I find it MUCH easier to multipurpose a Linux machine for a series of tasks if cost is really a problem. I find having something like a database, directory server, and exchange would easily begin to cause problems under a regular Windows box. This is of course just from my experience. Plus, don't forget the ridiculous per-user costs for exchange and all the other enterprise tools that are typically covered across the board with a Redhat license.
You could always do that even if every 'open' access point was encrypted. If you want to start mandating legal licensing of access points than I think you're going to find some resistance from this crowd. If else, how can you assure that anything I'm connected to is legitimately what I think it is? That, or we start creating a registry of 'official' access points in the wild, and start issuing certificates like SSL currently works. Both require bureaucracy, and expense, and both are pretty much the only solutions that could close the gap we're seeing between security and wireless internet access.
Oh, I thought of another good idea, though this involves extra hardware. You have (at the coffee shop) a card swiper/USB host/whatever that stores a single one time password and self-signed certificate onto the device. You read the card into your device (laptop/phone, etc..) and then you know that the device you're connecting to much have the same information as the swiped device, otherwise its spoofing. This means that coffee shops can regulate who can use the service (or give it away for free for people physically accessible to swipe the data) and it means the consumer of the wireless is sure that the system is closed. I haven't worked it all out since its cloudy in my mind, but this can also be a solution to the MIM attack, since I can transfer the initial handshake through non-open channels, nay?
will still get you arrested for illegal breach into a seemingly closed system. The attempt (even if performed by the system) is still your legal responsibility. The only possible caveat being that this workaround somehow becomes part of the next wireless standard, in which case its assumed that you are offering your services for all to consume. Having an automatic attempt to connect using 'free' as a colloquial solution to WPA2's flaws are the wrong approach.
It sucks for load balancers unless you're offloading the SSL to the load balancer itself, then you have issues with embedded server URL's needing to be rewritten to not only use the load balancer IP's but also all HTTP:// references into HTTPS:// references, which in turn may blow up some random poorly written apps that depend on specific file sizes... plus all the overhead of possibly decompressing a compressed result, scanning for the offending URI and re-compressing the fixed the results, etc...
This is actually from personal experience regarding JNLP hosted from servlets, but the same can apply with any web technologies that use absolute addresses within the web application.
Harmony classpath are actually not too bad. I don't know comparatively how they stack up against Hotspot's classpath, but it seems to be working for android anyways. The lacking member of the equation is GCJ or any other clean room JVM implementations which sadly do lag behind the official releases.
"Novell extended the patent protection to anyone who uses their software."
So does this propagate with the GPL, LGPL, MIT based licensing that Mono apparently has? If I included a single file of mono and developed a clean room implementation independently does this indemnification still exist? What's the point of releasing something with an open license if nobody receiving said code can benefit from said license?
No, forget for a moment that Java is faster than said scripting languages. Do these languages offer something more compelling than Java is the real question for me. If performance was the end all issue then fine, don't use a purely scripting language. But what I really want to ask is if Perl, python, Lua, etc.. offer anything to the developer that the Java language doesn't support? At least the logical jump from C/C++ to java was evident. It was basically the same language make-up without the worry of managing pointers directly, and having a large surface of standard language features built-in.
I have little doubt that there are Sun (now Oracle) held parents that overlap with the offerings within CLI. The OP referred to James Gosling who would know surely know the truth of the matter given how close he was to Java within Sun for decades.
1. I hate functional languages, so scala looks and feels generally against my grain. I'm not the only one, and trying to shoe-horn people toward the wrong solution will not win you any points 2. Even Gosling found Scala to be complicated and you expect the regular rank and file corporate developers to adopt it?
"intelligent detail-oriented people who after a few years of training" I guess that eliminates most of the programmers out there... so sad.
Yes, because every programmer on earth is just as you describe. They are perfect beings that NEED to use pointers in order to get their dull little boiler plate web application written. Oh wait, you mean pointers don't serve a specifically beneficial role in programs based purely on 99% of business domain solutions? That's insane! They're so elegant, they have to be woven into every programmer's brain. I mean how else can you write the most tight elegant sexy for loop if you're not using array pointer iteration.
Yes, its all hyperbole and so is your statement. C/C++ mandates a large set of things that MUST be done to get a job done. Some jobs are much better served if you use pointers, and macros and all the archaic and low level sugar that these languages support. Most programmer these days don't need such a level of control over the innards of the program in order to make an ideal tool, and in fact, moving many existing applications into C/C++ may incrementally improve performance while causing all sorts of problems in accessibility, bugs, and portability.
Another thing that I think would suffer is the rich and wonderful ecosystem of Java libraries that have grown over the years. I'd hate to have to glue libraries together in the classic C standard ways. In fact, I would find it as a big step backward. Maybe the.NET folks have come up with something more compelling than classical approaches, but who knows.
