It it were only $10K, we'd probably do it.... For us, even just paying the $7/FTE would get us something on the order of $50,000. There's no way we'll pay that much. It's more than we pay for Solaris, AIX, and IRIX combined.
Yeah, I thought this was a pretty silly claim by SCO also.... Redesigning Linux for use by demanding business customers means they stole from SCO? Come on, anyone that's dealt with SCO knows they've never had a product that's for "demanding business customers"....
It was supposed to more of technology that SCO was to contribute, not specific code. AIX was already a pretty mature OS at this point in time, it just wasn't an OS that ran on Intel chips.
Sequent and Intel were was also involved in this project (this was Project Monterey). At the start of the project, the rumors were that IBM would end up buying Sequent and SCO since IBM has a habit of doing that to get the technology from smaller companies.
Well, IBM did buy Sequent for their NUMA technology. The IA64 port of AIX died and SCO was cut loose. At the time, IBM bascially said they didn't think SCO had anything worth buying because they could get the Intel side of the world by using Linux.
SCO has a long history if thinking everyone is stupid. Just a couple years ago (before they were doing anything Linux) they were claiming they had something like 98% of the PC Unix market and using that as example of why Linux didn't matter. Of course, to claim that sort of percentage meant they weren't counting Linux as part of the market....
And my experience is just the opposite. The GameCube controller feels FAR too small. I end up feeling like I'm hitting several buttons at the same time, but the Xbox controller feels fine to me.
I didn't like the Xbox controller when I tried it at one of the demo kiosks, but I think that has to do with the stiff plastic they use to attach them to the kiosks -- it forces you to hold it at a funky angle. Once I used the controller not attached to anything, it felt fine. It's rather similar to the Dreamcast controllers.
I thought his point was "not everyone can get broadband".... It seems all of you are argreeing with that point. You're going on to justify why that is true, but you still seem to be in agreement.
I'm older than you think I am, free TV, why yes, I recall free and black&white.....
My phone doesn't work without a monthly fee either.... nor does my cell phone, etc....
It'd be different if TiVo was the first item ever marketed where you had to do more than just buy the box. It's not, paying for a service beyond the hardware is nothing new.
Now, you can argue that TiVo is overpriced for what you get, but again, that's a totally different point and still nothing unique to TiVo.
Oh no, I've got this satellite receiver, and I don't pay for a subscription, and the damn service provider won't give me any channels unless I pay them monthly! I paid good money for that satellite receiver, I shouldn't have to keep paying just to make it work.....
Sounds pretty silly, doesn't it? Well, that's basically what this issue is like. It's made pretty clear that the box is basically a doorstop without the service.
Can some one make something like a TiVo that works without the monthly service? Sure, but that's not current business model for this sort of thing. Note that UltimateTV does even less without the monthly service. While I understand that folks WANT to be able to do this stuff without paying a service, the facts are that product doesn't yet exist.
Actually, it would mean they care what their non-customers think.... TiVo doesn't make any money on selling the units, they make their money on the subscription.
This is a valid concern if it requirements to convict some one were simple and strictly tech based. They're not. An honor trial is a pretty elaborate process. I would suspect it's unlikely that an unwitting "source" of the copied material would be convicted. UVA's honor system has a single sanction: expulsion. As a result, it doesn't require too much doubt in the minds of the jury to avoid conviction.
The honor system at UVA is student run so the folks that get the money don't control it (in theory, there's always possibily of behind the scenes manipulation by the suits).
I think another big bonus to curses is that it's most likely already going to work on any flavor of *nix or terminal type you encounter. There are certainly newer and fancier libs than curses, but if you need portability across OS and possibly terminals, it's hard to argue with curses.
They have. For starters, there are other mailbox formats that have advatanges over the Berkeley standard. However, the Berkeley one has the advantage of inerita since it's the most common.
If you want to stick with the "standard" standard, you can use the Content-Length: header, which removes the need to quote lines starting with From. Of course, not everything supports it.
