Why don't they have these same people use kde everyday and come back and say if they still want all the options hidden. This is where the gnome ui designers went wrong. They took away all the options and messed up their desktop trying to be the best DE for first day users. Then the users use it for a few weeks and are no longer first time users and switch to something more meaty.
I have to disagree with you. In the last 8 years or so, I've used Solaris (on UltraSPARC), OpenBSD on x86, Red Hat Linux, Windows (95, 98, 20000, XP), and Mac OSX. Guess what. I can not stand to use KDE precicely because it is so cluttered. GNOME and OSX do it right. The interface is clean, uncluttered, unconfusing. I spent some.01% of my time configuring things and 99.99% doing real work. The uncluttered interface helps with this. The configuration that most folks are likely to need are easily available, and anything more advanced is available via gconf-editor.
Take the CVS integration in Konqueror. I'd be shocked if more than the smallest fraction of all KDE users have ever used it. It should NOT be there by default.
I'm not opposed to having advanced configuration. I am opposed to user interface clutter (which [in my opinion] KDE has in excess).
They do the same thing in India (show yellow just before the green). However, folks in India (at least Bangalore and Pune) just run the yellow going both directions. Some intersections even have green light countdown timers.
As near as I could tell from my visit, the only real rule to driving in India is "don't get caught". During the rush hour commute to work, intersections are literally a very intricate / scary web of traffic flowing in all directions.
However, about the fastest any one goes is ~25-30mph. It's just not possible to go any faster in the city.
While I can't disagree with the article, as it is mostly an opinion piece, it seems that the author is not familiar with other segments of the game playing community.
There are some -- myself included -- who do not want challenging games. If it takes more than a dozen tries to get through a level, and a trip to gamefaqs isn't able to clear things up, the game designers did [some of] their players a disservice.
Those of us in that category like games that entertain. Playing the same damned level over [and over, and over] just to shave.0001 seconds off a lap time is tedious and boring as hell. I'd much rather play games that show a lot of creativity. I don't want to be twitch master of the universe. I don't care if my initials never make it on the top 10 list. To me, that is not what gaming is about. It isn't something to master. It is something to distract and entertain.
One of the things I like about the Resident Evil series is the fact that they are generally playable by a diverse group of gamers. For starters, there is a choice of difficulty levels. People in it for the challenge take the more difficult character, and set the difficulty level higher. Those you are just in it for that adreniline rush that comes when some big nasty monster jumps out at you when you were least expecting it can use an easier difficulty setting.
There are a great many who like to pick up a game, and just sit back, relax, and let themselves be distracted for awhile. These sorts of gamers don't _want_ games that get them so frustrated the it ceases to be enjoyable.
To boil this all down a bit, there are a wide variety of gamers out there. They have a wide variety of tastes. They have a wide variety of motivations for playing. If game studios are still pulling in the bucks, they must be doing something right.
1. It is *impossible* for Red Hat to be the next MS. For one, Microsoft already supports *all* of their OS offerings longer than Red Hat does it base distribution. Two, every application in Red Hat Linux is open source. Everyone is free to fork a nearly exact copy (minus the "Red Hat" branding) of all of its software.
2. If you are a small buisness, department, etc running Red hat Linux, you should not be running the basic Red Hat distribution. Red Hat currently sells a whole range of offerings, including Workstaton, Enterprise Server, and Advanced Server (used to be Enterprise Edition). These come with lifecycles of 2 years or more and anywhere from 8x5 to 24x7 support. In otherwords, the things that *real* professional corporate organizations *want*. If you are joe-home-server, you don't make Red Hat money, so you're stuck with the basic distro with 12 months of support. This is called capitalisim. It order for someone to win, someone has to lose. In this case, it's you. Deal with it, or move to a different distro. Workstation edition starts at $179. Server editions start at $399. This is exactly on par with what *corporate* types pay for server editions of Microsoft operating systems *without* all the extra client-access-licenses needed to make them usable for all but the smallest organizations.
