A perfect example. X11's key design feature is something that does not apply 99% of the time. It was a total and utter mistake from the days of many users connected to one mainframe or minicomputer. It is a non-issue for desktop use. Microsoft and Apple understand this. You design for the common case.
Every time I see people dismiss the X client/server model I have to laugh. What do you do with your PC, run it in isolation in your parents basement?
I develop software for Solaris and Linux from my Linux box using X. I use network transparency 100% of the time and so do all of the developers I work with. When I get home I can use X to develop software on my server from my laptop, and to run XMMS from the PC hooked up to my stereo to play music.
That silly network transparency feature has lead to millions of dollars in sales in the Windows world (Citrix, Windows Terminal Server) when people realized that running your desktop over the network is essential.
The previous poster is right; those who don't understand X are doomed to re-implement it - poorly.
ESD damage *does* happen with a surprisingly high frequency when you handle components unsafely, but you don't notice because the damage takes time to show
I used to work at a semiconductor manufacturing facility once upon a time. Let me just say that this is 100% correct.
My employer spent a lot of money on ESD prevention because ESD errors were the worst kind of errors. Sometimes the chip would fail catastrophically, but usually it would pass probe and test and get shipped, only to fail prematurely in the field (latent failure). This is obviously much more expensive than finding the problem before the device ships.
Another common misconception is that you need to feel the ESD charge - like walking across a carpet in sock feet and touching a doorknob - in order for damage to occur. This is false - most electronic components can be damaged at a much smaller voltage than you can feel in your body.
My best advice is that simple ESD precautions like a wriststrap are cheap, so use them.
or resorted to www.gamecopyworld.com for a no-CD crack. In the end he chose the latter option, but he told me that he somehow feels like a software pirate even though he paid real money for the game
I run Windows on my gaming machine, and I don't have a problem shelling out for games that I like to play.
However, even when I own a legit copy of the game I prefer to get the No-CD crack when I can. I hate trying to find the right CD and putting it in every time I want to play a different game.
I call BS. If you are going to have a look at US foreign policy, there are lots of real things to be critical of. So why does every 2-bit critic of this war feel the need to make things up?
helicopters provided by the United States
Wrong. Check out the helicopters on the Iraqi TO&E. Russian. I'd love to find out who started this myth of the US providing the Iraqis weapons. Almost everything they deploy is Russian.
spraying gas provided by the United States
http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/research/factsheet-19 84.html points to the Russians as the most likely supplier, and mentions accusations against the French and Germans too. The US did sell Iraq some biological agents like anthrax in the 1980s, which have civillian uses. Considering Iraq's past use of chemical and biological weapons this was pretty stupid. However, it wan't anthrax that was used on the Kurds - most likely mustard gas that was never supplied by the US.
ordered by a dictator who was placed into power by the United States
More unsubstantied crap. Hussein's rise to power has nothing to do with the US.
Here's an idea: try defending your anti-war beliefs without resorting to outright lies, ok?
I run Linux on my laptop, so I know where you are coming from.
I would imagine that RedHat Enterprise WS would run on your laptop OK, but it would take quite a bit more work (read: cost) on HPs part to support it officially. For example, RedHat 8 installs without a hitch on my older Dell, but I installed it on a new HP (Compaq) laptop for a friend and I had to patch the kernel, pass bootparms to the kernel through grub, etc. etc. to get it working.
My guess is that if people start buying Linux workstations from them they will start supporting some laptops, but I wouldn't expect that right away.
I have already said this, but this announcement is not aimed at selling Linux on HP hardware to Joe consumer. They are selling/supporting the Entrerprise versions of RedHat that are aimed at corporate accounts.
"The Red Hat operating systems covered by this agreement include Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS, used in high-end servers for demanding tasks such as database and enterprise applications; Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES, used in smaller, departmental servers, such as mail, Web and print servers; and Red Hat Enterprise WS, used in workstations."
CompUSA will still just be selling HP home PCs bundled with WinXP home. This is for commercial accounts who want RedHat Linux with their HP servers or workstations and are prepared to pay for it.
It already talks to Evolution, and I am working on an Opie/Zaurus plugin right now. The version in CVS is already partially working - hopefully within a few weeks it will be useable for everyday synching.
