I wouldn't say that Perforce is going to lose out.
Perforce easily handles repositories with hundreds of thousands of files.
Perforce is dead simple to setup and has a number of 'enterprise' type features (distributed repositories, caching proxy servers for satellite offices, ftp/http frontend, etc).
Perforce support is top-notch. Perforce has the best support team I've ever contacted.
1. Script GUI apps
2. Script them over the network
Yeah, it does.
As mentioned in the article, this capability was present in the System 7.0.x days (late '80s/early '90s). When you enabled filesharing (Localtalk based), there was an option to enable program sharing.
If you enabled that, you were able to script applications on a remote machine (assuming you had an user account with the rights).
What was really nice about Apple's scripting engine was that you didn't have to do anything extra to enable remote scripting in an app. If you took the effort to make your app AppleScriptable, you got remote scripting for free.
So one should give root access to boxes to people who: 1) thinks 'password' is a good password 2) thinks telnet is better than ssh 3) likes world writable permissions on the deployed code
I've worked with developers who have said or done these things. These developers also designed code that was inherently insecure and was exceeding hard to secure 'after the fact'.
At work, *nix dev boxes are locked down almost as tightly production systems. This way, the developers know what kind of permissions their code will have when it is deployed in production.
I'm sure some of the developers would be more productive with root access. But I doubt the team as a whole would be any more productive.
As the name implies, it is an 800Mbps implementation of the IEEE-1394b standard. It utilizes a new connector, dubbed bilingual, and developed specifically to support the new interface. As before, there are connections for signals as well as power. There is still no guaranteed power spec for supplied bus power. With an appropriate adaptor, FireWire 800 bilingual connections can be used with legacy 6-pin or 4-pin connections, now dubbed FireWire 400.
FireWire 800 peripherals should be compatible with existing, slower devices provided the right adaptor cable is used. LaCie FireWire 800 products (see separate announcement) include 2 cables - a "FireWire 800 to FireWire 800" and a "FireWire 800 to FireWire 400 (6-pin)". The FireWire 800 connector is called bilingual, as it signifies the interface is compatible with legacy as well as new, faster interfaces.
IEEE-1394b also specifies a "beta" connector option. This is for FireWire interfaces that cannot be used at the lower, legacy and compatible speeds. Detailed information is available at the Molex website.
So the new plug is a feature enhancement, not a brazen way to force people to buy new cables...whenever someone ships FireWire 800 only products
For one thing, I doubt they even have them all electronically. Most of her works were published before the start of Webscription.
AFAIK, just about all publishing houses accept/demand story submission in softcopy (i.e. text/Word doc/TEX). It's been that way for years. So it's quite possible for them to convert books into HTML/RTF formats fairly easily.
I didn't want to spend the time/effort to get you something you would actually want. So, I'm going to give you the equivilent of cash without any of benefits of cash (i.e accepted anywhere, no expiration, no fees, no unused balance)
If you're going to give a gift card, why not just give cash?
You're making the assumption that all the hosts are sharing files.
I don't recall the exact figures, but an analysis of napster showed that well under 10% of users provided the bulk of files (75%+)
I knew a guy who used napster a lot to download songs, but was bothered by the idea of someone downloading *his* collection of mp3s. He made sure that napster never pointed to his main collection. Only songs he downloaded were eligible for upload. Bandwidth wasn't an issue as this was at work sitting behind 2 T1's.
Then there's people who through firewalls and/or NATing can't serve files.
The RIAA would still need a honking big pipe, but not as large as your calculations would indicate.
The sad thing is Microsoft 'fixed' this issue a while ago.
Late 1999 or early 2000, I saw a webpage that embedded controls from Wordpad/Word.
You could type text, select it, hit the bold or italics icon to format it, etc. just like in a word processor. You could then view the formatted text on another web page.
The catch being you had to use Internet Explorer on Windows. I don't recall what happened if you tried the page in Netscape or IE/Mac.
If you want a cross-platform website, you end up catering to the lowest common denominator (i.e. ).
If or until the LCD is raised, we'll be stuck in the 90's.
I saw the Digital Edition of Phantom Menace at a Pacific theatre in LA County.
Like Ebert says, it was better than the analog print, but not by much. The CGI effects were sharper but I couldn't say that any of the live action looked better. The improvements were pretty subtle.
One thing Ebert doesn't mention is that the digital version won't get marred by dust and scratches as the film version would. So in this manner, digital does give you a better picture than film.
I'd like to see the MaxiVision48 system in action to compare it to digital projection. If it's only 50% or 100% better than regular film, it's still leaps and bounds over the current state of digital projection.
It being cheaper and compatible with existing formats, is definitely a plus. You've got to wonder how much a truely superior digital projection system will cost.
Right now, some theatres (in LA) have raised ticket prices to $9! How much do you think they'll raise prices to recoup the costs of a digital projection system? If MaxiVision48 works as they say it does, this means that a theatre will only have to have 1 projector system to play both regular and 'enhanced' movies. With a digital system, they'll need to keep a regular film projector for any analog only movies they get! I'm not going to be willing to pay a lot more (frex $15 or $20) for a barely noticable improvement in picture quality.
