Sure, but at least Sun gives you the specifications of the JVM. Will Microsoft do the same for the CLR? IMHO, they won't because they want both Winblows and.NET to dominate (according to the article in my previous post).
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Yes, that is true and in fact 2 states (Maine and ?) do split Electoral College votes. My point is that to remove the Electoral College from U.S. Constitution would require a herculean effort.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
According to the Electoral College FAQ, there have been 700 proposed changes to the Electoral College and not one has been implemented. It would require a 2/3 majority in US Congress and ratification by 3/4 of the States to amend the US Constitution to 'do away with' the Electoral College. It hasn't been changed for 224 years and it probably won't in the next 224 years.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Interesting points. I will look into the HURD documentation.
It can do really amazing things that will never be possible under linux.
Can it really do things now, or is this still vaporware? I ask only because I have been hearing about HURD since I started with Linux in 1995, but Linux is running my computer, not HURD. I'll check it out.
Later
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
With the Linux kernel it became clear very quickly that we want to have a system which is modular as possible...
With the 2.0 kernel Linux really grew up a lot. This was the point that we added loadable kernel modules. This obviously improved modularity by making an explicit structure for writing modules. Programmers could work on different modules without risk of interference. (emphasis mine).
This would seem to contradict Mr. Dr. Dobb's 'eggspert' on the Linux kernel.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
I disagree. The point about how there is no simple way to add new features into the kernel is a crock:
When new OS functionality is required -- for example, support for some new networking protocol -- no framework exists in a monolithic-kernel-based OS for placing this functionality elsewhere, so it is simply added to
the kernel.
I am not a kernel hacker, but according to Linus' essay in Open Sources, the kernel design is quite modular, thank you.
As a user of the kernel, I understand the use of modules and this seems to be a modular way to add features. AFAIK, the module feature of Linux is and interface.
Bottom line: how accurate is this article?
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
I have been using Slackware since 1995. I have worked through 4 iterations of the product(3.0, 3.1, 4.0, and 7.0). In the meantime, I have installed Red Hat 4.0, 5.0, 6.2 and SuSE 6.1.
Of these distributions, I had the fewest installation problems with Slackware. My Slackware boxes are easy to configure. Unlike Red Hat, Slackware is a more conservative distribution that releases about every 6 months. The result is that "the latest and greatest" beta code is released in the/contrib area rather than just added to the main distribution. The Slackware guys keep out unproven, unreliable versions of software until the bugs are worked out. This is their philosophy - Check out Slackware.com for details.
In my experience in using Slackware and the other distributions, Slackware has far fewer updates (or 'errata' as RHAT likes to call them) than other distributions.
No I don't have actual "number of bugs per distribution" to support my hypothesis. What I do have is 6 years of Linux experience and the failures of trying to install and configure Red Hat and SuSE. In fact, of the other distributions I have installed over the years only Red Hat 6.2 went off without a hitch.
Finally, many newbies think that Slackware is easy to install. For example, read Andrew Chen's
review of Slackware 7:
"Of the several Linux distributions I've tried, I feel that Slackware Linux 7 has presented me with one of the cleanest, most usable desktops, very suitable for anyone from a Linux professional to the casual desktop user switching from Windows."
This is why I prefer Slackware. Later.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
When worried about mixing presentation layers, don't you really need to decide how long the web site will live in its current state? Whole sites are rewritten frequently, so spending too much time on interface separation costs your company unecessary dollars.
Now you can reply with the 'but what about big sites'? IMHO - large sites should use JSP and Servlets because they have larger staffs and easier separation of work. However, you can use other technologies to keep your presentation and data layers abstracted. PHP comes to mind.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Hmm. So here's the receipe for certain DOT COM failure:
Get lame idea.
Cultivate lame idea as the 'next great thing'.
Convince idiot VCs to give you money, even though your idea is lame and your business plan is to fund the drug habits of your loser employees.
Cash check.
Party.
Pat yourself on the back because you 'made it'.
Hire a bunch of high school drop outs / stoners.
Let them smoke pot on the job.
Let them surf porn all day on the job.
Act astonished when the company goes bankrupt.
I am glad the rest of us with real jobs are paying for the unemployment benefits of Mr. Art Boy. Maybe he should have laid off the pot and learned a real skill. Oh, but we're GEN X, so we are entitled to high pay, aren't we?
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
5.2 is much more stable than 5.1. Plus the MS Office import/export actually works. For example, I would write a SOffice document that had page numbers in the footers. When I exported to MS Word format, the page footers were in German. They fixed this and other annoying problems. Overall 5.2 has been more stable for me.
Check into it.
Engage in it.
Deal with it.
Drugs are a great way to avoid reality and shorten your longevity. So, reality-avoiders, continue to use. Soon, you'll be another burn out who can't spell your own name or worse...Body bags, here you come!
