I was in PC World the other day, and started playing with one of those red marble things from Logitech. It was on a tilt.. I spun it.. it shot out and started bouncing down the aisle. =)
I don't know about anyone else, but compared to the GIMP, Photoshop has a much better interface. Although the GIMP is pretty damn similar, subtleties like the keyboard shortcuts were completely missed.
Photoshop's layout of the keyboard shortcuts is incredible... common combinations of shortcuts (eg. F-F-TAB) are designed to be fluid on one hand, etc. That's why so many graphic designers hate upgrading Photoshop -- they change the shortcuts each time round. (I'm still sticking to 4.0.1... 5 is too different!)
Macromedia xRes seemed to be a direct clone UI-wise of Photoshop, and they completely missed the subtleties too.
When the average programmer decides to clone an interface, (eg. FVWM'95 from Win95) I've found they tend to miss the point. It might *look* like the original, but in real use, it's miles off.
The problem comes when you start adding modules to Apache like mod_perl. This is when the forking mechanism really starts to suck. The individual processes can get large, limiting the number of concurrent connected users by memory footprint alone. An Apache fork spends most of it's time in network communication on real WANs in my experience, NOT content retrieval.
What's better is to have a smallish pool of subprocesses and then pass every client to a small, fast, single-forked buffer (an accelerator) so that clients don't sit on the big Apache processes due to slow international network bandwidth. Instead, they talk to the accelerator, which as it is very simple (a straightforward buffer) can take many clients. In effect, you're allowing many many more clients to stay connected to the server concurrently, while using a smaller number of Apache forks to actually construct and arrange the content response.
You can use something like Squid for that, but Squid can be a bit of a monster. I'd like to see a really small non-cacheing accelerator based around a single select(2) loop....?
As far as I know, the architecture for IIS is slightly better in this respect, in that the bit of the server the client listens to is effectively detached from the server thread which builds the response (the big bit).
I might be talking complete balls as I haven't had a chance to play with this structure yet, but I've heard reports that it flies. In which case, it might be a fairer test.
Although I'm on the side of AOL on this one, I think the thing that makes it different for Slashdot is that AOL expected a level of service from their moderators: 4 hours a week plus paperwork time. The penalty clause: loss of the free account.
IIRC, it's not like Slashdot moderation is an obligation. More of a "calling" =) If Rob started making the moderators sign contracts obligating them to do a minimum level of "work", *then* it would make a difference.
I figure 'volunteering' is actually offering and agreeing to provide a service... rather than just doing it.
If I submit a few URLs to a search engine, I'm not agreeing to carry on doing that. Since most search engines are commercial, my adding URLs increases their business value (usually). However, as it's not an obligation, I haven't volunteered or obligated myself to carry on doing it for time immemorial. If I *had* made that kind of commitment, I might have grounds (albeit shaky) to demand compensation.
Hmmm.. 2039. That makes me about 64 years old. About 9 years after my pension matures.
Let's see.. 9 years of Golf, seeing the sights, watching daytime 3D-TV, and complaining about how things were better in my day.
Yep. I'll be (a) bored enough by then, and (b) have the money to take a cruise to the Bahamas and watch the fireworks about three seconds before I'm nuked.
That's if I haven't died of sexual exhaustion (here's hoping), or more likely unfitness and cardiac arrest by then.
Ah well, it's been a hard day. Perhaps I'm being cynical. =)
I just had a horrible thought... Imagine Windows 9x having an enhanced Internet Connection Wizard which will help you register a domain!
I really wouldn't put it past them to do that.
Oooo.. how about: "Corporate Deathmatch: The Battle of the Monopolies! Network Solutions -v- Microsoft Corp." I'd pay money to see that fight. =)
Saw the new logo in use today
on
SGI Name Change
·
· Score: 2
Hmmm.. have you noticed that a lot of the product shots on the website have had the new logo hastily retouched on? I think their GD department need a few lessons in quality retouching. =)
_S_ervers, _G_raphic workstations, and _I_nsights? Pah. No sign of the wireframe cube, though. =(
I used to think that a degree didn't matter in the slightest. However, after working with a number of programmers with no degree (or a completely irrelevent degree), it does seem to make a difference.
Especially if they're in a leadership position, like a team leader or manager. Programming is rarely about coding nowadays, and although I know enough people who spent their early years in their bedrooms coding, I don't know of anyone who spent them learning about software engineering paradigms.
Sure, most of the time at Uni is completely and utterly wasted.. I'm not sure any of the lectures I went to actually taught me anything. In fact, most of them 'un-taught' me. However, the process of doing coursework and team projects taught me a lot more than I thought.
