Next thing you know, they'll be after our precious bodily fluids.
Soylent Green is people
Re:How much difference between Java and C++?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 1
Then again, Azureus isn't exactly a large application like OO.o.
Mayhap, that is the real issue. We all bitch about MS Office being bloated. OO.o is turning into a bloated alternative.
Re:How much difference between Java and C++?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 1
I will not dispute what you are saying. I also can't quite understand why Java is dragging down OO.o. My general complaint and the use of the word myth is directed at the blanket statement that if a program uses Java, it is slow.
With that said, I believe a good example of a fast Java GUI application is Azureus. As bittorrent clients go, it is quite amazing.
Just go ahead and admit it, they both suck for different reasons. We need a third player.
Now THAT is the smartest thing I've read on this topic yet!
I've tried to use OpenOffice, but it seems that I've traded one feature-bloated app for another. Apart from being free, I have not found any upside to OpenOffice. But... Since Microsoft seriously thinks that I should pay ~$300 per copy of Office, it is compelling. Given that my family now has 5 PeeCees, I don't think MS will be getting my $1500 any time soon.
As far as performance... OpenOffice suxx0rs. Even with the "quickstart" running, it takes forever for Calc to startup with a blank sheet.
Now on the the third choice... Anybody? Please? Let's call it SmallAndFastOffice to be sure we get it right this time.
Re:How much difference between Java and C++?
on
OpenOffice Bloated?
·
· Score: 1
How much of this slowness is the application's fault vs. this being a giant Java app running in a JRE? AFAIK, MS Office 2003 is still a suite of (mostly) C++ applications, and isn't running in.NET yet.
C'mon! Do we have to blame Java every time there is a performance issue? As someone pointed out, the core pieces of Open Office are C++. When will we stop fanning the flames of Java performance myths? Prolly when we stop bitching about Microsoft.:-)
I'm not sure I can see the conflict of interest here. Does Intel have an office suite of their own they're trying to sell? Or did they merge with Microsoft recently?:)
I wonder if Intel pays Microsoft to bloatify their OS and Apps, so as to sell newer, faster processors?:-)
My first drive I bought is a SmartDisk Firelite. They make USB and FireWire versions. These come with an HD pre-installed.
I have since bought a 2.5" enclosure - Vantec NexStar. This is a USB2.0 enclosure for 2.5" drives. Very handy for making use of old laptop drives. The best part is that these new ones pull power off the USB line. I can't speak to the FireWire drives.
I also have some high capacity 3.5" drives in external enclosures. One is a Metal Gear Box. The other is a Mad Dog. The Metal Gear unit is all aluminum with vented sides for maximum cooling. The Mad Dog is not so good for cooling. It is a tight fit and the outer case feels like plastic. Also, the Mad Dog plays havoc with AM radios. I suspect it is because it is a non-metal housing. Well, it says it is anodized aluminum, but it feels more like plastic.
Generally speaking, you will pay a lot more per GB for a pre-installed hard drive, compared with smart shopping for bargains on enclosures and drives.
I also have no doubt the MPAA will be very willing to show their benevolence by making the fee for this service quite small, so that families can afford to to have a copy on both their main media player as well as the children's laptops.
What were you worried about again?
Absolutely! Just like M$ thinks I can afford $300 per pc to use their warez. Oh, and I should pay twice that to get M$ Office. Oh, and I should pay that every 3-5 years. I currently have 5 home Pee Cees, and with 4 kids, that number is going up.:-)
The subscription services are getting bad too. I want to get Sirius, but I dread the thought of yet another monthly bill. All these "cheap" monthly services add up!
I recently picked up a book entitled _Designing with Web Standards_ by Jeffrey Zeldman. It's a good an honest resource, and he even claims to avoid zealotry. But, in the book, he examines a particular website, one with a plain-jane two-column appearance, which he said took "three CSS experts" to re-code from tables to CSS layout. Not three CSS advocates, three CSS *experts*. On top of that, their "solution" turned out to be a hack.
Ugh! No zealotry? The whole book is one big "Ra, ra! Cis boom ba! Goooooo CSSS!" I had to put it down halfway through because there was no meat to the book, just chapter after chapter telling me why I should use CSS.
