Removing it is equally simple: delete the application and *poff* it's gone.
Except that's not true for non-application things like drivers. MacOS X has no real package manager. There's no way for an average user to see what drivers are installed much less remove them without sudo.
Ever noticed that... Windows is centralized around... WaitForSingleObject/WaitForMultipleObject that are used everywhere... Unix and Linux doesn't have these.
Obviously you've never bothered to read the pthread standard.
I just wonder what makes people think that the pole is special enough so that they want to conceive their children there.
Stupidity and the consequential belief in superstition. Same things about salt over one's shoulder, not stepping on cracks, walking under ladders, etc.
The patent seems pretty broad... but reading the specification makes it clear that the focus is on "virtual" keyboards, mousepads, and presentation pointing...
The whole idea of a patent (from the author's point of view) is to be as broad as possible, to cover as many areas and as much technology as it exists and may exist through the patent's lifetime. That's a patent lawyer's job. The patent office tries to whittle down the broadness. That's their job. It's an adversarial process. That's why getting a patent takes about 3 years.
The only thing that legally matters in a patent are its claims. The rest is merely illustrative.
Actually, MS (or anybody else) can use GPL'd software and not have to disclose source if they get a separate license from the original author who is free to grant licenses at will.
SWISH++ is the fastest freely available search engine. Briefly from the feature list, it natively indexes text, HTML, Unix manual pages (makes much better apropos(1) command replacement), e-mail/news (RFC 822), LaTeX. Through filters of your choice, it indexes PDF, PostScript, M$ Office.
For high-traffic sites, the search engine can be run as a multithreaded daemon process that listens on either a Unix or TCP socket.
You could write a filter or a native module to index the names of binary files.
Maybe it's because I live smack in the middle of Sillicon Valley (geek central) or something, but when I'm out and about and see other people using PDAs, I see far more Palm-based devices than WinCE devices. Hence, I don't see how PocketPCs are eating Palm's lunch.
I hope they're planning on releasing this iHub on its own, some time soon. It would be a sweet machine - short on expandability...
It already has ethernet, 3 USB, 2 FireWire, an AirPort slot, video out, 56K modem. What more do most people need?
If you really need more, then get a G4 tower; but for most people, the iMac's expandability is just fine.
Because UDP affinities through NAT boxes have to be refreshed refquently. Bandwidth for a few million users sending a "UDP ping" costs lots and lots of money.
Aren't ephemeral ports only used for outgoing connections, not incoming ones?
Uhm, I think what I meant is that when you do an accept(2) on the listening socket, you get a new file descriptor that is attached to another socket connection that is independent of the listening socket. There are a finite number of those.
Actually, I said "instant messaging type server." In reality, the application is to send real-time video/audio peer-to-peer. (My question would have been 5 pages long if I gave all the exhaustive details.)
... presumbely you want to keep the TCP connection open so you would know when a client goes offline.
No, we want to keep the TCP connection open so a client knows when it has an incoming message instantly. Polling is out of the question because (a) it's not instant and (b) would use enormous amounts of bandwidth we'd have to pay for.
It's also not good to use UDP for peer-to-peer connections...
It is for audio and video. Again, I simplified my question because this detail is mostly irrelevant. I only mentioned it to point out that the bulk fo the bandwidth is NOT going through the server, just the "call setup."
Notify everyone that requested to be notified and is currently online that the user went online. Cut the TCP connection.
This does allow people not on your "buddy list" to call you (which every IM clients does in fact allow).
The TCP connections to the server are used only for one client to be able to locate a user on another client. Once the conversation starts, the clients talk peer-to-peer using UDP.
Hence, the server sees very little traffic in comparison.
The NIC and CPU can only do so much; so isn't that going to be a bottel neck for you?
I don't think so because most of the time a connection is idle. In my application, unlike a web server, it only gets traffic over it when there is an incoming message for a client.
This is just like the real telephone network.
Most large websites have load balancers that distribute the requests to several machines.
One of the goals is to reduce the cost of buying and maintaining the racks and racks of servers that are ordinarily needed for something like this. All those machines are needed only because of TCP/socket/port limitations not CPU or bandwidth because the connections are idle most of the time. The real telephone network isn't engineered to be able to handle everybody going off-hook simultaneously.
You can't use UDP as easily because you have to frequently send a UDP packet from the client to the server to keep the affinity mapped if the client is behind a NAT, e.g., Linksys DSL modem/router or equivalent.
If you don't do this, the UDP affinity will time out and they the server can no longer contact the client when there is an incoming message for it.
