IE only compatible websites. Like it or not... they are out there, and people use them (for example, to trade stocks online). It made IBMs life a misery
Have you given OS X a run? It suffers from none of these problems, and gives a complete, smooth and consistent user experience.
You have the win32 ActiveX emulation library installed under OS X? Sweet! Mind sharing with the rest of us? IBM would be particularly interested in figuring out how you made that proprietary Windows junk run perfectly with "none of these problems" on a non-Windows system.
The NetBSD Packages Collection (pkgsrc) is a framework for building third-party software on NetBSD and other UNIX-like systems, currently containing nearly
5000 packages.
[graph with a y-value of
12,000 at the current time]
Which brings us back to my statement:
Besides being the easiest, FreeBSD has by far the largest collection of ported software.
If you can make a FreeBSD port of a program, then you can probably also get it to run on NetBSD or OpenBSD. However, the odds of any particular program already being ported to FreeBSD are significantly higher.
On a K6-400 I found an improvement in performance, although I have absolutely no idea why.
One big reason may be that 5.x uses GCC 3.4.2, which has much better optimization than GCC 2.9.5 in 4.x. I upgraded some pretty unusual hardware (an older Alpha) and saw tremendous speed increases (several hundred percent) in a few areas, like running "openssl speed".
I hadn't seen portsnap before, but that looks pretty interesting for the bandwidth-limited. BTW, have you used portversion? It's many times faster than pkg_version in my experience.
It's not that minimal, considering obsd includes Apache, Perl, SSH, CVS, and other goodies in the base system.
In my post, "minimal" referred to "the installer".
It can also make a good desktop system (I use it as such, and so do many others), since most of the window managers, kde/gnome stuff, and common X apps (xpdf, firefox, mplayer, xv, xmms, etc.) run fine on it.
Sure, although the list of available software seems pretty slim after being used to FreeBSD's ports. The main strike against it as a desktop, for me, is that OpenBSD feels much slower on given hardware than does FreeBSD. I haven't done any benchmarks to see how they really stack up on live servers, but all of that cryptographic goodness certainly comes with an overhead. You need to weigh raw performance against paranoid security; there are places for both, but I prefer FreeBSD's speed on the desktop.
I didn't have to mess with anything to get sound working on the same machine with OpenBSD or Linux. Besides, "same as Linux" is not a particularly lofty standard.
Those drivers are compiled into OpenBSD's GENERIC kernel, and any given Linux distro may also have them compiled in (or autodetect them). FreeBSD tends to leave such decisions to the user, and isn't as cautious about providing modules as OpenBSD.
Can't you do NAT for the various jails? The firewall is global to all jails.
Sure (although that won't help for IPv6). It's kind of an extra annoyance for LAN-only services, though, if you don't want to maintain multiple machines running distinct NAT setups. For example, I have NAT on my standalone firewall server, and I use that to point multiple addresses to the same jail (for SSLed websites, say). Now, I have to configure another NAT on the jail host itself to redirect addr1:443, addr2:443, and addr3:443 to different ports on the same jail. Sure, it can be done, but it's not exactly the cleanest or most easily maintained setup in that case.
Theo says jails aren't the way to go, but it keeps OpenBSD out a lot of areas that FreeBSD is currently popular.
I have a lot of respect for Theo, but I think he's dead wrong on this one. I keep an identical copy of my company's main webserver setup running inside a jail on the same machine. Whenever I want to test something, like upgrading a particular piece of software, I can do it with complete impunity. The alternative would be to have an identically-configured spare box sitting next to the main server. Since my company isn't in the webhosting business and unplanned downtime isn't a business-killer for us, I don't get the luxury of asking for redundant hardware. That jail still lets me do my testing as though I do.
FreeBSD has more software and better performance, but it's never been worth it for me because you have to mess around with the kernel and stuff (We're not on Linux, after all). I had to manually enable modules to get things like sound and set all sorts of environment variables to get some of the ports to work right.
I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about. There are quite a few ports that accept environmental variables to decide with optional dependencies to compile in. For example, if you set "WITHOUT_X11='YES'", then ports will avoid requiring xorg (or xf86 on 4.x) whenever possible. Ports are pretty good about letting you know which options you can select, and you can put all of those definitions in a single file so that you don't have to remember them each time.