Remember digital does not always mean better quality. Digital solutions often beats analog solutions based on convenience, price, or consistency not on higher quality!
It was really easy to register a domain with Joker.
They processed my order within 24 hours and with their web based DNS configurator (I paid extra for Joker to do DNS) my web site was available by name in an additional hour.
No, I never thought the stores were being nice to me. The savings cards are in the stores best interest. They get some basic info from you and then cross index that with other databases to figure out a lot of information that you never gave to the super market. The market can then in turn fine tune their marketing and potentially sell this info about you (unless you're lucky enough to live in an area where they need your permission to sell the info) to the highest bidder.
In fact, super markets often **force** you to sign up for a card by manipulating prices.
Two super market chains in the So. Cal area used the following technique.
They post a "discount" price and a hyper (think over 200%) inflated "regular" price on different cuts of meat. The discount price is a few cents cheaper than what the regular price was before the market started playing tricks with prices.
Since a lot of people eat meat, this practice encourages people to sign up for the store card.
It also significantly pads the "you saved this much.." figure you see printed on the bottom of your receipt at the cashier.
Slashdot Mirror
But, Perforce is centralized and the kernel developers want a distributed source control system.
I wouldn't say that Perforce is going to lose out.
l .
Perforce easily handles repositories with hundreds of thousands of files.
Perforce is dead simple to setup and has a number of 'enterprise' type features (distributed repositories, caching proxy servers for satellite offices, ftp/http frontend, etc).
Perforce support is top-notch. Perforce has the best support team I've ever contacted.
You've gotta love a SCM that offers GUIs for Windows, OS X, Linux, Solaris, & FreeBSD: http://www.perforce.com/perforce/products/p4v.htm
Finally, in addition to the free 2-user version, Perforce offers free licenses to projects developed under a recognized open source license.
Good, free software is wonderful. But there's no shame in paying for a solid commercial product backed by a fantastic company.
As mentioned in the article, this capability was present in the System 7.0.x days (late '80s/early '90s). When you enabled filesharing (Localtalk based), there was an option to enable program sharing.
If you enabled that, you were able to script applications on a remote machine (assuming you had an user account with the rights).
What was really nice about Apple's scripting engine was that you didn't have to do anything extra to enable remote scripting in an app. If you took the effort to make your app AppleScriptable, you got remote scripting for free.
So one should give root access to boxes to people who:
1) thinks 'password' is a good password
2) thinks telnet is better than ssh
3) likes world writable permissions on the deployed code
I've worked with developers who have said or done these things. These developers also designed code that was inherently insecure and was exceeding hard to secure 'after the fact'.
At work, *nix dev boxes are locked down almost as tightly production systems. This way, the developers know what kind of permissions their code will have when it is deployed in production.
I'm sure some of the developers would be more productive with root access. But I doubt the team as a whole would be any more productive.
Well, the GPL license hasn't been tested in a court of law as of yet. That, I think, is what Ransom Love is referring to.
Until the GPL is tested in a court of law, no one knows for sure that it won't be rendered invalid.
It's like making a bullet proof vest. You really don't know that it is bullet proof until someone gets shot while wearing it and survives.
That particular MP3 player was a similar design to the Creative Muvo player.
The reviewed player didn't have DRM support and didn't require drivers (as long as your OS supported USB media).
According to your PBS link, Einstein was born in 1879.
His big year was 1905 (the Special Theory of Relativity).
So 1905 - 1879 = 26 years
Much of his later work (the General Theory of Relativity) were refinements to his seminal works published in his twenties.
You should take a look at the quote in the article again:
Sounds to me like Einstein was in the two-thirds category to me.
The Osbourne was the first computer I had ever seen in person.
:(
My father had purchased (or was given one) for work.
It was a huge box but I remember being impressed that you could carry a computer at all.
Unfortunately, I was never allowed to play around with such an expensive piece of equipment.
So the new plug is a feature enhancement, not a brazen way to force people to buy new cables...whenever someone ships FireWire 800 only products
Also, I guess Lois McMaster Bujold isn't quite as hesitant as you think since her official webpage has a list of available e-books available from Baen as well as this page at Fictionwise.com
They're not all free, but I don't have a problem paying Webscriptions.net $15 for six to eight books.
Here's what a gift card says:
If you're going to give a gift card, why not just give cash?
There are (or were) government/military sites that handled top secret documents by limiting storage to removable media.
At the end of the day, you popped the media out and it went into a safe until the next day.
You could use these tiny pc's the same way, but you get the added advantage of making more difficult to install spyware in the PC itself.
Of course, you now have to deal with people just slipping one of the tiny pc's into their pocket and walking out of the facility.
Yeah, it's called Apache 1.3.22. :)
Seriously, it wasn't a problem with mod_perl, but the way Apache would be built.
It's been fixed in the latest rev of Apache.
