Binary compatibility = can I run software I compiled last week after the upgrade. While the items you list will most certainly break binary compatibility if they change, so can:
If you run a mailbox with quotas, you can be denied the use of that resource. For that matter, if you get enough spam that all your mail processes/threads/other resources as appropriate are tied up, you're denied the use of the resource.
You know, part of the value of New Zealand is that it isn't overflowing with people. Vast flows of people in would ruin exactly what they're coming to see (cf Bali, Hawaii).
Because it's just a spec. AIX, IRIX, Windows NT (POSIX Server) and VMS have all claimed to be fully POSIX compliant. Now try and untar, build, and run a POSIX compliant C program on all those platforms unchanged.
J2EE is just a spec. The devil's in the details...
Because in the past,/. linking into Bugzilla entries has crippled Bugzilla for extended periods of time. Oddly enough, the Moz developers rate a functioning defect tracking tool to generating hits from the goatse.cx crowd.
I can easily interface to SQL Server from numerous other programming environments. Java seems to be the exception, unless one pays for expensive commercial JDBC libs.
At $50k per name, they probably made enough to be in coke and hookers forever. There were a *lot* of dot-bombs, and lots of established companies decided to change their names (PWC Consulting -> Monday).
I'm not asserting that there aren't wealthy Chinese, or that parts of the China aren't booming (although, ironically for somewhere still claiming to be a Communist state, it's getting serious inequity in the distribution of wealth). I'm pointing out that the ability of Chinese programmers, or any Chinese individual for that matter, is ultimately dependent on what the Party will allow.
And if the party decide Chinese programmers are pricing themselves too high for the good of the Party, they'll be told to drop their rates. Living in a dictatorship, they'll comply, whether they like it or not.
SCO's assertion is that everyone working on Linux is too dim to have made a worthwhile Unix work-a-like without IBM providing access to proprietary information, and that the only way one could produce a Unix work-a-like is via that licensed code.
It's absurd on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin. For starters, "How Unix Works" is documented by the POSIX specs and the BSD code, neither of which carry AT&T UNIX encumberance (which is the UNIX that SCO own).
A number of the capabilities - such as SMP support - which SCO allege could only exist as a result of IBM providing illegal material - existed long before IBM had anything to do with Linux. So that's a non-starter.
And the Linux code is freely available, so if any code or documentation had simply been inserted wholesale, it would be trivial for SCO to reference it.
SCO's complaint contains a number of other untrue assertions, including the one that no-one has made Unix workalikes on the ia32 architecture before - which is simply untrue. Witness the POSIX layer for older versions of NT, the various BSDs on ia32, Solaris x86, and Unix/POSIX emulation layers for other operating systems (ixemul will be familiar to Amigans).
Basically, it's an opportunistic crock of shit that doesn't have one single, unarguable, factual assertion to its credit.
Yes, but they don't match the behaviour my parent was describing. Prior to arrays, everything was a string, with lists being a magic string, and any operator could be used on any variable.
Arrays are not "just strings", as anyone looking for consistent behaviour between array, list, and string operators quickly discovers to their frustration, not to mention interacting with procs.
In practise, our government-run censorship is far more liberal than the industry-run censorship practised in the US, so far as the average person is concerned.
They didn't win. Ronnie Reagan let them off, ordering the DOJ to leave them alone.
The irony is that had it not been for the antitrust action (which left IBM too afraid to develop the PC and the operating system for it), Microsoft would still be selling poorly debugged BASIC interpreters.
More like: if you can't beat Linux, and no-one will buy it from you, make sure you destroy the Linux and Unix markets. Better to fuck up everything and hand it all over to Microsoft than to admit you're a worthless company.
Unfortunately for Chinese programmers, they live in a facist state. They can have all the salary expectations they like, but the local party officials have the guns.
This question's been asked before. Plenty of Holocaut survivors and relatives have basically answered that they'd prefer people benefit from those atrocities if possible, since it at least means their sufferring had some value and meaning.
Actually, I call double bullshit. If I want a stable hardware environment, I buy Linux on IBM hardware. And I have a lot more faith in IBM to get it right than I do with Sun.
Slashdot Mirror
Binary compatibility = can I run software I compiled last week after the upgrade. While the items you list will most certainly break binary compatibility if they change, so can:
...at a minimum.
* Kernel upgrades
* GNOME/GTK+ upgrades
* KDE/QT upgrades
If you run a mailbox with quotas, you can be denied the use of that resource. For that matter, if you get enough spam that all your mail processes/threads/other resources as appropriate are tied up, you're denied the use of the resource.
