No, XP doesnt require 4x the ram. MS recommends it, but it surely doesnt require it if you ONLY want it to run as well as NT4 did. You'll need it if you want to use some of the newer features and eye candy.
Keep NT 4, or your linux install on a 3 gig hard drive with your pentium 166 and 16 megs of ram. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Me, I like having big DVD sized games that run from the hard disc, or being able to stream a few hours of TV-quality video. I like having two 120 gig drives in RAID 0 and never having to worry about running out of space.
It's not just about technology driving the market. It's about the market driving the technology.
If you follow the judeo-christian beliefs more strictly, you'd expect the heavens to be populated by the One God, his angelic choir, and the souls of the ascended. Not space herpes or Klingons or little green men.
Theres a PET/V20/C64 comminity, an Amiga community, an Atari ST community.
There's a community for every past console, from Atari 2600 to the Dreamcast.
There are communities for Model T Fords. I once drove to a theme park (Canada's Wonderland) and my jaw dropped when I saw hundred upon hundreds of restored Model T's in the parking lot - the Model T association was having an outing.
Model T's dont compare with today's cars, yet some people still cherish 'em.
Re:apple not P2P and doing exactly what you hate
on
The Law and P2P
·
· Score: 1
Because it's apple.
If it was MSFT, with the exact same service, it would be tacked onto michaels childish "I hate MS" whine of an article. In fact, there was a bunch of DRM whining in that article.
Ever tried to type into a laptop while standing, holding it in one hand and typing with the other?
The home inspector I used had one. He could just jot down notes and check boxes without having to find a seat. I don't know if the recognition was flawless or not, there were a few misspellings in my hard report, but it was readable. (Moreso than your average slashdot article, in fact)
I'm sure if you use your imagination you could think of more people and professions that would prefer one to a laptop or PDA.
They are currently a niche product, sure, but they're great on a sales floor or to take quick notes in the field.
The home inspector who did my walkthrough had a tablet PC, and it suited him fine for checking off boxes, jotting a few notes, making some quick sketches, and then printing me a hard copy.
This is the hardest thing for computer geeks to understand: not everyone has the same demands of a computer that they do.
For many people, a tablet PC is a much better fit than a laptop. Comparing the two is like comparing a PDA with Gameboy Advance.
They're benchmarking the software, not the hardware.
In this test, the hardware is the constant and the software is the variable.
In a CPU benchmark, the software would be the constant, the hardware the variable.
The P3 Xeons are a better choice than the P4 Xeons, it keeps the iSSE2 and AthlonXP and hyperthreading stuff out of the mix, which could really skew results.
Plus it represents the vast majority of hardware in the real world.
But it does. I can't get any kind of power management support to work. I'm recompiling the kernel right now with another crap-shoot of settings that might make it suspend properly. The userland desktop apps are garbage. Half the hardware on the shelves is either not supported, or half-way supported.
Either deal with the hassles of linux, or deal with the hassles of windows. One will cost you time and features, the other money.
Life's a bitch. Let's get over it, shall we?
BTW, RedHat ain't exactly gods gift to corporate america either.
Well, that's what I'm saying. In most cases, it wouldnt be worth the hassle of fighting unless it was pretty clear that you were stealing company IP.
I'm sure it's a policy in the employee handbook that you agree not to release any trade secrets or source code or designs to anyone outside the company.
It's not like they have the anti-open source stormtroopers running around Redmond looking for people with knoppix CDs, that's just how the zealots make it seem.
If you worked on the NT Kernel design team, and also contributed to the linux kernel, there'd definately be a conflict of interest there, and you might get in crap.
Or if you were working on NTFS for windows, and submitted an NTFS driver to linux, stuff like that.
If you work on some drawing routines for Visio and are helping out with an OSS encryption program, I doubt it would be an issue.
No, anything with the word "science" in the title is a collection of sciences.
Social Science is not a field of study, it's a group of fields like Anthropology, Paleobiology, Demography, Epidemiology, etc, etc..
Likewise Political Science is a collection of social sciences with a focus on states rather than individuals, and a heavy dose of statistics.
Computer science is a collection of electronic engineering (which contains some applied physics, applied chemistry, now quantum mechanics, etc), cryptology, number theory and other pure mathematics, and virtually every 'scientist' is a mathematician first, even if they wont admit it.
Computer science is the sum total of fields of study that relate to computers. It is not programming, that's merely a small part of it. Writing a VBScript to punch the monkey doesnt make you a computer scientist.
But I'd doubt you could walk into Intel's clean room where they're designing the next generation of carbon nanotub mega-quantum superprocessors and tell them they arent scientists.
Microsoft discourages employees from contributing to open-source projects
And McDonalds discourages employees from handing out free hamburgers to penniless bums and hippies. Shocking.
