Very frequently we use K-maps, which can take any number of dimensions. 1-d Kmaps exist in things we call LINES. 2-D K-maps exist in things we call SQUARES. 3-D K-maps exist in things we call CUBES, and higher than that, we call the things the K-maps are in HYPERCUBES.
Extending this terminology...shouldn't a 4-d object with all surface points equidistant from a single point be called a hypersphere to distinguish it from normal usage?
Have you studied any image compression theory? Have you heard of the famed graduate student method for fractal compression? Here it is 1) Lock a graduate student in a room with an image and a huge collection of mathematical knowledge about fractals 2) Tell him/her to compress the image by finding and modeling fractal patterns 3) Wait four days... VOILA! 10000x compression is not unheard of with 1% or less degredation.
Ever image format that we use today is sub-optimal. We don't even have a mathematical formalism to perfectly identify the entropy (i.e. information) encoded within an image (though we can make rough estimates) to determine the maximum compression. Also, consider than even given the techniques we have today, jpeg isn't the best thing out there, though it is the standard. jpeg2000 is better, and there are some even more highly sophisticated and accurate wavelet based approaches. If we can ever get the kind of computing power available to the supercomputers of today we can do even better by modeling our images using more complex basis functions than sinusiods and wavelets.
Just one final note to sum up: finding optimal compression is definitely an NP-hard problem. Who knows what kind of stuff can be thrown in there without affecting much.
...when someone calls up and says "Is the internet down?" you can finally say, "It was." not just to simplify it to the level that your callers can understand, but because its the truth.
Have you read any sword and sorcery books? The characters are SUPPOSED to be cardboard cutouts. That's the genre. And I wouldn't have it any other way. Its not a romance novel - its the literary equivalent of a Conan movie (or Conan book, for that matter). You know - something that should be consumable by someone with a sixth grade reading level and with a plot which is merely a twist around a single (sometimes two, if they really push it) major idea.
I was overjoyed to find a book in this genre that could actually appeal to programmers.
Cursed is up, sort of...it goes up to chapter 20 (roughly half the book) and you have to look real hard to find it. Is the whole thing supposed to be up there?
Wizard's Bane, Compiled, and Cursed are all available online.
They're stories about a normal guy who is transported using magic to a fantasy world where he's the man because he's an excellent programmer.
Mix of my favorite genre's - fantasy and computers. He brings up TLAs (three letter acronyms), R2D2, the power of caffiene, the dragon book (for compiler writers), a spell called "hello world," emacs, and a lot of other funny stuff I can't remember. And it all seems to fit (not just puns thrown in there for their own sake, like the often-criticized Xanth books).
Do you know how many good musicians there are? I personally KNOW three very talented musicians: a punk rocker, a broadway singer, and a folk singer. None of them are famous, and only one of them actually sells his work. Yet all of them are about as talented as those in the industry today. (And as a sound tech myself, I have an educated opinion on the subject).
The truth is that we don't NEED to all be listening to the same people. I really enjoy listening to my friends do their things. And I enjoy singing with them. Can you say that you've sung with your favorite artists?
Perhaps the problem is that you equate fame with musicianship. I don't think we should have famous singers at all - at least not because of marketing. There are a few singers who worked their way to the top by playing and clubs and bars first (Jewel comes to mind).
There is one thing that should remain, I think: famous songwriters - it takes a lot more talent to write a song than it does to sing/play it, and the average minstrel can't pull it off.
There a plenty of songs that have found their way into the mainstream over the centuries without any known channel of distribution. I won't cite incredibly modern examples, because recently we have a lot more advertising, but here are few one hit wonders that have run their course on word of mouth alone: the Kookaburra Song (Austrialian folk song, now popular worldwide), Danny Boy (American song set to Irish tune).
Back when Pascal was prevalent...wait that never happened.
Anyway, twenty years ago people didn't write thing modularly like they do today so recompiles were of a bigger piece of the project.
Now we use modularity, so code is broken up into much smaller pieces. A recompile need only be the file you're working on - the other 50 of them can just stay compiled as they are. Obviously 'make' was developed specifically to optimize the decision of what needs to be recompiled.
