slashdot effect n. Also spelled "/. effect"; what is said to have happened when a website being virtually unreachable because too many people are hitting it after the site was mentioned in an interesting article on the popular http://slashdot.org/, Slashdot news service. The term is quite widely used by/. readers, including variants like "That site has been slashdotted again!"
alloca() is like malloc(), except it allocates memory on top of your stack (not the heap). Allocation is fast, O(1), because alloca() simply pushes the stack pointer forward. You don't need to free() alloca blocks. When your function returns, the stack disappears! But you need to be careful not to use alloca() for any memory blocks that need to be retained after the function returns (like nodes in a global data structure).
Which is easier to find? The segfault, of course. When developing/testing your application, a memory is very likely to slip through into the shipped product. Any way to set "tripwires" (like assertions) will help you shake out bugs before shipping.
Yes, I was curious!:-) Microsoft's US download site said FTP time would be 14.5 hours! I ended up downloading it from Japan (after ie5setup.exe crashed three times).
Final verdict? IE5 = IE4 + minor UI annoyances + silly net radio toolbar + "under the covers" support for developers, like XML, CSS stuff, etc. For users, there seems to be no real value. How long did IE5 take to develop? 12-18 months? From what I see, this feels more like an IE 4.5 upgrade with a 4-6 month product cycle.
I remember reading text on BBSes back in the late 1980s. With the text screaming past at 9600 baud! My friends would brag, "dewd, I can read at 19200 baud! really!"
A teacher once told me that, if you're having trouble understanding a textbook chapter (for example), you should speed up, not slow down. If you slow down you'll get lost in the details with no context. The key is to read the "important stuff", such as intros, bold face stuff, captions,... Once you have a high-level view, you should have a better time re-reading the chapter because you can picture where the details fit within the big picture.
Regarding tech books, I think the most important thing is to know where you can find more information when you actually need it. I've skimmed many tech books, giving me the big picture. Later, I can flip back to Page 495 when I have a question. Knowing what you don't know is wise.
for the naysayers who doubt Apple's commitment to Unix: A/UX; NeXTSTEP; AIX; MAE; MkLinux; OS X.
Where are A/UX, NextStep, AIX, MAE, and MkLinux now? Apple can never seem to stay committed to anything (or anyone) very long. Yes, they are now clearly betting the farm on OS X.
I am confused by Apple's client OS strategy, though. If OS X Client is due out in late 1999, why is Apple wasting time and money developing Mac OS 8.6 (Veronica)?
Would Omnigroup be running their web server on a beta release of OS X? If Apple can't get production (or even pre-release) servers for their sites, why would someone else bother yet?
This makes a lot of sense. With Linux and the BSDs making the OS a commodity, Apple follows suit. What prevents someone from making their own Darwin Distro, like Red Hat? Probably not much, but the proprietary Mac GUI and Boxes are Apple's added-value. I think that is fair (and smart for Apple).
Everyone seems to be chastising Apple for "jumping on the bandwagon" or "not doing enough". Give 'em a break! They're doing more than most other commercial software companies. Apple isn't completely new to Open Source; they have MkLinux.
Look how scared Sun has been to open Java. Sun now talks about opening up Java and Solaris, but have they done much with that? Apple is making good progress for a company well-known of closed, proprietary systems! Remember that Apple makes money from hardware, so opening their software will HELP them increase software quality and mindshare!
Say what you like about RMS (and being a BSD license advocate, I disagree with the GNU Manifesto), at least he's consistent.
But does the GPL require that everything GNU software touches be called GNU/This and GNU/That? Isn't Stallman caught in his own "IP freedom" trap?
Microsoft's chance for Office monopoly on Linux!
on
MS Office for Linux
·
· Score: 1
Linux is a good OS with rapidly growing market share. And it has no office suite "winner"! Perfect opportunity for Microsoft to establish its as Linux office suite monopoly. Once again, Microsoft controls the desktop. Average users don't know the difference between an OS and the desktop. Microsoft controls what they see and hear..
