Intrepid (8.10) has several months out. Ok, maybe it is because 8.10 is not a LTS, but (obviously) netbooks are not meant to be used as servers, so it make sense to use the last version. That's the reason I was yet waiting for the Dell mini-9 (that too comes with 8.04) to buy with an upgraded OS.
> Many C and C++ programmers aren't so good at doing shell scripts. *shrug*
But I can assure you that most shell "scripters" aren't good for C, and even less for any non trivial programming project.
That's one of the top reasons IDEs are popular: they hide the build process from the developer.
I just don't understand why people defends autoconf as "the right tool(tm)". Maybe it's right for your case or knowledge, but most users (and developers) find it really annoying, yet is the sanctified open-source-build-tool standard... just because lack of decent alternatives.
We understand perfectly your needs about traffic generation and advertisements.
But please, why publish another stupidity like this... when too recently you had a highly criticized "story" about some random guy that found Ubuntu downloads faster than Vista in his home PC's. Please avoid that kind of sh... (how to name it???), that only ends turning people away for your site in the long term.
Eventually, if you can't stop from posting about so called "comparative benchmarks", please do it in the "idle" section.
> . In fact, one of the most common complaints about the first edition was its small size (176 pages).
I'm not telling the reviewer is lying, but it seems pretty strange to me why people would want to read an 800-page-brick for something like Joomla. One of the things I found more value in a well written book is when it can provide a lot in less pages (for the rest, there is the Internet.)
100 pages (with references to the web for the details) are more than enough for most software topics. I think that's the main reason for the software book/magazine debacle usually commented: people goes to the web because of up to date 5-page quick tutorials that get you running (albeit with bad writing style or other minor caveats.)
With that logic Windows is also a doomed business because of Linux and a lot of Unix clones. Many of good quality, all struggling, open source, etc. But it takes more that price.
In the loooong term, if nothing else changes, maybe you're right.
The same as with MBAs, pay 30k/year in order to listen the obvious, sometimes from funny teachers... BUT at the end, make commercially interesting relationships.
From the "package installation" point of view, almost any mayor distro solved that problem (even for Slackware you can get any unstable tgz and "install" it.)
But other aspects are rather important:
1) Provide developers (even of closed source coders like autocad or grand-theft-*) with a single target platform (as Vista proved, it is really difficult to support several OS flavors) 2) Provide a standard set of GUI tools; for example, I'm used to the Ubuntu admin tools, but get totally lost when trying to use a Suse distro (ok, you can always use the command line tools bla bla bla) 3) Do not confuse "standard" newcomers with the "not just Linux, but Ubuntu/Fedora/OpenSuse/Gentoo/whatever thing"... Remember the mess created by M$ with the Vista "editions".
> Unfortunately, Microsoft would probably rather use it to sell Windows.
My (maybe bad expressed) point is that I'm ready to pay for gaming in Linux to whatever seller. Of course for the mentioned case, I'd rather pay for a polished and really "completed" version of Flightgear.
> Probably. However, most Wine things seem to work fine without any Microsoft code whatsoever, and a few might need you to find a DLL to download
This always confuses me. It's legal to download DDLs at random? maybe those are published in order to repair a licensed Windows installation.
> Me, I'm more paranoid about a piece of malware giving people access to my partitions, but I suspect that's a long way off. As far as losing everything, that's why you need backups. NOW.
Ok. I always use a "test" user for downloaded binaries (other than the OS updates.) For example, to avoid compiling google-earth, just downloaded the binary and always use it on the "test user", so malware infection danger is minimized to that dummy account. Since Wine is implemented in user mode, I think that that prevents me from liberal access to my partitions.
That's also the reason I hate IBM when forces me to run their installers as root (I think in order to install some secret-shitty-license-key-file)... In last December had a crazy experience where their installer deleted a full filesystem after aborting the wizard-download, I think trying to remove the (unexistent)/opt/IBM (sorry for the offtopic.)
And yes, I do backups to internet of my unrecoverable information, but always try to avoid losing two days doing a full restore from the bare machine.
I'd easily pay $70 for Flight Simulator X if I could run it in my Linux box. That game was targeted for Vista (albeit runs on XP) but I hate the idea of installing Vista (again) in my laptop (the thought of a virus deleting all my partitions scares me too much.) I would run it with vmware, but the graphic acceleration makes it difficult to impossible.
Since 2004 Linux is my only work OS, and that means that I no longer play as before. I'm always considering buying a desktop PC just for gaming, but the money waste sensation, and the space requirements, end stopping me.
