However according to Hommey, these new faster and less sluggish builds of Firefox for Linux will be available only from Firefox 6 onwards and we expect the first beta of Firefox 6 to available only by September - October 2011.
So, Firefox 1.0 came out in Fall 2004, and only in Fall 2011 will the Linux version be as fast as the Windows version?
Only more evidence that Linux on the desktop is still a toy for masochistic nerds.
So, don't buy music if you don't like the terms under which it is sold. It's their product, and if they want to sell it under onerous conditions and make their customers "gamble", that's their right. If you don't like it, don't buy their music.
Not liking the terms under which a product is sold does not entitle you to pirate it. A return policy is not a civil right.
You couldn't hide a Mac Pro behind a counter, they're enormous. I guess you could if you really cared to, but come on - it's pretty obvious the GP looked into an Apple Store, saw a bunch of iMacs, and came away with the wrong impression...
What, you saw a bunch of iMacs? Those are the computers - that slab of aluminum is all there is. There's nothing hidden under the counter.
The only computer Apple makes that they could conceivably hide is the Mac Mini, and there's no reason to - it's about the size of four CD jewel cases. It's small enough that you might be excused for not noticing it - but no Apple Stores hide them.
Why is this getting so much press? The maker of an expensive, cheesy robot dinosaur toy files for bankruptcy. What a shocker. This should be a 1-paragraph blurb tucked in some back corner of the Wall Street Journal, but instead I've been seeing it on every website I check for nearly a week.
On another note - who in their right mind would pay $300 for this thing? Who in their right mind would think someone would pay $300 for this thing?
Sorry, but you're quite wrong here. Most filesystems can be configured at mount-time to behave in the manner you describe, but by default, they may defer writes to the disk for upwards of several seconds.
This improves performance tremendously, and the resulting unreliability is simply a tradeoff that is required to deal with what are fundamentally very slow devices.
You do not want the filesystem to striving to dump all data to disk as fast as possible, all the time - for instance, it doesn't really matter if you lose some items from your browser cache during a crash. So, the filesystem can defer writing new files in your cache until the disk is idle in between some more important operations, and the only effect you'll notice is vastly improved performance.
That's not a problem, that's a feature. What, you want a window manager or something? Most people don't want to worry about process management on their freaking phone.
If a developer wants to build an application that remembers where the user was when it last closed and returns to that spot when it launches again, that's certainly doable on the iPhone.
What an idiot - doesn't he realize how wonderful it is that technology makes it possible for us to avoid paying the authors we like as much money as we used to?
A Mac is a genuine Unix workstation that is much easier to administer, and has much better software and hardware support than Linux.
I can run basically every Linux/Unix application on my Mac, both command-line and GUI, while not having to worry about wireless networking drivers, printer support, power management / sleep support on my laptop, getting accelerated 3D drivers working, or any of the other minor hassles that are involved with setting up and maintaining a Linux install.
If you walk into the computer science department at MIT, basically all the faculty have a Mac, and fully half the students do. These people are not buying Macs because they saw a cool ad on the bus - they're buying them because a Mac is the best tool available.
The argument that Macs are just expensive, "designer" PCs that look pretty and sell well because Apple has marketed them well doesn't hold water. Yes, they have nice hardware, and a clean, polished, slick UI, and that does make them more pleasant to work with than some blob of Dell plastic running Vista - but they have the functionality to back up their appearance, as well.
Yeah, they're more expensive. If you value your time at all, you should realize that spending an extra $100 on a Mac is well worth it if it improves your productivity. Hell, if you ever spend two hours fighting with some weird issue on your Linux box, it's no longer saved you any money. You know how long I've spent fighting with the OS to get my wireless working, or hibernate working, or whatever, in Mac OS X, in the five years I've been using a Mac? Zero. I'm not exaggerating. It lives up to the hype. It "just works". It gets out of my way and lets me get things done.
Actually, I call that an extremely unimpressive demo. It is a lot of technology with little purpose. In that entire video, what are they doing? Just spinning a bunch of pictures around.
Without a compelling application that requires that interface, it's a just a big, expensive toy.
I have the exact same issues with my 2.4 GHz MacBook Pro. I did an "archive and install" from 10.4, but I'm thinking of doing a clean reinstall and seeing what happens. A friend of mine with the exact same laptop upgraded to Leopard and is having no problems, so I'm guessing I have some kind of crap third-party drivers, kernel extensions, or something on my system that is screwing things up.
MIPS stands for millions of instructions per second, not mega-instructions per second. We'd have to talk about billions of instructions per second, or BIPS, and that sounds lame.
Oh, and by the way - solar power gets energy from the sun. And you know what the sun runs on? Nuclear fusion! Why not skip the inefficient solar panels and just go right to the source?
