Re:looks like it still loses history
on
BASH 4.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
"all software running under the same account will get along perfectly is naive."
Sorry , why wouldn't it? Perhaps in Windows apps stomp all over each other but I've never come across that problem in unix or linux. If you configure them to use their own specific directories whats the problem?
"If you grant such access, of course"
Err, root can read and do what it likes. As a normal user you don't get a choice in the matter. If someone or thing with root access wants to go through your home directory they will and theres bugger all you can do about it. The only exception to this was in old HP-UX systems were chmod had a -h option to hide files , but even then root could view them if he knew the name.
Re:looks like it still loses history
on
BASH 4.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
"when will applications have private temp folders "
Who cares? Are you worried one of your own programs might sabotage another?? And anyone or thing with root access will be able to read it anyway.
Unfortunately politicians are in thrall to Joe Public and the 40 years of anti nuclear BS and bias from the eco loony and CND camps. Anyone with a brain knows nuclear is probably the best way to go but its the thick nimbys that need convincing.
Which would make the whole enterprise totally pointless. Anyway , anyone with a clue about X Windows (ie not MS and Apple fanboys and probably no one who has the words HTML, Javascript or Ruby in pride of place in their resume) knows that people have been able to do this sort of thing for 20 odd years without going near a web browser.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up. The web weenies really have no clue about the kind of functionality that power users want. As long as the eye candy looks "kewl" and the app is "Remote editing! , woah!, cutting edge dude!" (they've probably never heard of X Windows) thats all they need.
... pretending to be helpful but surreptitiously twirling its moustache while doing nfaerious deeds to the computer and generally making life miserable for the user.... actually thinking about it - thats not too different from the real clippy.
No one apart from uber nerds care - its just a word. Hoover were probably pissed that their name became the de facto name for vacuum cleaners too. Tough, deal.
In other news - a new Starter Car was introduced by Ford. It has 2 gears and can only manage 30mph but a spokesman said "when drivers learn the ins and outs of driving they can upgrade to a more powerful version - which can do 60!"
Oh please.
A computer is a tool - you expect it to have certain fundamental abilities and since we're not in 1980 running DOS computers are expected to be able to run as many apps and services as memory and CPU allow.
This isn't a troll - I installed it with Suse 11.0 last year and though it was supposedly a release version it was utterly unusable, unstable and missing important features. I had to install 3.5.4 to actually get some work done. Since then I haven't bothered to check what state 4 is in now as I felt the KDE team (and Suse) had, to be polite, been rather dishonest about it. Is it worthwhile looking at it yet or should I just stick to 3.5 for the forseable future.
Re:Markup language != programming language
on
FBML Essentials
·
· Score: 1
I wasnt talking about the server side you idiot, i was talking about the client side.
Markup language != programming language
on
FBML Essentials
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Writing a few lines of a data markup language does not make you a programmer , you have not "developed" anything and hence what you have written is not an "application". At best its a description of functionality but it is NOT the implementation of it which is what the word "develop" in the programming sense means. FBJS may well be a programing language (albeit a noddy one) but FBML is not and I get a teensy bit tired of idiots people pretending they're some amazing app developer because they can grasp how to use *ML. Lets get this straight - a friggin chimp could code in a markup language given 2 hours training.
I don't use Windows much so perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but why is it so hard for MS to implement this sort of system? Unix has managed it with root, groups since the 70s and with ACLs, su, sudo etc since the 80s so why can't MS manage to get right something so simple and so fundamental to a multi user OS in 2009?? And why would you need it much anyway? If you're simply installing an app (as opposed to an OS/library update) why would you need administrator/root type access anyway?
"so, was surprised especially for someone that chose a career that involved computers...that they would tire of them"
Why? If someone spends their day driving a taxi do you think they want to jump into a car as soon as they get home and go for a 3 hour drive for the hell of it? Its no different. Doing the same thing all the time gets very boring.
Has it occured to you that perhaps when he gets home having spent 8 hours in front of a PC the last thing he wants to do is spend his free time in front of one too? Not all of us find computer technology so fascinating that we want to use it 24/7.
Especially on a single core CPU. Any coder worth his salary knows how to do single threaded non blocking/asynch I/O , using multithreading is just a lazymans approach plus it gives rise to potential deadlocks and race situations.
I dont use Windows much but I assumed MS had disabled or at least set the default to off of the autoexec.bat feature so how else could it spread just by plugging in a USB stick? Someone tell me this security hole the size of a planet isn't still enabled by default in Windows installs??
The computer did do what she wanted - it would connect to the internet and process Word documents. She was just too stupid to know how to plug in an ethernet cable or double click on a.doc
"in modern software development would just not be feasible for most business applications using more primitive languages such as C"
Like what? All it would take is a bunch of libraries for C to emulate pretty much everything that can done by C++ (or language of your choice) out of the box and in fact you can program a hacky form of OO in C anyway using function pointers in structures which is what many coders used to do. In fact OO is just another form of procedural programming anyway. Also don't confuse libraries with the language itself - java without its libraries would be virtually useless - and don't assume certain fancy language features in various languages that fanboys rave about (eg anonymous functions, templating) can produce code that can't be produced any other way. Remember - assembler is turing complete - anything built on top of it is just syntatic sugar.
Ok , if you're running under root/administator priviledge then I guess thats a partial excuse for it , but if the process is running as an unpriviledged user there is NO excuse WHATSOEVER for ANY API to bring down an OS kernel. End of.
Slashdot Mirror
"all software running under the same account will get along perfectly is naive."
Sorry , why wouldn't it? Perhaps in Windows apps stomp all over each other but I've never come across that problem in unix or linux. If you configure them to use their own specific directories whats the problem?