Note that my current laptop came with Vista (but soon it was erased for the mentioned reason), so I think I could use the Windows files for Wine without paying any license.
So, I think allowing games targeted for Windows running with Wine, will make things easy to Linux desktop users, and reciprocally, will let a lot of people that refrains to be "converted to Linux" because Windows is MANDATORY for their loved games.
>> it's time to hold Adobe and Sun accountable for their dangerously insecure products >> Neither provide any decent support for sysadmins to push out updates
Correct. It's stupid that the JRE tries to autoupdate by default on startup, annoying users that just use it for executing some REAL application... In the other side, the last week I tried to use the Adobe flash 10 plugin inside an intranet (without internet access, by first installing the last plugin.EXE) and IE simply crashed on the first page with a flash reference, apparently because the plugin tries to connect to somewhere (I suppose adobe.com for autoupdates) and trashes everything. The solution was some "special" version of flash 9 that a friend had by chance.
> Wrong. Immigrants do jobs we citizens would not do at the prices Business owners are willing to pay.
It would be interesting to see numbers. Most immigrants I know are working on jobs largely regarded as bad jobs by natives (taking care of childs, cleaning baths, etc.) The Hi-tech-H1B case calls more attention, but I think it is proportionally less impacting.
> The company then has to pay for a legal employee 2*"base rate", therefore encourages more illegals to enter at a price of "Base Pay" * 3/4.
Illegals do not enter because a Base-Pay*X (again, not talking about professionals), just because in their native counties there are no opportunities to get a decent job or payment.
Regarding Hi-Tech again, if companies can't get cheaper foreign jobs, they just close here and reopen outside in order to get better profits or lower costs (this is called globalization.) In that case nobody complains about the visas.
1) Colonization is mostly an "illegal" immigration, so please remember that USA was always made that way from the beginning. I'm not promoting that people should broke the law, but for a more consequent law. 2) Immigrants mostly do works that native citizens don't like to do, but are needed anyway. Just a relative minority got hi-tech jobs.
So instead of the typical reaction of searching for the culprit in the foreign, why don't try to get those migrants into the legal system, so they can be taxed (I assure most of them would like to do it for a legal status), then GDP grows and the deficit lowers proportionally?
> Neither of the natural patterns are likely to lead to the organised pattern of chips that a worked stone would exhibit.
It depends. Up to this day there is a big number of inconclusive cases where archaeologists "discovered" sets of "older stone tools" but there is no clear consensus but acid disputes.
Of course when you have the nice bifacial spearpoints depicted in most books your argument is valid, but in a lot of "unifacial industries" typically oriented to cutting wood and plants, there are no such clear traces of chipping you allude. In several areas, a lot of originally "non interesting" stones are being reevaluated (always with several levels of controversy); the case is that probably most of the "stone age" tools and cultures are of this "ugly" kind.
Ok agreed. We have two points here. Currently printed material supports better content, but the trend is no more printed material at all (which is good for the environment, bla bla bla)
For example, despite all the love Asimov used to express to his editors, I'm sure that currently he would have a blog... at least for the errata of his encyclopedias. IMHO when screens turn to be so pleasant for reading like paper, we will get more good online paid content; BTW I don't believe advertisement will be the answer, as cable TV demonstrated in the last decade.
Just visit http://www.freebsd.org/... you will find BOTH logos, but Bestie is four times bigger and "important". The other anodyne logo seems more like a decoration element of the stylesheet.
Agreed, but this usually happens because younger people don't have the time to help them in other activities (I suspect older people just do that in order to not being "annoying" to their sons.) I too will be old at sometime, and really hope not end my days by looking all day long the silliest TV shows that provides the "open" TV.
There is a poll running at java.net regarding what the community thinks about the new spec...
I like it 12.1% I think the main spec is missing important JSRs 3% I think the web profile spec is missing important JSRs 6% I don't like it for some other reason 6% I haven't read it, but plan to 9% I haven't read it, and don't plan to 63.6%
Well, most people never read the specs (that are normally boring and with a lawyer-like style) but most Sun specs appear to being ignored because of bad timing for appearance (usually too late.) The "hot thing" are mostly the open source frameworks, from which Sun ends copying at the end.
The same is happening, albeit radically, in the Mobile editions with Android, despite the Sun auto-acclaimed ubiquity of Jave ME.
> it's surely a big deal to all those folks whose TVs will cease to work next month.
