Bash completion is great. It really makes using the keyboard productive.
And yeah, MS has noticed that too. Support for Autocomplete has improved with IE5/Win2000, now I get autocomplete in cmd.exe, and in most File Open/Save dialog boxes.
Whats interesting is, MS has been talking about a "universal command line" (perhaps attached to the start bar) as one of the possible features for "Longhorn" (2004-5?) (ahh, can't find a link).
This apparently would feature auto-complete as well as context-sensitivity... you could use the *same* command line for different applications. Anyone got any details on this?
A defense attorney hired by Afroze's father, a tailor by profession, reportedly asked the court to allow Afroze to receive a
psychiatric examination but was rejected.
> "Open source is an intellectual property
> destroyer. I can't imagine something that
> could be worse than this for the software
> business."
He is technically right. Open Source in itself is not against the intellectual property... ask Apple. But the bulk of the software which RedHat is associated with a license whose originator has made no secret of his distaste for copyrights and patents... intellectual property in general.
Now, if you (like many academics and thinkers) think IP is bad, then great, you'll love the GNU idea. If, on the other hand, you are in a business protected only by IP rights (think software, videos, music, books, newspapers), then you just *may* believe otherwise.
JonKatz, stung by attacks on his journalistic integrity, scours the Earth for 'Junis', then makes a triumphant comeback with the guy himself and writes all about it in a Slashpost, enjoying the discomfited posts about it. Giving you the benefit of doubt, Jon. How 'bout it?
Hell, if the/. gang cared about running an actual *news* site in their spare time from being bartenders at the busiest open source joints in town, they actually be *doing* such a thing!
... with the money they make out of selling Perl books, they could easily fulfil a goodly part of the modest $55000 they talk about on this page. (Yes, I know 55k was the *2001* budget.)
But dunno how much people will be willing to fork out to charity during tough times.. last year this time, things were much better.
Go check his/. User Page... I wouldn't say this guy's a drone.
Re:Please, let's not spread the DivX
on
The Hype of the Rings
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
> not because I'm deluding myself that J.R.R.
> Tolkien, the author of the similiarly themed
> book would have cared, or that his estate has
> any interest, rights or say in this film
It is a myth almost as cherished as JRR Tolkien's tales of Middle Earth: that nearing the end of his life, and under pressure from the taxman and a wolfpack of sharp Hollywood suits, the cloistered Oxford scholar signed away the rights to The Lord of the Rings for a mere £10,000.
But like many good yarns that have grown in the telling, it is - the Guardian can reveal - just that, a myth.
...
Far from the £10,000 of lore, he got $250,000 (then worth about £102,500) and a percentage of the royalties, which could eventually be a massive fillip to his estate, already fat from the sale of 100m books around the globe. The estate's solicitors confirmed yesterday that it would get more royalties if the film took two and a half times its costs.
I haven't done much on embedded java, so would anyone please tell me why shipping with a ages-old JVM is a good idea? Especially since JDK 1.4 will be out around the same time (or a bit later than) the device's debut.
The *full* list of ideas...
on
The Year In Ideas
·
· Score: 5, Informative
>excellent marketing opportunity
>for Linux distros like RH and SuSE
I don't want to be offensive, but.. Touching naivete. It may be a (slim) opportunity for Linux as a genre. But *marketing opportunity* for RH/Suse?
Remember, most people running Win95 are people with old boxes which would probably buckle under Mozilla's strain.
These people would probably borrow a Linux CD from a friend/relative, try running Wolf3D on it before deciding that what they really need is not a new OS, but a new box.
So either they grins and bears with the old box (and old OS), or they go and buy a new box from Dell/Gateway/whoever.
And guess what they're gonna get with their new box? Yes sir, WinXP pre-installed and pre-activated.
RH/Suse never got much of a chance imho.
Point is, joe user wants to use the box, not the OS. The only way you can get people to switch is offer the same capabilities as XP can today, but on a 4-5 year old machine. Then you got a winner (open source or not).