How humans do it doesn't mean much in the way that a computer does it. Humans and computers have very different strengths and weaknesses in their "brains". The computer can manage a very large search tree without any problems. The human can't and doesn't maintain search tree anywhere near the size that a computer can.
On the otherhand, the human is a great pattern matcher and can see that certain moves aren't even worth considering very quickly whereas the computer is "stupid" and has to search the tree to see the move is no good.
They way a top level chess player goes about move selection is very different than the way a top level chess program does move selection.
If player says something like "mate in 5 moves", they've seen a forced checkmate..... It's not showing the other guy the strategy, it's saying "Ok, I can see a forced end to this".
It can be argued that giving all the info to the human is simply slanting the playing field the other way. Certainly in human vs. human, the players will study how the other guy has played and try to come up with opening lines that play against the other guys weakness. However, as "the other guy" you do some of the same stuff, such as plan to play something you haven't done before so your opponents study is less useful.
If one player is a computer, it's a little different. It's a bit easier for a human to change their style of play. It's not so easy for the computer (at least, it's not been so easy for the majority of the chess programs written to date, it's certainly possible to make a program that could change styles).
For me it was very much a case of comparing Ruby to Python and finding compelling arguments to use Ruby.
In my opinion, Ruby is what many pro-Python folks claim Python to be: a better OO alternative to Perl. I find Python syntax painful at best. Whereas I feel comfortable with Ruby.
The threat "you will have to recompile" due to OS fragmentation is pretty hollow since you have to recompile anyway if you're dealing with multiple hardware platforms. Sun should know better, it's not like I can compile something on Solaris X86 and have it run on a Sparc. No matter what happens with OS fragmentation, I think it's safe to say that the hardware will be fragmented for a long time to come.
Slashdot Mirror
It it were only $10K, we'd probably do it.... For us, even just paying the $7/FTE would get us something on the order of $50,000. There's no way we'll pay that much. It's more than we pay for Solaris, AIX, and IRIX combined.
When has SCO ever held the dominant market share in anything? They've never been anything more than a fringe player.
RMS predicted it? Yeah, well even a hypochondriac is sometimes really sick.....
Yeah, I thought this was a pretty silly claim by SCO also.... Redesigning Linux for use by demanding business customers means they stole from SCO? Come on, anyone that's dealt with SCO knows they've never had a product that's for "demanding business customers"....
It was supposed to more of technology that SCO was to contribute, not specific code. AIX was already a pretty mature OS at this point in time, it just wasn't an OS that ran on Intel chips.
Sequent and Intel were was also involved in this project (this was Project Monterey). At the start of the project, the rumors were that IBM would end up buying Sequent and SCO since IBM has a habit of doing that to get the technology from smaller companies.
Well, IBM did buy Sequent for their NUMA technology. The IA64 port of AIX died and SCO was cut loose. At the time, IBM bascially said they didn't think SCO had anything worth buying because they could get the Intel side of the world by using Linux.
SCO has a long history if thinking everyone is stupid. Just a couple years ago (before they were doing anything Linux) they were claiming they had something like 98% of the PC Unix market and using that as example of why Linux didn't matter. Of course, to claim that sort of percentage meant they weren't counting Linux as part of the market....
I don't think creating the ODM or something along those lines for SMIT would be a great hardship. The ODM is just a fairly simple database.
And my experience is just the opposite. The GameCube controller feels FAR too small. I end up feeling like I'm hitting several buttons at the same time, but the Xbox controller feels fine to me.
I didn't like the Xbox controller when I tried it at one of the demo kiosks, but I think that has to do with the stiff plastic they use to attach them to the kiosks -- it forces you to hold it at a funky angle. Once I used the controller not attached to anything, it felt fine. It's rather similar to the Dreamcast controllers.
I thought his point was "not everyone can get broadband".... It seems all of you are argreeing with that point. You're going on to justify why that is true, but you still seem to be in agreement.
IBM already has emergency fixes available at ftp://aix.software.ibm.com/aix/efixes/security/tsm login_efix.tar.Z
I'm older than you think I am, free TV, why yes, I recall free and black&white.....
My phone doesn't work without a monthly fee either.... nor does my cell phone, etc....
