I agree with you concerning Windows platform, but on a Mac I don't. I find NN4.7 much much faster and, get this, much more stable than IE4.5. IE4.5 will crash me hard (force restart) every time I use it, but NN4.7 rarely crashed, and when it does the app can be force quit without a restart. I can't even remember the last time NN4.7 crashed on me.
The key? Turn off java. Who needs it anyway? Like I really need things scrolling across my screen.
As for security. Have there been any holes in either IE or NN that really affected the Mac platform?
>Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
Huh? There must be something very wrong with your setup. My machine easily saturates our 10BaseT. Plus, I remember Jobs nearly saturating a 100BaseT when he demoed OS8.6 and was comparing file transfer to NT.
Anyway, YMMV, but your claim is clearly circumspect.
Run Norton once in a blue moon and fix all you're B-tree problems if you think that is the source of your problems.
I agree with the earlier comment that once properly configured (read all the useless and buggy 3rd party extensions removed) and the OS almost never crashes. In fact I can't remember the last time my 8.6 B&W350 crashed where I needed a forced reboot. I do have apps crash, but a cmd-opt-esc almost always saves me from a reboot.
I do however realize there a number of inherent problems with the MacOS, but crashing is the least of them. The fact that clicking on a menu brings the system to a grinding halt, for example, is simply inexcusable.
Blame it on the weather. Yeah right. I live in Seattle and yeah, there was some lightning (1000 strikes *StateWide* in 24 hours). After living in here for three years this seemed like a lot, but remember it is only because we never get lightning. Living in New Mexico and Arizona I can say that 1000 strikes per storm cell is not uncommon. And besides, many places in the world get many more strikes on a continual basis and yet their services don't stop... even when the power actually goes out. So don't blame it on the weather.
Your second argument may hold some water (some), but the server shouldn't crash. The worst it should do is tell you it's too wimpy to cope and to try again later. Plus the LinuxPPC is running on a 132MHz PPC 604, not exactly a mighty processor.
Based on the number of tidbit Rob posts about Apple and the iMac, not to mention that he rarely slams Apple like many other/.ers, I think Rob has at least an iMac and probably a G3 at home/work.
Hell he may even switch to OSXserver.... but I doubt it. Yo!
I remember a when OSX server came out someone wanted to know when there was a site running on MacOSXserver. Well http://www.publicsource.apple.com is on OSX server, so see if it holds up any better than FreeBSD.
Agreed. We _know _ only 30 people from the outside have contributed code. So let's see if the/.ers will put up or shut up. I think neither...they'll just flame on and microdissect various licenses, the projects of which they'll never write a line of code for.
... many of the readers on/. promulgate the tenets of open source.
Many get all wrapped up in flame wars over ESR and RMS and Bruce and Apple and M$.
Many advocate an OS that is difficult to use, but use it for the same reason; demonstrating their technical abilities.
Many are programmers, or much more so than your average joe.
And... many complain about the lack of a good browser for Linux.
And now JWZ resigns from an open source project which has the ability to demonstrate to the rest of the world why open source matters and what it can do. JWZ basically says over and over that only about 30 people contributed to the _code_ in Mozilla that were not NS employees. Then apparently to assuage the OS advocates and to fend off the naysayers, he says that open source works.
So how can a critical open source project lose its leader due to the projects' inability to ship a product when there are so many/.ers who daily flame each other over the virtues of open source, but who obviously have not backed up their words by writing code for such a critical open source project?
I have no understanding of why Linux advocates complain so much about running *LINUX* on apple hardware. Seems to me like the more exposure for the *OS* the better. You can make your proprietary bla bla bla argument all you want, but is only running Linux on Intel and Alpha (and there are so many daily users who need Alpha boxes) what you really want?
I am assuming that if ten moderators lower the score for a post, then it will drop by ten points. If this is correct, then a slightly bad post could really get hammered.
The solution could be a defined scale... 1-10. 1=crap, 10=insightful, cogent, on topic, etc. 5=Average, where every post starts 4=AC, if you want to penalize them
If your a moderator, you have ten radio buttons and you can vote on any post. All the moderators' numerical votes are averaged and the post gets that ranking.
As a user, you can set your threshold to any number from 1-10.
How about a simple scale like 1-10? Each post starts out a 5 and each moderator has 10 radio button for each post then can select a _defined_ level for a post. 1=First Post, LINUX r00lz; 10=well informed, thought out and presented argument. Then if a moderator submits a new level, it a _averaged_ with all other moderations to give the story a new level. This way if I want everything I set my level to 1. If I want only the best posts, 9 or 10. This also alleviates the problem of an okay post being lowered by numerous moderators to a level way lower than it should. The same goes for increasing the level.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you concerning Windows platform, but on a Mac I don't. I find NN4.7 much much faster and, get this, much more stable than IE4.5. IE4.5 will crash me hard (force restart) every time I use it, but NN4.7 rarely crashed, and when it does the app can be force quit without a restart. I can't even remember the last time NN4.7 crashed on me.