What did Microsoft ever sell software for its "competitor", the Mac? Bill recognized that the Mac had something special that Windows couldn't steal. Maybe they see something special in Linux. I heard that Microsoft makes more money from selling Mac apps than Windows apps! Can they do the same with "penny-pinching" Linux users?
Office is already cross-platform: Windows and Mac
on
MS Office for Linux
·
· Score: 1
Ironically, Office was already designed to be cross-platform! Yes, going from Windows to Mac is probably easier than Windows to Linux, but Microsoft has already abstracted the OS within Office. Office may not be as closely tied to Win32 as people imagine. Many Windows features are actually first implemented in Office before moving into the Windows. For example, those funky sliding menus.
I heard a rumor (from Microsoft) that Office was actually pseudocode running on a VM (like Java's JVM). Just port the VM to Mac or Linux.
Did you report this VM crash to the linux-kernel list? I'm surprised no one was interested.
Isn't this exactly the type of sneeky bug the kernel developers would love to fix? If Linux is supposed to be "enterprise-ready", the kernel should be able withstand huge loads, even if they aren't "normal".
According to t his Mindcraft Report, NT+IIS running with 256 MB was faster than your Linux+Apache running with 512 MB!
Your Linux 2.2 statistics: Server connection rate: 684.13 connections/sec Server thruput: 103.30 Mbit/sec
Mindcraft's NT4 statistics: Server connection rate: 929 connectsion/sec @ 50 clients Server thruput: 137.7 Mbit/sec @ 50 clients
Wanker: Were the Linux statistics you posted from your EEPro + 3c905 benchmark? The NT benchmark used two 100Base-TX network interfaces on the server. This might explain why the NT numbers look so good..?
One caveat: the NT benchmark was done with WebStone 2.0.1 and the Linux benchmark was done with WebStone 2.5b3.
We get so much "Linux rulezzzzz" and "FreeBSD is for euro-wimpzzz" here on Slashdot. I'd like to see unbiased benchmarks (ha!) comparing Linux 2.0, Linux 2.2, and FreeBSD 3.1.
I've seen some old HTTP server benchmarks comparing Linux 2.0 and FreeBSD 2.8. FreeBSD had twice the transactions per second! Now that the shiny new Linux 2.2 and FreeBSD 3.1 kernels are out, let's get a second look. Does anyone know of any recent benchmarks in this vein??
cpeterso
How much Netscape 4.x code is still in Mozilla?
on
Mozilla-dot-party 2.0
·
· Score: 1
Is Mozilla a complete rewrite?
Microsoft Linux 2001 might not be a bad idea...
on
Corel Desktop Linux
·
· Score: 1
...for Microsoft, at least. What are Microsoft's crown jewels? Its "easy" UI and Office applications. Windows itself is a liability. If Microsoft ports the Windows UI and Win32 APIs to Linux, then it would be a major contender (in the eyes of many corporate IT folks).
Microsoft has a serious case of the NIH syndrome. I doubt they would throw away NT for Linux. Microsoft has "bet the company" and spent a lot of money to build their "NT Story". Then again, look at Microsoft's quick turnaround with the Internet. Microsoft is big, but scared. Don't underestimate them..
Steve Woz said in his 1998 Wired interview that the Commodore 64 had all the computing power any home user would need. Computers are fashion. If your neighbors, the Joneses, have Windows 98, then your stale Windows 95 will never do..:-)
Whatever you think about Microsoft, their use of year version numbers was a great (marketing) idea. Software that automatically obsoletes itself. In 1997, Windows 95 was already old news even though there was no Windows 98 yet!
Slashdot Mirror
The Jargon File (accidently) lists Slashdot's URL as http://slashdot.org/, Slashdot!
/. readers, including variants like "That site has been slashdotted again!"
slashdot effect n.
