Re:Correction to Answer
on
Is Mac OS X Slow?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Macs are based on Objective-C - that's REALLY slow.
Correction: It is Mac OS X that is based on Objective-C. Linux/PPC systems are (all kernel, all Xfree86 and most of server applications) written on C.
Correction for the correction. The operating system is written in C/C++. The Mac OS X Cocoa Framework is written for Objective-C (and can implement Objective-C++ and Java).
Thanks for the info guys... I posted this based on my 1996 knowledge of the format...
Well, being six years out of date sure makes you the expert.. glad you took time out of your busy day to post.
When it comes to representing information on the web, PDF is a wrong solution.
This is not quite true. Web content is best delivered in HTML(DHTML/XML+CSS/etc..), but I would much rather get large documents (that contain graphics, equations, ect..) in PDF format -- just like the zsh manual I referenced in my previous post. Surely you can see the difference. If you were thinking that PDF was a replacement for HTML your crazier that I thought.
From your original post: Hope MS takes them to the cleaners
Yes MS to the rescue. Now what are you expecting -- Some free, open-source solutions.
Did I say it? PDF Docs are huge
Did I say it? You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
have to buy a piece of software that costs hundreds of dollars to be able to produce these documents
Your kidding right? Oh, Sorry, you must be using a Windoze box. I've been using ps2pdf for years. Also, any Mac OS X application that can "Print" can produce a PDF.
where the documents get positively huge (one of our clients insists on building pdf documents instead of html/php docs because of "better graphical formatting"
First of all, your client is right. Secondly, PDF documents can be down right tiny (unless your building them "without-a-clue"). For example, I just downloaded the zsh users guide this weekend in PDF format -- about 1100 Kb for 415 pages. A fully formatted and WYSIWYG'ed document for only 2.65 Kb per page. Here it is [1110 Kb PDF File]
never mind that a single one is 700Kb who's going to sit through downloading that???)
Yes, I remember fearing those dreaded 700Kb downloads.... in 1989.
G4Tower:/etc $ cat/etc/shells
# List of acceptable shells for chpass(1).
# Ftpd will not allow users to connect who are not using
# one of these shells.
32MB = about 30 min @ 192 kbps.
Most people are probabaly encoding at 128 kbps (from crusing the gnutella p2p) -- coming close to 1 hour depending on the source.
Check the G-shock specs for the drive while running.. nuff said
Shock absorbtion my @ss. Listen, the iPOD is great and I have one, but the 32 MB of "shock absorbtion" memory has got to be the *BIGGEST* mis-direct I have ever seen.
Depending on the encoding rate, the 32 MB can hold upwards of an *HOUR* of music. This has nothing to do with shock protection; generally 30 sec to 1 min works fine for this. The 32 MB is what gives the iPOD its great battery life for a hard disk based MP3 player. The iPOD's disk spins up, loads up the 32MB and spins down. If it had only shock protection memory -- 1MB or 4MB -- the HD would be spinning alot more (or all the time) so you wouldn't be getting the 10+ hours of battery life like we do now.
To summarize: 32 MB != shock protection (well, for the most part)
32 MB = battery life extention.
MIT did not just think this up. On my desk I have Volume 1, Issue 1 (March, 1999) of the International Journal of Phytoremediation (ISSN15522-6514). The science of phytoremediation is the study on how plants and there associated rhizosphere microbial communities deal with contaminants.
The science of phytoremediation is not new. The US military has studied it for years as a method to clean up metal contaminated soils at gun ranges. One of the problems of phytoremediation with inorganic contaminants (such as lead or aresnic) is what to do with the plants after the remediation program. They can be just as hard to dispose of as the metal contaminated soil. I believe the lead concentrations in one barley crop was so high that they sold the "harvest" to a smelter!!
LOL -- I didn't realize people were going to be reviewing my code. You are of course right:)
This is the *only* PS code I had ever deveopled. It printed one evelope at a time and seemed to work. Picked up the Adobe manual and was able to figure out enough in a evening to get this to work (man, were those the days). As I remember, being familar with RPN really helped out when it came to PS programming. (BTW, all the coding was done on an RS/6000 -- his name was darcy -- sniff -- I miss him)
Man! I hate being called a liar -- OK, you asked for it! -- Here is the code. The executable was wrapped in a shell scrip that shuffled everything nicely along -- it also required standard input file (text) to define the address for the envelope
What are the compelling reasons to use Fortran in 2002?
Fortran is still used quite a bit in scientific and engineering circles. There is a HUGE code base that people (understandably) do not want to give up. I spent three years in the mid-90's developing groundwater numerical models with Fortran90.
Some reasearch instutituions and software development companies have starting using C; however, mainly for pre- and post-processors. Many are still using Fortran numerical engines.
Another reason that Fortran was still popular (at least through the 90's) was that some of the major compilers (Such as IBMs Fortran complier) ROCKED. Some simulations that I was working on took weeks to peform and the compliers were very good at optimizing the Fortran code -- without the scientist getting too close to the hardware.
I must admit; however, that today all my programming is either done in C, Objective-C, or Perl -- even though gcc will compile Fortran code. (Can you believe I wrote a postscript driver for printing evelopes on our lab's printer in Fortran! )
The book has an audience problem because of its size. UNIX guys like thick books. Is this book mostly for newbies to OS X, to UNIX, or to Mac OS X's implementation of UNIX? Despite this targeting problem.....
This is crazy!!! There is no "targeting problem" -- the book is written for people who are new to UNIX -- that is the target audience. The book is right on for this crowd. As mentioned by others, there are other books that the UNIX savvy will find useful. -- Why would someone who owns "Unix PowerTools" or "Essential System Administration" even consider bying a book with "Learning Unix" in the title???
This story is a bit lame (and reporting like this is probably why I stopped reading wired 5 years ago -- Too many adds and not enough real content anymore).
I find Mac OS X *infinitely* more tweakable than previous versions of Mac operating systems. (I find it comical that people equate tweaking an OS with changing their desktop theme.)
For crying out loud, the next book from O'Reilly (Mac OS X for Unix Geeks) has a chapter on compiling the kernel -- This book has been approved by Apple's Developer Connection! Try that with Mac OS 9 or Windows XP.
Slashdot Mirror
If you haven't seen in then ... Bill -- Owns a software company [Requires Flash 5 or greater].
Macs are based on Objective-C - that's REALLY slow.
Correction: It is Mac OS X that is based on Objective-C. Linux/PPC systems are (all kernel, all Xfree86 and most of server applications) written on C.
Correction for the correction. The operating system is written in C/C++. The Mac OS X Cocoa Framework is written for Objective-C (and can implement Objective-C++ and Java).
Yes, and thanks for asking!!
Thanks for the info guys... I posted this based on my 1996 knowledge of the format...
Well, being six years out of date sure makes you the expert .. glad you took time out of your busy day to post.
When it comes to representing information on the web, PDF is a wrong solution.
This is not quite true. Web content is best delivered in HTML(DHTML/XML+CSS/etc..), but I would much rather get large documents (that contain graphics, equations, ect..) in PDF format -- just like the zsh manual I referenced in my previous post. Surely you can see the difference. If you were thinking that PDF was a replacement for HTML your crazier that I thought.
From your original post: Hope MS takes them to the cleaners
Yes MS to the rescue. Now what are you expecting -- Some free, open-source solutions.
Did I say it? PDF Docs are huge
Did I say it? You don't know what the fuck you are talking about.
Just about
have to buy a piece of software that costs hundreds of dollars to be able to produce these documents
Your kidding right? Oh, Sorry, you must be using a Windoze box. I've been using ps2pdf for years. Also, any Mac OS X application that can "Print" can produce a PDF.
where the documents get positively huge (one of our clients insists on building pdf documents instead of html/php docs because of "better graphical formatting"
First of all, your client is right. Secondly, PDF documents can be down right tiny (unless your building them "without-a-clue"). For example, I just downloaded the zsh users guide this weekend in PDF format -- about 1100 Kb for 415 pages. A fully formatted and WYSIWYG'ed document for only 2.65 Kb per page. Here it is [1110 Kb PDF File]
never mind that a single one is 700Kb who's going to sit through downloading that???)
Yes, I remember fearing those dreaded 700Kb downloads .... in 1989.
MvMac
From the man page:
MvMac - move files while preserving metadata and forks
G4Tower:/etc $ cat /etc/shells
/bin/bash
/bin/csh
/bin/sh
/bin/tcsh
/bin/zsh
# List of acceptable shells for chpass(1).
# Ftpd will not allow users to connect who are not using
# one of these shells.
From Mac OS X 10.2.1
And this has what to do the shock absortion?
