Don't be a dipshit, (...) Hey Boomer, (...) Don't be doofus. (...)
Could be do this without the name calling?
I didn't specify obsolete, esoteric, idiomatic features of marginal utility, did I? I don't believe I spoke to the removal of antiquated and noxious features. No. I believe I was implying(hoping you would infer, maybe) that there was a removal of features which people FOUND KEENLY USEFUL.
I'm sorry, but you seem to completely miss my point. ODBMS != RDBMS. There was no 'removal' of features. Use of e.g. indexes in an rdbms is NOT a _goal_, it is a _method_ to reach a goal. The goal is to be able to retrieve sorted data (objects) in a fast way. An rdbms uses indexes for that. In an odbms, you can do it any way you want. Saying that odbms-es are bad because they e.g. lack indexes is as misplaced as saying that bicycles are bad because they lack a combustion engine.
In this instance, I was comparing the two data storage methods, and how the newer compared to the older. Fruit to fruit.
There is from a theoretical point of view nothing you can do with a relational database that you cannot do with a rdbms. If I paid better attention during my university classes I could probably give you the proof. I got the impression that you are hitting on odbms-es because they don't 'taste' like rdbms-es.
When you create an object data storage method, you are either going to handroll all the queries ahead of time, or provide a method for querying your objects. If someone needs to query your objects, they are relegated to one of three options: tracking down the coder and altering the source(yuck), hand-rolling their own solutions with your API(ugh...blackbox...), or rolling around with your queries in the hopes they can pull out what they need. These all BITE if you didn't do the design right for them. The odds of this are HIGH.
Again, this holds for relational databases as well as for objectbases. Letting a naive enduser fiddle around with SQL is as bad as letting him change sourcecode.
If someone is marketing a product as a replacement for another product(throw away your Oracle database, cuz its slooow!) they damn well better be able to live up to client expectations of the PREVIOUS product, nevermind the promises made about their new product being all shiny and better!
Everybody who (at this point in time) markets an odbms as being a snap-in replacement for an rdbms is overhyping. Again, they are two different products with their own characteristics. There are situations oracle cannot handle but an odbms can. CERN has got an odbms running which holds more data than any oracle db can.
This is where I think you should definitely have noticed that I was just fucking kidding around!
No, sorry. A lot of advantages of talking face to face or even over a telephone line are missing in an electronic discussion. You could be a 14 year old troll, a 30 year old database mgr, a 50 year old cobol-only developer, or whatever. I don't know. I cannot hear your voice, I cannot pick up on your body language. Also, English is not my native language. Without smileys/emoticons I have without knowing you virtually no way if you were kidding or not.
Your statements collide. If your company already has the Microsoft software, it's likely at least an OPTION if affordability is your concern. Then again, I've rarely seen affordable equated with best.
That depends on how you define the 'best'. Economic? Technical? Emotional? I tent to look more technical, companies more (short term) economical. And my statements do not collide: most companies I work for do have Microsoft software, but that does not mean I automatically use it. Right now I've got the only mdk linux desktop in the company I am at. Could also have gotten a Windows machine, but since I am developing in java at the moment linux is by far the better choice.
A short time ago I started trying to write a better 'getting started' guide for ozone, a java gpl odbms hosted on sourceforge. Although that guide is far from finished, drop me a line at leo at mekenkamp dt com, and I'll mail it to you.
Ah, how could I forget: this is slashdot, the easiest place in cyberspace to get misquoted;-)
Odbms-es are _newer_ than rdbms-es; I never said _anything_ on them simply being better. Both have their pro's and contra's
It has removed features that the likely clients have used extensively for years.
Removed features? So, car manufacturers in the early years removed the feature of horses in front of the carriage? Motorcycle manufacturers removed the oh so handy pedals found on (non-motorized) bicycles? There is no way to get home when your engine has gone kaputt! Outrageous. Odbms-es and rdbms-es are two completely different pieces of cake. You are comparing apples to pears (both fruits)
If someone tries to do something with your product that you didn't take into consideration at design time, it runs terribly slow.
And you say that is not the case with an rdbms? I have run into some great examples of rdbms-es not living up to their expectations because of bad design. I'm sure these sorts of examples can be found on odbms-es as well. Your point?