Main Entry: cannot
Pronunciation: 'ka-(")nät; k&-'nät, ka-'
Date: 15th century : can not
- cannot but or cannot help but also cannot help : to be unable to do otherwise than
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, according to a CNNarticle, Gore said (on day after election):
"We now need to resolve this election in a way that is fair and forthright, and in a way that is fully consistent with the Constitution and our laws."
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Sure, but at least Sun gives you the specifications of the JVM. Will Microsoft do the same for the CLR? IMHO, they won't because they want both Winblows and .NET to dominate (according to the article in my previous post).
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Check this out to see where MS stands on .NET.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Do not bet on MS releasing anything as big as .NET that does not run under Winblows. If you read this article, you understand my assertion.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
John Sun (?) where ? = Scott McNealy, CEO of Sun
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Yes, that is true and in fact 2 states (Maine and ?) do split Electoral College votes. My point is that to remove the Electoral College from U.S. Constitution would require a herculean effort.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
According to the Electoral College FAQ, there have been 700 proposed changes to the Electoral College and not one has been implemented. It would require a 2/3 majority in US Congress and ratification by 3/4 of the States to amend the US Constitution to 'do away with' the Electoral College. It hasn't been changed for 224 years and it probably won't in the next 224 years.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/elctcoll/faq.html
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Interesting points. I will look into the HURD documentation. It can do really amazing things that will never be possible under linux. Can it really do things now, or is this still vaporware? I ask only because I have been hearing about HURD since I started with Linux in 1995, but Linux is running my computer, not HURD. I'll check it out. Later
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
I disagree. The point about how there is no simple way to add new features into the kernel is a crock:
I am not a kernel hacker, but according to Linus' essay in Open Sources , the kernel design is quite modular, thank you.
As a user of the kernel, I understand the use of modules and this seems to be a modular way to add features. AFAIK, the module feature of Linux is and interface.
Bottom line: how accurate is this article?
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
I have been using Slackware since 1995. I have worked through 4 iterations of the product(3.0, 3.1, 4.0, and 7.0). In the meantime, I have installed Red Hat 4.0, 5.0, 6.2 and SuSE 6.1.
Of these distributions, I had the fewest installation problems with Slackware. My Slackware boxes are easy to configure. Unlike Red Hat, Slackware is a more conservative distribution that releases about every 6 months. The result is that "the latest and greatest" beta code is released in the /contrib area rather than just added to the main distribution. The Slackware guys keep out unproven, unreliable versions of software until the bugs are worked out. This is their philosophy - Check out Slackware.com for details.
In my experience in using Slackware and the other distributions, Slackware has far fewer updates (or 'errata' as RHAT likes to call them) than other distributions.
No I don't have actual "number of bugs per distribution" to support my hypothesis. What I do have is 6 years of Linux experience and the failures of trying to install and configure Red Hat and SuSE. In fact, of the other distributions I have installed over the years only Red Hat 6.2 went off without a hitch.
Finally, many newbies think that Slackware is easy to install. For example, read Andrew Chen's review of Slackware 7:
This is why I prefer Slackware. Later.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
When worried about mixing presentation layers, don't you really need to decide how long the web site will live in its current state? Whole sites are rewritten frequently, so spending too much time on interface separation costs your company unecessary dollars.
Now you can reply with the 'but what about big sites'? IMHO - large sites should use JSP and Servlets because they have larger staffs and easier separation of work. However, you can use other technologies to keep your presentation and data layers abstracted. PHP comes to mind.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Remember the days when Slackware was the competition? Slack was based on SLS, which was the first Linux distribution (ca. 1993).
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Setting the license issue aside... has anyone actually built a QT application on Linux and then ported it to Win32 using the non-free QT library?
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
Hmm. So here's the receipe for certain DOT COM failure:
I am glad the rest of us with real jobs are paying for the unemployment benefits of Mr. Art Boy. Maybe he should have laid off the pot and learned a real skill. Oh, but we're GEN X, so we are entitled to high pay, aren't we?
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."
My apologies.
--
RTFM for build instructions.
--
5.2 is much more stable than 5.1. Plus the MS Office import/export actually works. For example, I would write a SOffice document that had page numbers in the footers. When I exported to MS Word format, the page footers were in German. They fixed this and other annoying problems. Overall 5.2 has been more stable for me.
--
Slackware is rock-solid distribution. Tired of Red Hat (NASDAQ:RHAT)? Try Slack.
--
Who is the loser who moderated this as flamebait? This is an interesting point, only if you know the history referred to in the post.
Get a clue...
--
Check into it.
Engage in it.
Deal with it.
Drugs are a great way to avoid reality and shorten your longevity. So, reality-avoiders, continue to use. Soon, you'll be another burn out who can't spell your own name or worse...Body bags, here you come!
--
Clones blowing up on /.!
Late
--
Uh... Back to our friends at M-W:
--
Why do we need books, anyway? I can "learn" all I want from Television.
--