That's funny (tm). My NT web app server running w2k beta 1 hasn't BSOD'd or needed a reboot in 666 days. These false claims of NT instability are a favorite tactic of Linux/Apache advocates:(
How did you get 666 days of uptime and still install w2k beta 1?
Does Microsoft allow you to upgrade your OS without rebooting now?
Actually, that would be quite interesting. Take an NT server (I have a copy I would gladly donate for this test) and install Perl, Apache, MySQL and mod_perl. Copy Slashdot over to the new machine and transfer the load and see what happens.
I am beginning to hate Linux USERS, because they just don't seem to know any better. REBOL looks great, and has promise. "Awww, but it may not be GPL, therefore it sucks." "Ahhh, it ain't Perl" "Why do we need another language" Shit like this really scares me when I think about the intelligence level of a lot of Linux users. I must say, Windows may suck, but Windows users don't. I know a lot of Windows users that embrace new development technologies, while Slashdot is full of whinning programmers who feel that if you can't do it in C/Perl, you shouldn't be a programmer.
Linux is part of the Free Software movement. If you don't like that then you should present clean, concise reasoning why we should never discuss it. You are making HUGE generalizations about Linux and Windows users and you ought to learn how to present a rational argument instead of this silly banter.
Why shouldn't we critique the license under which new software is released? Why should we accept everything developed for Linux with beggar's hands? We shouldn't and we don't (surprise). If that offends you, I'm not sorry and I won't apologize for "whinning programmer" bretheren for it is you who is doing the whinning here.
As for the issues; UNIX is based on small utilities which do one thing well. None of the examples on their website showed anything revolutionary or even interesting when compared to BASH. What's the difference between doing
send luke@rebol.com "Hello World!"
and
echo "Hello World" | mail luke@rebol.com
It is any surprise that were not very impressed?
Perl is a schitzophrenic language. It can look good, it can look bad. It can be object-oriented, it can be iterative, it can be threaded, it can be modularized. It can embed code from other languages, it can communicate with the native OS using native constructs, it can be graphical, it can be ttyable. It is what you want it to be, and yes, it should be compared to REBOL because they are trying to solve the same problems.
But I suppose you'd rather whine about Linux users with your time. What a joke. And as for the Amiga user: get over it. I used to be an Amiga user and I don't expect the Linux community to "care about my feelings" or other such bullshit. If you want to compare something with AREXX then do it. If you want to spout how 31337 you are because you're the "only" one to ever use it, you have no business raking Linux users over the coals for doing the same thing with Perl and C. Shut up and present a post with content.
There is another spin to this. By not accepting the obviously rigged challenge and pointing this out to the media, you still come out smelling better than you would if Linux loses or if they just shy away and let Microsofts marketing geniuses stomp all over Linux. And yet, we could simply challenge them to make Windows NT keep up with Linux on a Pentium 166 with 64MB of RAM. They would fail miserably -- probably even web traffic. While they may not consider this enterprise hardware, we run it on our system to serve 350 users:
put down that crack pipe. Creative most definately DID NOT allow creation of open drivers. they hired someone to write binary only drivers, which is a bad thing, I will never buy any hardware which is not supported with a Free driver. (Freedom, not beer)
Yes, unless you have a box which Linux doesn't support, or doesn't support well. Or you are trying to run evil closed OSs like Solaris x86 or SCO. As far as a production system goes, the Linux decision might come down to whether a driver is available or not.
And don't forget all major commerical unixes will run on IA64, along with Linux. UDI support will be pretty much mandatory for any hardware vendor. Yet you are proposing looking this gift horse in the mouth to wait for someone to write a Linux native in their spare time.
And yet, if you look at the history involved here, which UNIX-like OS has the most drivers? Your argument has no basis in logic; if we are able to have more drivers for Linux right now than any of the other commercial UNIX systems, then it is they who should be adopting the Linux driver system, not the other way around.
