My guess is that the submitter looked at the pretty pictures and jumped to conclusions.
No/. poster would ever do such a thing! Especially not if his first glance at the story could show microsoft in a bad light.
And even if a poster did such a thing, it would never get through/.'s fact checking department.
Oh...sorry, my keyboard was accidentally switched to qwerty. That should be "dvorak rules".
For those of us with short fingers, the fact that the five true vowels are right there on the left home row, and the five most important consonants are on the right home row means less stretching. It's also a much faster way of typing. I won't be winning any typing competitions soon, but I went from barely clearing 20wpm on qwerty to over 50wpm on dvorak.
The only downside is that as a sofware engineer, I use curly and square braces far more than the average person, but they're way up there between the 0 and backspace keys.
That's the kernel. Running a 64-bit kernel with 32-bit apps doesn't get you the full performance of the chip. AMD isn't discounting its chips 50%, so why should users limit themselves to 50% of the chip?
My thanks to the others who pointed out the unofficial 64-bit Sarge.
Pop in a disc and begin playing a game on an XBox (or soon a PS3) on a 56" 1280x720 DLP with a Dolby 5.1 surround system and awesome speakers.
OR
Deal with installing windows, updating drivers, dealing with buggy PC games, figuring out hardware incompatibilities, etc., to play the game on a 20" 1600x1200 TFT with Dolby 5.1 on a much weaker sound system.
If you go the console route, you can keep a moderate PC for computer activity, and spend all the money you save on an HT system (which goes obsolete much slower) for watching movies and playing games.
The current generation of consoles added online play; the next generation will have wireless networking built in. The next generation will also have enough processing power, peripheral capability, and the HD monitor support needed to play games at near Toy Story quality, with advanced AI and better controller options.
I switched from Debian to Gentoo when I bought my first Athlon chip a few years ago. My reasoning was, why use a distribution optimized for a 20 year old architecture, when I can use one that takes advantage of my CPU's capabilities?
I saw this article and thought I'd look into Debian again, just to see what it's like. I figured since I've always liked apt just a tad better than portage, and I'm now switching to a new architecture (AMD64), the Debian packages for that architecture would be optimized for my chip. To my shock, there is no Debian release (at least not listed under their supported architecture section) for AMD64. They support the MIPS and Alpha chips (has anyone built a MIPS or Alpha CPU in this century?). They support the Motorola 68k series (which makes the Alpha look trendy). And strangest of all, they support the IA-64. AMD's 64-bit chip sales in the first month exceeded Intel's entire IA-64 sales to that point (and it had been out for a long time).
So what I have to wonder is: are they 1) just that far behind the times, 2) anti-AMD/pro-Intel, or 3) just assuming that since i386 binaries run on AMD64 chips, that's good enough?
Given that they expect Athlon32 and PentiumIV users to use the i386 binaries, I'd guess it's option 3. Years ago, I sent an old Celeron 300 and Pentium 166 to Hungary to help support the debian 586 project (according to this page they're still using them), but nothing ever came of it.
Is Debian going to cause its own extinction by not keeping up with the new technology?
Why is that unfair? The US government would never use Chinese or Russian software. They'd be too afraid of secret back doors.
And with the growing hostility coming from the US and Japan, the Chinese government probably feels it's not a good idea to be dependent on us for something so crucial.
However protectionism, while occasionally helping one industry, has never had a positive effect on an economy.
But did any trades actually take place at that price or was it just listed as the current price?
If I had been interested in Maxco, Inc. stock, I would be watching the price and waiting for it to hit around $4 before buying, or perhaps be willing to buy it up to $5, if I thought it was going to keeep going up.
If it was at $951, I wouldn't buy it, since that's orders of magnitude higher than I expect it to be in a week.
I would assume wall street traders similarly limit the price when they buy.
(I do pity the guy who set his Ameritrade up for "buy at market price" though...)
Some places like to add their own information to the resumes, which makes pdf a poor choice.
