Where did my sarcasm tags go?! Anyway, here's how that was supposed to read:
Really, this just means 14,000 more EU and US programmers can now work on IBM's Open Source initiatives without having to be on payroll. <sarcasm>Don't programmers seem to prefer that anyway?</sarcasm>
Really, this just means 14,000 more EU and US programmers can now work on IBM's Open Source initiatives without having to be on payroll. Don't programmers seem to prefer that anyway?
Wouldn't it be possible to change the Unix shells to pipe objects instead, in a somewhat backwards-compatible manner, by implementing a toString() method that would be called automatically on all types if they're treated like a string?
So this Unix 'ps' example would still work:
ps vOr | awk '$8 > 15000'
But it could also be written as:
ps vOr | awk '$_.virtualmemorysize > 15000'
In the above, that would require cooperative changes to both the Bash and Awk languages, but the idea is theoretically possible and we wouldn't have to give up a lot of the finer aspects of the Unix shell either. Being that this change would likely require major rewrites, it's doubtful it'll ever happen, but it is possible someone will learn from Microsoft and improve Unix, and one is allowed to dream...:)
What about cases like shareware or self-made products then, where you're the one who determines what the specification is? It seems to me that most shareware is just as bad as most contracted software, so while I agree with you about contracted software, we also need to be aware that when we're our own customer of sorts (or when we'll be selling something as a product to -- hopefully -- many customers down the road) we need to know how to create specs ourselves too.
Reason we don't do this is because it's no the fun part. It takes the cowboy out of coding.
This is right on the money. Anything less than this will have you eating cost and wasting time. There's no possibility of educating a client in most cases, because nobody wants to pay for the "planning" stage at the beginning, they only want to pay for the "real" work. Thus they end up with something that misses the mark, guaranteed. The only way to avoid this is to defend against its occurrence from your side (ie. get it in writing -- and be ultra-specific), not from the customer's.
Start your startup now. Why wait? That's exactly what Paul Graham is talking about. You don't have to be qualified and you don't need a degree to start a business. You need an idea and a lot of trial and error. Oh, and the right people (this one is key, and is the hardest part).
Back in high school I did web design for local businesses instead of flipping burgers. Now I run a small software company for a living. And truth be told, I'm still one credit shy of graduating high school.
Please dismount your steed, sir, you're blocking our view. What the article said (including a quote of his words) was this:
"Pressed about security by Mr. Mossberg, Mr. Otellini had a startling confession: He spends an hour a weekend removing spyware from his daughter's computer. And when further pressed about whether a mainstream computer user in search of immediate safety from security woes ought to buy Apple Computer Inc.'s Macintosh instead of a Wintel PC, he said, 'If you want to fix it tomorrow, maybe you should buy something else.'"
In other words, if you want a real fix (as opposed to the Longhaul one "coming in 2006/2007") for your spyware and security woes, you should buy something other than Windows/x86. He didn't have to say the name "Apple" because it was in the question.
Wouldn't it have been in his best interest, being the head of an x86 chip maker and all, to recommend an x86 alternative to Windows instead of a PPC one? Nice of him to give an honest answer at least, just hope he's not in shit for it...;)
OTOH, maybe if the rumours about Apple and Intel joining forces are true, then he would have alterior motives for his comment after all. Of course, a Mac sale now is still only helping IBM or Motorola and not Intel just yet.
They say cockroaches are one of the only things that survive a nuclear catastrophe. Equipping them with robots would be awesome to see after they're the only things left running around. It would be a giant game of bumper-robots on a big pile of debris. Awesome.
Too bad we'd be dead, so we wouldn't actually get to see it...
It would be nice if more than just the featured listings had screenshots visible on the list screen. Of course, my own dashboard site (see.sig) doesn't have any screenshots yet, despite the ability for developers to add them. Come on guys, add some screenshots! Post some widgets!:)
While the suit may have some merit, it is odd for them to wait until now to try and halt such a heralded product.
TigerDirect is a seller of PCs, and as such has an interest in seeing Apple do worse. That's why they waited and sat quietly while Apple promoted Tiger for the past 12 months, only to threaten to sue and seek an injunction days before its release. That's grounds for a dismissal of their claim, IMO, because they knowingly let their "trademark" go undefended for that length of time prior to acting. It's not self-defense, it's acting with malicious intentions.
It ranges from 20% to 50% I believe (I don't remember specifics), depending on how much you make. Not as bad as your dad (what country is he in?), but 20% is the low-end of things here.
