Apple is not just Macs any more, and that is a big reason they are the new Microsoft, and #2 in Market Cap, possibly getting to #1 next year sometime.
Apple surpassed Microsoft's market cap in May, and remains second highest mcap in the S&P 500 to exxonmobil. MS is third.
There is a pretty big gap between exxonmobil and apple, still. Unlikely to close in the next year. But I'm guessing you weren't taking petro companies into consideration in your rankings.
I've been using linux as my primary OS for work and play since you had to edit x.conf by hand.
I'm running ubuntu 10.10 on an intel mobile chipset. I had to hand-edit xorg.conf yesterday.
you'd think some of the most common generic graphic hardware produced by a very OSS friendly giant would be decently supported on a milestone release. FBDEV? get serious.
Whether or not current browser implementations of javascript are or are not a resource hog is not at issue here. This article, and thus the discussion, are about a new implementation for the server. Unless you have used and experienced this particular server-side implementation, you cannot say something like
when an app is written in JS it is more likely to be a resource hog than the same app written in compiled C
Because you don't know. I'm willing to bet that you haven't benchmarked it, and that you can write code in neither language, so in reality you have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you can come to understand why and learn from that, if you so choose.
What I don't understand is....why is yahoo now apologizing for this?!?!?
Seriously. Who doesn't love a good lapdance. Most of the _girls_ I know like lapdances. Hackers love them some lapdances. Why is this "embarrassing?" and since when are lapdances trendy (or whatever would cause someone to say yahoo's "trying too hard to be cool")
I agree. If somebody uses Blender to make a movie, nobody seriously thinks said person needs to provide the relevant.blend files.
If, however, someone used the blender codebase to make a web-app that allowed you to make 3d models and renderings, would the providers of the web app be required under GPLv2 to distribute the source of the app to people who were using the web service? I think that's the "loop hole" we're talking about here.
If you're going to be lugging an extra battery around, just carry a spare.
Yeah, because nothing's quite so convenient as hibernating your laptop, swapping out the batteries, and resuming.
Actually the double-convenience of the swappable bay battery is that if you don't want to lug anything extra around, and you know you need the battery life and not the CD/DVD, you can drop that extra battery RIGHT IN YOUR LAPTOP and don't need to carry it separately. Added bonus: don't waste power spinning up the CD at boot time.
I'm surprised that Google doesn't do this, it would be SO much faster than scanning each page one at a time.
Except that they use high-quality book scanners that can go through a hundred pages in a few seconds flat, and it would cost a fortune for them to do it this way, and no libraries would let them touch any archival materials which is half the point.
You genuinely think that in a hundred years no one will have any interest in the emails that George Bush and Dick Cheney exchanged?
Oh, but I'm interested in them today, and they're not around. The really good ones have been erased so that they're not subject to document preservation laws. I don't think 100 years from now they'll suddenly surface. It was harder to keep paper mail from disappearing without a trace. Most of the documents that have surfaced like downing street and rumsfeld's 9/11 notes were paper documents.
What is it with these people who look down on modern communication as if being able to talk to someone in real time is a great evil?
I don't care if it's carried around by a serf or otherwise (i'm sure you're making friends with your postal carriers referring to them thus), my point is that people tend to save their written letters, store them someplace and forget about them, to be uncovered years and decades later. Digital media can be deleted, no ashes, no shreds, or locked behind passwords to never be recovered.
I surely don't think that real time communication is evil, I do think however that it takes a very different tone and form than its paper counterparts, and historically, ends up more poorly preserved, and more thoroughly concealed.
Really the issue I'm concerned with has less to do with the medium. Paper and pen/cil in the script of your choice, typewriter, word processor or what have you, The art of correspondence is all but dead. Volumes of history books have been written from source materials that largely consisted of letters to and from historic figures. Somehow I doubt that historical material will ever be written sourced from emails and instant messaging.
if the file is in memory, why wouldn't you want to overwrite it on disk? if it's a resident service, you update the files and restart the service. This doesn't apply to the kernel or it's object files (modules) which if they are overwritten, can cause instability so a decent (apt, rpm, etc) manager will prompt you to restart, even though usually the files aren't overwritten but installed side by side.
the problem I see is with an OS that has so much crap in resident memory that overwriting any system file is dangerous and has to be put off until you can actually reboot the machine. On a linux machine, everything is fairly modular so you can just restart individual services and don't have to bring the whole machine down for something routine, like updating your web browser, because it's not integrated into the OS shell.
