Well, theres _always_ more overhead with a VM language. The question is whether or not runtime optimizations from JIT can overcome the VM overhead, and so far the answer is sometimes. Of course, as we get more and more power and memory the overhead becomes less and less a factor.
Now, as for your claim that you can write better algorithms - algorithms don't care about memory, thats an implementation detail. And keeping track of every pointer and when it might go out of scope is exactly what GC does. It's fundamentally less efficent than manual memory management - a tradeoff of runtime performance for ease of implementation. Although, again GC overhead gets flattened out as computers get more powerful.
While most of what you said is true (although I should point out that fully half your post is about cases where Java may become faster, rather than cases where it is faster), #2 isn't valid - an algorith isn't "faster" if you just ignore the memory issues, because the garbage collection overhead is real and signifigant. Java profiling ususally disables GC and ignores startup time, but you could write the exact same thing in C and just let all your pointers leak all over. Memory has to be dealt with somewhere, and just ignoring GC and claiming you've got a better algorithm because you don't have to free memory is dishonest.
In rare cases, yes, but in general no. Certainly not with large scale programs - the kind of analysis a compiler can do on a modern machine with memory and cycles to burn on it rivals anything a human programmer could do. In certain cases you can know more about the compiler is doing and therefore write better code than it can (this one reason JIT compilers can (rarely) outperform traditional compiilers, afterall), but the general statement "assembler is faster" is untrue.
In fact, as a previous poster said, there's no real point in evaluating the "speed" of a language - it's the runtime and compilation that determine the speed, not the language it was written in - C code running under CINT is going to be slower than "native" code, obviously. The question is whether or not a human is a better compiler than a compiler and the answer is "only sometimes".
On my lower end work machine (900Mhz p3, 512megs of ram), eclipse, argus, C++ Builder X and all the other Java apps I use are noticably slower than my other preferred IDEs, like VS 6 (2003 is a pig because of all it's stupid com dispatch). On my more powerful home machine (Athlon 1900+, 512 megs of ram) the difference is harder to see, only really comes up when it's been swapped out (working set for all these apps includes the app + the jvm, so theres alot more data to read out of swap). Startup times are a bitch for all of them, but in fairness I can live with that.
I'm part of that community - I started using wxWindows (oops, widgets) precisely because I was getting very frustrated with the free version of Qt, and someone mentioned it in one of the (many) licensing debates about Qt. Having used it for about 18 months now I prefer it to Qt and wouldn't switch even if Qt did release a GPL Windows version.
Despite being fairly under the radar, wxWidgets is very actively developed and there's a signifigant user community. I'll grant that it lacks some of the polish of Qt but it meets or surpases it in functionality (at least in all my needs, I'm sure theres people out there with other needs).
They've said that they're looking into providing POP access (I'd love IMAP, myself), and you severly underestimate what you can do with screenscraping. That said, I think they will experiment with a number of different limitations. Email-per day and bandwidth limits seem very likely.
Theres plenty of open source apps developed for and on Windows, but they tend to be cross platform so perhaps they don't register as being a "Windows community". A good percentage of them start on Windows and move to other platforms, not the other way around (another good percentage are started as cross platform from the beginning).
Of course, there might be more if Qt had GPL windows version. But I think the biggest problem with it's lack is that it's impossible to port GPL Qt/KDE apps to Windows, and I think that kinda sucks.
I don't know _any_ apps made with either FOX or FLTK. Certainly nothing with the userbase of bittorrent or xmule. So maybe it's only trailing _for you_.
Not sure what you mean, there - there's lots of toolkits that run on Windows (including, of course, the superb wxWidgets), and almost all of them have script language bindings if you don't like C/C++, and almost all of those scripting languages run on Windows. It's true that _most_ windows apps are writting with Visual Studio or VB, but not all. And it certainly doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of other options.
This sort of idle behavior is probably the most common breaking the 4th wall, especially in humor games. It's common even in more serious games, Sacred has a similiar thing.
MtG was designed largely because of Richard Garfields interest in metagaming (theres a number of interviews where he talks about the metagame in Diplomacy, where if you have a habit of betraying alliances, people won't ally with you even if you haven't betrayed them _in that game_). Making the metagame part of the game was something he was actively trying to do.
I have a deaf friend and I've talked to her via TTY a couple times. It's very wierd and I was totally uncomfortable, but the woman involved was almost unreally professional, to the point of reproducing my stammers and mutters about how I didn't really like it. I can't even imagine the mindset involved to be able to do that sort of thing all day long, without letting yourself get involved in the conversation.
It's pretty simple, really. Patents on hardware don't harm "free" development of hardware because there is no such thing - you can't make transistors without a fab and patent fees are the least of your worries there. On the other hand, freelance/hobbyist software development can't afford that kind of fee. It's why we have copyrights on books instead of patents.
