Forget that Opera/TOTALLY/ ripped off in rendering HTML.
Lousy bastards, how dare they copy features! Tell you what... they get tabs, but no HTML rendering. Sound fair?
Wait a minute! When I look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing#History -- "The NeWS version of UniPress's Gosling Emacs text editor was the first commercially available product to pioneer the use of multiple tabbed windows in 1988." Heck, everyone except UniPress's Gosling Emacs -- they're the only ones allowed to use tabs! Stupid IBrowse copying a bunch of other people to put it in a browser, before Opera.
Hmm, seems like a bunch of copycat jerks all over the net. Oh, hey, I think that software battles were done before! (reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war) -- looks like we all need to disconnect and get origional before opening our big mouths!
It's only a slight modification, but the problem is still solved by regenerating the session ID on login. So obtaining the session ID without being able to generate an ID is occuring through a weaker mechanism (leading someone to login to his website first), but the basic solution is the same.
Don't forget about the fect that none of this would be possible, as an unprivelaged user, without [warning: PDF!] Session Fixation which is easily avoided by using session_regenrate_id in PHP when the user logs in. Those 'stored session IDs' would all bcome expired upon login, and contain no important information.
Any serious PHP developer does this. Also, I wouldn't peronally choose to run or develop my software on PHP4. 5 is so much better. After having spent the past year developing PHP5, PHP4 is just... ew.
And Smarty makes HTML escaping user input easy and fun!
The same reason I shouldn't have to be a good designer to make my own clothes that look good. Or I shouldn't have to be a good designer to make my own car that looks tits. Designing shit should happen programmatically, and not look like squares. Sheesh. Computers can replace designers. They are useless.
[For the sarcasm impaired, that was sarcasm.]
It's easy to put up a web page that looks the SAME in all browsers: USE NO FORMATTING. There you go. Make it "my_perfect_rendering_page.txt". It'll look the same in all browsers.
There's a difference between 'free' and 'at no additional charge'.
And if you're unhappy with the product, you shouldn't use it. I never said you should. If you ahve criticisims, you should state them in a polite manner. The point is, it's free and you can't expect something of someone who hasn't promised you anything, and hasn't taken any of your money.
Don't like Firefox? Great. Don't want to use it? Fine. Demanding that they provide features you want? Moronic.
Yes, cool! Bitch about free. While you're at it, tell the developers they're stupid when they ask how they can better serve everyone. And make demands about what you were supposed to have, you know, for all your hard-earned debt from the Mozilla organization.
Nice link! Too bad it doesn't contain anything about OSX, MAC, or CONTROLS. But adding a link that 99% of the/. readers will take at blind faith to say exactly what the link text says goes a long way to make you look like you know what you're talking about.
Yeah, I am flaming, but you all need to start allotting a little more oxygen to the brain.
Do any of you even know how memory usage works? Comments like "It's using 42mb just to display this page! IE is using 22." amuse me. Hello, memory caching. Is this page theonly one you've looked at before you loaded firefox?
And where's the memory leak? I've been running my browser for 3 days, with gmail, and I'm not swapping memory yet. I only have 512mb on this machine. If it's a real memory leak, and not managed memory caching, then I will eventually hit swap, no? Please let me know how long I can expect for that to happen.
Memory is extremely fast, so the fact that an app is taking up a whole 42mb of memory doesn't mean it's going to be slower than an app using 12mb. Memory usage is not an indicator of performance, or bloat. It's simply what the application has allocated. Also, with IE, there's parts of it integrated into the OS, if I recall correctly, so there's hidden memory usage you're missing.
Look at how much paging the app is doing while it's operating. Run vmstat when running IE vs. Firefox and report those numbers. Wait, you can't do that.
OBVIOUSLY you know nothing about virtualization. When you run 4 copies of windows on VirtualPC, you can get >100% uptime, per instance, up to, like, 110%.
There's a general assumption that Slashdot is running on a single machine, with a really crappy SA environment where joe-admin puts up web content from random sites.
I installed IE7, then uninstalled it 30 minutes later after a crash as a result of the install. It was, what I like to call, the "Total u$oft Upgrade Experience".
To be fair, I have had FrieFox crash once or twice, a few months ago, on a Mac.
Very good points, and I admit this is not, in any way, my area of expertise. However, you still haven't proven the following statement: "Not even the Romans managed power production, even though they invented the tech early on. (See: Aeolipile [wikipedia.org])."