Your interpretation of the law is inaccurate.
ask RSA.
and no, not everyone has nuclear technology, but containment of the information, which has been our national security strategy, obviously isn't working, or the news wouldn't be so full of reports of countries happy to show off their newly developed technology. Strangely it's somewhat difficult to keep the laws of nature a secret.
I am perfectly capable of programming in JS. I've written a number of extremely useful classes in the language and I don't care for your tone.
if you think your language is better than all the rest, or some other language should go away, then you are a shitty programmer.
well, hello mr. strawman. I never declared that I wish javascript would go away, and I don't suggest any "better" language should take its place... I merely asked for an alternative that reflects how it is used in a modern sense more accurately.
Why? [...]Javascript has barely changed in the last 15 years.
Thank you for answering your own question. js wasn't a good language in the first place and 15 years of cobbling have only gone on to expose and underscore its various weaknesses. JS can do quite a bit, and it's undoubtedly useful. that doesn't change the fact that it's fundamentally a poor structure for doing what people do with it now: namely DOM scripting and asynchronous requests. I don't disagree that in 15 years whatever we develop today probably won't be a good fit for what we're doing with it then: this however is no excuse for a complete lack of progress.
If you find a language/environment difficult to use, you are the shitty part of the equation.
well that's an extremely lazy way of looking at things. Yes languages are just that, languages, and since there's no excuse for being a "bad programmer" and expecting your tools and vocabulary to be up to the task you're attempting to address, we should all still be programming in assembler using punchcards by your logic. God forbid we make use of decades worth of brilliant thought on the topic of how programming languages ought to be structured and keep things moving forward.
yes I know about the var keyword and use it quite religiously. However let me give a specific example of how crappy the JS scope rules are.
I can globally scope a variable in JS, let's call it foo. If I am a sloppy programmer and write a function accessing a variable named foo without var'ing it within that function, it will access the global var unless foo is an argument for my function.
oh crap but it's worse because my functions are objects. So i can have a function foo() and a variable foo as properties of the same class and just have to be careful which one i mean in which context. And then, I can always assign the function foo() to the variable foo, and if i still have it declared globally, i have to make sure and use the right context.
speaking of context, take a look at any of the frameworks that try to make use of JS's OO nature, and the many and various tricks they use to make sure that 'this' actually refers to the parent object and not another unrelated object, or the specific member-function context since objects are functions. Most of it quickly becomes unreadable garbage.
Welcome to the free world.
yes yes, python has libraries too, and they have this fantastic feature called namespace. check it out sometime. If you have two or more third-party libraries loaded in python it's extremely unlikely that they conflict, because of namespaces. in JS, unless you enable compatibility mode with jQuery, you're up a creek, as you're just going to get whichever meaning of whichever function is defined last in parse order. it's insanity.
Cleaning up the browser programming environment is not about getting rid of Javascript.
Maybe not, but javascript is not a good language, it's a bad language with some good features. The awful scoping mechanism is evidence of this enough. The intrinsic objects are too limited to be useful, so much so that now there are more than 4 different common framework projects to handle all the inconsistency in implementation and they're all incompatible with each other. anonymous functions are great but they make debugging a giant pain the arse.
i would like to see a viable alternative language to javascript, just for variety's sake. It's just had layers of crap pasted on top of it since 1995 or whatever and it'd be nice to see a new approach that fits what people actually use it for these days.
x86 may be catching up by the numbers, but x86 is still and has always been a terrible architecture. Modern designs (by which I mean arches designed after 1980) deliver similar per-core performance at half or less clock speed. This is especially true for floating point calcs.
I know it's easy to forget sometimes but the 8086 came out in 1978. Everything that's been added since then, protected mode, segmented memory, virtual mode, superscalar, MMX, SSE, hyperthreading, macro ops, and speedstep are all just so many coats of varnish on an ever decomposing turd
Slashdot Mirror
Apple is not just Macs any more, and that is a big reason they are the new Microsoft, and #2 in Market Cap, possibly getting to #1 next year sometime.
Apple surpassed Microsoft's market cap in May, and remains second highest mcap in the S&P 500 to exxonmobil. MS is third. There is a pretty big gap between exxonmobil and apple, still. Unlikely to close in the next year. But I'm guessing you weren't taking petro companies into consideration in your rankings.
I've been using linux as my primary OS for work and play since you had to edit x.conf by hand.
