We'll upgrade everything to 64 bits. Remember, few Un*x boxen (except Vaxen, if any such are still in use) will last until 2037. They're not mainframes.
Right. Nobody wants to do it with funky addressing schemes. That is his point. But: people certainly would want to do it with simple (e.g. 64 bit) addressing schemes---also his point. So, there is an advantage (and a significant one) to 64 bit processors over i386.
You think doing everything in our power to destroy the world economy and send us all back to the Agricultural age and kill 59/60 of the world's population is ``err[ing] on the side of caution''? Deep
without having to purchase external tools or spend hours integrating some external solution!
Instead you get to spend hours tying your product to a single platform. Brilliant.
I don't WANT components I rely on to be uninstalled.
You know, if Windoze had a decent package management system, this wouldn't be an issue. If you relied on it, it would be installed automatically when your program is. And then un-installed when your program is. But then again, I don't really think you can do Debian in proprietary software, so that'll never happen.
Actually, I don't think MS is capable of improving their product. They've got too many stupid ideas/fuzz bugs/security holes designed in and now required for backward compatibility.
Actually, a filesystem is a fundamental system service, but a partiular filesystem is not fundamental. On any decent system, filesystems can be swapped out.
OK, this I find confusing: on Windows, the command interpreter (I assume that's what you mean) can be un-installed and replaced, but the terminal emulator can't?!?!
That'd make a good SF story---many centuries from now, a generation star ship makes ``first contact'' with a ship that turns out to be a later generation star ship.
I think that HTML/XHTML/etc should evolve, but in a concertated way, not every player doing what he wants, and fuck the rest of the world.
Yeah, because that's the kind of evolution that made the Internet what it is today---a mass of perfect ISO standards. After all, the IETF's emphasis on two tested, production implementations only stuck them with inferior standards.
I don't think that browsers should "innovate" in HTML (like Netscape 2 frames or all the crap in IE), that is the job of w3c
Absolutely not. The last thing we need is yet another complicated, exclusive standards body churning out more bloated, unimplementable standards. Face it, the only way to ensure that a standard is implementable is to implement it. And that had better be done before it's an international standard and every vendor in the world is committed to it:) (credit goes to ich kenne nicht from fortune on that last bit).
I realize this is how film majors always explain it but there're two problems: (1) they're largely projecting their psychology on others. Many of us don't picture the scenes in our heads as we read. (2) they're largely projecting their psychology on others. Many of us are already larger than supposing a movie has to look the same as the pictures in our heads. But the ideas it presents have to be the same as those from the book, otherwise it's a shitty adaptation.
In any case, if you want something that will be judged on its own, you should create something that can stand on its own not something that pretends to be the same as something else.
It was the point to make it a campy B movie. They were lampooning the conformist attitude and showing the effects of totalitarian rule. Intellect is marginalized unless it is directly controlled by the state. The mindless football stud is elevated to puppet-hero; a perfect vassal for the powers that be. A violent reaction to those who are different.
If that's the case, calling the result Starship Troopers is slandering Heinlein.
Re:will Titan be classified as a planet?
on
Defining "Planet"
·
· Score: 1
That's better. We still need to clarify that stars aren't planets, though. Otherwise the Sun would fit the definition of ``planet'' and, thus, Earth again wouldn't qualify.
So it looks like BSD init doesn't use inittab, instead it just (always) runs/etc/rc? And also/etc/rc looks like it has the services it starts hard-coded (I didn't read the whole thing). I fail to see how this is easier to maintain or customize, but to each his own, I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
We'll upgrade everything to 64 bits. Remember, few Un*x boxen (except Vaxen, if any such are still in use) will last until 2037. They're not mainframes.
Since when is ``grandmother'' a typical cross-section of the computer market? Seriously, what percentage of users are mom-and-pop or grandma?
Right. Nobody wants to do it with funky addressing schemes. That is his point. But: people certainly would want to do it with simple (e.g. 64 bit) addressing schemes---also his point. So, there is an advantage (and a significant one) to 64 bit processors over i386.
You think doing everything in our power to destroy the world economy and send us all back to the Agricultural age and kill 59/60 of the world's population is ``err[ing] on the side of caution''? Deep
Sorry, but the `make 2001 reference -> get modded up insightful' trick doesn't work twice, and izto already invoked it.
You know, terminal emulator, as in the thing that connects your keyboard and screen to the stdin/stdout of the command prompt?
Instead you get to spend hours tying your product to a single platform. Brilliant.
You know, if Windoze had a decent package management system, this wouldn't be an issue. If you relied on it, it would be installed automatically when your program is. And then un-installed when your program is. But then again, I don't really think you can do Debian in proprietary software, so that'll never happen.
What makes you think Windoze is good?
Actually, I don't think MS is capable of improving their product. They've got too many stupid ideas/fuzz bugs/security holes designed in and now required for backward compatibility.
Actually, a filesystem is a fundamental system service, but a partiular filesystem is not fundamental. On any decent system, filesystems can be swapped out.
The window manager is a fundamental part of the OS? Since when?
OK, this I find confusing: on Windows, the command interpreter (I assume that's what you mean) can be un-installed and replaced, but the terminal emulator can't?!?!
That'd make a good SF story---many centuries from now, a generation star ship makes ``first contact'' with a ship that turns out to be a later generation star ship.
If you read the article, you will notice that it's basically saying there are no ruffled feathers. All of that is just media buzz.
Yeah, because that's the kind of evolution that made the Internet what it is today---a mass of perfect ISO standards. After all, the IETF's emphasis on two tested, production implementations only stuck them with inferior standards.
How much testing/actual use does Amaya get? How many websites are written to use its features (where present)? I'm skeptical.
In any case, you have to think of M$ like terrorists. If we in the free world hunker down because we're afraid of them, they've already won.
Absolutely not. The last thing we need is yet another complicated, exclusive standards body churning out more bloated, unimplementable standards. Face it, the only way to ensure that a standard is implementable is to implement it. And that had better be done before it's an international standard and every vendor in the world is committed to it
I realize this is how film majors always explain it but there're two problems: (1) they're largely projecting their psychology on others. Many of us don't picture the scenes in our heads as we read. (2) they're largely projecting their psychology on others. Many of us are already larger than supposing a movie has to look the same as the pictures in our heads. But the ideas it presents have to be the same as those from the book, otherwise it's a shitty adaptation.
In any case, if you want something that will be judged on its own, you should create something that can stand on its own not something that pretends to be the same as something else.
If that's the case, calling the result Starship Troopers is slandering Heinlein.
That's better. We still need to clarify that stars aren't planets, though. Otherwise the Sun would fit the definition of ``planet'' and, thus, Earth again wouldn't qualify.
Sure, that's what you think now...
``Not orbiting something bigger than itself''? Um the Earth orbits something bigger than itself. Are you implying we don't live on a planet?
So it looks like BSD init doesn't use inittab, instead it just (always) runs /etc/rc? And also /etc/rc looks like it has the services it starts hard-coded (I didn't read the whole thing). I fail to see how this is easier to maintain or customize, but to each his own, I guess.
Drifting off topic here...
How exactly does the BSD system work? Alternatively, which man page is it in?
Sound like good enough reasonsto me...