Yeah, I'm pretty old school so I still think of 3.2 as more or less the standard, although I've gotten in the habbit of coding more xhtml these days (although they can take 'align=' from my cold dead hands). I tend to get IE versions mixed up since they all pretty much look the same from IE4 on. I've never tried to suppress the alt with the title, so maybe I'm thinking of IE (4?) displaying the alt when no title is present.
I thought the first official version was 2.0?
Yeah, I caught that too. Maybe the fact that jwz thinks there was an html 1.2 explains why Netscape 4 and below did everything wrong since Netscape use to make up the standard as they went along
Internet explorer will still display the alt, unless they fixed that in modern versions. I'm pretty sure IE4 always shows the alt as a tool tip, although I'm pretty sure NS4 would should show neither the alt or the title.
That's one nice thing about Mozilla, and to a lesser extent IE6 - you can put title attributes on just about everything which is handy for web applications. I'm not sure where jwz got the title attribute implemented in HTML 1.2, although he'd know more than me. My impression was that wasn't a part of the spec until version 3 or later.
I'm not sure I get these "har har, no one uses a text browser" posts either. What do you think blind people use? Do people really think IE and it's pop-up/Active-X haeven are conductive to a user who can't see the screen? I'd be surprised if a blind person would use lynx over 'links' or 'elinks' but these are up to the user.
Different users have different needs, and not everyone needs to see pictures. Some people may prefer a text interface, for others its an important feature.
Ask them whether they know that they can drag things with the right mouse button?
Yeah, easiest way to creat a shortcut is to right-click-drag the app where you want the shortcut. You try explaining that to people and you have to tell them at least 2 more times. I've had a few instances where the people simply couldn't do it.
When they went from 56bit to 128 they already broke backwards compatibility. I think MS uses RC4 in Office because they use RC4 in everything else. RDP, IIS, among others all use RC4 for "high grade encryption". I'm sure they could have used a new algorithm if they really wanted to, but they seem to like RC4 for some reason.
Another reason to use Open Office I guess. I feel reasonably secure with 128bit blowfish.
Hey, this guy needs to ease into things from Linux, lets not blow his mind here. I'm sure his head will be spinning when he sees man pages that document things instead of saying "read the info page". Hell, he might even pass out when he finds out he can read man pages about configuration files.
I've found 5x to be... well hard to predict. On a K6-400 I found an improvement in performance, although I have absolutely no idea why. On my first computer (P166/192Mb RAM) I found the performance to be rather poor. I suppose it depends on what you run as well. I'm runing Apache2 (with random CGI), Postgresql, with a Music Player Daemon playing ogg/mp3 at times. But maybe I just idealize how fast I expect the machine to run, since I recall only being able to run Paint Shop Pro 5, Netscape and Winamp (1.8 or lower) at one time on win95.
Support for old NIC cards seem to be fine as far as I've seen.
For a 486 stick with 4x or NetBSD. On a 233... I'm not sure. Just keep in mind that the minimum recommended swap is 256Mb no matter how little ram you have.
Second, where does this nonsense about id saving OpenGL come from?
Not to disagree with you, but I wonder if graphics card companies (ATI and Nvidia anyway) would even bother supporting OpenGL if there wasn't even a single game that required it? I doubt OpenGL would have died, but I wouldn't be surprised if OpenGL would have become a 'novelty' thing to suport more for nitch video cards. And before anyone pipes in with "but Apple uses OpenGL", I'd point out that ID had their foot in the door for quite a while before Apple moved to Unix. I'm not sure how many other game companies use OpenGL (because I haven't seen any myself), but I doubt they would have been enough by themselves.
I did try DragonFly, and basically found it to be 4x with a kick ass installer. I also found that a fair number of ports were broken, and I don't think hacking stuff together to get it to compile is a good solution. I also found a fair number of system utilities were broken (sockstat comes to mind), and got all sorts of crazy error messages in the system logs.
I think the DragonFly team will do awsome things in the years to come, but there's a lot of work to do - the scope of the changes will be pretty large. DragonFly will really get off the ground once they make a clean break and import things from FreeBSD instead of the current method that comes across more like using FreeBSD as a crutch.
And the sooner the other BSD's start using DragonFly's installer, the better.
"WHY in GODS NAME do I need to have Windows Media Player EMBEDDED into my server??"