The UDI sounds like a good idea, but what people seem to be missing is that with the source code, a driver is a simple thing to implement. The underlying feeling about the UDI is that binary drivers are going to be a necessity -- and in that case it will not help anyway because new architectures and operating systems will break it. (not to mention that the core open source developers for freeUNIX systems will not use them anyway). We have seen this in action several times -- look at the Riva TNT and more recently the ATI TV card (although I still can't figure out why anyone would want a TV on their computer). In both cases, they allowed open drivers to be implemented for their cards. ESR makes some very good points on this subject -- the turn-around for hardware secrets is measured in months and so companies will open up their source after that time anyway; see www.opensource.org for more information.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Nightmares of Bloom County and Donald Trump
on
Web Sites Shut Down
·
· Score: 1
His bash on Gates' book seemed to be driven by the fact that Gates doesn't write anything personal, anything that helps the reader get to know him.
His disliked the book because Gates not only didn't offer any technical points, it failed to provide any insight on how Gates made Microsoft into what it is today. One would expect a book written by the "most successful" buisnessman of today to contain some glimpse into how he did it. Alas, much as "the road ahead" failed miserably as a technical piece -- B@TSOT fails to deliver on the other front. That you pushed it off as "Gates bashing" is quite interesting...
Perhaps your family doesn't share my family's (how shall I put this) 'passion' for politics. People enjoy this sort of banter, myself included. To the "can't we all just get along" group it looks bad, but in reality it is simply the free exchange of ideas. When we must get along to avoid "this bickering" I would call that totalitarianism -- which is present in many corperations.
Open source debates take place in public, not in closed board rooms. I like it.
After months of silence out of Redmond, the themes of Microsoft's coming FUD campaign against Linux are beginning to emerge like a zombie army from the fetid mists of Redmond. And who should that black-armored, axe-wielding figure riding point be but our old friend Ed "Sheriff of Nottingham" Muth, apparently recovered from leading with his chin last time around and ready for another go at Linus and his Merry Men of Sherwood.
Does he realize how ridiculous this sounds to anyone in the real world? Heck, even Wired authors aren't this strange.
Very well done, and true, I might add. I have experienced the persecution complex first-hand (I am an ex-Amiga hacker) and it takes a bit to get over it.
From postmaster@backoffice.com Thu Feb 18 17:18:40 1999 Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 18:43:30 -0500 From: System Administrator To: ink@inconnu.isu.edu Subject: Undeliverable: Suggestion Your message To: letters@backoffice.com Subject: Suggestion Sent: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 19:17:53 -0500 did not reach the following recipient(s): letters@backoffice.com on Thu, 18 Feb 1999 18:43:30 -0500 The recipient name is not recognized MSEXCH:IMS:PENNWELL:BACKOFFICE:WILDEBEEST 0 (000C05A6) Unknown Recipient [Part 1.2, Text/HTML 26 lines] [Unable to print this part] [ Part 2: "Included Message" ]
Hmmm, I think I'll install *insert product here* on my machine. Oh, it needs the latest HTML engine from Microsoft (IE version Y), okay I guess I better install that. Hmmm, IE version Y won't install with the error message: "IE Setup detected that you have a Pentium III processor but the PSN has been deactivated. Please reboot your machine and re-activate tht PSN for Setup to continue."
Oh, so this is just like my refirgerator: I can't use it unless I send the serial number to Kenmore and keep them updated on what food I have 'installed'.
Slashdot Mirror
How did you get 666 days of uptime and still install w2k beta 1?
Does Microsoft allow you to upgrade your OS without rebooting now?
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Actually, that would be quite interesting. Take an NT server (I have a copy I would gladly donate for this test) and install Perl, Apache, MySQL and mod_perl. Copy Slashdot over to the new machine and transfer the load and see what happens.
I'd wager that it'd fall all over itself.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Linux is part of the Free Software movement. If you don't like that then you should present clean, concise reasoning why we should never discuss it. You are making HUGE generalizations about Linux and Windows users and you ought to learn how to present a rational argument instead of this silly banter.
Why shouldn't we critique the license under which new software is released? Why should we accept everything developed for Linux with beggar's hands? We shouldn't and we don't (surprise). If that offends you, I'm not sorry and I won't apologize for "whinning programmer" bretheren for it is you who is doing the whinning here.