I used to think that a degree didn't matter in the slightest. However, after working with a number of programmers with no degree (or a completely irrelevent degree), it does seem to make a difference.
Especially if they're in a leadership position, like a team leader or manager. Programming is rarely about coding nowadays, and although I know enough people who spent their early years in their bedrooms coding, I don't know of anyone who spent them learning about software engineering paradigms.
Sure, most of the time at Uni is completely and utterly wasted.. I'm not sure any of the lectures I went to actually taught me anything. In fact, most of them 'un-taught' me. However, the process of doing coursework and team projects taught me a lot more than I thought.
Well, if the license was hand-coded into this shorthand, then the ambiguities and the parsing issues would be heavily reduced.
The fact that there can be entirely different interpretations of the same license makes me wonder how many of these licenses have been put together properly. This ambiguity is exactly what such a license coding would try to prevent.
Would it be possible to build an expert system which decides on compliance based on these codes?
Yep.. looks like the same idea! =) Having more than one license, all expressed in completely different ways, all expressed in legalese only, is terrible.
Having lots of different licenses expressed in a uniform way, so you can see at a glance what they mean would help a lot, I think.
Mumbleco Corporation's lawyers won't find a standard license which says exactly how they want to license their new Widget Pro(TM) software. So they'll create their own. If they've got the option of doing that, but in a nice clean uniform agreed way, it's a good compromise.
We can't even hope that all the big players will stick to a single license, so let's not bother.
Hmmm.. As I was saying in an earlier/. discussion.. would it be sensible to have a Standardized License Markup Language? =)
In other words, have all the different features and variations of a license represented like the Geek Code, and then be able to derive legalese and informal descriptions from it. Then a parent website which interprets the license for you, and compares it with other licenses.
The web site would also have a 'Build Your Own License' section for software authors.
What would be most useful would be to have a utility which can compare the license to other licenses and requirements, and tells you how they differ/whether they conform.
Question: is it possible to create a simple question tree (expert system) to decide whether a license is Open Source [with capital letters], or GNU [well, GNU-like], etc. ?
If this all could be done, then what's the point in having a mailing list to harumph about whether licenses conform, when you could just go to "http://www.licenses-r-us.com/", and click on 'Conformity'? =)
Nah.. they should copy something a bit more like the Acorn Risc PC:
This great machine had a polycarbonate slice-based system, where if you ran out of space in the machine, you just took the top panel off, added another slice, and put the top panel back on.
They weren't very pretty as consumer devices, but a cool concept... Check these ones out -- a workstation with a built-in pizza oven and kitchen sink!
What do people hate most about the Microsoft monopoly? Is it that we're forced to use their software, or that we're forced to be screwed by them making us use their BAD software and then pay $$$ for "upgrades"?
Which argument would you prefer (assuming Justice ain't going to do _exactly_ what we want):
"You've got a monopoly, so we're going to make a piss-poor effort to break it which will probably make you more powerful"OR"You've got a monopoly. That means that you've clobbered yourselves with the responsibility to respect your unwilling users."
(1) means Microsoft will get away with it whereas (2) means Microsoft might be allowed to continue the monopoly, but be expected to pass code audits, and to give their upgrades away for free. Oh, and suffer penalties for major problems... Hell, we might even *like* being ruled by Microsoft! Maybe a good heavy dose of accountability would make the situation a lot better.
Yeah, in principle, it would be better to have neither, but in the final analysis, isn't a kind and fair dictator better than a democratic but corrupt leader?
...would not surprise me a bit if FreeBSD hits critical mass in 2-3 years, the way Linux did last year.
I think it might happen sooner than that.. IMHO, FreeBSD doesn't lag behind Linux per se.. more "develop at a more 'patient' rate". The kind of philosophy is "it's better to do it right rather than on time".
I switched to FreeBSD back in the days around Slackware 1, and then I had the recent misfortune to work somewhere with a diehard SuSE zealot as technical director. So I went back to Linux and just got sick of the all the inconsistencies and megabloat. Those are the reasons I hate Windoze. Linux could be the Windows of the future: hate it, but you gotta use it.
How long's it going to be before Linux is one big bloated rolling stone (or avalanche of different stones), mashing everyone in it's way without due regard for whether it's the right direction to roll? Sound familiar? The fat-ass hideous penguin's an apt mascot for it. (Better than a piece of flying double-glazing, though. Damn dangerous that one.)
FreeBSD manages to be stubborn enough to stick when it's the right thing to do. eg. SMP support. "Let's take it nice and easy, and do it right", rather than "Let's throw everything we can think of in." Oh and one organised OS release tree, rather than the pick-n-mix of Linux distributions.