You don't say what language you are using, but I will assume C/C++ here...
no context-sensitive help
You use the context sensitive help in your IDE regularly? What for?
no organized documentation
man
intellisense
I have no idea what this is.
no autocompletion, and having to resort to home-brewed makefiles
There are IDEs for Linux that have autocompletion. You should check out Anjuta or KDevelop for GNOME and KDE respectively. Makefiles are a powerful tool, but it you don't want to bother to read the freely available docs, Anjuta and KDevelop will generate Makefiles (using automake) for you. You could even check out automake, autoconf and libtool yourself.
My only web access to the time was lynx, and I had to dial in to my university's network to get it. So, I downloaded Mosaic to my home PC and created HTML pages on my HD and viewed them on Mosaic to see how cool it would be.
Then my university started offering SLIP dial-up and I was all set. I could surf the web using Mosaic from my home PC!:)
1. Closing a tab takes you onto the previous tab you were viewing, not the physically next tab. (Logical tab stack)
I can't say as I ever wanted this, but it might be useful once you try it.
2. You can drag and drop tabs to rearrange them.
Galeon (my browser of choice) does this. I find its tab handling generally superior - for example, I love having the "close" X appear on each tab, rather than only for the active tab.
Re:Don't know your history, do you?
on
Building the A380
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Soviet Suffered 13.6 million military casualties... and more than 30 times the number of americans troops lost(300,000)
I wonder whay that is? The Soviets were fighting tooth and nail against the Germans since 1941 - the Americans did not get involved in ground fighting until North Africa in 1942, and that was a comparatively tiny commitment. The Soviets had plenty of people to spare, so they exchanged blood for more time to prepare their reserves. Soldiers were sometimes sent into combat without traning and without a personal weapon. Penal battalions were used to clear minefields by stepping on mines. Millions of Soviet prisoners that ended up in German hands also perished in labour camps, fighting ("Hiwis") for the Germans or were liquidated by Stalin's regime after the war (becoming an enemy prisoner was a capital offense).
There is no doubt that the Soviets suffered tremendous casualties during the war - by far the most of any nation. However, your implication that 30X the casulaties implies 30X the effort is ridiculous.
Where do you think Germany lost the bulk of its troops? Thank you Soviet Union, for getting rid of the nazi menace.
Germany did indeed lose the bulk of its troops on the Eastern front. However, it isn't like the numbers in the West were minisule - the fall of Tunisia in 1943, France in 1944 and the Ruhr in 1945 were all German defeats at the hands of the Americans and British that were at least as catastrophic as Stalingrad.
And let us not forget there are other contributions to victory besides the killing infantry. Who destroyed the most German aircraft? Ships? U-boats? Industrial capacity and oil refining? It wasn't the Russians. Who knocked Italy out of the war and forced the Germans to expend troops occupying and fighting there? Who had the means to project power and keep first-line German formations deployed in theatres they would never fight in (e.g. the Balkans)? Also not the Russians. How many billions did the US expend in lend-lease aid (food and military equipment) for the USSR?
The point is that it took a combined effort from the Soviets, Americans, British, Canadians, French, Australians, etc. to destroy Nazi Germany. To imply otherwise is assinine.
As for the US, its true that your presense probably have saved us from a communist takeover. So thank you US of A for that. Wether that is a good thing or not is debatable.
This is probably the most ignorant and disgusting comment I have ever seen. I'll tell you what - go read up on Stalin, on how many of his own people he had murdered (hint: millions) or imprisioned (hint: millions more) and get back to me on how "debatable" that is.
Many thanks to Roblimo for setting this up and to Prof. Moglen for responding to the questions.
Re:H2 is NOT a just Tahoe with ugly cladding
on
Buy a Segway... Please
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
recently on Car and Driver Television (on TNN?) they did a comparison of the H2 vs. the Hummer
Don't buy too much into shows like "Car & Driver television" (do they ever give a car a bad review?).
The conclusion was the H2 provided 80% of the capability of the Hummer
The H2 has nothing in common with the H1 besides the name, and the H2 is based off of the Tahoe. No wide wheel base, run-flat capability, engine snorkel. Plastic bumper bits and body cladding. Heck, even a locking rear differential is optional on the H2.
at 50% of the price.. with much more comfort.