And if they try to open it and it comes up in Acrobat, an HR worker (who probably can't understand the idea of a computer not having MS software on it) might just decide that if you can't follow simple instructions you're not worth a follow up, rather than asking you to resend it.
I submit mine in Rich Text Format. OO.o can write it correctly, without format errors, it still supports all the pretty formatting I use, and an HR drone who gets it on an email will just see the blue "W" and not know the difference.
Read the quotes: a strong competitor... a good alternative... most controls will be familiar to those who have used [Microsoft] Office... OpenOffice was also slower in opening and saving documents... has a confusing interface... "help" files...are not as thorough... It may well meet your needs.
Come on! If you can read those quotes and not infer that OO.o is an MSO killer then I guess you know how to read English. Too bad blacklily8 (the blurb's author) doesn't have such skills.
If OpenOffice ships with Solaris 10, Aix 5.4, all linux distros, Mac OS... then it's a matter of time before it becomes the standard. ...on the 10% of desktops and notebooks that run those OSes.
I use three or four AIX boxes in a normal day of working. Not one has an office suite.
I have two Gentoo Linux boxes at home. Only one has an office suite (and it's OO.o 1.1.4).
For OO.o to become close to a standard, those OSes need to gain a majority of the desktop market share (and MS Office runs on Macs, so a Mac superiority won't be helpful on its own).
Or the guys at OO.o need to come up with a compelling and innovative alternative to the current leader, like the Mozilla team did.
Option two seems more plausible.
It's not completely useless. It is true that the values are not adjusted for inflation, and that would be a useful update, but it doesn't need to be adjusted for ticket prices. If you're doing that, you should also adjust for G movies selling a larger percentage of matinee tickets (at a lower cost).
It's not supposed to be a measure of how many tickets were sold, otherwise it would be measured in tickets sold. It is a measure of how much cash the movie took in. Which do you think a studio cares more about: ticket sales or dollars generated?
For a very rigid economic analysis of movie profitability and its relationship to film ratings, that list would not be a good source. But for the purposes of this discussion of whether the PG-13 rating will hurt RotS, that list is a very good indicator that a PG-13 rating does not harm ticket sales.
Given the context (read the parent) and the quotes around "stolen", it's quite obvious that he's trying to say "stolen" GPL code is very rare, because one cannot steal what is freely shared.
The mod should have been "+1 Sarcastic", but they haven't added that yet.
George Lucas does not use cash to light his cigars. And I really wish people would stop characterizing him as such.
He uses the $20 bills as toilet paper (due to their cottony softness). He uses orignial Shakespearean manuscripts to light his cigars.
In the future, please be more sensitive.
Is this a late/. April Fool's story?
I've been a gentoo user for a few years now, and have wasted^H^H^H^H^H^Hspent countless hours reading the gentoo forums. Every few weeks somebody asks why gentoo doesn't have an installer (graphical or otherwise). The question is followed by pages of "gentoo doesn't need an installer" or "the installer would get in the way of the fine tuning during install" or "if you need an installer, you shouldn't be using gentoo", etc.
I don't see how they can have all the options and customizations of a true gentoo install with a gui. But if they can manage it, then that's great.
I actually prefer booting the CD mounting my partitions, pulling down the stage 1, then going from there. The first thing I do when I boot the CD is start sshd. Then I go to another box, start a screen session and ssh into the new box. Then I can ssh into the second box from anywhere (or just sit at the keyboard) and attach to that screen and install. Since a gentoo install is: run some commands, wait a few hours, repeat, I find containing my install in a screen session convenient.
To reduce the compile time, I find it quite helpful to set up distcc as quickly as possible, and have all the PCs in my house pitch in.
!ptr was his example of a simple case. I wasn't saying it's too complex to read. But
if (ptr == 0)
does look "cleaner". And as somebody mentioned above
if (0 == ptr)
looks cleaner and makes equality test versus assignment operator errors show up at compile time.
