You're _so_ right. I'm sure boat users and plan flyers really need to worry about this. I mean, they're so close to power lines! And hey, nobody ever thinks about those poor people flying planes, they're practically defenseless! PEople will just let them die by the hundreds since aircraft are so unprotected!
I'm sorry, did that whole ditraibe seem sarcastic?
Did that "AMD" tattoo on your pantyline hurt? You're clearly convinced you're some kind of iconoclast cyber-genius, but most of your gibberish is old hat.
First, if Intel released a 5GHz P4 this year, it would be the fastest chip out there without question through 2003. I don't understand what kind of congenital brain defect is responsible for you and the AC claiming otherwise. End of story.
Intel and Windows have the market because they are the best solution for more people. You dirty geeky nerds don't count, and nobody really cares about your "Worst OS Ever!" inside jokes.
Lastly, you are seriously d u m b. Right now Intel has the fastest solution. It also happens to be higher speed MHz. I never claimed all higher speed chips are faster. It just happens for you, unfortunately, that this is true right now.
Clue: Umm, 5GHz processor...It _would_ be faster, rocket surgeon. Maybe "Joe Idiot" is a bad choice of names since he seems to be a little smarter than you think.
A real 'Joe Idiot' thinks a 64-bit processor is somehow going to be faster, when in fact it will do aboslutely nothing for 'Joe Idiot', or for most people with desktop machines.
"Best" web server? Questionable. It depends on what you're using it for. Enterprise application development is far easier in the IIS world. Performance isn't everything.
Best kernel is even more questionable. Solaris is much more mature, and has a better threading model. The WinXP kernel is quite advanced whether you people like the rest of the OS or not.
And NTFS is a very nice filesystem. Better ACL management, decent to good performance, journaling, etc...
...follow the terms of the license, or don't use it.
You're completely right. Please, people, follow this advise. Do not use the GPL. It's a pain in the ass for everyone involved.
If you want it to be free, use a free license like BSD/MIT. Nobody is going to sell your code unless they make substantial (incredibly) changes or incorporate it into a much larger project.
But still, it all depends on the type of application. You don't write "real" applications in TCL/TK _or_ VB. You use C++, C#, Java, Eiffel, whatever. VB and Tcl/TK aren't great examples of how to write complex, yet manageable applications.
Visual Studio.NET doesn't have an equal on the Unix side, and most other IDE's work better on Windows as well (e.g. Netbeans, Eclipse). The Windows API is _much_ richer than your average Unix API, though of course it's easier for Windows since there's only one version.
Some of the most cutting edge applications in existence run on the Windows platform. It's faster to develop Windows applications that Unix-based apps because the Windows development environment is so much better, in general.
You seem to believe that your rancorous dislike of MS has something to do with how well people can develop applications for it.
I mean, what do you think, that security holes are going to stop developers? Do you also think there is a good alternative? Unix security is pathetic, as well. It's entirely a matter of the application developer, not the OS. Windows XP _proper_ (meaning the core OS only) is quite secure, the problems you see are with applications (from MS or from others).
Microsoft's record of failure with regards to security is directory proportional to the fact that there are for more Windows machines out there than any other platform, hence it's under much more scrutiny.
Also, note, Unix security has historically been a complete joke, riddled with buffer overflow exploits. In fact, it largely still is a joke in terms of application exploits.
Nonsense. The whole concept of their complaint is idiotic. No matter what you do, you're excluding someone. What about people who can't read? What about people who speak Zimbabwayan?
It's just fucking stupid. They can _call_ the company to confirm they're real people. They can send in a hand-written email requesting access. Whiners.
Hint: That's because nobody gives a flying shit about other operating systems, because nobody FUCKING USES them.
You expect people to write viruses for what, QNX? BSDI? Linux? Yeah, write, and infect all (relatively speaking) 50 users?
Right... If people gave a shit about Linux you can rest assured that there are numerous unexploited buffer overruns, misconfigured systems, etc... that they could infect a large number of them.
If "most people" consider it a crime, "most people" are idiots. If I sign a contract to work for you for 8 months, then I decide not to, I'm a criminal? Completely wrong.
I'm no flunky, I develop software on both architectures and I understand both Windows and Unix. I'm just not some pathetic, dirty, stinky nerd zealot who hates MS in everything they do simply because they're too "mainstream".
As for anti-trust, the allegation is absurd. There are countless alternatives to Windows and to Microsoft. How can MS conceivably have a monopoly? And if they do, it's based on intellectual property, not a finite resource they can control and use to starve or freeze people.
Computer OS's are not oil, power, water, or even phone lines. The concept of applying antitrust law to them is completely idiotic and is obviously a pitiful attempt by their competitors to negate the fact that the masses have, time and again, _chosen_ MS products.
Your analogy makes you look stupid. Until I've been proven guilty of burning down your house, you have no recourse against me and you of course shouldn't be allowed to live in my house.