No argument there. The H2 is a "luxury SUV" with heated leather seats, sunroof, etc. - something the H1 never claimed to be.
The Hummer folks kept a very close eye on GM to make sure they weren't tarnishing their name.
I call BS here. GM purchased the naming rights from AM General. They took a Tahoe and made the body look as much like the H1 as possible - even fake air intakes and fake lift hooks. Expect to see more of this in the future - the public assoicates the "Hummer" with a quasi-exotic military vehicle. Now that GM has the name they can re-body existing vehicles and call them a "Hummer", hoping to market them on the name recognition. Which is exactly what they have done with the H2.
What's wrong with the Hummer H2, and what about it would make the buyer an idiot?
Well, we are offtopic here, but since you asked...
The H2 is a Chevy Tahoe in some fancy body cladding that they are charging twice the money for. It doesn't have half of the offroad capabilities of the real Hummer (HMMWV), which was selected by the U.S. military because it was the best wheeled offroad vehicle they could get.
So, the people who are buying the H2 are doing it for the look-cool factor, but all they are getting is a minivan that uses three times as much gas. Sure, people might buy the original Hummer for the look-cool factor too, but at least they are getting the real deal.
fsn stands for "file system navigator" - you can still get it from SGI here.
You need an old version of IRIX to run it (5.3) and I remember doing so back in the day. Basically you can "fly" through the filesystem hierarchy, and the vertical bars are the sizes of the files, colors are for age and the height of the base is the size of the directory.
Nothing you can't accomplish with du and ls, but great for impressing people in a movie:-)
The person who invented Unix is doing what the rest of the world does - use a desktop computer and desktop software that actually works
I'm glad Dennis Ritchie validated your view of the world for you.
He uses Windows as an X-terminal and for web browsing and Office. Big deal - personally I think he is nuts since my favourite web browser, Galeon runs on Linux, and Linux makes a much better X client than Exceed running on NT. I use OpenOffice, and on the rare occasion I need to use MS Office I can fire it up in vmware.
That is what makes a productive and useful tool for me. But hey, I'm not Dennis Ritchie, so what do I know?
You can tell Java not to check the cert when using https. In other words, the https connection will encrypt the data over the connection but you know nothing about the authenticity of the endpoint.
If you are running a point-to-point system in a controlled environment, this isn't too big of a deal.
I can't remember the exact Java API used to get it to ignore the cert, but I was able to look it up when I had to do it about a year ago.
the Canadian Copyright Board is not a bunch of dimwits or lackeys
I know the copyright board didn't pass the law, but the CCB are the ones who allowed the current ridiculous scheme to be put in place. I don't care if they reduced the amount requested by the record companies - the fact that I have to pay a flat-rate levy on CD-Rs and the money just disappears into a black hole is a farce.
If the CCB wants to show that they aren't a bunch of lackeys, they will turn down the current proposed increases, and repeal the previous levy too. From what I understand, this is within their power.
I wrote my (Canadian Alliance) MP about this issue, and he replied that they will be opposing the increases. Hopefully they have enough clout to do something about it.
More information on what is wrong with this whole levy system can be found here. If you want to check out the propoganda put out by the record industry group, you can check out their website too, where they freely admit that they have taken in $28M of our money, but have not give a cent out to any of the artists that are supposed to benefit from this screwed-up system. Nice, isn't it?
I'll confirm this one. I used to work for a small software consulting company, and we would sometimes get work from that was supposed to be done by a big consulting company but had been screwed up. Inevitably, this was exactly what had been done - the client had been impressed with the guys in the $5000 suits, but the people doing the coding had no understanding of the design and produced garbage. This obviously did not happen every time, but we were called in to clean up the mess more than once.
Slashdot Mirror
A perfect example. X11's key design feature is something that does not apply 99% of the time. It was a total and utter mistake from the days of many users connected to one mainframe or minicomputer. It is a non-issue for desktop use. Microsoft and Apple understand this. You design for the common case.
Every time I see people dismiss the X client/server model I have to laugh. What do you do with your PC, run it in isolation in your parents basement?
