They were very innovative. However as has been said in other posts, they've gotten caught in an innovation trap and have been essentially releasing nothing but small bug fixes for close to a decade now. For all intents and purposes the enlightenment you used on SuSe 6.3 is exactly the same as the on they've currently got in stable release.
Well mostly because it's a natural boundary not an artificial one.
I don't necessarily want to be friends with my boss, and even in cases where I am, there has to be "friend" boss, and "boss" boss, in order for that to work. Extending that out to colleagues you are not friends with is even worse. My work life and my personal life are and must remain separate, because that's the way life works. Your boss doesn't need to know you got really drunk last night, and your friends don't need to know the confidential details of your most recent work project.
That said, I personally find that PHP is a bad fit for an enterprise level system, so I'm not a big fan of drupal(or for that matter any of the other miss the boat systems of its ilk). Enterprise social networking however, if done for the right reasons and with the right focus is quite useful.
That said, money begets money so if you have a lot of it's a hell of a lot easier to get more. Education is expensive for your kids, social connections make getting a job a lot easier, and if you've got a hundred grand you can afford to lose it's a lot easier to make a killing on the stock market or get in on the ground floor of some major new product.
Not everyone who is rich deserves to be, and a lot of the people who are poor are there because despite hard work, they never had the opportunities a lot of the wealthy had. Yes there are always people who manage to pull themselves up by their bootstraps from extreme poverty to extreme wealth, but they are few and far between. I would suggest that nearly everyone on slashdot is not capable of doing so, including myself. I do pretty well for myself, but while I wasn't rich by any means I had a lot of opportunities. I never had to try focus on my education in a school rife with violence or find a part time job in an area where the only real economic activity is drug distribution and crime. I got to grow up lower middle class, go to a good school, get a university education and never get shot at.
While not everyone has to be rich, we don't need to have people who do not earn enough to survive. We do not have to have people living in slums. We do not have to have kids who have no access to adequate health care, food, or education. None of those things are necessary for even our current economic model to work.
The vast majority of the population doesn't necessarily have to be relatively well off, they just need to have access to the basic necessities of life, food, shelter, clothing, education, health care, safe streets, all the things most of us took for granted growing up and still do. Even guaranteeing those things to children who can't control who their parents are would be a start. Anyone who can argue that some 6 year old shouldn't be allowed adequate nutrition because their parents are losers is an asshole and should go die in a fire.
Some rich people work hard and contribute to society. Some of them build companies which provide jobs or improve the standards of living of everyone. Some of them just run companies into the ground or siphon off funds to make themselves rich. You could argue that perhaps the one deserves some relief from taxes since they provide so much other value to society, but far far far too much of that richest 1% are in the other category, and most of the good ones end up in the upper middle classes working hard at a small business.
WINE emulates windows on Linux and other Operating Systems. That's almost exclusively what it's used for. Yes you can replace the Windows API with WINE's version, but nobody does that. People use WINE as an emulator and so that's what it is.
No, glibc is an implementation of the POSIX standard, as is OpenJVM of the Java standard. You have defined APIs and defined returns and you implement that standard.
That's not what WINE does. WINE takes an existing API and emulates it, it's not based on any particular standard, they work it all out by guesswork and API documentation. It's used to emulate the Windows APIs on another system, so you can run Windows software. In all reality VMWare is an emulator too, it emulates a physical PC which you can then install an OS on. It does other things as well, but that doesn't stop it being an emulator.
Wine is an emulator(yes I know that it claims not to be, but it is). It emulates Windows(or at least a part of windows) on Linux. Yes it emulates system calls instead of emulating an OS, but that's really neither here nor there. I think that initially there might have been some other intended direction for the product, but it's pretty much only used now to run Windows software on Linux. There's no technical reason they couldn't implement some additional translation into their API emulations. There may be philosophical reasons, but generally I find that pretending your successful open source product is for something other than what people actually use it for is a pretty good way to piss off your users and wipe out your success.