Clippy: "It looks like SQL Server is dying and NTFS is corrupting as we speak. Would you like to watch a video to see how to press ctrl+alt+del and pray to God that your machine can still boot?"
In any case, if there is to be a FreeBSD 6.0 someday, it will probably look like Dragonfly. [dragonflybsd.org] I would say that future is now. Dragonfly 1.0 == FreeBSD 6.0
Pfft, what are you smoking? Dragonfly and FreeBSD 6 are going to be nothing alike. FreeBSD 6x is basically a simple evolutionary step away from 5x and as such any fundamental design problems will remain. Dragonfly 1.0 is not really a complete OS so I'm not sure how you can compair it. Dragonfly is taking the 4x branch in a radically different direction and will probably be it's own different flavor within the next 2 years. That's basically like saying FreeBSD 6 == NetBSD 2.2 - the two aren't really similar enough to compair in such a fashion.
I think the growing problem with "off the shelf" software is inflexibility. Often you end up with software systems which do not do what you really need them to and you can end up spending a considerable ammount of resources trying to get what you need out of it. The main problem with this is that smaller software companies that address these needs are getting harder and harder to find, while larger software companies are only interested in big generic systems they can market to everyone.
If you can find off the shelf packages that do all you need them to or are easy to extend, then yes; off the shelf components make sense. But realistically, a large ammount of software does not meet these requirements. And that's assuming that you can even GET off the shelf software to do what you need.
I think the biggest consideration is how much money do you have left over at the end of the month. My job is pretty similar to yours although I live in a cluster of towns that adds up to about 250k people. I'd be living large if I made the low end they talk about. I'm not exactly paranoid about moving, but I'd say I really enjoy my work - and seriously, how many jobs in larger cities really offer anything that isn't being stuck in a cubicle doing not so interesting tasks. To me the variety makes my job interesting more than any particular task.
Knowing that section of the midwest, I'd say you should still command above $30k per year, especially considering your experience. Well it's better than the $19k a year job listing a saw for a C++ programmer with at LEAST 3 years experience. =)
I hope they at least asked you what kind of switches and NICs you were using. I found out the hard way one time that Nortel switches (at least the ones we use) default to 100Tx with NO duplexing when you turn negociation off (and you can't force it to duplex either). Man did networking take a shit on some servers that day...
4) Getting to know BSD would require getting comfortable with a new administration system for startup, shutdown, and package management
Actually that's sort of funny because when Redhat dumped support on me I had to do just that. It was hard enough getting my boss onboard to implement some of that "Linux" stuff, but the price was reasonable for up2date. Then no more 7x updates after about what 1 year, 2 years?
I looked at various Linux distributors but tended to be wary of commercial vendors. Debian looked promising but just didn't strike me as the right choice. By contrast I found good performance and security as well as a stable consistent OS with up to date packaging in FreeBSD. I had to not only re-learn package management, but system administration as well. And you know what, it's the same for most Linux distros because they're all different. Even worse that Redhat tends to spoon feed you with their own special tools - I became a better admin when I moved to BSD, not because BSD is neccesarily superior, but because it gave me another perspective on how things could be done.
Well most of the other points are flamebait as well (although I sort of agree with some of them) but I thought I'd address that one point.
Once you have your characteristics you can build a three dimensional vector out of a song.
I think to some extent that's exactly what people do right now. I mean isn't that why people listen to one "type" of music, because it has certain attributes they like? I suppose in any given type of music there is an associated formula which would yeild a "good song". It's also sure to farther drown out any ammount of creativity and innovation left in the music industry. But hey, lets face it - the music industry already picks the "hits" and the "artists" and what will be popular, so using a computer to automate this task isn't probably as big of a deal as we'd like to think.
Basically what they want is a machine that can pick a hit through a predictable formula, but we already knew this. You know what's sort of weird about that is this sounds like the start of some sort of stupid movie plot from the 50's... I can see the reels of tape on the master computer now.
Each BSD operating system (yes the whole damn system) is different but BSD derrivative. Because BSDs are an entire operating system, they do things their own consistent way and avoid the mess that LSB is trying to fix.