The fact is, I'm already using CSS. I like CSS. I know it's strengths and weaknesses. I was trying to learn more about CSS. Zeldman's book did not do it for me.
Eric Meyer does a fair job in O'Reilly's "Cascading Style Sheets: The Definitive Guide", but that book is not perfect either. His problem stems from crude examples that demonstrate CSS subtleties, but bear very little resemblance to real-world websites.
Because he didn't go on to form some wildly successful.com company, rape an pillage an unwitting stock market, and sellout to a dying behemoth (AOL).
People don't seem to care about you if you don't make an unreasonable amount of money doing something.
Imagine if some greedy pig like MS had "invented" the internet. We'd be paying by the bit./. wouldn't exist because it would be too costly to read all the comments.:-)
I'll never forget when the Lead Engineer of our team at HP looked at Mosaic / WWW and said, "Who needs that?" This guy was supposed to be the "visionary" for management, but he definitely had his head in the sand.
If nothing else, you think he would appreciate the ease of getting pr0n. Cobbling together alt.binary... threads was state-of-the-art back then.:-)
Acrobat is indeed a bloated pig. Given that my choices of PDF viewers is limited, I was glad to see that they did SOMETHING in 7.0 to address the problem. Most of my 'puters are fast enough that the pre-load doesn't seem to be an issue.
Ideally, it should be re-written from scratch. However, I think the real problem is the over-engineered feature-set. They should have abided by KISS.
Well, if that's what it takes to make it perform well, then I have no complaints.
What is so evil about the Windows start-up folder? It serves a very useful purpose. The problems I have observed have been the over-use or abuse of the start-up folder by 3rd party apps.
Believe me, I hate MS as much as the next slashdotter, but let's hate them for the right reason.
Actually, part of the original agreement was just that. I think at one point HP was going to have PA-RISC chips made at Intel, but I'm not 100% sure about that. As a co-designer, HP was going to get some guaranteed level of parts and discounted pricing. Essentially, HP were hoping to get "the pick of the litter" off the Itanium line. Well, after Intel get's first pick.:-)
I dunno if any of this stuff is still in place. My involvement was during the mid-90's.
On this day of remembrance, I would like to share an anecdote...
I was HP during the rollout of 64-bit PA-RISC. We were in the compiler / tools group, working on debuggers. One of my co-workers told our manager, "I'm sorry, I can't make the 64-bit schedule you have laid out, but I can get 63-bits." The PHB-esque manager, cheerily replied, "Ok, if that's the best you can do. We'll get the rest out in the next release." We laughed for a week about that one.
Intel wisely picked the partner with the stupidest management (Carly) to give up their competitive edge and announce to analysts that Intel's vision/roadmap is so AwSuM that RISC is dead and that they're going to follow the bidding of their master Intel for their 64-bit plan.
You are wrong. Your statements are all speculative and based on an outsiders view. I was on the inside. I worked with the IA-64 design team. Also, HP approached Intel, not the other way around.
First off, Carly was not at HP when the alliance was formed. Second, HP approached Intel. HP realized they could not afford the continued retooling of their fabs. They just didn't sell enough PA-RISC chips to cover the cost. At first, they tried to stuff PA-RISC into the printers, but the printer group balked. It was too expensive a chip to put in a commodity product like printers. So, HP saw Intel as a partner that could save them from digging a deeper hole with each new fab. This all started around 1993. It seemed like the thing to do.
IMHO, the reason all 64-bit architecures have not taken off is because there are no killer apps. Sure, there are a lot of niche uses, but mose apps just don't need 64 bits. The compelling reasons that pushed us from 16-bits to 32-bits just don't exist yet for 64-bits. When we all have terabyte hard drives (or holographic cubes) and laptops have >4GB RAM, then 64-bit will start to have meaning.
You are correct. The initial design came out of HP Labs. It was heavily influenced by ex-Multiflow engineers, which was one of the pioneers of VLIW. The final architecture had a lot of Intel influence, but it started as an HP design.
I believe the initial HP-Intel meeting occured circa 1993. I was involved during the Itanium design stages as part of the HP-UX compiler group and implemented the HP-UX debugger for one of the IA-64 simulators.