I'd say Nielsen or the like would be a more viable target for their business model. Oh, and imagine Google TV giving discounts on service offering to customers that turn on a tracking bit on the Google TV's? That is totally up their alley of trending and analytics.
I would say you only have a difference of opinion. For one, it does really suck not being within a geographic distribution channel that a service supports. Being in Canada, there are a ton of useful services that are either available in US/Europe that aren't available here. It is frustrating and inane. Netflix only just came to Canada a couple months ago. I as a developer could only just sell android apps to anyone a month or so ago. Hulu? Can't get it without crazy proxy workarounds. Like I said, as a consumer, having the ability to go to thepiratebay.org or a similar service makes sense because frankly there is no distinction about what is or isn't available to me as a consumer. Quite frankly, its the content provider's fault of not arranging the proper agreements and policies to get the content into the hands of people willing to monetize them for it.
On the flip side, content producers have stupid policies where they usually grant distributors monopolies of distribution for given territories. This is a flaw in the way producers distribute their content into the future, and it will have to be addressed sooner or later if they ever hope to stem the tide of unauthorized copyright activity.
Oh, forgot to mention it was Eclipse, running JDT's built-in compiler. Nobody (myself included) made any gigantic changes to the eclipse setup from stock that would affect performance dramatically. When I was developing, it was always on the latest Fedora.
When running and debugging my code, my Linux PC (same hardware) as my Windows XP based coworkers would always be faster to use. I can't say why, but that's the way it was. It was a painful experience to sit at a windows dev's desk to wait a minute for things to compile when it took me, oh 10 sec max.
All true, but being somewhat interested in the X server around the time of the fork, very few people found the change to be a negative. XFree86 guys that didn't move with the change seemed to be against adding changes and extensions into the server, and only after the fork could things like RENDER and RANDR become first class citizens in the distro instead of being relegated to the experimental branches like KDrive. The Since it was a fork, its not like things were instantly broken. I think the big change was the executable was named Xorg instead of XFree86 which I assume broke some custom scripts.
Is the fact that window tearing, or only a single display handling poor video interaction a failure in X, or a failure in the driver developers? I really really want to know what AMD, NVidia, and Intel think about the change. Because frankly, if they aren't behind the shift, does anyone find this solution making it in the long term?
Gnome apps run on windows, so they've in one way or another accomplished the same thing.
The question really lies in if they believe that this new server is in fact a step in the right direction. If they do, then it is feasible that it'll get some developer love, but if they're making a bad step then I wouldn't expect support from others. I would say that XFree86 was definitely being held up by the group themselves, but since the X.org fork there has been some good changes to the system that have moved it along. I'd say the worst part of my desktop Linux experience has been related to driver support, and frankly you can run any number of graphics servers on top of something, but if you don't have good drivers then nothing will be solved. Someone thinks that flaky composting support is X's fault? X and Compiz have it done. If a graphics card doesn't support the needed GL extensions sufficiently enough, it looks or performs like garbage.
To all those that truly love and understand Wayland, how does this graphics environment improve the quality, efficiency, and advancement of Linux based graphics drivers? Because frankly, that is really the only problem I ever seem to have with Linux based desktops.
When a company sells CD's, books, broadcasts TV shows, etc.. they 'lose control' of their works as well. That doesn't diminish the granted right of control over what can and cannot be done with said works and productions.
Nexus One has an 802.11N chip, and its a year old. The lack of higher end features was more about the cost of chips, and the power drain on using them, than the phone's capabilities to take those chips.
That said, I really don't see a large market for this kind of tech. I mean I have a PC sitting in my bedroom that stores all my files, and use PS3 Media Server to serve them up to my TV. I would never think: Hey lets download something large to my phone and stream it to my TV. It sounds retarded actually. The same thing goes for 'bringing videos to friends house'. Do you really see having large videos on your phone just waiting to play which aren't available for instant streaming on the internet?
1. From my memory of past new releases, Apple never did a good job of supporting new features in the JVM to begin with 2. Apple seems to be in a frenzy to gut anything that isn't explicitly tied to their platform, so having an open (from apple api's) java floating on top of their OS means that they can just up and support other platforms. The fact that the apple camp seems to be turning their OSX into an iPhone/iPad, this makes total sense
*shrugs* Oracle DB is a hodgepodge internally (how old is it now?) but it runs very well from my experience. I can't say about other pieces of their software stack, but the DB deserves the market share it gets.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, you get the TOS when you install Steam, nay?