Now you could use LSB for a BSD distro, but why? Now you have something layed out like Linux but isn't linux, and you have a BSD that isn't layed out like a BSD. BSDs have a (usually) logical well documented heirarchy. LSB is a good thing for Linux with all the distros having things sprawled out all over the place, but is probably not for the BSDs.
Re:How lightweight, if it requires gtk+?
on
Xfce 4.2.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
If you're looking for a different window manager I'd recommend downloading knoppix. By default it uses KDE, but there are actually a LOT more window managers you can boot into (of which xfce is one). Something like larswm might be more your style.
Personally I liked the functionallity of knoppix but didn't like how slow kde ran on it. After trying out all the window manager options I found Xfce by far offered the best ballence of aetheticly pleasing, speed, weight, and functionality.
I have IE disabled on machines where I work. If I need to access windows update I just use a snap-in to windows update (or office update) in mmc. I have one mmc set up with most of the admin tools I need so I don't have to dig through the control panel.
I'd have to say I agree. Where I work we have PC's on a production floor running win31/9x and networking is often the problem. That aside sometimes the video is the problem, or the keyboard isn't "working" or the mouse isn't "working" so I don't see how all these people advocating network solutions plan on fixing something like that (and if your firewall locks you out that would also make network solutions useless). Even worse is the fact that the monitors are literally 12-15 feet away. The programs they normally run have huge boxes, but windows dialogs are unreadable.
Apperently I'm the only one who's unlucky enough to end up in lots of scenarios where there are no spare monitors around, and all available power outlets are taken - i.e. a monitor wont do you any good anyway. A laptop would be perfect since they have their own battery, keyboard,mouse and fold up nicely. I also have a lot of laptops beyond their "useful" life that I thought would be perfect for this but figured there was no solution available.
Not that slashdot is helping any either appernetly. *sigh* Wish I had bought that rackmount colsole on ebay when it was cheap.
Yeah mom, to access my email which is on the same server as my web host, just ssh into port 20002. The username is "xxxx". Password? No, there's no password, you have to use a DSA certificate. It says in the man pages you can use '-i'....
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I'm pretty old school so I still think of 3.2 as more or less the standard, although I've gotten in the habbit of coding more xhtml these days (although they can take 'align=' from my cold dead hands). I tend to get IE versions mixed up since they all pretty much look the same from IE4 on. I've never tried to suppress the alt with the title, so maybe I'm thinking of IE (4?) displaying the alt when no title is present.
I thought the first official version was 2.0?
Yeah, I caught that too. Maybe the fact that jwz thinks there was an html 1.2 explains why Netscape 4 and below did everything wrong since Netscape use to make up the standard as they went along
Internet explorer will still display the alt, unless they fixed that in modern versions. I'm pretty sure IE4 always shows the alt as a tool tip, although I'm pretty sure NS4 would should show neither the alt or the title.
That's one nice thing about Mozilla, and to a lesser extent IE6 - you can put title attributes on just about everything which is handy for web applications. I'm not sure where jwz got the title attribute implemented in HTML 1.2, although he'd know more than me. My impression was that wasn't a part of the spec until version 3 or later.
I'm not sure I get these "har har, no one uses a text browser" posts either. What do you think blind people use? Do people really think IE and it's pop-up/Active-X haeven are conductive to a user who can't see the screen? I'd be surprised if a blind person would use lynx over 'links' or 'elinks' but these are up to the user.
Different users have different needs, and not everyone needs to see pictures. Some people may prefer a text interface, for others its an important feature.
Ask them whether they know that they can drag things with the right mouse button?
Yeah, easiest way to creat a shortcut is to right-click-drag the app where you want the shortcut. You try explaining that to people and you have to tell them at least 2 more times. I've had a few instances where the people simply couldn't do it.
When they went from 56bit to 128 they already broke backwards compatibility. I think MS uses RC4 in Office because they use RC4 in everything else. RDP, IIS, among others all use RC4 for "high grade encryption". I'm sure they could have used a new algorithm if they really wanted to, but they seem to like RC4 for some reason.
Another reason to use Open Office I guess. I feel reasonably secure with 128bit blowfish.
Hey, this guy needs to ease into things from Linux, lets not blow his mind here. I'm sure his head will be spinning when he sees man pages that document things instead of saying "read the info page". Hell, he might even pass out when he finds out he can read man pages about configuration files.
Pf is supported by Free,Net,and Dragonfly BSD as well.