But if you can't, you don't have a chance. And remember, in terms of general usability*, XP on current hardware beats even Mandrake running on current hardware.
* general usability = usability as measured by a non-Unix savvy user.
eBooks require more than ePaper
on
Electronic Paper
·
· Score: 1
ePaper is fine, but to be viable, eBooks need:
- a convenient, ubiquitous *wireless* network from where books can be purchased/downloaded freely. (no booklover would want to hook up to a ethernet/modem jack on a sunday afternoon to read the Maybe 802.11b?
- enough *free* content to lure early adopters and spread the "ebook culture". Yeah, Project Gutenberg exists and does a fine job, but book publishers (and the music industry as well) has not yet done a good enough job in giving away *recent* content to draw users.
- eBook readers may have to given away on a large scale initially to create demand. This may sound impractical, and yet someone -- maybe the hardware unit makers -- has to do this to create demand.
OTHO, many book publishers -- and book lovers -- may feel that this is not required, since they are quite happy with paper books and paper book sales. eBooks may yet turn out to be a solution to a problem nobody has, imho.
Um.. possibly because this guy has a better track record that *you* do when it comes to pushing out reasonable quality *commercial* software, and on time?
Assuming developers listen to their target user audience (i.e., they don't write *just* to satisfy their itch), would the number of developers with different agendas not be proportional to the number of *users* with different agendas?
User group A could be CS types who'd see nothing wrong with compiling odd-numbered kernels for breakfast and who drool over things like CML2. User group B could the Mandrake using types (or even Mac using types:)) for whom graphical installers exist. And so on.
End result: a variety of users leads to a variety of solutions, which ultimately enriches the platform. One downside: there's (sometimes massive) duplication of effort (KDE/Gnome:))-- but hey, natural selection also works the same way. The only thing to guard against is: is one user group being a nuisance to the others?
Ecosystem biased against small players?
on
The Evolution of Linux
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Reading this lkml thread, I had the distinct feeling that you could replace Sun with Apple in Linus' posts and much of it would still be true.
You heard them above. Sun is basically inbreeding. That tends to be good
to bring out specific characteristics of a breed...
Following that thread, can I now propose Linus' Law:
Any software system with a large enough user base can rely on the accumulated experience of its users to add features, and also picking ideas from smaller systems now and then (at a very low incremental effort).
Corollary. The onus is on the smaller players to come up with new features to distinguish themselves from the masses -- but ultimately it's no-win for them because their *really useful* ideas will be subsumed into more popular systems anyway... only a matter of time.
I need sleep and I'm quite possibly not thinking straight, but am I right in thinking this would create enormous pressures for specialized players like Sun and Apple (and Be, as they found out) in the long term?
If that is the case, where does that leave the "small is beautiful" rule? Does it mutate to "small is beautiful, provided you are part of a *big* idea that has incredible amounts of 'traction'"?
>Apple was kinder than they had
>to be to give us a CD that is
>capable of fully installing OS X.
s/kinder/more\ stupid/
'Nuff said.
Re:Finally Learning From The Open Source Community
on
Windows XP Embedded
·
· Score: 2
>Most of the MS administrators are just in
>it for the money. If street cleaning paid
>as well then they'd be doing that.
Oversimplification. Just MS admins != greedy capitalist b******d.
There are many sysadmins I know of who take great pride in their being able to manage a AD system spread over 4 continents with ease. Who keep it secure from day one. Who maintain 16- and 32-way Datacenter systems.
And: there are a number of MS oriented *developers* I know who would not even consider consider the CLI-centric Unix tools to be real programs. Like you put a premium on power and expressiveness, they put a premium on ease of use, visual slickness and usability by your grandmother.
Never seen a BSOD on my ATMs... but one time it went into a "load-money" operation or something like that in front of me... and what I saw was, quite amazingly, Microsoft OS/2 1.3!