I find it MUCH easier to multipurpose a Linux machine for a series of tasks if cost is really a problem. I find having something like a database, directory server, and exchange would easily begin to cause problems under a regular Windows box. This is of course just from my experience. Plus, don't forget the ridiculous per-user costs for exchange and all the other enterprise tools that are typically covered across the board with a Redhat license.
You could always do that even if every 'open' access point was encrypted. If you want to start mandating legal licensing of access points than I think you're going to find some resistance from this crowd. If else, how can you assure that anything I'm connected to is legitimately what I think it is? That, or we start creating a registry of 'official' access points in the wild, and start issuing certificates like SSL currently works. Both require bureaucracy, and expense, and both are pretty much the only solutions that could close the gap we're seeing between security and wireless internet access.
Oh, I thought of another good idea, though this involves extra hardware. You have (at the coffee shop) a card swiper/USB host/whatever that stores a single one time password and self-signed certificate onto the device. You read the card into your device (laptop/phone, etc..) and then you know that the device you're connecting to much have the same information as the swiped device, otherwise its spoofing. This means that coffee shops can regulate who can use the service (or give it away for free for people physically accessible to swipe the data) and it means the consumer of the wireless is sure that the system is closed. I haven't worked it all out since its cloudy in my mind, but this can also be a solution to the MIM attack, since I can transfer the initial handshake through non-open channels, nay?
will still get you arrested for illegal breach into a seemingly closed system. The attempt (even if performed by the system) is still your legal responsibility. The only possible caveat being that this workaround somehow becomes part of the next wireless standard, in which case its assumed that you are offering your services for all to consume. Having an automatic attempt to connect using 'free' as a colloquial solution to WPA2's flaws are the wrong approach.
It sucks for load balancers unless you're offloading the SSL to the load balancer itself, then you have issues with embedded server URL's needing to be rewritten to not only use the load balancer IP's but also all HTTP:// references into HTTPS:// references, which in turn may blow up some random poorly written apps that depend on specific file sizes... plus all the overhead of possibly decompressing a compressed result, scanning for the offending URI and re-compressing the fixed the results, etc...
This is actually from personal experience regarding JNLP hosted from servlets, but the same can apply with any web technologies that use absolute addresses within the web application.
Harmony classpath are actually not too bad. I don't know comparatively how they stack up against Hotspot's classpath, but it seems to be working for android anyways. The lacking member of the equation is GCJ or any other clean room JVM implementations which sadly do lag behind the official releases.
"Novell extended the patent protection to anyone who uses their software."
So does this propagate with the GPL, LGPL, MIT based licensing that Mono apparently has? If I included a single file of mono and developed a clean room implementation independently does this indemnification still exist? What's the point of releasing something with an open license if nobody receiving said code can benefit from said license?
No, forget for a moment that Java is faster than said scripting languages. Do these languages offer something more compelling than Java is the real question for me. If performance was the end all issue then fine, don't use a purely scripting language. But what I really want to ask is if Perl, python, Lua, etc.. offer anything to the developer that the Java language doesn't support? At least the logical jump from C/C++ to java was evident. It was basically the same language make-up without the worry of managing pointers directly, and having a large surface of standard language features built-in.
Maybe, but I probably wouldn't be restarting the application every fraction of a second either.
I have little doubt that there are Sun (now Oracle) held parents that overlap with the offerings within CLI. The OP referred to James Gosling who would know surely know the truth of the matter given how close he was to Java within Sun for decades.
1. I hate functional languages, so scala looks and feels generally against my grain. I'm not the only one, and trying to shoe-horn people toward the wrong solution will not win you any points
2. Even Gosling found Scala to be complicated and you expect the regular rank and file corporate developers to adopt it?
"intelligent detail-oriented people who after a few years of training"
I guess that eliminates most of the programmers out there... so sad.
Yes, because every programmer on earth is just as you describe. They are perfect beings that NEED to use pointers in order to get their dull little boiler plate web application written. Oh wait, you mean pointers don't serve a specifically beneficial role in programs based purely on 99% of business domain solutions? That's insane! They're so elegant, they have to be woven into every programmer's brain. I mean how else can you write the most tight elegant sexy for loop if you're not using array pointer iteration.
Yes, its all hyperbole and so is your statement. C/C++ mandates a large set of things that MUST be done to get a job done. Some jobs are much better served if you use pointers, and macros and all the archaic and low level sugar that these languages support. Most programmer these days don't need such a level of control over the innards of the program in order to make an ideal tool, and in fact, moving many existing applications into C/C++ may incrementally improve performance while causing all sorts of problems in accessibility, bugs, and portability.
Another thing that I think would suffer is the rich and wonderful ecosystem of Java libraries that have grown over the years. I'd hate to have to glue libraries together in the classic C standard ways. In fact, I would find it as a big step backward. Maybe the .NET folks have come up with something more compelling than classical approaches, but who knows.
