My understanding is that the 10-K is what you really want - they have to file one each FY, and RHAT's FY ended February 28, 2001. I don't really understand what a 10-Q is (contextually it looks like a quarterly 10-K). The problem with finding better data is that they're not required to publish it real-time.
I agree with most of your post, but I don't get how X15 has a "restrictive license"; they just want some money for it, that's all. This may get me tarred and feathered, but I for one am glad that there are independent commercial s/w houses trying to make a buck by writing to the Linux platform.
<rant>
IMO, Microsoft has destroyed independent for profit s/w development on their platform, and Linux could revitalize that sort of work (which consequently moves people off of MS platforms onto Linux, which is a Good Thing). Open source and commercial software can live together.
</rant>
That said, I wonder if you're right that "teams of geeks" will make something as good as X15. Maybe, but lots of good people have been working on both TUX and Apache (and many other web servers) for a long time, but X15 is still faster. Same goes for ChiliSoft - you don't see Open Source ASP clones either.
Of course it can do dynamic content - if it has code to read a file and send it down the HTTP pipe, you can send generated content as well.
But don't make the mistake of thinking that your Apache modules will work with TUX - you roll your own. IMHO, this makes TUX a nice toy but useless for production web sites (how can I get along w/o JSP?)
Hear hear. I've always thought that TUX was a terrible idea that exists only for the sake of creating artificially inflated benchmark scores.
I notice that several posters comment that "TUX runs dynamic content", etc., etc. Yeah, it runs arbitrary dynamic content in my kernel where it will take down my whole system! No thank you. Oh, and by "dynamic content", they mean my own binaries; forget about all of those nice Apache modules you were planning on using.
And even the most basic HOWTO on setting up httpd starts with "make the daemon run as nobody". But TUX does away with that: run not only your http process but all dynamic applications as root! Wow this is dumb.
On the other hand, X15 has an intelligent model (Apache's model, in fact), and leverages the most popular web server ever, namely Apache. And in fact, it does appear to greatly improve my performance.
If you think you need to make your regular Apache install run faster, avoid TUX and try X15.
It actually has little to do with YOPY vs. iPAQ, the question is "what Linux utilities know how to sync email and schedule w/ Outlook?" To my knowledge, there are none.
[Going off on a slight tangent]: Now, if you want to be really wily, you could talk your IS dept into setting up Outlook Web Access (OWA) and try syncing over the web. OWA's not pretty, but it is a reasonable out-of-the-box web solution for MS Outlook. IMHO, all Linux users who have to interoperate w/ Outlook at their office should force their admins into adding OWA, allowing them to ditch the Win95 box they kept just to read mail.
No Intel Inside the computer you used to post this, eh? I'll bet you buy plenty of the stuff "they" are trying to sell. Either that or your self-sustaining commune has one hell of a homebrew computer club.
I think my research technique is superior to yours. Instead of going to Netcraft, I've been going directly to the porn sites and trying to determine if the server "feels" like Apache or IIS. I've had limited success so far, but I have been able to recycle several empty Kleenex boxes.
In making offers to potential new employees at non-public companies, I'm struck by how often candidates accept (or even negotiate for) their stock option package without asking some of the basics, like what the strike price is, what previous funding rounds were, or even how many outstanding shares there are.
Sure, some of the people are (correctly) taking the bet that if they contribute to the success of our company that they'll be rewarded commensurately. But for others (particularly those who ask for more shares in their offer), it seems that a big number is all that matters. How much is 25000 shares of a private company worth (other than zero if it goes under)? Well, it makes a big difference whether there are 10M or 100M outstanding shares.
You say you're interested in how well Linux runs on a PS1? Boy, reading your post all I saw was your whining about how even a 386 has paging hardware, and then sniffling about how the developers who worked to port Linux to the PS1 are just nerds with too much time on their hands.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt in thinking that you were trolling for a reaction. But now I see that I was mistaken to take you for something other than a crybaby who puts down hobbyists for creating something interesting (like the folks at Runix).
So allow me to ammend: you were not trolling, you were being an idiot.
If by "no paging hardware" you mean no MMU (memory management unit), that is not a show stopper. From uCLinux: The Linux/Microcontroller project is a port of Linux to systems without a Memory Management Unit (MMU).