Well that sort of depends upon what kind of book, what it's made of, what the ink is made of, how wet, and what happens to it afterwards. What happens to your artificial rock substrate DVD if you bend it?
That's really not the point. The point is that while you can still destroy these things(you can destroy anything), they'll still provide quite reasonable data archiving, and they're a hell of a lot better than the current available options.
Even the price point on the drive isn't really that bad if you consider that the only other reasonable solution for reliable long term storage is the process used to make the commercially distributed ones and the equipment for that is much more expensive.
The biggest problem with DVDs at the moment is that you can never be sure when they'll start to fail, even under the best of circumstances(let alone average home use). Since it could be 5 years or it could be a couple months, it's almost impossible to set up a workable backup schedule to maintain them. This is kind of a problem for people since these days most people have quite a lot of valuable(usually sentimental value) digital data and no real reliable long term way to store it.
Even if these things only really last for 50 years, and not 100, that's generally speaking enough that for most peoples purposes the data will last long enough, and that for the purposes where longer term storage is important, you can actually manage that without having a few thousand copies of your data by the time you've been archiving it for a couple of years. The price point is still a little high, but if it works that'll drop quite substantially over time, and is certainly within a viable range for someone with a commercial interest in archiving data.
That's true, but it can survive sitting in around in your house for a few hundred years(in theory) which, while not any better than a book, is at least as good as one.
That said, the CERT advisories aren't really all that accurate either since I think you'll find that a lot of them are for IE6 which even Microsoft will tell you is a steaming pile of shit.
IE8 is a hell of a lot better(though not enough to make me give up firefox, noscript and firebug), and Microsoft are really starting to get their act together for whatever reason. They've screwed up in the past(as have most companies that have been around that long, and they'll almost certainly screw up in the future, but they are getting better lately.
No, this is what happens when you sign up for a service and agree to the terms of that service.
It wouldn't matter if the Xbox was completely open source, you're agreeing to Microsoft's ToS to connect to Xbox Live. Those ToS include the fact that they'll only provide that service to non modified consoles. They're perfectly within their rights to do that, and since all that is basically server side, they could continue to do so even if you were connecting to it with a Linux box built from parts you built yourself.
I didn't say that economics didn't work, I didn't say that this data wasn't useful. My comment was specific to Game theory.
TFA was about predicting the Nash equilibrium, which is a relatively pointless exercise since it can't be achieved even if you knew what it was because people are not rational.
The original study wasn't just about empathy either, some people did the $9 $1 split, but most of the people they did it to refused to screw them over for being greedy.
You can make perfectly valid economic predictions. You just can't ever make them based on the idea that people will act rationally(in an economic context) because in nearly every case where it's actually important they don't.
Oracle is internally, as I understand it, an eclipse shop. They always have been. They've got Jbuilder for some specific applications, but for the most part it's eclipse all the way. Sun has tried a number of times to change this, but it's never worked, Oracle just doesn't like NetBeans much. When you combine that with the fact that it's not a hugely popular product(it's a lot more limited and a lot less powerful than eclipse) it's not really a huge shocker they're not going to pour resources into it. They're already working heavily with the eclipse project(including donating a rather large chunk of source code to them) and of course JBuilder as well. Maintaining a third IDE which they don't believe in and don't seem to particularly like and which isn't tremendously popular wouldn't really be terribly sensible of them.
On the plus side for all you NetBeans fans out there, it's all open source and it's all written in Java so you can all get together and maintain it yourself(if you're using NetBeans you're almost certainly a Java developer so there's no excuse). If it's not worth it to you, learn to use Eclipse like everyone else. It's a bitch to set up, but it's incredibly powerful.
I dunno about you, but I reckon most people would take an increased risk of breast cancer(or even a straight up mastectomy) over what happens to you with PD, not a fun way to die as I understand it and die you will.
I remember a few years back some economists doing a study where they gave one person $10 and they could any amount to another person and if they accepted it they both got to keep the cash.