Sure, it is much, much slower. But linking takes very little time, and compile time has been cut way down by previous compiles - almost enough to make up the difference (although, I admit, not quite). Still, you're comparison is not the best - Pascal hardly has the powers available to a bigger programming language, and since its only been academic, not as much effort has been placed in making the compiler really smart (and therefore slower). Perhaps you should talk about Fortran '77?
Thats an interesting point about requiring a more hefty server. But computing power is much cheaper than bandwidth. It would cost you about $5,000 for a citrix mainframe that could serve 100 people and have them use your company's resources (probably the same machine) for dialup. Alternatively, they could all run X, and you could pay about ten times as much for the 4MB/sec for each person that would be necessary for a decent X connection. Option #1 is a couple of orders of magnitude cheaper initially, and the cost of the bandwidth continues even after the server is paid off.
Responsive? You must have some special X connection that's different from the one I've got.
First of all, I've never actually used WTS myself, but I have used Citrix and TightVNC.
I try X now and again, but I always have to twiddle my thumbs while the program loads, and every time I click on anything which opens another window, menu, or dialog box, which happens quite frequently. VNC CAN be horribly, horribly bad, if you use more than 256 colors, but my experience has been that if you do it right it is much more responsive than X even after X loads (with the notable exception of text-only applications, which take advantage of the font server).
Citrix blows this out of the water - it uses about 2kbps for full (indistinguishable from non-network use) responsiveness, and then the only question is latency. If you can get it down to under 100ms, you shouldn't notice the difference much from running stuff on your local machine.
I have my system set up for my use...and everybody else's.
My Window manager, Sawfish/Gnome, is completely customizable, so I customized it. Gone is Nautilus! I just open up a terminal if I want to see files. I don't need to spend 25 megs for that. In its place is DFM, a mere 2MB investment, just in case someone I know prefers a graphical file manager.
All the apps that I start frequently are mapped to keystrokes starting with alt+letter. For example, to start my mail client, I use alt+m, for galeon alt+g, etc. Minimizing (equivalent to meta+m in Windows) is done with meta+m. Minimize/maximize toggle (like in Windows again) is done with meta+d. I can tile windows with meta+v for verticle, and meta+h for horizontal. That has REALLY come in handy. And of course, switching apps is really easy (tab key).
Not all my apps are keyboard powered, however. Some are like galeon. However, for the most part, I don't have to use the keyboard in galeon at all (except for posting, for example).
The upside of doing all this on a bigger Window manager is that I don't scare the crap out of anyone else who wants to see what Linux is all about. And the downside is that I had to pay roughly $8 for enough RAM to run the WM.
I'm not so sure...there are transparent solutions for the Windows desktop that use FAR less resources (I'm thinking of Citrix at the moment). There's no way to do that on X systems because X's primitives are drawings, not Windows functions. This is a PROBLEM! A huge one!
TightVNC is lower bandwidth (not bulky, and its free) than X over a network (with compression) because of this (even compared to lbxproxy).
Of course, a more feature Windowing library could be added as a extension to X and gradually grow to support all applications. Then we wouldn't have to use the bulk, and it would be useful (the best solution) transparently.
Keep in mind that each collision has to be such that the weight of the first object (i.e. tennis ball) is negligable compared to the second (basketball). Perhaps you'd be able to get it down to orbital velocity, but the size of the balls would be going down as well. I doubt that the last ball would be big enough to see with the naked eye, unless the first ball you started with was very, very, large.
Also, I am fairly certian that IF you couldn't get up to orbital velocity because you'd reach terminal velocity first (i.e. drag would be such a problem that there's no way anything would leave orbit).
Several hundred feet is probably a better target to shoot for with such an experiment (though that may fail, too).
There's a reason that the highest flying toys are rockets. They can get the highest the most.
Sure you don't. But it really helps. There were a lot of things that weren't really good until AFTER the install, and I could really have used some docs (Mandrake was my previous distro).
Things like:
-getting rpmdrake/urpmi to work properly with any given mirror (I had to figure that one out by reverse engineering based upon how it does security update works)
-getting the firewall to work (the firewall that comes with Mandrake has a horribly inflexible Mandrake front-end (won't do certain kinds of forwarding, etc.). However, if you scour your path, you can find that it has a really good OTHER front-end that you have to use).
-figuring out why a lot of stuff won't compile (ships with a rather broken version of gcc)
-Mandrake's init path structure (sure, you can figure it out, but why don't they just tell you?)
