Theres a few reasons why I use FireFox instead of Safari on OS X:
1) Tab close button on the tab itself... it's a real hassle when I go to switch a tab and actually close it by being a little off the mark.
2) No confirmation for closing the actual window when you have tabs open. If by some mistake, you actually close the whole window (either by not thinking for a moment or mistakenly thinking you're closing a browser window opened from a link) it's extremely annoying that it will close all your tabs. Firefox and Mozilla will ask for confirmation when closing a window with multiple tabs.
3) Rendering is busted! My website doesn't render correctly in Safari 1.3 and it's W3C COMPLIANT! So wtf there. Granted, it renders fine in 2.0 that is distributed with the OS X 10.4 preview but still the fact it took them years to get to that point is a little silly. (I guess I just hold Apple to a higher standard than others).
4) Completely lack of extensibility. I understand that simple is good and all and that's what most people like about it but sheesh some sort of plug-in api would be nice.
Additionally, if you wanted to add more drives, just throw in another USB2 card and throw some more on there. It's scales pretty nicely at 480Mbit/s per bus!
I have a 3x300GB array made of just off the shelf 3.5" Aluminum enclosures from CompUSA. They're hooked up via USB2 and quick enough for my needs since they primarily store contraband that I don't access all that often.
It's running at RAID 5 via Mac OS X and software called RAID Toolkit from FWB Software. Great stuff, never failed and was fairly cheap..
Enclosures = 3x$40 Hard Drives = 3x$250 Software = $99
$3.00 per raw GB... but RAID 5 I only realize about 550GB so that's about $5.30ish I guess.
Maybe the doctor was blowing smoke up my ass (which I doubt because they were very professional) but he told me as fact that nobody has ever gone blind from Lasik. Which I tend to believe, Lasik is much more advanced than PRK or PKR or whatever. In any case, my experience was great and I can see 20/15 in both eyes and I was pretty horrible before say, 20/50 or so.
Also, there are different lasers used for Lasik.. it's important to not skimp and use the cheap one. The after-effects significantly differ from laser to laser.
I have two Replays and am still generally happy that I have them. The main reason I switched from Tivo about 2-2.5 years ago (right before SonicBlue went under) was because at the time it was the only option that had ethernet built right in and with DVArchive I could effortlessly transfer recordings from a stock device, something that Tivo has never been able to do (presumeably because they wanted to avoid the lawsuits that this article now discusses). Now Tivo2 has ethernet built-in but I haven't bothered to switch yet nor will I in the forseeable future but there is a possibility since I don't really even use the show transfer "feature" much.
I don't believe people really know what Lucent does. I see one post about "Lucent should use OSS" and another post talking about their Lucent DSL modem.
Lucent had/has their hands in alot of pots. Yeah, they do make DSL modems, but that was just so they had something to offer up when service providers bought their Stinger DSL Concentrator.
Lucent to me was the manufacturer of hardcore ATM equipment as this really was their core business before the CBX500 became aged. Of course, this is just my experience from my job. Lucent is still so big that knowing all the divisions and sub-organizations within it is confusing at best. I'm sure the other organizations within Lucent had their own core business that was pretty successful.
In 2000, we worked with four lines of ATM switches. Today, we still work with 3 of the 4 and nothing really new has been introduced. So pretty much, everybody that needs to buy one has probably bought one already. That's the peril of a hardware company that hasn't introduced anything new or innovative in about 5-6 years.
The optical switches are pretty exciting (but I've never worked with it so I can't speak to the actual models) but I know they are expensive and are overkill for alot of applications so I don't believe they're flying off the shelf.
So what have we left but to become a services company which has been another auxillary department at Lucent for many years. Perhaps you recall Lucent's acquisition of INS in the late 90s. The difference nowadays is that the services arm of Lucent is probably financially more healthy than the hardware manufacturing arms of Lucent.
I converted over to OS X in August. I love the OS as a whole but my bitch is, of course, Finder.
For the love of god, make it use some preference file in ~/Library instead of dropping.DS_Store in every freakin directory. It's especially annoying when traversing directories that are shared with other OS's and FTP.
I would pay $129 just for that alone. I hope they do something "revolutionary" with Finder like make it not suck in 10.4.