Yes, the 2MB limit is pretty steep, but to say that this makes the PS1 w/ Linux worthless is pretty silly. I was able to get all manner of stuff done on my old Apple ][ with a paltry 64KB RAM (and on the//e with my bank-swappable 128KB, now that was something!) My first IBM clone had a whopping 1MB of RAM, and I hardly knew what to do with myself. The uCLinux guys have gotten the kernel down to a ~500KB working set, so this actually sounds pretty cool to me.
Yeah, yeah, I know you were trolling. Either that, or I'm just another nerd with too much time on my hands.:)
Example of bugs could be screens freezing up, to which a re-boot (switch off/on) of the phone is the only solution. Kinda reminds me of Windows.
I know that was meant tongue in cheek, but the statement is nearer to reality than one might think. We've become used to embedded devices just working, but as they become more complex, they become more like a general purpose computer. So yes, your phone crashing with similar regularity to your desktop PC is something that will become much less remarkable.
Embedded software developers have sometimes been a bit cocky towards their non-embedded bretheren ("well, we just code better see?"), but the truth is that embedded development hasn't typically been anywhere near as complex as s/w development for desktops (due to very limited processing power, memory requirements, etc. (If you don't believe me, think about how simple it would be to write the UI for any of the current generation of cell phones). All that's changing though, so learn to love those mono LCD screens o' death.
"The software is apparently the next generation of the software used for Deep Space One."
Folks, we stand at the edge of a new frontier. Just think - this is the software which will eventually lead to the the technology that makes Deep Space Nine possible!
In a prepared statement, Patrick Naughton says that he also supports the drive for more online privacy, and intends to launch an online privacy initiative in three to ten years.
Come on: "I don't mind that most Linux distros come with CD-burning software, IRC clients, a great paint program, etc. -- but then, they're independently written and optional."
And the fact that they're "independently written" matters to you why? When Redhat bundles apps you want that's righteous, but when MS does then it's nefarious? I thought we'd progressed past the days that just saying "me too" on a "Microsoft is evil" thread got you moderated up to 5.
That's a good idea, but from experience I know that the authorities can easily order you to start keeping such logs.
Your idea might work to hide any historical data before a search warrant, but once ordered to keep logs (and to keep your mouth shut about it), you have to do so or face the music. They'll get the logs anyway by siezing your property and incarcerating you. Yes, this really happens.
We classify bugs on two axes: severity and priority. This is actually a variation on how MS classifies their bugs internally, and we find that it's great for answering the eternal developer questions of "how bad is the bug?", and "which one should I fix first?"
Severity has to do with how badly the bug affects users:
sev 1: crashing bug, or data corruption
sev 2: feature broken, no workaround
sev 3: feature incomplete, or broken w/ workaround.
sev 4: cosmetic or UI flaw
Priority has to do with how important fixing the bug is to shipping the product. There are no names for the priority levels, but in conjunction with severity levels you can make determinations on what to fix, what to cut, and in what order.
Using this system, a sev1/pri1 bug is clearly the first bug I'd fix. A sev1/pri1 bug gets fixed before a sev2/pri1, and very rarely, a sev2/pri1 bug will get fixed before a sev1/pri2. These last two are the corner cases: sev2/pri1 is typically a very ugly sev2 bug, and a common reason for marking a bug with this classification is to fix a beta or demo issue. A sev1/pri2 bug is also rare - it means that the product crashes or corrupts data after a very obscure repro case.
I've been using this system for years, and I have yet to find a clearer method.
And look, Intel is already moving all of its lines to.13 micron, and their existing low-heat chips are already in the same ballpark as Transmeta's in term of cooling characteristics (albeit still with a thin fan package).
Meanwhile, Transmeta's still struggling to break through to >700Mhz speeds (necessary to compete with even slower Intel chips considering that the instructions are emulated, Transmeta propoganda aside). So net-net, Intel is going to roll over Transmeta like a Mack truck.
Which is sad, Transmeta has a lot of promise, but results need to live up to hype. Brento asks why geeks have abandoned Transmeta, didn't we want cooler chips? Yes, but first we want them to be fast.
XML is a standard way of marking up data using nested tags, but it doesn't in any way remove the "protrietary" nature of the data itself.
So you're right, this isn't any different than proprietary browser tags, but why would you expect it to be? Using XML to describe your data doesn't mean that you need to submit yourself to a standards body for approval.
I hear all sorts of people make the absurd statement that their application is XML compliant and therefore somehow more "open". Why someone would believe this is beyond me.
