I don't know--do you really think that a Mac user is less likely to enter her/his password into the prompt just because they don't have to do it very often?
Well, yes. That is basic UI knowledge. If you present a sceen to users often enough, they'll stop reading and even thinking about it. Sometimes they can't even remembert they clicked something.
The problem is not performance. There are serious issues about the semantics of the metadata you put on the files.
I've also once looked at the problem (and shortly after discovered WinFS). There are several papers writen about how to classify files, but it seems nobody was able to solve it on a general way. I guess that is why Microsoft was never very specific about what WinFS will do, and probably why it is still on the lab.
They didn't change the ssh protocol on ages, their server is a simple tty, and the client simple echoes data to a tty. If you don't consider security fixes, you'd have only small cosmetic changes.
Also, OpenSSH must be flawless. That is the software that gives acess to near everybody on near every server (and some desktops) at the internet. You don't want flaws on it.
That was specific for my system, of course. That is a home server Debian install (that is used as desktop lots of times). I didn't include subdirectories (I think it is better to count them as single libraries, since you often just import one of the files) and, of course, I have a very tiny fraction of Debian instaled on my machine.
No, I did not. However, many people seem to be missing my point by a mile, which is that computing power increases vastly more quickly than power saving capabilities (and than prices decrease).
That shows deep ignorance. Power usage versus performance is a well known trade-off. You can't have more chances for one without more chances for the other.
Now, about "Moore law" the way you define it, it didn't hold for the last iteration, did it?
Oh, no. It didn't. ISO changed the procedure exclusively for this one draft, hours before making a decision to not kill it while the old procedures required it to be killed.
No, that is about banishing closed proprietary formats from govenment distribution. There is no provision at my country's Constitution giving Microsoft power to tax me.
For example, the Czech Republic voted NO in September, but switched to YES. Why? Because nearly every one of their issues have been addressed now.
http://xmlguru.cz/2008/01/ecma-response-to-czech-ooxml-comments
Do you really expect the Czech Republic to continue to oppose OOXML when nearly all of its objections to the original spec have been fixed? Why would they do that? The problems were fixed, so they switched to YES, and this was the case with many countries (those without a political agenda).
Were they fixed? Really? Like the other 98% of the comments, that were "fixed" even nobody reading the "fix" due to lack of time?
Did you know that they had to vote NO if any one of their issues weren't fixed? "Nearly every one" doesn't cut it. Also, they could vote NO even if all of their issues were solved just because they discovered a new one, or because they think some other problem that wasn't fixed is important.
Now, how did the Czech Republic know that their issues were fixed if nobody readed the final document before voting?
Slashdot Mirror
You still can't know. Altough you are safer without Windows, you have simply no means of knowing that your computer is compromissed. On any OS.
Well, yes. That is basic UI knowledge. If you present a sceen to users often enough, they'll stop reading and even thinking about it. Sometimes they can't even remembert they clicked something.
Well, my computer will open it on a text editor.
Don't forget the file servers that host Windows files, and the web servers where Windows computers can upload stuff...
A antivirus has plenty of uses on Linux.
You don't get rooted at Ubuntu by just clicking at things. You need to get out of your way and make your system vunerable.
I am not saying that no user will get virus at Ubuntu. A few will, but those few will have to work very hard toward it.
They quite probably do. But they aren't NUCLEAR!
Kernel developers, of course! So, lets complain loudly and keep using the nice OSs from Redmond... Ops, wrong thread.
The problem is not performance. There are serious issues about the semantics of the metadata you put on the files.
I've also once looked at the problem (and shortly after discovered WinFS). There are several papers writen about how to classify files, but it seems nobody was able to solve it on a general way. I guess that is why Microsoft was never very specific about what WinFS will do, and probably why it is still on the lab.
WinFS was first (that I heard of) planned for release by 1992, within Cairo project. I hightly doubt it will sudenly work.
That said, there are several theoretical prblems with the idea behind WinFS. That is probably why we'll never see it working.
I didn't listen about any beta. But their marketing campaign started last year.
Anyway, the beta was scheduled for anytime now (at least acording to their presentations). If history is a gide, that means "at any time by 2010".
Yeah, but this time it is legal.
So if Microsoft were offering money (instead of MS shares), they'd surely listen?
They didn't change the ssh protocol on ages, their server is a simple tty, and the client simple echoes data to a tty. If you don't consider security fixes, you'd have only small cosmetic changes.
Also, OpenSSH must be flawless. That is the software that gives acess to near everybody on near every server (and some desktops) at the internet. You don't want flaws on it.
That was specific for my system, of course. That is a home server Debian install (that is used as desktop lots of times). I didn't include subdirectories (I think it is better to count them as single libraries, since you often just import one of the files) and, of course, I have a very tiny fraction of Debian instaled on my machine.
Probably because of Java, Flash, Wine, Mplayer codecs and all that small stuff that isn't free.
At least that is what stoped me from trying to put such architectures on the desktop.
That shows deep ignorance. Power usage versus performance is a well known trade-off. You can't have more chances for one without more chances for the other.
Now, about "Moore law" the way you define it, it didn't hold for the last iteration, did it?
$ls /usr/lib | wc -l
$2956
I guess that qualifies as "thousands" ;)
Great! Now we just need to run Windows on a virtual machine inside Linux :)
You are talking about OpenSSH here. It is not "merely" a security update. It is a top priority security update.
Besides, what other kind of update would you expect on ssh?
Oh, no. It didn't. ISO changed the procedure exclusively for this one draft, hours before making a decision to not kill it while the old procedures required it to be killed.
Maybe because it is a galaxy (arguably).
No, I am not. OOXML is still fraudulent and MS Office still doesn't implement it.
Well, they did.
No, that is about banishing closed proprietary formats from govenment distribution. There is no provision at my country's Constitution giving Microsoft power to tax me.
Were they fixed? Really? Like the other 98% of the comments, that were "fixed" even nobody reading the "fix" due to lack of time?
Did you know that they had to vote NO if any one of their issues weren't fixed? "Nearly every one" doesn't cut it. Also, they could vote NO even if all of their issues were solved just because they discovered a new one, or because they think some other problem that wasn't fixed is important.
Now, how did the Czech Republic know that their issues were fixed if nobody readed the final document before voting?