I'm running ubuntu 10.10 on an intel mobile chipset. I had to hand-edit xorg.conf yesterday.
you'd think some of the most common generic graphic hardware produced by a very OSS friendly giant would be decently supported on a milestone release. FBDEV? get serious.
I don't know why anyone would have wanted it any other way.
umm...
meaning 1 Million dollars worth of money ends up in CCP's pockets
I think i might know why someone would have wanted it another way.
I know I shouldn't feed the trolls but...
Whether or not current browser implementations of javascript are or are not a resource hog is not at issue here. This article, and thus the discussion, are about a new implementation for the server. Unless you have used and experienced this particular server-side implementation, you cannot say something like
when an app is written in JS it is more likely to be a resource hog than the same app written in compiled C
Because you don't know. I'm willing to bet that you haven't benchmarked it, and that you can write code in neither language, so in reality you have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you can come to understand why and learn from that, if you so choose.
I suspect he skipped the reading and just looked at the pictures.
What I don't understand is....why is yahoo now apologizing for this?!?!?
Seriously. Who doesn't love a good lapdance. Most of the _girls_ I know like lapdances. Hackers love them some lapdances. Why is this "embarrassing?" and since when are lapdances trendy (or whatever would cause someone to say yahoo's "trying too hard to be cool")
I agree. If somebody uses Blender to make a movie, nobody seriously thinks said person needs to provide the relevant .blend files.
If, however, someone used the blender codebase to make a web-app that allowed you to make 3d models and renderings, would the providers of the web app be required under GPLv2 to distribute the source of the app to people who were using the web service? I think that's the "loop hole" we're talking about here.
If you're going to be lugging an extra battery around, just carry a spare.
Yeah, because nothing's quite so convenient as hibernating your laptop, swapping out the batteries, and resuming.
Actually the double-convenience of the swappable bay battery is that if you don't want to lug anything extra around, and you know you need the battery life and not the CD/DVD, you can drop that extra battery RIGHT IN YOUR LAPTOP and don't need to carry it separately. Added bonus: don't waste power spinning up the CD at boot time.
I'd say the Morals of America have greatly changed since it's founding.
Yeah, I miss the old days of witch-burning, slavery, and industrial child labor, too. /p
Pot, cocaine and heroin used to be legal. You could own people. Gentlemen were expected to wear hats when in public, and remove them indoors.
Adventure, excitement. A Jedi craves not these things.
I don't even let people I *like* borrow my tools.
If you have ~$300 to drop on the project, Make has plans for a nice book scanner: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2009/04/how-to_book_scanner_on_the_cheap.html It seems to hold the pages at an angle so there's little-to-no distortion on the page.
I'm surprised that Google doesn't do this, it would be SO much faster than scanning each page one at a time.
Except that they use high-quality book scanners that can go through a hundred pages in a few seconds flat, and it would cost a fortune for them to do it this way, and no libraries would let them touch any archival materials which is half the point.
You genuinely think that in a hundred years no one will have any interest in the emails that George Bush and Dick Cheney exchanged?
Oh, but I'm interested in them today, and they're not around. The really good ones have been erased so that they're not subject to document preservation laws. I don't think 100 years from now they'll suddenly surface. It was harder to keep paper mail from disappearing without a trace. Most of the documents that have surfaced like downing street and rumsfeld's 9/11 notes were paper documents.
What is it with these people who look down on modern communication as if being able to talk to someone in real time is a great evil?
I don't care if it's carried around by a serf or otherwise (i'm sure you're making friends with your postal carriers referring to them thus), my point is that people tend to save their written letters, store them someplace and forget about them, to be uncovered years and decades later. Digital media can be deleted, no ashes, no shreds, or locked behind passwords to never be recovered.
I surely don't think that real time communication is evil, I do think however that it takes a very different tone and form than its paper counterparts, and historically, ends up more poorly preserved, and more thoroughly concealed.
Really the issue I'm concerned with has less to do with the medium. Paper and pen/cil in the script of your choice, typewriter, word processor or what have you, The art of correspondence is all but dead. Volumes of history books have been written from source materials that largely consisted of letters to and from historic figures. Somehow I doubt that historical material will ever be written sourced from emails and instant messaging.
if the file is in memory, why wouldn't you want to overwrite it on disk? if it's a resident service, you update the files and restart the service. This doesn't apply to the kernel or it's object files (modules) which if they are overwritten, can cause instability so a decent (apt, rpm, etc) manager will prompt you to restart, even though usually the files aren't overwritten but installed side by side. the problem I see is with an OS that has so much crap in resident memory that overwriting any system file is dangerous and has to be put off until you can actually reboot the machine. On a linux machine, everything is fairly modular so you can just restart individual services and don't have to bring the whole machine down for something routine, like updating your web browser, because it's not integrated into the OS shell.
