I use the optical finder in my Canon S410 exclusively, even in the darkest rooms. I quit trying to use the LCD screen on digicams way back with a Minolta Dimage V, which was what convinced me that LCD "viewfinders" were worthless in low light.
The camera looks nice. and that they went to Schneider Kreuznach for their optics is a major plus. Unfortunately, the total lack of an optical viewfinder is a major drawback. The problem with LCD-only viewfinders is that they're useless for trying to take a picture in an area dark enough that you need the flash to make the picture: even though the picture will work, you can't see to compose it.
it's been stable by Hans standards(i.e. officially released) for the last year Hans's standards must be pretty low, then; when it was first released, it was known to be very fragile and lose data easily. Has it improved since then? We're talking about code that *must* be utterly reliable, and Hans's record in that regard is pretty lousy.
If you're running an SMP AMD64, you need this version to avoid random segfaults. It turns out that 4-level page table support on all but very current AMDs tickles a processor bug. See this discussion on the kernel Bugzilla for more detail than you ever wanted to know.
This would have been funny, too, except that he does not drink. (Or use recreational drugs, either, so showing up stoned out of his gourd is out as well.)
Merciful $DEITY. TOu claim a moonbat like RMS as your idol and believe that ESR having fun casts discredit on the open source community?
Render unto me a ****ing break.
Anyone who's read ESR's writings knows that this is definitely not the way he deals with the world in general. He's a professional to the core. This situation was simply too funny to pass up the opportunity.
I would have been much more restrained, myself, but then I can't afford to burn bridges. ESR's bridges with Microsoft were smoldering ash long before this happened.
Why do I get the feeling you are a college graduate?
All that piece of sheepskin proves is that you were willing to put up with four years of BS. It says exactly zero about your skill, ability to learn, or competence.
NIU still does have a mainframe program. It's very good, and has lots of very good people working in it. The leader, Dr. Robert Rannie, is a legend in the mainframe world, and a hell of a nice guy to boot. He's been there and done that in the real world, too.
I know for a fact that VISA, MasterCard (yes, the associations), and AmEx all use IBM mainframe clusters running TPF. VISA and MasterCard use them for their clearinghouse functions.
When you need to handle tens of thousands of transactions a second, all dat, every day, without fail, only a mainframe can handle the job.
I constantly hear things like "you're using !FIVE PERCENT! of the CPU when you're processing transactions." Five percent of a multi-million dollar mainframe is not chump change.
Efficiency counts in a system that's expected to serve thousands of users with subsecond response times reliably. If you can't just throw more CPU at a problem, then you have to actually pay attention to writing small, fast, efficient programs.
The bit about record types is the same thing. That was designed in 1964 when it mattered how you stored data on the disk, both for efficient use of limited disk space and for efficient use of the processor. It's hard for Unix geeks to wrap their minds around it, but there are reasons for it - and they all stem from a fundamentally different approach to computing. That's why Gates's Law (the converse of Moore's Law: software will get twice as inefficient every 18 months) has never hammered the mainframe world as it has the small computer world.
In fact I have repeatedly found mainframe folk who are overly proud of their transaction systems to be way behind the curve in expectations. Tell that to the folks at VISA, MasterCard, American Express, the major airlines... who are all processing tens of thousands of transactions per second, all day, every day, with uptimes measured in years. They're all doing it on mainframes.
Some executive VP probably read one too many articles on the airplane about how the mainframe is dying. That's how it usually goes.Mainframe computing, although still the most reliable and often most cost-effective, is just not fashionable.
You got it. Unix shops are learning lessons now the hard way that mainframe shops learned the hard way 40 years ago, and they're evolving the same answers.
Even if the derived works are closed source, there's nothing stopping someone sufficiently dedicated and interested from duplicating those features in an open source program.
The simple fact is that if, say, the BSD TCP/IP stack were GPLed, Microsoft wouldn't have used it anyway and published the source code. They would simply have continued with their own buggy stack. The GPL is totally ineffective at its stated objective, creating a body of work so compelling that it would supplant closed source software entirely. Companies are going to avoid GPLed software if there's any hint of a possibility of it forcing them to open their source.
You could run X on your SGI just fine. You couldn't run 4dwm on that, though.
You and the rest of the GPL zealots listen to yourselves too much. If X had been GPLed, the computer manufacturers would simply have chosen some other windowing system. The big reason that X beat out NeWS, for example, was that X was freely available to use and modify without forcing others to do anything.
Slashdot Mirror
I use the optical finder in my Canon S410 exclusively, even in the darkest rooms. I quit trying to use the LCD screen on digicams way back with a Minolta Dimage V, which was what convinced me that LCD "viewfinders" were worthless in low light.
The camera looks nice. and that they went to Schneider Kreuznach for their optics is a major plus. Unfortunately, the total lack of an optical viewfinder is a major drawback. The problem with LCD-only viewfinders is that they're useless for trying to take a picture in an area dark enough that you need the flash to make the picture: even though the picture will work, you can't see to compose it.