On the plus side, corporations here pay around 20%, which is essentially what they charge poor people. Having a corporation means you can maintain a lower perceived income level while making what would normally put you in a higher tax bracket. In effect, a corporation owner (even small ones like me) can take home around $0.65 on $1.00, whereas the average person takes $0.50, and many take home even less.
The issue I take is with additional tariffs on everything (tariffs on airfare double the price of airline tickets), and in many cases (blank CDs, for example) we're charge a "just in case you're going to break the law" tariff, which is a not-so-subtle statement that the purchaser is assumed to be unlawful. Now with the possibility of an extra $0.25 on each $1.00 spent on iTunes and the like, it's getting out of hand. They're also talking about tariffs on Internet access -- like $50/mo for the crappy connections we get here isn't enough...
The fault however, is with the masses bending over and taking it. We let just about every right or benefit we've had go to shit due to apathy.
My comment was "socialist tax guise" meaning they pretend (and most people here believe them) that they're being socialist, when in fact they are being exactly the opposite. Not that I'm a socialist -- that would suck too -- we're simply not a legitimate democracy IMO. Canada is an oligarchy, plain and simple.
My comment was "socialist tax guise" meaning they pretend, and most people here believe them, that they're being socialist, when in fact they are being exactly the opposite. Not that I'm a socialist -- that would suck too -- we're simply not a legitimate democracy IMO.
This God damn socialist tax guise is a real fucking piss off. We already pay at least 20% of our gross annual revenue to the government, plus 14% (15% in Ontario, but I live in Manitoba now) to the provincial and federal governments whenever we spend what is left over from what they already plundered.
Sure we have "better" health care than the US, and a "better" education system (my ass -- education in Manitoba is severely disabled, and the Ontario government also managed to fuck theirs up over the past decade too). If that's the case, then why would my mother, who works with nurses all day, tell me that if I get sick we're going to the states to pay for real health care? Why would my girlfriend, who is a nurse here in Canada, agree with her?
This new tariff idea is one more reason to say "fuck off" to corporations altogether and download your shit for free (somewhat legal here in Canada anyway). Sorry Apple, I'm really happy with my iPod, and I'm really happy with the iTunes Music Store as well, but if they impose this tariff I'm gone.
This is ridiculous and unproductive discussion. How about instead of pointing fingers (read: shut the f*** up, Bruce, you're no help here), we start a more open discussion of how to solve the SCM crisis Linus/Linux find themselves in?
Open Source SCM solutions are crap compared to BK at solving the distributed source code problem (as stated by Linus). Personally, I think they are crap at many other aspects of SCM as well (access control, ease of use, ease of administration, etc.). We've had a surge of new Open Source SCM tools crop up recently, but either they went unsupported by all but the initial developer, burnt out at 0.3.1, or failed to solve any really useful or interesting problems (Subversion, for example), or made design decisions that make installation/maintenance a nightmare (Subversion again).
Perhaps a UI wrapper around Arch (which has the ugliest command line interface known to man) would be a start. Or perhaps some additional tools to help with Darcs. Or perhaps Linus is right and we need a completely new tool that _actually_ solves the problem (if these don't already).
The point is, let's discuss moving forward and stop wasting our breath on stupid accusations. We're acting like children, for Christ's sake.
But while the OS bears plenty of similarities to Tiger, Allchin stressed that Microsoft has broken new ground in Longhorn. For example, document icons are no longer a hint of the type of file, but rather a small picture of the file itself. The icon for a Word document, for example, is a tiny iteration of the first page of the file. Folders, too, show glimpses of what's inside. Such images can be rather small, but they offer a visual cue that aids in the searching process, Allchin said.
Didn't this first appear in Nautilus (the file manager for the Gnome Desktop)? I remember it because it rendered Nautilus so painfully slow as to be completely unusable.
This line, which comes directly after the Linus Torvalds "quote", is a very careless omission on the part of the/. submitter:
Actually he didn't - we just made that quote up.
This changes the entire meaning of the article, to one posing a question to Torvalds: Is this something you'd agree with, being that your support of McVoy seems to imply you would?
Very different than him actually making that statement himself.
Slashdot Mirror
Where did my sarcasm tags go?! Anyway, here's how that was supposed to read:
Really, this just means 14,000 more EU and US programmers can now work on IBM's Open Source initiatives without having to be on payroll. <sarcasm>Don't programmers seem to prefer that anyway?</sarcasm>
Really, this just means 14,000 more EU and US programmers can now work on IBM's Open Source initiatives without having to be on payroll. Don't programmers seem to prefer that anyway?
