I do too, but not from old, fat, hippie stoners. Have you "loost" your mind?
Whatever. Jerry is not old, fat, or a hippie stoner. He has been dead 10 years. He is more like a skeleton now.
Jerry was a very kind and intelligent person that could play the fuck out of a guitar. Other things he has said:
Regarding consciousness:
"What is life but being conscious? And good and evil are manifestations of consciousness. If you reject one, you're not getting the whole thing that's there to be had."
There are others, but I can't find them, and my laptop is turned off.
Regarding being a kick ass human being, company, or whatever:
"You do not merely want to be considered the best of the best. You want to be considered the only ones that do what you do."
Insight into their role in life:
"Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us."
Similar things have been said by other good and bad bright people like Stephen Hawking and Charles Manson. Hawking said, something like "I don't know if I'm good at this physics stuff, or if people just think I am and want me to be". Manson said, "You created me".
Guys, this is not flamebate. MS is adding more UNIX-like features, but they still are forgetting the simple thing -- KISS. Monad seems OK in theory. Light years ahead of command.com or cmd.exe, but it seems pretty complex and difficult to use. Simple unixy shells are all over the place. MSDOS was similar. Embedded devices like many routers and switches have similar unixy shells. Windows commands simply are not set up for standard scripting or chaining. They will have to return reliable exit codes on success or failure. They will have to have options for output and filtering and piping. They will have to be more like UNIX commands.
I do audio work as well, and filtering, chaining, and piping of software and hardware processors are analogous to shell commands and tools. Networking hardware and software does filtering, chaining, and piping like stuff as well. Microsoft is making a jack of all trades and master of none with Monad, just like they have with their other products.
"Unix is the only way"? Eh, Microsoft is very successfull with it's own non-Unix operating system.
Basically, yes. Every good operating system I know of or have used in the past 10 years is unixy. I did not do pre OS X Macs, I did do Apple squiggle squiggle in for 10 years before this time, and had no UNIX experience. The first MacOS was pretty cool, because there simply wasn't anything else remotely like it available. I didn't use it, I just played with it on other people's computers and in stores. I did occasionally use pre-OS X MacOSes, and I did not like them. Bombs from memory mismanagement, other stability issues, and whatever. I thought they were behind X windowing systems and even Windows in terms of cosmetic looks. The OS wasn't 3d-like until 8, but I crashed 8 within 10 minutes of using it, and was not impressed.
Hell, even Microsoft is starting to add UNIX features like better headless support, scripting, a real shell, remote access, periodic commands (cron), etc. They have had SFU, etc. These are standard unix features that have been around for about 30 years. I work with UNIX and Linux systems, and use Macs as my personal machines. At work, we have Windows, Macs, and UNIX and Linux, more on that later.
I'm not sure what "market value" is really an indicator of.
Actually, when first reading the headline and stuff, I was thinking what commodity OS are people going to use after Windows?
I don't see OS X being the standard any more than Ferrari or Porche or other high-end cars being standard. Even though the price (TCO for the PHBs) is about the same as other systems now, I just don't see Apple with 90% market share, and I'm not sure if they want to either.
But, IMNSHO, Windows is dead. Bear with me. At work the Windows admins, have mostly switched to Macs for their personal machines. I don't talk to them or see them that much, but I see that their emails are coming from Mail.app (Mac default mailer), and I have heard of people switching. Honestly, I can't think of one of our Windows admins that does not have a Mac now, I could be wrong. All of the UNIX admins have Macs.
I'm a geek, and a computer guy by trade. I simply don't have the need to use any Microsoft software for my personal or professional needs. The only MS software I have on my computers is IE and WMP. Both are basically EOLed, and horrible on the Mac.
Maybe people will still use Windows because it has been "good enough" and maybe that will stay the same. If Apple breaks the bond between the hardware and software integration since they now use commodity processors like Dell and others, then maybe OS X will become the standard. I just don't think Apple wants to have the issues with 3rd party hardware and the associated stability issues and support costs and possible tarnish their reputation. Maybe people will use Linux if the fundamental issues of conformity, ease of use increases with software installation, and a good GUI. However, there does not appear to be enough focus on that end. Maybe a commercial company will put these things together, and it will be the commodity OS. Don't know.
Interesting times for computers. There is still plenty of room for improvement across the board though.
Q: Why should I pay more for a Prius just because a boat motor guy came up with the same technology???
A: Because this guy came up with it first.
So long as I'm the only person that is punished because the other guy came up with it first (unverified, just like Edison's lightbulb), I guess its OK.
Patents are a necessary evil
I like pithy quotes:
"Constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil."
-- Jerry Garcia
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
-- Edmond Burke
hellish world of guild secrets
Well, patents are I guess open "secrets" for some period of time. I seriously doubt that Toyota looked at Solomon's motor, and said, "Why didn't we think of that, lets just rip this off?" BTW, I do that all the time with snippits or sometimes just generic methods from open source software. In fact, being that I have much more experience in that area, lets parallel this to patents, which I have no direct experience with.