Bottom line: even the least sophisticated distro needs documentation because an operating system by nature is a complex thing.
I had a lot of trouble getting esoteric packages written by one guy for some strange task (that I happen to be working on too) had a lot of trouble installing on my previous distro, so I decided to try a source distro.
This one by FAR had the most documentation. And it had more docs than Debian, Mandrake, and Slackware for installation. So I decided to give it a try.
And I screwed up by not following the directions. Undaunted, I tried again. This time, I succeeded - without the help of the developers. Everything compiled perfectly - I had a working version of X with support for my video card, along with a full install of Apache, Gnome, KDE, IceWM, and my favorite development environments and text editors. It took me three days to succeed.
From that point forward, occasionally, I ran into problems. Unlike Mandrake, my previous distro, I found the solutions by going to the user forums for the site - it seems other people had problems similar to mine. A lot of the problems weren't even due to the distro - things like how upgrading postfix sometimes leads to a difference in how the alias files are stored (so that they have to be rebuilt) are things I would expect to have to scour the internet to find out, rather than just checking at my distro.
And the three times when I couldn't find the answer, I posted to a forum, and within hours (one time within minutes) I had my answer.
There sure is some brokenness with the distro - but to me its worth it. The documentation, while out of date, is still pretty useful, and the forums are the best support I've ever had from anyone for using Linux (including a local LUG, #linux, and #linuxhelp on Dalnet, #linux and #linuxhelp on EFnet, and my local net admin).
Now my computer nearly sings - I can install, uninstall, and fix problems faster than I ever have before, (even faster than I could with nice, user friendly options), and its only getting better.
Perhaps you have been a sysadmin for four years, and used linux-pmac, but perhaps you didn't get as many scars as you say. You don't like the kernel? They don't force you to use it, you know. You don't have to run it even once - you can use any kernel you want, if you're so inclined, even plain vanilla. Switch. Problem solved. Can't use simple compile flags? They wrote a huge 10 page html file about how to use them and documented the file with the compile flags so you'd get them right. I've NEVER been a sysadmin, and I didn't even doubt that I got them right. Can't stand the 5 minutes of doing stuff by hand? You know you can just do exactly what the guide says, right? A trained monkey, or the newbie I was when I first installed it could do it. Why don't you? It doesn't really take that long.
It sounds more like you gave up when you hit a snag than that you gave this distro a fair chance. One snag in the install of this distro can take 40 hours to fix. However, the install is only the beginning of a distro's use. Perhaps you think I'm acting haughty. I'm sorry if you take it this way; know that I write this without emotion, but with more experience in this distro. Ask for help from me when installing and I'll give it if I am able.
Enoch was one of the first men - great great great great great grandson of Adam, the first man. He holds the superlative of being the only man that didn't die - instead God took him - to heaven, or paradise, or something like that.
What does that have to do with Gentoo? Gentoo is bleeding edge. It dies a lot (and I know, because I use it and am willing to pay that price). I guess it could have something to do with purity? Enoch was such a good man that God took him. Could they have been saying that Gentoo is a very pure, noble distribution that will one day be embraced by the masters of Linux as the One True Distro?
Even better, he's the only one who can HUNT them (being that he was frozen in ice for a couple thousand years). Also, somewhere during the movie, Pauly Shore, who tried to bring him up to speed on the modern world, gets eaten by Raptors.
So we've got Encino Man, The Mummy, and Jurassic Park all in one movie. Outstanding!
It doesn't check for the browser. It checks for the browser functionality: This is the sniffer code I used: ns4 = (document.layers)? true:false ie4 = (document.all)? true:false ns6 = (document.getElementById&&!document.all)? true:false
So if what you're saying is true, it actually changes the way it works when it switches. That's way better than konqueror 3.0.3, which is what I use. I can't get it to work on my page for any reason at all. I guess I'll have to keep my eyes on that one.
The DHTML is old, so it won't work with DOM, EXCEPT for the stars which should be whizzing by, which use normal dhtml. Does that work?
For a java example, try this. It uses signed applets to allow you to save and load a game. When I tried it, it opened another window to contain the applet, and I couldn't get it to save for anything.