If your client doesn't appreciate the product, it's the fault of the client, not your product.
If I sell lemons, and someone buys a lemon from me, because he wants something sweet and tasty, then he should not complain to me the fruit is sour. Again, odbms != rdbms.
You work for Microsoft. Don't you.
Ah, slashdot... No. I do not work for Microsoft. I tend to choose the best (affordable) working software to fill my needs. And that is almost never stuff from Redmond.
I've still never heard a good answer to this problem, only that I'm using the wrong hammer.
(...) For instance, contrast "select last_activity, uid from users"(...)
You are trying to tighten a screw with a hammer here;-)
In order to use odbms-es in a good way you _must_ first let go of all relational persistence thoughts. Think about how you would solve the same problem in memory only, then move to an odbms.
Shameless plug for a GPL project I am involved in: ozone is a 100% java odbms. Developing takes place on sourceforge.
Ozone is a client-server proxy based object database system; although it is not multi-language, it seems to compare favourably to the prevalence project.
Although you certainly have a point, there are some remarks I have to make here:
There's no "SELECT * FROM USERS".
That's just like saying Latin is a bad language because it does not have equivalents for 'the', 'le/la', 'de/het', 'der/die/das', whatever. An rdbms is *fundamentally* different from an oodbms
DB Performance when querying outside the normal object hierarchy (...) is orders of magnitude SLOWER on an OODB!
That's right: you are trying to use a oodbms as a rdbms. Ever tried to drive a car like you ride a bicycle?
Oodbms are relatively new, and they have their 'problems', just like rdbms-es have theirs. But the biggest problems arise when one approaches an oodbms like one would an rdbms. Just like you run into problems using an oo language when you have only used a proc. language
Replace all electronic stuff to just using your voice, have a person as the main distributor and voila, you have prior art going back to the days of the first 'modern' democracy in ancient Greece. The agenda dictates the subjects, the chairman says who can speak and when.
And just for the fun of it: the chairman of the Dutch 'Tweede Kamer' (house of commons) has access to buttons which can turn all microphones on or off individually. Electronic prior art.
I can understand the part about imposing Microsoft proprietary technologies, protocols and formats;Employing abusive licensing and other exclusionary practices vis-à-vis PC OEMs to foreclose the PC OEM distribution channel to competing products... but what the hell does it have to do with bundling of additional apps along with Windows?
Say you start a PC hardware biz; customers ask for Windows, so you call Microsoft to ask how much Windows costs.
MS: that depends
you: on what?
MS: what are you going to install on those PCs you want to be selling?
you: mozilla, RealPlayer and OpenOffice
MS: okay, 150$ per PC.
you:what??? And what if I install nothing except for Windows itself?
MS: then it's $15. But then you already have a browser, media player, etc., so you don't need that other stuff. Aren't we just the best?
That's considered value-added incentive for the consumer. Hell, even major Linux distributions bundle browsers, media players and office productivity suites. And I am GLAD that such apps are included, therefore I don't need to buy a copy or download a free one.(emph. mine)
Different linux distibuters distribute different software from different sources. Microsoft only allows distibution of Microsoft s/w on windows pre-installed systems.
I think the CCIA has gone overzealous in its approach to pin MS. They should have gotten more facts correct before publishing this paper.
The facts are clear:Microsoft has been found guilty by the US courts (2x); the remedy is simply a teethless little dog.
Microsoft is guilty; because the US does not like to punish those with lots of money the CCIA looks at the EU to punish Microsoft for braking the law. Very understandable.
Makes me think of that Greek guy in ancient times that had invented steam powered machines, but his king did not want him to further work on his invention, fearing mass unemployment under his slaves....
The one thing I absolutely *loved* about TOS (The Original Series) was that they had 16:9 displays everywhere. This was ofcourse years before anyone in the electric biz started talking about this format for television sets.
Such a shame that feature is missing, and they have the boring old 4:3 display layout. Maybe NCC-1701 was more advanced than any of it's sister ships? It was Starfleets flagship...
Glad to be of service. If you ever get to the Netherlands and 'accuse' a real Fries (inhabitant of Friesland province) of being a 'Hollander', he might give you a good punch in the face. It's about as bad as calling a Scotsman an Englishman, or a Dallas southerner a yankee:-p
but the issue is that by simply visiting a website, I have entered into some sort of contract
Well, it is more than actually visiting, it is actively retrieving info from that site. In that use a link to the usage terms is provided.