As for the issues; UNIX is based on small utilities which do one thing well. None of the examples on their website showed anything revolutionary or even interesting when compared to BASH. What's the difference between doing
and It is any surprise that were not very impressed?Perl is a schitzophrenic language. It can look good, it can look bad. It can be object-oriented, it can be iterative, it can be threaded, it can be modularized. It can embed code from other languages, it can communicate with the native OS using native constructs, it can be graphical, it can be ttyable. It is what you want it to be, and yes, it should be compared to REBOL because they are trying to solve the same problems.
But I suppose you'd rather whine about Linux users with your time. What a joke. And as for the Amiga user: get over it. I used to be an Amiga user and I don't expect the Linux community to "care about my feelings" or other such bullshit. If you want to compare something with AREXX then do it. If you want to spout how 31337 you are because you're the "only" one to ever use it, you have no business raking Linux users over the coals for doing the same thing with Perl and C. Shut up and present a post with content.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
http://inconnu.isu.edu/~ink/new/links/computing/li nks/gront
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Who said anything about Creative?
How will the UDI fix that problem?
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
And don't forget all major commerical unixes will run on IA64, along with Linux. UDI support will be pretty much mandatory for any hardware vendor. Yet you are proposing looking this gift horse in the mouth to wait for someone to write a Linux native in their spare time.
And yet, if you look at the history involved here, which UNIX-like OS has the most drivers? Your argument has no basis in logic; if we are able to have more drivers for Linux right now than any of the other commercial UNIX systems, then it is they who should be adopting the Linux driver system, not the other way around.
The UDI sounds like a good idea, but what people seem to be missing is that with the source code, a driver is a simple thing to implement. The underlying feeling about the UDI is that binary drivers are going to be a necessity -- and in that case it will not help anyway because new architectures and operating systems will break it. (not to mention that the core open source developers for freeUNIX systems will not use them anyway). We have seen this in action several times -- look at the Riva TNT and more recently the ATI TV card (although I still can't figure out why anyone would want a TV on their computer). In both cases, they allowed open drivers to be implemented for their cards. ESR makes some very good points on this subject -- the turn-around for hardware secrets is measured in months and so companies will open up their source after that time anyway; see www.opensource.org for more information.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
His disliked the book because Gates not only didn't offer any technical points, it failed to provide any insight on how Gates made Microsoft into what it is today. One would expect a book written by the "most successful" buisnessman of today to contain some glimpse into how he did it. Alas, much as "the road ahead" failed miserably as a technical piece -- B@TSOT fails to deliver on the other front. That you pushed it off as "Gates bashing" is quite interesting...
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
You become adept at mining useful information from chaos.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Open source debates take place in public, not in closed board rooms. I like it.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
After months of silence out of Redmond, the themes of Microsoft's coming FUD campaign against Linux are beginning to emerge like a zombie army from the fetid mists of Redmond. And who should that black-armored, axe-wielding figure riding point be but our old friend Ed "Sheriff of Nottingham" Muth, apparently recovered from leading with his chin last time around and ready for another go at Linus and his Merry Men of Sherwood.
Does he realize how ridiculous this sounds to anyone in the real world? Heck, even Wired authors aren't this strange.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
ME TOO
Very well done, and true, I might add. I have experienced the persecution complex first-hand (I am an ex-Amiga hacker) and it takes a bit to get over it.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
I had the same feeling, but after using .99.8 I must say that a LOT has changed. Give it a try.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Try to do anything like that under Windows or KDE. It provides all the functionallity of Windowmaker's dock plus some.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
It would surprise me if Nintendo did anything intelligent. :>
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
I'd LOVE to know how they are going to do this *and* guarantee that the serial number is real.
It all reeks of security through obscurity.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Can they do anything right??
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
At least gtk 1.1 is labeled as a development version.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Is that like getting one .c file with your open source application?
Hmmmm, sounds a lot like Free Beer to me.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Oh, so this is just like my refirgerator: I can't use it unless I send the serial number to Kenmore and keep them updated on what food I have 'installed'.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
and that the Windows' WINS properties are
pointing to your nmbd server.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.