I just went to java.com and went to the manual download page (since the automatic page detected I have a JVM installed) and the "offline" installer I downloaded was 15,633,128 bytes (14.9MB, if you just want to toss numbers around). The net installer package was about 1.5MB. Where are you getting this 27MB number?
Files with the.ics extension are actually iCalendar (or sometimes vCalendar) files and are supposed to a spec (RFC 2445) jointly authored by representatives from Microsoft and Lotus (now IBM). Interestingly, Microsoft has done a really mediocre job of implementing parts of this spec in the past, as I found when trying to generate files that Outlook would be able to read.
Apple is also using the iCalendar format for their calendaring app, iCal (which conveniently has the same name as the standard, no confusion there). As far as I can tell, they're done a better job of it so far, as have the Sunbird people.
Any switch can blow up if a transition isn't well-planned or done with the right expertise. In my experience, major shifts like that require a lot of training of existing staff while bringing in a number of consultants that are fluent in the new tech.
True, choosing a product that is a poor fit will make it blow up in your face, but that doesn't mean that sticking with the old code forever is the answer.
Besides, we use SAP at my place of work and are pretty damn successful.
Role of programmer versus server admin
on
J2EE Security
·
· Score: 1
While it'd be nice to know these steps, I've personally never had to address them. This book seems to cover all of the programmer-oriented pieces of the security model while assuming the server environment is complete.
I would guess the reasoning for omitting these steps is due to this role seperation, or the fact that Application Servers and OSes tend to have vastly different configuration options and covering all of them (or even just a few major ones like WebLogic, JRun, WebSphere, etc.) could be a book in itself. I'd prefer to see those issues addressed by a seasoned server admin who would ideally have a book like this that would only cover the steps you feel were left out.
And while I don't regularly watch FOX News, they were the only station not to prematurely declare Al Gore the next president of the United States during the last election.
I can't remember, but did they only make a single declaration a week later? If not, then they prematurely declared George W. Bush president since it wasn't officially decided until later.
To the credit of most networks, the "winner" was announced multiple times over the evening, until everyone gave up during the wee hours of the morning.
The following example shows an OBJECT tag that loads a control without a prompt from Internet Explorer because the NOEXTERNALDATA attribute is set to true. The control does not receive the URL property.
In other words, the control doesn't get that URL parameter, it's just loading the component without a data source.
Let me clarify: MS also mentions a way to inline base64 encoded data. This would stop the popup dialog, but I think it sort of kills part of the point of linking to data. If a page had some flash elements (or even images embedded with ), you'd have to load that content even with browsing with images/flash/etc disabled.
The NOEXTERNALDATA tag can only be used when there are no parameters passed. If I simply have as their example shows, then the plugin will load, but will not know where to load data from. It'd be similar to loading the flash plugin but not pointing it to a data file... pretty useless.
Additional parameters (like a file) would be ignored if NOEXTERNALDATA is specified.
Oddly enough, the tag is theoretically the correct way to embed images, depending on how you read the HTML spec. Can you imagine a popup coming up for every image on a page?
At a recent project review meeting, developers at my company listed the strengths of our development process. To my surprise, user interface design was mentioned as one of our stronger points. While I haven't been around long enough to see many projects, I definitely didn't believe this was the case.
I think what has happened is that web applications have expanded the user base of our programs while lowering the training curve. Where we might have built an application for a specific group in the past and conducted training specific to their needs, we're now deploying web apps that are used by a much broader group that gets no specific training.
You can get away with mediocre user interfaces when you're there to tell a group exactly how it works (and they pass on that information), but if your work needs to be quickly understood by a broad base, then usability is a necessity.
Since nobody has brought it up this time around....
Space is yet another area to explore, but what about the depths of the ocean? There's ongoing research, but much of it lacks the funding and technology. Sound familiar? The majority of the planet's surface is covered with water, but little of it has been explored in-depth. Sure, we might not have a base on the moon, but we don't have one on the ocean floor either.
Having SQL Server as the underlying filesystem technology doesn't mean that you're going to be running SQL Server directly. I mean, if you currently use NTFS, there isn't a NTFS daemon that the kernel connects to when it does filesystem transactions. Just like every other filesystem, the support will be built into the kernel. Instead of writing data as NTFS does, the structure will look a lot more like how SQL Server stores data -- with built in indexes, etc.
Many database servers already have some fairly optimized code when it comes to file access. This just implements it at the kernel level, rather than having it sit on top of a traditional fs.