To enabling the drivers for my SB Live! card, I added this to/boot/loader.conf:
snd_emu10k1_load="YES"
which would be analogous to adding an entry to/etc/modules on a Linux system.
FreeBSD is a bit more up to date, and has more powerful features (I love jails).
That is such an understatement.:-) I host a few webservers, a Freenet/Gnutella/IRC server, and my ISP's newsserver inside their own jails on my server at home with almost zero CPU overhead. The only downside is that you can only assign one IPv4 address to each jail right now, although that's being worked on.
I disagree. OpenBSD was a bear to install when I first tried several years ago. I gave it another shot last year after getting quite a bit of FreeBSD experience under my belt, and it was a breeze.
It defines "minimal", but if you can get used to the fact that the installer won't hold your hand in any way, then it's actually about the easiest you'll find. Seriously. It's just not that bad for an experienced user.
Besides being the easiest, FreeBSD has by far the largest collection of ported software. Although you can probably built almost all of the same programs by hand on Net- or OpenBSD, it's nice to be able to let someone else do the hard work for you, particularly if this is your first time to use the system.
BTW, I'd rewrite your instructions as:
Update your software collection: cd/usr/ports; make update
portupgrade -ra
Install from source: portinstall misc/screen
Install from binaries: portinstall -PP misc/screen
Yes, I know that the first one is rarely that simple (although it can be, especially on relatively new machines). The second two are pretty representative, though.
I think it's great that they're maintaining the 4.x branch for a little while longer for those who can't afford to upgrade today. Still, if you're on 4.x and haven't made the jump because you're nervous about it, this is an excellent time to do so. I'm running it on several production servers, and it's at least as fast for everything I've thrown at it (and quite a bit faster at some things).
What if they (specifically their parents) don't want a vaccination, due to not wanting to overdose them with mercury, antifreeze and other poisonous substances?
Then they (specifically their parents) are ignorant mouthbreathers who probably also believe you can get rid of HIV by raping a virgin - both ideas have roughly the same scientific merit.
Do you know what the LD-50 of antifreeze is? I suspect you could sustain a.5cc injection of raw propylene glycol without many problems. If thimerosal decomposed to methylmercury instead of ethylmercury, then a vaccination would contain a couple times more than WHO's established average allowable daily intake limits, but it's not so that's pretty much a straw man.
In a nutshell, skipping vaccinations is one of the worst forms of child abuse around. If someone's stupid enough to keep their kids from getting them, then they shouldn't be having kids in the first place.
Can you tell I feel rather strongly about this? My sister works is an infectious health analyst, and she makes me seem pretty uninterested in comparison.
also it always looks right no matter what your useing so its all good.
Put down the Dreamweaver and step the hell away from the webdav server.
Do you really believe that, or are you just acting stupid to get a laugh on Slashdot? No, it's not "all good" to write crap code that just manages to parse in most browsers. That's the exact reason why pages don't render uniformly today: IE and Mozilla had to make so many allowances for broken HTML that the rendering of a given piece of non-compliant code is a crapshoot.
That's also why people who complain that Slashdot doesn't "look right" in Mozilla get shouted down. Slashcode's HTML doesn't validate so there's no deterministic answer to what "looks right" means. We're basically in the current situation because so many webmasters put up half-assed code that IE and Mozilla had to accept whatever was thrown at them.
Fortunately, XHTML is very cut-and-dried: either a page is valid, or it's not a page. I look forward to they day when "good enough" isn't, and things really will look like they're supposed to on non-IE browsers.
It was a pretty lame one, granted, and requires a particular environmental variable to be set on the server. However, it (justifiably) gave the "QMa1l is teh 1337!!1!" fanboys a rude awakening.
10 messages into the replies to your post, and every single one of them says the exact same thing.
Congratulations, guys; you all got it right without stopping to realize that 10,000 other people also knew the same answer but weren't frothing to correct him. I bet you're all a lot of fun on mailing lists, too.
Freedom of speech is in the Constitution, cellphone number portability, do not call list, and WiFi are not.
In other words, even though he didn't have to enact number portability and increased spectrum usage, he did because it would be good for citizens. Sounds pretty good to me!