I've found 5x to be... well hard to predict. On a K6-400 I found an improvement in performance, although I have absolutely no idea why. On my first computer (P166/192Mb RAM) I found the performance to be rather poor. I suppose it depends on what you run as well. I'm runing Apache2 (with random CGI), Postgresql, with a Music Player Daemon playing ogg/mp3 at times. But maybe I just idealize how fast I expect the machine to run, since I recall only being able to run Paint Shop Pro 5, Netscape and Winamp (1.8 or lower) at one time on win95.
Support for old NIC cards seem to be fine as far as I've seen.
For a 486 stick with 4x or NetBSD. On a 233... I'm not sure. Just keep in mind that the minimum recommended swap is 256Mb no matter how little ram you have.
Second, where does this nonsense about id saving OpenGL come from?
Not to disagree with you, but I wonder if graphics card companies (ATI and Nvidia anyway) would even bother supporting OpenGL if there wasn't even a single game that required it? I doubt OpenGL would have died, but I wouldn't be surprised if OpenGL would have become a 'novelty' thing to suport more for nitch video cards. And before anyone pipes in with "but Apple uses OpenGL", I'd point out that ID had their foot in the door for quite a while before Apple moved to Unix. I'm not sure how many other game companies use OpenGL (because I haven't seen any myself), but I doubt they would have been enough by themselves.
I did try DragonFly, and basically found it to be 4x with a kick ass installer. I also found that a fair number of ports were broken, and I don't think hacking stuff together to get it to compile is a good solution. I also found a fair number of system utilities were broken (sockstat comes to mind), and got all sorts of crazy error messages in the system logs.
I think the DragonFly team will do awsome things in the years to come, but there's a lot of work to do - the scope of the changes will be pretty large. DragonFly will really get off the ground once they make a clean break and import things from FreeBSD instead of the current method that comes across more like using FreeBSD as a crutch.
And the sooner the other BSD's start using DragonFly's installer, the better.
"WHY in GODS NAME do I need to have Windows Media Player EMBEDDED into my server??"
Clippy: "It looks like SQL Server is dying and NTFS is corrupting as we speak. Would you like to watch a video to see how to press ctrl+alt+del and pray to God that your machine can still boot?"
In any case, if there is to be a FreeBSD 6.0 someday, it will probably look like Dragonfly. [dragonflybsd.org] I would say that future is now. Dragonfly 1.0 == FreeBSD 6.0
Pfft, what are you smoking? Dragonfly and FreeBSD 6 are going to be nothing alike. FreeBSD 6x is basically a simple evolutionary step away from 5x and as such any fundamental design problems will remain. Dragonfly 1.0 is not really a complete OS so I'm not sure how you can compair it. Dragonfly is taking the 4x branch in a radically different direction and will probably be it's own different flavor within the next 2 years. That's basically like saying FreeBSD 6 == NetBSD 2.2 - the two aren't really similar enough to compair in such a fashion.
the ultimate dupe!
I think the growing problem with "off the shelf" software is inflexibility. Often you end up with software systems which do not do what you really need them to and you can end up spending a considerable ammount of resources trying to get what you need out of it. The main problem with this is that smaller software companies that address these needs are getting harder and harder to find, while larger software companies are only interested in big generic systems they can market to everyone.
If you can find off the shelf packages that do all you need them to or are easy to extend, then yes; off the shelf components make sense. But realistically, a large ammount of software does not meet these requirements. And that's assuming that you can even GET off the shelf software to do what you need.
I think the biggest consideration is how much money do you have left over at the end of the month. My job is pretty similar to yours although I live in a cluster of towns that adds up to about 250k people. I'd be living large if I made the low end they talk about. I'm not exactly paranoid about moving, but I'd say I really enjoy my work - and seriously, how many jobs in larger cities really offer anything that isn't being stuck in a cubicle doing not so interesting tasks. To me the variety makes my job interesting more than any particular task.
Knowing that section of the midwest, I'd say you should still command above $30k per year, especially considering your experience. Well it's better than the $19k a year job listing a saw for a C++ programmer with at LEAST 3 years experience. =)
I hope they at least asked you what kind of switches and NICs you were using. I found out the hard way one time that Nortel switches (at least the ones we use) default to 100Tx with NO duplexing when you turn negociation off (and you can't force it to duplex either). Man did networking take a shit on some servers that day...