There is a lot of inertia among banks against replacing systems that work. XP will have to prove itself many *years* before a hardnosed banker will reconsider.
Some questions from a guy who has played around with Jakarta a lot, but never quite used it at work:
Are there people who are using Jakarta/Tomcat for high-volume sites? I use Tomcat for development all the time (primarily because I can use it on some really low end hardware). But in production use, it's always been a different story.
I mean, I can point to/. when people say MySQL cannot handle loads -- would any of you know a similar highly-trafficked, prominent site that runs Jakarta software?
For that matter, how 'bout the same question applied to JBoss? or are they used quietly in departmental intranets, anonymous because they didn't require a big-ticket purchase order to acquire?
I want to know if you consider Jakarta/JBoss ready from 'prime-time' in the same way (say) Websphere is.
But she and Liu agree that most of the pre-loaded Linux computers don't stay in that condition once buyers take them home or to the office. It's only slightly more difficult than it used to be to buy an inexpensive, unauthorized copy of Windows, which tends to make its way onto many of the hard disks that housed Linux when they left the store.
Excuse me for being cynical, but I know what software piracy in Asia is like. These are places where you can pick up Mathematica, STAAD, Oracle - for $20 or thereabouts. So is this bundling of Linux anything more a fig leaf from rock-bottom assemblers to not appear as selling "naked pcs" to clueless consumers?
The only two good points are -
a) since pc penetration in china is less than that of the US, the avg pc user in china is a lot more savvy than the avg us pc user. hence the chances of staying with linux is higher.
b) maybe (like the article notes) the users will dual-boot. At least the bright school/college goer will take a look at Linux and realize choice does exist.
In fact, the SQL Server 2000 install routine routine allows you change the main DBA's login name from the default "sa" to something else, and also allows you to set a password on the same screen.
All those *stupid* suggestions about msft-pays-for-hardware-redhat-gives-software *suck*. Do you really think poor kids need fancy hardware? A good education will help them much better. Unfortunately everyone in the IT biz seems to equate better education == better hardware.
>and didn't know you could change colors Of course you can change colors! That's the first thing they show l^Husers in the learn-office-in-24-hours books/programs, who promptly go on to perpetrate visual atrocities on the world from then on:-).
[seriously] Okay. I agree, there are times when a set of quickly whipped up scripts (whether in latex, perl or whatever) would be better than combing through the manual for an obscure feature (For instance, Word has a set of commands under Insert|Reference to do the stuff you wanted about the exams and the references to sections of text and graphics). But yeah, for a person who can code, it's *much* easier to come up with a custom system in minutes.
Slashdot Mirror
I can just see it now
Bash completion is great. It really makes using the keyboard productive.
... you could use the *same* command line for different applications. Anyone got any details on this?
And yeah, MS has noticed that too. Support for Autocomplete has improved with IE5/Win2000, now I get autocomplete in cmd.exe, and in most File Open/Save dialog boxes.
Whats interesting is, MS has been talking about a "universal command line" (perhaps attached to the start bar) as one of the possible features for "Longhorn" (2004-5?) (ahh, can't find a link).
This apparently would feature auto-complete as well as context-sensitivity
The guy sure sounds loco to me.
Szulik said:
> "Open source is an intellectual property
> destroyer. I can't imagine something that
> could be worse than this for the software
> business."
He is technically right. Open Source in itself is not against the intellectual property... ask Apple. But the bulk of the software which RedHat is associated with a license whose originator has made no secret of his distaste for copyrights and patents... intellectual property in general.
Now, if you (like many academics and thinkers) think IP is bad, then great, you'll love the GNU idea. If, on the other hand, you are in a business protected only by IP rights (think software, videos, music, books, newspapers), then you just *may* believe otherwise.
I can smell a major human interest story here :-).
/. gang cared about running an actual *news* site in their spare time from being bartenders at the busiest open source joints in town, they actually be *doing* such a thing!
