Have you talked to your existing vendors about porting their data-aquisition & gradebook software?
There could be hundreds of other customers who are all saying the same thing. The vendors might be thinking that none of their customers want to run Linux. If you get talking to each other, you might find that it benefits you both.
. A zServer is unique in the sense that you can (with the right model) run Linux S390, VM, zOS and other guest operating systems in Logical Partitions.
It's not totally unique. There are other virtualization systems, for example Vmware for x86. VM is definatly a much better implementation than Vmware, not least because guest OS's are now written expecting to be run on VM, but the concept is identical.
Fork & Copy on write is still quite expensive in terms of resources, if you're going for high performance you really want a non-forking model.
The model you describe is basically that used by NCSA httpd, at the time that Apache split off. Apache was redesigned to do it's forks basically at startup time, and then load balance between looping httpd's. This gave much higher performance.
No it wasn't. GNU is a license, and licenses are notoriously bad for writing code (or doing anything except sit on a disk or shelf). Linus wrote Linux for the 386, but there was nothing stopping you running it on the 486 even on day 1. In fact, even today, you can run 386 code on a Pentium IV. The only disadvantage is that you'll not get the best optimizations. The GNU license was applied for version 0.12 in Jan 1992, before it was really a practical OS, and in March 1992, it became 0.95, and was really a usable OS.
Sounds to me like you're saying that voting systems and counting the votes is comlicatated, not that automating them is. In that case, automating them is a good idea. A complicated system done manually is highly prone to making mistakes, which are hard to detect and correct. Each time you have an election, you are prone to making the same mistakes. An automated system can be verified to ensure that it does the correct thing, both by inspection of the source code, and by testing, and the complex & error prone process is done only once (per set of rules).
I had a headless router that ran nothing except the kernel, init, pppd chat, and ash. No GNU programs at all. You either have to say "It's they kernel", or "It's everything". Saying "It's the kernel, plus this useful package of tools but not any of those" doesn't make any sense.
KDE_or_GNOME/Xfree/GNU/Linux probably meets more people's definition of "operating system', as a bare console wouldn't be recognizable or terribly useful to the majority of people. You'd want a printing system too, CUPS/KDE_or_GNOME/XFree/GNU/Linux. How long do you extend it as useful packages get added to a distribution?
Well he's asked. Most people have said no. Next issue please. Continuing to beat the issue won't make any difference to what people have decided. If he had got a kernel out on the street in 1986, when they started working on a kernel, then Linux wouldn't exist, so it's really his own fault.
Incadescant flickers on and off too. It's not so prounced, because the tungsten takes time to cool down, but it's there. Connect a light sensor up to an oscilloscope, or those old fashioned 'tell if your record player is revolving at the correct speed' gizomes, and you can see it.
The POSIX calls are mainly the v7 calls. There are some which were added later, in the Xenix, BSD & SysIII/SysV worlds, but without the v7 calls, you couldn't do anything useful, while the opposite is not true.
It's not so much a case of survival of tbe fittest, it's more a case of when the v7 calls and X calls were designed, they were designed by a single group of people, and everyone else adopoted them, there wasn't any alternatives designed or implemented. The *nix world was much smaller then, so everyone who was interested knew about the efforts going on and didn't duplicate them. Now, there are too many people developing for anyone to know about them all. If someone is interested in doing something which needs a new API, then 5 or 6 other people may also be interested, and they will also define their own API's, so instead of one clear API, we get a mess.
Isn't that the opposite to the drug laws? They make the obtaining & use of the drugs illegal, while not making any difference to the legality of production.
Even a book where the actual information does go out of date still has value. The building code of 1975 isn't useful to tell me how to build a house today, but it does tell me how a house build then will have been built.
Re:I hope this thing stands up to the elements.
on
Periodic Table Table
·
· Score: 2
It looks like the structure of the table is made only from one wood. The different woods are only the caps for the compartments.
The difference is that the legal name of "The New York Times" includes the location, while the legal name of the "The Times", which happens to be published in London, is just "The Times". This is reflected in their mastheads, website names, and copyright statements.
That only tells you how about the 'successful' ads you had. If you have one ad which is seen by 100,000 people, and 1,000 respond, and a second ad which is seen by 95,000 people and 1,000 respond, then you can't really tell anything about the people who didn't respond.
But this is equally true for any other license. Unless the author gives up all rights, making it public domain, then you can be violating their copyright using deritive code.
There is a difference between "it's possible" and "it's possible for a top down bureaucracy where the top level bureacrats have no idea of the engineering and more interested in their political careers"
The theoretical permissions are one thing, the actual ones used in practice are another. As Microsoft Office requires the %WINNT% directory to be world writable, that means in practice, the majority of NT setups are insecure.