IBM uses Eclipse as a basis
on
Eclipse in Action
·
· Score: 2, Informative
WSAD is a lot bulkier than Eclipse, and integrates strongly with WebSphere for debugging. It also includes a lot more project types than Eclipse, although there are some Eclipse plugins that add similar functionality.
First, as others have mentioned, the "homebase" system is just xul, meaning that it is the same layer as the browser. In addition, Mozilla does not have to call gnome/kde, and it can run without a window manager, as it is its own environment. So basically you have as much overhead as running KDE or GNOME.
This will not be faster than KDE or GNOME. It will be simpler because it will have a consistent user interface with interactivity between applications at the forefront. You can easily use this system as a standalone web terminal without the use for any other apps.
Therefore, it's better than other solutions when these are your requirements.
What Invader Zim\Hot Topic rumor are you talking about? All I ever heard was that they were going to start carrying Zim merchandise (t-shirts, etc.) which they, in fact, now do. Either that or I keep hallucinating my friend's "Ride the Pig" t-shirt.
It was show true in the courts (in the US, at least) that personal information does have a value and you cannot advertise something as free if you provide it in return for personal info.
In this case, DMACC does have a library -- but not at this location. As stated by others, this is only one location of a fairly widespread community college (they have classes at an urban campus, the main campus is in a neighboring city, and the West Des Moines campus is a new addition). In other words, while this specific location may have a tech library, it's not necessary.
As a Computer Science student (one year left), I took a software engineering class this past semester that was basically about the different models and processes of a project. While the waterfall model and others were used and introduced, a variety of techniques like XP were taught as well. The advantages and disadvantages of different development techniques were addressed, along with material on how to find the right process for a given task.
Although acceptance can be slow, schools *are* teaching this.
While normally marketing involves a producer attempting to convince a consumer to either purchase or flat-out use what they have created, it's a different situation when it comes to Open Source Software.
The main difference lies in that you have to rely on publicity to market your project to fellow developers as well. I would assume the OpenBeOS team would like like-minded individuals to join in their development efforts. However, to do so, they have to answer questions. Why work on this project, and not develop for BeOS R5? Why not work on a different operating system?
Obviously, some of their work has been done by Be, since BeOS was a well-crafted product with a lot of potential. But looking over their website, there are many features that relate to marketing - such as a FAQ. It may not be in the strict definition, but I'd say any time you're convincing others to flock to your cause by extolling your project's virtues, it's a form of marketing.
Not being able to get into somewhere in another state seems trivial until it actually happens. I drove over four hours with some friends to catch a concert in Chicago last spring, and we were turned away at the door after they decided they didn't trust our drivers licenses.
Supposedly some people had come to the same place two weeks before with Iowa licenses and they turned out to be fake. It didn't help that my license looked slightly different than that of my friend's, since we got them on different years and the design had been changed. We even stuck around another half hour for the officer on duty who was going to be around, but he didn't feel it was worth the effort to actually check into the matter.
Four hours driving there, four hours back. I would have appreciated some sort of standard license.
I personally only care about the directors with a strong artistic vision who create movies where the actions in the movie MEAN something. Would a version of A Clockwork Orange without violence make a point? Would Requiem For A Dream make sense if you don't see the consequences of the characters' actions? There are many cases where directors have fought to keep their works intact because of the message it conveys.
If you need to edit a movie, why watch it at all? You're most likely (though not always) conveying the message that you want more movies with gratuitous sex and violence. Why not just watch good movies, instead of editing bad ones to the point you don't feel offended by viewing them?
Yes, the majority of Hollywood blockbusters are group-targetting business ventures. But isn't it insulting to assume all movies are? I would like to think artistic vision should only be limited by practical constraints, not necessarily who will find the movie objectionable.
Where do you draw the line on what is objectionable? At the point where your backers start to pull back their money?
While this may not apply to a lot of B-grade movies, isn't there something to be said about artistic vision? Many directors are appalled by the changes their movies go through to be shown on television. In recent times, movies like Schindler's List have been shown on TV completely unedited (and witohut commercials) because of the strong messages they express in their unedited forms.
While many other films may not have such morally redeeming qualities, I remember when many Kubrick fans were upset when changes were made to his last film after his death. Not to mention the fact that Darren Aranofsky refused to edit Requiem for a Dream, and because of this it was not shown in the majority of theaters.
If I were a director, I would be appalled to think that a group of people were selectively removing parts of my film to make it appealing to a different group than I made the movie for, especially if I felt that the so-called "objectionable" content figured greatly into the film's message.