I develop software for Solaris and Linux from my Linux box using X. I use network transparency 100% of the time and so do all of the developers I work with. When I get home I can use X to develop software on my server from my laptop, and to run XMMS from the PC hooked up to my stereo to play music.
That silly network transparency feature has lead to millions of dollars in sales in the Windows world (Citrix, Windows Terminal Server) when people realized that running your desktop over the network is essential.
The previous poster is right; those who don't understand X are doomed to re-implement it - poorly.
XP EULA protects rights of developers at expense of users
XP EULA protects rights of Microsoft at the expense of users and 3rd party developers.
Great if you are a MSFT shareholder, but does nothing for average users or developers.
If you want to sync with Evolution, you should check out MultiSync.
I am a developer, currently writing a plugin for Zaurus/Opie devices. MultiSync already has an Evolution plugin that works well.
If you are interested in writing a plugin for PHPGroupware, you should drop by the devel mailing list.
ESD damage *does* happen with a surprisingly high frequency when you handle components unsafely, but you don't notice because the damage takes time to show
I used to work at a semiconductor manufacturing facility once upon a time. Let me just say that this is 100% correct.
My employer spent a lot of money on ESD prevention because ESD errors were the worst kind of errors. Sometimes the chip would fail catastrophically, but usually it would pass probe and test and get shipped, only to fail prematurely in the field (latent failure). This is obviously much more expensive than finding the problem before the device ships.
Another common misconception is that you need to feel the ESD charge - like walking across a carpet in sock feet and touching a doorknob - in order for damage to occur. This is false - most electronic components can be damaged at a much smaller voltage than you can feel in your body.
My best advice is that simple ESD precautions like a wriststrap are cheap, so use them.
or resorted to www.gamecopyworld.com for a no-CD crack. In the end he chose the latter option, but he told me that he somehow feels like a software pirate even though he paid real money for the game
I run Windows on my gaming machine, and I don't have a problem shelling out for games that I like to play.
However, even when I own a legit copy of the game I prefer to get the No-CD crack when I can. I hate trying to find the right CD and putting it in every time I want to play a different game.
I call BS. If you are going to have a look at US foreign policy, there are lots of real things to be critical of. So why does every 2-bit critic of this war feel the need to make things up?
helicopters provided by the United States
Wrong. Check out the helicopters on the Iraqi TO&E. Russian. I'd love to find out who started this myth of the US providing the Iraqis weapons. Almost everything they deploy is Russian.
spraying gas provided by the United States
http://projects.sipri.se/cbw/research/factsheet-19 84.html points to the Russians as the most likely supplier, and mentions accusations against the French and Germans too. The US did sell Iraq some biological agents like anthrax in the 1980s, which have civillian uses. Considering Iraq's past use of chemical and biological weapons this was pretty stupid. However, it wan't anthrax that was used on the Kurds - most likely mustard gas that was never supplied by the US.
ordered by a dictator who was placed into power by the United States
More unsubstantied crap. Hussein's rise to power has nothing to do with the US.
Here's an idea: try defending your anti-war beliefs without resorting to outright lies, ok?
That woooshing noise is the sound of the joke flying over your head.
I run Linux on my laptop, so I know where you are coming from.
I would imagine that RedHat Enterprise WS would run on your laptop OK, but it would take quite a bit more work (read: cost) on HPs part to support it officially. For example, RedHat 8 installs without a hitch on my older Dell, but I installed it on a new HP (Compaq) laptop for a friend and I had to patch the kernel, pass bootparms to the kernel through grub, etc. etc. to get it working.
My guess is that if people start buying Linux workstations from them they will start supporting some laptops, but I wouldn't expect that right away.
I have already said this, but this announcement is not aimed at selling Linux on HP hardware to Joe consumer. They are selling/supporting the Entrerprise versions of RedHat that are aimed at corporate accounts.
"The Red Hat operating systems covered by this agreement include Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS, used in high-end servers for demanding tasks such as database and enterprise applications; Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES, used in smaller, departmental servers, such as mail, Web and print servers; and Red Hat Enterprise WS, used in workstations."