I seem to recall all the game theorists being shocked that their predicted ideal result(guy 1 gives $1 to guy 2 who accepts the $1 because $1 is better than nothing) didn't happen.
People are not rational, at least not for any value of rational that any economist has ever managed to define.
No one is saying that the national debt in the US isn't outrageous and doesn't need to be reduced, rather desperately(thanks dubya).
What people are saying is that aside from the fact that reasonable social services provide a stabilizing affect on economies(generally the highs and lows are less extreme) and that a healthier population would be overall better off, this is the first time that this kind of bill has ever had a chance of passing, and it may very well be the last.
The system isn't perfect of course, it'd be better to cut the HMO's out entirely and just offer health care to people in exchange for a reasonable tax levy, but it's a hell of a lot better than things are now, and while from a prudent perspective it probably isn't the best time to be spending money on anything at all, sometimes you've got to grab opportunity with both hands.
Hopefully along with these sorts of changes we'll see cuts in the amount of other spending and maybe just maybe the big government spend thrift social program democrats can get the budget in control before the next small government republicans can come along and wrack up huge amounts of debt again.
And you don't find a problem with the fact that your health insurance, with a high deductible(which would likely bankrupt you if you really needed expensive treatment) costs you more than half of what you're paying for your house?
The problem with all this stuff(and mind you this system doesn't really fix it that well) is that sick people generally don't make the same amount of money as healthy people and so when you actually need health insurance you usually can't actually afford to have it.
The problem with that is that in the US system, if you're unemployed, unless you're also independently wealthy, you almost certainly will not be able to afford to maintain your insurance premiums. Self insurance is insanely expensive, most employed people wouldn't be able to cover it.
This means that if John Smith is covered by his parents till hi finishes college, gets a job works hard and pays his premiums for 20 years, and then gets cancer and can't work(and therefor can't continue to make his insurance payments) he's screwed. If he passes that time limit and they're allowed to call it a pre-existing condition no HMO will cover him.
It's one thing to say you can't get in a car accident and then get insurance to cover it, that's perfectly fair. It's another to say that because you lost your job, or your husband or wife lost their job through no fault of their own that you're not going to be covered even if you paid premiums your whole life.
There are some pretty easy ways to solve patients rorting the system anyway. You can either make coverage mandatory and pay for it with taxes(which is what we do for our public health insurance here in Australia) or you can put a waiting period for hospital cover(which is what we do on our private insurance).
The US pays an absolutely extraordinary amount for health insurance, far more per capita than pretty much any other nation in the world. Which is pretty damned impressive when you consider how many people in the country are uninsured. If you took all that money that everyone is paying, and pumped it into a public system, like the one which pretty much every western nation in the world other than the US has and runs reasonably successfully, you could have a top notch system with great coverage for everyone without anyone paying one dime extra. You could probably distribute the costs better and get some better efficiency and offer a great system and cut the expenditures it costs an awful lot to run an HMO after all, not even counting profits.
That won't happen of course since the US is so desperately afraid of actually letting their government do anything actually productive with their tax dollars like actually offering halfway decent public services and would much rather pay for guns or bailing out wall street millionaires, but at the least this new system might not screw over people who just have bad luck.
As much as I like AMD they killed themselves. Lots of companies bought AMD chips, both in servers and in desktops. For quite a while after the Itanium debacle and Intel's architecture mistakes they were the preferred chipset. They gained massive amounts of market share. That said, market share takes a long time to acquire in this sort of market, most machines have a replacement cycle of 3-4 years or more and they weren't so massively good that they were getting every single sale. Under those circumstances 25% was pretty damned good.
The problem was that the times of AMD's dominance also coincided with essentially the highest average CPU prices I've seen since I started buying. I paid over $AU500 for my 4200+ three and a half years ago. This left the door open for Intel to come in with a chip that was just as fast or faster and cost about half the price. Needless to say that blew a pretty big hole in AMDs market share rise, and their subsequent failure to even have anything that can compete with Intel's middle end, let alone high end basically finished them off.