I know what you mean. I had a Chemistry teacher who had such a difficult accent, I couldn't understand a word he said. I stopped going to class.
1st year of college (U. MA, Lowell, BSEE) would have killed me if I hadn't gone to college prep school (Catholic High School). Most of my 1st college classes were repeats of senior year high school. The problem in most colleges and universities is that they assign the worst teachers to the freshman classes.
I remember we had a big meeting at the start of BSEE. Everyone was sitting in the lecture hall and the head of the dept. said, "Look to your left. Look to your right. Those people will not graduate with you." Which is to say, only 1/3rd of BSEE freshman go on to earn their BSEE degree. He was right. I dropped out junior year. My heart was in software, not hardware. I had a part time job at Wang as a junior programmer. So, I went to my boss and said, "How would you like me to work full time." His eyes lit up and he gathered up the paperwork that day. The next day I formally dropped out of ULowell. My parents were devestated, but I knew it was the right choice. I have had a very successful 20 years as a software engineer. My parents are ok with it now, but it took a long time. I also dropped out of the Catholic church, despite 12 years of "programming". That was more devestating to them. My Dad was pissed because he spent all that money on Catholic school. It had a benefit. Just not the one they were looking for. Well educated, but agnostic.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
Wow, I didn't think that was possible. I guess that's why I dropped out of BSEE. EMF theory was killing me, along with Circuit Theory. Software is much comfier.:-)
From the article:
"A conventional laser diode goes through diffraction grating and gets split into seven discrete beams, spaced evenly to illuminate seven tracks."
Of course, you can't split a hard-drive head 7 ways, so I guess this doesn't quite apply. Oh well. Move along. Nothing to see here.
Slashdot Mirror
Next thing you know, they'll be after our precious bodily fluids.
Soylent Green is people
Then again, Azureus isn't exactly a large application like OO.o.
Mayhap, that is the real issue. We all bitch about MS Office being bloated. OO.o is turning into a bloated alternative.
I will not dispute what you are saying. I also can't quite understand why Java is dragging down OO.o. My general complaint and the use of the word myth is directed at the blanket statement that if a program uses Java, it is slow.
With that said, I believe a good example of a fast Java GUI application is Azureus. As bittorrent clients go, it is quite amazing.
Just go ahead and admit it, they both suck for different reasons. We need a third player.
Now THAT is the smartest thing I've read on this topic yet!
I've tried to use OpenOffice, but it seems that I've traded one feature-bloated app for another. Apart from being free, I have not found any upside to OpenOffice. But... Since Microsoft seriously thinks that I should pay ~$300 per copy of Office, it is compelling. Given that my family now has 5 PeeCees, I don't think MS will be getting my $1500 any time soon.
As far as performance... OpenOffice suxx0rs. Even with the "quickstart" running, it takes forever for Calc to startup with a blank sheet.
Now on the the third choice... Anybody? Please? Let's call it SmallAndFastOffice to be sure we get it right this time.
How much of this slowness is the application's fault vs. this being a giant Java app running in a JRE? AFAIK, MS Office 2003 is still a suite of (mostly) C++ applications, and isn't running in .NET yet.
:-)
C'mon! Do we have to blame Java every time there is a performance issue? As someone pointed out, the core pieces of Open Office are C++. When will we stop fanning the flames of Java performance myths? Prolly when we stop bitching about Microsoft.
I'm not sure I can see the conflict of interest here. Does Intel have an office suite of their own they're trying to sell? Or did they merge with Microsoft recently? :)
:-)
I wonder if Intel pays Microsoft to bloatify their OS and Apps, so as to sell newer, faster processors?
2.5" (laptop)
or
3.5"
My first drive I bought is a SmartDisk Firelite. They make USB and FireWire versions. These come with an HD pre-installed.
I have since bought a 2.5" enclosure - Vantec NexStar. This is a USB2.0 enclosure for 2.5" drives. Very handy for making use of old laptop drives. The best part is that these new ones pull power off the USB line. I can't speak to the FireWire drives.
I also have some high capacity 3.5" drives in external enclosures. One is a Metal Gear Box. The other is a Mad Dog. The Metal Gear unit is all aluminum with vented sides for maximum cooling. The Mad Dog is not so good for cooling. It is a tight fit and the outer case feels like plastic. Also, the Mad Dog plays havoc with AM radios. I suspect it is because it is a non-metal housing. Well, it says it is anodized aluminum, but it feels more like plastic.