JonKatz, stung by attacks on his journalistic integrity, scours the Earth for 'Junis', then makes a triumphant comeback with the guy himself and writes all about it in a Slashpost, enjoying the discomfited posts about it. Giving you the benefit of doubt, Jon. How 'bout it?
Hell, if the
>If OpenSource has a project like
>this and the comptability is never
>included, I don't even want to think
>about what MS could retaliate with
This.
... with the money they make out of selling Perl books, they could easily fulfil a goodly part of the modest $55000 they talk about on this page. (Yes, I know 55k was the *2001* budget.)
But dunno how much people will be willing to fork out to charity during tough times.. last year this time, things were much better.
Go check his /. User Page ... I wouldn't say this guy's a drone.
> Tolkien, the author of the similiarly themed
> book would have cared, or that his estate has
> any interest, rights or say in this film
This URL seems to differ with you:
I haven't done much on embedded java, so would anyone please tell me why shipping with a ages-old JVM is a good idea? Especially since JDK 1.4 will be out around the same time (or a bit later than) the device's debut.
is here: http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/
>excellent marketing opportunity
>for Linux distros like RH and SuSE
I don't want to be offensive, but.. Touching naivete. It may be a (slim) opportunity for Linux as a genre. But *marketing opportunity* for RH/Suse?
Remember, most people running Win95 are people with old boxes which would probably buckle under Mozilla's strain.
These people would probably borrow a Linux CD from a friend/relative, try running Wolf3D on it before deciding that what they really need is not a new OS, but a new box.
So either they grins and bears with the old box (and old OS), or they go and buy a new box from Dell/Gateway/whoever.
And guess what they're gonna get with their new box? Yes sir, WinXP pre-installed and pre-activated.
RH/Suse never got much of a chance imho.
Point is, joe user wants to use the box, not the OS. The only way you can get people to switch is offer the same capabilities as XP can today, but on a 4-5 year old machine. Then you got a winner (open source or not).
But if you can't, you don't have a chance. And remember, in terms of general usability*, XP on current hardware beats even Mandrake running on current hardware.
* general usability = usability as measured by a non-Unix savvy user.
ePaper is fine, but to be viable, eBooks need:
- a convenient, ubiquitous *wireless* network from where books can be purchased/downloaded freely. (no booklover would want to hook up to a ethernet/modem jack on a sunday afternoon to read the Maybe 802.11b?
- enough *free* content to lure early adopters and spread the "ebook culture". Yeah, Project Gutenberg exists and does a fine job, but book publishers (and the music industry as well) has not yet done a good enough job in giving away *recent* content to draw users.
- eBook readers may have to given away on a large scale initially to create demand. This may sound impractical, and yet someone -- maybe the hardware unit makers -- has to do this to create demand.
OTHO, many book publishers -- and book lovers -- may feel that this is not required, since they are quite happy with paper books and paper book sales. eBooks may yet turn out to be a solution to a problem nobody has, imho.
>why are we listening to this guy?
Um.. possibly because this guy has a better track record that *you* do when it comes to pushing out reasonable quality *commercial* software, and on time?
Assuming developers listen to their target user audience (i.e., they don't write *just* to satisfy their itch), would the number of developers with different agendas not be proportional to the number of *users* with different agendas?
:)) for whom graphical installers exist. And so on.
:))-- but hey, natural selection also works the same way. The only thing to guard against is: is one user group being a nuisance to the others?
User group A could be CS types who'd see nothing wrong with compiling odd-numbered kernels for breakfast and who drool over things like CML2. User group B could the Mandrake using types (or even Mac using types
End result: a variety of users leads to a variety of solutions, which ultimately enriches the platform. One downside: there's (sometimes massive) duplication of effort (KDE/Gnome
Following that thread, can I now propose Linus' Law:
Any software system with a large enough user base can rely on the accumulated experience of its users to add features, and also picking ideas from smaller systems now and then (at a very low incremental effort).