If I can tuck a EULA somewhere in a website and bind people to conform to whatever that EULA says in other areas of the website, why can't I do that with real property?
That would certainly s*ck, and fortunately this isn't the case here. The terms of use are publicly displayed and almost impossible to miss. Also, as I stated in my example, the judge would _never_ have allowed anything 'strange' in the terms, as for instance a you-must-buy clause.
Using that logic, it is perfectly reasonable for a car dealership to require you to purchase something when you step on their property.
But it is the other way round. When a restaurant has a no shirt, no service policy, a half-naked customer can be refused, even if there is no 'no-shirt-no-service' sign. A judge will consider proper attire (sp?) normal for a restaurant. When you use the service of a website, and the terms for using that service are clearly stated and reasonable, the judge will rule against someone going against these rules. The 'law' for the normal world is extended to the internet world, not the other way round.
Unfortunately this world became legalistic and have lost the sense of good and bad. Intention doesn't matter. Only what's written on some WWW page with an Accept button.
That's one of the reasons why I like living in The Netherlands: if you were not sending out spam, not selling these addresses on spam-cds, not harassing the owners of the email addresses etc. etc. etc., the judge would not have found you in violation of the terms, as you were using them for personal reasons.
How I like living in a country were judges and politicians can be open about the fact that once in a while they smoke pot, and almost everybody is cool with that.
Just for the record, Holland != The Netherlands; 'Holland' is just a name for 2 provinces: North & South Holland. The Netherlands are made up of 12 provinces.
Back on topic: yes, if you are in The Netherlands and you are using a Dutch website (thus implying that you know Dutch), you are bound by Dutch law, that's no surprise. If you used the site without knowing any Dutch (which is technically possible) the judge would have taken that into account also. Dutch judges are far from brain-dead;
However (to abuse your example) if you were here in NL and visited a Dutch website for a Dutch car dealer which stated in it's click-through that by using that site you are bound in contract to buy a car there would not hold up in court. No court here in NL. No judge here would _ever_ find such a contract valid.
And you know why? Because when you visit a site one might reasonally expect NOT to be forced into buying something just by visiting that site. That is simply rediculous, and the judge knows it. Disallowing harvesting email addresses and using them for non-personal purposes is ethically, morally and law-technically perfectly normal, and a judge here takes that into account.
No, the judge just found that the 'do not harvest & abuse' clause was legitimate and binding. He/she did NOT say that you can put _anything_ in a clickwrap.
Not exactly; IIRC only verdicts by the highest court ('hoge raad') are more or less 'appended' to the law; these verdicts are also known as 'jurisprudentie'.
I certainly understand your line of reasoning since you are a US citizen. Here in The Netherlands judges have a different way of looking at law than where you come from, especially regarding contracts (IANAL, but IHSFWSL (I have some friends who studied law). In this case for instance, the judge found it perfectly acceptable that e-mailgids put the 'do not abuse our email addresses, they are for personal use only' clause in. That same judge would have probably whiped the floor with a 'you are not allowed to copy anything of our site' clause. Why? Because it is rediculous, and a judge over here knows it.
But Microsoft already has it's own linux distribution ready slated for release in november 2003. Knowing MS and it's slipping OS release dates this will probably end up being released in 2004.
My monitor sometimes thinks it is a crystal ball; using it I can predict future/. headlines. Here goes:
03-01-06 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC2 Now Available
03-01-14 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC3 Now Available
03-01-25 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC4 Now Available
03-02-02 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC5 Now Available
03-02-17 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0 Released
03-02-19 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0.1 Released
Funny thing though, apart from the different version numbers the discussion is always exactly the same...
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be a dipshit, (...) Hey Boomer, (...) Don't be doofus. (...)
Could be do this without the name calling?
I didn't specify obsolete, esoteric, idiomatic features of marginal utility, did I? I don't believe I spoke to the removal of antiquated and noxious features. No. I believe I was implying(hoping you would infer, maybe) that there was a removal of features which people FOUND KEENLY USEFUL.