In every other Google article I've read, they say that they use old slow PCs in mini to mid tower cases. You can fit about... 12-16 machines in a rack if they're not rackmount cases. Not 88.
In any case, all this calculation is a bit over speculatory and pointless.
The genie was out of the bottle a few thousand years ago when people started the very concept of "entertainment" by sharing stories from group to group. That was entertainment. Transfering an idea (i.e. story) from person to person. And it was as free as can be. But over the years, inflation really took a toll on free. Now, that same story will cost you $20 in a book store or $10 in a movie theater for 85 minutes or $15 for 60 minutes of music which for many in this world takes them 2-3 hours to make.
I'm rambling and I don't really have a point so don't bring up my flawed thinking because I'm tired and in Vegas.:P
Viacom is quite simply extorting Echostar. They see Echostar raising the bill for it's customers (for what reason, I don't know but I'm willing to bet it's partly due to rising costs on their end and not purely for profit) and Viacom immediately assumes they can demand a cut. That alone is bad, but coupled with their crawls and promos all over their channels really pisses me off and I'm not even a customer of Echostar.
Viacom is throwing a _very_ public temper-tantrum and it really turns me off to watching content on their channels. Music TV is horribly bad so I don't watch it anyway but I'm starting to have second thoughts about watching Survivor, CSI, and South Park. It's really making me reevaluate what to do with my spare time besides wasting it away in front of the TV.
It sucks for Echostar's customers who want to (for one reason or another) watch Viacom stations but Viacom is pulling me into the suckfest by interupting the programming for their propaganda. And it's really going to suck when Echostar buckles and shows that media conglomerates really do own everybody and everything and can do as they please.
It's actually SunOS 5.10. (SunOS 4.x was Solaris 1.x, SunOS 5.x was Solaris 2.x up until 2.7, then they changed it to just Solaris 7 with the underworkings of SunOS 5.7... got that?)I can't imagine they're going to break into the next major version number. (i.e. SunOS 6) but you never know.
Damn, I haven't seen anything this slanted since I read an Ann Coulter book yesterday...
Honestly, Why people are so fierce about this I have no idea. I use Mac OS X, I like it, it works for me, I can afford it. If you want to run Windows, so be it. I will never run Windows again but that's just me.
This is such a political debate with really no point other than trying to compare your worth as a productive human by your platform and OS. And really, I'm getting tired of it. So with this post, I declare the OS war over with all OS's being shit!
Quite frankly in recent years in the workstation market, no, no they haven't. They switched to PCI/IDE years ago for workstations. A majority of the Ultra series was PCI and not S/bus. The current Blades are more powerful than Ultra boxes. Sun is just behind the development curve of x86 (and PowerPC even for that matter) and they don't look to catch up anytime soon. Anyway, I can't really tell if you're defending old Sun hardware and blasting the new or if you're just trying to tear down my statement.
Would you please enlighten me?
Yes, I would.
I've got no idea why someone would want one of these blades. If you have software that has not been ported over to GNU, you could just use x86 Solaris or purchase a real Sun used.
That is a hugely humorous statement. You wouldn't. Companies that have applications that run on Sparc like having workstations of the same architecture for debuging purposes among others. And if you think that all applications _should_ be ported over to a GNU system, you should have your head examined as that's a very closed way of thinking. Many corporations don't see a need to port their (in many cases) proprietary software from something that already works just fine. And the last part of that statement, x86 Solaris is a joke and not compatible with binaries from Sparc Solaris (obviously) which doesn't help at all when debugging and/or using commercial applications. But the kicker, "purchase a real Sun used", um, these are real Sun's.. they even have the magical logo. Did you realize that a used Sun which I'm assuming you're going for an S/Bus Ultra with an UltraSparc IIe is dog slow compared to the UltraSparc III in that Blade. If you're so worried about disk performance, just put a SCSI PCI card and disk in it and shut up.
If Sun's goal is to comoditize thier hardware, they need to ditch the AMD windoze hunchback and embrace free software.
No, they don't need to embrace free software. Closed source, Proprietary, well supported software is just fine when it works well. Just because you can't feel special because you can't./configure; make; make install with it doesn't make it bad. And how cute... you spelled windows, windoze.