He signed the damn thing because when Congress passed it they already had more than 80% in favor of it in both the House and Senate, which is way more than enough to override a veto.
If they really had that majority, as you're claiming, then why bother signing it? Why not say "do what you must, but I won't support it" and go on record as opposing it when it really mattered?
I've been around several diagnosed depressed people, and realistic outlook on life is not how I'd describe them.
Scenario: the car won't start.
You: Dang. Now I have to find someone to give me a jump start. Guess I better call work and tell them I'll be a little late.
Depressed person: I'm going to be late for work and lose my job. That means I'll lose the house, and my children will be homeless unless I give them up for adoption and move into the YMCA.
Scenario: not enough in the checking account today to pay all the bills.
You: Let's see, this one isn't quite due yet, and my wife will get paid on Thursday, so I'll just pay these and pick up the rest next week.
DP: I can't believe I work this hard and don't have enough money to even pay the bills. I'm a failure and will probably go bankrupt.
An obsession with utter despair isn't my idea of a pragmatic approach to life.
Can you name a single man here on slashdot who wouldn't get hot @ the thought of his wife wanting to use a UNIX-based operating system?
My wife used Win98 when we first started dating. After we got married, I upgraded her system to Debian and later FreeBSD. She bought an iMac a couple of years ago but she despises Windows to this day, to the point of making fun of people who complain about viruses and spyware and telling them to "just get FreeBSD or a Mac and be done with it".
Oh, she also got through college on an Army ROTC scholarship which is how she ended up graduating from Airborne School, and went on to go to med school and become a surgeon. That's right: I married a Unix-loving doctor who could kick my ass and yours at the same time. In case you were wondering, I am The Man.
The science involved in these images represents the careers of many people.
They also represent the tax dollars of millions of "civilians" who have just as much right to them.
They had a right to publish first.
Fortunately for us, they did: right up on that webserver with a nice, fat pipe. Thanks, space agencies!
Do not expect raw images of important discoveries any more.
That presumes that NASA/ESA are so full of regrettably stupid rocket scientists that none of them - not one - realized that someone else might take that data and make it look pretty. Sure.
OK, your post was funny and I laughed along with it. In all seriousness, though, I'd be perfectly happy to see "Fly Virgin" or "British Airways" or "JetBlue" on it, because that would mean that private industry has finally taken a serious interest in getting man off this rock. Go, Mr. Branson, GO!
What computers are currently on the market to compete with this? When my wife asks for the 'cute little Mac', what PC can I buy instead that will take up as little space and do as much for the same price (or less)?
None, and you can't.
You want something small and functional for your breakfast bar, right? Then just get the Mac Mini and be done with it. It'll play your music, browse the web, and read your email every bit as well as your Windows PC, so what's the problem? Are you planning to play Doom 3 over eggs and bacon?
I used to play with VistaPro on my Amiga back in the day, and loved being able to tinker around with elevations, camera angles, self-made lakes and such. Is there any F/OSS program even remotely similar in scope to Terragen?
I'm not sure about that. In the cases you mention, the question is how far we should go to treat critically ill people. My question is, what are the implications for an otherwise healthy person discontinuing the treatment saving them from certain death? I think a closer analogy would be the case of a diabetic who decides not to take their insulin anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you given OS X a run? It suffers from none of these problems, and gives a complete, smooth and consistent user experience.
You have the win32 ActiveX emulation library installed under OS X? Sweet! Mind sharing with the rest of us? IBM would be particularly interested in figuring out how you made that proprietary Windows junk run perfectly with "none of these problems" on a non-Windows system.
Which brings us back to my statement:
If you can make a FreeBSD port of a program, then you can probably also get it to run on NetBSD or OpenBSD. However, the odds of any particular program already being ported to FreeBSD are significantly higher.One big reason may be that 5.x uses GCC 3.4.2, which has much better optimization than GCC 2.9.5 in 4.x. I upgraded some pretty unusual hardware (an older Alpha) and saw tremendous speed increases (several hundred percent) in a few areas, like running "openssl speed".
I hadn't seen portsnap before, but that looks pretty interesting for the bandwidth-limited. BTW, have you used portversion? It's many times faster than pkg_version in my experience.
In my post, "minimal" referred to "the installer".