3. Red Hat *only* increments the major version when they break binary compatibility. When they break binary compatibility, the *always* increment the major version number. This is a *feature*, not a *bug*. Red Hat does not play the "lets increase our major version number to catch up with everyone else" game. In the case of Red hat 9, they inlude the latest Gnome (2.2.0), KDE (3.1), and glibc (2.3.2). They *can't* install that software without breaking binary compatibility. If they didn't install all that software, you'd all be bitching about how Red Hat was so out of date. The reason Red hat had to go from 8.0 to 9.0 is because of all the cool software that's been developed lately. If anything, blame the Gnome, KDE, and glibc developers for making progress and creating desired new features. No one is locking you in. Some distributions increment their major number whenever they feel like it, and don't maintain binary compatibility across minor versions. This is a *royal* pain in the ass for pretty much everyone who uses the distro.
4. If it ever becomes viable, Red Hat will almost certainly provide a version of their distro targeted at the home user. It will probably run approximately $100-$200 just like the comperable offerings from MS. They will include security updates for more than 1 year. However, they will still provide a free downloadable version that doesn't include support, and only gets a year of free updates. This is *generous* for a corporate Linux supplier, not evil. However, it still isn't as generous as what you get from some other distros (e.g., Debian).
5. Red Hat is a corporate Linux supplier. They target people who pay them money for a valuable service. They do not solicit donations to maintain their for-profit viability as a corpopraion. They provide valuable services, including support, integrations, and QA to people who are willing to pay them. If this is not you, you are free to continue bitching at them and still not pay them a damned thing for a less valuable service. You are also free to switch to any of the hundreds of other distros. You are not locked in. The only way Red Hat will survive is if they do things that *paying* customers like. They aren't stupid. They're in the black, so they must be doing the right things (more or less).
In order to run "GTA Settings.exe" you need a legit Windows install (so you have MFC42.DLL to be specific). The DLL needs to be in your WineX "windows\system32" directory.
The push for a one-size-fits-all desktop based on KDE/GNOME means that it is getting incresingly hard to administer a system that does not use either of those.
Sorry, but what have you been smoking? Are you operating under the assumtion that because they ship Gnome and/or KDE that they're going to rip tar/gzip/vi/emacs/etc out of your hands? For the most part, RedHat has been -adding- new GUI tools to make it easier to perform certain tasks. If you want to edit/etc/modules.conf or compile your own kernel, or whatever, you can (as a general rule) still use the same old tools, and edit the same old files.
It is not helped that so many KDE and GNOME programs do not even bother including a man page.
Sigh. No, they don't come with man pages. Both Gnome and KDE have well developed help subsystems. They are GUI environment with GUI programs. Using their GUI help system to read the documentation is not an unreasonable requirement. (If documentation in man format is that important to you, might I suggest OpenBSD [and probably any of the other *BSDs]? It [they] tend to be much more thorough about writing man pages for all config files and programs on the system.)
You don't provide a single piece of evidence in support of anything you said. I've been using RedHat on my desktop and in server roles since 6.1 (with a brief pitstop with an OpenBSD then a Solaris desktop). My opinion of RedHat 8.0 is very high.
Pretty much every app supports Unicode (utf-8 encoding). I'm learning Japanese and multi-language support worked out of the box. I have standard version of gcc (not that 2.96-RH b.s.). I have (relatively) current releases of KDE and Gnome. And you know what else? I don't use either KDE or Gnome. I've been using
Fluxbox and/or WindowMaker. I still have vi. I still have tar and gzip and bash. The config files are (more or less) in the same places RedHat has been keeping them for years and years. RedHat 8.0 is nothing more than a further refinement of the same damned thing they've been working on for years.
So you propose that if you can do something evil and profit, it is ethical to do so if you know full well that if you don't do it, someone else will.
I don't thing that was what he was propsing at all. Just because a company sells a product that gets uses for 'evil' purposes does not mean the company itself is evil. If that were the case, just about every gun manufactuer would be evil. If the company sold an item and they had reason to believe the buyer would do something evil with it, your point is certainly valid.