I am a very skilled programmer and system administrator. Besides generic education in science and from troubleshooting and working with things since I was a kid, I have had no formal training in computers.
By the open source aspects of Linux and other GNU and other open source software, I was able to understand and help build on some of these, and I treat my experience as something like a mentorship from people from around the world that have freely given away their software, including the source.
If that information were closed source or patented, or whatever, I believe that would be a worse situation for me and my employers and for those that have benefitted from using my patches and my shared experience.
With this patent from this guy, every Prius buyer and Toyota, and possibly other makes from other manufacturers and their customers will to some degree loose because of this patent. The only winner is Solomon, et al.
I have no experience with business in China or in a system free of patents, with the exception for most all of the software that I use personally and professionally.
The software developers that have taught me how to do what I do did it for "free", but I seriously doubt that these people are hungry and without a place to live. I seriously doubt that the boat engine guy will loose a sale or be hungry or without a place to live because Toyota sells cars that may or may not have been a complete rip off of his idea.
The fact is that with the patent way, I see a few people gaining non-significantly, while many loose, again, probably non-significantly. I can't afford a Prius, or at least justify the cost. But if it were another $100 or $1000 dollars, I don't think that would make much of a difference, but I certainly could and would use that money for something else.
It may be good to have lots of patches, but once you have a car where the duct tape weighs more than any other parts combined, isn't it time to just get another car?
That and isn't the quantity == to the quality? I mean shouldn't sufficient quality mean that all known security issues are fixed?
"Those who don't understand UNIX are doomed to reinvent it, poorly."
From the article and elaborating on the/. summary (It has a print version that consolidates the 4 pages together if you want):
Q: Are there scaling reasons to think about the benefits of a command line for managing over a GUI, or are there other things to think about?
A: Our operations group never wants to rely on any sort of user interface. Everything has to be scriptable and run from some sort of command line. That's the only way you're going to be able to execute scripts and gather the results over thousands of machines.
Also, we all remember the scaling issues that MS had when they took over hotmail and initially tried to switch from freebsd to Windows.
MS had to port over cron jobs because its not something that is installed and used by default under windows like UNIX. They had to rewrite the "inefficient" perl code that ran fine on FreeBSD to C++. They had to redo the memory allocation to prevent memory leaks in the new C++ code. Read about it from the goat's mouth http://www.microsoft.com/technet/interopmigration/ case/hotmail/default.mspx.
I can't wait until FreeBSD and other inferior OSes get tools to find memory leaks. One day....
Yet the lightbulb was patentable. That damn Thomas Edison.
Too bad he filed for the patent too late and/or copied someone else and got sued and lost hist patent due to the idea being prior art http://www.inventioncity.com/edison_bulb.htm
This is a perfect example of what I originally was talking about. Its common for new technology to be invented by 2 or more people at one time because it is just natural progression from current technology.
Calculus was invented by about 3 people independently at about the same time. The light bulb too. The laser. And now throwing batteries into a car.
Why should I pay more for a Prius just because a boat motor guy came up with the same technology???
Why should I be denied to even purchase a Prius because of this guy?
Maybe we should just sit in the dark by the fire in a cave.
Bingo. TFA also says, Solomon president Peter W. DeVecchis, Jr., said, "The filing of the ITC complaint is the next step in our effort to fully prosecute the alleged infringement by Toyota..." Sounds like a nice guy.
Peter DeVecchis' phone number is (727) 934-8778, Ext. 14 if you want to let him know how you feel about the patent.
Solomon says about their patent that their IP "combines variable torque converters, brushless motors with Neodymium Iron Boron (NeFe B) magnets, and a powerful regenerative feedback function that converts the motor(s) into a generator of electricity to recharge the batteries while under sail, and provide electrical power to other appliances on the boat."
I'm not saying that this is not cool stuff. I've heard great things about the Prius. But variable torque converters are common, brushless motors are common, Neodymium Iron Boron (NeFe B) magnets are common, generators are common, but my cookie recipe is patented for them, huh? Google those terms if you don't believe me.
I'm no automotive engineer or anything like it, but I've read about regenerative braking for almost 20 years, and I'm sure it wasn't new then either. In other words, the idea, excuse me, intellectual property, is common sense. I would bet that Ford, Toyota, and Honda's hybrid techniques were basically independently created. AFAIK, they are all similar. And then, the article says, "While the ITC can not assess damages against an infringer, it can issue an exclusion order prohibiting the importation of infringing technology. We will continue our effort to protect our intellectual property to the fullest extent possible."
So the goal is to prevent this technology from being available to people??? What a selfish prick.
"Hell, since the Mac can run Windows now too, why bother with a Mac version at all?"