XML-based standards are another thing altogether. For example, SOAP is a (proposed) standard that is represented using XML, but the fact that it uses XML doesn't make it a standard.
When you say that your liberties are not being encroached upon by such massive governmental data collection, ask yourself why the government wants access to that data.
Last I checked, the government is serves me by providing essential services in exchange for pooling my money and interestes with my fellow citizens. I guess that I'm at a loss as to how the government intends to serve me better by purchasing and using this information. Face facts: this data will be used by the government for control purposes.
In my analogy, such information collection is one of the links in the chain.
I don't know if you meant this as a troll. If not, my mind boggles that someone could still believe the premise that you shouldn't worry about your privacy if you have nothing to hide, and that governmental intrusion in your life only harms you if "you had it coming".
This is the first step toward fascim. A dog chained to a tree feels completely free until he tries to go one step past the chain's limits. The previous poster will have a rude awakening the first time he tries to take that next step.
In the words of Benjamin Franklin: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I'm guessing that you don't come from an embedded background. I generally prefer development on UNIX-based systems, but there are a number of reasons to use an embedded MS OS. I'd say that the top two are:
1. Tons of developers know the platforms. If you're an MS development shop, it's easier to do embedded development if you stick with the familiar.
2. There are many choices of embedded platforms that license MS OSs. Just look at how many MSDOS-based embedded platforms there are: http://www.google.com/search?q=embedded+microsoft+ dos.
As for embedded systems with a GUI, MS is actually the clear market-share winner. AT&T set-top boxes embed CE, as do devices from Hitachi, Samsung, Siemens, etc. How many embedded UNIX-based systems with a GUI do you know?
The good news is that Open Source looks like it's poised to open up market for embedded OS development.
Slashdot Mirror
My understanding is that the 10-K is what you really want - they have to file one each FY, and RHAT's FY ended February 28, 2001. I don't really understand what a 10-Q is (contextually it looks like a quarterly 10-K). The problem with finding better data is that they're not required to publish it real-time.
Invisible Agent
Does anyone know where the most recent financial statements are available for RedHat?
i cker=RHAT&script=1901
Sure, here they are back to Oct 2000:
http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?t
Invisible Agent
I agree with most of your post, but I don't get how X15 has a "restrictive license"; they just want some money for it, that's all. This may get me tarred and feathered, but I for one am glad that there are independent commercial s/w houses trying to make a buck by writing to the Linux platform.
<rant>
IMO, Microsoft has destroyed independent for profit s/w development on their platform, and Linux could revitalize that sort of work (which consequently moves people off of MS platforms onto Linux, which is a Good Thing). Open source and commercial software can live together.
</rant>
That said, I wonder if you're right that "teams of geeks" will make something as good as X15. Maybe, but lots of good people have been working on both TUX and Apache (and many other web servers) for a long time, but X15 is still faster. Same goes for ChiliSoft - you don't see Open Source ASP clones either.
Invisible Agent
Of course it can do dynamic content - if it has code to read a file and send it down the HTTP pipe, you can send generated content as well.
But don't make the mistake of thinking that your Apache modules will work with TUX - you roll your own. IMHO, this makes TUX a nice toy but useless for production web sites (how can I get along w/o JSP?)
Invisible Agent
Hear hear. I've always thought that TUX was a terrible idea that exists only for the sake of creating artificially inflated benchmark scores.
I notice that several posters comment that "TUX runs dynamic content", etc., etc. Yeah, it runs arbitrary dynamic content in my kernel where it will take down my whole system! No thank you. Oh, and by "dynamic content", they mean my own binaries; forget about all of those nice Apache modules you were planning on using.
And even the most basic HOWTO on setting up httpd starts with "make the daemon run as nobody". But TUX does away with that: run not only your http process but all dynamic applications as root! Wow this is dumb.
On the other hand, X15 has an intelligent model (Apache's model, in fact), and leverages the most popular web server ever, namely Apache. And in fact, it does appear to greatly improve my performance.
If you think you need to make your regular Apache install run faster, avoid TUX and try X15.
Invisible Agent
Sure, here's an answer: no.
It actually has little to do with YOPY vs. iPAQ, the question is "what Linux utilities know how to sync email and schedule w/ Outlook?" To my knowledge, there are none.
[Going off on a slight tangent]: Now, if you want to be really wily, you could talk your IS dept into setting up Outlook Web Access (OWA) and try syncing over the web. OWA's not pretty, but it is a reasonable out-of-the-box web solution for MS Outlook. IMHO, all Linux users who have to interoperate w/ Outlook at their office should force their admins into adding OWA, allowing them to ditch the Win95 box they kept just to read mail.