I'm sorry, but you seem to completely miss my point. ODBMS != RDBMS. There was no 'removal' of features. Use of e.g. indexes in an rdbms is NOT a _goal_, it is a _method_ to reach a goal. The goal is to be able to retrieve sorted data (objects) in a fast way. An rdbms uses indexes for that. In an odbms, you can do it any way you want. Saying that odbms-es are bad because they e.g. lack indexes is as misplaced as saying that bicycles are bad because they lack a combustion engine.
In this instance, I was comparing the two data storage methods, and how the newer compared to the older. Fruit to fruit.
There is from a theoretical point of view nothing you can do with a relational database that you cannot do with a rdbms. If I paid better attention during my university classes I could probably give you the proof. I got the impression that you are hitting on odbms-es because they don't 'taste' like rdbms-es.
When you create an object data storage method, you are either going to handroll all the queries ahead of time, or provide a method for querying your objects. If someone needs to query your objects, they are relegated to one of three options: tracking down the coder and altering the source(yuck), hand-rolling their own solutions with your API(ugh...blackbox...), or rolling around with your queries in the hopes they can pull out what they need. These all BITE if you didn't do the design right for them. The odds of this are HIGH.
Again, this holds for relational databases as well as for objectbases. Letting a naive enduser fiddle around with SQL is as bad as letting him change sourcecode.
If someone is marketing a product as a replacement for another product(throw away your Oracle database, cuz its slooow!) they damn well better be able to live up to client expectations of the PREVIOUS product, nevermind the promises made about their new product being all shiny and better!
Everybody who (at this point in time) markets an odbms as being a snap-in replacement for an rdbms is overhyping. Again, they are two different products with their own characteristics. There are situations oracle cannot handle but an odbms can. CERN has got an odbms running which holds more data than any oracle db can.
This is where I think you should definitely have noticed that I was just fucking kidding around!
No, sorry. A lot of advantages of talking face to face or even over a telephone line are missing in an electronic discussion. You could be a 14 year old troll, a 30 year old database mgr, a 50 year old cobol-only developer, or whatever. I don't know. I cannot hear your voice, I cannot pick up on your body language. Also, English is not my native language. Without smileys/emoticons I have without knowing you virtually no way if you were kidding or not.
Your statements collide. If your company already has the Microsoft software, it's likely at least an OPTION if affordability is your concern. Then again, I've rarely seen affordable equated with best.
That depends on how you define the 'best'. Economic? Technical? Emotional? I tent to look more technical, companies more (short term) economical. And my statements do not collide: most companies I work for do have Microsoft software, but that does not mean I automatically use it. Right now I've got the only mdk linux desktop in the company I am at. Could also have gotten a Windows machine, but since I am developing in java at the moment linux is by far the better choice.
A short time ago I started trying to write a better 'getting started' guide for ozone, a java gpl odbms hosted on sourceforge. Although that guide is far from finished, drop me a line at leo at mekenkamp dt com, and I'll mail it to you.
Sooo.... You have a new and better product.
Ah, how could I forget: this is slashdot, the easiest place in cyberspace to get misquoted ;-)
Odbms-es are _newer_ than rdbms-es; I never said _anything_ on them simply being better. Both have their pro's and contra's
It has removed features that the likely clients have used extensively for years.
Removed features? So, car manufacturers in the early years removed the feature of horses in front of the carriage? Motorcycle manufacturers removed the oh so handy pedals found on (non-motorized) bicycles? There is no way to get home when your engine has gone kaputt! Outrageous.
Odbms-es and rdbms-es are two completely different pieces of cake. You are comparing apples to pears (both fruits)
If someone tries to do something with your product that you didn't take into consideration at design time, it runs terribly slow.
And you say that is not the case with an rdbms? I have run into some great examples of rdbms-es not living up to their expectations because of bad design. I'm sure these sorts of examples can be found on odbms-es as well. Your point?
If your client doesn't appreciate the product, it's the fault of the client, not your product.
If I sell lemons, and someone buys a lemon from me, because he wants something sweet and tasty, then he should not complain to me the fruit is sour. Again, odbms != rdbms.
You work for Microsoft. Don't you.
Ah, slashdot...
No. I do not work for Microsoft. I tend to choose the best (affordable) working software to fill my needs. And that is almost never stuff from Redmond.
I've still never heard a good answer to this problem, only that I'm using the wrong hammer.