After the initial shock of the Intel switch, I came to my senses a little, but that has always been my question.
If virtualization/emulation or whatever works on the Intel Mac at a decent speed, or worse, dual booting (/me remembers mid 90s in disbelief), why would current Windows software targets ever move?
I'm a little worried about the "close but no cigar" in the compatibility between Windows and Macs now. Only time will tell.
How well would a pair of wings work for a human? We have dense bone structure. We have muscles in places where they'd add extra weight during flight. We don't have any adaptations to our sensory organs to make them work well during flight or at high altitudes. We don't have attachment points in our skeletons for the added musculature needed to operate the wings.
Any respectable Linux geek and/or penguin fan knows penguins can fly underwater and we could do that too with the addition of wings and better lungs.
So, if I submit my email address to this database, and just say it belongs to a kid, I can stop recieving v!@gr@ spam?
That is what I would do, although I would guess it would have no affect on the amount of spam sent to me since most of it is from outside of the US.
Also, forgive my in-sensitivities again, but fuck the children. They will look at porn and drink alcohol because they want to anyway. Nobody wants spam, why make it special for kids and not the taxpayers?
The next generation of all of Intel's processors will indeed be 64-bit.
Although the linked article does say what you claim, Intel has made 64bit processors for over 15 years (well, at least the FPU in the i860), and still makes embedded processors at 16bit. http://www.intel.com/products/embedded/processors. htm.
Why does the CPU roadmap linked only discuss the x86 chips? Although, it is their bread and butter, they do make a number of other chips that do have their own roadmaps as well.
Notice that the Windows cult following has some of the Apple cult following hits.
Macs are nice machines but they're not exactly easy to upgrade
AFAIK, "normal" people don't upgrade their computers. Macs often don't need upgrades because they come with what you want and need already, and anything extra or a niche can be installed as an external device and then can be plugged into your new computer if you want. Also, people keep Macs longer than Windows boxes, and they have a higher resale value. I've heard of retail salesman that have said that they don't like selling Macs that much because the people buy them and disappear. Windows buyers keep coming back for more stuff.
I guess that aside from games (I am not a gamer), I'm not sure why many Mac owners would want to run Windows. If anything, I would imagine that an "emulator" or something like wine might be of interest, but I'm not sure if that is possible. Personally, I would not mind running WinAmp on my Mac, but I would never dual boot or buy a windows box for WinAmp, and even in emulation it would suck because it would not be a native app. Meaning I couldn't use the Finder to load a file in WinAmp.
No, it doesn't. You're probably thinking of the 9th Amendment, but that reads: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
I did a cursory search of the Constitution and could not find the "inaliable rights" thing, but I hear about it all the time. Is that an urban legend or misquoted or misattributed to the Bill of Rights?
you do know that the indented portion of the earlier post was a direct quote of Roe v. Wade, and not my own words, right?
I didn't know for certain, but I figured as such. Seemed like a quote to me.
FYI, there are two kinds of due process, procedural (which is the kind you're likely thinking of there) and substantive. Procedural due process requires that if the government takes action that impairs your life, liberty, or property, they have to go about it the right way, e.g. by going to court. Substantive due process requires that the government cannot take such action unless it has a sufficiently strong reason for doing so, as compared to the strength of your right to life, liberty, or property.
Good info. What I believe is key to due process either substantive or procedural is that some form of third party or check is made and that nobody or agency or becomes too powerful as things have come already. I guess we will have to set ourselves on fire or get run over by a tank soon ourselves.
Also, what is YAIMNAL?
Ha! YA is all over the place as "yet another" something. I guess it might not make much english sense to say yet another i am not a lawyer, and especially when I did a typo:)
All societies have taboos, and all societies believe that those taboos protect either all of society or the target of the taboo.
Yeah, but we got over most of ours. Remember the "Red scare"? Its not like the FBI will investigate a college student for retrieving "The Little Red Book" from a library system or anything, right?
Inhibition of freedom, especially of basic information, only alienates people from the government. By making crimes out of non-crimes (morality, silly stuff) it only hurts the authority that the government has, because people give them less authority and then have to question which laws are really important or not.
Keep in mind that the US government did away with slavery in 1865 (or so), gave basic rights to women in 1920, and more rights (mostly lip service) to blacks and other minorities in 1964. It seems pretty common for governments to make egregious mistakes.
Oh, and we are part of the government process so long as we follow it, wether or not we approve of it.
I don't see how patents further anything -- research occurs with and without the force of patents.
I mostly agree, and mostly dislike patents. But I do see kindof a place for patents that benefit an industry I don't like to begin with, but seems to be a necessary evil.
Manmade drugs.
From what I know, it takes tons of money in research and development, testing, and liability to be in the drug business, and patents or something similar are necessary for this research.
