I have to disagree strongly at least with some of your points.
1. Samba has got to be one of the most useful pieces of software I use.. and to suggest that half of it doesn't work really suggests that you don't know what you are doing.
2. Yes, there are lots of people who don't RTFM or man page before asking for help, and it pisses people off, a lot. 90% of things I get asked about to do with Linux are stuff they could have worked out for themselves if they had only bothered to engage their brains, use man and google.
3. XFree86 has some flaws, but recent versions are improving a lot. Fontconfig has helped. I find that X provides features that are above and beyond many other popular windowing systems. Just because you don't use those features (and this especially goes to the people who suggest dumping network transparency) doesn't mean they aren't extremely useful to a lot of other people.
It's a long time since I've used ncp, but I don't ever remember it being a problem... In fact, I seem to remember it was pretty much the same as mounting using NFS or SMB shares.
If I've ever told some one to RTFM, then it generally means the problem they are trying to fix is explicitly discussed in the manual, and when I've been told to RTFM, the answer has always been in there (and I've just missed it).
More generally, reverse engineering is (stolen from FOLDOC)...
The process of analysing an existing system to identify its components and their interrelationships and create representations of the system in another form or at a higher level of abstraction. Reverse engineering is usually undertaken in order to redesign the system for better maintainability or to produce a copy of a system without access to the design from which it was originally produced.
For example, one might take the {executable} code of a computer program, run it to study how it behaved with different input and then attempt to write a program oneself which behaved identially (or better). An {integrated circuit} might also be reverse engineered by an unscrupulous company wishing to make unlicensed copies of a popular chip.
Why does a cookie provide a problem? One of the nicer things about cookies is that the client-side (i.e. YOU) have *complete* control over them. Unlike RFID tags, which you have no control over.
Will people get over cookies once and for all? If you don't like them, turn them off. If you can't turn them off, delete them after each session.
I've come to the conclusion that for the general public it doesn't matter what the metrics used to indicate performance actually mean, but that there is a metric and that bigger means better.
As an example consider a car. The most common metric given for a car that is "pseudo-related" to performance is the size of the engine. Regardless of what the performance of the engine is actually like, the perception is that a larger engine will mean the car goes faster, whilst a smaller engine will result in better fuel economy. It doesn't matter whether this is actually true or not, but that that is what people think, and that is what makes the car sell.
Actually, BBC radio is totally free in the UK. Radio licenses for receiving domestic radio programming (for want of a better phrase) were abolished a long time ago.
The BBC also provide a lot more than the 4 radio stations and 2 TV channels. There are a lot more DAB radio transmissions, local radio stations, DVB TV channels.
I don't mind paying the TV license. The BBC provide a superb service for a hundred quid a year - and no adverts!!
I'm sorry, but if you consider Creative soundcards to be "high end" or anything approaching "Audiophile-grade" then you are really kidding yourselves. The same can be said about most home theater systems. They are nearly all consumer kit, stuff that looks pretty and works reasonably well.
I always remember at Uni I lived with a Danish guy who used to work at Bang & Olufsen but never used any of their kit, saying it was "cheap", and I competely understand why. B&O's products are consumer grade, although definately expensive and pretty for consumer-grade. The "high-end" Creative cards are the same, pretty and reasonably expensive, but don't fool yourself into thinking they're "audiophile".
However, I do agree with you on the last paragraph. Most people are never going to notice the difference.
I'm probably going to burn Karma for this, but I'm impressed at the number of irrelevant acronyms that you managed to squeeze in there.
IS-IS and BGP4 are solutions to a problem that exists in IP land. Developing an ad-hoc peer-to-peer wireless network, would all most certainly require an entirely different strategy and therefore protocol.
Also, what kind of MAN's have you been dealing with that run at 54Mbps (if you're lucky)? All the ones I've worked with are up to or above an order of magnitude quicker than that, try NetNorthWest and YHMAN.
A terrible Karma Whore opportunity, but from FOLDOC..
John von Neumann/jon von noy'mahn/ Born 1903-12-28, died 1957-02-08.