You're making the assumption that all the hosts are sharing files.
I don't recall the exact figures, but an analysis of napster showed that well under 10% of users provided the bulk of files (75%+)
I knew a guy who used napster a lot to download songs, but was bothered by the idea of someone downloading *his* collection of mp3s. He made sure that napster never pointed to his main collection. Only songs he downloaded were eligible for upload. Bandwidth wasn't an issue as this was at work sitting behind 2 T1's.
Then there's people who through firewalls and/or NATing can't serve files.
The RIAA would still need a honking big pipe, but not as large as your calculations would indicate.
The sad thing is Microsoft 'fixed' this issue a while ago.
Late 1999 or early 2000, I saw a webpage that embedded controls from Wordpad/Word.
You could type text, select it, hit the bold or italics icon to format it, etc. just like in a word processor. You could then view the formatted text on another web page.
The catch being you had to use Internet Explorer on Windows. I don't recall what happened if you tried the page in Netscape or IE/Mac.
If you want a cross-platform website, you end up catering to the lowest common denominator (i.e. ).
If or until the LCD is raised, we'll be stuck in the 90's.
Why are you switching from the NT4 domain model to W2K domain model? What do you benefit from such a move? Don't switch just because it's the latest thing from Microsoft© At my job, we've rolled out an Active Directory/W2K environment and we have been dealing with Active Directory limitations and a serious problem ¥services die silently on some servers that we think may be caused by Active Directory©
Rather than replacing your existing PDC/BDC, I'd suggest that you create an Active Directory domain that resides with your NT4 domain© Then, start adding machines to the AD domain as you convert them to W2K© See what works and what doesn't before you convert everything over©
I worked as a Y2K consultant from 1998 through 1999 and saw and heard about several serious Y2K related bugs.
But, they were all found prior to Dec 31, 1999 through testing.
One very public one I remember was when the DWP in Sherman Oaks (So. Cal) tested a sewage system and found a Y2K bug the hard way.
Apparently an automated pump got confused when forward dated past Y2K and raw sewage poured out into the streets surrounding the pump station.
Just glad this got fixed before Dec 31, 1999!
Those ISOs are for the previous release of LinuxPPC 2000 (3rd quarter, I think).
I've checked several mirrors as well as ftp.linuxppc.org and all the ISO files I've found are dated Jun 1, 2000.
Looks like there will be a while before ISOs for LinuxPPC 2000 4th quarter.
I saw the Digital Edition of Phantom Menace at a Pacific theatre in LA County.
Like Ebert says, it was better than the analog print, but not by much. The CGI effects were sharper but I couldn't say that any of the live action looked better. The improvements were pretty subtle.
One thing Ebert doesn't mention is that the digital version won't get marred by dust and scratches as the film version would. So in this manner, digital does give you a better picture than film.
I'd like to see the MaxiVision48 system in action to compare it to digital projection. If it's only 50% or 100% better than regular film, it's still leaps and bounds over the current state of digital projection.
It being cheaper and compatible with existing formats, is definitely a plus. You've got to wonder how much a truely superior digital projection system will cost.
Right now, some theatres (in LA) have raised ticket prices to $9! How much do you think they'll raise prices to recoup the costs of a digital projection system? If MaxiVision48 works as they say it does, this means that a theatre will only have to have 1 projector system to play both regular and 'enhanced' movies. With a digital system, they'll need to keep a regular film projector for any analog only movies they get! I'm not going to be willing to pay a lot more (frex $15 or $20) for a barely noticable improvement in picture quality.
Remember digital does not always mean better quality. Digital solutions often beats analog solutions based on convenience, price, or consistency not on higher quality!
It was really easy to register a domain with Joker.
They processed my order within 24 hours and with their web based DNS configurator (I paid extra for Joker to do DNS) my web site was available by name in an additional hour.
No, I never thought the stores were being nice to me. The savings cards are in the stores best interest. They get some basic info from you and then cross index that with other databases to figure out a lot of information that you never gave to the super market. The market can then in turn fine tune their marketing and potentially sell this info about you (unless you're lucky enough to live in an area where they need your permission to sell the info) to the highest bidder.
In fact, super markets often **force** you to sign up for a card by manipulating prices.
Two super market chains in the So. Cal area used the following technique.
They post a "discount" price and a hyper (think over 200%) inflated "regular" price on different cuts of meat. The discount price is a few cents cheaper than what the regular price was before the market started playing tricks with prices.
Since a lot of people eat meat, this practice encourages people to sign up for the store card.
It also significantly pads the "you saved this much.." figure you see printed on the bottom of your receipt at the cashier.
Back in the Mac 512 and Mac Plus days there were several companies that would redo Mac cases.
They were really expensive ($300 or more) but looked really cool.
I remember seeing several woodgrain patterns and a 'black granite' option.
I don't know if a business like this would work now-a-days.
It's one thing contemplating a $300 custom case finish on a $4000 computer than a $200 case job on a $800 computer.
Ah well, at least it's one less thing for me to squander money on.