Linux + Apache + Python + Pgsql = LAPP
Windows + Apache + Python + Pgsql = WAPP
Windows is an OS too.
too sounds like 2
Windows + Apache + Ruby + Pgsql = OS2 WARP
4) Getting to know BSD would require getting comfortable with a new administration system for startup, shutdown, and package management
Actually that's sort of funny because when Redhat dumped support on me I had to do just that. It was hard enough getting my boss onboard to implement some of that "Linux" stuff, but the price was reasonable for up2date. Then no more 7x updates after about what 1 year, 2 years?
I looked at various Linux distributors but tended to be wary of commercial vendors. Debian looked promising but just didn't strike me as the right choice. By contrast I found good performance and security as well as a stable consistent OS with up to date packaging in FreeBSD. I had to not only re-learn package management, but system administration as well. And you know what, it's the same for most Linux distros because they're all different. Even worse that Redhat tends to spoon feed you with their own special tools - I became a better admin when I moved to BSD, not because BSD is neccesarily superior, but because it gave me another perspective on how things could be done.
Well most of the other points are flamebait as well (although I sort of agree with some of them) but I thought I'd address that one point.
Once you have your characteristics you can build a three dimensional vector out of a song.
I think to some extent that's exactly what people do right now. I mean isn't that why people listen to one "type" of music, because it has certain attributes they like? I suppose in any given type of music there is an associated formula which would yeild a "good song". It's also sure to farther drown out any ammount of creativity and innovation left in the music industry. But hey, lets face it - the music industry already picks the "hits" and the "artists" and what will be popular, so using a computer to automate this task isn't probably as big of a deal as we'd like to think.
Basically what they want is a machine that can pick a hit through a predictable formula, but we already knew this. You know what's sort of weird about that is this sounds like the start of some sort of stupid movie plot from the 50's... I can see the reels of tape on the master computer now.
Sounds pretty cool if you take some sections out of context though:
"What's with those giant tables and all those women?"
She then whispered, "Next time, please don't wear jeans"
Each BSD operating system (yes the whole damn system) is different but BSD derrivative. Because BSDs are an entire operating system, they do things their own consistent way and avoid the mess that LSB is trying to fix.
Now you could use LSB for a BSD distro, but why? Now you have something layed out like Linux but isn't linux, and you have a BSD that isn't layed out like a BSD. BSDs have a (usually) logical well documented heirarchy. LSB is a good thing for Linux with all the distros having things sprawled out all over the place, but is probably not for the BSDs.
If you're looking for a different window manager I'd recommend downloading knoppix. By default it uses KDE, but there are actually a LOT more window managers you can boot into (of which xfce is one). Something like larswm might be more your style.
Personally I liked the functionallity of knoppix but didn't like how slow kde ran on it. After trying out all the window manager options I found Xfce by far offered the best ballence of aetheticly pleasing, speed, weight, and functionality.
I have IE disabled on machines where I work. If I need to access windows update I just use a snap-in to windows update (or office update) in mmc. I have one mmc set up with most of the admin tools I need so I don't have to dig through the control panel.
I'd have to say I agree. Where I work we have PC's on a production floor running win31/9x and networking is often the problem. That aside sometimes the video is the problem, or the keyboard isn't "working" or the mouse isn't "working" so I don't see how all these people advocating network solutions plan on fixing something like that (and if your firewall locks you out that would also make network solutions useless). Even worse is the fact that the monitors are literally 12-15 feet away. The programs they normally run have huge boxes, but windows dialogs are unreadable.
Apperently I'm the only one who's unlucky enough to end up in lots of scenarios where there are no spare monitors around, and all available power outlets are taken - i.e. a monitor wont do you any good anyway. A laptop would be perfect since they have their own battery, keyboard,mouse and fold up nicely. I also have a lot of laptops beyond their "useful" life that I thought would be perfect for this but figured there was no solution available.
Not that slashdot is helping any either appernetly. *sigh* Wish I had bought that rackmount colsole on ebay when it was cheap.
and the access methods for them before you die
....
Yeah mom, to access my email which is on the same server as my web host, just ssh into port 20002. The username is "xxxx". Password? No, there's no password, you have to use a DSA certificate. It says in the man pages you can use '-i'