A Hungarian-born mathematician who did pioneering work in
quantum physics and computer science.
While serving on the BRL Scientific Advisory Committee, von
Neumann joined the developers of {ENIAC} and made some
critical contributions. In 1947, while working on the design
for the successor machine, {EDVAC}, von Neumann realized that
ENIAC's lack of a centralized control unit could be overcome
to obtain a rudimentary stored program computer. He also
proposed the {fetch-execute cycle}.
-- Basically a von Neumann machine takes instructions in serial and process them one by one, altering the course of it's instruction flow based upon the instructions preceeding it (i.e. normally it carries on to the next instruction except for jumps and things like that). Nearly all current (All? can any one suggest any others in frequent use) computers are Von Neumann architectures.
I disagree, modern computer technology hasn't changed that much in the past 50 years, the basic concepts are the same (granted... digital electronic computers haven't been around 100 years:) ).
I don't think any of the original Manchester Mark I team would have problems comparing the concepts used in that original machine to a modern computer. Everything has just got faster.
To make an analogy between computers and cars... Imagine the progression from points ignition, through to electronic ignition and on to the EMU's we have in cars today... the core technology is still the same (suck in petrol, explode..), computers are still binary, just faster and smaller and with fancy ignition:)
This is far more complicated than Hz. When you go to the cinema, the film is projected at 24fps (I *think*). How many people do you see complaining about flicker at the cinema? Not many.
Remember, XBox, PS2, Gamecube and all the other consoles are designed to output to *INTERLACED* devices (ie, your TV). So whilst they are outputting 50 times a second, they're only outputting half the scan lines each time the scan down the screen.
It's my guess that monitor designers have a hard time calibrating there monitors for the best "non-flicker" effect. A designer never really knows what frequency the monitor is going to be run at. Certainly, if they could guarantee that a monitor is always going to be run at a specific rate, they could design the phosphor so that it only begins to fade (significantly) after 1/74th of a second later. I imagine that would have far more effect on flickeriness (I like the sound of that word).
I'm guessing here, but I'm guessing to convince your brain that animation is fluid, you need around 30hz or so (similar to TV and film). I imagine convincing your brain that something is flicker free is a combination of frequency, phosphor fade time and all sorts of other magic.
Arses... I've just realised I completely contradicted my initial post. What I meant to say was... I only use IE when I'm testing to see how b0rked it is;)
Yes, but I believe you'd still see IE trying to use it's "odd" TCP set up on the initial connection. Having said that... I *still* haven't read the original:)
Another thought: Surely, if this is what's happenning... IE has got some pretty hairy control of the TCP layer (or it's has it's own TCP packet generating code). Either way, it's purest evil.
Ok, I've only been able to read the copy of the blog from that which has been pasted in these Slashdot replies (i.e. I might have missed some of the story), but I've just tried this out and it's not what I'm seeing at all. Between an IE6/XP machine and my Apache box...
Which appears to be a perfectly standard SYN->SYN->ACK handshake at the beginning.
Also, do IE5.5/6 support HTTP pipelining? Surely this would explain the web browser not tearing down connections in between HTTP commands. Mozilla supports it!:)... or maybe I've just not understood the blog entry correctly!
I would very much disagree. Sun has built a huge company from designing and manufacturing (well, more outsourcing on the low end stuff nowadays) hardware.
I imagine Solaris/SunOS was a bit of an afterthought in the early days.
My Diamond RIO 500 only has 32Meg of memory and it's far too small for me. If I only want to stick a couple of tracks onto it for a quick journey then it's fine but for anything more than 40 minutes playback, it's no good.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong! Debian unstable should have 10, then testing, then stable
Nope, GCC is still distributed under the GPL and it's not the GPL that's discriminating against SCO, it's the developers.
It's the license that the Opensource definition says has to be non-discriminatory.
I have to disagree strongly at least with some of your points.
1. Samba has got to be one of the most useful pieces of software I use.. and to suggest that half of it doesn't work really suggests that you don't know what you are doing.