Even this claim doesn't argue that Intel sold those CPUs at a loss or anything like that, and when your competitor can come back from what was essentially almost the dead with something that outperforms your best offering for less than half the price, you deserve to fail.
It won't actually break your brakes. It will prevent them from working for the duration of that particular stop.
You won't kill anyone by saying "do not ever pump the breaks on a car with power assist braking". It's just never a good idea. Will it damage your brakes, no. Will it 99.99% of the time mean you're going to have one hell of a time actually stopping the car. Hell yes. Even in cars which handle it, it's not a good idea. Pumping the breaks used to work, it doesn't anymore.
That's true, however I'd place a distinction between Computer Aided Development, and Computer Aided Software Engineering. CAD would be tools which help a developer develop. CASE was supposed to do the development itself.
There's a big difference between a nail gun and a computer which builds a house for you from blueprints.
Compilers are probably blurring this line, but even then they only work with the code they've been given by someone else. To stick with the metaphor they're a nail gun which measures the surface you put it against and picks the right kind of nail and the right kind of force to use, clever, but still a tool.
That's a tool which allows you to design a gui and implement it in code, which is a clearly defined case. A button here results in this code, a button there results in that code. All very simple.
Case was about replacing programmers. It was the idea that if you described the problem in the right way a computer would do all that nasty programming for you and you wouldn't have to actually hire someone to write your code. UML was supposed to go down that path, describe the problem in UML and the solution would magically happen at the back end.
The fact that we can now do simple repeatable tasks automatically isn't anything close to what CASE was supposed to offer.
Slashdot Mirror
They were very innovative. However as has been said in other posts, they've gotten caught in an innovation trap and have been essentially releasing nothing but small bug fixes for close to a decade now. For all intents and purposes the enlightenment you used on SuSe 6.3 is exactly the same as the on they've currently got in stable release.
I accept your challenge and answer it with Microsoft Office Sharepoint.
It's expensive, and it's not perfect, but if you know how to use Office you can use it right out of the box. That's why it's expensive.
Well mostly because it's a natural boundary not an artificial one.
I don't necessarily want to be friends with my boss, and even in cases where I am, there has to be "friend" boss, and "boss" boss, in order for that to work. Extending that out to colleagues you are not friends with is even worse. My work life and my personal life are and must remain separate, because that's the way life works. Your boss doesn't need to know you got really drunk last night, and your friends don't need to know the confidential details of your most recent work project.
That said, I personally find that PHP is a bad fit for an enterprise level system, so I'm not a big fan of drupal(or for that matter any of the other miss the boat systems of its ilk). Enterprise social networking however, if done for the right reasons and with the right focus is quite useful.
It's true that not everyone can be rich.
It's also true that not everyone is equal.
That said, money begets money so if you have a lot of it's a hell of a lot easier to get more. Education is expensive for your kids, social connections make getting a job a lot easier, and if you've got a hundred grand you can afford to lose it's a lot easier to make a killing on the stock market or get in on the ground floor of some major new product.
Not everyone who is rich deserves to be, and a lot of the people who are poor are there because despite hard work, they never had the opportunities a lot of the wealthy had. Yes there are always people who manage to pull themselves up by their bootstraps from extreme poverty to extreme wealth, but they are few and far between. I would suggest that nearly everyone on slashdot is not capable of doing so, including myself. I do pretty well for myself, but while I wasn't rich by any means I had a lot of opportunities. I never had to try focus on my education in a school rife with violence or find a part time job in an area where the only real economic activity is drug distribution and crime. I got to grow up lower middle class, go to a good school, get a university education and never get shot at.
While not everyone has to be rich, we don't need to have people who do not earn enough to survive. We do not have to have people living in slums. We do not have to have kids who have no access to adequate health care, food, or education. None of those things are necessary for even our current economic model to work.