I can't speak for your DVI/LCD issue, but the kernel module example is invalid (in my experience, anyways). All I did was download the NVIDIA_kernel and NVIDIA_GLX source RPMs, 'rpmbuild --rebuild *.src.rpm', and install the resulting binary RPMs. A simple tweak of the XF86Config file later, and viola. Working 3d. As for locale support, I imagine there will be a rough transition period while the various tools are mirgated to use UTF-8 encoding.
Actually, this isn't as far from the truth as you think it is. Everyones favorite anonymous Perl KU (kwalitee usherance) developer, chromatic, manged to turn the Bill of Rights into a circumvention device.
you'd have to be nuts to visit america as a non-citizen since you have no rights.
The almost trollish nature of your comment begs the question, What are the rights of non-citizens in other (non-US) countries? In the US, the constitution guaraneets certain rights for US citizens. The same rights do not necessarily apply to "outsiders".
Re:Sadly Intel has the upper hand here
on
AMD's 64-Bit Chip
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Just because a chip is backwards compatible, does *not* mean that it is slower. For starters,
the new x86-64 is a superset of the x86-32. This means that 64-bit apps can take advantage of
additional registers, better (read: not stack based) floating point, etc. In other words, it
makes no sense of AMD to have a "pure" 64 bit proc and a "compatible" 64 bit proc. The "pure"
proc would not gain anything from ditching the 32bit ompatibility (other than fewer transistors,
which would cause the chip to run a bit cooler/suck less power). Unless of course, the "pure"
proc and "compatible" proc had different instruction sets, which would go against their whole
strategy.
In other words, newer does not necessarily equal better (for some definitions of better).
It may have been better for you to construct your post in the form of a question ("all other
factors (bus speeds, memory latencies, process technology, etc) being equal, what
advandages/disadvantages does x64-64 have over IA64?").
What I want to know is how this impacts those of use who own/operate our own domains and SMTP server (i.e. those of us who do not use ISP supplied SMTP servers to send out mail). Will we be forced to log our own traffic for fear mean old Uncle Ashcroft wants to know who we emailed three years ago? Will we have to enact some sort of robust long term backup of these logs (i.e. fire resistant safes and offsite backups of logs)? What if, through no fault of our own, a fire destroys the last weeks worth of backups and Uncle Bush needs yesterdays logs (i.e. how paranoid about backing things up do we need to be)?
Here are a few articles written by/about TJ Rodgers (Cypress' CEO) and/or about Cypress
On Jesse Jackson (towards the bottom): http://www.reasonvsracism.com/essay_race _century.h tm http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_release.c fm?o bjectID=00268C54-86B3-4E6C-978C016CEF39A32A
Reguarding afirmative action (to a Nun, no less): http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/summer96/ 0241.htm l
On Second Harvest Food Bank: http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_releas e.cfm?o bjectID=F2451423-D66F-438C-BB283FC6673CACC0
Solar Power: http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_relea se.cfm?o bjectID=A571C5CC-0870-447C-993E7DE2BC4E8A02
He also had an interesting piece in the May 20th USA Today reguarding frivilous lawsuits, but I can't find a link to it anywhere.
I don't know about this guys situation, but in some companies it is part of the admins job description to take every reasonable action to force users to "do the right thing". Having them sign a document absolving him/her of guilt would just not cut it. In his case, he should put in place the appropiate software/hardware to implement a backup system and ensure that it is either hard or impossible for users to do the wrong thing. At the absolute very least the workers should be trained on the new/proper procedures (and reminded as appropriate). The idea of a sacrificial lamb mentioned earlier would be interesting, so long as he made sure to have a copy of all the important data first (i.e., I'd fire his ass if he pulled a stunt like that and intentionally destroyed valuable company data).
"If a software application representing 5000 hours uses GPL code that reflects only 100 hours, is the GPL fair in its
argument that the entire product is GPL?
This "argument" really bothers me. What would they say to this: "If a software application represeting 5000 hours uses proprietary code reflecting only 100 hours, should the author really be guilty of copyright infringment?"
Last time I checked, no one was forced to use GPL code in their products. I think everyone would agree that the author of a piece of code is well within their rights to dictate the terms under which other people are allowed to use it. People who use the GPL effectively say, "I will share my code with you, however, you must share your code with me if you intend to use my code in your project".