Corollary. The onus is on the smaller players to come up with new features to distinguish themselves from the masses -- but ultimately it's no-win for them because their *really useful* ideas will be subsumed into more popular systems anyway
I need sleep and I'm quite possibly not thinking straight, but am I right in thinking this would create enormous pressures for specialized players like Sun and Apple (and Be, as they found out) in the long term?
If that is the case, where does that leave the "small is beautiful" rule? Does it mutate to "small is beautiful, provided you are part of a *big* idea that has incredible amounts of 'traction'"?
>Apple was kinder than they had
>to be to give us a CD that is
>capable of fully installing OS X.
s/kinder/more\ stupid/
'Nuff said.
>Most of the MS administrators are just in
>it for the money. If street cleaning paid
>as well then they'd be doing that.
Oversimplification. Just MS admins != greedy capitalist b******d.
There are many sysadmins I know of who take great pride in their being able to manage a AD system spread over 4 continents with ease. Who keep it secure from day one. Who maintain 16- and 32-way Datacenter systems.
And: there are a number of MS oriented *developers* I know who would not even consider consider the CLI-centric Unix tools to be real programs. Like you put a premium on power and expressiveness, they put a premium on ease of use, visual slickness and usability by your grandmother.
So all it boils down to is different worldviews.
Never seen a BSOD on my ATMs... but one time it went into a "load-money" operation or something like that in front of me... and what I saw was, quite amazingly, Microsoft OS/2 1.3!
There is a lot of inertia among banks against replacing systems that work. XP will have to prove itself many *years* before a hardnosed banker will reconsider.
--PD
Some questions from a guy who has played around with Jakarta a lot, but never quite used it at work:
/. when people say MySQL cannot handle loads -- would any of you know a similar highly-trafficked, prominent site that runs Jakarta software?
Are there people who are using Jakarta/Tomcat for high-volume sites? I use Tomcat for development all the time (primarily because I can use it on some really low end hardware). But in production use, it's always been a different story.
I mean, I can point to
For that matter, how 'bout the same question applied to JBoss? or are they used quietly in departmental intranets, anonymous because they didn't require a big-ticket purchase order to acquire?
I want to know if you consider Jakarta/JBoss ready from 'prime-time' in the same way (say) Websphere is.
Excuse me for being cynical, but I know what software piracy in Asia is like. These are places where you can pick up Mathematica, STAAD, Oracle - for $20 or thereabouts. So is this bundling of Linux anything more a fig leaf from rock-bottom assemblers to not appear as selling "naked pcs" to clueless consumers?
The only two good points are -
a) since pc penetration in china is less than that of the US, the avg pc user in china is a lot more savvy than the avg us pc user. hence the chances of staying with linux is higher.
b) maybe (like the article notes) the users will dual-boot. At least the bright school/college goer will take a look at Linux and realize choice does exist.
In fact, the SQL Server 2000 install routine routine allows you change the main DBA's login name from the default "sa" to something else, and also allows you to set a password on the same screen.
Dunno about older versions though.
...Gravity is less strong in India...
So *this* explains the Indian Rope Trick!
:-)
Great idea!!
All those *stupid* suggestions about msft-pays-for-hardware-redhat-gives-software *suck*. Do you really think poor kids need fancy hardware? A good education will help them much better. Unfortunately everyone in the IT biz seems to equate better education == better hardware.
>and didn't know you could change colors :-).
Of course you can change colors! That's the first thing they show l^Husers in the learn-office-in-24-hours books/programs, who promptly go on to perpetrate visual atrocities on the world from then on
[seriously] Okay. I agree, there are times when a set of quickly whipped up scripts (whether in latex, perl or whatever) would be better than combing through the manual for an obscure feature (For instance, Word has a set of commands under Insert|Reference to do the stuff you wanted about the exams and the references to sections of text and graphics). But yeah, for a person who can code, it's *much* easier to come up with a custom system in minutes.