I think the most polar source control system is Rational's ClearCase. You really love it or really hate. It's a very complex software package, but very powerful.
Personally, I really like ClearCase. Too bad its so expensive, otherwise I'd use it for all my open source work.
I have a Neuros and its far from just an "MP3 Player". My Neuros plays MP3's, Ogg Vorbis, WAV, and even the dreadful WMA files...
I hate when people call it an "MP3 Player".
<shameless plug>
If you haven't looked the Neuros, you don't know what you are missing. It's the perfect player for the geek in you. Recently they have open sourced the Firmware, allowing us hackers to have our way with it.
This is a strange comment. It is like saying, "The one thing I don't like about C++ is that if you distribute the source code, whoever is compiling needs to have the compiler."
Of course you need the toolkit library if source code uses it.
It makes me sad to see all of these closed minded people when it comes to XML. They just haven't seen what XML can do and have been turned away from previous work in XML. XML can be used for data storage, and has many advantages.
XML allows data to be stored with context. For example if you have the data element "CmdrTaco", that doesn't mean much. But with xml, you can store this bit of information with context:
It is surprising to me that people who like OO don't like XML. OO allows you to have functionality attached to your data. XML allows you to put context (and even functionality) around your data.
Another big advantage of XML databases is the lack of a schema. If you want to have a dynamic database is the relational world, you are looking at a large schema migration. An XML database allows you to just add the information with no migration at all.
Advanced storing techniques allows query of the XML database to be just as fast as a relational database. How can that be? The XML is stored in a specialized indexed form that allows for fast retrival.
Sure, there are applications where it doesn't make sense to use an XML database. Using an XML database to store relational data doesn't make sence, that's what relational databases are for. But if you can think outside the mold, and store your data in a new way, XML databases are for you.
I might be a little biased in this area, since I work for a XML database company (http://www.neocore.com). I have seen XML in action, and it is more than just a data transport. I hope that I can convince at least one person to look at this advanced technology.
I hate to post this here since Universe is almost vaporware itself, but we do have some stuff working. But how can you pass up a free plug like this? You can check out our stuff at sourceforge (http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/universe).
Since its written in Java, it works under Linux (and developed for the most part under Linux.)
You can get a patent for applying a technology "first" in a given field. I haven't read NetZero's patent, but I would assume that they filed for the ability of pop-up ad windows in an ISP.
Personally, I think that pop-up ad windows should be banned, but that was an earlier story.
Isn't the goal here to get the *best* software? If MS is open source, you have access to it and you can use it. If an open source NT is better than Linux, then great! Who cares who is making money off of it...
What I thought was really interesting is that the author received good support from Red Hat. Isn't that one of Linux's biggest (FUD) complaints is the lack of support?
Try to get that kind of support from Microsoft.
Re:I'm hoping for Diablo 2 :)
on
Civ:CTP Preview
·
· Score: 1
If this is true, I would never be heard from again.;)
I already have purchased SMAC for Windows. If a version for Linux is released, I probably would purchase a second copy for Linux. It wouldn't be too difficult to dump the Windows version.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the most polar source control system is Rational's ClearCase. You really love it or really hate. It's a very complex software package, but very powerful.
Personally, I really like ClearCase. Too bad its so expensive, otherwise I'd use it for all my open source work.
I have a Neuros and its far from just an "MP3 Player". My Neuros plays MP3's, Ogg Vorbis, WAV, and even the dreadful WMA files...
I hate when people call it an "MP3 Player".
<shameless plug>
If you haven't looked the Neuros, you don't know what you are missing. It's the perfect player for the geek in you. Recently they have open sourced the Firmware, allowing us hackers to have our way with it.
</shameless plug>
The Neuros isn't an mp3 player. That doesn't do it justice. :)
http://www.cool4u2view.com
You are misreading the quote. The Neuros memory only reader (the $99 unit) can play Ogg Vorbis files.
The only difference between the memory unit and the HD unit is the size available for files.
The Neuros also has a way to upgrade the firmware easily, allowing additional features as the product matures.
Smarter people earn more.
This is a strange comment. It is like saying, "The one thing I don't like about C++ is that if you distribute the source code, whoever is compiling needs to have the compiler."
Of course you need the toolkit library if source code uses it.
It makes me sad to see all of these closed minded people when it comes to XML. They just haven't seen what XML can do and have been turned away from previous work in XML. XML can be used for data storage, and has many advantages.
XML allows data to be stored with context. For example if you have the data element "CmdrTaco", that doesn't mean much. But with xml, you can store this bit of information with context:
<SlashDot>
<Editor>
<Name>CmdrTaco</Name>
</Editor>
</Slashdot>
Isn't that more informative?
It is surprising to me that people who like OO don't like XML. OO allows you to have functionality attached to your data. XML allows you to put context (and even functionality) around your data.
Another big advantage of XML databases is the lack of a schema. If you want to have a dynamic database is the relational world, you are looking at a large schema migration. An XML database allows you to just add the information with no migration at all.
Advanced storing techniques allows query of the XML database to be just as fast as a relational database. How can that be? The XML is stored in a specialized indexed form that allows for fast retrival.
Sure, there are applications where it doesn't make sense to use an XML database. Using an XML database to store relational data doesn't make sence, that's what relational databases are for. But if you can think outside the mold, and store your data in a new way, XML databases are for you.
I might be a little biased in this area, since I work for a XML database company (http://www.neocore.com). I have seen XML in action, and it is more than just a data transport. I hope that I can convince at least one person to look at this advanced technology.
Excuse my ignorance, but what does VBR mean?
Since its written in Java, it works under Linux (and developed for the most part under Linux.)
Personally, I think that pop-up ad windows should be banned, but that was an earlier story.
RADIUS really means Remote Autehntication Dial In User Service. But you are close enough...
The RFC definition is 2138, not for the faint of heart.
Who cares?
Isn't the goal here to get the *best* software? If MS is open source, you have access to it and you can use it. If an open source NT is better than Linux, then great! Who cares who is making money off of it...
Sean
What I thought was really interesting is that the author received good support from Red Hat. Isn't that one of Linux's biggest (FUD) complaints is the lack of support?
Try to get that kind of support from Microsoft.
If this is true, I would never be heard from again. ;)
I already have purchased SMAC for Windows. If a version for Linux is released, I probably would purchase a second copy for Linux. It wouldn't be too difficult to dump the Windows version.
Cast your vote for Linux games with your dollars!
To never reboot again...