They could steal most of the Xenon server market if they did this.
Huh? By making Solaris open-source they could steal most of the Xenon market? I have no idea what you're talking about.
Yes, it's very difficult to get data from the cheap XP box to your nice Sun.
Oh yeah, FTP, NFS, CDROM even... super hard.
The answer is to convince people that a GNU box works better than an XP box for any and all work related computing. Then they have their pick of ssh and all the traditional Unix networking software.
What? We have to convince people to use Linux instead of Windows XP... Um, this isn't even relevant to what we're talking about.
To sum up, you're pretty mixed on several things. The primary thing I was trying to educate you on in the parent post is that, these boxes are not for you. They're for research, development, and mission-critical applications. You will never have a need for it. Corporations on the other hand do for various reasons.
Ever time somebody brings up Sun, everyone goes "THOSE SPECS SUCK, KILL KILL KILL!". Sun equipment isn't about the specs. It's about the OS mostly and the support you get for that OS to run your extremely important applications. We can debate all day long about how they should've put SCSI in there instead of IDE or what have you but that's not the point of my posts. Sun has made some poor decisions in regards to their hardware but I really don't think that will stop customers (read: companies, not you) that already have Sun equipment from switching. It certainly won't gain them customers, but thats another debate.
I will plainly admit I didn't read the article and that I should be shot. However, usually Sun includes an installer CD for the current version of Solaris. The disc includes an updated kernel and some other things so you can use the latest Solaris. Why that did not happen in this case, I have no idea.
So you provide a machine with inferior performance that doesn't even support Linux/FreeBSD/The latest version of YOUR OWN Solaris Operating System
Newsflash genius, FreeBSD supports Sparc, few Linux's and Sol 9 (I don't know where you got that Sol 9 didn't support an UltraSparc IIIi). They hope it to become their best-seller to replace their low-end and aging Ultra line.
It's never a suprised that people on slashdot just don't get Sun equipment. Much like Apple, companies (I'd wager extremely few people buy Sun's for personal everyday use) that buy these boxes are buying them for the OS and rarely for the groundbreaking hardware.
They like the support that Sun provides with thier OS and how it's been grown to be rock solid. Yada, yada, yada. Cut to the posts here by people that probably have never seen a Sun box let alone owned/used one and I'm not shocked.
I wouldn't even be using OS X if it still had that crap application/process menu. I think the dock is a good way to handle things and in comparison to Windows and KDE/GNOME, my opinion is that it's the best idea.
I have tried to use OS 9 on occassion and I must say the handling of open applications is horrid. I'm rather suprised that anyone liked it and even more so that people defend it.
But like we all say, we all have opinions and should respect others. In any case, the idea that this guy is blasting something that replaced his technology that he no doubt spent alot of blood, sweat and tears to create is no shocker at all.
That was my thought as well... IBM could definately license Apple's operating system. This would be great for both Apple and IBM as Apple could definately dictate the terms for such an agreement and I think IBM would like it just in principle to stick it to Microsoft.
How can a public company that's based on profits and such in this day and age spend so much resources on those bloody robots without every really selling any of them? This could be my misconception though, but I have never heard of anybody really buying them.
It seems every few months we have a new video of the latest, greatest robot dancing. Maybe I should be happy about all of this because it's R&D and any of that is needed in today's marketplace because so many companies have ditched it. In any case, I rather have them research rockets or other space machinary to get to Mars a little quicker. (I realize robotics has an impact on space exploration but sheesh, what's the use if we can't get anywhere first.)
I'm really ranting now but the hot dance moves on the Super Humanoid Robot 5000 really makes me want to cap myself.
Sorry, I just have to say it...
on
Your Own Mecha
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Slashdot Mirror
Theres a few reasons why I use FireFox instead of Safari on OS X:
1) Tab close button on the tab itself... it's a real hassle when I go to switch a tab and actually close it by being a little off the mark.
2) No confirmation for closing the actual window when you have tabs open. If by some mistake, you actually close the whole window (either by not thinking for a moment or mistakenly thinking you're closing a browser window opened from a link) it's extremely annoying that it will close all your tabs. Firefox and Mozilla will ask for confirmation when closing a window with multiple tabs.