As for "very illegal and harmful activities", bullshit. Contract law is not criminal law, Microsoft did nothing illegal in this case. As for harmful, complete bullshit. Antitrust law applied to intellectual property is asinine. End of story.
Are you daft, or do you just misinterpret for the sake of avoiding the argument? Of course you know exactly what I meant.
I love how people go on and on about all this great free music out there. Yeah, that's why people use P2P. Sure. That's why you need P2P after all, it's not like all those great free musicians can't find other online venues to give away their great music.
You have the right to download anything out there you wish??!? Do you really believe that? Unfortunately, ignorance of the law is no defense.
And "fair use" is a pretty limited thing. It grants you immunity from prosecution in certain circumstances, it doesn't require the publisher to in any way facilitate you copying anything. So if they come out with an unbreakable copy-proof media, don't go complaining about fair use.
Any chimp in training should have been able to infer what I meant by "free music". And the RIAA won't be able to do anything to people who download all those great fucking "free" songs out there people are spending all their time on Kazaa looking for.
Jesus H Fucking Christ, at least be intellectually honest. You like to download free """COPYRIGHTED"""!!!!!!!! music. Don't give me any shit about fair use. Fair use doesn't include copying music over a P2P network because you think you should be able to, whether you have the song on vinyl, or whether you're just stealing it.
It's not a problem for me, it's a problem for _everything_ else.
You can't just decide to use a 64-bit time_t in your program. The kernel, libraries, and all the tools on the system have to be recompiled to use it. This includes any commercial binaries you use that use time_t.
Umm, I get my information from myself because I understand software. Clearly you either don't develop software, or you do it in a high-level language where you don't have to worry about those nasty, nasty bits.
To get past the 32-bit time_t you need to recompile everything. You can do this with absolutely no difference in effort on a 32-bit machine vs. a 64-bit machine.
Slashdot Mirror
You're _so_ right. I'm sure boat users and plan flyers really need to worry about this. I mean, they're so close to power lines! And hey, nobody ever thinks about those poor people flying planes, they're practically defenseless! PEople will just let them die by the hundreds since aircraft are so unprotected!
I'm sorry, did that whole ditraibe seem sarcastic?
Yeah, sorry. 2 words.
Nobody cares.
Did that "AMD" tattoo on your pantyline hurt? You're clearly convinced you're some kind of iconoclast cyber-genius, but most of your gibberish is old hat.
First, if Intel released a 5GHz P4 this year, it would be the fastest chip out there without question through 2003. I don't understand what kind of congenital brain defect is responsible for you and the AC claiming otherwise. End of story.
Intel and Windows have the market because they are the best solution for more people. You dirty geeky nerds don't count, and nobody really cares about your "Worst OS Ever!" inside jokes.
Lastly, you are seriously d u m b. Right now Intel has the fastest solution. It also happens to be higher speed MHz. I never claimed all higher speed chips are faster. It just happens for you, unfortunately, that this is true right now.
Clue: Umm, 5GHz processor...It _would_ be faster, rocket surgeon. Maybe "Joe Idiot" is a bad choice of names since he seems to be a little smarter than you think.
A real 'Joe Idiot' thinks a 64-bit processor is somehow going to be faster, when in fact it will do aboslutely nothing for 'Joe Idiot', or for most people with desktop machines.
Yeah, it's just a party trick - I agree.
One-time costs of the machines is such a small factor, and lasers are well established and reliable.
"Best" web server? Questionable. It depends on what you're using it for. Enterprise application development is far easier in the IIS world. Performance isn't everything.
Best kernel is even more questionable. Solaris is much more mature, and has a better threading model. The WinXP kernel is quite advanced whether you people like the rest of the OS or not.
And NTFS is a very nice filesystem. Better ACL management, decent to good performance, journaling, etc...
...follow the terms of the license, or don't use it.
You're completely right. Please, people, follow this advise. Do not use the GPL. It's a pain in the ass for everyone involved.
If you want it to be free, use a free license like BSD/MIT. Nobody is going to sell your code unless they make substantial (incredibly) changes or incorporate it into a much larger project.
You could have used Tcl/TK on Windows, of course.
.NET doesn't have an equal on the Unix side, and most other IDE's work better on Windows as well (e.g. Netbeans, Eclipse). The Windows API is _much_ richer than your average Unix API, though of course it's easier for Windows since there's only one version.
But still, it all depends on the type of application. You don't write "real" applications in TCL/TK _or_ VB. You use C++, C#, Java, Eiffel, whatever. VB and Tcl/TK aren't great examples of how to write complex, yet manageable applications.
Visual Studio
You sure told me. What a trenchant analysis.
More accurate:
Somewhere, in a dank, stinky cube, some dirty geeky nerds are having a baseless laugh.
Right... You're, umm, smart.
Some of the most cutting edge applications in existence run on the Windows platform. It's faster to develop Windows applications that Unix-based apps because the Windows development environment is so much better, in general.
You seem to believe that your rancorous dislike of MS has something to do with how well people can develop applications for it.