I was also speaking in terms of non-embedded systems, where storage and CPU time are plentiful. In an embedded or real-time environment, it might be more cost effective to tweak the code.
It's better to write clear, legible code that saves a human minutes of reading, than complex code that might save a computer a few milliseconds of processing time per year, because human time costs more than machine time.
Also the clear code will result in fewer misinterpretations, which will mean fewer bugs (especially when the original author is not the one doing maintenance years later), further reducing costs in dollars, man hours, and frustration.
The TVA provided "low cost" electricity in that it didn't charge much per kilowatt-hour. Of course if you include the massive tax funded expenses to build the whole thing, it actually was quite expensive, which is why no private company wanted to touch it.
Is there any proof of this? Never in the history of the United States has the government done anything "low cost". Compare the true cost of shipping a package FedEx versus USPS.
It might cost less for the few hundred thousand subscribers who pay for it, but don't forget all the money taken from the people who don't use it, but who still get to pay for it.
A government granted telco monopoly is a bad thing, but a government run monopoly (amtrak, usps, etc) is worse.
And just imagine how great that customer service will be. It might reach DMV levels of greatness!
And I suppose we can trust the government to provide our network access and not snoop in on us.
Of course, if it does cost too much, has poor service, or impedes on your privacy, you can always switch to the competition...oh wait, they ran the competition under, because "for profit" has become evil.
Slashdot Mirror
So if MS doesn't admit a bug exists (and they usually don't until right before they issue a patch), it doesn't get counted?
Who thinks they were influenced by it being named after one of their islands?
My guess is that the submitter looked at the pretty pictures and jumped to conclusions.
/. poster would ever do such a thing! Especially not if his first glance at the story could show microsoft in a bad light. /.'s fact checking department.
No
And even if a poster did such a thing, it would never get through
:)
I'm on package 353 of 397.
Why did this get modded down? It was funny.
For the record it does take 3-5 days for me to do a stage 1 install.
I've had AMD64 Gentoo running for over a year.
Oh...sorry, my keyboard was accidentally switched to qwerty. That should be "dvorak rules".
For those of us with short fingers, the fact that the five true vowels are right there on the left home row, and the five most important consonants are on the right home row means less stretching. It's also a much faster way of typing. I won't be winning any typing competitions soon, but I went from barely clearing 20wpm on qwerty to over 50wpm on dvorak.
The only downside is that as a sofware engineer, I use curly and square braces far more than the average person, but they're way up there between the 0 and backspace keys.
That's the kernel. Running a 64-bit kernel with 32-bit apps doesn't get you the full performance of the chip. AMD isn't discounting its chips 50%, so why should users limit themselves to 50% of the chip?
My thanks to the others who pointed out the unofficial 64-bit Sarge.
Pop in a disc and begin playing a game on an XBox (or soon a PS3) on a 56" 1280x720 DLP with a Dolby 5.1 surround system and awesome speakers.
OR
Deal with installing windows, updating drivers, dealing with buggy PC games, figuring out hardware incompatibilities, etc., to play the game on a 20" 1600x1200 TFT with Dolby 5.1 on a much weaker sound system.
If you go the console route, you can keep a moderate PC for computer activity, and spend all the money you save on an HT system (which goes obsolete much slower) for watching movies and playing games.
The current generation of consoles added online play; the next generation will have wireless networking built in. The next generation will also have enough processing power, peripheral capability, and the HD monitor support needed to play games at near Toy Story quality, with advanced AI and better controller options.
I switched from Debian to Gentoo when I bought my first Athlon chip a few years ago. My reasoning was, why use a distribution optimized for a 20 year old architecture, when I can use one that takes advantage of my CPU's capabilities?