The key? Turn off java. Who needs it anyway? Like I really need things scrolling across my screen.
As for security. Have there been any holes in either IE or NN that really affected the Mac platform?
>Their TCP/IP stack can't handle ftping at more that 10KB/s on a 10BaseT connection to the server that is 20 feet away...
Huh? There must be something very wrong with your setup. My machine easily saturates our 10BaseT. Plus, I remember Jobs nearly saturating a 100BaseT when he demoed OS8.6 and was comparing file transfer to NT.
Anyway, YMMV, but your claim is clearly circumspect.
Yo
Run Norton once in a blue moon and fix all you're B-tree problems if you think that is the source of your problems.
I agree with the earlier comment that once properly configured (read all the useless and buggy 3rd party extensions removed) and the OS almost never crashes. In fact I can't remember the last time my 8.6 B&W350 crashed where I needed a forced reboot. I do have apps crash, but a cmd-opt-esc almost always saves me from a reboot.
I do however realize there a number of inherent problems with the MacOS, but crashing is the least of them. The fact that clicking on a menu brings the system to a grinding halt, for example, is simply inexcusable.
Yo
Blame it on the weather. Yeah right. I live in Seattle and yeah, there was some lightning (1000 strikes *StateWide* in 24 hours). After living in here for three years this seemed like a lot, but remember it is only because we never get lightning. Living in New Mexico and Arizona I can say that 1000 strikes per storm cell is not uncommon. And besides, many places in the world get many more strikes on a continual basis and yet their services don't stop... even when the power actually goes out. So don't blame it on the weather.
Your second argument may hold some water (some), but the server shouldn't crash. The worst it should do is tell you it's too wimpy to cope and to try again later. Plus the LinuxPPC is running on a 132MHz PPC 604, not exactly a mighty processor.
Just pointing out the ovious
Yo
Based on the number of tidbit Rob posts about Apple and the iMac, not to mention that he rarely slams Apple like many other /.ers, I think Rob has at least an iMac and probably a G3 at home/work.
Hell he may even switch to OSXserver.... but I doubt it.
Yo!
I remember a when OSX server came out someone wanted to know when there was a site running on MacOSXserver. Well http://www.publicsource.apple.com is on OSX server, so see if it holds up any better than FreeBSD.
Yo!
Agreed. We _know _ only 30 people from the outside have contributed code. So let's see if the /.ers will put up or shut up. I think neither...they'll just flame on and microdissect various licenses, the projects of which they'll never write a line of code for.
Linux does need a good browser... doesn't it?
Yo!
... many of the readers on /. promulgate the tenets of open source.
/.ers who daily flame each other over the virtues of open source, but who obviously have not backed up their words by writing code for such a critical open source project?
Many get all wrapped up in flame wars over ESR and RMS and Bruce and Apple and M$.
Many advocate an OS that is difficult to use, but use it for the same reason; demonstrating their technical abilities.
Many are programmers, or much more so than your average joe.
And... many complain about the lack of a good browser for Linux.
And now JWZ resigns from an open source project which has the ability to demonstrate to the rest of the world why open source matters and what it can do. JWZ basically says over and over that only about 30 people contributed to the _code_ in Mozilla that were not NS employees. Then apparently to assuage the OS advocates and to fend off the naysayers, he says that open source works.
So how can a critical open source project lose its leader due to the projects' inability to ship a product when there are so many
Yo!
I have no understanding of why Linux advocates complain so much about running *LINUX* on apple hardware. Seems to me like the more exposure for the *OS* the better. You can make your proprietary bla bla bla argument all you want, but is only running Linux on Intel and Alpha (and there are so many daily users who need Alpha boxes) what you really want?
Yo!
I am assuming that if ten moderators lower the score for a post, then it will drop by ten points. If this is correct, then a slightly bad post could really get hammered.
The solution could be a defined scale... 1-10.
1=crap,
10=insightful, cogent, on topic, etc.
5=Average, where every post starts
4=AC, if you want to penalize them
If your a moderator, you have ten radio buttons and you can vote on any post. All the moderators' numerical votes are averaged and the post gets that ranking.
As a user, you can set your threshold to any number from 1-10.
I'll try this again.
How about a simple scale like 1-10? Each post starts out a 5 and each moderator has 10 radio button for each post then can select a _defined_ level for a post. 1=First Post, LINUX r00lz; 10=well informed, thought out and presented argument. Then if a moderator submits a new level, it a _averaged_ with all other moderations to give the story a new level. This way if I want everything I set my level to 1. If I want only the best posts, 9 or 10. This also alleviates the problem of an okay post being lowered by numerous moderators to a level way lower than it should. The same goes for increasing the level.
Yo!