"That'll work for a good long while. But in Total Reality we are simply going to have to make OTHER PLANS. We live in a high energy society thanks to fossil fuels. This level of energy consumption is not sustainable, and I would argue, not desirable. We need to adjust our direction of civilisation away from more toys and gadgets to higher quality human interactions and more meaningful labour."
It is perfectly sustainable. Nuclear power, first through fusion and then through fission, is perfectly capable of sustaining our energy consumption for millenia, if we can just get over our stupid, misinformed objections to it.
Whether the society that results from this energy consumption is desirable is another question. Personally, I'm quite enjoying it, but you are certainly free to go live on a farm in Botswana without electricity, medicine, or machinery, and enjoy your higher-quality human interaction. Or was that not what you meant?
Nuclear power has always been safe, and the technological developments of the past twenty years have made it even safer still.
The worst nuclear accident in the Western world harmed no one. The Chernobyl accident happened because the Soviet engineers who designed and ran the plant were idiots.
Oh, for fuck's sake. Everything will eventually run out. At some point, the sun will go dark, and even your "renewable" sources like wind and solar will be useless. Hell, hydroelectric power isn't renewable either - it's slowly sapping energy from the moon.
Nuclear fusion, which we will figure out sometime in the next few decades, will provide enough energy for millenia. That's fine for me.
It was pretty clear to me that he died. Remember the flashback in the previous episode, where Bobby says "You never even hear it when it happens, do you?" Implying everything just goes black - you're dead before you even hear the gun being fired. Well, that's exactly what happened. The last thing Tony say was Meadow walking in the door.
Earlier in the episode, he was eating an orange, which is a reference to the Godfather files that has been made before in the series. They signify death, don't they?
I thought it was an excellent episode. It would be so cliche if they just showed him getting his head blown off, or even ended with a black screen and gunshot. If you pay attention, you pretty much know what happened. But you have to think about it.
Slashdot Mirror
However according to Hommey, these new faster and less sluggish builds of Firefox for Linux will be available only from Firefox 6 onwards and we expect the first beta of Firefox 6 to available only by September - October 2011.
So, Firefox 1.0 came out in Fall 2004, and only in Fall 2011 will the Linux version be as fast as the Windows version?
Only more evidence that Linux on the desktop is still a toy for masochistic nerds.
So, don't buy music if you don't like the terms under which it is sold. It's their product, and if they want to sell it under onerous conditions and make their customers "gamble", that's their right. If you don't like it, don't buy their music.
Not liking the terms under which a product is sold does not entitle you to pirate it. A return policy is not a civil right.
You couldn't hide a Mac Pro behind a counter, they're enormous. I guess you could if you really cared to, but come on - it's pretty obvious the GP looked into an Apple Store, saw a bunch of iMacs, and came away with the wrong impression...
What, you saw a bunch of iMacs? Those are the computers - that slab of aluminum is all there is. There's nothing hidden under the counter.
The only computer Apple makes that they could conceivably hide is the Mac Mini, and there's no reason to - it's about the size of four CD jewel cases. It's small enough that you might be excused for not noticing it - but no Apple Stores hide them.
"Sage has similar capabilities to Mathematica including the separation of client and server for example."
Yeah, forget all that math shit, the client-server separation is the hardest and most important part to get right.
Why is this getting so much press? The maker of an expensive, cheesy robot dinosaur toy files for bankruptcy. What a shocker. This should be a 1-paragraph blurb tucked in some back corner of the Wall Street Journal, but instead I've been seeing it on every website I check for nearly a week.
On another note - who in their right mind would pay $300 for this thing? Who in their right mind would think someone would pay $300 for this thing?
They made him watch a TV show that makes fun of him. It's a little childish, but I really don't see what's so reprehensible about that.
What else should Apple care about besides my money?
I'm glad they care about getting my money, because it means they will continue to try to build products that I want to pay for.
Sorry, but you're quite wrong here. Most filesystems can be configured at mount-time to behave in the manner you describe, but by default, they may defer writes to the disk for upwards of several seconds.
This improves performance tremendously, and the resulting unreliability is simply a tradeoff that is required to deal with what are fundamentally very slow devices.
http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~enightin/syncio.ps
You do not want the filesystem to striving to dump all data to disk as fast as possible, all the time - for instance, it doesn't really matter if you lose some items from your browser cache during a crash. So, the filesystem can defer writing new files in your cache until the disk is idle in between some more important operations, and the only effect you'll notice is vastly improved performance.
No, it's really distance traveled per unit of money that matters.
Or, per unit of CO2, if you're one of those people.
That's not a problem, that's a feature. What, you want a window manager or something? Most people don't want to worry about process management on their freaking phone.
