Linux circa 1998 would be far more stable, and far safer, than Windows 98. Everyone loves to joke about how often Win98 crashes, but when it's running your car, it's no joke. It really is only a matter of time (a short matter) before Win98 crashes, and then what happens to your car?
When you're talking about controlling a critical system, stability is also critical. The old 2.0 Linux kernel was and is quite stable, unlike Win98.
Clearcase is great until you actually want to use it for something, or until something goes wrong. Good luck sorting through the Clearcase registry, or trying to recover someone's changes when it breaks.
I've been using Clearcase for over 2 years now, and administering it for 8 months. We've been slowly making the switch over to CVS for the past few months, and it's amazing how straight forward it is. We haven't had a single problem.
CVS is far more appropriate for us, especially since we have a fairly small development team. Perhaps Clearcase would still be ok for a very large corporate development department, but for most people CVS is more than adequate.
Hmmm, you want isolated and desolate? Try Alaska. Maybe then we could finally tap into some of the oil reserves there as well, since the environment would already be in "questionable" state.
It's not the car's fault for burning the foreign oil you put in it, it's our fault (as a country) for relying so heavily on foreign oil in the first place.
Ahh, yes, please stop buying SUV's, if that makes you feel better. And stop using so much gasoline and electricity. Don't buy as many computer parts, and definitely stop buying up our precious coastline. That should lower the demand enough for me to be able to get a cheap SUV with cheap gas, a nice new computer, and beach home. So now we're all happy!
Well, I hate to say it, but too bad. It's not like Moby is now living on the street because his record sales have slowed.
Some people seem to be of the opinion that an artist has *the Right* to make zillions on record sales and such. There is no such right, sorry. If you can't make it as an artist, try getting a real job like everyone else.
I'm a programmer, and no one cares about the market trends or labor issues involved if I got layed off, or took a pay cut. That's life, buy a @#$%&*! helmet.
I think it would be ridiculous to hold a software company liable for insecure software. It's your responsibility to ensure that the software you use is secure, period. Just as it's your responsibility to update and maintain it.
Given Microsoft's track record, it also seems silly for one to think that using their software (even patched and updated) will provide a high level of security. These are choices you can make when deciding what to run on your servers or desktops.
Here we see another strength of open source software: you don't need to trust a company to produce secure software. You can see for yourself what the software is doing.
Also, some security holes are caused simply by using software for purposes contrary to its original design. It is unreasonable to expect a company to attempt to forsee every possible malicious use of their software or be responsible for as much.
If software companies are made liable for insecure software, this will work against consumers. It will become more difficult and expensive to sell software, and fewer companies will be able to do it. This means fewer products on the market and fewer options, as well as fewer jobs for the rest of us (here's the rub).
------
2 + 2 = 5 (for sufficiently large values of 2)
I wonder if well managed SW company even exists
on
Do You Like Your Job?
·
· Score: 1
I work for small (and rapidly shrinking) company still hanging on from the dot-com era. Our management is nothing short of terrible. We've been told that it's the *management* team that gives the company value. Our management actually believes this!
So, when it comes time for layoffs, we pick and choose among the developers and other worker bees, instead of the bloated executive staff. As if laying off an underpaid developer who actually creates the product we sell will save more money than getting rid of an exec who doesn't turn a buck for the company. Incredible!
We're now so top heavy, if our company was a weeble we'd be standing on our heads. In a company of approximately 25 people, 6 are executives, but we only have 3 developers left! Do the math there.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that floppy drives still sell for ~$25 or more. I don't know why they're so expensive, how old is this technology again?
Linux circa 1998 would be far more stable, and far safer, than Windows 98. Everyone loves to joke about how often Win98 crashes, but when it's running your car, it's no joke. It really is only a matter of time (a short matter) before Win98 crashes, and then what happens to your car?
When you're talking about controlling a critical system, stability is also critical. The old 2.0 Linux kernel was and is quite stable, unlike Win98.
Clearcase is great until you actually want to use it for something, or until something goes wrong.
Good luck sorting through the Clearcase registry, or trying to recover someone's changes when it breaks.
I've been using Clearcase for over 2 years now, and administering it for 8 months. We've been slowly making the switch over to CVS for the past few months, and it's amazing how straight forward it is. We haven't had a single problem.
CVS is far more appropriate for us, especially since we have a fairly small development team. Perhaps Clearcase would still be ok for a very large corporate development department, but for most people CVS is more than adequate.
desolate: adj. uninhabited, abandoned --Webster's College Dictionary.
Alaska is, in fact, quite desolate, especially northern Alaska.
And how wonderfully off topic we are now.
Hmmm, you want isolated and desolate? Try Alaska. Maybe then we could finally tap into some of the oil reserves there as well, since the environment would already be in "questionable" state.
It's not the car's fault for burning the foreign oil you put in it, it's our fault (as a country) for relying so heavily on foreign oil in the first place.
I heard there's some up in Alaska though, hmmm...
Ahh, yes, please stop buying SUV's, if that makes you feel better. And stop using so much gasoline and electricity. Don't buy as many computer parts, and definitely stop buying up our precious coastline.
That should lower the demand enough for me to be able to get a cheap SUV with cheap gas, a nice new computer, and beach home. So now we're all happy!
2 + 2 = 5 (for sufficiently large values of 2)
Well, I hate to say it, but too bad. It's not like Moby is now living on the street because his record sales have slowed.
Some people seem to be of the opinion that an artist has *the Right* to make zillions on record sales and such. There is no such right, sorry. If you can't make it as an artist, try getting a real job like everyone else.
I'm a programmer, and no one cares about the market trends or labor issues involved if I got layed off, or took a pay cut. That's life, buy a @#$%&*! helmet.
Step and repeat.
I think it would be ridiculous to hold a software company liable for insecure software. It's your responsibility to ensure that the software you use is secure, period. Just as it's your responsibility to update and maintain it.
Given Microsoft's track record, it also seems silly for one to think that using their software (even patched and updated) will provide a high level of security. These are choices you can make when deciding what to run on your servers or desktops.
Here we see another strength of open source software: you don't need to trust a company to produce secure software. You can see for yourself what the software is doing.
Also, some security holes are caused simply by using software for purposes contrary to its original design. It is unreasonable to expect a company to attempt to forsee every possible malicious use of their software or be responsible for as much.
If software companies are made liable for insecure software, this will work against consumers. It will become more difficult and expensive to sell software, and fewer companies will be able to do it. This means fewer products on the market and fewer options, as well as fewer jobs for the rest of us (here's the rub).
------
2 + 2 = 5 (for sufficiently large values of 2)
I work for small (and rapidly shrinking) company still hanging on from the dot-com era. Our management is nothing short of terrible. We've been told that it's the *management* team that gives the company value. Our management actually believes this!
So, when it comes time for layoffs, we pick and choose among the developers and other worker bees, instead of the bloated executive staff. As if laying off an underpaid developer who actually creates the product we sell will save more money than getting rid of an exec who doesn't turn a buck for the company. Incredible!
We're now so top heavy, if our company was a weeble we'd be standing on our heads. In a company of approximately 25 people, 6 are executives, but we only have 3 developers left! Do the math there.
Is there a well managed SW company out there?
------
2 + 2 = 5 (for sufficiently high values of 2)