And the scary thing (for MS) is that it being free changes, well, everything. At my company, we used to have a few people who needed a word processor, so they got Office. When OOo got good enough, we start giving it out to everyone on our standard deployment. Have a PC? You're getting OpenOffice. Now we find ourselves in the position where OOo is our standard suite, and only a couple of people get MS Office (mainly because of legacy documents, like complicated spreadsheets etc.).
In more recent news, my little Eee PC ships with OpenOffice. A few million units later, a lot of people will have OOo who never knew such a thing existed before. Free-of-charge isn't a huge selling point for large corporations where maintenance costs are more important than initial purchase costs, but it's extremely influential everywhere else. The thin end of the wedge is already in, and now it's starting to split the market wide open.
Re:Does it support multithreaded queries?
on
PostgreSQL 8.3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It would seem not to. Yeah, I wish it had that, too. The other posters who keep telling you to get faster IO miss the idea of having extra CPUs handling locking, cache management, etc. so that even single running queries are faster.
Re:Why PostgreSQL doesn't have more of the market
on
PostgreSQL 8.3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I thought Wikis were shared by definition.
Forget about the Wiki part. "Shared" here means that many clients are simultaneously reading from and writing to the same store. Sites like Slashdot and Wikipedia are darn near read-only in that sense, because a comment or article is typically viewed many thousands of times more often than it is written or edited.
Contrast with something like a point of sale system where each time a clerk scans in a product, a unit is removed from the inventory database and the accounting system gets updated with the new revenue. Multiplied by a few thousand terminals, that is a large, shared data bank.
Why would you want to drop the durability part of ACID? Why would you risk losing data for speed?
We run an hour job to copy legacy FoxPro data to PostgreSQL. It's squirreled away in its own schema, and should that schema get totally destroyed, it only takes about 20 minutes to do a full rebuild.
I would happily trade integrity for speed on that schema, and anything that gives me that option is welcome.
Wouldn't it be easier to just make the fix in Pidgin and submit a patch?
I haven't seen the Pidgin code or dealt with the community, so this may very well be off base: perhaps it's darn nigh unfixable, or the authors don't readily accept patches?
Yes, because RFC 822 header fields are the pinnacle of parser research. Have you ever tried to write your own mail client? Have you ever tried to write your own mail server? By comparison, I'm pretty sure I could knock out a minimal compliant XMPP server in an afternoon, and it would support Unicode for free.
But anyway, the biggest thing the "X" buys you is a lot of extensions. I'd say it's actually delivering on what it promises.
I don't like it any more than I like the new discussion system.
I actually like it a lot more. For once, all the comments aren't indented a couple of inches just because there's a navigation bar next to the story up at the very top.
I can understand and am sympathetic to ISPs who force outbound traffic to go through their servers. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I really do get what they're trying to accomplish. I also understand ISPs having spam filters on their outbounds, and think that's actually a pretty good idea. If you really need to send a virus so someone, then you should be technically competent to encrypt it or otherwise shield it from a scanner.
But never in a million years can I even remotely condone actually scanning the text of emails and rejecting ones an ISP doesn't like. That's just Evil.
Don't. Outside of a very small niche, you're wrong. Lots of kids have PS. A few adults, almost exclusively artists of different kinds, have PS. Almost no one else is interested in it, either legally or otherwise.
Huh? You don't really have any idea what you're talking about, right?
You're not great at this whole "reading comprehension" thing, huh? What he said was that Win7 will start out with a nice, compact kernel. Then some manager will insist that his pet project be run in kernel mode for performance reasons. And then another will think that's a great idea, and lobby for her project to be imported to the kernel. Repeat until we end up with, well, Vista.
And they will love you for it, until they try to edit their photos with GIMP.
I think your average user would be better served by other applications. And for all the times I hear "but they won't have Photoshop", I have to wonder how many people actually use PS in the first place. Outside a handful of graphic designers, no one I know has it installed.
Attributes can be specified in four different ways:
Empty attribute syntax
Just the attribute name.
Unquoted attribute value syntax
The attribute name, followed by zero or more space characters, followed by a single U+003D EQUALS SIGN character, followed by zero or more space characters, followed by the attribute value, which, in addition to the requirements given above for attribute values, must not contain any literal space characters or U+003E GREATER-THAN SIGN (>) characters, and must not, furthermore, start with either a literal U+0022 QUOTATION MARK (") character or a literal U+0027 APOSTROPHE (') character.
A head element's end tag may be omitted if the head element is not immediately followed by a space character or a comment.
A li element's end tag may be omitted if the li element is immediately followed by another li element or if there is no more content in the parent element.
A tr element's end tag may be omitted if the tr element is immediately followed by another tr element, or if there is no more content in the parent element.