It'd be different if TiVo was the first item ever marketed where you had to do more than just buy the box. It's not, paying for a service beyond the hardware is nothing new.
Now, you can argue that TiVo is overpriced for what you get, but again, that's a totally different point and still nothing unique to TiVo.
Oh no, I've got this satellite receiver, and I don't pay for a subscription, and the damn service provider won't give me any channels unless I pay them monthly! I paid good money for that satellite receiver, I shouldn't have to keep paying just to make it work.....
Sounds pretty silly, doesn't it? Well, that's basically what this issue is like. It's made pretty clear that the box is basically a doorstop without the service.
Can some one make something like a TiVo that works without the monthly service? Sure, but that's not current business model for this sort of thing. Note that UltimateTV does even less without the monthly service. While I understand that folks WANT to be able to do this stuff without paying a service, the facts are that product doesn't yet exist.
Actually, it would mean they care what their non-customers think.... TiVo doesn't make any money on selling the units, they make their money on the subscription.
This is a valid concern if it requirements to convict some one were simple and strictly tech based. They're not. An honor trial is a pretty elaborate process. I would suspect it's unlikely that an unwitting "source" of the copied material would be convicted. UVA's honor system has a single sanction: expulsion. As a result, it doesn't require too much doubt in the minds of the jury to avoid conviction.
The honor system at UVA is student run so the folks that get the money don't control it (in theory, there's always possibily of behind the scenes manipulation by the suits).
I think another big bonus to curses is that it's most likely already going to work on any flavor of *nix or terminal type you encounter. There are certainly newer and fancier libs than curses, but if you need portability across OS and possibly terminals, it's hard to argue with curses.
They have. For starters, there are other mailbox formats that have advatanges over the Berkeley standard. However, the Berkeley one has the advantage of inerita since it's the most common.
If you want to stick with the "standard" standard, you can use the Content-Length: header, which removes the need to quote lines starting with From. Of course, not everything supports it.
How humans do it doesn't mean much in the way that a computer does it. Humans and computers have very different strengths and weaknesses in their "brains". The computer can manage a very large search tree without any problems. The human can't and doesn't maintain search tree anywhere near the size that a computer can.
On the otherhand, the human is a great pattern matcher and can see that certain moves aren't even worth considering very quickly whereas the computer is "stupid" and has to search the tree to see the move is no good.
They way a top level chess player goes about move selection is very different than the way a top level chess program does move selection.
If player says something like "mate in 5 moves", they've seen a forced checkmate..... It's not showing the other guy the strategy, it's saying "Ok, I can see a forced end to this".
It can be argued that giving all the info to the human is simply slanting the playing field the other way. Certainly in human vs. human, the players will study how the other guy has played and try to come up with opening lines that play against the other guys weakness. However, as "the other guy" you do some of the same stuff, such as plan to play something you haven't done before so your opponents study is less useful.
If one player is a computer, it's a little different. It's a bit easier for a human to change their style of play. It's not so easy for the computer (at least, it's not been so easy for the majority of the chess programs written to date, it's certainly possible to make a program that could change styles).
The problem is that current crop of chess programs aren't really "AI". They're (mostly) brute forcers that simply search the move tree.
There's a little "AI" element in the evalatution function that decides if one position is better than another, but it's not much.
For me it was very much a case of comparing Ruby to Python and finding compelling arguments to use Ruby.
In my opinion, Ruby is what many pro-Python folks claim Python to be: a better OO alternative to Perl. I find Python syntax painful at best. Whereas I feel comfortable with Ruby.
It's actually the name of Sushi restaurant the developers frequent....
The threat "you will have to recompile" due to OS fragmentation is pretty hollow since you have to recompile anyway if you're dealing with multiple hardware platforms. Sun should know better, it's not like I can compile something on Solaris X86 and have it run on a Sparc. No matter what happens with OS fragmentation, I think it's safe to say that the hardware will be fragmented for a long time to come.
What about them? This was talking about IBM's 'leg up' on the other partners in Monterey. None of of those companies are part of Monterey.