(...)
For instance, contrast "select last_activity, uid from users"(...)
You are trying to tighten a screw with a hammer here ;-)
In order to use odbms-es in a good way you _must_ first let go of all relational persistence thoughts. Think about how you would solve the same problem in memory only, then move to an odbms.
Shameless plug for a GPL project I am involved in: ozone is a 100% java odbms. Developing takes place on sourceforge. Ozone is a client-server proxy based object database system; although it is not multi-language, it seems to compare favourably to the prevalence project.
Although you certainly have a point, there are some remarks I have to make here:
There's no "SELECT * FROM USERS".
That's just like saying Latin is a bad language because it does not have equivalents for 'the', 'le/la', 'de/het', 'der/die/das', whatever. An rdbms is *fundamentally* different from an oodbms
DB Performance when querying outside the normal object hierarchy (...) is orders of magnitude SLOWER on an OODB!
That's right: you are trying to use a oodbms as a rdbms. Ever tried to drive a car like you ride a bicycle?
Oodbms are relatively new, and they have their 'problems', just like rdbms-es have theirs. But the biggest problems arise when one approaches an oodbms like one would an rdbms. Just like you run into problems using an oo language when you have only used a proc. language
(...)this should let you backup 13GB in a cheap MiniDV tape in a safe manner, and restore it all later.
Hmm...
Replace all electronic stuff to just using your voice, have a person as the main distributor and voila, you have prior art going back to the days of the first 'modern' democracy in ancient Greece. The agenda dictates the subjects, the chairman says who can speak and when.
And just for the fun of it: the chairman of the Dutch 'Tweede Kamer' (house of commons) has access to buttons which can turn all microphones on or off individually. Electronic prior art.
Never visited his website?
I can understand the part about imposing Microsoft proprietary technologies, protocols and formats;Employing abusive licensing and other exclusionary practices vis-à-vis PC OEMs to foreclose the PC OEM distribution channel to competing products... but what the hell does it have to do with bundling of additional apps along with Windows?
Say you start a PC hardware biz; customers ask for Windows, so you call Microsoft to ask how much Windows costs.
MS: that depends
you: on what?
MS: what are you going to install on those PCs you want to be selling?
you: mozilla, RealPlayer and OpenOffice
MS: okay, 150$ per PC.
you:what??? And what if I install nothing except for Windows itself?
MS: then it's $15. But then you already have a browser, media player, etc., so you don't need that other stuff. Aren't we just the best?
That's considered value-added incentive for the consumer. Hell, even major Linux distributions bundle browsers, media players and office productivity suites. And I am GLAD that such apps are included, therefore I don't need to buy a copy or download a free one.(emph. mine)
Different linux distibuters distribute different software from different sources. Microsoft only allows distibution of Microsoft s/w on windows pre-installed systems.
I think the CCIA has gone overzealous in its approach to pin MS. They should have gotten more facts correct before publishing this paper.
The facts are clear:Microsoft has been found guilty by the US courts (2x); the remedy is simply a teethless little dog.
Microsoft is guilty; because the US does not like to punish those with lots of money the CCIA looks at the EU to punish Microsoft for braking the law. Very understandable.
--Many more users Many more users
--Much higher data rates Much higher data rates
--Much longer Much longer distances
So I guess it's much so I guess it's much better?
*ducks*
My prediction is one day off...
Can anyone recommend a display cleaner?
Considering the facts that
- the name SoloTrek looks alot like StarTrek
- the font of their logo is remarkably similar to the font used for TNG
- they obviously are into science fiction
How long until they get sued by a certain company protecting their trademark?I started writing this post trying to make a joke, but now I have thought some more about it; dunno...
Makes me think of that Greek guy in ancient times that had invented steam powered machines, but his king did not want him to further work on his invention, fearing mass unemployment under his slaves....
The one thing I absolutely *loved* about TOS (The Original Series) was that they had 16:9 displays everywhere. This was ofcourse years before anyone in the electric biz started talking about this format for television sets. ...
Such a shame that feature is missing, and they have the boring old 4:3 display layout. Maybe NCC-1701 was more advanced than any of it's sister ships? It was Starfleets flagship
I guess in the light of recent financial changes it might be more appropriate if they company would rename itself Black Hat?