Yes, they will have at least 30% more time to read, learn new skills, forget bad language, chat with the family members, and maybe improve their income.... we should feel envy!
I don't agree... If it took a long time for people to "forget" the funny Batman tv show, is because no serious attempts were made in a totally different direction, maybe until Burton. For the same reason, I'm yet waiting to see another serious version of spiderman:):):)
So, I don't have any fear about another Blade Runner... if turns to be bad (which is the most probable), it would be just totally forgotten. But a bad Blade Runner II, with the good old Harrison ford, would be pretty bad for the original classic "reputation".
Note that doing another version doesn't harms the original, in the same way as the "official sequels" do. For example, if somebody does a new silly version of Batman (there are already several) with a totally different cast, then despite being Batman, it will never damage the current saga of Christopher Nolan. So I go for a new Blade Runner, better with the less involvement of the original people.
But doing a Blade Runner II, with the same director, producers, or even an older H. Ford, has the potential to trash the original version the same way Matrix 2/3 did to Matrix. Matrix, despite good, is a film that you really don't want to *think* about.
Not surprisingly. At the end, the management always carries with the responsibility. Part of the duty.
The point is not about some (indeed true) fatal management failure. The point is that always there are a lot of management (and engineering) failures despite the quality of the people at charge (because of intractable complexity), but only in a fatal outcome there are commissions that inform as about the most probable/credible causes for the accident (the so called "conclusions".)
> The managers then challenged MTI to prove that the shuttle was not safe instead of the more cautious stance of proving that the shuttle was safe.
Out of context, for a standard project this sounds really nasty (or unethical if you want.) But when you are in regressive counting, spending a lot of tax money for every second delayed, and when supposedly every supplier already tested every piece provided, it is pretty difficult to start a new investigation in order to prove that the shuttle is safe (BTW, how do you "prove" that?)
Please, I'm not apologizing that people; the point is that there is no decision process that provides a 99% of reliability for that kind of project (and as far as I remember, both accident reports added the recommendation of an improved decision process...)
Slashdot Mirror
Intrepid (8.10) has several months out. Ok, maybe it is because 8.10 is not a LTS, but (obviously) netbooks are not meant to be used as servers, so it make sense to use the last version. That's the reason I was yet waiting for the Dell mini-9 (that too comes with 8.04) to buy with an upgraded OS.
> Many C and C++ programmers aren't so good at doing shell scripts. *shrug*
But I can assure you that most shell "scripters" aren't good for C, and even less for any non trivial programming project.
That's one of the top reasons IDEs are popular: they hide the build process from the developer.
I just don't understand why people defends autoconf as "the right tool(tm)". Maybe it's right for your case or knowledge, but most users (and developers) find it really annoying, yet is the sanctified open-source-build-tool standard... just because lack of decent alternatives.
> So where is the niche for MySQL?
See for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software_(PHP)#Data_storage
Dear Slashdot editors,
We understand perfectly your needs about traffic generation and advertisements.
But please, why publish another stupidity like this... when too recently you had a highly criticized "story" about some random guy that found Ubuntu downloads faster than Vista in his home PC's. Please avoid that kind of sh... (how to name it???), that only ends turning people away for your site in the long term.
Eventually, if you can't stop from posting about so called "comparative benchmarks", please do it in the "idle" section.
regards,
> . In fact, one of the most common complaints about the first edition was its small size (176 pages).
I'm not telling the reviewer is lying, but it seems pretty strange to me why people would want to read an 800-page-brick for something like Joomla. One of the things I found more value in a well written book is when it can provide a lot in less pages (for the rest, there is the Internet.)
100 pages (with references to the web for the details) are more than enough for most software topics. I think that's the main reason for the software book/magazine debacle usually commented: people goes to the web because of up to date 5-page quick tutorials that get you running (albeit with bad writing style or other minor caveats.)
With that logic Windows is also a doomed business because of Linux and a lot of Unix clones. Many of good quality, all struggling, open source, etc. But it takes more that price.
In the loooong term, if nothing else changes, maybe you're right.
The same as with MBAs, pay 30k/year in order to listen the obvious, sometimes from funny teachers... BUT at the end, make commercially interesting relationships.
From the "package installation" point of view, almost any mayor distro solved that problem (even for Slackware you can get any unstable tgz and "install" it.)