Slashdot Mirror
I just went to java.com and went to the manual download page (since the automatic page detected I have a JVM installed) and the "offline" installer I downloaded was 15,633,128 bytes (14.9MB, if you just want to toss numbers around). The net installer package was about 1.5MB. Where are you getting this 27MB number?
Files with the .ics extension are actually iCalendar (or sometimes vCalendar) files and are supposed to a spec (RFC 2445) jointly authored by representatives from Microsoft and Lotus (now IBM). Interestingly, Microsoft has done a really mediocre job of implementing parts of this spec in the past, as I found when trying to generate files that Outlook would be able to read.
Apple is also using the iCalendar format for their calendaring app, iCal (which conveniently has the same name as the standard, no confusion there). As far as I can tell, they're done a better job of it so far, as have the Sunbird people.
You must not be looking close enough.
Any switch can blow up if a transition isn't well-planned or done with the right expertise. In my experience, major shifts like that require a lot of training of existing staff while bringing in a number of consultants that are fluent in the new tech.
True, choosing a product that is a poor fit will make it blow up in your face, but that doesn't mean that sticking with the old code forever is the answer.
Besides, we use SAP at my place of work and are pretty damn successful.
While it'd be nice to know these steps, I've personally never had to address them. This book seems to cover all of the programmer-oriented pieces of the security model while assuming the server environment is complete.
I would guess the reasoning for omitting these steps is due to this role seperation, or the fact that Application Servers and OSes tend to have vastly different configuration options and covering all of them (or even just a few major ones like WebLogic, JRun, WebSphere, etc.) could be a book in itself. I'd prefer to see those issues addressed by a seasoned server admin who would ideally have a book like this that would only cover the steps you feel were left out.
..both a new Powerbook and a new iPod
Neither of which is a desktop, meaning the original poster's point may be valid.
I can't remember, but did they only make a single declaration a week later? If not, then they prematurely declared George W. Bush president since it wasn't officially decided until later.
To the credit of most networks, the "winner" was announced multiple times over the evening, until everyone gave up during the wee hours of the morning.
The following example shows an OBJECT tag that loads a control without a prompt from Internet Explorer because the NOEXTERNALDATA attribute is set to true. The control does not receive the URL property.
In other words, the control doesn't get that URL parameter, it's just loading the component without a data source.
Let me clarify: MS also mentions a way to inline base64 encoded data. This would stop the popup dialog, but I think it sort of kills part of the point of linking to data. If a page had some flash elements (or even images embedded with ), you'd have to load that content even with browsing with images/flash/etc disabled.
The NOEXTERNALDATA tag can only be used when there are no parameters passed. If I simply have as their example shows, then the plugin will load, but will not know where to load data from. It'd be similar to loading the flash plugin but not pointing it to a data file... pretty useless.
Additional parameters (like a file) would be ignored if NOEXTERNALDATA is specified.
Oddly enough, the tag is theoretically the correct way to embed images, depending on how you read the HTML spec. Can you imagine a popup coming up for every image on a page?
At a recent project review meeting, developers at my company listed the strengths of our development process. To my surprise, user interface design was mentioned as one of our stronger points. While I haven't been around long enough to see many projects, I definitely didn't believe this was the case.
I think what has happened is that web applications have expanded the user base of our programs while lowering the training curve. Where we might have built an application for a specific group in the past and conducted training specific to their needs, we're now deploying web apps that are used by a much broader group that gets no specific training.
You can get away with mediocre user interfaces when you're there to tell a group exactly how it works (and they pass on that information), but if your work needs to be quickly understood by a broad base, then usability is a necessity.
Since nobody has brought it up this time around....
Space is yet another area to explore, but what about the depths of the ocean? There's ongoing research, but much of it lacks the funding and technology. Sound familiar? The majority of the planet's surface is covered with water, but little of it has been explored in-depth. Sure, we might not have a base on the moon, but we don't have one on the ocean floor either.
Having SQL Server as the underlying filesystem technology doesn't mean that you're going to be running SQL Server directly. I mean, if you currently use NTFS, there isn't a NTFS daemon that the kernel connects to when it does filesystem transactions. Just like every other filesystem, the support will be built into the kernel. Instead of writing data as NTFS does, the structure will look a lot more like how SQL Server stores data -- with built in indexes, etc.
Many database servers already have some fairly optimized code when it comes to file access. This just implements it at the kernel level, rather than having it sit on top of a traditional fs.
..for what I believe is their current flagship Java development tool, WebSphere Studio Application Developer.