I tested these with Konqeror v. 3.0.3 for these negative results. This version also doesn't have tabbed browsing built-in. As for extra media types, plugger is a fairly simple and small install, and it has given me all the media types I use, at least (everything that ghostview, adobe, mplayer, abiword, gnumeric, image magick, and xmms are capable of playing).
If all I want is what konqeror can do, I'll just use links in graphical mode.
Its the same speed as Galeon, uses 23MB on my system (which is only 2 less than Galeon), doesn't do applets very well (try one - it loads it out of the browser), doesn't do tabbed browsing yet in most major releases, and will hardly do DHTML well at all.
And it doesn't have nearly the features of Mozilla or Galeon.
I think its worth the measly 2MB price for the same speed and many more features that you get from Galeon.
I can't figure out what the fuss is all about. I just ran it on my machine, with little improvement.
First of all, let me say how I tested it. I am running Gentoo linux on a PIII-500, which is lucky enough to have someone who distributed the source to it for us. So I compiled it and started trying to use it.
My previous browser was (and now is again) Galeon.
Everything worked pretty well: I downloaded mouse gestures (and then changed permissions so that they would work without being root), and advanced tabbed browsing, and was generally impressed.
But then I checked on the speed thing that everyone touts by 1) Opening a bunch of tabs and switching between them. 2) Going back and forward rapidly in the browser history 3) Running some javascript animations
Then I ran gnome-system-monitor (which can detect threads, unlike top), and checked on the memory requirements.
Know what I found with all of this? Its seems to run the same speed as galeon. It takes about 25MB on my system, and runs about the same speed.
Now, both of these two do run faster and with smaller memory requirements than Mozilla, but...we should probably compare it to all Mozilla variations to see if its doing something unique in the open source world.
The reason I switched back to galeon is because Galeon has all of the features that Phoenix does, PLUS it has smart bookmarks (so that you can search google, freshmeat, dogpile, slackware, etc).
Did you hear what I wrote about the neighborhoods? They won't put them in neighborhoods.
And keep in mind that governing bodies have an official policy of neutrality; they're not going to build AIs that aren't neutral.
By the way, there's another way that the algorithms are a "colorblind": skin detection algorithms detect everyone as almost exactly the same skin color (but with different intensity). (One notable exception is asiatic skin tones, which are slightly different - but only slightly - almost not even statistically different).
I worked in a computer vision lab that was commissioned to invent a vision system for downtown Orlando that would detect violence or possibly disturbing behavior. Actually, about all we got was a heck of a lot of publicity, and an agreement that when we finished our research, the city would buy the hardware.
Anyway, we called it the downtown project because most of the rest of our work was for the academic community, Darpa, or Lockheed-Martin.
Our goal was similar to most such projects: to allow policemen to focus on suspicious activity, and to ignore what isn't. You've heard the phrase "a policeman on every street corner?" Why have them there if nothing is happening?
We're not talking about putting these in neighborhoods; not it private areas - in fact, this came up during the conversations we had with local government and they were very much against it -we're talking about putting them in very public places. This is a measure which is intended to save lives and potentially lower the cost of law enforcement.
One of the things I like best about this is that unlike policemen, cameras are colorblind. They don't care if you're homeless, or a minority, rich or poor. They only look at what you're doing. A policemen's attention won't be tuned to an area because he doesn't like the color of skin of its inhabitants (which has a lot to do with how it works right now), he'll be doing it because he got an impartial warning. Seems like a good idea to me.
afaik, Sorceror was first among source based distros. And this has a lot of that development team and source code. So they did do something new. But not very well - they didn't have hardly any documentation, and it killed them.
At least compared to the other choice - Gentoo linux, which has a userbase the talks to each other on the forums (imagine!) and they update much more frequently than all the Sorceror distros.
My thought when I read this was: they JUST made 1.0? What took them so long?
Well, yes, I could put Suspended up there. I have it in zcode. However, I won't.
Unlike Hitchhiker's guide, the author wasn't kind enough to distribute a freeware version, so it's illegal to put it up. All of these games are on the up-and-up.
My ACTUAL personal favorite is the Enchanter trilogy, and I would REALLY like to put it up there.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been studying EE stuff for a long time now.
Very frequently we use K-maps, which can take any number of dimensions. 1-d Kmaps exist in things we call LINES. 2-D K-maps exist in things we call SQUARES. 3-D K-maps exist in things we call CUBES, and higher than that, we call the things the K-maps are in HYPERCUBES.