Patents aren't boogeymen. Patents on things that haven't been invented (speculative patents), have already been invented (trivial patents), and things which shouldn't be invented (frivolous patents) are boogeymen. Patents on things you DO rather than things you MAKE are REALLY boogeymen, because they're extremely broad and conver the concept of doing something rather than a way of doing something, preventing innovation, and, incidently, being totally useless to the public domain once the patent expires.
Absolutely. You're being kinda blinded by the gameplay mechanics of 'computer' RPGs. The article is talking more about freeform social stuff (the computer part is incidental, really), where theres plenty of people (and the point of the "game", really) is the RP, not the game mechanics. You'll also find people who, say, aren't willing to exploit cheats or macros because they don't find that fun and get cranky when they get beat on by people who do.
It's funny how people refuse to take "you're doing it wrong" as an answer, even when it's true. People who can't participate in the troubleshooting process (and it's not hard, any more than answering questions at the doctors office is hard) don't really have much right to bitch if they don't get fixed, imo. Either step away from it and turn it over the professionals without butting it, or be willing to think about what you do and follow step by step instructions.
Well, I guess it depends on how you define "sugar coat", but SCOs SEC filings pretty much say exactly that - theres not much wiggle room there really, since they're required to speculate on worst case scenarios and it's obvious to anyone that IBM can, in fact, totally fucking destroy them.
It was even worse in this case, because payroll was decided by the corporate office in Wisconsin, and they just weren't ready to accept the kind of money you had to offer to get people in the door in upstate Connecticut. I think there is a subtle push for low level managers to do shady things like this (the manager in question is/was one of the least computer-literate people I know/knew, she had to have gotten some training to be able to edit the payroll records...). That doesn't absolve her from blame of course, but I don't blame JUST her.
This happened at a Kohls where I worked and when it came out the store manager was asked to resign. There was a _lot_ of pressure on her to eliminate overtime, so I guess it's kind of unfair to her, but I don't have that much sympathy.
Re:What, no editorial?
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 1
Re:What, no editorial?
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 1
Just to be clear, all that huge assortment of applications have thier own fees - you don't get them all in a bundle (well, you can, but you pay the total cost of all of them). So comparing postgre to Oracle is still fair in that sense.
Why do companies structure themselves like a monarchy or oligarchy? It doesn't work for nations, yet big companies routinely take the revenue-generating power away from the individual workers or team managers, and make corporation-wide decrees
It's because corporations are not countries, and the primary goal of a corporation is to benefit itself, not it's corporate citizens/employees. Oligarchies work just fine if your goal is to maximize the consolidation of power and exploitation of your citizens.
Something to think about (Slashbot libertarians, I'm looking at you) is the point at which you should start (philosophically, morally) treating a company as a government rather than just a group of people.
Best buy.com might have it, but none of the best buys I've been into (a half dozen or so around NYC) have had Linux boxes, at least not on the shelf near Windows. There was a CompUSA that had some but they were dusty old boxes shoved to one side to make shelf space for something else.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, as for your claim that you can write better algorithms - algorithms don't care about memory, thats an implementation detail. And keeping track of every pointer and when it might go out of scope is exactly what GC does. It's fundamentally less efficent than manual memory management - a tradeoff of runtime performance for ease of implementation. Although, again GC overhead gets flattened out as computers get more powerful.
While most of what you said is true (although I should point out that fully half your post is about cases where Java may become faster, rather than cases where it is faster), #2 isn't valid - an algorith isn't "faster" if you just ignore the memory issues, because the garbage collection overhead is real and signifigant. Java profiling ususally disables GC and ignores startup time, but you could write the exact same thing in C and just let all your pointers leak all over. Memory has to be dealt with somewhere, and just ignoring GC and claiming you've got a better algorithm because you don't have to free memory is dishonest.
In fact, as a previous poster said, there's no real point in evaluating the "speed" of a language - it's the runtime and compilation that determine the speed, not the language it was written in - C code running under CINT is going to be slower than "native" code, obviously. The question is whether or not a human is a better compiler than a compiler and the answer is "only sometimes".
On my lower end work machine (900Mhz p3, 512megs of ram), eclipse, argus, C++ Builder X and all the other Java apps I use are noticably slower than my other preferred IDEs, like VS 6 (2003 is a pig because of all it's stupid com dispatch). On my more powerful home machine (Athlon 1900+, 512 megs of ram) the difference is harder to see, only really comes up when it's been swapped out (working set for all these apps includes the app + the jvm, so theres alot more data to read out of swap). Startup times are a bitch for all of them, but in fairness I can live with that.