Generally speaking, you will pay a lot more per GB for a pre-installed hard drive, compared with smart shopping for bargains on enclosures and drives.
Good luck.
... Soylent Green is people.
But apart from that, everything is fantastic!
Well, I'm torn. On the one hand, there's the thrill of exploration and the pioneer spirit. On the other, there's insane ping times.
One Word:
A L I E N
Because if one of those things gets loose, your ping time won't matter!
I also have no doubt the MPAA will be very willing to show their benevolence by making the fee for this service quite small, so that families can afford to to have a copy on both their main media player as well as the children's laptops.
:-)
What were you worried about again?
Absolutely! Just like M$ thinks I can afford $300 per pc to use their warez. Oh, and I should pay twice that to get M$ Office. Oh, and I should pay that every 3-5 years. I currently have 5 home Pee Cees, and with 4 kids, that number is going up.
The subscription services are getting bad too. I want to get Sirius, but I dread the thought of yet another monthly bill. All these "cheap" monthly services add up!
I recently picked up a book entitled _Designing with Web Standards_ by Jeffrey Zeldman. It's a good an honest resource, and he even claims to avoid zealotry. But, in the book, he examines a particular website, one with a plain-jane two-column appearance, which he said took "three CSS experts" to re-code from tables to CSS layout. Not three CSS advocates, three CSS *experts*. On top of that, their "solution" turned out to be a hack.
Ugh! No zealotry? The whole book is one big "Ra, ra! Cis boom ba! Goooooo CSSS!" I had to put it down halfway through because there was no meat to the book, just chapter after chapter telling me why I should use CSS.
The fact is, I'm already using CSS. I like CSS. I know it's strengths and weaknesses. I was trying to learn more about CSS. Zeldman's book did not do it for me.
Eric Meyer does a fair job in O'Reilly's "Cascading Style Sheets: The Definitive Guide", but that book is not perfect either. His problem stems from crude examples that demonstrate CSS subtleties, but bear very little resemblance to real-world websites.
Nobody needs the internet.
Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities. -- Mark Twain
Because he didn't go on to form some wildly successful .com company, rape an pillage an unwitting stock market, and sellout to a dying behemoth (AOL).
/. wouldn't exist because it would be too costly to read all the comments. :-)
People don't seem to care about you if you don't make an unreasonable amount of money doing something.
Imagine if some greedy pig like MS had "invented" the internet. We'd be paying by the bit.
Don't you remember the original spammer?
BIFF BIFF BIFF bIff Biff bIFF
BIFF
BIFF BIFF
BIFF BIFF BIFF
BIFF BIFF BIFF BIFF
BIFF BIFF BIFF BIFF BIFF
BIFF BIFF BIFF BIFF BIFF BIFF
I remember seeing his posts all over the newsgroups "back in the day". If nothing else, he was creative.
I'll never forget when the Lead Engineer of our team at HP looked at Mosaic / WWW and said, "Who needs that?" This guy was supposed to be the "visionary" for management, but he definitely had his head in the sand.
:-)
If nothing else, you think he would appreciate the ease of getting pr0n. Cobbling together alt.binary... threads was state-of-the-art back then.
I can't argue that.
Acrobat is indeed a bloated pig. Given that my choices of PDF viewers is limited, I was glad to see that they did SOMETHING in 7.0 to address the problem. Most of my 'puters are fast enough that the pre-load doesn't seem to be an issue.
Ideally, it should be re-written from scratch. However, I think the real problem is the over-engineered feature-set. They should have abided by KISS.
Well, if that's what it takes to make it perform well, then I have no complaints.
What is so evil about the Windows start-up folder? It serves a very useful purpose. The problems I have observed have been the over-use or abuse of the start-up folder by 3rd party apps.
Believe me, I hate MS as much as the next slashdotter, but let's hate them for the right reason.
Actually, part of the original agreement was just that. I think at one point HP was going to have PA-RISC chips made at Intel, but I'm not 100% sure about that. As a co-designer, HP was going to get some guaranteed level of parts and discounted pricing. Essentially, HP were hoping to get "the pick of the litter" off the Itanium line. Well, after Intel get's first pick. :-)
I dunno if any of this stuff is still in place. My involvement was during the mid-90's.