Extending this terminology...shouldn't a 4-d object with all surface points equidistant from a single point be called a hypersphere to distinguish it from normal usage?
Have you studied any image compression theory? Have you heard of the famed graduate student method for fractal compression?
Here it is
1) Lock a graduate student in a room with an image and a huge collection of mathematical knowledge about fractals
2) Tell him/her to compress the image by finding and modeling fractal patterns
3) Wait four days...
VOILA! 10000x compression is not unheard of with 1% or less degredation.
Ever image format that we use today is sub-optimal. We don't even have a mathematical formalism to perfectly identify the entropy (i.e. information) encoded within an image (though we can make rough estimates) to determine the maximum compression. Also, consider than even given the techniques we have today, jpeg isn't the best thing out there, though it is the standard. jpeg2000 is better, and there are some even more highly sophisticated and accurate wavelet based approaches. If we can ever get the kind of computing power available to the supercomputers of today we can do even better by modeling our images using more complex basis functions than sinusiods and wavelets.
Just one final note to sum up: finding optimal compression is definitely an NP-hard problem. Who knows what kind of stuff can be thrown in there without affecting much.
...when someone calls up and says "Is the internet down?" you can finally say, "It was." not just to simplify it to the level that your callers can understand, but because its the truth.
Have you read any sword and sorcery books? The characters are SUPPOSED to be cardboard cutouts. That's the genre. And I wouldn't have it any other way. Its not a romance novel - its the literary equivalent of a Conan movie (or Conan book, for that matter). You know - something that should be consumable by someone with a sixth grade reading level and with a plot which is merely a twist around a single (sometimes two, if they really push it) major idea.
I was overjoyed to find a book in this genre that could actually appeal to programmers.
Cursed is up, sort of...it goes up to chapter 20 (roughly half the book) and you have to look real hard to find it. Is the whole thing supposed to be up there?
was written by Rick Cook.
:)
Wizard's Bane, Compiled, and Cursed are all available online.
They're stories about a normal guy who is transported using magic to a fantasy world where he's the man because he's an excellent programmer.
Mix of my favorite genre's - fantasy and computers. He brings up TLAs (three letter acronyms), R2D2, the power of caffiene, the dragon book (for compiler writers), a spell called "hello world," emacs, and a lot of other funny stuff I can't remember. And it all seems to fit (not just puns thrown in there for their own sake, like the often-criticized Xanth books).
Now I REALLY want to go buy the next three.
Do you know how many good musicians there are? I personally KNOW three very talented musicians: a punk rocker, a broadway singer, and a folk singer. None of them are famous, and only one of them actually sells his work. Yet all of them are about as talented as those in the industry today. (And as a sound tech myself, I have an educated opinion on the subject).
The truth is that we don't NEED to all be listening to the same people. I really enjoy listening to my friends do their things. And I enjoy singing with them. Can you say that you've sung with your favorite artists?
Perhaps the problem is that you equate fame with musicianship. I don't think we should have famous singers at all - at least not because of marketing. There are a few singers who worked their way to the top by playing and clubs and bars first (Jewel comes to mind).
There is one thing that should remain, I think: famous songwriters - it takes a lot more talent to write a song than it does to sing/play it, and the average minstrel can't pull it off.
There a plenty of songs that have found their way into the mainstream over the centuries without any known channel of distribution. I won't cite incredibly modern examples, because recently we have a lot more advertising, but here are few one hit wonders that have run their course on word of mouth alone: the Kookaburra Song (Austrialian folk song, now popular worldwide), Danny Boy (American song set to Irish tune).
Back when Pascal was prevalent...wait that never happened.
Anyway, twenty years ago people didn't write thing modularly like they do today so recompiles were of a bigger piece of the project.
Now we use modularity, so code is broken up into much smaller pieces. A recompile need only be the file you're working on - the other 50 of them can just stay compiled as they are. Obviously 'make' was developed specifically to optimize the decision of what needs to be recompiled.
Sure, it is much, much slower. But linking takes very little time, and compile time has been cut way down by previous compiles - almost enough to make up the difference (although, I admit, not quite). Still, you're comparison is not the best - Pascal hardly has the powers available to a bigger programming language, and since its only been academic, not as much effort has been placed in making the compiler really smart (and therefore slower). Perhaps you should talk about Fortran '77?