This is not to say there isn't a place for Linux, or even NT. Linux does have better [software|hardware|phonecall] support. It does have a larger user base. It's just that once every intelligent IT manager has finally exorcised NT from important systems, then the holes in Linux might start showing. _Then_ they might ask for a well engineered clean build (poss. one of the BSDs). _Then_ they'll want something better. (HURD? BeOS? Who knows..)
When that happens, FreeBSD might have its day in the limelight. For now, it's benefitting from the low exposure. So much less pressure to poison it with 'must-have's
5-10 years and $350,000? What the f*ck is that? Maybe Microsoft should be slapped with a class action lawsuit for setting up the infrastructure that allowed this virus to spread.
That's like saying Ford should get sued when there's a hit-and-run, or HP getting done when I run out of paper in my printer and miss a deadline, or tobacco manufacturers getting sued when someone dies from smoking Marlboros.
Oh bugger. I just disproved my point. I'll shut up now. =)
Well, the author would decide the options, permanently, and the options could be endless, from "You must distribute the source code" (optional) to "You may only distribute this software on Wednesdays while wearing a blue shirt" (very optional), "You must pay $xxx for the software after xxx days of use" (shareware), "You must send me a postcard from somewhere", "You may not use this in a commercial product", "You may not use this in a commercial product without contacting me first", etc.
The software would compare the license you had designed (and in the case of a user, the license you had retrieved) and describe the nature of the license informally, and show comparisons with other licenses and software, whether it fulfils the requirements of Open Source, whether it includes all of the stipulations of the GPL, etc.
The possibilities are endless.
I'm a programmer, not a lawyer, so I want to tell the site what I mean, and then let it turn it into legalese. I also want my users to see at a glance what I'm getting at with the license and compare it to other software/licenses they know and use, and also have the option to retrieve the full legal document.
How about a web site which gives you a tick-box based license generator:
* You'd select what you want to limit/allow
* It'd read it back to you in a) Formal license form (text file) b) English, with warnings (eg. "You're forcing people to release their own source code here") c) A Geek-code style shorthand
Then, any savvy user could take one glance at the Geek code and understand the restrictions.
"This software is licensed according to the Open Source Modular License (URL here) with the following stipulations to be interpreted as described by the license:
Slashdot Mirror
I was in PC World the other day, and started playing with one of those red marble things from Logitech. It was on a tilt.. I spun it.. it shot out and started bouncing down the aisle. =)
I don't know about anyone else, but compared to the GIMP, Photoshop has a much better interface. Although the GIMP is pretty damn similar, subtleties like the keyboard shortcuts were completely missed.
Photoshop's layout of the keyboard shortcuts is incredible... common combinations of shortcuts (eg. F-F-TAB) are designed to be fluid on one hand, etc. That's why so many graphic designers hate upgrading Photoshop -- they change the shortcuts each time round. (I'm still sticking to 4.0.1... 5 is too different!)
Macromedia xRes seemed to be a direct clone UI-wise of Photoshop, and they completely missed the subtleties too.
When the average programmer decides to clone an interface, (eg. FVWM'95 from Win95) I've found they tend to miss the point. It might *look* like the original, but in real use, it's miles off.
The problem comes when you start adding modules to Apache like mod_perl. This is when the forking mechanism really starts to suck. The individual processes can get large, limiting the number of concurrent connected users by memory footprint alone. An Apache fork spends most of it's time in network communication on real WANs in my experience, NOT content retrieval.
What's better is to have a smallish pool of subprocesses and then pass every client to a small, fast, single-forked buffer (an accelerator) so that clients don't sit on the big Apache processes due to slow international network bandwidth. Instead, they talk to the accelerator, which as it is very simple (a straightforward buffer) can take many clients. In effect, you're allowing many many more clients to stay connected to the server concurrently, while using a smaller number of Apache forks to actually construct and arrange the content response.
You can use something like Squid for that, but Squid can be a bit of a monster. I'd like to see a really small non-cacheing accelerator based around a single select(2) loop....?
As far as I know, the architecture for IIS is slightly better in this respect, in that the bit of the server the client listens to is effectively detached from the server thread which builds the response (the big bit).
I might be talking complete balls as I haven't had a chance to play with this structure yet, but I've heard reports that it flies. In which case, it might be a fairer test.
Although I'm on the side of AOL on this one, I think the thing that makes it different for Slashdot is that AOL expected a level of service from their moderators: 4 hours a week plus paperwork time. The penalty clause: loss of the free account.