Also spelled "/. effect"; what is said to have happened when a website being virtually unreachable because too many people are hitting it after the site was mentioned in an interesting article on the popular http://slashdot.org/, Slashdot news service. The term is quite widely used by
alloca() is like malloc(), except it allocates memory on top of your stack (not the heap). Allocation is fast, O(1), because alloca() simply pushes the stack pointer forward. You don't need to free() alloca blocks. When your function returns, the stack disappears! But you need to be careful not to use alloca() for any memory blocks that need to be retained after the function returns (like nodes in a global data structure).
Which is easier to find? The segfault, of course. When developing/testing your application, a memory is very likely to slip through into the shipped product. Any way to set "tripwires" (like assertions) will help you shake out bugs before shipping.
Yes, I was curious! :-) Microsoft's US download site said FTP time would be 14.5 hours! I ended up downloading it from Japan (after ie5setup.exe crashed three times).
Final verdict? IE5 = IE4 + minor UI annoyances + silly net radio toolbar + "under the covers" support for developers, like XML, CSS stuff, etc. For users, there seems to be no real value. How long did IE5 take to develop? 12-18 months? From what I see, this feels more like an IE 4.5 upgrade with a 4-6 month product cycle.
I remember reading text on BBSes back in the late 1980s. With the text screaming past at 9600 baud! My friends would brag, "dewd, I can read at 19200 baud! really!"
A teacher once told me that, if you're having trouble understanding a textbook chapter (for example), you should speed up, not slow down. If you slow down you'll get lost in the details with no context. The key is to read the "important stuff", such as intros, bold face stuff, captions, ... Once you have a high-level view, you should have a better time re-reading the chapter because you can picture where the details fit within the big picture.
Regarding tech books, I think the most important thing is to know where you can find more information when you actually need it. I've skimmed many tech books, giving me the big picture. Later, I can flip back to Page 495 when I have a question. Knowing what you don't know is wise.
for the naysayers who doubt Apple's commitment to Unix: A/UX; NeXTSTEP; AIX; MAE; MkLinux; OS X.
Where are A/UX, NextStep, AIX, MAE, and MkLinux now? Apple can never seem to stay committed to anything (or anyone) very long. Yes, they are now clearly betting the farm on OS X.
I am confused by Apple's client OS strategy, though. If OS X Client is due out in late 1999, why is Apple wasting time and money developing Mac OS 8.6 (Veronica)?
Would Omnigroup be running their web server on a beta release of OS X? If Apple can't get production (or even pre-release) servers for their sites, why would someone else bother yet?
This makes a lot of sense. With Linux and the BSDs making the OS a commodity, Apple follows suit. What prevents someone from making their own Darwin Distro, like Red Hat? Probably not much, but the proprietary Mac GUI and Boxes are Apple's added-value. I think that is fair (and smart for Apple).
So when do we find a public web site running on Mac OS X? That would make an interesting target for some /. server melting! Mac OS X is a /. virgin.. :-)
Everyone seems to be chastising Apple for "jumping on the bandwagon" or "not doing enough". Give 'em a break! They're doing more than most other commercial software companies. Apple isn't completely new to Open Source; they have MkLinux.
Look how scared Sun has been to open Java. Sun now talks about opening up Java and Solaris, but have they done much with that? Apple is making good progress for a company well-known of closed, proprietary systems! Remember that Apple makes money from hardware, so opening their software will HELP them increase software quality and mindshare!
www.publicsource.apple.com isn't responding, but other Apple web servers seem to run Netscape-Enterprise /3.6 on Solaris.
Funny they're are using Mac OS X Server! Why are web servers so easily melted by Slashdot?? Don't they test these things?
Their http://www.publicsource.apple.com/ server is barely alive..
The principal investigator for Mach, Rick Rashid, is now the VP of Microsoft Research.
Isn't the anti-MP3 argument that "MP3 is not scalable". Real's G2 and MSFT's ASF supposedly support "more scalable" streaming content.