It can also make a good desktop system (I use it as such, and so do many others), since most of the window managers, kde/gnome stuff, and common X apps (xpdf, firefox, mplayer, xv, xmms, etc.) run fine on it.
Sure, although the list of available software seems pretty slim after being used to FreeBSD's ports. The main strike against it as a desktop, for me, is that OpenBSD feels much slower on given hardware than does FreeBSD. I haven't done any benchmarks to see how they really stack up on live servers, but all of that cryptographic goodness certainly comes with an overhead. You need to weigh raw performance against paranoid security; there are places for both, but I prefer FreeBSD's speed on the desktop.
Those drivers are compiled into OpenBSD's GENERIC kernel, and any given Linux distro may also have them compiled in (or autodetect them). FreeBSD tends to leave such decisions to the user, and isn't as cautious about providing modules as OpenBSD.
Can't you do NAT for the various jails? The firewall is global to all jails.
Sure (although that won't help for IPv6). It's kind of an extra annoyance for LAN-only services, though, if you don't want to maintain multiple machines running distinct NAT setups. For example, I have NAT on my standalone firewall server, and I use that to point multiple addresses to the same jail (for SSLed websites, say). Now, I have to configure another NAT on the jail host itself to redirect addr1:443, addr2:443, and addr3:443 to different ports on the same jail. Sure, it can be done, but it's not exactly the cleanest or most easily maintained setup in that case.
Theo says jails aren't the way to go, but it keeps OpenBSD out a lot of areas that FreeBSD is currently popular.
I have a lot of respect for Theo, but I think he's dead wrong on this one. I keep an identical copy of my company's main webserver setup running inside a jail on the same machine. Whenever I want to test something, like upgrading a particular piece of software, I can do it with complete impunity. The alternative would be to have an identically-configured spare box sitting next to the main server. Since my company isn't in the webhosting business and unplanned downtime isn't a business-killer for us, I don't get the luxury of asking for redundant hardware. That jail still lets me do my testing as though I do.
I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about. There are quite a few ports that accept environmental variables to decide with optional dependencies to compile in. For example, if you set "WITHOUT_X11='YES'", then ports will avoid requiring xorg (or xf86 on 4.x) whenever possible. Ports are pretty good about letting you know which options you can select, and you can put all of those definitions in a single file so that you don't have to remember them each time.
To enabling the drivers for my SB Live! card, I added this to /boot/loader.conf:
which would be analogous to adding an entry toFreeBSD is a bit more up to date, and has more powerful features (I love jails).
That is such an understatement. :-) I host a few webservers, a Freenet/Gnutella/IRC server, and my ISP's newsserver inside their own jails on my server at home with almost zero CPU overhead. The only downside is that you can only assign one IPv4 address to each jail right now, although that's being worked on.
It defines "minimal", but if you can get used to the fact that the installer won't hold your hand in any way, then it's actually about the easiest you'll find. Seriously. It's just not that bad for an experienced user.
BTW, I'd rewrite your instructions as:
Update your software collection: /usr/ports; make update
cd
portupgrade -ra
Install from source:
portinstall misc/screen
Install from binaries:
portinstall -PP misc/screen
Yes, I know that the first one is rarely that simple (although it can be, especially on relatively new machines). The second two are pretty representative, though.
I think it's great that they're maintaining the 4.x branch for a little while longer for those who can't afford to upgrade today. Still, if you're on 4.x and haven't made the jump because you're nervous about it, this is an excellent time to do so. I'm running it on several production servers, and it's at least as fast for everything I've thrown at it (and quite a bit faster at some things).
Then they (specifically their parents) are ignorant mouthbreathers who probably also believe you can get rid of HIV by raping a virgin - both ideas have roughly the same scientific merit.
Do you know what the LD-50 of antifreeze is? I suspect you could sustain a .5cc injection of raw propylene glycol without many problems. If thimerosal decomposed to methylmercury instead of ethylmercury, then a vaccination would contain a couple times more than WHO's established average allowable daily intake limits, but it's not so that's pretty much a straw man.
In a nutshell, skipping vaccinations is one of the worst forms of child abuse around. If someone's stupid enough to keep their kids from getting them, then they shouldn't be having kids in the first place.
Can you tell I feel rather strongly about this? My sister works is an infectious health analyst, and she makes me seem pretty uninterested in comparison.