3) Rendering is busted! My website doesn't render correctly in Safari 1.3 and it's W3C COMPLIANT! So wtf there. Granted, it renders fine in 2.0 that is distributed with the OS X 10.4 preview but still the fact it took them years to get to that point is a little silly. (I guess I just hold Apple to a higher standard than others).
4) Completely lack of extensibility. I understand that simple is good and all and that's what most people like about it but sheesh some sort of plug-in api would be nice.
Those are my gripes and why I don't use Safari.
Hi, I can't do math apparently...
900GB / $900 = $1.00/GB raw
550GB / $900 = $1.63/GB cooked RAID5
Additionally, if you wanted to add more drives, just throw in another USB2 card and throw some more on there. It's scales pretty nicely at 480Mbit/s per bus!
I have a 3x300GB array made of just off the shelf 3.5" Aluminum enclosures from CompUSA. They're hooked up via USB2 and quick enough for my needs since they primarily store contraband that I don't access all that often.
It's running at RAID 5 via Mac OS X and software called RAID Toolkit from FWB Software. Great stuff, never failed and was fairly cheap..
Enclosures = 3x$40
Hard Drives = 3x$250
Software = $99
$3.00 per raw GB... but RAID 5 I only realize about 550GB so that's about $5.30ish I guess.
Yeah, but a vast majority of the CDs with quantities over 100 are as noted "crap". Alot of the useful stuff (non-pop) has quantities of 1.
Maybe the doctor was blowing smoke up my ass (which I doubt because they were very professional) but he told me as fact that nobody has ever gone blind from Lasik. Which I tend to believe, Lasik is much more advanced than PRK or PKR or whatever. In any case, my experience was great and I can see 20/15 in both eyes and I was pretty horrible before say, 20/50 or so.
Also, there are different lasers used for Lasik.. it's important to not skimp and use the cheap one. The after-effects significantly differ from laser to laser.
In any case, best money I've ever spent.
I have two Replays and am still generally happy that I have them. The main reason I switched from Tivo about 2-2.5 years ago (right before SonicBlue went under) was because at the time it was the only option that had ethernet built right in and with DVArchive I could effortlessly transfer recordings from a stock device, something that Tivo has never been able to do (presumeably because they wanted to avoid the lawsuits that this article now discusses). Now Tivo2 has ethernet built-in but I haven't bothered to switch yet nor will I in the forseeable future but there is a possibility since I don't really even use the show transfer "feature" much.
Those that can't make the news, submit the news!
Your song is known as "The Xerox Blues". :)
I don't believe people really know what Lucent does. I see one post about "Lucent should use OSS" and another post talking about their Lucent DSL modem.
Lucent had/has their hands in alot of pots. Yeah, they do make DSL modems, but that was just so they had something to offer up when service providers bought their Stinger DSL Concentrator.
Lucent to me was the manufacturer of hardcore ATM equipment as this really was their core business before the CBX500 became aged. Of course, this is just my experience from my job. Lucent is still so big that knowing all the divisions and sub-organizations within it is confusing at best. I'm sure the other organizations within Lucent had their own core business that was pretty successful.
In 2000, we worked with four lines of ATM switches. Today, we still work with 3 of the 4 and nothing really new has been introduced. So pretty much, everybody that needs to buy one has probably bought one already. That's the peril of a hardware company that hasn't introduced anything new or innovative in about 5-6 years.
The optical switches are pretty exciting (but I've never worked with it so I can't speak to the actual models) but I know they are expensive and are overkill for alot of applications so I don't believe they're flying off the shelf.
So what have we left but to become a services company which has been another auxillary department at Lucent for many years. Perhaps you recall Lucent's acquisition of INS in the late 90s. The difference nowadays is that the services arm of Lucent is probably financially more healthy than the hardware manufacturing arms of Lucent.
I converted over to OS X in August. I love the OS as a whole but my bitch is, of course, Finder.
.DS_Store in every freakin directory. It's especially annoying when traversing directories that are shared with other OS's and FTP.