IIRC, it's not like Slashdot moderation is an obligation. More of a "calling" =) If Rob started making the moderators sign contracts obligating them to do a minimum level of "work", *then* it would make a difference.
I figure 'volunteering' is actually offering and agreeing to provide a service... rather than just doing it.
If I submit a few URLs to a search engine, I'm not agreeing to carry on doing that. Since most search engines are commercial, my adding URLs increases their business value (usually). However, as it's not an obligation, I haven't volunteered or obligated myself to carry on doing it for time immemorial. If I *had* made that kind of commitment, I might have grounds (albeit shaky) to demand compensation.
Hmmm.. 2039. That makes me about 64 years old. About 9 years after my pension matures.
Let's see.. 9 years of Golf, seeing the sights, watching daytime 3D-TV, and complaining about how things were better in my day.
Yep. I'll be (a) bored enough by then, and (b) have the money to take a cruise to the Bahamas and watch the fireworks about three seconds before I'm nuked.
That's if I haven't died of sexual exhaustion (here's hoping), or more likely unfitness and cardiac arrest by then.
Ah well, it's been a hard day. Perhaps I'm being cynical. =)
I just had a horrible thought... Imagine Windows 9x having an enhanced Internet Connection Wizard which will help you register a domain!
I really wouldn't put it past them to do that.
Oooo.. how about: "Corporate Deathmatch: The Battle of the Monopolies! Network Solutions -v- Microsoft Corp." I'd pay money to see that fight. =)
Hmmm.. have you noticed that a lot of the product shots on the website have had the new logo hastily retouched on? I think their GD department need a few lessons in quality retouching. =)
_S_ervers, _G_raphic workstations, and _I_nsights? Pah. No sign of the wireframe cube, though. =(
I used to think that a degree didn't matter in the slightest. However, after working with a number of programmers with no degree (or a completely irrelevent degree), it does seem to make a difference.
Especially if they're in a leadership position, like a team leader or manager. Programming is rarely about coding nowadays, and although I know enough people who spent their early years in their bedrooms coding, I don't know of anyone who spent them learning about software engineering paradigms.
Sure, most of the time at Uni is completely and utterly wasted.. I'm not sure any of the lectures I went to actually taught me anything. In fact, most of them 'un-taught' me. However, the process of doing coursework and team projects taught me a lot more than I thought.
I used to think that a degree didn't matter in the slightest. However, after working with a number of programmers with no degree (or a completely irrelevent degree), it does seem to make a difference.
Especially if they're in a leadership position, like a team leader or manager. Programming is rarely about coding nowadays, and although I know enough people who spent their early years in their bedrooms coding, I don't know of anyone who spent them learning about software engineering paradigms.
Sure, most of the time at Uni is completely and utterly wasted.. I'm not sure any of the lectures I went to actually taught me anything. In fact, most of them 'un-taught' me. However, the process of doing coursework and team projects taught me a lot more than I thought.
Well, if the license was hand-coded into this shorthand, then the ambiguities and the parsing issues would be heavily reduced.
The fact that there can be entirely different interpretations of the same license makes me wonder how many of these licenses have been put together properly. This ambiguity is exactly what such a license coding would try to prevent.
Would it be possible to build an expert system which decides on compliance based on these codes?
Yep.. looks like the same idea! =) Having more than one license, all expressed in completely different ways, all expressed in legalese only, is terrible.
Having lots of different licenses expressed in a uniform way, so you can see at a glance what they mean would help a lot, I think.
Mumbleco Corporation's lawyers won't find a standard license which says exactly how they want to license their new Widget Pro(TM) software. So they'll create their own. If they've got the option of doing that, but in a nice clean uniform agreed way, it's a good compromise.
We can't even hope that all the big players will stick to a single license, so let's not bother.
Hmmm.. As I was saying in an earlier /. discussion.. would it be sensible to have a Standardized License Markup Language? =)
In other words, have all the different features and variations of a license represented like the Geek Code, and then be able to derive legalese and informal descriptions from it. Then a parent website which interprets the license for you, and compares it with other licenses.
The web site would also have a 'Build Your Own License' section for software authors.
What would be most useful would be to have a utility which can compare the license to other licenses and requirements, and tells you how they differ/whether they conform.
Question: is it possible to create a simple question tree (expert system) to decide whether a license is Open Source [with capital letters], or GNU [well, GNU-like], etc. ?
If this all could be done, then what's the point in having a mailing list to harumph about whether licenses conform, when you could just go to "http://www.licenses-r-us.com/", and click on 'Conformity'? =)
Nah.. they should copy something a bit more like the Acorn Risc PC:
This great machine had a polycarbonate slice-based system, where if you ran out of space in the machine, you just took the top panel off, added another slice, and put the top panel back on.