The vast majority of the population doesn't necessarily have to be relatively well off, they just need to have access to the basic necessities of life, food, shelter, clothing, education, health care, safe streets, all the things most of us took for granted growing up and still do. Even guaranteeing those things to children who can't control who their parents are would be a start. Anyone who can argue that some 6 year old shouldn't be allowed adequate nutrition because their parents are losers is an asshole and should go die in a fire.
Some rich people work hard and contribute to society. Some of them build companies which provide jobs or improve the standards of living of everyone. Some of them just run companies into the ground or siphon off funds to make themselves rich. You could argue that perhaps the one deserves some relief from taxes since they provide so much other value to society, but far far far too much of that richest 1% are in the other category, and most of the good ones end up in the upper middle classes working hard at a small business.
WINE emulates windows on Linux and other Operating Systems. That's almost exclusively what it's used for. Yes you can replace the Windows API with WINE's version, but nobody does that. People use WINE as an emulator and so that's what it is.
That would be internet searching and advertising for 500 Alex.
Yes there are other players in both sectors, but none big enough to matter.
No, glibc is an implementation of the POSIX standard, as is OpenJVM of the Java standard. You have defined APIs and defined returns and you implement that standard.
That's not what WINE does. WINE takes an existing API and emulates it, it's not based on any particular standard, they work it all out by guesswork and API documentation. It's used to emulate the Windows APIs on another system, so you can run Windows software. In all reality VMWare is an emulator too, it emulates a physical PC which you can then install an OS on. It does other things as well, but that doesn't stop it being an emulator.
Wine is an emulator(yes I know that it claims not to be, but it is). It emulates Windows(or at least a part of windows) on Linux. Yes it emulates system calls instead of emulating an OS, but that's really neither here nor there. I think that initially there might have been some other intended direction for the product, but it's pretty much only used now to run Windows software on Linux. There's no technical reason they couldn't implement some additional translation into their API emulations. There may be philosophical reasons, but generally I find that pretending your successful open source product is for something other than what people actually use it for is a pretty good way to piss off your users and wipe out your success.
Well that sort of depends upon what kind of book, what it's made of, what the ink is made of, how wet, and what happens to it afterwards. What happens to your artificial rock substrate DVD if you bend it?
That's really not the point. The point is that while you can still destroy these things(you can destroy anything), they'll still provide quite reasonable data archiving, and they're a hell of a lot better than the current available options.
Even the price point on the drive isn't really that bad if you consider that the only other reasonable solution for reliable long term storage is the process used to make the commercially distributed ones and the equipment for that is much more expensive.
The biggest problem with DVDs at the moment is that you can never be sure when they'll start to fail, even under the best of circumstances(let alone average home use). Since it could be 5 years or it could be a couple months, it's almost impossible to set up a workable backup schedule to maintain them. This is kind of a problem for people since these days most people have quite a lot of valuable(usually sentimental value) digital data and no real reliable long term way to store it.
Even if these things only really last for 50 years, and not 100, that's generally speaking enough that for most peoples purposes the data will last long enough, and that for the purposes where longer term storage is important, you can actually manage that without having a few thousand copies of your data by the time you've been archiving it for a couple of years. The price point is still a little high, but if it works that'll drop quite substantially over time, and is certainly within a viable range for someone with a commercial interest in archiving data.
That's true, but it can survive sitting in around in your house for a few hundred years(in theory) which, while not any better than a book, is at least as good as one.
That might be true, but no one sells IE for cash, and all the alternative browsers in the world haven't made a dent in Windows sales.
That said, the CERT advisories aren't really all that accurate either since I think you'll find that a lot of them are for IE6 which even Microsoft will tell you is a steaming pile of shit.
IE8 is a hell of a lot better(though not enough to make me give up firefox, noscript and firebug), and Microsoft are really starting to get their act together for whatever reason. They've screwed up in the past(as have most companies that have been around that long, and they'll almost certainly screw up in the future, but they are getting better lately.