I still believe that health care and medication is way overvalued and priced in the US, but there may be a cure or helpful medication some day. It seems like Viagra is the best drug to hit the market since penicillin (not from personal experience).
Software patents and business method patents are basically the same, and are stupid. Although they are instructions just like drugs. Argg, this is difficult. If a business method is good, be the first to implement it and go ahead and do business. There are so many other things that distinguish businesses that sharing a "business method" is not going to give a competitor or non-competitor any advantage, its just hindering progress. Software patents I don't get either. Things like the expiring of the RSA encryption patents in 2000 (9/20 I believe) were bad for many people. People are very rich writing free software, people are very rich from writing closed software in binary only.
The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy.
Keep in mind that the US Constitution is the longest standing constitution in the world, and US is not a very old country. "Good" laws are more on the non-specific side, and bad ones add too specific information that will only be trumped when something similar comes up but not specific enough (most any new law regarding computers is basically redundant. fraud is a very inclusive law that is not used enough, etc).
The Constitution mentions "Certain Inaliable Rights", which is fairly and intentionally vague. Its in the Bill of Rights somewhere. I'm a little (lot) on the liberal side of people's rights, and I believe that privacy is one of them. I believe that the privacy is implied by the forgotten warrant and illegal search and seizure, not forcing US citizens to house troops, etc.
If I don't have the right to privacy,... this does not make sense.
Unless I am a harm to someone or myself as defined by a law and the law is followed by due process, then privacy is implied. (YAIMNAL).
To test the opposite, where is it explained that the government allowed to invade privacy? Baring due process and reasonable limits to protect others.
It's pretty expensive, to tell you the truth. I ran the specs on a Gateway NX560XL that is set up very similarly to the 15.4" MacBook Pro and got a price of $1454.99.
If price is all you care about, then go to Wal-mart or when Dell or Gateway is having a sale, buy a computer, but all of the other software you need, rinse and repeat in 2 years.
If you want to just get a nice looking, reliable, locally serviceable, notebook and tons of useful software that will last you 4 years or so, buy an Apple notebook.
Its up to you. If you need Linux by your side 24x7 I would go with the cheaper "PC" notebook.
FWIW, the NX560XL has a lower res monitor if that matters to you (not me). XP Pro, which I hear is worth it over home or media (not sure personally) will cost extra or your soul. I doubt the keys are backlit, which is a very nice feature. The new MacBook has a new safety feature that basically eliminates a majority of repairs -- magnetically attached power cord. Although, I've never had an issue with the power cord thing (I'm careful), I believe it might have almost happened once or twice. You're also giving up bluetooth.
There are tradeoffs for every action and inaction. To me, I would spend the extra $500 and get a computer with a better name and rep than a Gateway. Besides the old ones from 1997 or so at work, I don't remember the last time I've seen a Gateway.
I think the name is fine. Unfortunately, the product looks less like an Apple product and more like a laptop from a company that rhymes with "Hell".
I looked at the slideshow and the notebook looks almost identical to my powerbook. Every regular PC besides sony vios (whose designers helped with the new pow^H^H^HMacBook) looks '90s to me.
If it had cheap plastic and was thicker, it might look more like a dell, but to me it looks like a stylish notebook that I would be proud to have.
Am I the only person who thinks that 1440x900 is a pretty low resolution for a 15" laptop?
No, I've heard PC people say it, but I don't think its low.
I'm not sure what my iMac resolution is, its better than my powerbook which is 1280x854. I know a lot of younger Windows users like the ultra high resolution and squinting at the screen, but I don't have real estate issues, and everything is legible although the antialiasing in Tiger sucks vs Panther.
External monitors can be as nice as you can want I guess.
Am I not geek enough or man enough to need this ultra resolution? Is this something like gamers that need 8,000 FPM to shoot stuff?
I'm really curious what the need for ultra or slightly better than what is offered by Apple for portable computers.
I don't use firewire for anything that _requires_ 800 speed, but don't some people, especially video people need this, and couldn't this be an issue for them?
One of the many things I like about my PowerBook is that I can plug anything into it -- including FW800. Any ideas here?
Slashdot Mirror
I do too, but not from old, fat, hippie stoners. Have you "loost" your mind?
Whatever. Jerry is not old, fat, or a hippie stoner. He has been dead 10 years. He is more like a skeleton now.
Jerry was a very kind and intelligent person that could play the fuck out of a guitar. Other things he has said:
Regarding consciousness:
"What is life but being conscious? And good and evil are manifestations of consciousness. If you reject one, you're not getting the whole thing that's there to be had."
There are others, but I can't find them, and my laptop is turned off.
Regarding being a kick ass human being, company, or whatever:
"You do not merely want to be considered the best of the best. You want to be considered the only ones that do what you do."
Insight into their role in life:
"Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us."