Of course, do customer care? No.
Say what you like about RMS (and being a BSD license advocate, I disagree with the GNU Manifesto), at least he's consistent.
But does the GPL require that everything GNU software touches be called GNU/This and GNU/That? Isn't Stallman caught in his own "IP freedom" trap?
Linux is a good OS with rapidly growing market share. And it has no office suite "winner"! Perfect opportunity for Microsoft to establish its as Linux office suite monopoly. Once again, Microsoft controls the desktop. Average users don't know the difference between an OS and the desktop. Microsoft controls what they see and hear..
What did Microsoft ever sell software for its "competitor", the Mac? Bill recognized that the Mac had something special that Windows couldn't steal. Maybe they see something special in Linux. I heard that Microsoft makes more money from selling Mac apps than Windows apps! Can they do the same with "penny-pinching" Linux users?
Ironically, Office was already designed to be cross-platform! Yes, going from Windows to Mac is probably easier than Windows to Linux, but Microsoft has already abstracted the OS within Office. Office may not be as closely tied to Win32 as people imagine. Many Windows features are actually first implemented in Office before moving into the Windows. For example, those funky sliding menus.
I heard a rumor (from Microsoft) that Office was actually pseudocode running on a VM (like Java's JVM). Just port the VM to Mac or Linux.
www.myleftasscheek.com is a portal.
Did you report this VM crash to the linux-kernel list? I'm surprised no one was interested.
Isn't this exactly the type of sneeky bug the kernel developers would love to fix? If Linux is supposed to be "enterprise-ready", the kernel should be able withstand huge loads, even if they aren't "normal".
According to t his Mindcraft Report, NT+IIS running with 256 MB was faster than your Linux+Apache running with 512 MB!
Your Linux 2.2 statistics:
Server connection rate: 684.13 connections/sec
Server thruput: 103.30 Mbit/sec
Mindcraft's NT4 statistics:
Server connection rate: 929 connectsion/sec @ 50 clients
Server thruput: 137.7 Mbit/sec @ 50 clients
Wanker: Were the Linux statistics you posted from your EEPro + 3c905 benchmark? The NT benchmark used two 100Base-TX network interfaces on the server. This might explain why the NT numbers look so good..?
One caveat: the NT benchmark was done with WebStone 2.0.1 and the Linux benchmark was done with WebStone 2.5b3.
We get so much "Linux rulezzzzz" and "FreeBSD is for euro-wimpzzz" here on Slashdot. I'd like to see unbiased benchmarks (ha!) comparing Linux 2.0, Linux 2.2, and FreeBSD 3.1.
I've seen some old HTTP server benchmarks comparing Linux 2.0 and FreeBSD 2.8. FreeBSD had twice the transactions per second! Now that the shiny new Linux 2.2 and FreeBSD 3.1 kernels are out, let's get a second look. Does anyone know of any recent benchmarks in this vein??
cpeterso
Is Mozilla a complete rewrite?
...for Microsoft, at least. What are Microsoft's crown jewels? Its "easy" UI and Office applications. Windows itself is a liability. If Microsoft ports the Windows UI and Win32 APIs to Linux, then it would be a major contender (in the eyes of many corporate IT folks).
Microsoft has a serious case of the NIH syndrome. I doubt they would throw away NT for Linux. Microsoft has "bet the company" and spent a lot of money to build their "NT Story". Then again, look at Microsoft's quick turnaround with the Internet. Microsoft is big, but scared. Don't underestimate them..
Steve Woz said in his 1998 Wired interview that the Commodore 64 had all the computing power any home user would need. Computers are fashion. If your neighbors, the Joneses, have Windows 98, then your stale Windows 95 will never do.. :-)
Whatever you think about Microsoft, their use of year version numbers was a great (marketing) idea. Software that automatically obsoletes itself. In 1997, Windows 95 was already old news even though there was no Windows 98 yet!