Invisible Agent
No Intel Inside the computer you used to post this, eh? I'll bet you buy plenty of the stuff "they" are trying to sell. Either that or your self-sustaining commune has one hell of a homebrew computer club.
Invisible Agent
I think my research technique is superior to yours. Instead of going to Netcraft, I've been going directly to the porn sites and trying to determine if the server "feels" like Apache or IIS. I've had limited success so far, but I have been able to recycle several empty Kleenex boxes.
Invisible Agent
In making offers to potential new employees at non-public companies, I'm struck by how often candidates accept (or even negotiate for) their stock option package without asking some of the basics, like what the strike price is, what previous funding rounds were, or even how many outstanding shares there are.
Sure, some of the people are (correctly) taking the bet that if they contribute to the success of our company that they'll be rewarded commensurately. But for others (particularly those who ask for more shares in their offer), it seems that a big number is all that matters. How much is 25000 shares of a private company worth (other than zero if it goes under)? Well, it makes a big difference whether there are 10M or 100M outstanding shares.
Invisible Agent
You say you're interested in how well Linux runs on a PS1? Boy, reading your post all I saw was your whining about how even a 386 has paging hardware, and then sniffling about how the developers who worked to port Linux to the PS1 are just nerds with too much time on their hands.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt in thinking that you were trolling for a reaction. But now I see that I was mistaken to take you for something other than a crybaby who puts down hobbyists for creating something interesting (like the folks at Runix).
So allow me to ammend: you were not trolling, you were being an idiot.
Invisible Agent
If by "no paging hardware" you mean no MMU (memory management unit), that is not a show stopper. From uCLinux: The Linux/Microcontroller project is a port of Linux to systems without a Memory Management Unit (MMU).
//e with my bank-swappable 128KB, now that was something!) My first IBM clone had a whopping 1MB of RAM, and I hardly knew what to do with myself. The uCLinux guys have gotten the kernel down to a ~500KB working set, so this actually sounds pretty cool to me.
:)
Yes, the 2MB limit is pretty steep, but to say that this makes the PS1 w/ Linux worthless is pretty silly. I was able to get all manner of stuff done on my old Apple ][ with a paltry 64KB RAM (and on the
Yeah, yeah, I know you were trolling. Either that, or I'm just another nerd with too much time on my hands.
Invisible Agent
Example of bugs could be screens freezing up, to which a re-boot (switch off/on) of the phone is the only solution. Kinda reminds me of Windows.
I know that was meant tongue in cheek, but the statement is nearer to reality than one might think. We've become used to embedded devices just working, but as they become more complex, they become more like a general purpose computer. So yes, your phone crashing with similar regularity to your desktop PC is something that will become much less remarkable.
Embedded software developers have sometimes been a bit cocky towards their non-embedded bretheren ("well, we just code better see?"), but the truth is that embedded development hasn't typically been anywhere near as complex as s/w development for desktops (due to very limited processing power, memory requirements, etc. (If you don't believe me, think about how simple it would be to write the UI for any of the current generation of cell phones). All that's changing though, so learn to love those mono LCD screens o' death.
Invisible Agent
"The software is apparently the next generation of the software used for Deep Space One."
Folks, we stand at the edge of a new frontier. Just think - this is the software which will eventually lead to the the technology that makes Deep Space Nine possible!
Invisible Agent
...the Pope has come out against masturbation.
I love this non-news. Craig Mundi says that Open Source is bad (oh my!) And Richard Stallman follows up saying it is good (egads!)
At least it makes for good spectator sport.
Invisible Agent
In a prepared statement, Patrick Naughton says that he also supports the drive for more online privacy, and intends to launch an online privacy initiative in three to ten years.
Invisible Agent
Come on: "I don't mind that most Linux distros come with CD-burning software, IRC clients, a great paint program, etc. -- but then, they're independently written and optional."
And the fact that they're "independently written" matters to you why? When Redhat bundles apps you want that's righteous, but when MS does then it's nefarious? I thought we'd progressed past the days that just saying "me too" on a "Microsoft is evil" thread got you moderated up to 5.
Invisible Agent
That's a good idea, but from experience I know that the authorities can easily order you to start keeping such logs.