Troll aside, AFAIK Microsoft can't and doesnt prevent anyone from contributing to open source, but the employee who does better be ready to prove that he didn't contribute any of the companies code, else he'd be fired and probably sued.
It's common sense, and pretty much par for the course for any paid programmer.
To keep the analogy, McDonalds doesnt prevent you from giving food to the homeless, but it better be your own food and not theirs.
Anything that evokes an emotional response in the viewer could be considered an art. This is thrown around all the time. Personally I think it's too loose a definition. My dog shit on the rug - I definately had an emotional reaction, but I dont call him an artist.
I've also never had an emotional reaction to code. It's all about function. Maybe some would, maybe you could consider that art. You could consider anything art.
But, it is not a Fine Art, which painting is. Painting, sculpting, composing, mosaic tiling, etc, are the classical fine arts.
So there you go. Now quit fighting about whether its an art or not.
In short, you can call anything an art. The term fine art refers to a very specific set of functions.
But they don't see that there is exactly the same risk involved with using proprietary software. Except that with this case it's that of an external third party company no longer supporting the software.
And with this case it's a calculable risk. They can look at the companies history, look at its business plan, value of stock, etc, etc. When it comes to Microsoft, IBM or Oracle, there's little doubt that the company will exist long enough to support the solution. Bill the geek, however, could be hit by a bus tomorrow.
Management will take risks, but only when they know what the risk is.
As opposed to a proprietary software company insisting that in order to continue with their product you not only have to get a new version of their product you also have to get a new version of the proprietary OS it runs under and the hardware to run it on. For a business of any size buying and deploying that lot will cost a lot more than a few hundred thousand USD.
Again, they CAN get a new version. It'll cost them, but compared to the cost of being completely dead in the water, it doesnt look so bad. A few hundred thousand dollars every decade or so (MS may release a new OS every 3 years, but real world people upgrade every 10 or so, most sites I visit still run NT 4.0) is nothing compared to "Oh Gee, we're out of business. The SAMBA team decided not to work on it anymore, they're writing a Pokemon clone now".
Unless you are dealing with proprietary software, in which case shopping around isn't really possible. The only entity which really understands how the thing works is whoever wrote it. Who may not even work for the company who owns the copyright any more.
I'm talking about shopping around support. There may be one commercial software supplier (like MSFT), but there will be hundreds of firms willing to support it.
Like your bookshelf is right now impervious to fire, earthquakes or floods?
With an electronic system, you'd still own a license to the books, and could possibly restore them from the publishers onto your new e-paper after the flare is over.
Lots of people "waste time" making the case look good, because a good looking case is a well maintained case, that doesnt have a rats nest of wires and a CPU fan that clogs up and dies.
I dont go putting an automotive finish on it and type R stickers, but a little forethought into getting matching drives and whatnot doesnt kill anyone.
There are a lot of PC cases that look much better than macs. IMO mac's look like super nintendos on growth hormones.
No, what they see is the entire company infrastructure being built by and around one person. And if that one person quits or dies or something, they're up shits creek without a paddle.
They remember the early days of IT where some pear shaped geek would hold the entire business hostage while he demanded a quarter million dollars a year in salary. Because after all, he's the only one who knows how the system works.
Those days are dead and gone.
Outsourced support eliminates this risk, and yes, it's much easier to hold a corporation accountable, and shopping around for a new support contract is easier than hiring and training another pear shaped geek.
Just use open source, if its the best solution for a problem, it will be seen as such and embraced.
All of the philosophy society-revolution bullshit rhetoric from the "OSS Leaders" is pretty much ignored in the real world.
And if you want your employer/client to completely dismiss you for a zealot idiot, just write "Micro$uck" into an email, or yammer about the MS Palladium world-domination conspiracy theory. Or give them some false information about how windows cant do this or that, nothing more pathetic than a "computer nerd" who knows less than someone who's thumbed through a copy of "Windows for Dummies"
Thats the best way to show your lack of objectivity, and guarantee your position in the mailroom is secure for all eternity.
Slashdot Mirror
No, XP doesnt require 4x the ram. MS recommends it, but it surely doesnt require it if you ONLY want it to run as well as NT4 did. You'll need it if you want to use some of the newer features and eye candy.
Keep NT 4, or your linux install on a 3 gig hard drive with your pentium 166 and 16 megs of ram. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Me, I like having big DVD sized games that run from the hard disc, or being able to stream a few hours of TV-quality video. I like having two 120 gig drives in RAID 0 and never having to worry about running out of space.
It's not just about technology driving the market. It's about the market driving the technology.
You should compare increase in storage density.
Moore's law is about how many transistors can get crammed into a given space.
So you'd compare how many bits can get crammed onto a square inch of a drive platter, or something like that.