The court has said that when you mail, you have a duty to figure out in advance what state the mailbox you're mailing to is in, and then find out the e-mail laws of that state and obey them.
Awwww... Poor spammers. My heart bleeds for them -- NOT! If they don't like the spam business, they're free to do something else.
If Linux wants to be on alot of desktops then this type of memo isn't going to get it too far.
Linux (or rather Linus, since Linux, being an inanimate thing, can't "want" anything) is done for fun by developers. Linus has said words to this effect many times. Linus doesn't care about Microsoft or desktops or whether you or the general public use Linux.
The Kyocera Palm OS phone is BAD at this, as you
can't dial numbers out of synced contacts.
If by "synced contacts" you mean the Address Book app, then you are wrong: you certainly can dial directly from it just by tapping on the phone number.
Slashdot Mirror
Reachability, closure, minimum spanning trees, finite state automata minimization, etc., have lots of uses and are some of my favorites.
Obviously you've never bothered to read the pthread standard.
Stupidity and the consequential belief in superstition. Same things about salt over one's shoulder, not stepping on cracks, walking under ladders, etc.
The whole idea of a patent (from the author's point of view) is to be as broad as possible, to cover as many areas and as much technology as it exists and may exist through the patent's lifetime. That's a patent lawyer's job. The patent office tries to whittle down the broadness. That's their job. It's an adversarial process. That's why getting a patent takes about 3 years.
The only thing that legally matters in a patent are its claims. The rest is merely illustrative.
Actually, MS (or anybody else) can use GPL'd software and not have to disclose source if they get a separate license from the original author who is free to grant licenses at will.
For high-traffic sites, the search engine can be run as a multithreaded daemon process that listens on either a Unix or TCP socket.
You could write a filter or a native module to index the names of binary files.
Maybe it's because I live smack in the middle of Sillicon Valley (geek central) or something, but when I'm out and about and see other people using PDAs, I see far more Palm-based devices than WinCE devices. Hence, I don't see how PocketPCs are eating Palm's lunch.
For technical papers, I still use troff with the mm macros. I can incorporate figures either using xfig(1) or raw PostScript.
Both cases above are:
Because UDP affinities through NAT boxes have to be refreshed refquently. Bandwidth for a few million users sending a "UDP ping" costs lots and lots of money.
Uhm, I think what I meant is that when you do an accept(2) on the listening socket, you get a new file descriptor that is attached to another socket connection that is independent of the listening socket. There are a finite number of those.
Actually, I said "instant messaging type server." In reality, the application is to send real-time video/audio peer-to-peer. (My question would have been 5 pages long if I gave all the exhaustive details.)
No, we want to keep the TCP connection open so a client knows when it has an incoming message instantly. Polling is out of the question because (a) it's not instant and (b) would use enormous amounts of bandwidth we'd have to pay for.
It is for audio and video. Again, I simplified my question because this detail is mostly irrelevant. I only mentioned it to point out that the bulk fo the bandwidth is NOT going through the server, just the "call setup."
This does allow people not on your "buddy list" to call you (which every IM clients does in fact allow).
We already did that with the hope that we would solve the bigger problems later. :-)
AFAIK, ephemeral ports for sockets are a system-wide resource. More than one process can't use the same IP/port pair on a machine.
Because multiply that by the goal of millions of users and that's a lot of bandwidth to pay for.
Hence, the server sees very little traffic in comparison.
I don't think so because most of the time a connection is idle. In my application, unlike a web server, it only gets traffic over it when there is an incoming message for a client. This is just like the real telephone network.
One of the goals is to reduce the cost of buying and maintaining the racks and racks of servers that are ordinarily needed for something like this. All those machines are needed only because of TCP/socket/port limitations not CPU or bandwidth because the connections are idle most of the time. The real telephone network isn't engineered to be able to handle everybody going off-hook simultaneously.If you don't do this, the UDP affinity will time out and they the server can no longer contact the client when there is an incoming message for it.
Awwww... Poor spammers. My heart bleeds for them -- NOT! If they don't like the spam business, they're free to do something else.
Linux (or rather Linus, since Linux, being an inanimate thing, can't "want" anything) is done for fun by developers. Linus has said words to this effect many times. Linus doesn't care about Microsoft or desktops or whether you or the general public use Linux.
So what you're saying is that Linux needs to become Mac OS X in terms in the UI. It meets all the criteria in your bullet list.
If by "synced contacts" you mean the Address Book app, then you are wrong: you certainly can dial directly from it just by tapping on the phone number.