Similar things have been said by other good and bad bright people like Stephen Hawking and Charles Manson. Hawking said, something like "I don't know if I'm good at this physics stuff, or if people just think I am and want me to be". Manson said, "You created me".
Jerry was an excellent human being. I miss him.
Guys, this is not flamebate. MS is adding more UNIX-like features, but they still are forgetting the simple thing -- KISS. Monad seems OK in theory. Light years ahead of command.com or cmd.exe, but it seems pretty complex and difficult to use. Simple unixy shells are all over the place. MSDOS was similar. Embedded devices like many routers and switches have similar unixy shells. Windows commands simply are not set up for standard scripting or chaining. They will have to return reliable exit codes on success or failure. They will have to have options for output and filtering and piping. They will have to be more like UNIX commands.
I do audio work as well, and filtering, chaining, and piping of software and hardware processors are analogous to shell commands and tools. Networking hardware and software does filtering, chaining, and piping like stuff as well. Microsoft is making a jack of all trades and master of none with Monad, just like they have with their other products.
"Unix is the only way"? Eh, Microsoft is very successfull with it's own non-Unix operating system.
Basically, yes. Every good operating system I know of or have used in the past 10 years is unixy. I did not do pre OS X Macs, I did do Apple squiggle squiggle in for 10 years before this time, and had no UNIX experience. The first MacOS was pretty cool, because there simply wasn't anything else remotely like it available. I didn't use it, I just played with it on other people's computers and in stores. I did occasionally use pre-OS X MacOSes, and I did not like them. Bombs from memory mismanagement, other stability issues, and whatever. I thought they were behind X windowing systems and even Windows in terms of cosmetic looks. The OS wasn't 3d-like until 8, but I crashed 8 within 10 minutes of using it, and was not impressed.
Hell, even Microsoft is starting to add UNIX features like better headless support, scripting, a real shell, remote access, periodic commands (cron), etc. They have had SFU, etc. These are standard unix features that have been around for about 30 years. I work with UNIX and Linux systems, and use Macs as my personal machines. At work, we have Windows, Macs, and UNIX and Linux, more on that later.
I'm not sure what "market value" is really an indicator of.
Actually, when first reading the headline and stuff, I was thinking what commodity OS are people going to use after Windows?
I don't see OS X being the standard any more than Ferrari or Porche or other high-end cars being standard. Even though the price (TCO for the PHBs) is about the same as other systems now, I just don't see Apple with 90% market share, and I'm not sure if they want to either.
But, IMNSHO, Windows is dead. Bear with me. At work the Windows admins, have mostly switched to Macs for their personal machines. I don't talk to them or see them that much, but I see that their emails are coming from Mail.app (Mac default mailer), and I have heard of people switching. Honestly, I can't think of one of our Windows admins that does not have a Mac now, I could be wrong. All of the UNIX admins have Macs.
I'm a geek, and a computer guy by trade. I simply don't have the need to use any Microsoft software for my personal or professional needs. The only MS software I have on my computers is IE and WMP. Both are basically EOLed, and horrible on the Mac.
Maybe people will still use Windows because it has been "good enough" and maybe that will stay the same. If Apple breaks the bond between the hardware and software integration since they now use commodity processors like Dell and others, then maybe OS X will become the standard. I just don't think Apple wants to have the issues with 3rd party hardware and the associated stability issues and support costs and possible tarnish their reputation. Maybe people will use Linux if the fundamental issues of conformity, ease of use increases with software installation, and a good GUI. However, there does not appear to be enough focus on that end. Maybe a commercial company will put these things together, and it will be the commodity OS. Don't know.
Interesting times for computers. There is still plenty of room for improvement across the board though.
That's a rather shabby thing to say about Linus Torvalds, and it's not at all true.
Honestly, when I see and use that quote I think the same thing.
The only difference, is that Linus understands UNIX, and he reinvented it well.
Q: Why should I pay more for a Prius just because a boat motor guy came up with the same technology???
A: Because this guy came up with it first.
So long as I'm the only person that is punished because the other guy came up with it first (unverified, just like Edison's lightbulb), I guess its OK.
Patents are a necessary evil
I like pithy quotes:
"Constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil."
-- Jerry Garcia
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
-- Edmond Burke
hellish world of guild secrets
Well, patents are I guess open "secrets" for some period of time. I seriously doubt that Toyota looked at Solomon's motor, and said, "Why didn't we think of that, lets just rip this off?" BTW, I do that all the time with snippits or sometimes just generic methods from open source software. In fact, being that I have much more experience in that area, lets parallel this to patents, which I have no direct experience with.
I am a very skilled programmer and system administrator. Besides generic education in science and from troubleshooting and working with things since I was a kid, I have had no formal training in computers.
By the open source aspects of Linux and other GNU and other open source software, I was able to understand and help build on some of these, and I treat my experience as something like a mentorship from people from around the world that have freely given away their software, including the source.
