...these chips most likely won't actually be delivered until 2016...
I don't see why there would be such a delay when the article says:
The company finalized development of Elbrus-4C in April 2014, and began mass production last fall.
As for the "five years behind comment" (which was not anyone bragging but instead criticising), I suspect that the article mashed together two different quotes into one. In terms of performance (which put them between the i3 & i5), they are five years behind mainstream performance. But it is difficult to compare this and the other performance metrics because of the architectural differences. This isn't a x86 CPU, it is more of a hybrid design. It runs at a very low clock speed (800MHz) and it's power requirements (45W) are low for a 65nm process.
It's not really the important part of the story though. For some countries affected by US export restrictions, having an alternate supplier makes them better than nothing. This CPU will not make the company a household name in the West, but they will continue to have a market in the places that the big boys can't play.
If you have a need to recompile Powershell, it would be because it lacks something. What is it lacking? I understand that ideology is important and that open source is a reasonable thing to prefer, but that it not an answer to my question of what Linux does that Powershell does not.
I think that you have put way too much thought into this. It is just not important. The original comment was inaccurate and just not insightful. If it is so wrong to correct the examples offered, then perhaps it was equally wrong for the AC to make the original post in the first place as it serves no point other than to perpetuate the myth that the language is too verbose to use.
Except the majority of people running Windows don't use Powershell, so *.ps1 files cannot be used as a mechanism to infect those systems with malware. And you can still use Powershell interactively without having to change the security. This only affects people who want to run script files.
And there is no one operating system that has every single security feature, let alone has them enabled by default. Just because OpenBSD doesn't have it, doesn't mean that it isn't a security feature on Windows.
Those were impressions, not examples. Impressions cannot be wrong.
Have you never heard of people getting the wrong impression of something? I have merely corrected the impression that Powershell will always be verbose where *nix is concise.
Yet I have already shown you that it has built-in short aliases for common functions (some which use standard Unix names), and you can add your own. For the long commands and parameters Powershell has tab completion that is miles ahead of bash as it works for parameters and values too.
When the initial remark was "I can do a lot more with old linux tools than powershell have ever had the capability of" and the grandparent said "If you know linux well enough, you have complete control over everything including the kernel", then short (and cryptic) command names is an underwhelming example to choose.
Who has been doing this? Scanning through the posts here shows a lot of nay-sayers who are obviously uninformed, but I don't see any people saying that Powershell can do things that Bash can't without offering an example. And even if they do, why don't you ask them for examples like I did?
In the meantime, I still have to keep asking what it is that Powershell can't do.
In the Linux world, Powershell is very limited. You may think it's powerful, but it's really very weak. If you know linux well enough, you have complete control over everything including the kernel.
So you claim, but I have yet to hear of anything that can't be done in Powershell. Undoubtedly there will be something, but I think that most of the time when people make this claim it is because they just assume that it is the case. But when asked to back up the statement...
Well, we can see what has happened. Just further vague claims.
Build a script library based on short mnemonic commands.
That's easy to do with set-alias. It already has built-in aliases for mv, cp, ls, cat, diff, echo, lp, man, ps, pushd, rm, wget and many more. Use get-alias to see the list of them.
For the other commands you listed, I use UnxUtils. It's a lot lighter than cygwin, although the versions are very old.
Every time I have used powershell it has been anything but intuitive or easy to remember.
Once you get used to the naming system then it is quite intuitive. And if you don't know how to do something then it has some built-in mechanisms to make it easy to find out how to do things. For example, if you don't know how to import a CSV file, try get-help *csv* and it shows all the aliases and commandlets and pertain to CSV importing and exporting.
Then with tab completion you can Import-Csv - and press tab after the dash and view all the parameters of the command. If you choose -Encoding press space then press tab again and it displays the options just for that argument (the different encoding types).
So all that was found without having to look up help files. You didn't even need to look at get-help to see the list of commands. Just type *csv* and press tab and display the commands interactively.
So yes it is a verbose language, but that makes it easier to discover the commands to use.
One of the authors thinks the problem may have been due to a leak at a storage tank on the surface. Emphasis on the "may".
Plus there's the concentration issue - parts per trillion doesn't make for much of a problem in any case. Even the authors didn't make this out to be a health problem....
So you are saying it was a pretty balanced and non-alarmist report then. That still didn't stop the industry shills from attacking it with their over-the-top "fact..fact..fact" format.
I retract my original statement, and revise it to "Pivot tables became a lot more user-friendly in Excel 2007." Many users simply did not know the functionality was even there prior to that version.
I think that statement is also false. By "many users", you really just mean you.
Instead of Insert Ribbon->PivotTable in Excel 2013, the 2003 version used Data Menu->Pivot Table and Pivot Chart Report. Not really different at all.