WSAD is a lot bulkier than Eclipse, and integrates strongly with WebSphere for debugging. It also includes a lot more project types than Eclipse, although there are some Eclipse plugins that add similar functionality.
First, as others have mentioned, the "homebase" system is just xul, meaning that it is the same layer as the browser. In addition, Mozilla does not have to call gnome/kde, and it can run without a window manager, as it is its own environment. So basically you have as much overhead as running KDE or GNOME.
This will not be faster than KDE or GNOME. It will be simpler because it will have a consistent user interface with interactivity between applications at the forefront. You can easily use this system as a standalone web terminal without the use for any other apps.
Therefore, it's better than other solutions when these are your requirements.
What Invader Zim\Hot Topic rumor are you talking about? All I ever heard was that they were going to start carrying Zim merchandise (t-shirts, etc.) which they, in fact, now do. Either that or I keep hallucinating my friend's "Ride the Pig" t-shirt.
It was show true in the courts (in the US, at least) that personal information does have a value and you cannot advertise something as free if you provide it in return for personal info.
..leaves out the word "an."
Ideally it should read "An Iowa college has gone paperless," but due to some bad choices in titling, some people may interpret it otherwise.
In this case, DMACC does have a library -- but not at this location. As stated by others, this is only one location of a fairly widespread community college (they have classes at an urban campus, the main campus is in a neighboring city, and the West Des Moines campus is a new addition). In other words, while this specific location may have a tech library, it's not necessary.
As a Computer Science student (one year left), I took a software engineering class this past semester that was basically about the different models and processes of a project. While the waterfall model and others were used and introduced, a variety of techniques like XP were taught as well. The advantages and disadvantages of different development techniques were addressed, along with material on how to find the right process for a given task.
Although acceptance can be slow, schools *are* teaching this.
While normally marketing involves a producer attempting to convince a consumer to either purchase or flat-out use what they have created, it's a different situation when it comes to Open Source Software.
The main difference lies in that you have to rely on publicity to market your project to fellow developers as well. I would assume the OpenBeOS team would like like-minded individuals to join in their development efforts. However, to do so, they have to answer questions. Why work on this project, and not develop for BeOS R5? Why not work on a different operating system?
Obviously, some of their work has been done by Be, since BeOS was a well-crafted product with a lot of potential. But looking over their website, there are many features that relate to marketing - such as a FAQ. It may not be in the strict definition, but I'd say any time you're convincing others to flock to your cause by extolling your project's virtues, it's a form of marketing.
Not being able to get into somewhere in another state seems trivial until it actually happens. I drove over four hours with some friends to catch a concert in Chicago last spring, and we were turned away at the door after they decided they didn't trust our drivers licenses.
Supposedly some people had come to the same place two weeks before with Iowa licenses and they turned out to be fake. It didn't help that my license looked slightly different than that of my friend's, since we got them on different years and the design had been changed. We even stuck around another half hour for the officer on duty who was going to be around, but he didn't feel it was worth the effort to actually check into the matter.
Four hours driving there, four hours back. I would have appreciated some sort of standard license.
I personally only care about the directors with a strong artistic vision who create movies where the actions in the movie MEAN something. Would a version of A Clockwork Orange without violence make a point? Would Requiem For A Dream make sense if you don't see the consequences of the characters' actions? There are many cases where directors have fought to keep their works intact because of the message it conveys.
If you need to edit a movie, why watch it at all? You're most likely (though not always) conveying the message that you want more movies with gratuitous sex and violence. Why not just watch good movies, instead of editing bad ones to the point you don't feel offended by viewing them?
Yes, the majority of Hollywood blockbusters are group-targetting business ventures. But isn't it insulting to assume all movies are? I would like to think artistic vision should only be limited by practical constraints, not necessarily who will find the movie objectionable.
Where do you draw the line on what is objectionable? At the point where your backers start to pull back their money?
While this may not apply to a lot of B-grade movies, isn't there something to be said about artistic vision? Many directors are appalled by the changes their movies go through to be shown on television. In recent times, movies like Schindler's List have been shown on TV completely unedited (and witohut commercials) because of the strong messages they express in their unedited forms.
While many other films may not have such morally redeeming qualities, I remember when many Kubrick fans were upset when changes were made to his last film after his death. Not to mention the fact that Darren Aranofsky refused to edit Requiem for a Dream, and because of this it was not shown in the majority of theaters.
If I were a director, I would be appalled to think that a group of people were selectively removing parts of my film to make it appealing to a different group than I made the movie for, especially if I felt that the so-called "objectionable" content figured greatly into the film's message.