For the love of god, make it use some preference file in ~/Library instead of dropping
I would pay $129 just for that alone. I hope they do something "revolutionary" with Finder like make it not suck in 10.4.
In every other Google article I've read, they say that they use old slow PCs in mini to mid tower cases. You can fit about... 12-16 machines in a rack if they're not rackmount cases. Not 88.
In any case, all this calculation is a bit over speculatory and pointless.
*cough* Time for Apple to step up. ;)
Some huge boxes from Apple would fill the void and would undeniably be very interesting.
The genie was out of the bottle a few thousand years ago when people started the very concept of "entertainment" by sharing stories from group to group. That was entertainment. Transfering an idea (i.e. story) from person to person. And it was as free as can be. But over the years, inflation really took a toll on free. Now, that same story will cost you $20 in a book store or $10 in a movie theater for 85 minutes or $15 for 60 minutes of music which for many in this world takes them 2-3 hours to make.
:P
I'm rambling and I don't really have a point so don't bring up my flawed thinking because I'm tired and in Vegas.
Viacom is quite simply extorting Echostar. They see Echostar raising the bill for it's customers (for what reason, I don't know but I'm willing to bet it's partly due to rising costs on their end and not purely for profit) and Viacom immediately assumes they can demand a cut. That alone is bad, but coupled with their crawls and promos all over their channels really pisses me off and I'm not even a customer of Echostar.
Viacom is throwing a _very_ public temper-tantrum and it really turns me off to watching content on their channels. Music TV is horribly bad so I don't watch it anyway but I'm starting to have second thoughts about watching Survivor, CSI, and South Park. It's really making me reevaluate what to do with my spare time besides wasting it away in front of the TV.
It sucks for Echostar's customers who want to (for one reason or another) watch Viacom stations but Viacom is pulling me into the suckfest by interupting the programming for their propaganda. And it's really going to suck when Echostar buckles and shows that media conglomerates really do own everybody and everything and can do as they please.
Will it be called SunOS 2.10 or SunOS 3.0?
It's actually SunOS 5.10. (SunOS 4.x was Solaris 1.x, SunOS 5.x was Solaris 2.x up until 2.7, then they changed it to just Solaris 7 with the underworkings of SunOS 5.7... got that?)I can't imagine they're going to break into the next major version number. (i.e. SunOS 6) but you never know.
*cough* sex.
Seriously though, I find pretty much everything at thinkgeek.com to be cool. Plenty of things under $100 there.
Damn, I haven't seen anything this slanted since I read an Ann Coulter book yesterday...
Honestly, Why people are so fierce about this I have no idea. I use Mac OS X, I like it, it works for me, I can afford it. If you want to run Windows, so be it. I will never run Windows again but that's just me.
This is such a political debate with really no point other than trying to compare your worth as a productive human by your platform and OS. And really, I'm getting tired of it. So with this post, I declare the OS war over with all OS's being shit!
Sun has not made cutting edge hardware?
./configure; make; make install with it doesn't make it bad. And how cute... you spelled windows, windoze.
Quite frankly in recent years in the workstation market, no, no they haven't. They switched to PCI/IDE years ago for workstations. A majority of the Ultra series was PCI and not S/bus. The current Blades are more powerful than Ultra boxes. Sun is just behind the development curve of x86 (and PowerPC even for that matter) and they don't look to catch up anytime soon. Anyway, I can't really tell if you're defending old Sun hardware and blasting the new or if you're just trying to tear down my statement.
Would you please enlighten me?
Yes, I would.
I've got no idea why someone would want one of these blades. If you have software that has not been ported over to GNU, you could just use x86 Solaris or purchase a real Sun used.
That is a hugely humorous statement. You wouldn't. Companies that have applications that run on Sparc like having workstations of the same architecture for debuging purposes among others. And if you think that all applications _should_ be ported over to a GNU system, you should have your head examined as that's a very closed way of thinking. Many corporations don't see a need to port their (in many cases) proprietary software from something that already works just fine. And the last part of that statement, x86 Solaris is a joke and not compatible with binaries from Sparc Solaris (obviously) which doesn't help at all when debugging and/or using commercial applications. But the kicker, "purchase a real Sun used", um, these are real Sun's.. they even have the magical logo. Did you realize that a used Sun which I'm assuming you're going for an S/Bus Ultra with an UltraSparc IIe is dog slow compared to the UltraSparc III in that Blade. If you're so worried about disk performance, just put a SCSI PCI card and disk in it and shut up.