Aeolipile != technology to manage power production. This is the crux of my argument.
And I damn myself for arguing on slashdot. It's just stupid. I apologise for anything that came off as a personal attack. Seriously. My whole argument against this statement was mostly knee-jerk reaction. I still disagree with a lot of what you are saying, but I don't think it's worth arguing about. No one gets more information from arguments in on-line forums, IMO.
Oh! You must have done some HS class report on the industrial revolution, and use WikiPedia as your source.
This isn't much of an issue, except the slight discrepency where they talk about how the industrial revolution was/STARTED/ with the steam engine, but was not possible without "machine tools". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_tool), which are required to make steam engines. In fact, I am pretty sure there were a lot of other steps necessairy to get to 'machine tools', including the ability to make metals capable of cutting iron.
See, I know exactly where you were mislead. It's the first part of 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_Engine'.
See, I don't pretend to know any more than the average Joe about such things, but this is what sets people like you apart from people like me. I try not to make outlandish claims without a firm understanding of what I am talking about. And if I fail this, then I don't go off in another tangent about something else I don't know about.
I mean seriously, man. Compare the description of what's necessairy to make http://www.pr.afrl.af.mil/aeolipile.html vs. a steam engine. That's more than the length of the Roman civilization was capable of.
This isn't starcraft. This shit doesn't happen in the span of a 30 minute game.
The world isn't going to end from global warming. It will exist long past it, if it is indeed happening. The real issue is, can we survive without any changes to our daily lives? You know, like half the population living on the coasts not having homes because they're under water.
Additionally, if you really believe that the Aeolipile is even remotely powerful enough to be considered 'the technology to manage power production', you're seriously insane.
PHP does use a significant amount of RAM, but this is largely based upon what modules you are loading in. If you're writing basic SQL query pages with some crypto, then just load those modules. You'll still use some memory, but much less that loading GD every time, and not using it. You can also install the modules and call them only when you need them.
The Apache module does use a significant amount of RAM, but unlike standard CGI's, the processes are not dying and re-spawning, so the same process actually processes many pages before re-starting, so there is not a big problem except when you have scripts processing at the exact same time on the server. With CGI's, you get a lot more memory thrasshing. For Perl, Python, etc, there are apache modules that do the same kind of thing, but I have no experience with them.
Accelerators help you in that the process will complete quicker, thus there's less overlap of processing. A great free accelerator is eAccelerator (http://sourceforge.net/projects/eaccelerator/). Their main site appears to be down right this second, and it's flagged as 'beta', but I have been using it without any problems. Granted, we are pre-production, so I have not tested it under a lot of load. I put up a cop of their 'README' on my site at http://under-score.net/~brian/eaccelerator.README. txt
Re:Posting anon to protect the guilty
on
Spring Into PHP 5
·
· Score: 1
OH! You want to replace developers with a floppy disc. Good luck!
I was addressing 'not being able to see compile errors in anything but a web page'...
What amazes me about this whole discussion is how nearly everyones complaints about PHP contain serious errors, and are totally unresearched. I can only assume this is largely based upon what other people told them, rather than actual experience.
I never have heard anyone, respectable or otherwise, proclaim "We took x application, and re-wrote it in/some non-php language/, and it was so much easier to (debug|write)!"
Re:Posting anon to protect the guilty
on
Spring Into PHP 5
·
· Score: 1
In your extensive research, eh?
brian@vicky> php -h .. SNIP.. -l Syntax check only (lint)
Re:PHP's effect on Linux's reputation.
on
Spring Into PHP 5
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This is the most rediculously stupid comment I have ever seen. It makes a series of statements as fact, without any proof.
It also makes claims of a solution which is incomplete. WTF? 'Would they even be willing to go so far as to demand that the PHP developers include functionality to severely limit the ability of faulty scripts to run?'
Demand to make C programs unable to be hacked. Demand that perl programs are unable to be hacked. Demand that assembly programs are unable to be hacked.
How about looking at the reputation of the group developing the software you morons install? If there's been tens or hundreds of vulnerabilities in the product you want to install, expect more!
Slashdot Mirror
Forget that Opera /TOTALLY/ ripped off in rendering HTML.
Lousy bastards, how dare they copy features! Tell you what... they get tabs, but no HTML rendering. Sound fair?