Some people (e.g. those who use the BSD license) don't mind if others use their code without sharing in return. That is their perogative.
The Business Software Alliance, a trade group that represents the major
software makers, says that more than half of all Web users have
downloaded software they have not paid for.
Oh no. Whatever shall I do with all that copyrighted software I've
downloaded?!? Oh, wait, false alarm. It's all Free Software/Open
Source. Whew. The BSA had me scared for a second there...
From the bottom of the page:
Lindows.com is not endorsed by or affiliated with Microsoft Corporation in any way.
IANAL (*cough*) but if I were, I would read this as an admission that there is a potential for confusion in the mind of the consumer requiring clarification by the
disclaimer.
Aren't they shooting themselves in the foot with that?
Not necessarily. No generic word, even if it obtains a secondary meaning, can ever be protected as a trademark. That is what prevents the co-opting of generic descriptive words. E.g., without this provision, the Ford Motor Company could spend a lot of money on advertising to try to and associate the word "truck" with the Ford Motor Company to the point where the word "truck" is nearly synomimous with a Ford brand pickup.
Three letter intials work pretty well for user bases less than a few thousand. The vast majority of the time, users get their birth initials. In cases where people do not have a middle name, fill it in with an uncommon letter (e.g. x). When there is an overlap, other variations like the first two letters of the first name, and last initial (or simmilar).
The user names are short, which makes them pretty easy to remember. They generally have some reasonable association with the persons name (which also makes them easy to remember). Plus, there are a variety of schemes to use in case of a collision.
Of course it isn't perfect, and some people will end up with wacky intials, but that is a very small percentage of the time. If the number of anticipated users is too large of a scheme like this, add the department as part of the domain (e.g. abc@art.university.edu or foo@pld.company.com).
Not entirely true. If he used some sort of NAT soloution to rewrite the incomming/outgoing packets header with the server/routers IP address, there would no problems. His biggest problem would be preventing his DDHCP server from allocating IP addresses that someoen else has set staticaly. If he was able to sniff all the packets on the network, he could scan for people using IP addresses from the DHCP pool that the DHCP server didn't allocate itself. If it sees one, it would remove that IP address from the DHCP pool (i.e. pretend it was allocated by the DHCP server). If he was able to set relatively short lease times on DHCPed IP addresses, he could minimize the potential imact. The best he can hope for is to minimze the likelyhood of a collision.
The Cygwin DLL works with all non-beta versions of Windows since Windows 95, with the exception of Windows CE.
Hmmm. www.cygwin.com/xfree: (first link returned by a friggen google search).
Cygwin/XFree86 is a port of XFree86 to the Microsoft Windows family of operating systems. Cygwin/XFree86 runs on all recent consumer and business versions of Windows; as of 2002-01-06 those versions are specifically Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, and Windows XP.
Not all companies have bad managers...
on
Do You Like Your Job?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I've found that if you are in an engineering field, competent former engineers make the best managers. They have first hand experience about what it takes to do a job and do it correctly. Of course, not all engineers make good managers, but most good managers were at one point a good engineer. This applies equally well to other diciplines, of course.
The reason for this is because they have good working knowledge from both sides of the fence. They are aware of the buisiness concerns (time schedules, money, the competition) and engineering concerns. For instance, they can take the long view and recognize that putting a little more design and documentation work up front usually results in a better, more maintainable project. It also keeps the engineers happy (and by extention more productive) which is better for the company.
However, there are occasions where it does make better business sense to kill or rush a project. Former engineers are much more capable of conveying this to the workforce in a manner that they can accept.
Don't forget the Tualitin (also the name of a river [and city] in Oregon). There has also been Katmai (a river in Alaska), Coppermine (a river from the Nunavut region of Canada), Merced (a river in northern California), McKinley (also a river in Alaska), Tillamook ([the Pentium with MMX), also a river in Oregon).
Slashdot Mirror
Why don't they have these same people use kde everyday and come back and say if they still want all the options hidden.