I saw this article and thought I'd look into Debian again, just to see what it's like. I figured since I've always liked apt just a tad better than portage, and I'm now switching to a new architecture (AMD64), the Debian packages for that architecture would be optimized for my chip. To my shock, there is no Debian release (at least not listed under their supported architecture section) for AMD64. They support the MIPS and Alpha chips (has anyone built a MIPS or Alpha CPU in this century?). They support the Motorola 68k series (which makes the Alpha look trendy). And strangest of all, they support the IA-64. AMD's 64-bit chip sales in the first month exceeded Intel's entire IA-64 sales to that point (and it had been out for a long time).
So what I have to wonder is: are they 1) just that far behind the times, 2) anti-AMD/pro-Intel, or 3) just assuming that since i386 binaries run on AMD64 chips, that's good enough?
Given that they expect Athlon32 and PentiumIV users to use the i386 binaries, I'd guess it's option 3. Years ago, I sent an old Celeron 300 and Pentium 166 to Hungary to help support the debian 586 project (according to this page they're still using them), but nothing ever came of it.
Is Debian going to cause its own extinction by not keeping up with the new technology?
Why is that unfair? The US government would never use Chinese or Russian software. They'd be too afraid of secret back doors.
And with the growing hostility coming from the US and Japan, the Chinese government probably feels it's not a good idea to be dependent on us for something so crucial.
However protectionism, while occasionally helping one industry, has never had a positive effect on an economy.
But did any trades actually take place at that price or was it just listed as the current price?
If I had been interested in Maxco, Inc. stock, I would be watching the price and waiting for it to hit around $4 before buying, or perhaps be willing to buy it up to $5, if I thought it was going to keeep going up.
If it was at $951, I wouldn't buy it, since that's orders of magnitude higher than I expect it to be in a week.
I would assume wall street traders similarly limit the price when they buy.
(I do pity the guy who set his Ameritrade up for "buy at market price" though...)
Why do I never have mod points when I need them!?
Some places like to add their own information to the resumes, which makes pdf a poor choice.
And if they try to open it and it comes up in Acrobat, an HR worker (who probably can't understand the idea of a computer not having MS software on it) might just decide that if you can't follow simple instructions you're not worth a follow up, rather than asking you to resend it.
I submit mine in Rich Text Format. OO.o can write it correctly, without format errors, it still supports all the pretty formatting I use, and an HR drone who gets it on an email will just see the blue "W" and not know the difference.
Read the quotes:
a strong competitor...
a good alternative...
most controls will be familiar to those who have used [Microsoft] Office...
OpenOffice was also slower in opening and saving documents...
has a confusing interface...
"help" files...are not as thorough...
It may well meet your needs.
Come on! If you can read those quotes and not infer that OO.o is an MSO killer then I guess you know how to read English. Too bad blacklily8 (the blurb's author) doesn't have such skills.
If OpenOffice ships with Solaris 10, Aix 5.4, all linux distros, Mac OS... then it's a matter of time before it becomes the standard.
...on the 10% of desktops and notebooks that run those OSes.
I use three or four AIX boxes in a normal day of working. Not one has an office suite.
I have two Gentoo Linux boxes at home. Only one has an office suite (and it's OO.o 1.1.4).
For OO.o to become close to a standard, those OSes need to gain a majority of the desktop market share (and MS Office runs on Macs, so a Mac superiority won't be helpful on its own).
Or the guys at OO.o need to come up with a compelling and innovative alternative to the current leader, like the Mozilla team did.
Option two seems more plausible.
It's not completely useless. It is true that the values are not adjusted for inflation, and that would be a useful update, but it doesn't need to be adjusted for ticket prices. If you're doing that, you should also adjust for G movies selling a larger percentage of matinee tickets (at a lower cost).
It's not supposed to be a measure of how many tickets were sold, otherwise it would be measured in tickets sold. It is a measure of how much cash the movie took in. Which do you think a studio cares more about: ticket sales or dollars generated?
For a very rigid economic analysis of movie profitability and its relationship to film ratings, that list would not be a good source. But for the purposes of this discussion of whether the PG-13 rating will hurt RotS, that list is a very good indicator that a PG-13 rating does not harm ticket sales.