Wait a minute! When I look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing#History -- "The NeWS version of UniPress's Gosling Emacs text editor was the first commercially available product to pioneer the use of multiple tabbed windows in 1988." Heck, everyone except UniPress's Gosling Emacs -- they're the only ones allowed to use tabs! Stupid IBrowse copying a bunch of other people to put it in a browser, before Opera.
Hmm, seems like a bunch of copycat jerks all over the net. Oh, hey, I think that software battles were done before! (reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war) -- looks like we all need to disconnect and get origional before opening our big mouths!
try doing hundreds of small files that are under the buffer size.
Yeah, no serious sites use MySQL. They *ALL* use Postgres. Right? Right? It's like saying Pro Linux. Hah!
It's only a slight modification, but the problem is still solved by regenerating the session ID on login. So obtaining the session ID without being able to generate an ID is occuring through a weaker mechanism (leading someone to login to his website first), but the basic solution is the same.
Don't forget about the fect that none of this would be possible, as an unprivelaged user, without [warning: PDF!] Session Fixation which is easily avoided by using session_regenrate_id in PHP when the user logs in. Those 'stored session IDs' would all bcome expired upon login, and contain no important information.
Any serious PHP developer does this. Also, I wouldn't peronally choose to run or develop my software on PHP4. 5 is so much better. After having spent the past year developing PHP5, PHP4 is just... ew.
And Smarty makes HTML escaping user input easy and fun!
The same reason I shouldn't have to be a good designer to make my own clothes that look good. Or I shouldn't have to be a good designer to make my own car that looks tits. Designing shit should happen programmatically, and not look like squares. Sheesh. Computers can replace designers. They are useless.
[For the sarcasm impaired, that was sarcasm.]
It's easy to put up a web page that looks the SAME in all browsers: USE NO FORMATTING. There you go. Make it "my_perfect_rendering_page.txt". It'll look the same in all browsers.
There's a difference between 'free' and 'at no additional charge'.
And if you're unhappy with the product, you shouldn't use it. I never said you should. If you ahve criticisims, you should state them in a polite manner. The point is, it's free and you can't expect something of someone who hasn't promised you anything, and hasn't taken any of your money.
Don't like Firefox? Great. Don't want to use it? Fine. Demanding that they provide features you want? Moronic.
Yes, cool! Bitch about free. While you're at it, tell the developers they're stupid when they ask how they can better serve everyone. And make demands about what you were supposed to have, you know, for all your hard-earned debt from the Mozilla organization.
/. readers will take at blind faith to say exactly what the link text says goes a long way to make you look like you know what you're talking about.
Nice link! Too bad it doesn't contain anything about OSX, MAC, or CONTROLS. But adding a link that 99% of the
Yeah, I am flaming, but you all need to start allotting a little more oxygen to the brain.
Do any of you even know how memory usage works? Comments like "It's using 42mb just to display this page! IE is using 22." amuse me. Hello, memory caching. Is this page theonly one you've looked at before you loaded firefox?
And where's the memory leak? I've been running my browser for 3 days, with gmail, and I'm not swapping memory yet. I only have 512mb on this machine. If it's a real memory leak, and not managed memory caching, then I will eventually hit swap, no? Please let me know how long I can expect for that to happen.
Memory is extremely fast, so the fact that an app is taking up a whole 42mb of memory doesn't mean it's going to be slower than an app using 12mb. Memory usage is not an indicator of performance, or bloat. It's simply what the application has allocated. Also, with IE, there's parts of it integrated into the OS, if I recall correctly, so there's hidden memory usage you're missing.
Look at how much paging the app is doing while it's operating. Run vmstat when running IE vs. Firefox and report those numbers. Wait, you can't do that.
Never mind. Remain ignorant and opinionated.
Sorry, whoever owned the heap-of-shit we call a server room I have inherited at my new company would be considered prior... art...
No, it's because they are bad at respecting copyright. :P
OBVIOUSLY you know nothing about virtualization. When you run 4 copies of windows on VirtualPC, you can get >100% uptime, per instance, up to, like, 110%.
Wait, there's other countries that matter? Someone tell our fucking government.
staggering (stg'r-ng) pronunciation
adj.
Causing great astonishment, amazement, or dismay; overwhelming: a staggering achievement; a staggering defeat.
There's a general assumption that Slashdot is running on a single machine, with a really crappy SA environment where joe-admin puts up web content from random sites.