Wouldn't it be possible to change the Unix shells to pipe objects instead, in a somewhat backwards-compatible manner, by implementing a toString() method that would be called automatically on all types if they're treated like a string?
So this Unix 'ps' example would still work:
ps vOr | awk '$8 > 15000'But it could also be written as:
ps vOr | awk '$_.virtualmemorysize > 15000'In the above, that would require cooperative changes to both the Bash and Awk languages, but the idea is theoretically possible and we wouldn't have to give up a lot of the finer aspects of the Unix shell either. Being that this change would likely require major rewrites, it's doubtful it'll ever happen, but it is possible someone will learn from Microsoft and improve Unix, and one is allowed to dream... :)
What about cases like shareware or self-made products then, where you're the one who determines what the specification is? It seems to me that most shareware is just as bad as most contracted software, so while I agree with you about contracted software, we also need to be aware that when we're our own customer of sorts (or when we'll be selling something as a product to -- hopefully -- many customers down the road) we need to know how to create specs ourselves too.
Reason we don't do this is because it's no the fun part. It takes the cowboy out of coding.
Exactly!
This is right on the money. Anything less than this will have you eating cost and wasting time. There's no possibility of educating a client in most cases, because nobody wants to pay for the "planning" stage at the beginning, they only want to pay for the "real" work. Thus they end up with something that misses the mark, guaranteed. The only way to avoid this is to defend against its occurrence from your side (ie. get it in writing -- and be ultra-specific), not from the customer's.
Start your startup now. Why wait? That's exactly what Paul Graham is talking about. You don't have to be qualified and you don't need a degree to start a business. You need an idea and a lot of trial and error. Oh, and the right people (this one is key, and is the hardest part).
Back in high school I did web design for local businesses instead of flipping burgers. Now I run a small software company for a living. And truth be told, I'm still one credit shy of graduating high school.
Is there a Google cache of it? Ahhh, circular references!!!!!
Their blog is holding up at least.
Please dismount your steed, sir, you're blocking our view. What the article said (including a quote of his words) was this:
"Pressed about security by Mr. Mossberg, Mr. Otellini had a startling confession: He spends an hour a weekend removing spyware from his daughter's computer. And when further pressed about whether a mainstream computer user in search of immediate safety from security woes ought to buy Apple Computer Inc.'s Macintosh instead of a Wintel PC, he said, 'If you want to fix it tomorrow, maybe you should buy something else.'"
In other words, if you want a real fix (as opposed to the Longhaul one "coming in 2006/2007") for your spyware and security woes, you should buy something other than Windows/x86. He didn't have to say the name "Apple" because it was in the question.
Wouldn't it have been in his best interest, being the head of an x86 chip maker and all, to recommend an x86 alternative to Windows instead of a PPC one? Nice of him to give an honest answer at least, just hope he's not in shit for it... ;)
OTOH, maybe if the rumours about Apple and Intel joining forces are true, then he would have alterior motives for his comment after all. Of course, a Mac sale now is still only helping IBM or Motorola and not Intel just yet.
They say cockroaches are one of the only things that survive a nuclear catastrophe. Equipping them with robots would be awesome to see after they're the only things left running around. It would be a giant game of bumper-robots on a big pile of debris. Awesome.
Too bad we'd be dead, so we wouldn't actually get to see it...
The kudzu group got just an intoxicated.
Awesome. This means we can get just as drunk for half the price, or twice as drunk for the same amount it costs us now!
Space weapons? You mean like lazers and photon torpedoes? Cloaking devices?
Awesome.
It would be nice if more than just the featured listings had screenshots visible on the list screen. Of course, my own dashboard site (see .sig) doesn't have any screenshots yet, despite the ability for developers to add them. Come on guys, add some screenshots! Post some widgets! :)
While the suit may have some merit, it is odd for them to wait until now to try and halt such a heralded product.
TigerDirect is a seller of PCs, and as such has an interest in seeing Apple do worse. That's why they waited and sat quietly while Apple promoted Tiger for the past 12 months, only to threaten to sue and seek an injunction days before its release. That's grounds for a dismissal of their claim, IMO, because they knowingly let their "trademark" go undefended for that length of time prior to acting. It's not self-defense, it's acting with malicious intentions.