Given the context (read the parent) and the quotes around "stolen", it's quite obvious that he's trying to say "stolen" GPL code is very rare, because one cannot steal what is freely shared.
The mod should have been "+1 Sarcastic", but they haven't added that yet.
And it still won't come close to the "on-and-off screen body count" of Episode IV and the destruction of Alderaan (and the first Death Star).
- PG13 Titanic (1997) $1,835,300,000
- PG13 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) $1,129,219,252
- PG Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001) $968,600,000
- PG Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999) $922,379,000
- PG13 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) $921,600,000
- PG13 Jurassic Park (1993) $919,700,000
- PG Shrek 2 (2004) $880,871,036
- PG Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) $866,300,000
- G Finding Nemo (2003) $865,000,000
- PG13 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) $860,700,000
- PG13 Independence Day (1996) $811,200,000
- PG13 Spider-Man (2002) $806,700,000
- PG Star Wars (1977) $797,900,000
- PG Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) $789,458,727
- PG13 Spider-Man 2 (2004) $783,577,893
- G The Lion King (1994) $783,400,000
- PG E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) $756,700,000
- R The Matrix Reloaded (2003) $735,600,000
- PG13 Forrest Gump (1994) $679,400,000
- PG13 The Sixth Sense (1999) $661,500,000
So obviously PG-13 doesn't hurt ticket sales much (if at all).George Lucas does not use cash to light his cigars. And I really wish people would stop characterizing him as such.
He uses the $20 bills as toilet paper (due to their cottony softness). He uses orignial Shakespearean manuscripts to light his cigars.
In the future, please be more sensitive.
Is this a late /. April Fool's story?
I've been a gentoo user for a few years now, and have wasted^H^H^H^H^H^Hspent countless hours reading the gentoo forums. Every few weeks somebody asks why gentoo doesn't have an installer (graphical or otherwise). The question is followed by pages of "gentoo doesn't need an installer" or "the installer would get in the way of the fine tuning during install" or "if you need an installer, you shouldn't be using gentoo", etc.
I don't see how they can have all the options and customizations of a true gentoo install with a gui. But if they can manage it, then that's great.
I actually prefer booting the CD mounting my partitions, pulling down the stage 1, then going from there. The first thing I do when I boot the CD is start sshd. Then I go to another box, start a screen session and ssh into the new box. Then I can ssh into the second box from anywhere (or just sit at the keyboard) and attach to that screen and install. Since a gentoo install is: run some commands, wait a few hours, repeat, I find containing my install in a screen session convenient.
To reduce the compile time, I find it quite helpful to set up distcc as quickly as possible, and have all the PCs in my house pitch in.
I was also speaking in terms of non-embedded systems, where storage and CPU time are plentiful. In an embedded or real-time environment, it might be more cost effective to tweak the code.
It's better to write clear, legible code that saves a human minutes of reading, than complex code that might save a computer a few milliseconds of processing time per year, because human time costs more than machine time.
Also the clear code will result in fewer misinterpretations, which will mean fewer bugs (especially when the original author is not the one doing maintenance years later), further reducing costs in dollars, man hours, and frustration.
The TVA provided "low cost" electricity in that it didn't charge much per kilowatt-hour. Of course if you include the massive tax funded expenses to build the whole thing, it actually was quite expensive, which is why no private company wanted to touch it.
Is there any proof of this? Never in the history of the United States has the government done anything "low cost". Compare the true cost of shipping a package FedEx versus USPS.
It might cost less for the few hundred thousand subscribers who pay for it, but don't forget all the money taken from the people who don't use it, but who still get to pay for it.
A government granted telco monopoly is a bad thing, but a government run monopoly (amtrak, usps, etc) is worse.
And just imagine how great that customer service will be. It might reach DMV levels of greatness!
And I suppose we can trust the government to provide our network access and not snoop in on us.
Of course, if it does cost too much, has poor service, or impedes on your privacy, you can always switch to the competition...oh wait, they ran the competition under, because "for profit" has become evil.