If that information were closed source or patented, or whatever, I believe that would be a worse situation for me and my employers and for those that have benefitted from using my patches and my shared experience.
With this patent from this guy, every Prius buyer and Toyota, and possibly other makes from other manufacturers and their customers will to some degree loose because of this patent. The only winner is Solomon, et al.
I have no experience with business in China or in a system free of patents, with the exception for most all of the software that I use personally and professionally.
The software developers that have taught me how to do what I do did it for "free", but I seriously doubt that these people are hungry and without a place to live. I seriously doubt that the boat engine guy will loose a sale or be hungry or without a place to live because Toyota sells cars that may or may not have been a complete rip off of his idea.
The fact is that with the patent way, I see a few people gaining non-significantly, while many loose, again, probably non-significantly. I can't afford a Prius, or at least justify the cost. But if it were another $100 or $1000 dollars, I don't think that would make much of a difference, but I certainly could and would use that money for something else.
It may be good to have lots of patches, but once you have a car where the duct tape weighs more than any other parts combined, isn't it time to just get another car?
That and isn't the quantity == to the quality? I mean shouldn't sufficient quality mean that all known security issues are fixed?
"Those who don't understand UNIX are doomed to reinvent it, poorly."
From the article and elaborating on the
Q: Are there scaling reasons to think about the benefits of a command line for managing over a GUI, or are there other things to think about?
A: Our operations group never wants to rely on any sort of user interface. Everything has to be scriptable and run from some sort of command line. That's the only way you're going to be able to execute scripts and gather the results over thousands of machines.
Also, we all remember the scaling issues that MS had when they took over hotmail and initially tried to switch from freebsd to Windows.
MS had to port over cron jobs because its not something that is installed and used by default under windows like UNIX. They had to rewrite the "inefficient" perl code that ran fine on FreeBSD to C++. They had to redo the memory allocation to prevent memory leaks in the new C++ code. Read about it from the goat's mouth http://www.microsoft.com/technet/interopmigration
I can't wait until FreeBSD and other inferior OSes get tools to find memory leaks. One day....
(That last line was sarcasm and not a flame).
Yet the lightbulb was patentable. That damn Thomas Edison.
Too bad he filed for the patent too late and/or copied someone else and got sued and lost hist patent due to the idea being prior art http://www.inventioncity.com/edison_bulb.htm
This is a perfect example of what I originally was talking about. Its common for new technology to be invented by 2 or more people at one time because it is just natural progression from current technology.
Calculus was invented by about 3 people independently at about the same time. The light bulb too. The laser. And now throwing batteries into a car.
Why should I pay more for a Prius just because a boat motor guy came up with the same technology???
Why should I be denied to even purchase a Prius because of this guy?
Maybe we should just sit in the dark by the fire in a cave.
ITC can't rule guilt or fine Toyota.
Bingo. TFA also says, Solomon president Peter W. DeVecchis, Jr., said, "The filing of the ITC complaint is the next step in our effort to fully prosecute the alleged infringement by Toyota..." Sounds like a nice guy.
Peter DeVecchis' phone number is (727) 934-8778, Ext. 14 if you want to let him know how you feel about the patent.
Solomon says about their patent that their IP "combines variable torque converters, brushless motors with Neodymium Iron Boron (NeFe B) magnets, and a powerful regenerative feedback function that converts the motor(s) into a generator of electricity to recharge the batteries while under sail, and provide electrical power to other appliances on the boat."
I'm not saying that this is not cool stuff. I've heard great things about the Prius. But variable torque converters are common, brushless motors are common, Neodymium Iron Boron (NeFe B) magnets are common, generators are common, but my cookie recipe is patented for them, huh? Google those terms if you don't believe me.
I'm no automotive engineer or anything like it, but I've read about regenerative braking for almost 20 years, and I'm sure it wasn't new then either. In other words, the idea, excuse me, intellectual property, is common sense. I would bet that Ford, Toyota, and Honda's hybrid techniques were basically independently created. AFAIK, they are all similar. And then, the article says, "While the ITC can not assess damages against an infringer, it can issue an exclusion order prohibiting the importation of infringing technology. We will continue our effort to protect our intellectual property to the fullest extent possible."
So the goal is to prevent this technology from being available to people??? What a selfish prick.
Give the asshole a call.
"Hell, since the Mac can run Windows now too, why bother with a Mac version at all?"
After the initial shock of the Intel switch, I came to my senses a little, but that has always been my question.
If virtualization/emulation or whatever works on the Intel Mac at a decent speed, or worse, dual booting (/me remembers mid 90s in disbelief), why would current Windows software targets ever move?
I'm a little worried about the "close but no cigar" in the compatibility between Windows and Macs now. Only time will tell.