So yes, right now, today, in 2008, people are seriously discussing rolling out another non-XML HMTL spec.
At least I assume they'll be smart enough not to create any non-namespaced ones....
When you get to slower frequency at lower CAS latency it is not as clear cut, because now the clocks you are using to measure the latency are not the same so even if the latency was the same the CAS latency would not be.
Well, apparently the Eee's FSB is locked to 70MHz, so I'd imagine that the stock DDR2 533 is about as fast as it could possibly take advantage of. I guess what I was really wondering (but expressed poorly) is whether "faster" RAM was the same as "slower" RAM, just certified to work at higher clocks, or if there was some fundamental difference that would affect power consumption (such as earning the higher spec by drawing more voltage or something like that). Crappy car analogy that triggered this question: a Prius at 30MPH gets better mileage than a stock car at 30MPH because they're actually made differently, and holding them back to the same speed won't erase the difference.
Seriously - did I get the magic copy of Vista that works just fine or something?
Not at all. My wife needed a laptop to run a certain industry-specific application, so we bought a Compaq that we later discovered to be XP-incompatible. That is, there are no XP drivers for the chipset or graphics card, so unless we want to give up USB, Wi-Fi, DMA, and resolutions above 800x600, we pretty much have to leave Vista on it.
Know what? You're right. It's a nice OS that boots quickly and smoothly with plenty of nice eye candy. Never mind that none of our printers worked any more, or that it used up so much RAM that we can barely load any applications without swapping, and that it's somewhat incompatible with the application we bought it to run but not in any well-defined or deterministic ways that we can readily pin down. No, Vista itself is just fine. It's only when we have to actually load applications or print that we despise it and want to throw the laptop through a plate glass window.
I just got issued an Eee PC for a travelling laptop. So far I'm planning on leaving it in "Easy Mode" - when in Rome, right? I want to spend more time actually using it than hacking on it.
Having said that, 512MB RAM just isn't enough when there isn't swap to fall back on. Anyone know how much the extra capacity will increase power consumption and decrease battery runtime, assuming it takes more current to keep 2GB refreshed than.5GB? And in such things, is CAS 4 any different than CAS 5? Finally, higher speed RAM (such as 667 vs. 533) just means it's specced to run faster, and once you reach the FSB speed you don't act get any benefit, correct?
Sorry for asking here, but most forums I've seen are along the lines of "how do i make the fonts smaller" and are silent on more technical questions.
Meanwhile every day I meet more people refusing the medication (like myself), who are perfectly healthy, despite of bad lab numbers (High "viral load", low CD4).
As long as they haven't had kids yet, I'm all for that. Darwin and all.
Slashdot Mirror
And the scary thing (for MS) is that it being free changes, well, everything. At my company, we used to have a few people who needed a word processor, so they got Office. When OOo got good enough, we start giving it out to everyone on our standard deployment. Have a PC? You're getting OpenOffice. Now we find ourselves in the position where OOo is our standard suite, and only a couple of people get MS Office (mainly because of legacy documents, like complicated spreadsheets etc.).
In more recent news, my little Eee PC ships with OpenOffice. A few million units later, a lot of people will have OOo who never knew such a thing existed before. Free-of-charge isn't a huge selling point for large corporations where maintenance costs are more important than initial purchase costs, but it's extremely influential everywhere else. The thin end of the wedge is already in, and now it's starting to split the market wide open.
It would seem not to. Yeah, I wish it had that, too. The other posters who keep telling you to get faster IO miss the idea of having extra CPUs handling locking, cache management, etc. so that even single running queries are faster.
Forget about the Wiki part. "Shared" here means that many clients are simultaneously reading from and writing to the same store. Sites like Slashdot and Wikipedia are darn near read-only in that sense, because a comment or article is typically viewed many thousands of times more often than it is written or edited.
Contrast with something like a point of sale system where each time a clerk scans in a product, a unit is removed from the inventory database and the accounting system gets updated with the new revenue. Multiplied by a few thousand terminals, that is a large, shared data bank.
I think the disconnect is that PostgreSQL has a different definition of schema than you are using.
Slashdot has always had a fetish for F/OSS that outperforms the competition. This isn't new.
We run an hour job to copy legacy FoxPro data to PostgreSQL. It's squirreled away in its own schema, and should that schema get totally destroyed, it only takes about 20 minutes to do a full rebuild.
I would happily trade integrity for speed on that schema, and anything that gives me that option is welcome.
What I was addressing was that the fault is in the library (or libraries) you've tried, not that writing a client is inherently difficult.
If you don't think that any of the other candidates are hearing the buzz around him and adjusting to steal some of that thunder, you're nuts.