Thats an interesting point about requiring a more hefty server. But computing power is much cheaper than bandwidth. It would cost you about $5,000 for a citrix mainframe that could serve 100 people and have them use your company's resources (probably the same machine) for dialup. Alternatively, they could all run X, and you could pay about ten times as much for the 4MB/sec for each person that would be necessary for a decent X connection. Option #1 is a couple of orders of magnitude cheaper initially, and the cost of the bandwidth continues even after the server is paid off.
Responsive? You must have some special X connection that's different from the one I've got.
First of all, I've never actually used WTS myself, but I have used Citrix and TightVNC.
I try X now and again, but I always have to twiddle my thumbs while the program loads, and every time I click on anything which opens another window, menu, or dialog box, which happens quite frequently. VNC CAN be horribly, horribly bad, if you use more than 256 colors, but my experience has been that if you do it right it is much more responsive than X even after X loads (with the notable exception of text-only applications, which take advantage of the font server).
Citrix blows this out of the water - it uses about 2kbps for full (indistinguishable from non-network use) responsiveness, and then the only question is latency. If you can get it down to under 100ms, you shouldn't notice the difference much from running stuff on your local machine.
I have my system set up for my use...and everybody else's.
My Window manager, Sawfish/Gnome, is completely customizable, so I customized it. Gone is Nautilus! I just open up a terminal if I want to see files. I don't need to spend 25 megs for that. In its place is DFM, a mere 2MB investment, just in case someone I know prefers a graphical file manager.
All the apps that I start frequently are mapped to keystrokes starting with alt+letter. For example, to start my mail client, I use alt+m, for galeon alt+g, etc. Minimizing (equivalent to meta+m in Windows) is done with meta+m. Minimize/maximize toggle (like in Windows again) is done with meta+d. I can tile windows with meta+v for verticle, and meta+h for horizontal. That has REALLY come in handy. And of course, switching apps is really easy (tab key).
Not all my apps are keyboard powered, however. Some are like galeon. However, for the most part, I don't have to use the keyboard in galeon at all (except for posting, for example).
The upside of doing all this on a bigger Window manager is that I don't scare the crap out of anyone else who wants to see what Linux is all about. And the downside is that I had to pay roughly $8 for enough RAM to run the WM.
I'm not so sure...there are transparent solutions for the Windows desktop that use FAR less resources (I'm thinking of Citrix at the moment). There's no way to do that on X systems because X's primitives are drawings, not Windows functions. This is a PROBLEM! A huge one!
TightVNC is lower bandwidth (not bulky, and its free) than X over a network (with compression) because of this (even compared to lbxproxy).
Of course, a more feature Windowing library could be added as a extension to X and gradually grow to support all applications. Then we wouldn't have to use the bulk, and it would be useful (the best solution) transparently.
Keep in mind that each collision has to be such that the weight of the first object (i.e. tennis ball) is negligable compared to the second (basketball). Perhaps you'd be able to get it down to orbital velocity, but the size of the balls would be going down as well. I doubt that the last ball would be big enough to see with the naked eye, unless the first ball you started with was very, very, large.
Also, I am fairly certian that IF you couldn't get up to orbital velocity because you'd reach terminal velocity first (i.e. drag would be such a problem that there's no way anything would leave orbit).
Several hundred feet is probably a better target to shoot for with such an experiment (though that may fail, too).
There's a reason that the highest flying toys are rockets. They can get the highest the most.
Sure you don't. But it really helps. There were a lot of things that weren't really good until AFTER the install, and I could really have used some docs (Mandrake was my previous distro).
Things like:
-getting rpmdrake/urpmi to work properly with any given mirror (I had to figure that one out by reverse engineering based upon how it does security update works)
-getting the firewall to work (the firewall that comes with Mandrake has a horribly inflexible Mandrake front-end (won't do certain kinds of forwarding, etc.). However, if you scour your path, you can find that it has a really good OTHER front-end that you have to use).
-figuring out why a lot of stuff won't compile (ships with a rather broken version of gcc)
-Mandrake's init path structure (sure, you can figure it out, but why don't they just tell you?)
Bottom line: even the least sophisticated distro needs documentation because an operating system by nature is a complex thing.