I mean, what do you think, that security holes are going to stop developers? Do you also think there is a good alternative? Unix security is pathetic, as well. It's entirely a matter of the application developer, not the OS. Windows XP _proper_ (meaning the core OS only) is quite secure, the problems you see are with applications (from MS or from others).
Quite deluding yourself.
You people are a broken record.
Microsoft's record of failure with regards to security is directory proportional to the fact that there are for more Windows machines out there than any other platform, hence it's under much more scrutiny.
Also, note, Unix security has historically been a complete joke, riddled with buffer overflow exploits. In fact, it largely still is a joke in terms of application exploits.
Nonsense. The whole concept of their complaint is idiotic. No matter what you do, you're excluding someone. What about people who can't read? What about people who speak Zimbabwayan?
It's just fucking stupid. They can _call_ the company to confirm they're real people. They can send in a hand-written email requesting access. Whiners.
Why on Earth would you say "e.g. AMD vs. Intel CPU's"? Speed is everything. IPC is worthless, the only thing that matters is speed.
Now, you could argue that MHz isn't everything, of course.
Hint: That's because nobody gives a flying shit about other operating systems, because nobody FUCKING USES them.
You expect people to write viruses for what, QNX? BSDI? Linux? Yeah, write, and infect all (relatively speaking) 50 users?
Right... If people gave a shit about Linux you can rest assured that there are numerous unexploited buffer overruns, misconfigured systems, etc... that they could infect a large number of them.
None are 100%, or, umm, 2% perfect?
If "most people" consider it a crime, "most people" are idiots. If I sign a contract to work for you for 8 months, then I decide not to, I'm a criminal? Completely wrong.
I'm no flunky, I develop software on both architectures and I understand both Windows and Unix. I'm just not some pathetic, dirty, stinky nerd zealot who hates MS in everything they do simply because they're too "mainstream".
As for anti-trust, the allegation is absurd. There are countless alternatives to Windows and to Microsoft. How can MS conceivably have a monopoly? And if they do, it's based on intellectual property, not a finite resource they can control and use to starve or freeze people.
Computer OS's are not oil, power, water, or even phone lines. The concept of applying antitrust law to them is completely idiotic and is obviously a pitiful attempt by their competitors to negate the fact that the masses have, time and again, _chosen_ MS products.
Are you daft or deranged?
Your analogy makes you look stupid. Until I've been proven guilty of burning down your house, you have no recourse against me and you of course shouldn't be allowed to live in my house.
As for "very illegal and harmful activities", bullshit. Contract law is not criminal law, Microsoft did nothing illegal in this case. As for harmful, complete bullshit. Antitrust law applied to intellectual property is asinine. End of story.
Are you daft, or do you just misinterpret for the sake of avoiding the argument? Of course you know exactly what I meant.
I love how people go on and on about all this great free music out there. Yeah, that's why people use P2P. Sure. That's why you need P2P after all, it's not like all those great free musicians can't find other online venues to give away their great music.
What in God's name are you talking about?
You have the right to download anything out there you wish??!? Do you really believe that? Unfortunately, ignorance of the law is no defense.
And "fair use" is a pretty limited thing. It grants you immunity from prosecution in certain circumstances, it doesn't require the publisher to in any way facilitate you copying anything. So if they come out with an unbreakable copy-proof media, don't go complaining about fair use.
If you want to put those songs on your computer, you extract the audio.
Legally, just because you own the cassette doesn't give you carte blanche to the songs on it in perpetuity.
And I'm not saying it's so horrible to download commercial MP3's, I'm just saying don't blame the RIAA for going after people who break the law.
Bullshit. Get real, you think the RIAA is going after the 3 people who don't trade in copyrighted songs?
Try being intellectually honest sometime, it's invigorating.
Wow. What a bunch of lying, sophist assholes.
Any chimp in training should have been able to infer what I meant by "free music". And the RIAA won't be able to do anything to people who download all those great fucking "free" songs out there people are spending all their time on Kazaa looking for.
Jesus H Fucking Christ, at least be intellectually honest. You like to download free """COPYRIGHTED"""!!!!!!!! music. Don't give me any shit about fair use. Fair use doesn't include copying music over a P2P network because you think you should be able to, whether you have the song on vinyl, or whether you're just stealing it.
It's not a problem for me, it's a problem for _everything_ else.
You can't just decide to use a 64-bit time_t in your program. The kernel, libraries, and all the tools on the system have to be recompiled to use it. This includes any commercial binaries you use that use time_t.
What's wrong with this, supposedly, why does the article make it sound like "Oh no, more evil antics from the RIAA"!
They are doing the _right_ thing. Go after people breaking the law, not the entire service.
Newsbreak! You don't have the right to download free music!
Umm, I get my information from myself because I understand software. Clearly you either don't develop software, or you do it in a high-level language where you don't have to worry about those nasty, nasty bits.
To get past the 32-bit time_t you need to recompile everything. You can do this with absolutely no difference in effort on a 32-bit machine vs. a 64-bit machine.