Seemed to turn out pretty well for that Jesus dude.
Bah. Three days to respawn? He must've done some serious TKing or something.
when he rises from the dead, will he spread the contagion through his bite, and will cutting off his head finally kill him?
Your interpretation of the law is inaccurate. ask RSA.
and no, not everyone has nuclear technology, but containment of the information, which has been our national security strategy, obviously isn't working, or the news wouldn't be so full of reports of countries happy to show off their newly developed technology. Strangely it's somewhat difficult to keep the laws of nature a secret.
wow, cs rage much?
I am perfectly capable of programming in JS. I've written a number of extremely useful classes in the language and I don't care for your tone.
if you think your language is better than all the rest, or some other language should go away, then you are a shitty programmer.
well, hello mr. strawman. I never declared that I wish javascript would go away, and I don't suggest any "better" language should take its place... I merely asked for an alternative that reflects how it is used in a modern sense more accurately.
Why? [...]Javascript has barely changed in the last 15 years.
Thank you for answering your own question. js wasn't a good language in the first place and 15 years of cobbling have only gone on to expose and underscore its various weaknesses. JS can do quite a bit, and it's undoubtedly useful. that doesn't change the fact that it's fundamentally a poor structure for doing what people do with it now: namely DOM scripting and asynchronous requests. I don't disagree that in 15 years whatever we develop today probably won't be a good fit for what we're doing with it then: this however is no excuse for a complete lack of progress.
If you find a language/environment difficult to use, you are the shitty part of the equation.
well that's an extremely lazy way of looking at things. Yes languages are just that, languages, and since there's no excuse for being a "bad programmer" and expecting your tools and vocabulary to be up to the task you're attempting to address, we should all still be programming in assembler using punchcards by your logic. God forbid we make use of decades worth of brilliant thought on the topic of how programming languages ought to be structured and keep things moving forward.
yes I know about the var keyword and use it quite religiously. However let me give a specific example of how crappy the JS scope rules are.
I can globally scope a variable in JS, let's call it foo. If I am a sloppy programmer and write a function accessing a variable named foo without var'ing it within that function, it will access the global var unless foo is an argument for my function.
oh crap but it's worse because my functions are objects. So i can have a function foo() and a variable foo as properties of the same class and just have to be careful which one i mean in which context. And then, I can always assign the function foo() to the variable foo, and if i still have it declared globally, i have to make sure and use the right context.
speaking of context, take a look at any of the frameworks that try to make use of JS's OO nature, and the many and various tricks they use to make sure that 'this' actually refers to the parent object and not another unrelated object, or the specific member-function context since objects are functions. Most of it quickly becomes unreadable garbage.
Welcome to the free world.
yes yes, python has libraries too, and they have this fantastic feature called namespace. check it out sometime. If you have two or more third-party libraries loaded in python it's extremely unlikely that they conflict, because of namespaces. in JS, unless you enable compatibility mode with jQuery, you're up a creek, as you're just going to get whichever meaning of whichever function is defined last in parse order. it's insanity.
Cleaning up the browser programming environment is not about getting rid of Javascript.
Maybe not, but javascript is not a good language, it's a bad language with some good features. The awful scoping mechanism is evidence of this enough. The intrinsic objects are too limited to be useful, so much so that now there are more than 4 different common framework projects to handle all the inconsistency in implementation and they're all incompatible with each other. anonymous functions are great but they make debugging a giant pain the arse.
i would like to see a viable alternative language to javascript, just for variety's sake. It's just had layers of crap pasted on top of it since 1995 or whatever and it'd be nice to see a new approach that fits what people actually use it for these days.
just curious, did you at least report the bug and see if there was any response from the maintainers?
x86 may be catching up by the numbers, but x86 is still and has always been a terrible architecture. Modern designs (by which I mean arches designed after 1980) deliver similar per-core performance at half or less clock speed. This is especially true for floating point calcs.
I know it's easy to forget sometimes but the 8086 came out in 1978. Everything that's been added since then, protected mode, segmented memory, virtual mode, superscalar, MMX, SSE, hyperthreading, macro ops, and speedstep are all just so many coats of varnish on an ever decomposing turd