"If you grant such access, of course"
Err, root can read and do what it likes. As a normal user you don't get a choice in the matter. If someone or thing with root access wants to go through your home directory they will and theres bugger all you can do about it. The only exception to this was in old HP-UX systems were chmod had a -h option to hide files , but even then root could view them if he knew the name.
"when will applications have private temp folders "
Who cares? Are you worried one of your own programs might sabotage another?? And anyone or thing with root access will be able to read it anyway.
Its the bloody default shell. I can't stand it - why can't they use bash or just plain bourne shell FFS?
I thought windows was supposed to be pointy clicky easy to use? Yeah right, not looking at that load of heiroglyphics it isn't.
Unfortunately politicians are in thrall to Joe Public and the 40 years of anti nuclear BS and bias from the eco loony and CND camps. Anyone with a brain knows nuclear is probably the best way to go but its the thick nimbys that need convincing.
>or even on your own server in your basement.
Which would make the whole enterprise totally pointless. Anyway , anyone with a clue about X Windows (ie not MS and Apple fanboys and probably no one who has the words HTML, Javascript or Ruby in pride of place in their resume) knows that people have been able to do this sort of thing for 20 odd years without going near a web browser.
If I had mod points I'd mod you up. The web weenies really have no clue about the kind of functionality that power users want. As long as the eye candy looks "kewl" and the app is "Remote editing! , woah!, cutting edge dude!" (they've probably never heard of X Windows) thats all they need.
Yet another traveller misses his flight on Sarcasm Airlines...
... pretending to be helpful but surreptitiously twirling its moustache while doing nfaerious deeds to the computer and generally making life miserable for the user.... actually thinking about it - thats not too different from the real clippy.
No one apart from uber nerds care - its just a word. Hoover were probably pissed that their name became the de facto name for vacuum cleaners too. Tough, deal.
In other news - a new Starter Car was introduced by Ford. It has 2 gears and can only manage 30mph but a spokesman said "when drivers learn the ins and outs of driving they can upgrade to a more powerful version - which can do 60!"
Oh please.
A computer is a tool - you expect it to have certain fundamental abilities and since we're not in 1980 running DOS computers are expected to be able to run as many apps and services as memory and CPU allow.
This isn't a troll - I installed it with Suse 11.0 last year and though it was supposedly a release version it was utterly unusable, unstable and missing important features. I had to install 3.5.4 to actually get some work done. Since then I haven't bothered to check what state 4 is in now as I felt the KDE team (and Suse) had, to be polite, been rather dishonest about it. Is it worthwhile looking at it yet or should I just stick to 3.5 for the forseable future.
I wasnt talking about the server side you idiot, i was talking about the client side.
Writing a few lines of a data markup language does not make you a programmer , you have not "developed" anything and hence what you have written is not an "application". At best its a description of functionality but it is NOT the implementation of it which is what the word "develop" in the programming sense means. FBJS may well be a programing language (albeit a noddy one) but FBML is not and I get a teensy bit tired of idiots people pretending they're some amazing app developer because they can grasp how to use *ML. Lets get this straight - a friggin chimp could code in a markup language given 2 hours training.
I don't use Windows much so perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but why is it so hard for MS to implement this sort of system? Unix has managed it with root, groups since the 70s and with ACLs, su, sudo etc since the 80s so why can't MS manage to get right something so simple and so fundamental to a multi user OS in 2009?? And why would you need it much anyway? If you're simply installing an app (as opposed to an OS/library update) why would you need administrator/root type access anyway?
What else did you think licenses were for? As a cool certificate to stick on the wall and show to your friends?? Jeez...
"so, was surprised especially for someone that chose a career that involved computers...that they would tire of them"
Why? If someone spends their day driving a taxi do you think they want to jump into a car as soon as they get home and go for a 3 hour drive for the hell of it? Its no different. Doing the same thing all the time gets very boring.
Has it occured to you that perhaps when he gets home having spent 8 hours in front of a PC the last thing he wants to do is spend his free time in front of one too? Not all of us find computer technology so fascinating that we want to use it 24/7.
Especially on a single core CPU. Any coder worth his salary knows how to do single threaded non blocking/asynch I/O , using multithreading is just a lazymans approach plus it gives rise to potential deadlocks and race situations.
I dont use Windows much but I assumed MS had disabled or at least set the default to off of the autoexec.bat feature so how else could it spread just by plugging in a USB stick? Someone tell me this security hole the size of a planet isn't still enabled by default in Windows installs??
I know O'Reilly hasn't exactly had a great Mac section but really , this is going too far!
The computer did do what she wanted - it would connect to the internet and process Word documents. She was just too stupid to know how to plug in an ethernet cable or double click on a .doc
Can you say "malware", "virus", "trojan"?
"in modern software development would just not be feasible for most business applications using more primitive languages such as C"
Like what? All it would take is a bunch of libraries for C to emulate pretty much everything that can done by C++ (or language of your choice) out of the box and in fact you can program a hacky form of OO in C anyway using function pointers in structures which is what many coders used to do. In fact OO is just another form of procedural programming anyway. Also don't confuse libraries with the language itself - java without its libraries would be virtually useless - and don't assume certain fancy language features in various languages that fanboys rave about (eg anonymous functions, templating) can produce code that can't be produced any other way. Remember - assembler is turing complete - anything built on top of it is just syntatic sugar.
Ok , if you're running under root/administator priviledge then I guess thats a partial excuse for it , but if the process is running as an unpriviledged user there is NO excuse WHATSOEVER for ANY API to bring down an OS kernel. End of.