No, this is what happens when you sign up for a service and agree to the terms of that service.
It wouldn't matter if the Xbox was completely open source, you're agreeing to Microsoft's ToS to connect to Xbox Live. Those ToS include the fact that they'll only provide that service to non modified consoles. They're perfectly within their rights to do that, and since all that is basically server side, they could continue to do so even if you were connecting to it with a Linux box built from parts you built yourself.
I didn't say that economics didn't work, I didn't say that this data wasn't useful. My comment was specific to Game theory.
TFA was about predicting the Nash equilibrium, which is a relatively pointless exercise since it can't be achieved even if you knew what it was because people are not rational.
The original study wasn't just about empathy either, some people did the $9 $1 split, but most of the people they did it to refused to screw them over for being greedy.
You can make perfectly valid economic predictions. You just can't ever make them based on the idea that people will act rationally(in an economic context) because in nearly every case where it's actually important they don't.
Oracle is internally, as I understand it, an eclipse shop. They always have been. They've got Jbuilder for some specific applications, but for the most part it's eclipse all the way. Sun has tried a number of times to change this, but it's never worked, Oracle just doesn't like NetBeans much. When you combine that with the fact that it's not a hugely popular product(it's a lot more limited and a lot less powerful than eclipse) it's not really a huge shocker they're not going to pour resources into it. They're already working heavily with the eclipse project(including donating a rather large chunk of source code to them) and of course JBuilder as well. Maintaining a third IDE which they don't believe in and don't seem to particularly like and which isn't tremendously popular wouldn't really be terribly sensible of them.
On the plus side for all you NetBeans fans out there, it's all open source and it's all written in Java so you can all get together and maintain it yourself(if you're using NetBeans you're almost certainly a Java developer so there's no excuse). If it's not worth it to you, learn to use Eclipse like everyone else. It's a bitch to set up, but it's incredibly powerful.
I dunno about you, but I reckon most people would take an increased risk of breast cancer(or even a straight up mastectomy) over what happens to you with PD, not a fun way to die as I understand it and die you will.
I remember a few years back some economists doing a study where they gave one person $10 and they could any amount to another person and if they accepted it they both got to keep the cash.
I seem to recall all the game theorists being shocked that their predicted ideal result(guy 1 gives $1 to guy 2 who accepts the $1 because $1 is better than nothing) didn't happen.
People are not rational, at least not for any value of rational that any economist has ever managed to define.
No one is saying that the national debt in the US isn't outrageous and doesn't need to be reduced, rather desperately(thanks dubya).
What people are saying is that aside from the fact that reasonable social services provide a stabilizing affect on economies(generally the highs and lows are less extreme) and that a healthier population would be overall better off, this is the first time that this kind of bill has ever had a chance of passing, and it may very well be the last.
The system isn't perfect of course, it'd be better to cut the HMO's out entirely and just offer health care to people in exchange for a reasonable tax levy, but it's a hell of a lot better than things are now, and while from a prudent perspective it probably isn't the best time to be spending money on anything at all, sometimes you've got to grab opportunity with both hands.
Hopefully along with these sorts of changes we'll see cuts in the amount of other spending and maybe just maybe the big government spend thrift social program democrats can get the budget in control before the next small government republicans can come along and wrack up huge amounts of debt again.
And you don't find a problem with the fact that your health insurance, with a high deductible(which would likely bankrupt you if you really needed expensive treatment) costs you more than half of what you're paying for your house?
The problem with all this stuff(and mind you this system doesn't really fix it that well) is that sick people generally don't make the same amount of money as healthy people and so when you actually need health insurance you usually can't actually afford to have it.
The problem with that is that in the US system, if you're unemployed, unless you're also independently wealthy, you almost certainly will not be able to afford to maintain your insurance premiums. Self insurance is insanely expensive, most employed people wouldn't be able to cover it.