But other aspects are rather important:
1) Provide developers (even of closed source coders like autocad or grand-theft-*) with a single target platform (as Vista proved, it is really difficult to support several OS flavors)
2) Provide a standard set of GUI tools; for example, I'm used to the Ubuntu admin tools, but get totally lost when trying to use a Suse distro (ok, you can always use the command line tools bla bla bla)
3) Do not confuse "standard" newcomers with the "not just Linux, but Ubuntu/Fedora/OpenSuse/Gentoo/whatever thing"... Remember the mess created by M$ with the Vista "editions".
regards,
Thanks for the comments...
> Unfortunately, Microsoft would probably rather use it to sell Windows.
My (maybe bad expressed) point is that I'm ready to pay for gaming in Linux to whatever seller. Of course for the mentioned case, I'd rather pay for a polished and really "completed" version of Flightgear.
> Probably. However, most Wine things seem to work fine without any Microsoft code whatsoever, and a few might need you to find a DLL to download
This always confuses me. It's legal to download DDLs at random? maybe those are published in order to repair a licensed Windows installation.
> Me, I'm more paranoid about a piece of malware giving people access to my partitions, but I suspect that's a long way off. As far as losing everything, that's why you need backups. NOW.
Ok. I always use a "test" user for downloaded binaries (other than the OS updates.) For example, to avoid compiling google-earth, just downloaded the binary and always use it on the "test user", so malware infection danger is minimized to that dummy account. Since Wine is implemented in user mode, I think that that prevents me from liberal access to my partitions.
That's also the reason I hate IBM when forces me to run their installers as root (I think in order to install some secret-shitty-license-key-file)... In last December had a crazy experience where their installer deleted a full filesystem after aborting the wizard-download, I think trying to remove the (unexistent) /opt/IBM (sorry for the offtopic.)
And yes, I do backups to internet of my unrecoverable information, but always try to avoid losing two days doing a full restore from the bare machine.
I'd easily pay $70 for Flight Simulator X if I could run it in my Linux box. That game was targeted for Vista (albeit runs on XP) but I hate the idea of installing Vista (again) in my laptop (the thought of a virus deleting all my partitions scares me too much.) I would run it with vmware, but the graphic acceleration makes it difficult to impossible.
Since 2004 Linux is my only work OS, and that means that I no longer play as before. I'm always considering buying a desktop PC just for gaming, but the money waste sensation, and the space requirements, end stopping me.
Note that my current laptop came with Vista (but soon it was erased for the mentioned reason), so I think I could use the Windows files for Wine without paying any license.
So, I think allowing games targeted for Windows running with Wine, will make things easy to Linux desktop users, and reciprocally, will let a lot of people that refrains to be "converted to Linux" because Windows is MANDATORY for their loved games.
>> it's time to hold Adobe and Sun accountable for their dangerously insecure products
>> Neither provide any decent support for sysadmins to push out updates
Correct. It's stupid that the JRE tries to autoupdate by default on startup, annoying users that just use it for executing some REAL application... In the other side, the last week I tried to use the Adobe flash 10 plugin inside an intranet (without internet access, by first installing the last plugin .EXE) and IE simply crashed on the first page with a flash reference, apparently because the plugin tries to connect to somewhere (I suppose adobe.com for autoupdates) and trashes everything. The solution was some "special" version of flash 9 that a friend had by chance.
> The crux is they lost, we won.
Ok, now in this turn, USA lost...
> Wrong. Immigrants do jobs we citizens would not do at the prices Business owners are willing to pay.
It would be interesting to see numbers. Most immigrants I know are working on jobs largely regarded as bad jobs by natives (taking care of childs, cleaning baths, etc.) The Hi-tech-H1B case calls more attention, but I think it is proportionally less impacting.
> The company then has to pay for a legal employee 2*"base rate", therefore encourages more illegals to enter at a price of "Base Pay" * 3/4.
Illegals do not enter because a Base-Pay*X (again, not talking about professionals), just because in their native counties there are no opportunities to get a decent job or payment.
Regarding Hi-Tech again, if companies can't get cheaper foreign jobs, they just close here and reopen outside in order to get better profits or lower costs (this is called globalization.) In that case nobody complains about the visas.
regards,
Ok... at risk of being taken as troll...
1) Colonization is mostly an "illegal" immigration, so please remember that USA was always made that way from the beginning. I'm not promoting that people should broke the law, but for a more consequent law.
2) Immigrants mostly do works that native citizens don't like to do, but are needed anyway. Just a relative minority got hi-tech jobs.
So instead of the typical reaction of searching for the culprit in the foreign, why don't try to get those migrants into the legal system, so they can be taxed (I assure most of them would like to do it for a legal status), then GDP grows and the deficit lowers proportionally?