How well would a pair of wings work for a human? We have dense bone structure. We have muscles in places where they'd add extra weight during flight. We don't have any adaptations to our sensory organs to make them work well during flight or at high altitudes. We don't have attachment points in our skeletons for the added musculature needed to operate the wings.
Any respectable Linux geek and/or penguin fan knows penguins can fly underwater and we could do that too with the addition of wings and better lungs.
So, if I submit my email address to this database, and just say it belongs to a kid, I can stop recieving v!@gr@ spam?
That is what I would do, although I would guess it would have no affect on the amount of spam sent to me since most of it is from outside of the US.
Also, forgive my in-sensitivities again, but fuck the children. They will look at porn and drink alcohol because they want to anyway. Nobody wants spam, why make it special for kids and not the taxpayers?
The next generation of all of Intel's processors will indeed be 64-bit.
. htm.
Although the linked article does say what you claim, Intel has made 64bit processors for over 15 years (well, at least the FPU in the i860), and still makes embedded processors at 16bit. http://www.intel.com/products/embedded/processors
Why does the CPU roadmap linked only discuss the x86 chips? Although, it is their bread and butter, they do make a number of other chips that do have their own roadmaps as well.
Kinda strange I think.
Windows does not have a cult following. Its just what comes with their computer. Proof:
& q=windows+cult+following&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
& q=apple+cult+following&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Search on "Windows cult following":
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en
Search on "Apple cult following":
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en
Notice that the Windows cult following has some of the Apple cult following hits.
Macs are nice machines but they're not exactly easy to upgrade
AFAIK, "normal" people don't upgrade their computers. Macs often don't need upgrades because they come with what you want and need already, and anything extra or a niche can be installed as an external device and then can be plugged into your new computer if you want. Also, people keep Macs longer than Windows boxes, and they have a higher resale value. I've heard of retail salesman that have said that they don't like selling Macs that much because the people buy them and disappear. Windows buyers keep coming back for more stuff.
I guess that aside from games (I am not a gamer), I'm not sure why many Mac owners would want to run Windows. If anything, I would imagine that an "emulator" or something like wine might be of interest, but I'm not sure if that is possible. Personally, I would not mind running WinAmp on my Mac, but I would never dual boot or buy a windows box for WinAmp, and even in emulation it would suck because it would not be a native app. Meaning I couldn't use the Finder to load a file in WinAmp.
From reading the article, the algae suck up the CO2 and the Nitrogen Oxides from the power plant emissions.
I know thousands of hippies that would spend $5 a balloon for the nitrous oxide. Give the CO2 to some, err, plants, and everybody's happy.
Are you willing to pay hundreds of dollars extra to get Mac OS X?
Yes.
Do you think the average user will be?
Why would they? Do you think that the average driver drives a BMW like I do?
As the late Douglas Adams once said: "The Macintosh may only have 10% of the market, but it is clearly the top 10%."
The average people don't fit into that category. It doesn't come biggie sized.
Now you can super foe me!
No, it doesn't. You're probably thinking of the 9th Amendment, but that reads: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
:)
I did a cursory search of the Constitution and could not find the "inaliable rights" thing, but I hear about it all the time. Is that an urban legend or misquoted or misattributed to the Bill of Rights?
you do know that the indented portion of the earlier post was a direct quote of Roe v. Wade, and not my own words, right?
I didn't know for certain, but I figured as such. Seemed like a quote to me.
FYI, there are two kinds of due process, procedural (which is the kind you're likely thinking of there) and substantive. Procedural due process requires that if the government takes action that impairs your life, liberty, or property, they have to go about it the right way, e.g. by going to court. Substantive due process requires that the government cannot take such action unless it has a sufficiently strong reason for doing so, as compared to the strength of your right to life, liberty, or property.
Good info. What I believe is key to due process either substantive or procedural is that some form of third party or check is made and that nobody or agency or becomes too powerful as things have come already. I guess we will have to set ourselves on fire or get run over by a tank soon ourselves.
Also, what is YAIMNAL?
Ha! YA is all over the place as "yet another" something. I guess it might not make much english sense to say yet another i am not a lawyer, and especially when I did a typo
All societies have taboos, and all societies believe that those taboos protect either all of society or the target of the taboo.
Yeah, but we got over most of ours. Remember the "Red scare"? Its not like the FBI will investigate a college student for retrieving "The Little Red Book" from a library system or anything, right?
Oh, I must have forgot.
Inhibition of freedom, especially of basic information, only alienates people from the government. By making crimes out of non-crimes (morality, silly stuff) it only hurts the authority that the government has, because people give them less authority and then have to question which laws are really important or not.
Keep in mind that the US government did away with slavery in 1865 (or so), gave basic rights to women in 1920, and more rights (mostly lip service) to blacks and other minorities in 1964. It seems pretty common for governments to make egregious mistakes.
Oh, and we are part of the government process so long as we follow it, wether or not we approve of it.