2. Yes, there are lots of people who don't RTFM or man page before asking for help, and it pisses people off, a lot. 90% of things I get asked about to do with Linux are stuff they could have worked out for themselves if they had only bothered to engage their brains, use man and google.
3. XFree86 has some flaws, but recent versions are improving a lot. Fontconfig has helped. I find that X provides features that are above and beyond many other popular windowing systems. Just because you don't use those features (and this especially goes to the people who suggest dumping network transparency) doesn't mean they aren't extremely useful to a lot of other people.
It's a long time since I've used ncp, but I don't ever remember it being a problem... In fact, I seem to remember it was pretty much the same as mounting using NFS or SMB shares.
If I've ever told some one to RTFM, then it generally means the problem they are trying to fix is explicitly discussed in the manual, and when I've been told to RTFM, the answer has always been in there (and I've just missed it).
Ok, so who do you think is right then, and why?
I believe 802.11b+ is the modified 802.11b that support 22Mbit/second operation
I'm terribly sorry, I forgot to give you the link to Google... it's.
http://www.google.com/
Now, you make sure you put the slashes in the right way ok?
Well, it's one way of doing reverse engineering.
More generally, reverse engineering is (stolen from FOLDOC)...
The process of analysing an existing system to identify its
components and their interrelationships and create
representations of the system in another form or at a higher
level of abstraction. Reverse engineering is usually
undertaken in order to redesign the system for better
maintainability or to produce a copy of a system without
access to the design from which it was originally produced.
For example, one might take the {executable} code of a
computer program, run it to study how it behaved with
different input and then attempt to write a program oneself
which behaved identially (or better). An {integrated circuit}
might also be reverse engineered by an unscrupulous company
wishing to make unlicensed copies of a popular chip.
Err, sorry, I think you got lost on your way to Internet Kindergarten.
Google is your friend. Try the following search terms.
"Reverse Engineering"
"802.11b"
"Device Driver"
Type and learn.
Why does a cookie provide a problem? One of the nicer things about cookies is that the client-side (i.e. YOU) have *complete* control over them. Unlike RFID tags, which you have no control over.
Will people get over cookies once and for all? If you don't like them, turn them off. If you can't turn them off, delete them after each session.
I've come to the conclusion that for the general public it doesn't matter what the metrics used to indicate performance actually mean, but that there is a metric and that bigger means better.
As an example consider a car. The most common metric given for a car that is "pseudo-related" to performance is the size of the engine. Regardless of what the performance of the engine is actually like, the perception is that a larger engine will mean the car goes faster, whilst a smaller engine will result in better fuel economy. It doesn't matter whether this is actually true or not, but that that is what people think, and that is what makes the car sell.
That's probably because they don't have to. GCC isn't included with the AP.
Actually, BBC radio is totally free in the UK. Radio licenses for receiving domestic radio programming (for want of a better phrase) were abolished a long time ago.
The BBC also provide a lot more than the 4 radio stations and 2 TV channels. There are a lot more DAB radio transmissions, local radio stations, DVB TV channels.
I don't mind paying the TV license. The BBC provide a superb service for a hundred quid a year - and no adverts!!
I'm sorry, but if you consider Creative soundcards to be "high end" or anything approaching "Audiophile-grade" then you are really kidding yourselves. The same can be said about most home theater systems. They are nearly all consumer kit, stuff that looks pretty and works reasonably well.
I always remember at Uni I lived with a Danish guy who used to work at Bang & Olufsen but never used any of their kit, saying it was "cheap", and I competely understand why. B&O's products are consumer grade, although definately expensive and pretty for consumer-grade. The "high-end" Creative cards are the same, pretty and reasonably expensive, but don't fool yourself into thinking they're "audiophile".
However, I do agree with you on the last paragraph. Most people are never going to notice the difference.
I'm probably going to burn Karma for this, but I'm impressed at the number of irrelevant acronyms that you managed to squeeze in there.
IS-IS and BGP4 are solutions to a problem that exists in IP land. Developing an ad-hoc peer-to-peer wireless network, would all most certainly require an entirely different strategy and therefore protocol.