Once you are in the function, the later version has a nicer interface, but the old one is still workable. I think the difference that you have found between the old and new version was that you had a need and an understanding of pivot tables as you matured and used Excel rather than any glaring deficiencies with the spreadsheet itself.
You're missing out on Excel pivot tables. That is one hell of a big selling point for versions >= 2007.
Microsoft Excel introduced pivot tables in version 5.0 released in 1995. So yes they do keep making improvements pivot tables in each version (up to and including Power Pivots as an add-on for 2010 and included in 2013), but no you do "miss out" on pivot tables at all.
And yet for those people who don't know or care about that reputation, it is still the perfectly good browser as the OP said. It shows all the websites they want (so as far as they care it does adhere to the standards) and they are far more likely to get hacked due to social engineering than any browser hack.
That was always such a dumb quote because Microsoft had been writing software for Unix since the 80s. Even Microsoft Word ran on Unix 6 years before the first Linux release.
Ah, yes. Warmist nut jobs. I bet you are one of those people who gets offended when they get called a denier. I bet that you are also not qualified to know whether those claims of a climate change link to earthquakes are true or not.
The best part about Graffiti was that you didn't have to watch the screen while entering text. When I travelled across Europe by train, was able to look out the window and enjoy the scenery while I wrote my travel diary on my Pilot (actually a Handera TRGPro with a compact flash slot). I didn't have to move my hand like I would with a paper diary. I didn't have to key my eye on the screen for when I hit the wrong key or auto-correct decided to change what I meant to write. It was a very liberating experience.
What is your evidence that he had mental problems?
Apparently you didn't comprehend the story either. According the TFA, he was "mentally ill and was acting strangely only days before his arrest, according to a Muslim cleric who said he was counseling him at the request of the FBI.". The cleric went on to say that "the agents told him that Booker suffered from bipolar disorder, characterized by unusual mood swings that can affect functioning."
So he had mental problems according to the FBI and the person that was counselling him.
Slashdot Mirror
Russia does have fabs. The Mikron Group made the Elbrus-2SM processor. They can't do less than a 90nm process yet.
We can't trust the Asian chips anymore.
These are fabricated in Taiwan. You had best keep using your abacus for a while longer.
...these chips most likely won't actually be delivered until 2016...
I don't see why there would be such a delay when the article says:
The company finalized development of Elbrus-4C in April 2014, and began mass production last fall.
As for the "five years behind comment" (which was not anyone bragging but instead criticising), I suspect that the article mashed together two different quotes into one. In terms of performance (which put them between the i3 & i5), they are five years behind mainstream performance. But it is difficult to compare this and the other performance metrics because of the architectural differences. This isn't a x86 CPU, it is more of a hybrid design. It runs at a very low clock speed (800MHz) and it's power requirements (45W) are low for a 65nm process.
It's not really the important part of the story though. For some countries affected by US export restrictions, having an alternate supplier makes them better than nothing. This CPU will not make the company a household name in the West, but they will continue to have a market in the places that the big boys can't play.
It can't be compiled by me, from source code.
If you have a need to recompile Powershell, it would be because it lacks something. What is it lacking? I understand that ideology is important and that open source is a reasonable thing to prefer, but that it not an answer to my question of what Linux does that Powershell does not.
I think that you have put way too much thought into this. It is just not important. The original comment was inaccurate and just not insightful. If it is so wrong to correct the examples offered, then perhaps it was equally wrong for the AC to make the original post in the first place as it serves no point other than to perpetuate the myth that the language is too verbose to use.
I do acknowledge your pedantry though.
Except the majority of people running Windows don't use Powershell, so *.ps1 files cannot be used as a mechanism to infect those systems with malware. And you can still use Powershell interactively without having to change the security. This only affects people who want to run script files.
And there is no one operating system that has every single security feature, let alone has them enabled by default. Just because OpenBSD doesn't have it, doesn't mean that it isn't a security feature on Windows.
Those were impressions, not examples. Impressions cannot be wrong.
Have you never heard of people getting the wrong impression of something? I have merely corrected the impression that Powershell will always be verbose where *nix is concise.
It can't be concise.
Yet I have already shown you that it has built-in short aliases for common functions (some which use standard Unix names), and you can add your own. For the long commands and parameters Powershell has tab completion that is miles ahead of bash as it works for parameters and values too.
When the initial remark was "I can do a lot more with old linux tools than powershell have ever had the capability of" and the grandparent said "If you know linux well enough, you have complete control over everything including the kernel", then short (and cryptic) command names is an underwhelming example to choose.
Who has been doing this? Scanning through the posts here shows a lot of nay-sayers who are obviously uninformed, but I don't see any people saying that Powershell can do things that Bash can't without offering an example. And even if they do, why don't you ask them for examples like I did?
In the meantime, I still have to keep asking what it is that Powershell can't do.
Broken-by-default
No, that would be secure-by-default. Sorry that is an inconvenience for you.
In the Linux world, Powershell is very limited. You may think it's powerful, but it's really very weak. If you know linux well enough, you have complete control over everything including the kernel.
So you claim, but I have yet to hear of anything that can't be done in Powershell. Undoubtedly there will be something, but I think that most of the time when people make this claim it is because they just assume that it is the case. But when asked to back up the statement...
Well, we can see what has happened. Just further vague claims.
The same thing in Powershell would be:
invoke-webrequest http://server/path/to/file -OutFile file
or use the built-in alias:
wget http://server/path/to/file -OutFile file
Those examples are wrong.
GNU/Linux copy command: cp
Powershell: cp
GNU/Linux delete command: rm
Powershell: rm
Build a script library based on short mnemonic commands.
That's easy to do with set-alias. It already has built-in aliases for mv, cp, ls, cat, diff, echo, lp, man, ps, pushd, rm, wget and many more. Use get-alias to see the list of them.
For the other commands you listed, I use UnxUtils. It's a lot lighter than cygwin, although the versions are very old.
Every time I have used powershell it has been anything but intuitive or easy to remember.
Once you get used to the naming system then it is quite intuitive. And if you don't know how to do something then it has some built-in mechanisms to make it easy to find out how to do things. For example, if you don't know how to import a CSV file, try get-help *csv* and it shows all the aliases and commandlets and pertain to CSV importing and exporting.
Then with tab completion you can Import-Csv - and press tab after the dash and view all the parameters of the command. If you choose -Encoding press space then press tab again and it displays the options just for that argument (the different encoding types).
So all that was found without having to look up help files. You didn't even need to look at get-help to see the list of commands. Just type *csv* and press tab and display the commands interactively.
So yes it is a verbose language, but that makes it easier to discover the commands to use.
I can do a lot more with old linux tools than powershell have ever had the capability of.
What is it that Powershell can't do?
One of the authors thinks the problem may have been due to a leak at a storage tank on the surface. Emphasis on the "may".
Plus there's the concentration issue - parts per trillion doesn't make for much of a problem in any case. Even the authors didn't make this out to be a health problem....
So you are saying it was a pretty balanced and non-alarmist report then. That still didn't stop the industry shills from attacking it with their over-the-top "fact..fact..fact" format.
I retract my original statement, and revise it to "Pivot tables became a lot more user-friendly in Excel 2007." Many users simply did not know the functionality was even there prior to that version.
I think that statement is also false. By "many users", you really just mean you.
Instead of Insert Ribbon->PivotTable in Excel 2013, the 2003 version used Data Menu->Pivot Table and Pivot Chart Report. Not really different at all.
Once you are in the function, the later version has a nicer interface, but the old one is still workable. I think the difference that you have found between the old and new version was that you had a need and an understanding of pivot tables as you matured and used Excel rather than any glaring deficiencies with the spreadsheet itself.
You're missing out on Excel pivot tables. That is one hell of a big selling point for versions >= 2007.
Microsoft Excel introduced pivot tables in version 5.0 released in 1995. So yes they do keep making improvements pivot tables in each version (up to and including Power Pivots as an add-on for 2010 and included in 2013), but no you do "miss out" on pivot tables at all.
And yet for those people who don't know or care about that reputation, it is still the perfectly good browser as the OP said. It shows all the websites they want (so as far as they care it does adhere to the standards) and they are far more likely to get hacked due to social engineering than any browser hack.
That was always such a dumb quote because Microsoft had been writing software for Unix since the 80s. Even Microsoft Word ran on Unix 6 years before the first Linux release.
Ah, yes. Warmist nut jobs. I bet you are one of those people who gets offended when they get called a denier. I bet that you are also not qualified to know whether those claims of a climate change link to earthquakes are true or not.
But hey, don't let that stop you.
You should thank them for doing something new, without simply copying other systems.
I think that a window full of icons has been done before. It is not exactly a revolutionary interface.
The best part about Graffiti was that you didn't have to watch the screen while entering text. When I travelled across Europe by train, was able to look out the window and enjoy the scenery while I wrote my travel diary on my Pilot (actually a Handera TRGPro with a compact flash slot). I didn't have to move my hand like I would with a paper diary. I didn't have to key my eye on the screen for when I hit the wrong key or auto-correct decided to change what I meant to write. It was a very liberating experience.
What is your evidence that he had mental problems?
Apparently you didn't comprehend the story either. According the TFA, he was "mentally ill and was acting strangely only days before his arrest, according to a Muslim cleric who said he was counseling him at the request of the FBI.". The cleric went on to say that "the agents told him that Booker suffered from bipolar disorder, characterized by unusual mood swings that can affect functioning."
So he had mental problems according to the FBI and the person that was counselling him.