Put down the Dreamweaver and step the hell away from the webdav server.
Do you really believe that, or are you just acting stupid to get a laugh on Slashdot? No, it's not "all good" to write crap code that just manages to parse in most browsers. That's the exact reason why pages don't render uniformly today: IE and Mozilla had to make so many allowances for broken HTML that the rendering of a given piece of non-compliant code is a crapshoot.
That's also why people who complain that Slashdot doesn't "look right" in Mozilla get shouted down. Slashcode's HTML doesn't validate so there's no deterministic answer to what "looks right" means. We're basically in the current situation because so many webmasters put up half-assed code that IE and Mozilla had to accept whatever was thrown at them.
Fortunately, XHTML is very cut-and-dried: either a page is valid, or it's not a page. I look forward to they day when "good enough" isn't, and things really will look like they're supposed to on non-IE browsers.
March.
It was a pretty lame one, granted, and requires a particular environmental variable to be set on the server. However, it (justifiably) gave the "QMa1l is teh 1337!!1!" fanboys a rude awakening.
Congratulations, guys; you all got it right without stopping to realize that 10,000 other people also knew the same answer but weren't frothing to correct him. I bet you're all a lot of fun on mailing lists, too.
In other words, even though he didn't have to enact number portability and increased spectrum usage, he did because it would be good for citizens. Sounds pretty good to me!
If they really had that majority, as you're claiming, then why bother signing it? Why not say "do what you must, but I won't support it" and go on record as opposing it when it really mattered?
EXEC SQL sql-statements
Very impressive, but no one uses REXX anymore.
Scenario: the car won't start.
You: Dang. Now I have to find someone to give me a jump start. Guess I better call work and tell them I'll be a little late.
Depressed person: I'm going to be late for work and lose my job. That means I'll lose the house, and my children will be homeless unless I give them up for adoption and move into the YMCA.
Scenario: not enough in the checking account today to pay all the bills.
You: Let's see, this one isn't quite due yet, and my wife will get paid on Thursday, so I'll just pay these and pick up the rest next week.
DP: I can't believe I work this hard and don't have enough money to even pay the bills. I'm a failure and will probably go bankrupt.
An obsession with utter despair isn't my idea of a pragmatic approach to life.
Whichever works. At this point, I'm not gonna rock the boat. :-)
My wife used Win98 when we first started dating. After we got married, I upgraded her system to Debian and later FreeBSD. She bought an iMac a couple of years ago but she despises Windows to this day, to the point of making fun of people who complain about viruses and spyware and telling them to "just get FreeBSD or a Mac and be done with it".
Oh, she also got through college on an Army ROTC scholarship which is how she ended up graduating from Airborne School, and went on to go to med school and become a surgeon. That's right: I married a Unix-loving doctor who could kick my ass and yours at the same time. In case you were wondering, I am The Man.
They also represent the tax dollars of millions of "civilians" who have just as much right to them.
They had a right to publish first.
Fortunately for us, they did: right up on that webserver with a nice, fat pipe. Thanks, space agencies!
Do not expect raw images of important discoveries any more.
That presumes that NASA/ESA are so full of regrettably stupid rocket scientists that none of them - not one - realized that someone else might take that data and make it look pretty. Sure.
OK, your post was funny and I laughed along with it. In all seriousness, though, I'd be perfectly happy to see "Fly Virgin" or "British Airways" or "JetBlue" on it, because that would mean that private industry has finally taken a serious interest in getting man off this rock. Go, Mr. Branson, GO!
None, and you can't.
You want something small and functional for your breakfast bar, right? Then just get the Mac Mini and be done with it. It'll play your music, browse the web, and read your email every bit as well as your Windows PC, so what's the problem? Are you planning to play Doom 3 over eggs and bacon?
I used to play with VistaPro on my Amiga back in the day, and loved being able to tinker around with elevations, camera angles, self-made lakes and such. Is there any F/OSS program even remotely similar in scope to Terragen?
I'm not sure about that. In the cases you mention, the question is how far we should go to treat critically ill people. My question is, what are the implications for an otherwise healthy person discontinuing the treatment saving them from certain death? I think a closer analogy would be the case of a diabetic who decides not to take their insulin anymore.