Your idea might work to hide any historical data before a search warrant, but once ordered to keep logs (and to keep your mouth shut about it), you have to do so or face the music. They'll get the logs anyway by siezing your property and incarcerating you. Yes, this really happens.
Invisible Agent
We classify bugs on two axes: severity and priority. This is actually a variation on how MS classifies their bugs internally, and we find that it's great for answering the eternal developer questions of "how bad is the bug?", and "which one should I fix first?"
Severity has to do with how badly the bug affects users:
sev 1: crashing bug, or data corruption
sev 2: feature broken, no workaround
sev 3: feature incomplete, or broken w/ workaround.
sev 4: cosmetic or UI flaw
Priority has to do with how important fixing the bug is to shipping the product. There are no names for the priority levels, but in conjunction with severity levels you can make determinations on what to fix, what to cut, and in what order.
Using this system, a sev1/pri1 bug is clearly the first bug I'd fix. A sev1/pri1 bug gets fixed before a sev2/pri1, and very rarely, a sev2/pri1 bug will get fixed before a sev1/pri2. These last two are the corner cases: sev2/pri1 is typically a very ugly sev2 bug, and a common reason for marking a bug with this classification is to fix a beta or demo issue. A sev1/pri2 bug is also rare - it means that the product crashes or corrupts data after a very obscure repro case.
I've been using this system for years, and I have yet to find a clearer method.
Invisible Agent
And look, Intel is already moving all of its lines to .13 micron, and their existing low-heat chips are already in the same ballpark as Transmeta's in term of cooling characteristics (albeit still with a thin fan package).
Meanwhile, Transmeta's still struggling to break through to >700Mhz speeds (necessary to compete with even slower Intel chips considering that the instructions are emulated, Transmeta propoganda aside). So net-net, Intel is going to roll over Transmeta like a Mack truck.
Which is sad, Transmeta has a lot of promise, but results need to live up to hype. Brento asks why geeks have abandoned Transmeta, didn't we want cooler chips? Yes, but first we want them to be fast.
Invisible Agent
Same as before - their Windows desktop crashes and hackers easily read their Hotmail correspondence. At least that part's uniform. :)
Invisible Agent
XML is a standard way of marking up data using nested tags, but it doesn't in any way remove the "protrietary" nature of the data itself.
So you're right, this isn't any different than proprietary browser tags, but why would you expect it to be? Using XML to describe your data doesn't mean that you need to submit yourself to a standards body for approval.
I hear all sorts of people make the absurd statement that their application is XML compliant and therefore somehow more "open". Why someone would believe this is beyond me.
XML-based standards are another thing altogether. For example, SOAP is a (proposed) standard that is represented using XML, but the fact that it uses XML doesn't make it a standard.
Invisible Agent
This article is clearly meant to prepare us for the inevitable day when Slashdot is sold Time Warner/AOL.
Invisible Agent
When you say that your liberties are not being encroached upon by such massive governmental data collection, ask yourself why the government wants access to that data.
Last I checked, the government is serves me by providing essential services in exchange for pooling my money and interestes with my fellow citizens. I guess that I'm at a loss as to how the government intends to serve me better by purchasing and using this information. Face facts: this data will be used by the government for control purposes.
In my analogy, such information collection is one of the links in the chain.
Invisible Agent
I don't know if you meant this as a troll. If not, my mind boggles that someone could still believe the premise that you shouldn't worry about your privacy if you have nothing to hide, and that governmental intrusion in your life only harms you if "you had it coming".
This is the first step toward fascim. A dog chained to a tree feels completely free until he tries to go one step past the chain's limits. The previous poster will have a rude awakening the first time he tries to take that next step.
In the words of Benjamin Franklin: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Invisible Agent
I'm guessing that you don't come from an embedded background. I generally prefer development on UNIX-based systems, but there are a number of reasons to use an embedded MS OS. I'd say that the top two are:
+ dos.
1. Tons of developers know the platforms. If you're an MS development shop, it's easier to do embedded development if you stick with the familiar.
2. There are many choices of embedded platforms that license MS OSs. Just look at how many MSDOS-based embedded platforms there are: http://www.google.com/search?q=embedded+microsoft
As for embedded systems with a GUI, MS is actually the clear market-share winner. AT&T set-top boxes embed CE, as do devices from Hitachi, Samsung, Siemens, etc. How many embedded UNIX-based systems with a GUI do you know?
The good news is that Open Source looks like it's poised to open up market for embedded OS development.
Invisible Agent