Maybe any netbook?
> Neither of the natural patterns are likely to lead to the organised pattern of chips that a worked stone would exhibit.
It depends. Up to this day there is a big number of inconclusive cases where archaeologists "discovered" sets of "older stone tools" but there is no clear consensus but acid disputes.
Of course when you have the nice bifacial spearpoints depicted in most books your argument is valid, but in a lot of "unifacial industries" typically oriented to cutting wood and plants, there are no such clear traces of chipping you allude. In several areas, a lot of originally "non interesting" stones are being reevaluated (always with several levels of controversy); the case is that probably most of the "stone age" tools and cultures are of this "ugly" kind.
Ok agreed. We have two points here. Currently printed material supports better content, but the trend is no more printed material at all (which is good for the environment, bla bla bla)
For example, despite all the love Asimov used to express to his editors, I'm sure that currently he would have a blog ... at least for the errata of his encyclopedias. IMHO when screens turn to be so pleasant for reading like paper, we will get more good online paid content; BTW I don't believe advertisement will be the answer, as cable TV demonstrated in the last decade.
Just visit http://www.freebsd.org/ ... you will find BOTH logos, but Bestie is four times bigger and "important". The other anodyne logo seems more like a decoration element of the stylesheet.
Ok, a pool of good writers may do the same in a blog. Dead tree doesn't guarantee anything.
Agreed, but this usually happens because younger people don't have the time to help them in other activities (I suspect older people just do that in order to not being "annoying" to their sons.) I too will be old at sometime, and really hope not end my days by looking all day long the silliest TV shows that provides the "open" TV.
>> Specifications are not there to innovate, but to define a common set of standards which are meant to be used by different vendors.
Tell it to Sun, that way they would never have a business.
From TFA:
There is a poll running at java.net regarding what the community thinks about the new spec...
I like it 12.1%
I think the main spec is missing important JSRs 3%
I think the web profile spec is missing important JSRs 6%
I don't like it for some other reason 6%
I haven't read it, but plan to 9%
I haven't read it, and don't plan to 63.6%
Well, most people never read the specs (that are normally boring and with a lawyer-like style) but most Sun specs appear to being ignored because of bad timing for appearance (usually too late.) The "hot thing" are mostly the open source frameworks, from which Sun ends copying at the end.
The same is happening, albeit radically, in the Mobile editions with Android, despite the Sun auto-acclaimed ubiquity of Jave ME.
> it's surely a big deal to all those folks whose TVs will cease to work next month.
Yes, they will have at least 30% more time to read, learn new skills, forget bad language, chat with the family members, and maybe improve their income.... we should feel envy!
I don't agree... If it took a long time for people to "forget" the funny Batman tv show, is because no serious attempts were made in a totally different direction, maybe until Burton. For the same reason, I'm yet waiting to see another serious version of spiderman :):):)
So, I don't have any fear about another Blade Runner... if turns to be bad (which is the most probable), it would be just totally forgotten. But a bad Blade Runner II, with the good old Harrison ford, would be pretty bad for the original classic "reputation".
Note that doing another version doesn't harms the original, in the same way as the "official sequels" do. For example, if somebody does a new silly version of Batman (there are already several) with a totally different cast, then despite being Batman, it will never damage the current saga of Christopher Nolan. So I go for a new Blade Runner, better with the less involvement of the original people.
But doing a Blade Runner II, with the same director, producers, or even an older H. Ford, has the potential to trash the original version the same way Matrix 2/3 did to Matrix. Matrix, despite good, is a film that you really don't want to *think* about.
Not surprisingly. At the end, the management always carries with the responsibility. Part of the duty.
The point is not about some (indeed true) fatal management failure. The point is that always there are a lot of management (and engineering) failures despite the quality of the people at charge (because of intractable complexity), but only in a fatal outcome there are commissions that inform as about the most probable/credible causes for the accident (the so called "conclusions".)
> The managers then challenged MTI to prove that the shuttle was not safe instead of the more cautious stance of proving that the shuttle was safe.
Out of context, for a standard project this sounds really nasty (or unethical if you want.) But when you are in regressive counting, spending a lot of tax money for every second delayed, and when supposedly every supplier already tested every piece provided, it is pretty difficult to start a new investigation in order to prove that the shuttle is safe (BTW, how do you "prove" that?)
Please, I'm not apologizing that people; the point is that there is no decision process that provides a 99% of reliability for that kind of project (and as far as I remember, both accident reports added the recommendation of an improved decision process...)
regards