not about only fab's, it's also about R&D on the production technology, the machines that perform the 'deep magic' also need to be developed, tested and put into production.
I'm working for ASML myself, which makes more than half of the lithography gear on the market, and I can attest that a surprisingly LARGE number of people on-site here know all the ins and outs of ASML scanner technology, both the stuff already on the market as well as the bleeding-edge stuff that no-one outside is supposed to know about.
ASML has 6500+ employees, so it's a pretty safe bet knowledge leaks out. I don't see why this would be different for IBM.
How in the world do you have this much phone sex, period, but especially at work, and not have anyone notice?
Shouldn't this article be filed in the 'Ask Slashdot' section?
I don't know much about US air traffic, but where I come from (Europe) most of the time you don't have much of a choice when you have to fly to a certain destination. It's either fly directly from the closest airport to your destination, or add hours or even days to your trip to drive to another airport, changing planes etc. I hardly believe someone will drive from Amsterdam to Dusseldorf to catch a BA flight that first goes to Heathrow to change planes for a direct flight to LA, when they can also catch a direct KLM flight from Schiphol, Amsterdam, just to prevent sitting next to someone calling from the plane the entire flight.
So having 'market forces' decide will most likely result in people getting excessively annoyed by voice conversations on a plane...