They weren't very pretty as consumer devices, but a cool concept... Check these ones out -- a workstation with a built-in pizza oven and kitchen sink!
Re: Justice Dept.
What do people hate most about the Microsoft monopoly? Is it that we're forced to use their software, or that we're forced to be screwed by them making us use their BAD software and then pay $$$ for "upgrades"?
Which argument would you prefer (assuming Justice ain't going to do _exactly_ what we want):
"You've got a monopoly, so we're going to make a piss-poor effort to break it which will probably make you more powerful" OR "You've got a monopoly. That means that you've clobbered yourselves with the responsibility to respect your unwilling users."
(1) means Microsoft will get away with it whereas (2) means Microsoft might be allowed to continue the monopoly, but be expected to pass code audits, and to give their upgrades away for free. Oh, and suffer penalties for major problems... Hell, we might even *like* being ruled by Microsoft! Maybe a good heavy dose of accountability would make the situation a lot better.
Yeah, in principle, it would be better to have neither, but in the final analysis, isn't a kind and fair dictator better than a democratic but corrupt leader?
...would not surprise me a bit if FreeBSD hits critical mass in 2-3 years, the way Linux did last year.
I think it might happen sooner than that.. IMHO, FreeBSD doesn't lag behind Linux per se.. more "develop at a more 'patient' rate". The kind of philosophy is "it's better to do it right rather than on time".
I switched to FreeBSD back in the days around Slackware 1, and then I had the recent misfortune to work somewhere with a diehard SuSE zealot as technical director. So I went back to Linux and just got sick of the all the inconsistencies and megabloat. Those are the reasons I hate Windoze. Linux could be the Windows of the future: hate it, but you gotta use it.
How long's it going to be before Linux is one big bloated rolling stone (or avalanche of different stones), mashing everyone in it's way without due regard for whether it's the right direction to roll? Sound familiar? The fat-ass hideous penguin's an apt mascot for it. (Better than a piece of flying double-glazing, though. Damn dangerous that one.)
FreeBSD manages to be stubborn enough to stick when it's the right thing to do. eg. SMP support. "Let's take it nice and easy, and do it right", rather than "Let's throw everything we can think of in." Oh and one organised OS release tree, rather than the pick-n-mix of Linux distributions.
This is not to say there isn't a place for Linux, or even NT. Linux does have better [software|hardware|phonecall] support. It does have a larger user base. It's just that once every intelligent IT manager has finally exorcised NT from important systems, then the holes in Linux might start showing. _Then_ they might ask for a well engineered clean build (poss. one of the BSDs). _Then_ they'll want something better. (HURD? BeOS? Who knows..)
When that happens, FreeBSD might have its day in the limelight. For now, it's benefitting from the low exposure. So much less pressure to poison it with 'must-have's
5-10 years and $350,000? What the f*ck is that? Maybe Microsoft should be slapped with a class action lawsuit for setting up the infrastructure that allowed this virus to spread.
That's like saying Ford should get sued when there's a hit-and-run, or HP getting done when I run out of paper in my printer and miss a deadline, or tobacco manufacturers getting sued when someone dies from smoking Marlboros.
Oh bugger. I just disproved my point. I'll shut up now. =)
Well, the author would decide the options, permanently, and the options could be endless, from "You must distribute the source code" (optional) to "You may only distribute this software on Wednesdays while wearing a blue shirt" (very optional), "You must pay $xxx for the software after xxx days of use" (shareware), "You must send me a postcard from somewhere", "You may not use this in a commercial product", "You may not use this in a commercial product without contacting me first", etc.
The software would compare the license you had designed (and in the case of a user, the license you had retrieved) and describe the nature of the license informally, and show comparisons with other licenses and software, whether it fulfils the requirements of Open Source, whether it includes all of the stipulations of the GPL, etc.
The possibilities are endless.
I'm a programmer, not a lawyer, so I want to tell the site what I mean, and then let it turn it into legalese. I also want my users to see at a glance what I'm getting at with the license and compare it to other software/licenses they know and use, and also have the option to retrieve the full legal document.
How about a web site which gives you a tick-box based license generator:
..."
* You'd select what you want to limit/allow
* It'd read it back to you in
a) Formal license form (text file)
b) English, with warnings (eg. "You're forcing people to release their own source code here")
c) A Geek-code style shorthand
Then, any savvy user could take one glance at the Geek code and understand the restrictions.
"This software is licensed according to the Open Source Modular License (URL here) with the following stipulations to be interpreted as described by the license:
FREE++ SRC- DIST+ COPY+++
Comments?