Also, what kind of MAN's have you been dealing with that run at 54Mbps (if you're lucky)? All the ones I've worked with are up to or above an order of magnitude quicker than that, try NetNorthWest and YHMAN.
A terrible Karma Whore opportunity, but from FOLDOC..
/jon von noy'mahn/ Born 1903-12-28, died 1957-02-08.
f _fame/vonneuma.htm)}.
John von Neumann
A Hungarian-born mathematician who did pioneering work in
quantum physics and computer science.
While serving on the BRL Scientific Advisory Committee, von
Neumann joined the developers of {ENIAC} and made some
critical contributions. In 1947, while working on the design
for the successor machine, {EDVAC}, von Neumann realized that
ENIAC's lack of a centralized control unit could be overcome
to obtain a rudimentary stored program computer. He also
proposed the {fetch-execute cycle}.
{(http://www.sis.pitt.edu/~mbsclass/is2000/hall_o
{(http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/VonNeumann.html)}.
{(http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/comphist/54nord/)}.
--
Basically a von Neumann machine takes instructions in serial and process them one by one, altering the course of it's instruction flow based upon the instructions preceeding it (i.e. normally it carries on to the next instruction except for jumps and things like that). Nearly all current (All? can any one suggest any others in frequent use) computers are Von Neumann architectures.
I love the irony of this comment. I only pity the author for writing his thoughts down and then commenting on how nobody cares about them anyway.
Of course, the AC also missed one important fact. When someone writes things in a blog, do they actually CARE if anyone reads them? I know I don't.
I disagree, modern computer technology hasn't changed that much in the past 50 years, the basic concepts are the same (granted... digital electronic computers haven't been around 100 years :) ).
:)
I don't think any of the original Manchester Mark I team would have problems comparing the concepts used in that original machine to a modern computer. Everything has just got faster.
To make an analogy between computers and cars... Imagine the progression from points ignition, through to electronic ignition and on to the EMU's we have in cars today... the core technology is still the same (suck in petrol, explode..), computers are still binary, just faster and smaller and with fancy ignition
This is far more complicated than Hz. When you go to the cinema, the film is projected at 24fps (I *think*). How many people do you see complaining about flicker at the cinema? Not many.
Remember, XBox, PS2, Gamecube and all the other consoles are designed to output to *INTERLACED* devices (ie, your TV). So whilst they are outputting 50 times a second, they're only outputting half the scan lines each time the scan down the screen.
It's my guess that monitor designers have a hard time calibrating there monitors for the best "non-flicker" effect. A designer never really knows what frequency the monitor is going to be run at. Certainly, if they could guarantee that a monitor is always going to be run at a specific rate, they could design the phosphor so that it only begins to fade (significantly) after 1/74th of a second later. I imagine that would have far more effect on flickeriness (I like the sound of that word).
I'm guessing here, but I'm guessing to convince your brain that animation is fluid, you need around 30hz or so (similar to TV and film). I imagine convincing your brain that something is flicker free is a combination of frequency, phosphor fade time and all sorts of other magic.
Arses... I've just realised I completely contradicted my initial post. What I meant to say was... I only use IE when I'm testing to see how b0rked it is ;)
Hehe :) Wow... I'm glad I'm not making a complete fool of myself then! :)
:)
Of course, I never see this problem. I don't use IE
Yes, but I believe you'd still see IE trying to use it's "odd" TCP set up on the initial connection. Having said that... I *still* haven't read the original :)
Another thought: Surely, if this is what's happenning... IE has got some pretty hairy control of the TCP layer (or it's has it's own TCP packet generating code). Either way, it's purest evil.
Generally, most "hardware" mp3 players are a CPU or DSP running some kind of software to enable them to play MP3s.
I would very much disagree. Sun has built a huge company from designing and manufacturing (well, more outsourcing on the low end stuff nowadays) hardware.
I imagine Solaris/SunOS was a bit of an afterthought in the early days.
My Diamond RIO 500 only has 32Meg of memory and it's far too small for me. If I only want to stick a couple of tracks onto it for a quick journey then it's fine but for anything more than 40 minutes playback, it's no good.