If Sun's goal is to comoditize thier hardware, they need to ditch the AMD windoze hunchback and embrace free software.
No, they don't need to embrace free software. Closed source, Proprietary, well supported software is just fine when it works well. Just because you can't feel special because you can't
They could steal most of the Xenon server market if they did this.
Huh? By making Solaris open-source they could steal most of the Xenon market? I have no idea what you're talking about.
Yes, it's very difficult to get data from the cheap XP box to your nice Sun.
Oh yeah, FTP, NFS, CDROM even... super hard.
The answer is to convince people that a GNU box works better than an XP box for any and all work related computing. Then they have their pick of ssh and all the traditional Unix networking software.
What? We have to convince people to use Linux instead of Windows XP... Um, this isn't even relevant to what we're talking about.
To sum up, you're pretty mixed on several things. The primary thing I was trying to educate you on in the parent post is that, these boxes are not for you. They're for research, development, and mission-critical applications. You will never have a need for it. Corporations on the other hand do for various reasons.
Ever time somebody brings up Sun, everyone goes "THOSE SPECS SUCK, KILL KILL KILL!". Sun equipment isn't about the specs. It's about the OS mostly and the support you get for that OS to run your extremely important applications. We can debate all day long about how they should've put SCSI in there instead of IDE or what have you but that's not the point of my posts. Sun has made some poor decisions in regards to their hardware but I really don't think that will stop customers (read: companies, not you) that already have Sun equipment from switching. It certainly won't gain them customers, but thats another debate.
I will plainly admit I didn't read the article and that I should be shot. However, usually Sun includes an installer CD for the current version of Solaris. The disc includes an updated kernel and some other things so you can use the latest Solaris. Why that did not happen in this case, I have no idea.
So you provide a machine with inferior performance that doesn't even support Linux/FreeBSD/The latest version of YOUR OWN Solaris Operating System
Newsflash genius, FreeBSD supports Sparc, few Linux's and Sol 9 (I don't know where you got that Sol 9 didn't support an UltraSparc IIIi). They hope it to become their best-seller to replace their low-end and aging Ultra line.
If you need more help, please see my related post.
It's never a suprised that people on slashdot just don't get Sun equipment. Much like Apple, companies (I'd wager extremely few people buy Sun's for personal everyday use) that buy these boxes are buying them for the OS and rarely for the groundbreaking hardware.
;)
They like the support that Sun provides with thier OS and how it's been grown to be rock solid. Yada, yada, yada. Cut to the posts here by people that probably have never seen a Sun box let alone owned/used one and I'm not shocked.
Disclaimer: This is not a troll.
I wouldn't even be using OS X if it still had that crap application/process menu. I think the dock is a good way to handle things and in comparison to Windows and KDE/GNOME, my opinion is that it's the best idea.
I have tried to use OS 9 on occassion and I must say the handling of open applications is horrid. I'm rather suprised that anyone liked it and even more so that people defend it.
But like we all say, we all have opinions and should respect others. In any case, the idea that this guy is blasting something that replaced his technology that he no doubt spent alot of blood, sweat and tears to create is no shocker at all.
That was my thought as well... IBM could definately license Apple's operating system. This would be great for both Apple and IBM as Apple could definately dictate the terms for such an agreement and I think IBM would like it just in principle to stick it to Microsoft.
How can a public company that's based on profits and such in this day and age spend so much resources on those bloody robots without every really selling any of them? This could be my misconception though, but I have never heard of anybody really buying them.
It seems every few months we have a new video of the latest, greatest robot dancing. Maybe I should be happy about all of this because it's R&D and any of that is needed in today's marketplace because so many companies have ditched it. In any case, I rather have them research rockets or other space machinary to get to Mars a little quicker. (I realize robotics has an impact on space exploration but sheesh, what's the use if we can't get anywhere first.)
I'm really ranting now but the hot dance moves on the Super Humanoid Robot 5000 really makes me want to cap myself.
DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER!