spent 5 years of my life learning software patterns, algorithm analysis, multithreading, etc, etc.
what do i get to do? technical document reviews. unit test code for ancient C programs.
it gets better.
batch scripts. shell scripts. adding layers of kludge to older layers of kludge.
but at least they pay me the same as if i were doing all the exciting tech i wanted to do. but there's only so much you can take of shell and batch scripting before you go completely insane, and open a new/. account with all caps, based on some computer game...
Wouldn't it be cool to be able to use the video ram as some sort of harddisk cache, or swap? Plenty of bandwidth... and its about 64mb - 64kb more video memory than I need in that box;)
now *this* is an idea worth looking into. tired of sharing your system RAM with your video card? turn the tables.
before you know it we'll have bootable floppies which require only 1 MB RAM and a fat video card, creating a VRAMFS slice and going to work.
Re:Yes, but who's fault is it? Not MS'!
on
Shattering Windows
·
· Score: 2
i'll have to remember that when the next discussion of God's existence comes up. also, he was the one making positive statements (this is not MS fault) meaning, if that's the statement he wants to make, burden of proof, logical or otherwise, is on him.
i guarantee that when you're using IIS on Win2K, many of the messages get tied up in the kernel. hence the BSODs you get using bad filters on IIS. otherwise, the bad code would just halt IIS, now wouldn't it?
Every blue screen on win2k pro I've ever had was a direct result of an ISAPI filter apparently crashing the kernel.
your first mistake was using a kernel-privileged web server (IIS).
I was developing the filter, and in its early stages, it had memory leaks, dangling pointers, double free()s, etc.
your second mistake was writing bad code.
but i'll agree that writing bad code shouldn't crash the OS. but when you're developing on windows, that's the modus operandi (sp?). but who am i to kvetch? i learned my C code on UNIX, where i got segmentation faults, bus errors, all kinds of evil crap, and the program terminated, and the OS chugged along.
but try playing a bit with framebuffer programming on linux, and see how fast you bring down the OS:)
they have nice JDBC 2.0 drivers, so it's not just ODBC.
but i'll agree that i'll not be using SAP-DB any time really soon. i'll be using berkeley DB for my tiny projects, mysql for my medium projects, and postgresql for my big projects.
So, by your logic it's ok for me to take any research papers you might create and use them as my own? I mean, I'm not hurting anyone and it's just intellectual property...
he's not copying someone's MP3s and trying to pass them off as his own recordings. or are you suggesting he is opposed to having people download copies of his research papers and read them?
not just physical access
on
Shattering Windows
·
· Score: 4, Informative
it works across terminal server, also, which means you bring in a terminal client and plug in, get access to a user account (think there aren't any giant post-it notes of "my login/password" on half the desks in any given office?), and viola. they have rooted the terminal server and can do whatever the hell they want.
the terminal server may be behind 8 inches of steel and plexi-glass. but this compromise shatters that, too.
Re:Yes, but who's fault is it? Not MS'!
on
Shattering Windows
·
· Score: 2
you're trying to say that a normal user can't bring up any MS-owned windows that run as system? you've gone through every app that MS ships, and all the dialog boxes, and none of them run as system?
completely agree. nearly ever XP and 2K blue screen i had was due to:
1) faulty hardware, e.g., bad memory chip 2) incredibly bad driver (which admittedly shouldn't crash the OS... but that's another discussion) 3) incredibly, incredibly bad software (which again shouldn't crash the OS... but that's yet another discussion)
i used to work in desktop support for my university, back in my college days. after a couple of years or really trying to help people, i started testing limits. like...
student comes in: "My teacher says my engineering ID should work to get me into the general PC labs..."
me: "your teacher is on crack. NEXT!?"
after a few talking-tos by supervisors, but no real punitive damages, it just got worse. i became a jerk. still am a jerk. and i was a nice guy before working there. a really, really nice guy. the kind of nice guy that never got the girl. so i became a self-centered, stupid-people-hating jerk. and got the girls.
i still haven't forgiven metallica for leading the charge against napster. as i've said before on/., during napster's heyday, i had a nearly unlimited computer budget -- CD burning, new laptops, wireless routers and cards. since napster, there's been almost nothing in the computer budget. my wife wants napster back.
i own about every metallica album. have i bought one since napster? no. will i? no. will i ever support them in any way? no.
when a metallica song comes on the radio, even one i used to like, i change the station. every time. when i'm on-line or by a phone and a metallica song comes on the radio, i change the station, and call or email the station and tell them why i changed the station.
i've never understood what happened to metallica, that turned them from encouraging bootlegs to helping destroy napster. p2p just isn't as good.
the Windows download is in TGZ format. how many Windows applications come packaged in TGZ? how many come in ZIP, or even more likely, self-extracting EXE?
you'd think they'd get a clue about this, when they have to warn on their own website: Check whether your browser changes the package extension from tgz to tar during the download. If so, rename the package to tgz before installing it.
so there must be a good reason why 99% of all R/3 installations use Oracle
answer: the CTOs are mostly idiots who pay for brand names and ability to finger-point down the road, not functions.
but Oracle is still better than SAP-DB, anyway. scalability, speed, not to mention the cadre upon cadre of available PL/SQL programmers. how many people do you have to choose from if you're looking for someone to embed some SAP-DB code?
that SAP DB isn't supported out of the box by Java, Perl, or PHP, etc. but one quick glance shows they support Perl through DBD::ODBC, have an ODBC driver suitable for PHP, and supply a JDBC driver for Java programs.
so now i'm wondering what the catch is. too big? bloated? slow?
well, the minimum requirements on Linux list a base memory footprint of 128 MB. MySQL runs on just about the smallest box you own, and most people tinkering with MySQL are on budgets of $0, meaning, no new bigger boxes for a long, long time.
it's funny how people ripped and ripped and ripped on Intel all through the 90s about keeping all their backward compatibility from 286 on through the P4. how people said they should cut the dead weight, etc.
well, now AMD is creating the kruftiest, heaviest, nastiest instruction set of backwards-compatible crud in the history of processor-dom. Intel comes out with a new, no-legacy 64-bit instruction set, and all of a sudden it is, "god, we hope AMD wins so all our old crap still works".
well anyway, here's at least one programmer who is looking forward to getting his mitts on a 64-bit chip which doesn't have layer upon layer of backwards compatibility, wrapped in an overpowered muscle-car of silicon. you'd think we would have learned our lesson with the Alpha, a much, much better chip than the x86 but no one adopted it. people scream and bitch and moan about supporting all the ancient krufty x86 bloat, but when it comes time, they stick with what is comfortable.
more than likely, Intel's 64-bit offering will follow the road of Alpha into technical superiority and market disaster. and we'll be stuck still supporting 286 instructions. way to go.
Slashdot Mirror
spent 5 years of my life learning software patterns, algorithm analysis, multithreading, etc, etc.
/. account with all caps, based on some computer game...
what do i get to do? technical document reviews. unit test code for ancient C programs.
it gets better.
batch scripts. shell scripts. adding layers of kludge to older layers of kludge.
but at least they pay me the same as if i were doing all the exciting tech i wanted to do. but there's only so much you can take of shell and batch scripting before you go completely insane, and open a new
Wouldn't it be cool to be able to use the video ram as some sort of harddisk cache, or swap? Plenty of bandwidth... and its about 64mb - 64kb more video memory than I need in that box ;)
now *this* is an idea worth looking into. tired of sharing your system RAM with your video card? turn the tables.
before you know it we'll have bootable floppies which require only 1 MB RAM and a fat video card, creating a VRAMFS slice and going to work.
i'll have to remember that when the next discussion of God's existence comes up. also, he was the one making positive statements (this is not MS fault) meaning, if that's the statement he wants to make, burden of proof, logical or otherwise, is on him.
i guarantee that when you're using IIS on Win2K, many of the messages get tied up in the kernel. hence the BSODs you get using bad filters on IIS. otherwise, the bad code would just halt IIS, now wouldn't it?
thank you.
Every blue screen on win2k pro I've ever had was a direct result of an ISAPI filter apparently crashing the kernel.
:)
your first mistake was using a kernel-privileged web server (IIS).
I was developing the filter, and in its early stages, it had memory leaks, dangling pointers, double free()s, etc.
your second mistake was writing bad code.
but i'll agree that writing bad code shouldn't crash the OS. but when you're developing on windows, that's the modus operandi (sp?). but who am i to kvetch? i learned my C code on UNIX, where i got segmentation faults, bus errors, all kinds of evil crap, and the program terminated, and the OS chugged along.
but try playing a bit with framebuffer programming on linux, and see how fast you bring down the OS
and then mod me down. posting this one at +1 to attempt to get some attention...
they have nice JDBC 2.0 drivers, so it's not just ODBC.
but i'll agree that i'll not be using SAP-DB any time really soon. i'll be using berkeley DB for my tiny projects, mysql for my medium projects, and postgresql for my big projects.
So, by your logic it's ok for me to take any research papers you might create and use them as my own? I mean, I'm not hurting anyone and it's just intellectual property...
he's not copying someone's MP3s and trying to pass them off as his own recordings. or are you suggesting he is opposed to having people download copies of his research papers and read them?
it works across terminal server, also, which means you bring in a terminal client and plug in, get access to a user account (think there aren't any giant post-it notes of "my login/password" on half the desks in any given office?), and viola. they have rooted the terminal server and can do whatever the hell they want.
the terminal server may be behind 8 inches of steel and plexi-glass. but this compromise shatters that, too.
you're trying to say that a normal user can't bring up any MS-owned windows that run as system? you've gone through every app that MS ships, and all the dialog boxes, and none of them run as system?
completely agree. nearly ever XP and 2K blue screen i had was due to:
1) faulty hardware, e.g., bad memory chip
2) incredibly bad driver (which admittedly shouldn't crash the OS... but that's another discussion)
3) incredibly, incredibly bad software (which again shouldn't crash the OS... but that's yet another discussion)
god, i don't miss college.
i still haven't forgiven metallica for leading the charge against napster. as i've said before on /., during napster's heyday, i had a nearly unlimited computer budget -- CD burning, new laptops, wireless routers and cards. since napster, there's been almost nothing in the computer budget. my wife wants napster back.
i own about every metallica album. have i bought one since napster? no. will i? no. will i ever support them in any way? no.
when a metallica song comes on the radio, even one i used to like, i change the station. every time. when i'm on-line or by a phone and a metallica song comes on the radio, i change the station, and call or email the station and tell them why i changed the station.
i've never understood what happened to metallica, that turned them from encouraging bootlegs to helping destroy napster. p2p just isn't as good.
It's like Rambo thinking he can take on the entire Russian Army.
didn't Rambo take them on successfully three times?
(i know, i know, he doesn't fight the russians until part III)
that's because the BBC "world news" is approx. 50% US news, 40% israel news, and 10% cricket scores from around the globe.
what is the one question you ask yourself just before you stamp "APPROVED" on the patent application?
naturally i can figure it out, i have cygwin on my windows environment and can tar xzvf the damned thing.
but i know that *i* for one do not have winzip installed on any machine which might be used as a database server.
i run a FreeBSD shop. i check out FreshPorts.org and there is nothing about SAP-DB to be found. there is MySQL and PostgreSQL a-plenty, though.
freshmeat.net has TWO projects listed: SAP Database and SAP DB. both link back to sapdb.org.
the Windows download is in TGZ format. how many Windows applications come packaged in TGZ? how many come in ZIP, or even more likely, self-extracting EXE?
you'd think they'd get a clue about this, when they have to warn on their own website: Check whether your browser changes the package extension from tgz to tar during the download. If so, rename the package to tgz before installing it.
so there must be a good reason why 99% of all R/3 installations use Oracle
answer: the CTOs are mostly idiots who pay for brand names and ability to finger-point down the road, not functions.
but Oracle is still better than SAP-DB, anyway. scalability, speed, not to mention the cadre upon cadre of available PL/SQL programmers. how many people do you have to choose from if you're looking for someone to embed some SAP-DB code?
that SAP DB isn't supported out of the box by Java, Perl, or PHP, etc. but one quick glance shows they support Perl through DBD::ODBC, have an ODBC driver suitable for PHP, and supply a JDBC driver for Java programs.
so now i'm wondering what the catch is. too big? bloated? slow?
well, the minimum requirements on Linux list a base memory footprint of 128 MB. MySQL runs on just about the smallest box you own, and most people tinkering with MySQL are on budgets of $0, meaning, no new bigger boxes for a long, long time.
my PC's BIOS refused to accept anything after y2k. it always reset the clock, thinking it was 1994. gah. and no update.
damn award bios. damn them to hell.
difficulty and risk of switching instruction sets == extremely large one time cost.
:) but you get what you pay for.
hardware instruction set translator == extremely small cost for every single instruction.
But, given that 99% of programming is not done in assembley
yes, but that 1% of programming is very lucrative and is actually quite interesting to some extremely f*cked up individuals like... well... me...
I want a MIPS or Alpha inside, not Intel.
and i'd rather have POWER4 inside than anything
it's funny how people ripped and ripped and ripped on Intel all through the 90s about keeping all their backward compatibility from 286 on through the P4. how people said they should cut the dead weight, etc.
well, now AMD is creating the kruftiest, heaviest, nastiest instruction set of backwards-compatible crud in the history of processor-dom. Intel comes out with a new, no-legacy 64-bit instruction set, and all of a sudden it is, "god, we hope AMD wins so all our old crap still works".
well anyway, here's at least one programmer who is looking forward to getting his mitts on a 64-bit chip which doesn't have layer upon layer of backwards compatibility, wrapped in an overpowered muscle-car of silicon. you'd think we would have learned our lesson with the Alpha, a much, much better chip than the x86 but no one adopted it. people scream and bitch and moan about supporting all the ancient krufty x86 bloat, but when it comes time, they stick with what is comfortable.
more than likely, Intel's 64-bit offering will follow the road of Alpha into technical superiority and market disaster. and we'll be stuck still supporting 286 instructions. way to go.