It's a real shame that 1) the guy only did Windows archivers, and 2) SBC Archiver is no longer in active development, closed source, and Windows-only.
it's been stable by Hans standards(i.e. officially released) for the last year
Hans's standards must be pretty low, then; when it was first released, it was known to be very fragile and lose data easily. Has it improved since then? We're talking about code that *must* be utterly reliable, and Hans's record in that regard is pretty lousy.
If you're running an SMP AMD64, you need this version to avoid random segfaults. It turns out that 4-level page table support on all but very current AMDs tickles a processor bug. See this discussion on the kernel Bugzilla for more detail than you ever wanted to know.
Is reiser4 ready for prime time yet? The last I heard (admittedly, a year ago), it was nowhere that stable.
You should try your hand at children's poetry. I have a feeling you'd be good at it. That got to be positively Seussian.
Don't piss Cathy Raymond off. She shoots as well as Eric does.
This would have been funny, too, except that he does not drink. (Or use recreational drugs, either, so showing up stoned out of his gourd is out as well.)
Merciful $DEITY. TOu claim a moonbat like RMS as your idol and believe that ESR having fun casts discredit on the open source community?
Render unto me a ****ing break.
Anyone who's read ESR's writings knows that this is definitely not the way he deals with the world in general. He's a professional to the core. This situation was simply too funny to pass up the opportunity.
I would have been much more restrained, myself, but then I can't afford to burn bridges. ESR's bridges with Microsoft were smoldering ash long before this happened.
Maybe Gates needed an acolyte for his cathedral.
That was the category I submitted this story under yesterday afternoon...
Why do I get the feeling you are a college graduate?
All that piece of sheepskin proves is that you were willing to put up with four years of BS. It says exactly zero about your skill, ability to learn, or competence.
How do you get on his bad side?! He's one of the most easygoing people I've met.
NIU still does have a mainframe program. It's very good, and has lots of very good people working in it. The leader, Dr. Robert Rannie, is a legend in the mainframe world, and a hell of a nice guy to boot. He's been there and done that in the real world, too.
Just write an emulator.
Check out Hercules.
I know for a fact that VISA, MasterCard (yes, the associations), and AmEx all use IBM mainframe clusters running TPF. VISA and MasterCard use them for their clearinghouse functions.
When you need to handle tens of thousands of transactions a second, all dat, every day, without fail, only a mainframe can handle the job.
I constantly hear things like "you're using !FIVE PERCENT! of the CPU when you're processing transactions."
Five percent of a multi-million dollar mainframe is not chump change.
Efficiency counts in a system that's expected to serve thousands of users with subsecond response times reliably. If you can't just throw more CPU at a problem, then you have to actually pay attention to writing small, fast, efficient programs.
The bit about record types is the same thing. That was designed in 1964 when it mattered how you stored data on the disk, both for efficient use of limited disk space and for efficient use of the processor. It's hard for Unix geeks to wrap their minds around it, but there are reasons for it - and they all stem from a fundamentally different approach to computing. That's why Gates's Law (the converse of Moore's Law: software will get twice as inefficient every 18 months) has never hammered the mainframe world as it has the small computer world.
In fact I have repeatedly found mainframe folk who are overly proud of their transaction systems to be way behind the curve in expectations.
Tell that to the folks at VISA, MasterCard, American Express, the major airlines... who are all processing tens of thousands of transactions per second, all day, every day, with uptimes measured in years. They're all doing it on mainframes.
Actually you only have to fetch one word (4 bytes)
All the world is not a VAX, or a Pentium...
Some executive VP probably read one too many articles on the airplane about how the mainframe is dying. That's how it usually goes.Mainframe computing, although still the most reliable and often most cost-effective, is just not fashionable.
You got it. Unix shops are learning lessons now the hard way that mainframe shops learned the hard way 40 years ago, and they're evolving the same answers.
Indeed. I was wondering if the group would make up its collective mind.
FWIW, I wouldn't wear the costume on a bicycle...too easy to damage it, and I've only got the one, still.
Even if the derived works are closed source, there's nothing stopping someone sufficiently dedicated and interested from duplicating those features in an open source program.
The simple fact is that if, say, the BSD TCP/IP stack were GPLed, Microsoft wouldn't have used it anyway and published the source code. They would simply have continued with their own buggy stack. The GPL is totally ineffective at its stated objective, creating a body of work so compelling that it would supplant closed source software entirely. Companies are going to avoid GPLed software if there's any hint of a possibility of it forcing them to open their source.
You could run X on your SGI just fine. You couldn't run 4dwm on that, though.
You and the rest of the GPL zealots listen to yourselves too much. If X had been GPLed, the computer manufacturers would simply have chosen some other windowing system. The big reason that X beat out NeWS, for example, was that X was freely available to use and modify without forcing others to do anything.