Despite being fairly under the radar, wxWidgets is very actively developed and there's a signifigant user community. I'll grant that it lacks some of the polish of Qt but it meets or surpases it in functionality (at least in all my needs, I'm sure theres people out there with other needs).
They've said that they're looking into providing POP access (I'd love IMAP, myself), and you severly underestimate what you can do with screenscraping. That said, I think they will experiment with a number of different limitations. Email-per day and bandwidth limits seem very likely.
Investigate wxWidgets.
Of course, there might be more if Qt had GPL windows version. But I think the biggest problem with it's lack is that it's impossible to port GPL Qt/KDE apps to Windows, and I think that kinda sucks.
I don't know _any_ apps made with either FOX or FLTK. Certainly nothing with the userbase of bittorrent or xmule. So maybe it's only trailing _for you_.
Not sure what you mean, there - there's lots of toolkits that run on Windows (including, of course, the superb wxWidgets), and almost all of them have script language bindings if you don't like C/C++, and almost all of those scripting languages run on Windows. It's true that _most_ windows apps are writting with Visual Studio or VB, but not all. And it certainly doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of other options.
This sort of idle behavior is probably the most common breaking the 4th wall, especially in humor games. It's common even in more serious games, Sacred has a similiar thing.
MtG was designed largely because of Richard Garfields interest in metagaming (theres a number of interviews where he talks about the metagame in Diplomacy, where if you have a habit of betraying alliances, people won't ally with you even if you haven't betrayed them _in that game_). Making the metagame part of the game was something he was actively trying to do.
That may be true but it's reprehensible none the less (which is not to say that the person scamming isn't reprehensible either).
I have a deaf friend and I've talked to her via TTY a couple times. It's very wierd and I was totally uncomfortable, but the woman involved was almost unreally professional, to the point of reproducing my stammers and mutters about how I didn't really like it. I can't even imagine the mindset involved to be able to do that sort of thing all day long, without letting yourself get involved in the conversation.
Patents aren't boogeymen. Patents on things that haven't been invented (speculative patents), have already been invented (trivial patents), and things which shouldn't be invented (frivolous patents) are boogeymen. Patents on things you DO rather than things you MAKE are REALLY boogeymen, because they're extremely broad and conver the concept of doing something rather than a way of doing something, preventing innovation, and, incidently, being totally useless to the public domain once the patent expires.
Somehow it doesn't suprise me that God is a pedant.
Absolutely. You're being kinda blinded by the gameplay mechanics of 'computer' RPGs. The article is talking more about freeform social stuff (the computer part is incidental, really), where theres plenty of people (and the point of the "game", really) is the RP, not the game mechanics. You'll also find people who, say, aren't willing to exploit cheats or macros because they don't find that fun and get cranky when they get beat on by people who do.
It's funny how people refuse to take "you're doing it wrong" as an answer, even when it's true. People who can't participate in the troubleshooting process (and it's not hard, any more than answering questions at the doctors office is hard) don't really have much right to bitch if they don't get fixed, imo. Either step away from it and turn it over the professionals without butting it, or be willing to think about what you do and follow step by step instructions.
Well, I guess it depends on how you define "sugar coat", but SCOs SEC filings pretty much say exactly that - theres not much wiggle room there really, since they're required to speculate on worst case scenarios and it's obvious to anyone that IBM can, in fact, totally fucking destroy them.
It was even worse in this case, because payroll was decided by the corporate office in Wisconsin, and they just weren't ready to accept the kind of money you had to offer to get people in the door in upstate Connecticut. I think there is a subtle push for low level managers to do shady things like this (the manager in question is/was one of the least computer-literate people I know/knew, she had to have gotten some training to be able to edit the payroll records...). That doesn't absolve her from blame of course, but I don't blame JUST her.
This happened at a Kohls where I worked and when it came out the store manager was asked to resign. There was a _lot_ of pressure on her to eliminate overtime, so I guess it's kind of unfair to her, but I don't have that much sympathy.
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/
Just to be clear, all that huge assortment of applications have thier own fees - you don't get them all in a bundle (well, you can, but you pay the total cost of all of them). So comparing postgre to Oracle is still fair in that sense.
It's because corporations are not countries, and the primary goal of a corporation is to benefit itself, not it's corporate citizens/employees. Oligarchies work just fine if your goal is to maximize the consolidation of power and exploitation of your citizens.
Something to think about (Slashbot libertarians, I'm looking at you) is the point at which you should start (philosophically, morally) treating a company as a government rather than just a group of people.
Best buy.com might have it, but none of the best buys I've been into (a half dozen or so around NYC) have had Linux boxes, at least not on the shelf near Windows. There was a CompUSA that had some but they were dusty old boxes shoved to one side to make shelf space for something else.