CompUSA will still just be selling HP home PCs bundled with WinXP home. This is for commercial accounts who want RedHat Linux with their HP servers or workstations and are prepared to pay for it.and future goal of Evolution support
For GNOME users, you can check out multisync.
It already talks to Evolution, and I am working on an Opie/Zaurus plugin right now. The version in CVS is already partially working - hopefully within a few weeks it will be useable for everyday synching.
You don't say what language you are using, but I will assume C/C++ here...
no context-sensitive help
You use the context sensitive help in your IDE regularly? What for?
no organized documentation
man
intellisense
I have no idea what this is.
no autocompletion, and having to resort to home-brewed makefiles
There are IDEs for Linux that have autocompletion. You should check out Anjuta or KDevelop for GNOME and KDE respectively. Makefiles are a powerful tool, but it you don't want to bother to read the freely available docs, Anjuta and KDevelop will generate Makefiles (using automake) for you. You could even check out automake, autoconf and libtool yourself.
My only web access to the time was lynx, and I had to dial in to my university's network to get it. So, I downloaded Mosaic to my home PC and created HTML pages on my HD and viewed them on Mosaic to see how cool it would be.
Then my university started offering SLIP dial-up and I was all set. I could surf the web using Mosaic from my home PC! :)
1. Closing a tab takes you onto the previous tab you were viewing, not the physically next tab. (Logical tab stack)
I can't say as I ever wanted this, but it might be useful once you try it.
2. You can drag and drop tabs to rearrange them.
Galeon (my browser of choice) does this. I find its tab handling generally superior - for example, I love having the "close" X appear on each tab, rather than only for the active tab.
Soviet Suffered 13.6 million military casualties ... and more than 30 times the number of americans troops lost(300,000)
I wonder whay that is? The Soviets were fighting tooth and nail against the Germans since 1941 - the Americans did not get involved in ground fighting until North Africa in 1942, and that was a comparatively tiny commitment. The Soviets had plenty of people to spare, so they exchanged blood for more time to prepare their reserves. Soldiers were sometimes sent into combat without traning and without a personal weapon. Penal battalions were used to clear minefields by stepping on mines. Millions of Soviet prisoners that ended up in German hands also perished in labour camps, fighting ("Hiwis") for the Germans or were liquidated by Stalin's regime after the war (becoming an enemy prisoner was a capital offense).
There is no doubt that the Soviets suffered tremendous casualties during the war - by far the most of any nation. However, your implication that 30X the casulaties implies 30X the effort is ridiculous.
Where do you think Germany lost the bulk of its troops? Thank you Soviet Union, for getting rid of the nazi menace.
Germany did indeed lose the bulk of its troops on the Eastern front. However, it isn't like the numbers in the West were minisule - the fall of Tunisia in 1943, France in 1944 and the Ruhr in 1945 were all German defeats at the hands of the Americans and British that were at least as catastrophic as Stalingrad.
And let us not forget there are other contributions to victory besides the killing infantry. Who destroyed the most German aircraft? Ships? U-boats? Industrial capacity and oil refining? It wasn't the Russians. Who knocked Italy out of the war and forced the Germans to expend troops occupying and fighting there? Who had the means to project power and keep first-line German formations deployed in theatres they would never fight in (e.g. the Balkans)? Also not the Russians. How many billions did the US expend in lend-lease aid (food and military equipment) for the USSR?
The point is that it took a combined effort from the Soviets, Americans, British, Canadians, French, Australians, etc. to destroy Nazi Germany. To imply otherwise is assinine.
As for the US, its true that your presense probably have saved us from a communist takeover. So thank you US of A for that. Wether that is a good thing or not is debatable.
This is probably the most ignorant and disgusting comment I have ever seen. I'll tell you what - go read up on Stalin, on how many of his own people he had murdered (hint: millions) or imprisioned (hint: millions more) and get back to me on how "debatable" that is.
Indeed.
Many thanks to Roblimo for setting this up and to Prof. Moglen for responding to the questions.
recently on Car and Driver Television (on TNN?) they did a comparison of the H2 vs. the Hummer
Don't buy too much into shows like "Car & Driver television" (do they ever give a car a bad review?).