We use jabber.py. It hasn't changed in years, but our needs are pretty simple and it meets all of them easily. For example
Honestly, I don't know how you could make that a whole lot simpler.
I haven't seen the Pidgin code or dealt with the community, so this may very well be off base: perhaps it's darn nigh unfixable, or the authors don't readily accept patches?
Yes, because RFC 822 header fields are the pinnacle of parser research. Have you ever tried to write your own mail client? Have you ever tried to write your own mail server? By comparison, I'm pretty sure I could knock out a minimal compliant XMPP server in an afternoon, and it would support Unicode for free.
But anyway, the biggest thing the "X" buys you is a lot of extensions. I'd say it's actually delivering on what it promises.
I actually like it a lot more. For once, all the comments aren't indented a couple of inches just because there's a navigation bar next to the story up at the very top.
I like that. Well played, sir.
I can understand and am sympathetic to ISPs who force outbound traffic to go through their servers. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I really do get what they're trying to accomplish. I also understand ISPs having spam filters on their outbounds, and think that's actually a pretty good idea. If you really need to send a virus so someone, then you should be technically competent to encrypt it or otherwise shield it from a scanner.
But never in a million years can I even remotely condone actually scanning the text of emails and rejecting ones an ISP doesn't like. That's just Evil.
Don't. Outside of a very small niche, you're wrong. Lots of kids have PS. A few adults, almost exclusively artists of different kinds, have PS. Almost no one else is interested in it, either legally or otherwise.
That's OK. No one expects the whole world to have perfect English. Just please remember this before you start yelling at someone.
You're not great at this whole "reading comprehension" thing, huh? What he said was that Win7 will start out with a nice, compact kernel. Then some manager will insist that his pet project be run in kernel mode for performance reasons. And then another will think that's a great idea, and lobby for her project to be imported to the kernel. Repeat until we end up with, well, Vista.
You won't get any argument from me. I use Krita except when I absolutely must revert to Gimp (such as to run a specific filter).
I think your average user would be better served by other applications. And for all the times I hear "but they won't have Photoshop", I have to wonder how many people actually use PS in the first place. Outside a handful of graphic designers, no one I know has it installed.
Wish I could. Check this out:
From 8.1.2.3. Attributes:
And don't forget:
From 8.1.2.4. Optional tags:
So yes, right now, today, in 2008, people are seriously discussing rolling out another non-XML HMTL spec.
At least I assume they'll be smart enough not to create any non-namespaced ones....I direct you to 8.3. Namespaces:
I hope that's sufficient.
Well, apparently the Eee's FSB is locked to 70MHz, so I'd imagine that the stock DDR2 533 is about as fast as it could possibly take advantage of. I guess what I was really wondering (but expressed poorly) is whether "faster" RAM was the same as "slower" RAM, just certified to work at higher clocks, or if there was some fundamental difference that would affect power consumption (such as earning the higher spec by drawing more voltage or something like that). Crappy car analogy that triggered this question: a Prius at 30MPH gets better mileage than a stock car at 30MPH because they're actually made differently, and holding them back to the same speed won't erase the difference.
Not at all. My wife needed a laptop to run a certain industry-specific application, so we bought a Compaq that we later discovered to be XP-incompatible. That is, there are no XP drivers for the chipset or graphics card, so unless we want to give up USB, Wi-Fi, DMA, and resolutions above 800x600, we pretty much have to leave Vista on it.
Know what? You're right. It's a nice OS that boots quickly and smoothly with plenty of nice eye candy. Never mind that none of our printers worked any more, or that it used up so much RAM that we can barely load any applications without swapping, and that it's somewhat incompatible with the application we bought it to run but not in any well-defined or deterministic ways that we can readily pin down. No, Vista itself is just fine. It's only when we have to actually load applications or print that we despise it and want to throw the laptop through a plate glass window.
I just got issued an Eee PC for a travelling laptop. So far I'm planning on leaving it in "Easy Mode" - when in Rome, right? I want to spend more time actually using it than hacking on it.
Having said that, 512MB RAM just isn't enough when there isn't swap to fall back on. Anyone know how much the extra capacity will increase power consumption and decrease battery runtime, assuming it takes more current to keep 2GB refreshed than .5GB? And in such things, is CAS 4 any different than CAS 5? Finally, higher speed RAM (such as 667 vs. 533) just means it's specced to run faster, and once you reach the FSB speed you don't act get any benefit, correct?
Sorry for asking here, but most forums I've seen are along the lines of "how do i make the fonts smaller" and are silent on more technical questions.
As long as they haven't had kids yet, I'm all for that. Darwin and all.
All games had that if you knew how to set it up.