I had a lot of trouble getting esoteric packages written by one guy for some strange task (that I happen to be working on too) had a lot of trouble installing on my previous distro, so I decided to try a source distro.
This one by FAR had the most documentation. And it had more docs than Debian, Mandrake, and Slackware for installation. So I decided to give it a try.
And I screwed up by not following the directions. Undaunted, I tried again. This time, I succeeded - without the help of the developers. Everything compiled perfectly - I had a working version of X with support for my video card, along with a full install of Apache, Gnome, KDE, IceWM, and my favorite development environments and text editors. It took me three days to succeed.
From that point forward, occasionally, I ran into problems. Unlike Mandrake, my previous distro, I found the solutions by going to the user forums for the site - it seems other people had problems similar to mine. A lot of the problems weren't even due to the distro - things like how upgrading postfix sometimes leads to a difference in how the alias files are stored (so that they have to be rebuilt) are things I would expect to have to scour the internet to find out, rather than just checking at my distro.
And the three times when I couldn't find the answer, I posted to a forum, and within hours (one time within minutes) I had my answer.
There sure is some brokenness with the distro - but to me its worth it. The documentation, while out of date, is still pretty useful, and the forums are the best support I've ever had from anyone for using Linux (including a local LUG, #linux, and #linuxhelp on Dalnet, #linux and #linuxhelp on EFnet, and my local net admin).
Now my computer nearly sings - I can install, uninstall, and fix problems faster than I ever have before, (even faster than I could with nice, user friendly options), and its only getting better.
Perhaps you have been a sysadmin for four years, and used linux-pmac, but perhaps you didn't get as many scars as you say. You don't like the kernel? They don't force you to use it, you know. You don't have to run it even once - you can use any kernel you want, if you're so inclined, even plain vanilla. Switch. Problem solved. Can't use simple compile flags? They wrote a huge 10 page html file about how to use them and documented the file with the compile flags so you'd get them right. I've NEVER been a sysadmin, and I didn't even doubt that I got them right. Can't stand the 5 minutes of doing stuff by hand? You know you can just do exactly what the guide says, right? A trained monkey, or the newbie I was when I first installed it could do it. Why don't you? It doesn't really take that long.
It sounds more like you gave up when you hit a snag than that you gave this distro a fair chance. One snag in the install of this distro can take 40 hours to fix. However, the install is only the beginning of a distro's use. Perhaps you think I'm acting haughty. I'm sorry if you take it this way; know that I write this without emotion, but with more experience in this distro. Ask for help from me when installing and I'll give it if I am able.
Enoch was one of the first men - great great great great great grandson of Adam, the first man. He holds the superlative of being the only man that didn't die - instead God took him - to heaven, or paradise, or something like that.
What does that have to do with Gentoo? Gentoo is bleeding edge. It dies a lot (and I know, because I use it and am willing to pay that price). I guess it could have something to do with purity? Enoch was such a good man that God took him. Could they have been saying that Gentoo is a very pure, noble distribution that will one day be embraced by the masters of Linux as the One True Distro?
Seems like a name change was in order.
Even better, he's the only one who can HUNT them (being that he was frozen in ice for a couple thousand years). Also, somewhere during the movie, Pauly Shore, who tried to bring him up to speed on the modern world, gets eaten by Raptors.
So we've got Encino Man, The Mummy, and Jurassic Park all in one movie. Outstanding!
It doesn't check for the browser. It checks for the browser functionality:
This is the sniffer code I used:
ns4 = (document.layers)? true:false
ie4 = (document.all)? true:false
ns6 = (document.getElementById&&!document.all)? true:false
So if what you're saying is true, it actually changes the way it works when it switches.
That's way better than konqueror 3.0.3, which is what I use. I can't get it to work on my page for any reason at all. I guess I'll have to keep my eyes on that one.
I made this to show to my students.
The DHTML is old, so it won't work with DOM, EXCEPT for the stars which should be whizzing by, which use normal dhtml. Does that work?
For a java example, try this. It uses signed applets to allow you to save and load a game. When I tried it, it opened another window to contain the applet, and I couldn't get it to save for anything.
I tested these with Konqeror v. 3.0.3 for these negative results. This version also doesn't have tabbed browsing built-in. As for extra media types, plugger is a fairly simple and small install, and it has given me all the media types I use, at least (everything that ghostview, adobe, mplayer, abiword, gnumeric, image magick, and xmms are capable of playing).