I don't see how patents further anything -- research occurs with and without the force of patents.
I mostly agree, and mostly dislike patents. But I do see kindof a place for patents that benefit an industry I don't like to begin with, but seems to be a necessary evil.
Manmade drugs.
From what I know, it takes tons of money in research and development, testing, and liability to be in the drug business, and patents or something similar are necessary for this research.
I still believe that health care and medication is way overvalued and priced in the US, but there may be a cure or helpful medication some day. It seems like Viagra is the best drug to hit the market since penicillin (not from personal experience).
Software patents and business method patents are basically the same, and are stupid. Although they are instructions just like drugs. Argg, this is difficult. If a business method is good, be the first to implement it and go ahead and do business. There are so many other things that distinguish businesses that sharing a "business method" is not going to give a competitor or non-competitor any advantage, its just hindering progress. Software patents I don't get either. Things like the expiring of the RSA encryption patents in 2000 (9/20 I believe) were bad for many people. People are very rich writing free software, people are very rich from writing closed software in binary only.
Have you read Roe v. Wade?
... this does not make sense.
The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy.
Keep in mind that the US Constitution is the longest standing constitution in the world, and US is not a very old country. "Good" laws are more on the non-specific side, and bad ones add too specific information that will only be trumped when something similar comes up but not specific enough (most any new law regarding computers is basically redundant. fraud is a very inclusive law that is not used enough, etc).
The Constitution mentions "Certain Inaliable Rights", which is fairly and intentionally vague. Its in the Bill of Rights somewhere. I'm a little (lot) on the liberal side of people's rights, and I believe that privacy is one of them. I believe that the privacy is implied by the forgotten warrant and illegal search and seizure, not forcing US citizens to house troops, etc.
If I don't have the right to privacy,
Unless I am a harm to someone or myself as defined by a law and the law is followed by due process, then privacy is implied. (YAIMNAL).
To test the opposite, where is it explained that the government allowed to invade privacy? Baring due process and reasonable limits to protect others.
Easier to do remote backups onto the remote RAID with rsync too.
AKA "offsite storage" without the sneaker.
yes this is very true. It seems as though replication is becoming more common than "backups".
Tapes still scale to the "big boy" range at a cheaper price. We have 2 PB of storage and about 100 TB of cache between users and the tapes.
Storage needs and capacity is always increasing.
It's pretty expensive, to tell you the truth. I ran the specs on a Gateway NX560XL that is set up very similarly to the 15.4" MacBook Pro and got a price of $1454.99.
If price is all you care about, then go to Wal-mart or when Dell or Gateway is having a sale, buy a computer, but all of the other software you need, rinse and repeat in 2 years.
If you want to just get a nice looking, reliable, locally serviceable, notebook and tons of useful software that will last you 4 years or so, buy an Apple notebook.
Its up to you. If you need Linux by your side 24x7 I would go with the cheaper "PC" notebook.
FWIW, the NX560XL has a lower res monitor if that matters to you (not me). XP Pro, which I hear is worth it over home or media (not sure personally) will cost extra or your soul. I doubt the keys are backlit, which is a very nice feature. The new MacBook has a new safety feature that basically eliminates a majority of repairs -- magnetically attached power cord. Although, I've never had an issue with the power cord thing (I'm careful), I believe it might have almost happened once or twice. You're also giving up bluetooth.
There are tradeoffs for every action and inaction. To me, I would spend the extra $500 and get a computer with a better name and rep than a Gateway. Besides the old ones from 1997 or so at work, I don't remember the last time I've seen a Gateway.
I think the name is fine. Unfortunately, the product looks less like an Apple product and more like a laptop from a company that rhymes with "Hell".
I looked at the slideshow and the notebook looks almost identical to my powerbook. Every regular PC besides sony vios (whose designers helped with the new pow^H^H^HMacBook) looks '90s to me.
If it had cheap plastic and was thicker, it might look more like a dell, but to me it looks like a stylish notebook that I would be proud to have.
Am I the only person who thinks that 1440x900 is a pretty low resolution for a 15" laptop?
No, I've heard PC people say it, but I don't think its low.
I'm not sure what my iMac resolution is, its better than my powerbook which is 1280x854. I know a lot of younger Windows users like the ultra high resolution and squinting at the screen, but I don't have real estate issues, and everything is legible although the antialiasing in Tiger sucks vs Panther.
External monitors can be as nice as you can want I guess.
Am I not geek enough or man enough to need this ultra resolution? Is this something like gamers that need 8,000 FPM to shoot stuff?
I'm really curious what the need for ultra or slightly better than what is offered by Apple for portable computers.
Dropped FW 800
I don't use firewire for anything that _requires_ 800 speed, but don't some people, especially video people need this, and couldn't this be an issue for them?
One of the many things I like about my PowerBook is that I can plug anything into it -- including FW800. Any ideas here?