On this day of remembrance, I would like to share an anecdote...
I was HP during the rollout of 64-bit PA-RISC. We were in the compiler / tools group, working on debuggers. One of my co-workers told our manager, "I'm sorry, I can't make the 64-bit schedule you have laid out, but I can get 63-bits." The PHB-esque manager, cheerily replied, "Ok, if that's the best you can do. We'll get the rest out in the next release." We laughed for a week about that one.
Intel wisely picked the partner with the stupidest management (Carly) to give up their competitive edge and announce to analysts that Intel's vision/roadmap is so AwSuM that RISC is dead and that they're going to follow the bidding of their master Intel for their 64-bit plan.
You are wrong. Your statements are all speculative and based on an outsiders view. I was on the inside. I worked with the IA-64 design team. Also, HP approached Intel, not the other way around.
First off, Carly was not at HP when the alliance was formed. Second, HP approached Intel. HP realized they could not afford the continued retooling of their fabs. They just didn't sell enough PA-RISC chips to cover the cost. At first, they tried to stuff PA-RISC into the printers, but the printer group balked. It was too expensive a chip to put in a commodity product like printers. So, HP saw Intel as a partner that could save them from digging a deeper hole with each new fab. This all started around 1993. It seemed like the thing to do.
IMHO, the reason all 64-bit architecures have not taken off is because there are no killer apps. Sure, there are a lot of niche uses, but mose apps just don't need 64 bits. The compelling reasons that pushed us from 16-bits to 32-bits just don't exist yet for 64-bits. When we all have terabyte hard drives (or holographic cubes) and laptops have >4GB RAM, then 64-bit will start to have meaning.
You are correct. The initial design came out of HP Labs. It was heavily influenced by ex-Multiflow engineers, which was one of the pioneers of VLIW. The final architecture had a lot of Intel influence, but it started as an HP design.
I believe the initial HP-Intel meeting occured circa 1993. I was involved during the Itanium design stages as part of the HP-UX compiler group and implemented the HP-UX debugger for one of the IA-64 simulators.
Acrobat 7 loads way faster than any prior version. Somebody at Adobe finally woke up.
Acrobat 7 also plays well with browsers.
I know what you mean. I had a Chemistry teacher who had such a difficult accent, I couldn't understand a word he said. I stopped going to class.
1st year of college (U. MA, Lowell, BSEE) would have killed me if I hadn't gone to college prep school (Catholic High School). Most of my 1st college classes were repeats of senior year high school. The problem in most colleges and universities is that they assign the worst teachers to the freshman classes.
I remember we had a big meeting at the start of BSEE. Everyone was sitting in the lecture hall and the head of the dept. said, "Look to your left. Look to your right. Those people will not graduate with you." Which is to say, only 1/3rd of BSEE freshman go on to earn their BSEE degree. He was right. I dropped out junior year. My heart was in software, not hardware. I had a part time job at Wang as a junior programmer. So, I went to my boss and said, "How would you like me to work full time." His eyes lit up and he gathered up the paperwork that day. The next day I formally dropped out of ULowell. My parents were devestated, but I knew it was the right choice. I have had a very successful 20 years as a software engineer. My parents are ok with it now, but it took a long time. I also dropped out of the Catholic church, despite 12 years of "programming". That was more devestating to them. My Dad was pissed because he spent all that money on Catholic school. It had a benefit. Just not the one they were looking for. Well educated, but agnostic.
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
Wow, I didn't think that was possible. I guess that's why I dropped out of BSEE. EMF theory was killing me, along with Circuit Theory. Software is much comfier. :-)
This technique was used on Kenwood CD-ROM drives, using technology from Zen Research. Instead of heads, they were lasers, but the concept is the same.
Here is a review of the Kenwood True-X 72X.
From the article:
"A conventional laser diode goes through diffraction grating and gets split into seven discrete beams, spaced evenly to illuminate seven tracks."
Of course, you can't split a hard-drive head 7 ways, so I guess this doesn't quite apply. Oh well. Move along. Nothing to see here.