This is where the gnome ui designers went wrong. They took away all the options and messed up their desktop trying to be the best DE for first day users. Then the users use it for a few weeks and are no longer first time users and switch to something more meaty.
I have to disagree with you. In the last 8 years or so, I've used Solaris (on UltraSPARC), OpenBSD on x86, Red Hat Linux, Windows (95, 98, 20000, XP), and Mac OSX. Guess what. I can not stand to use KDE precicely because it is so cluttered. GNOME and OSX do it right. The interface is clean, uncluttered, unconfusing. I spent some
Take the CVS integration in Konqueror. I'd be shocked if more than the smallest fraction of all KDE users have ever used it. It should NOT be there by default.
I'm not opposed to having advanced configuration. I am opposed to user interface clutter (which [in my opinion] KDE has in excess).
They do the same thing in India (show yellow just before the green). However,
folks in India (at least Bangalore and Pune) just run the yellow going both
directions. Some intersections even have green light countdown timers.
As near as I could tell from my visit, the only real rule to driving in India
is "don't get caught". During the rush hour commute to work, intersections are
literally a very intricate / scary web of traffic flowing in all directions.
However, about the fastest any one goes is ~25-30mph. It's just not possible to
go any faster in the city.
While I can't disagree with the article, as it is mostly an opinion piece, it
.0001 seconds off a lap time
seems that the author is not familiar with other segments of the game playing
community.
There are some -- myself included -- who do not want challenging games. If it
takes more than a dozen tries to get through a level, and a trip to gamefaqs
isn't able to clear things up, the game designers did [some of] their players a
disservice.
Those of us in that category like games that entertain. Playing the same damned
level over [and over, and over] just to shave
is tedious and boring as hell. I'd much rather play games that show a lot of
creativity. I don't want to be twitch master of the universe. I don't care if
my initials never make it on the top 10 list. To me, that is not what gaming is
about. It isn't something to master. It is something to distract and entertain.
One of the things I like about the Resident Evil series is the fact that they
are generally playable by a diverse group of gamers. For starters, there is a
choice of difficulty levels. People in it for the challenge take the more
difficult character, and set the difficulty level higher. Those you are just in
it for that adreniline rush that comes when some big nasty monster jumps out at
you when you were least expecting it can use an easier difficulty setting.
There are a great many who like to pick up a game, and just sit back, relax,
and let themselves be distracted for awhile. These sorts of gamers don't _want_
games that get them so frustrated the it ceases to be enjoyable.
To boil this all down a bit, there are a wide variety of gamers out there. They
have a wide variety of tastes. They have a wide variety of motivations for
playing. If game studios are still pulling in the bucks, they must be doing
something right.
1. It is *impossible* for Red Hat to be the next MS. For one, Microsoft
already supports *all* of their OS offerings longer than Red Hat does it base
distribution. Two, every application in Red Hat Linux is open source. Everyone
is free to fork a nearly exact copy (minus the "Red Hat" branding) of all of
its software.
2. If you are a small buisness, department, etc running Red hat Linux, you
should not be running the basic Red Hat distribution. Red Hat currently sells
a whole range of offerings, including Workstaton, Enterprise Server, and
Advanced Server (used to be Enterprise Edition). These come with lifecycles of
2 years or more and anywhere from 8x5 to 24x7 support. In otherwords, the
things that *real* professional corporate organizations *want*. If you are
joe-home-server, you don't make Red Hat money, so you're stuck with the basic
distro with 12 months of support. This is called capitalisim. It order for
someone to win, someone has to lose. In this case, it's you. Deal with it, or
move to a different distro. Workstation edition starts at $179. Server
editions start at $399. This is exactly on par with what *corporate* types pay
for server editions of Microsoft operating systems *without* all the extra
client-access-licenses needed to make them usable for all but the smallest
organizations.