I'd say Nielsen or the like would be a more viable target for their business model. Oh, and imagine Google TV giving discounts on service offering to customers that turn on a tracking bit on the Google TV's? That is totally up their alley of trending and analytics.
I would say you only have a difference of opinion. For one, it does really suck not being within a geographic distribution channel that a service supports. Being in Canada, there are a ton of useful services that are either available in US/Europe that aren't available here. It is frustrating and inane. Netflix only just came to Canada a couple months ago. I as a developer could only just sell android apps to anyone a month or so ago. Hulu? Can't get it without crazy proxy workarounds. Like I said, as a consumer, having the ability to go to thepiratebay.org or a similar service makes sense because frankly there is no distinction about what is or isn't available to me as a consumer. Quite frankly, its the content provider's fault of not arranging the proper agreements and policies to get the content into the hands of people willing to monetize them for it.
On the flip side, content producers have stupid policies where they usually grant distributors monopolies of distribution for given territories. This is a flaw in the way producers distribute their content into the future, and it will have to be addressed sooner or later if they ever hope to stem the tide of unauthorized copyright activity.
Oh, forgot to mention it was Eclipse, running JDT's built-in compiler. Nobody (myself included) made any gigantic changes to the eclipse setup from stock that would affect performance dramatically. When I was developing, it was always on the latest Fedora.
When running and debugging my code, my Linux PC (same hardware) as my Windows XP based coworkers would always be faster to use. I can't say why, but that's the way it was. It was a painful experience to sit at a windows dev's desk to wait a minute for things to compile when it took me, oh 10 sec max.
All true, but being somewhat interested in the X server around the time of the fork, very few people found the change to be a negative. XFree86 guys that didn't move with the change seemed to be against adding changes and extensions into the server, and only after the fork could things like RENDER and RANDR become first class citizens in the distro instead of being relegated to the experimental branches like KDrive. The Since it was a fork, its not like things were instantly broken. I think the big change was the executable was named Xorg instead of XFree86 which I assume broke some custom scripts.
Is the fact that window tearing, or only a single display handling poor video interaction a failure in X, or a failure in the driver developers? I really really want to know what AMD, NVidia, and Intel think about the change. Because frankly, if they aren't behind the shift, does anyone find this solution making it in the long term?
Pulse was in Fedora 8 -- November 8, 2007
Pulse was in Ubuntu 8.04 -- April 24, 2008
You may want to fact check before making assumptions.
Gnome apps run on windows, so they've in one way or another accomplished the same thing.
The question really lies in if they believe that this new server is in fact a step in the right direction. If they do, then it is feasible that it'll get some developer love, but if they're making a bad step then I wouldn't expect support from others. I would say that XFree86 was definitely being held up by the group themselves, but since the X.org fork there has been some good changes to the system that have moved it along. I'd say the worst part of my desktop Linux experience has been related to driver support, and frankly you can run any number of graphics servers on top of something, but if you don't have good drivers then nothing will be solved. Someone thinks that flaky composting support is X's fault? X and Compiz have it done. If a graphics card doesn't support the needed GL extensions sufficiently enough, it looks or performs like garbage.
To all those that truly love and understand Wayland, how does this graphics environment improve the quality, efficiency, and advancement of Linux based graphics drivers? Because frankly, that is really the only problem I ever seem to have with Linux based desktops.
When a company sells CD's, books, broadcasts TV shows, etc.. they 'lose control' of their works as well. That doesn't diminish the granted right of control over what can and cannot be done with said works and productions.
ipso facto
Nexus One has an 802.11N chip, and its a year old. The lack of higher end features was more about the cost of chips, and the power drain on using them, than the phone's capabilities to take those chips.
That said, I really don't see a large market for this kind of tech. I mean I have a PC sitting in my bedroom that stores all my files, and use PS3 Media Server to serve them up to my TV. I would never think: Hey lets download something large to my phone and stream it to my TV. It sounds retarded actually. The same thing goes for 'bringing videos to friends house'. Do you really see having large videos on your phone just waiting to play which aren't available for instant streaming on the internet?
1. From my memory of past new releases, Apple never did a good job of supporting new features in the JVM to begin with
2. Apple seems to be in a frenzy to gut anything that isn't explicitly tied to their platform, so having an open (from apple api's) java floating on top of their OS means that they can just up and support other platforms. The fact that the apple camp seems to be turning their OSX into an iPhone/iPad, this makes total sense
*shrugs* Oracle DB is a hodgepodge internally (how old is it now?) but it runs very well from my experience. I can't say about other pieces of their software stack, but the DB deserves the market share it gets.