Thanks for the Holland != the Netherlands
Glad to be of service. If you ever get to the Netherlands and 'accuse' a real Fries (inhabitant of Friesland province) of being a 'Hollander', he might give you a good punch in the face. It's about as bad as calling a Scotsman an Englishman, or a Dallas southerner a yankee :-p
but the issue is that by simply visiting a website, I have entered into some sort of contract
Well, it is more than actually visiting, it is actively retrieving info from that site. In that use a link to the usage terms is provided.
If I can tuck a EULA somewhere in a website and bind people to conform to whatever that EULA says in other areas of the website, why can't I do that with real property?
That would certainly s*ck, and fortunately this isn't the case here. The terms of use are publicly displayed and almost impossible to miss. Also, as I stated in my example, the judge would _never_ have allowed anything 'strange' in the terms, as for instance a you-must-buy clause.
Using that logic, it is perfectly reasonable for a car dealership to require you to purchase something when you step on their property.
But it is the other way round. When a restaurant has a no shirt, no service policy, a half-naked customer can be refused, even if there is no 'no-shirt-no-service' sign. A judge will consider proper attire (sp?) normal for a restaurant. When you use the service of a website, and the terms for using that service are clearly stated and reasonable, the judge will rule against someone going against these rules. The 'law' for the normal world is extended to the internet world, not the other way round.
Unfortunately this world became legalistic and have lost the sense of good and bad. Intention doesn't matter. Only what's written on some WWW page with an Accept button.
That's one of the reasons why I like living in The Netherlands: if you were not sending out spam, not selling these addresses on spam-cds, not harassing the owners of the email addresses etc. etc. etc., the judge would not have found you in violation of the terms, as you were using them for personal reasons.
How I like living in a country were judges and politicians can be open about the fact that once in a while they smoke pot, and almost everybody is cool with that.
Ishint dat weird?
Not any weirder than the language you are using.
;-)
Just for the record, Holland != The Netherlands; 'Holland' is just a name for 2 provinces: North & South Holland. The Netherlands are made up of 12 provinces.
Back on topic: yes, if you are in The Netherlands and you are using a Dutch website (thus implying that you know Dutch), you are bound by Dutch law, that's no surprise. If you used the site without knowing any Dutch (which is technically possible) the judge would have taken that into account also. Dutch judges are far from brain-dead;
However (to abuse your example) if you were here in NL and visited a Dutch website for a Dutch car dealer which stated in it's click-through that by using that site you are bound in contract to buy a car there would not hold up in court. No court here in NL. No judge here would _ever_ find such a contract valid.
And you know why? Because when you visit a site one might reasonally expect NOT to be forced into buying something just by visiting that site. That is simply rediculous, and the judge knows it. Disallowing harvesting email addresses and using them for non-personal purposes is ethically, morally and law-technically perfectly normal, and a judge here takes that into account.
No, the judge just found that the 'do not harvest & abuse' clause was legitimate and binding. He/she did NOT say that you can put _anything_ in a clickwrap.
Not exactly; IIRC only verdicts by the highest court ('hoge raad') are more or less 'appended' to the law; these verdicts are also known as 'jurisprudentie'.
I certainly understand your line of reasoning since you are a US citizen. Here in The Netherlands judges have a different way of looking at law than where you come from, especially regarding contracts (IANAL, but IHSFWSL (I have some friends who studied law). In this case for instance, the judge found it perfectly acceptable that e-mailgids put the 'do not abuse our email addresses, they are for personal use only' clause in. That same judge would have probably whiped the floor with a 'you are not allowed to copy anything of our site' clause. Why? Because it is rediculous, and a judge over here knows it.
But Microsoft already has it's own linux distribution ready slated for release in november 2003. Knowing MS and it's slipping OS release dates this will probably end up being released in 2004.
02-12-09 14:33 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC1 Now Available
My monitor sometimes thinks it is a crystal ball; using it I can predict future /. headlines. Here goes:
03-01-06 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC2 Now Available
03-01-14 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC3 Now Available
03-01-25 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC4 Now Available
03-02-02 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0-RC5 Now Available
03-02-17 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0 Released
03-02-19 9:25 BSD: FreeBSD 5.0.1 Released
Funny thing though, apart from the different version numbers the discussion is always exactly the same...