This means that if John Smith is covered by his parents till hi finishes college, gets a job works hard and pays his premiums for 20 years, and then gets cancer and can't work(and therefor can't continue to make his insurance payments) he's screwed. If he passes that time limit and they're allowed to call it a pre-existing condition no HMO will cover him.
It's one thing to say you can't get in a car accident and then get insurance to cover it, that's perfectly fair. It's another to say that because you lost your job, or your husband or wife lost their job through no fault of their own that you're not going to be covered even if you paid premiums your whole life.
There are some pretty easy ways to solve patients rorting the system anyway. You can either make coverage mandatory and pay for it with taxes(which is what we do for our public health insurance here in Australia) or you can put a waiting period for hospital cover(which is what we do on our private insurance).
The US pays an absolutely extraordinary amount for health insurance, far more per capita than pretty much any other nation in the world. Which is pretty damned impressive when you consider how many people in the country are uninsured. If you took all that money that everyone is paying, and pumped it into a public system, like the one which pretty much every western nation in the world other than the US has and runs reasonably successfully, you could have a top notch system with great coverage for everyone without anyone paying one dime extra. You could probably distribute the costs better and get some better efficiency and offer a great system and cut the expenditures it costs an awful lot to run an HMO after all, not even counting profits.
That won't happen of course since the US is so desperately afraid of actually letting their government do anything actually productive with their tax dollars like actually offering halfway decent public services and would much rather pay for guns or bailing out wall street millionaires, but at the least this new system might not screw over people who just have bad luck.
As much as I like AMD they killed themselves. Lots of companies bought AMD chips, both in servers and in desktops. For quite a while after the Itanium debacle and Intel's architecture mistakes they were the preferred chipset. They gained massive amounts of market share. That said, market share takes a long time to acquire in this sort of market, most machines have a replacement cycle of 3-4 years or more and they weren't so massively good that they were getting every single sale. Under those circumstances 25% was pretty damned good.
The problem was that the times of AMD's dominance also coincided with essentially the highest average CPU prices I've seen since I started buying. I paid over $AU500 for my 4200+ three and a half years ago. This left the door open for Intel to come in with a chip that was just as fast or faster and cost about half the price. Needless to say that blew a pretty big hole in AMDs market share rise, and their subsequent failure to even have anything that can compete with Intel's middle end, let alone high end basically finished them off.
Even this claim doesn't argue that Intel sold those CPUs at a loss or anything like that, and when your competitor can come back from what was essentially almost the dead with something that outperforms your best offering for less than half the price, you deserve to fail.
It won't actually break your brakes. It will prevent them from working for the duration of that particular stop.
You won't kill anyone by saying "do not ever pump the breaks on a car with power assist braking". It's just never a good idea. Will it damage your brakes, no. Will it 99.99% of the time mean you're going to have one hell of a time actually stopping the car. Hell yes. Even in cars which handle it, it's not a good idea. Pumping the breaks used to work, it doesn't anymore.
Pumping the brakes always causes brake failure in cars with power assist braking. It always has. That's why no one teaches you to do it anymore.
That's true, however I'd place a distinction between Computer Aided Development, and Computer Aided Software Engineering. CAD would be tools which help a developer develop. CASE was supposed to do the development itself.
There's a big difference between a nail gun and a computer which builds a house for you from blueprints.
Compilers are probably blurring this line, but even then they only work with the code they've been given by someone else. To stick with the metaphor they're a nail gun which measures the surface you put it against and picks the right kind of nail and the right kind of force to use, clever, but still a tool.
That's not CASE.
That's a tool which allows you to design a gui and implement it in code, which is a clearly defined case. A button here results in this code, a button there results in that code. All very simple.
Case was about replacing programmers. It was the idea that if you described the problem in the right way a computer would do all that nasty programming for you and you wouldn't have to actually hire someone to write your code. UML was supposed to go down that path, describe the problem in UML and the solution would magically happen at the back end.
The fact that we can now do simple repeatable tasks automatically isn't anything close to what CASE was supposed to offer.