32MB = about 30 min @ 192 kbps. Most people are probabaly encoding at 128 kbps (from crusing the gnutella p2p) -- coming close to 1 hour depending on the source. Check the G-shock specs for the drive while running .. nuff said
Shock absorbtion my @ss. Listen, the iPOD is great and I have one, but the 32 MB of "shock absorbtion" memory has got to be the *BIGGEST* mis-direct I have ever seen.
Depending on the encoding rate, the 32 MB can hold upwards of an *HOUR* of music. This has nothing to do with shock protection; generally 30 sec to 1 min works fine for this. The 32 MB is what gives the iPOD its great battery life for a hard disk based MP3 player. The iPOD's disk spins up, loads up the 32MB and spins down. If it had only shock protection memory -- 1MB or 4MB -- the HD would be spinning alot more (or all the time) so you wouldn't be getting the 10+ hours of battery life like we do now. To summarize:
32 MB != shock protection (well, for the most part)
32 MB = battery life extention.
MIT did not just think this up. On my desk I have Volume 1, Issue 1 (March, 1999) of the International Journal of Phytoremediation (ISSN15522-6514). The science of phytoremediation is the study on how plants and there associated rhizosphere microbial communities deal with contaminants.
The science of phytoremediation is not new. The US military has studied it for years as a method to clean up metal contaminated soils at gun ranges. One of the problems of phytoremediation with inorganic contaminants (such as lead or aresnic) is what to do with the plants after the remediation program. They can be just as hard to dispose of as the metal contaminated soil. I believe the lead concentrations in one barley crop was so high that they sold the "harvest" to a smelter!!
LOL -- I didn't realize people were going to be reviewing my code. You are of course right :)
This is the *only* PS code I had ever deveopled. It printed one evelope at a time and seemed to work. Picked up the Adobe manual and was able to figure out enough in a evening to get this to work (man, were those the days). As I remember, being familar with RPN really helped out when it came to PS programming. (BTW, all the coding was done on an RS/6000 -- his name was darcy -- sniff -- I miss him)
Man! I hate being called a liar -- OK, you asked for it! -- Here is the code. The executable was wrapped in a shell scrip that shuffled everything nicely along -- it also required standard input file (text) to define the address for the envelope
A link to "EV" Fortran source codeFortran is still used quite a bit in scientific and engineering circles. There is a HUGE code base that people (understandably) do not want to give up. I spent three years in the mid-90's developing groundwater numerical models with Fortran90.
Some reasearch instutituions and software development companies have starting using C; however, mainly for pre- and post-processors. Many are still using Fortran numerical engines.
Another reason that Fortran was still popular (at least through the 90's) was that some of the major compilers (Such as IBMs Fortran complier) ROCKED. Some simulations that I was working on took weeks to peform and the compliers were very good at optimizing the Fortran code -- without the scientist getting too close to the hardware.
I must admit; however, that today all my programming is either done in C, Objective-C, or Perl -- even though gcc will compile Fortran code. (Can you believe I wrote a postscript driver for printing evelopes on our lab's printer in Fortran! )
(-1) --- TROLL -- Your fucking kidding me, right?
The book has an audience problem because of its size. UNIX guys like thick books. Is this book mostly for newbies to OS X, to UNIX, or to Mac OS X's implementation of UNIX? Despite this targeting problem.....
This is crazy!!! There is no "targeting problem" -- the book is written for people who are new to UNIX -- that is the target audience. The book is right on for this crowd. As mentioned by others, there are other books that the UNIX savvy will find useful. -- Why would someone who owns "Unix PowerTools" or "Essential System Administration" even consider bying a book with "Learning Unix" in the title???
This story is a bit lame (and reporting like this is probably why I stopped reading wired 5 years ago -- Too many adds and not enough real content anymore).
I find Mac OS X *infinitely* more tweakable than previous versions of Mac operating systems. (I find it comical that people equate tweaking an OS with changing their desktop theme.)
For crying out loud, the next book from O'Reilly (Mac OS X for Unix Geeks) has a chapter on compiling the kernel -- This book has been approved by Apple's Developer Connection! Try that with Mac OS 9 or Windows XP.