3. Red Hat *only* increments the major version when they break binary
compatibility. When they break binary compatibility, the *always* increment
the major version number. This is a *feature*, not a *bug*. Red Hat does not
play the "lets increase our major version number to catch up with everyone
else" game. In the case of Red hat 9, they inlude the latest Gnome (2.2.0),
KDE (3.1), and glibc (2.3.2). They *can't* install that software without
breaking binary compatibility. If they didn't install all that software, you'd
all be bitching about how Red Hat was so out of date. The reason Red hat had to
go from 8.0 to 9.0 is because of all the cool software that's been developed
lately. If anything, blame the Gnome, KDE, and glibc developers for making
progress and creating desired new features. No one is locking you in. Some
distributions increment their major number whenever they feel like it, and
don't maintain binary compatibility across minor versions. This is a *royal*
pain in the ass for pretty much everyone who uses the distro.
4. If it ever becomes viable, Red Hat will almost certainly provide a version
of their distro targeted at the home user. It will probably run approximately
$100-$200 just like the comperable offerings from MS. They will include
security updates for more than 1 year. However, they will still provide a free
downloadable version that doesn't include support, and only gets a year of
free updates. This is *generous* for a corporate Linux supplier, not evil.
However, it still isn't as generous as what you get from some other distros
(e.g., Debian).
5. Red Hat is a corporate Linux supplier. They target people who pay them
money for a valuable service. They do not solicit donations to maintain their
for-profit viability as a corpopraion. They provide valuable services,
including support, integrations, and QA to people who are willing to pay them.
If this is not you, you are free to continue bitching at them and still not
pay them a damned thing for a less valuable service. You are also free to
switch to any of the hundreds of other distros. You are not locked in. The
only way Red Hat will survive is if they do things that *paying* customers
like. They aren't stupid. They're in the black, so they must be doing the
right things (more or less).
In order to run "GTA Settings.exe" you need a legit Windows install (so you have MFC42.DLL to be specific). The DLL needs to be in your WineX "windows\system32" directory.
/me takes the bait...
/etc/modules.conf or compile your own kernel, or whatever, you can (as a general rule) still use the same old tools, and edit the same old files.
The push for a one-size-fits-all desktop based on KDE/GNOME means that it is getting incresingly hard to administer a system that does not use either of those.
Sorry, but what have you been smoking? Are you operating under the assumtion that because they ship Gnome and/or KDE that they're going to rip tar/gzip/vi/emacs/etc out of your hands? For the most part, RedHat has been -adding- new GUI tools to make it easier to perform certain tasks. If you want to edit
It is not helped that so many KDE and GNOME programs do not even bother including a man page.
Sigh. No, they don't come with man pages. Both Gnome and KDE have well developed help subsystems. They are GUI environment with GUI programs. Using their GUI help system to read the documentation is not an unreasonable requirement. (If documentation in man format is that important to you, might I suggest OpenBSD [and probably any of the other *BSDs]? It [they] tend to be much more thorough about writing man pages for all config files and programs on the system.)
You don't provide a single piece of evidence in support of anything you said. I've been using RedHat on my desktop and in server roles since 6.1 (with a brief pitstop with an OpenBSD then a Solaris desktop). My opinion of RedHat 8.0 is very high.
Pretty much every app supports Unicode (utf-8 encoding). I'm learning Japanese and multi-language support worked out of the box. I have standard version of gcc (not that 2.96-RH b.s.). I have (relatively) current releases of KDE and Gnome. And you know what else? I don't use either KDE or Gnome. I've been using Fluxbox and/or WindowMaker. I still have vi. I still have tar and gzip and bash. The config files are (more or less) in the same places RedHat has been keeping them for years and years. RedHat 8.0 is nothing more than a further refinement of the same damned thing they've been working on for years.
So you propose that if you can do something evil and profit, it is ethical to do so if you know full well that if you don't do it, someone else will.
I don't thing that was what he was propsing at all. Just because a company sells a product that gets uses for 'evil' purposes does not mean the company itself is evil. If that were the case, just about every gun manufactuer would be evil. If the company sold an item and they had reason to believe the buyer would do something evil with it, your point is certainly valid.