You know, part of the value of New Zealand is that it isn't overflowing with people. Vast flows of people in would ruin exactly what they're coming to see (cf Bali, Hawaii).
Because it's just a spec. AIX, IRIX, Windows NT (POSIX Server) and VMS have all claimed to be fully POSIX compliant. Now try and untar, build, and run a POSIX compliant C program on all those platforms unchanged.
J2EE is just a spec. The devil's in the details...
+1, Funny.
Or you convince the developer you might snap and bring your Armalite AN-180 into work.
Nope.
Try "I have pornographic movies in my apartment, and lubricants, and amyl nitrate... "
Because in the past, /. linking into Bugzilla entries has crippled Bugzilla for extended periods of time. Oddly enough, the Moz developers rate a functioning defect tracking tool to generating hits from the goatse.cx crowd.
I can easily interface to SQL Server from numerous other programming environments. Java seems to be the exception, unless one pays for expensive commercial JDBC libs.
At $50k per name, they probably made enough to be in coke and hookers forever. There were a *lot* of dot-bombs, and lots of established companies decided to change their names (PWC Consulting -> Monday).
Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility, the principle male characters are much more interesting and better realised than in the book.
Don't buy an axe, just make adzes out of rocks.
I'm not asserting that there aren't wealthy Chinese, or that parts of the China aren't booming (although, ironically for somewhere still claiming to be a Communist state, it's getting serious inequity in the distribution of wealth). I'm pointing out that the ability of Chinese programmers, or any Chinese individual for that matter, is ultimately dependent on what the Party will allow.
And if the party decide Chinese programmers are pricing themselves too high for the good of the Party, they'll be told to drop their rates. Living in a dictatorship, they'll comply, whether they like it or not.
It's certainly winning in the sense of no longer having legal action over one's head, but it's not winning in the sense of being exonerated.
SCO's assertion is that everyone working on Linux is too dim to have made a worthwhile Unix work-a-like without IBM providing access to proprietary information, and that the only way one could produce a Unix work-a-like is via that licensed code.
It's absurd on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin. For starters, "How Unix Works" is documented by the POSIX specs and the BSD code, neither of which carry AT&T UNIX encumberance (which is the UNIX that SCO own).
A number of the capabilities - such as SMP support - which SCO allege could only exist as a result of IBM providing illegal material - existed long before IBM had anything to do with Linux. So that's a non-starter.
And the Linux code is freely available, so if any code or documentation had simply been inserted wholesale, it would be trivial for SCO to reference it.
SCO's complaint contains a number of other untrue assertions, including the one that no-one has made Unix workalikes on the ia32 architecture before - which is simply untrue. Witness the POSIX layer for older versions of NT, the various BSDs on ia32, Solaris x86, and Unix/POSIX emulation layers for other operating systems (ixemul will be familiar to Amigans).
Basically, it's an opportunistic crock of shit that doesn't have one single, unarguable, factual assertion to its credit.
Yes, but they don't match the behaviour my parent was describing. Prior to arrays, everything was a string, with lists being a magic string, and any operator could be used on any variable.
Arrays are not "just strings", as anyone looking for consistent behaviour between array, list, and string operators quickly discovers to their frustration, not to mention interacting with procs.
TCL has not had one data type since arrays arrived.
In practise, our government-run censorship is far more liberal than the industry-run censorship practised in the US, so far as the average person is concerned.
They didn't win. Ronnie Reagan let them off, ordering the DOJ to leave them alone.
The irony is that had it not been for the antitrust action (which left IBM too afraid to develop the PC and the operating system for it), Microsoft would still be selling poorly debugged BASIC interpreters.
More like: if you can't beat Linux, and no-one will buy it from you, make sure you destroy the Linux and Unix markets. Better to fuck up everything and hand it all over to Microsoft than to admit you're a worthless company.
Unfortunately for Chinese programmers, they live in a facist state. They can have all the salary expectations they like, but the local party officials have the guns.
This question's been asked before. Plenty of Holocaut survivors and relatives have basically answered that they'd prefer people benefit from those atrocities if possible, since it at least means their sufferring had some value and meaning.
If it's Epicurian philosophy it'll be exalting porn!
I call bullshit.
Actually, I call double bullshit. If I want a stable hardware environment, I buy Linux on IBM hardware. And I have a lot more faith in IBM to get it right than I do with Sun.
AllTheWeb is actually pretty handy, since it gives a different-but-equally-useful view. It also has a reasonably lightweight interface.