The conclusion was the H2 provided 80% of the capability of the Hummer
The H2 has nothing in common with the H1 besides the name, and the H2 is based off of the Tahoe. No wide wheel base, run-flat capability, engine snorkel. Plastic bumper bits and body cladding. Heck, even a locking rear differential is optional on the H2.
at 50% of the price.. with much more comfort.
No argument there. The H2 is a "luxury SUV" with heated leather seats, sunroof, etc. - something the H1 never claimed to be.
The Hummer folks kept a very close eye on GM to make sure they weren't tarnishing their name.
I call BS here. GM purchased the naming rights from AM General. They took a Tahoe and made the body look as much like the H1 as possible - even fake air intakes and fake lift hooks. Expect to see more of this in the future - the public assoicates the "Hummer" with a quasi-exotic military vehicle. Now that GM has the name they can re-body existing vehicles and call them a "Hummer", hoping to market them on the name recognition. Which is exactly what they have done with the H2.
What's wrong with the Hummer H2, and what about it would make the buyer an idiot?
Well, we are offtopic here, but since you asked...
The H2 is a Chevy Tahoe in some fancy body cladding that they are charging twice the money for. It doesn't have half of the offroad capabilities of the real Hummer (HMMWV), which was selected by the U.S. military because it was the best wheeled offroad vehicle they could get.
So, the people who are buying the H2 are doing it for the look-cool factor, but all they are getting is a minivan that uses three times as much gas. Sure, people might buy the original Hummer for the look-cool factor too, but at least they are getting the real deal.
fsn stands for "file system navigator" - you can still get it from SGI here.
You need an old version of IRIX to run it (5.3) and I remember doing so back in the day. Basically you can "fly" through the filesystem hierarchy, and the vertical bars are the sizes of the files, colors are for age and the height of the base is the size of the directory.
Nothing you can't accomplish with du and ls, but great for impressing people in a movie :-)
Gimli was an old RCAF training base
Indeed, my dad did his advanced jet training in a T-33 out of Gimli in the early 1970s.
The person who invented Unix is doing what the rest of the world does - use a desktop computer and desktop software that actually works
I'm glad Dennis Ritchie validated your view of the world for you.
He uses Windows as an X-terminal and for web browsing and Office. Big deal - personally I think he is nuts since my favourite web browser, Galeon runs on Linux, and Linux makes a much better X client than Exceed running on NT. I use OpenOffice, and on the rare occasion I need to use MS Office I can fire it up in vmware.
That is what makes a productive and useful tool for me. But hey, I'm not Dennis Ritchie, so what do I know?
You can tell Java not to check the cert when using https. In other words, the https connection will encrypt the data over the connection but you know nothing about the authenticity of the endpoint.
If you are running a point-to-point system in a controlled environment, this isn't too big of a deal.
I can't remember the exact Java API used to get it to ignore the cert, but I was able to look it up when I had to do it about a year ago.
Indeed. Wilford Brimley can be awfully intimidating :-)
the Canadian Copyright Board is not a bunch of dimwits or lackeys
I know the copyright board didn't pass the law, but the CCB are the ones who allowed the current ridiculous scheme to be put in place. I don't care if they reduced the amount requested by the record companies - the fact that I have to pay a flat-rate levy on CD-Rs and the money just disappears into a black hole is a farce.
If the CCB wants to show that they aren't a bunch of lackeys, they will turn down the current proposed increases, and repeal the previous levy too. From what I understand, this is within their power.
I wrote my (Canadian Alliance) MP about this issue, and he replied that they will be opposing the increases. Hopefully they have enough clout to do something about it.
More information on what is wrong with this whole levy system can be found here. If you want to check out the propoganda put out by the record industry group, you can check out their website too, where they freely admit that they have taken in $28M of our money, but have not give a cent out to any of the artists that are supposed to benefit from this screwed-up system. Nice, isn't it?
I'll confirm this one. I used to work for a small software consulting company, and we would sometimes get work from that was supposed to be done by a big consulting company but had been screwed up. Inevitably, this was exactly what had been done - the client had been impressed with the guys in the $5000 suits, but the people doing the coding had no understanding of the design and produced garbage. This obviously did not happen every time, but we were called in to clean up the mess more than once.
It all stems from the fact that consulting doesn't scale well, no matter what continent you live on.