What's your bugzilla bug number for this change?
I installed IE7, then uninstalled it 30 minutes later after a crash as a result of the install. It was, what I like to call, the "Total u$oft Upgrade Experience". To be fair, I have had FrieFox crash once or twice, a few months ago, on a Mac.
Sounds like the LUNIX kernel!
Very good points, and I admit this is not, in any way, my area of expertise. However, you still haven't proven the following statement:
"Not even the Romans managed power production, even though they invented the tech early on. (See: Aeolipile [wikipedia.org])."
Aeolipile != technology to manage power production. This is the crux of my argument.
And I damn myself for arguing on slashdot. It's just stupid. I apologise for anything that came off as a personal attack. Seriously. My whole argument against this statement was mostly knee-jerk reaction. I still disagree with a lot of what you are saying, but I don't think it's worth arguing about. No one gets more information from arguments in on-line forums, IMO.
-Brian
Oh! You must have done some HS class report on the industrial revolution, and use WikiPedia as your source.
/STARTED/ with the steam engine, but was not possible without "machine tools". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_tool), which are required to make steam engines. In fact, I am pretty sure there were a lot of other steps necessairy to get to 'machine tools', including the ability to make metals capable of cutting iron.
This isn't much of an issue, except the slight discrepency where they talk about how the industrial revolution was
See, I know exactly where you were mislead. It's the first part of 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_Engine'.
See, I don't pretend to know any more than the average Joe about such things, but this is what sets people like you apart from people like me. I try not to make outlandish claims without a firm understanding of what I am talking about. And if I fail this, then I don't go off in another tangent about something else I don't know about.
I mean seriously, man. Compare the description of what's necessairy to make http://www.pr.afrl.af.mil/aeolipile.html vs. a steam engine. That's more than the length of the Roman civilization was capable of.
This isn't starcraft. This shit doesn't happen in the span of a 30 minute game.
The world isn't going to end from global warming. It will exist long past it, if it is indeed happening. The real issue is, can we survive without any changes to our daily lives? You know, like half the population living on the coasts not having homes because they're under water. Additionally, if you really believe that the Aeolipile is even remotely powerful enough to be considered 'the technology to manage power production', you're seriously insane.
PHP does use a significant amount of RAM, but this is largely based upon what modules you are loading in. If you're writing basic SQL query pages with some crypto, then just load those modules. You'll still use some memory, but much less that loading GD every time, and not using it. You can also install the modules and call them only when you need them.
. txt
The Apache module does use a significant amount of RAM, but unlike standard CGI's, the processes are not dying and re-spawning, so the same process actually processes many pages before re-starting, so there is not a big problem except when you have scripts processing at the exact same time on the server. With CGI's, you get a lot more memory thrasshing. For Perl, Python, etc, there are apache modules that do the same kind of thing, but I have no experience with them.
Accelerators help you in that the process will complete quicker, thus there's less overlap of processing. A great free accelerator is eAccelerator (http://sourceforge.net/projects/eaccelerator/). Their main site appears to be down right this second, and it's flagged as 'beta', but I have been using it without any problems. Granted, we are pre-production, so I have not tested it under a lot of load. I put up a cop of their 'README' on my site at http://under-score.net/~brian/eaccelerator.README
OH! You want to replace developers with a floppy disc. Good luck!
/some non-php language/, and it was so much easier to (debug|write)!"
I was addressing 'not being able to see compile errors in anything but a web page'...
What amazes me about this whole discussion is how nearly everyones complaints about PHP contain serious errors, and are totally unresearched. I can only assume this is largely based upon what other people told them, rather than actual experience.
I never have heard anyone, respectable or otherwise, proclaim "We took x application, and re-wrote it in
In your extensive research, eh?
.. SNIP ..
brian@vicky> php -h
-l Syntax check only (lint)
This is the most rediculously stupid comment I have ever seen. It makes a series of statements as fact, without any proof.
It also makes claims of a solution which is incomplete. WTF? 'Would they even be willing to go so far as to demand that the PHP developers include functionality to severely limit the ability of faulty scripts to run?'
Demand to make C programs unable to be hacked.
Demand that perl programs are unable to be hacked.
Demand that assembly programs are unable to be hacked.
How about looking at the reputation of the group developing the software you morons install? If there's been tens or hundreds of vulnerabilities in the product you want to install, expect more!
Also, see See http://us2.php.net/features.safe-mode