I can't speak for your DVI/LCD issue, but the kernel module example is invalid (in my experience, anyways). All I did was download the NVIDIA_kernel and NVIDIA_GLX source RPMs, 'rpmbuild --rebuild *.src.rpm', and install the resulting binary RPMs. A simple tweak of the XF86Config file later, and viola. Working 3d. As for locale support, I imagine there will be a rough transition period while the various tools are mirgated to use UTF-8 encoding.
Karma, neh?
/. karma I'm refering to. Second, go pick up a copy. You'll be glad you did.
-PS For those who haven't read the book.... First off, that is not
Actually, this isn't as far from the truth as you think it is. Everyones favorite anonymous Perl KU (kwalitee usherance) developer, chromatic, manged to turn the Bill of Rights into a circumvention device.
you'd have to be nuts to visit america as a non-citizen since you have no rights.
The almost trollish nature of your comment begs the question, What are the rights of non-citizens in other (non-US) countries? In the US, the constitution guaraneets certain rights for US citizens. The same rights do not necessarily apply to "outsiders".
Just because a chip is backwards compatible, does *not* mean that it is slower. For starters, the new x86-64 is a superset of the x86-32. This means that 64-bit apps can take advantage of additional registers, better (read: not stack based) floating point, etc. In other words, it makes no sense of AMD to have a "pure" 64 bit proc and a "compatible" 64 bit proc. The "pure" proc would not gain anything from ditching the 32bit ompatibility (other than fewer transistors, which would cause the chip to run a bit cooler/suck less power). Unless of course, the "pure" proc and "compatible" proc had different instruction sets, which would go against their whole strategy.
In other words, newer does not necessarily equal better (for some definitions of better).
It may have been better for you to construct your post in the form of a question ("all other factors (bus speeds, memory latencies, process technology, etc) being equal, what advandages/disadvantages does x64-64 have over IA64?").
What I want to know is how this impacts those of use who own/operate our own domains and SMTP server (i.e. those of us who do not use ISP supplied SMTP servers to send out mail). Will we be forced to log our own traffic for fear mean old Uncle Ashcroft wants to know who we emailed three years ago? Will we have to enact some sort of robust long term backup of these logs (i.e. fire resistant safes and offsite backups of logs)? What if, through no fault of our own, a fire destroys the last weeks worth of backups and Uncle Bush needs yesterdays logs (i.e. how paranoid about backing things up do we need to be)?
Here are a few articles written by/about TJ Rodgers (Cypress' CEO) and/or about Cypress
e _century.h tmc fm?o bjectID=00268C54-86B3-4E6C-978C016CEF39A32A
/ 0241.htm l
s e.cfm?o bjectID=F2451423-D66F-438C-BB283FC6673CACC0
a se.cfm?o bjectID=A571C5CC-0870-447C-993E7DE2BC4E8A02
On Jesse Jackson (towards the bottom):
http://www.reasonvsracism.com/essay_rac
http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_release.
Reguarding afirmative action (to a Nun, no less):
http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/summer96
On Second Harvest Food Bank:
http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_relea
Solar Power:
http://www.cypress.com/aboutus/press_rele
He also had an interesting piece in the May 20th USA Today reguarding frivilous lawsuits, but I can't find a link to it anywhere.
I don't know about this guys situation, but in some companies it is part of the admins job description to take every reasonable action to force users to "do the right thing". Having them sign a document absolving him/her of guilt would just not cut it. In his case, he should put in place the appropiate software/hardware to implement a backup system and ensure that it is either hard or impossible for users to do the wrong thing. At the absolute very least the workers should be trained on the new/proper procedures (and reminded as appropriate). The idea of a sacrificial lamb mentioned earlier would be interesting, so long as he made sure to have a copy of all the important data first (i.e., I'd fire his ass if he pulled a stunt like that and intentionally destroyed valuable company data).
"If a software application representing 5000 hours uses GPL code that reflects only 100 hours, is the GPL fair in its argument that the entire product is GPL?
This "argument" really bothers me. What would they say to this: "If a software application represeting 5000 hours uses proprietary code reflecting only 100 hours, should the author really be guilty of copyright infringment?"