This article is just some more "hooray for the industry" cheerleading stuff. Whoopty doo. Computers get cheaper and faster and store more stuff.
I'm shocked and appalled.
Magnetic storage has gotten cheaper?
You don't say.
But recordable CD drives are still tens of thousands of dollars, right?
You can stream your mp3 in realtime, and do your live internet concert.
That and noone gives a shit about OGG.
The serial port could be 20 times faster than the firewire for all you know.
Firewire is serial too.
If you follow the judeo-christian beliefs more strictly, you'd expect the heavens to be populated by the One God, his angelic choir, and the souls of the ascended. Not space herpes or Klingons or little green men.
Do we always have to scream "FIRST!"?
Only if it's followed by "POST!"
Theres a PET/V20/C64 comminity, an Amiga community, an Atari ST community.
There's a community for every past console, from Atari 2600 to the Dreamcast.
There are communities for Model T Fords. I once drove to a theme park (Canada's Wonderland) and my jaw dropped when I saw hundred upon hundreds of restored Model T's in the parking lot - the Model T association was having an outing.
Model T's dont compare with today's cars, yet some people still cherish 'em.
Because it's apple.
If it was MSFT, with the exact same service, it would be tacked onto michaels childish "I hate MS" whine of an article. In fact, there was a bunch of DRM whining in that article.
You must realize you're dealing with hypocrites.
Is this about the anonymous gay sex in public restrooms in financial districts?
Ever tried to type into a laptop while standing, holding it in one hand and typing with the other?
The home inspector I used had one. He could just jot down notes and check boxes without having to find a seat. I don't know if the recognition was flawless or not, there were a few misspellings in my hard report, but it was readable. (Moreso than your average slashdot article, in fact)
I'm sure if you use your imagination you could think of more people and professions that would prefer one to a laptop or PDA.
- People dont get Tablets to run Photoshop.
They are currently a niche product, sure, but they're great on a sales floor or to take quick notes in the field.
The home inspector who did my walkthrough had a tablet PC, and it suited him fine for checking off boxes, jotting a few notes, making some quick sketches, and then printing me a hard copy.
This is the hardest thing for computer geeks to understand: not everyone has the same demands of a computer that they do.
For many people, a tablet PC is a much better fit than a laptop. Comparing the two is like comparing a PDA with Gameboy Advance.
They're benchmarking the software, not the hardware.
In this test, the hardware is the constant and the software is the variable.
In a CPU benchmark, the software would be the constant, the hardware the variable.
The P3 Xeons are a better choice than the P4 Xeons, it keeps the iSSE2 and AthlonXP and hyperthreading stuff out of the mix, which could really skew results.
Plus it represents the vast majority of hardware in the real world.
This is probably as fair as the benchmark can be.
We could all switch.
But it does. I can't get any kind of power management support to work. I'm recompiling the kernel right now with another crap-shoot of settings that might make it suspend properly. The userland desktop apps are garbage. Half the hardware on the shelves is either not supported, or half-way supported.
Either deal with the hassles of linux, or deal with the hassles of windows. One will cost you time and features, the other money.
Life's a bitch. Let's get over it, shall we?
BTW, RedHat ain't exactly gods gift to corporate america either.
Well, that's what I'm saying. In most cases, it wouldnt be worth the hassle of fighting unless it was pretty clear that you were stealing company IP.
I'm sure it's a policy in the employee handbook that you agree not to release any trade secrets or source code or designs to anyone outside the company.
It's not like they have the anti-open source stormtroopers running around Redmond looking for people with knoppix CDs, that's just how the zealots make it seem.
If you worked on the NT Kernel design team, and also contributed to the linux kernel, there'd definately be a conflict of interest there, and you might get in crap.
Or if you were working on NTFS for windows, and submitted an NTFS driver to linux, stuff like that.
If you work on some drawing routines for Visio and are helping out with an OSS encryption program, I doubt it would be an issue.
Where are your observable phenomena?
The data streams in and out of the processor dont count? The output on your screen doesn't count?
Your testable hypotheses?
I think I can make an O(log(n)) algorithm to do blah blah. I think that malloc algorithm A will improve throughput 30% over algorithm B.
Your experimental data?
No data in computers, that's for sure.
Your replicable results?
Nope. No way to copy a computer program. Good point.
No, anything with the word "science" in the title is a collection of sciences.
Social Science is not a field of study, it's a group of fields like Anthropology, Paleobiology, Demography, Epidemiology, etc, etc..
Likewise Political Science is a collection of social sciences with a focus on states rather than individuals, and a heavy dose of statistics.
Computer science is a collection of electronic engineering (which contains some applied physics, applied chemistry, now quantum mechanics, etc), cryptology, number theory and other pure mathematics, and virtually every 'scientist' is a mathematician first, even if they wont admit it.