Slashdot Mirror
There could be hundreds of other customers who are all saying the same thing. The vendors might be thinking that none of their customers want to run Linux. If you get talking to each other, you might find that it benefits you both.
. A zServer is unique in the sense that you can (with the right model) run Linux S390, VM, zOS and other guest operating systems in Logical Partitions. It's not totally unique. There are other virtualization systems, for example Vmware for x86. VM is definatly a much better implementation than Vmware, not least because guest OS's are now written expecting to be run on VM, but the concept is identical.
The model you describe is basically that used by NCSA httpd, at the time that Apache split off. Apache was redesigned to do it's forks basically at startup time, and then load balance between looping httpd's. This gave much higher performance.
No it wasn't. GNU is a license, and licenses are notoriously bad for writing code (or doing anything except sit on a disk or shelf). Linus wrote Linux for the 386, but there was nothing stopping you running it on the 486 even on day 1. In fact, even today, you can run 386 code on a Pentium IV. The only disadvantage is that you'll not get the best optimizations. The GNU license was applied for version 0.12 in Jan 1992, before it was really a practical OS, and in March 1992, it became 0.95, and was really a usable OS.
Sounds to me like you're saying that voting systems and counting the votes is comlicatated, not that automating them is. In that case, automating them is a good idea. A complicated system done manually is highly prone to making mistakes, which are hard to detect and correct. Each time you have an election, you are prone to making the same mistakes. An automated system can be verified to ensure that it does the correct thing, both by inspection of the source code, and by testing, and the complex & error prone process is done only once (per set of rules).
IBM ZSeries for Linux also won, in the Internet hardware category.
I had a headless router that ran nothing except the kernel, init, pppd chat, and ash. No GNU programs at all. You either have to say "It's they kernel", or "It's everything". Saying "It's the kernel, plus this useful package of tools but not any of those" doesn't make any sense.
KDE_or_GNOME/Xfree/GNU/Linux probably meets more people's definition of "operating system', as a bare console wouldn't be recognizable or terribly useful to the majority of people. You'd want a printing system too, CUPS/KDE_or_GNOME/XFree/GNU/Linux. How long do you extend it as useful packages get added to a distribution?
Well he's asked. Most people have said no. Next issue please. Continuing to beat the issue won't make any difference to what people have decided. If he had got a kernel out on the street in 1986, when they started working on a kernel, then Linux wouldn't exist, so it's really his own fault.
Incadescant flickers on and off too. It's not so prounced, because the tungsten takes time to cool down, but it's there. Connect a light sensor up to an oscilloscope, or those old fashioned 'tell if your record player is revolving at the correct speed' gizomes, and you can see it.
It's not so much a case of survival of tbe fittest, it's more a case of when the v7 calls and X calls were designed, they were designed by a single group of people, and everyone else adopoted them, there wasn't any alternatives designed or implemented. The *nix world was much smaller then, so everyone who was interested knew about the efforts going on and didn't duplicate them. Now, there are too many people developing for anyone to know about them all. If someone is interested in doing something which needs a new API, then 5 or 6 other people may also be interested, and they will also define their own API's, so instead of one clear API, we get a mess.
Isn't that the opposite to the drug laws? They make the obtaining & use of the drugs illegal, while not making any difference to the legality of production.
On the other hand, telnet is (almost always) installed, while nc is rarely installed.
Even a book where the actual information does go out of date still has value. The building code of 1975 isn't useful to tell me how to build a house today, but it does tell me how a house build then will have been built.
It looks like the structure of the table is made only from one wood. The different woods are only the caps for the compartments.
Florine gas is very hard to have around. It's so reactive, you end up with xx floride instead.
That depends on the owner. I'm alergic to dogs. 30 minutes in a room with a dog, and I'm suffering from an asthma attack.
The difference is that the legal name of "The New York Times" includes the location, while the legal name of the "The Times", which happens to be published in London, is just "The Times". This is reflected in their mastheads, website names, and copyright statements.
That only tells you how about the 'successful' ads you had. If you have one ad which is seen by 100,000 people, and 1,000 respond, and a second ad which is seen by 95,000 people and 1,000 respond, then you can't really tell anything about the people who didn't respond.
But this is equally true for any other license. Unless the author gives up all rights, making it public domain, then you can be violating their copyright using deritive code.
There is a difference between "it's possible" and "it's possible for a top down bureaucracy where the top level bureacrats have no idea of the engineering and more interested in their political careers"
Anyone with a wife and daughter should get life insurance, so that in the case of them unexpectantly dieing, the w & d are going to be covered.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb; EN-US;q169387
I guess that they're hoping that they can continue to sell hardware, unlike what the RIAA & MPAA plans would do.
The theoretical permissions are one thing, the actual ones used in practice are another. As Microsoft Office requires the %WINNT% directory to be world writable, that means in practice, the majority of NT setups are insecure.