Last time I checked, no one was forced to use GPL code in their products. I think everyone would agree that the author of a piece of code is well within their rights to dictate the terms under which other people are allowed to use it. People who use the GPL effectively say, "I will share my code with you, however, you must share your code with me if you intend to use my code in your project".
Some people (e.g. those who use the BSD license) don't mind if others use their code without sharing in return. That is their perogative.
The Business Software Alliance, a trade group that represents the major software makers, says that more than half of all Web users have downloaded software they have not paid for.
Oh no. Whatever shall I do with all that copyrighted software I've downloaded?!? Oh, wait, false alarm. It's all Free Software/Open Source. Whew. The BSA had me scared for a second there...
From the bottom of the page: Lindows.com is not endorsed by or affiliated with Microsoft Corporation in any way.
IANAL (*cough*) but if I were, I would read this as an admission that there is a potential for confusion in the mind of the consumer requiring clarification by the disclaimer.
Aren't they shooting themselves in the foot with that?
Not necessarily. No generic word, even if it obtains a secondary meaning, can ever be protected as a trademark. That is what prevents the co-opting of generic descriptive words. E.g., without this provision, the Ford Motor Company could spend a lot of money on advertising to try to and associate the word "truck" with the Ford Motor Company to the point where the word "truck" is nearly synomimous with a Ford brand pickup.
Three letter intials work pretty well for user bases less than a few thousand. The vast majority of the time, users get their birth initials. In cases where people do not have a middle name, fill it in with an uncommon letter (e.g. x). When there is an overlap, other variations like the first two letters of the first name, and last initial (or simmilar).
The user names are short, which makes them pretty easy to remember. They generally have some reasonable association with the persons name (which also makes them easy to remember). Plus, there are a variety of schemes to use in case of a collision.
Of course it isn't perfect, and some people will end up with wacky intials, but that is a very small percentage of the time. If the number of anticipated users is too large of a scheme like this, add the department as part of the domain (e.g. abc@art.university.edu or foo@pld.company.com).
Not entirely true. If he used some sort of NAT soloution to rewrite the incomming/outgoing packets header with the server/routers IP address, there would no problems. His biggest problem would be preventing his DDHCP server from allocating IP addresses that someoen else has set staticaly. If he was able to sniff all the packets on the network, he could scan for people using IP addresses from the DHCP pool that the DHCP server didn't allocate itself. If it sees one, it would remove that IP address from the DHCP pool (i.e. pretend it was allocated by the DHCP server). If he was able to set relatively short lease times on DHCPed IP addresses, he could minimize the potential imact. The best he can hope for is to minimze the likelyhood of a collision.
Hmmm. www.cygwin.com:
The Cygwin DLL works with all non-beta versions of Windows since Windows 95, with the exception of Windows CE.
Hmmm. www.cygwin.com/xfree: (first link returned by a friggen google search).
Cygwin/XFree86 is a port of XFree86 to the Microsoft Windows family of operating systems. Cygwin/XFree86 runs on all recent consumer and business versions of Windows; as of 2002-01-06 those versions are specifically Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000, and Windows XP.
I've found that if you are in an engineering field, competent former engineers make the best managers. They have first hand experience about what it takes to do a job and do it correctly. Of course, not all engineers make good managers, but most good managers were at one point a good engineer. This applies equally well to other diciplines, of course.
The reason for this is because they have good working knowledge from both sides of the fence. They are aware of the buisiness concerns (time schedules, money, the competition) and engineering concerns. For instance, they can take the long view and recognize that putting a little more design and documentation work up front usually results in a better, more maintainable project. It also keeps the engineers happy (and by extention more productive) which is better for the company.
However, there are occasions where it does make better business sense to kill or rush a project. Former engineers are much more capable of conveying this to the workforce in a manner that they can accept.
Don't forget the Tualitin (also the name of a river [and city] in Oregon). There has also been Katmai (a river in Alaska), Coppermine (a river from the Nunavut region of Canada), Merced (a river in northern California), McKinley (also a river in Alaska), Tillamook ([the Pentium with MMX), also a river in Oregon).
This guy must really hate solar flares. Maybe he should sequester himself in a faraday cage.
Actually, the address you want is here