If a developer wants to build an application that remembers where the user was when it last closed and returns to that spot when it launches again, that's certainly doable on the iPhone.
What an idiot - doesn't he realize how wonderful it is that technology makes it possible for us to avoid paying the authors we like as much money as we used to?
A Mac is a genuine Unix workstation that is much easier to administer, and has much better software and hardware support than Linux.
I can run basically every Linux/Unix application on my Mac, both command-line and GUI, while not having to worry about wireless networking drivers, printer support, power management / sleep support on my laptop, getting accelerated 3D drivers working, or any of the other minor hassles that are involved with setting up and maintaining a Linux install.
If you walk into the computer science department at MIT, basically all the faculty have a Mac, and fully half the students do. These people are not buying Macs because they saw a cool ad on the bus - they're buying them because a Mac is the best tool available.
The argument that Macs are just expensive, "designer" PCs that look pretty and sell well because Apple has marketed them well doesn't hold water. Yes, they have nice hardware, and a clean, polished, slick UI, and that does make them more pleasant to work with than some blob of Dell plastic running Vista - but they have the functionality to back up their appearance, as well.
Yeah, they're more expensive. If you value your time at all, you should realize that spending an extra $100 on a Mac is well worth it if it improves your productivity. Hell, if you ever spend two hours fighting with some weird issue on your Linux box, it's no longer saved you any money. You know how long I've spent fighting with the OS to get my wireless working, or hibernate working, or whatever, in Mac OS X, in the five years I've been using a Mac? Zero. I'm not exaggerating. It lives up to the hype. It "just works". It gets out of my way and lets me get things done.
Actually, I call that an extremely unimpressive demo. It is a lot of technology with little purpose. In that entire video, what are they doing? Just spinning a bunch of pictures around.
Without a compelling application that requires that interface, it's a just a big, expensive toy.
It will be used for nuclear weapons simulations - primarily for investigating issues related to how warheads will perform as they age.
I have the exact same issues with my 2.4 GHz MacBook Pro. I did an "archive and install" from 10.4, but I'm thinking of doing a clean reinstall and seeing what happens. A friend of mine with the exact same laptop upgraded to Leopard and is having no problems, so I'm guessing I have some kind of crap third-party drivers, kernel extensions, or something on my system that is screwing things up.
MIPS stands for millions of instructions per second, not mega-instructions per second. We'd have to talk about billions of instructions per second, or BIPS, and that sounds lame.
Uh, just what is different about the OS X command line and X11 implementation vs. Linux's/Unixes? "Nothing" is the correct answer, in my experience.
Oh, and by the way - solar power gets energy from the sun. And you know what the sun runs on? Nuclear fusion! Why not skip the inefficient solar panels and just go right to the source?
"That'll work for a good long while. But in Total Reality we are simply going to have to make OTHER PLANS. We live in a high energy society thanks to fossil fuels. This level of energy consumption is not sustainable, and I would argue, not desirable. We need to adjust our direction of civilisation away from more toys and gadgets to higher quality human interactions and more meaningful labour."
It is perfectly sustainable. Nuclear power, first through fusion and then through fission, is perfectly capable of sustaining our energy consumption for millenia, if we can just get over our stupid, misinformed objections to it.
Whether the society that results from this energy consumption is desirable is another question. Personally, I'm quite enjoying it, but you are certainly free to go live on a farm in Botswana without electricity, medicine, or machinery, and enjoy your higher-quality human interaction. Or was that not what you meant?
Nuclear power has always been safe, and the technological developments of the past twenty years have made it even safer still.
The worst nuclear accident in the Western world harmed no one. The Chernobyl accident happened because the Soviet engineers who designed and ran the plant were idiots.
Oh, for fuck's sake. Everything will eventually run out. At some point, the sun will go dark, and even your "renewable" sources like wind and solar will be useless. Hell, hydroelectric power isn't renewable either - it's slowly sapping energy from the moon.
Nuclear fusion, which we will figure out sometime in the next few decades, will provide enough energy for millenia. That's fine for me.
It was pretty clear to me that he died. Remember the flashback in the previous episode, where Bobby says "You never even hear it when it happens, do you?" Implying everything just goes black - you're dead before you even hear the gun being fired. Well, that's exactly what happened. The last thing Tony say was Meadow walking in the door.
Earlier in the episode, he was eating an orange, which is a reference to the Godfather files that has been made before in the series. They signify death, don't they?
I thought it was an excellent episode. It would be so cliche if they just showed him getting his head blown off, or even ended with a black screen and gunshot. If you pay attention, you pretty much know what happened. But you have to think about it.
And are you downloading all this stuff over your Verizon Wireless connection?
This article is about their EVDO wireless data service, not DSL or FiOS or something else wired.
Why should it be less money? You're paying for a higher quality file that you can do more things with.