It ranges from 20% to 50% I believe (I don't remember specifics), depending on how much you make. Not as bad as your dad (what country is he in?), but 20% is the low-end of things here.
On the plus side, corporations here pay around 20%, which is essentially what they charge poor people. Having a corporation means you can maintain a lower perceived income level while making what would normally put you in a higher tax bracket. In effect, a corporation owner (even small ones like me) can take home around $0.65 on $1.00, whereas the average person takes $0.50, and many take home even less.
The issue I take is with additional tariffs on everything (tariffs on airfare double the price of airline tickets), and in many cases (blank CDs, for example) we're charge a "just in case you're going to break the law" tariff, which is a not-so-subtle statement that the purchaser is assumed to be unlawful. Now with the possibility of an extra $0.25 on each $1.00 spent on iTunes and the like, it's getting out of hand. They're also talking about tariffs on Internet access -- like $50/mo for the crappy connections we get here isn't enough...
The fault however, is with the masses bending over and taking it. We let just about every right or benefit we've had go to shit due to apathy.
My comment was "socialist tax guise" meaning they pretend (and most people here believe them) that they're being socialist, when in fact they are being exactly the opposite. Not that I'm a socialist -- that would suck too -- we're simply not a legitimate democracy IMO. Canada is an oligarchy, plain and simple.
My comment was "socialist tax guise" meaning they pretend, and most people here believe them, that they're being socialist, when in fact they are being exactly the opposite. Not that I'm a socialist -- that would suck too -- we're simply not a legitimate democracy IMO.
This God damn socialist tax guise is a real fucking piss off. We already pay at least 20% of our gross annual revenue to the government, plus 14% (15% in Ontario, but I live in Manitoba now) to the provincial and federal governments whenever we spend what is left over from what they already plundered.
Sure we have "better" health care than the US, and a "better" education system (my ass -- education in Manitoba is severely disabled, and the Ontario government also managed to fuck theirs up over the past decade too). If that's the case, then why would my mother, who works with nurses all day, tell me that if I get sick we're going to the states to pay for real health care? Why would my girlfriend, who is a nurse here in Canada, agree with her?
This new tariff idea is one more reason to say "fuck off" to corporations altogether and download your shit for free (somewhat legal here in Canada anyway). Sorry Apple, I'm really happy with my iPod, and I'm really happy with the iTunes Music Store as well, but if they impose this tariff I'm gone.
This is ridiculous and unproductive discussion. How about instead of pointing fingers (read: shut the f*** up, Bruce, you're no help here), we start a more open discussion of how to solve the SCM crisis Linus/Linux find themselves in?
Open Source SCM solutions are crap compared to BK at solving the distributed source code problem (as stated by Linus). Personally, I think they are crap at many other aspects of SCM as well (access control, ease of use, ease of administration, etc.). We've had a surge of new Open Source SCM tools crop up recently, but either they went unsupported by all but the initial developer, burnt out at 0.3.1, or failed to solve any really useful or interesting problems (Subversion, for example), or made design decisions that make installation/maintenance a nightmare (Subversion again).
Perhaps a UI wrapper around Arch (which has the ugliest command line interface known to man) would be a start. Or perhaps some additional tools to help with Darcs. Or perhaps Linus is right and we need a completely new tool that _actually_ solves the problem (if these don't already).
The point is, let's discuss moving forward and stop wasting our breath on stupid accusations. We're acting like children, for Christ's sake.
But while the OS bears plenty of similarities to Tiger, Allchin stressed that Microsoft has broken new ground in Longhorn. For example, document icons are no longer a hint of the type of file, but rather a small picture of the file itself. The icon for a Word document, for example, is a tiny iteration of the first page of the file. Folders, too, show glimpses of what's inside. Such images can be rather small, but they offer a visual cue that aids in the searching process, Allchin said.
Didn't this first appear in Nautilus (the file manager for the Gnome Desktop)? I remember it because it rendered Nautilus so painfully slow as to be completely unusable.
You can preview widgets now by downloading them, unzipping them, and running the main html file in Safari.
Glad I could be #101. :)
This line, which comes directly after the Linus Torvalds "quote", is a very careless omission on the part of the /. submitter:
Actually he didn't - we just made that quote up.
This changes the entire meaning of the article, to one posing a question to Torvalds: Is this something you'd agree with, being that your support of McVoy seems to imply you would?
Very different than him actually making that statement himself.
Dashboard will be pretty spiffy.