Computer science is the sum total of fields of study that relate to computers. It is not programming, that's merely a small part of it. Writing a VBScript to punch the monkey doesnt make you a computer scientist.
But I'd doubt you could walk into Intel's clean room where they're designing the next generation of carbon nanotub mega-quantum superprocessors and tell them they arent scientists.
Microsoft discourages employees from contributing to open-source projects
And McDonalds discourages employees from handing out free hamburgers to penniless bums and hippies. Shocking.
Troll aside, AFAIK Microsoft can't and doesnt prevent anyone from contributing to open source, but the employee who does better be ready to prove that he didn't contribute any of the companies code, else he'd be fired and probably sued.
It's common sense, and pretty much par for the course for any paid programmer.
To keep the analogy, McDonalds doesnt prevent you from giving food to the homeless, but it better be your own food and not theirs.
Anything that evokes an emotional response in the viewer could be considered an art. This is thrown around all the time. Personally I think it's too loose a definition. My dog shit on the rug - I definately had an emotional reaction, but I dont call him an artist.
I've also never had an emotional reaction to code. It's all about function. Maybe some would, maybe you could consider that art. You could consider anything art.
But, it is not a Fine Art, which painting is. Painting, sculpting, composing, mosaic tiling, etc, are the classical fine arts.
So there you go. Now quit fighting about whether its an art or not.
In short, you can call anything an art. The term fine art refers to a very specific set of functions.
But they don't see that there is exactly the same risk involved with using proprietary software. Except that with this case it's that of an external third party company no longer supporting the software.
And with this case it's a calculable risk. They can look at the companies history, look at its business plan, value of stock, etc, etc. When it comes to Microsoft, IBM or Oracle, there's little doubt that the company will exist long enough to support the solution. Bill the geek, however, could be hit by a bus tomorrow.
Management will take risks, but only when they know what the risk is.
As opposed to a proprietary software company insisting that in order to continue with their product you not only have to get a new version of their product you also have to get a new version of the proprietary OS it runs under and the hardware to run it on. For a business of any size buying and deploying that lot will cost a lot more than a few hundred thousand USD.
Again, they CAN get a new version. It'll cost them, but compared to the cost of being completely dead in the water, it doesnt look so bad. A few hundred thousand dollars every decade or so (MS may release a new OS every 3 years, but real world people upgrade every 10 or so, most sites I visit still run NT 4.0) is nothing compared to "Oh Gee, we're out of business. The SAMBA team decided not to work on it anymore, they're writing a Pokemon clone now".
Unless you are dealing with proprietary software, in which case shopping around isn't really possible. The only entity which really understands how the thing works is whoever wrote it. Who may not even work for the company who owns the copyright any more.
I'm talking about shopping around support. There may be one commercial software supplier (like MSFT), but there will be hundreds of firms willing to support it.
Like your bookshelf is right now impervious to fire, earthquakes or floods?
With an electronic system, you'd still own a license to the books, and could possibly restore them from the publishers onto your new e-paper after the flare is over.
Lots of people "waste time" making the case look good, because a good looking case is a well maintained case, that doesnt have a rats nest of wires and a CPU fan that clogs up and dies.
I dont go putting an automotive finish on it and type R stickers, but a little forethought into getting matching drives and whatnot doesnt kill anyone.
There are a lot of PC cases that look much better than macs. IMO mac's look like super nintendos on growth hormones.
No, what they see is the entire company infrastructure being built by and around one person. And if that one person quits or dies or something, they're up shits creek without a paddle.
They remember the early days of IT where some pear shaped geek would hold the entire business hostage while he demanded a quarter million dollars a year in salary. Because after all, he's the only one who knows how the system works.
Those days are dead and gone.
Outsourced support eliminates this risk, and yes, it's much easier to hold a corporation accountable, and shopping around for a new support contract is easier than hiring and training another pear shaped geek.
Even screw the TCO crap. If they want to consider it, they'll crunch the TCO numbers themselves.
Business folks and beurocrats want to know one thing: Will the shit work or not?
They dont want to hear financial insight from IT guys. No more than they want to hear technical specs from the accounting dept.
A good product should be able to sell itself.
I have no desire to go into marketing.
Just use open source, if its the best solution for a problem, it will be seen as such and embraced.
All of the philosophy society-revolution bullshit rhetoric from the "OSS Leaders" is pretty much ignored in the real world.
And if you want your employer/client to completely dismiss you for a zealot idiot, just write "Micro$uck" into an email, or yammer about the MS Palladium world-domination conspiracy theory. Or give them some false information about how windows cant do this or that, nothing more pathetic than a "computer nerd" who knows less than someone who's thumbed through a copy of "Windows for Dummies"
Thats the best way to show your lack of objectivity, and guarantee your position in the mailroom is secure for all eternity.