If all I want is what konqeror can do, I'll just use links in graphical mode.
you've never used it.
Its the same speed as Galeon, uses 23MB on my system (which is only 2 less than Galeon), doesn't do applets very well (try one - it loads it out of the browser), doesn't do tabbed browsing yet in most major releases, and will hardly do DHTML well at all.
And it doesn't have nearly the features of Mozilla or Galeon.
I think its worth the measly 2MB price for the same speed and many more features that you get from Galeon.
I can't figure out what the fuss is all about. I just ran it on my machine, with little improvement.
First of all, let me say how I tested it. I am running Gentoo linux on a PIII-500, which is lucky enough to have someone who distributed the source to it for us. So I compiled it and started trying to use it.
My previous browser was (and now is again) Galeon.
Everything worked pretty well: I downloaded mouse gestures (and then changed permissions so that they would work without being root), and advanced tabbed browsing, and was generally impressed.
But then I checked on the speed thing that everyone touts by
1) Opening a bunch of tabs and switching between them.
2) Going back and forward rapidly in the browser history
3) Running some javascript animations
Then I ran gnome-system-monitor (which can detect threads, unlike top), and checked on the memory requirements.
Know what I found with all of this? Its seems to run the same speed as galeon. It takes about 25MB on my system, and runs about the same speed.
Now, both of these two do run faster and with smaller memory requirements than Mozilla, but...we should probably compare it to all Mozilla variations to see if its doing something unique in the open source world.
The reason I switched back to galeon is because Galeon has all of the features that Phoenix does, PLUS it has smart bookmarks (so that you can search google, freshmeat, dogpile, slackware, etc).
Did you hear what I wrote about the neighborhoods? They won't put them in neighborhoods.
And keep in mind that governing bodies have an official policy of neutrality; they're not going to build AIs that aren't neutral.
By the way, there's another way that the algorithms are a "colorblind": skin detection algorithms detect everyone as almost exactly the same skin color (but with different intensity). (One notable exception is asiatic skin tones, which are slightly different - but only slightly - almost not even statistically different).
I worked in a computer vision lab that was commissioned to invent a vision system for downtown Orlando that would detect violence or possibly disturbing behavior. Actually, about all we got was a heck of a lot of publicity, and an agreement that when we finished our research, the city would buy the hardware.
Anyway, we called it the downtown project because most of the rest of our work was for the academic community, Darpa, or Lockheed-Martin.
Our goal was similar to most such projects: to allow policemen to focus on suspicious activity, and to ignore what isn't. You've heard the phrase "a policeman on every street corner?" Why have them there if nothing is happening?
We're not talking about putting these in neighborhoods; not it private areas - in fact, this came up during the conversations we had with local government and they were very much against it -we're talking about putting them in very public places. This is a measure which is intended to save lives and potentially lower the cost of law enforcement.
One of the things I like best about this is that unlike policemen, cameras are colorblind. They don't care if you're homeless, or a minority, rich or poor. They only look at what you're doing. A policemen's attention won't be tuned to an area because he doesn't like the color of skin of its inhabitants (which has a lot to do with how it works right now), he'll be doing it because he got an impartial warning. Seems like a good idea to me.
afaik, Sorceror was first among source based distros. And this has a lot of that development team and source code. So they did do something new. But not very well - they didn't have hardly any documentation, and it killed them.
At least compared to the other choice - Gentoo linux, which has a userbase the talks to each other on the forums (imagine!) and they update much more frequently than all the Sorceror distros.
My thought when I read this was: they JUST made 1.0? What took them so long?
Its easy to click-through with internet explorer. But what if you've got Netscape 6 or Mozilla?
Sure, its easy to use https mode, but what if you want to sign applets?
Its a REAL pain. You have to download a public key, open up a console, find your certificate store, and manually add it.
I made something that I wanted to do that with. What a pain!
Well, yes, I could put Suspended up there. I have it in zcode. However, I won't.
Unlike Hitchhiker's guide, the author wasn't kind enough to distribute a freeware version, so it's illegal to put it up. All of these games are on the up-and-up.
My ACTUAL personal favorite is the Enchanter trilogy, and I would REALLY like to put it up there.