> In some other countries,there is no > certification process to go through
You say that like it's a good thing or something.
Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first.
on
A Sound Server For X
·
· Score: 1
> Remoting a video application is an idiotic > basis for comparing the performance of network > transparent graphics operations because it is > so heavily dominated by the bitmaps that are > being shipped around;
I used that example because you can do the same thing with X11 also (tho, minus the sound which is handled by something else if you wanna stick with X), but Citrix does it with less bandwidth. In fact, Citrix does everything you'd want to accomplish with X but with less bandwidth.
> it tells you nothing at > all about how well the protocol is designed.
X may be a better designed protocol (I don't know because I don't know the details of the ICA protocol and since you are clearly biased I would take your word with several grains of salt), but Citrix can do what X can using less resources so who cares. Granted, X wasn't designed with low bandwidth usage in mind and ICA was. So I guess X has an excuse for being a network hog.
> And between Citrix and VNC, VNC is by far the > more impressive hack.
More biased bullshit. Seeing as how VNC sucks ass going over my crappy Verizon(tm) DSL and using Word via Citrix over it is still very usable, I find that statement very hard to believe. Even when using TightVNC. So don't give me that shit that "VNC is a more impressive hack" because it is clearly not. Anybody who's used Metaframe for any length of time would laugh at that statement.
Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first.
on
A Sound Server For X
·
· Score: 1
> So, yes, X11 uses more bandwidth than Citrix, but > its overall performance over a LAN is better than > that of Citrix. And that is still the case today.
Umm... no. It is not. You can even watch a video in Media Player, with sound, over Citrix. If anything, they're about equal in performance. Not bad for something which wasn't designed for network transparency in the first place.
But when you consider that Citrix uses much less bandwidth than X11, it really puts plain vanilla X11 in perspective.
> Also, will this mean that OPs will start logging > DCCs and crossreference with the channels you're > on to determine if a channel is being used to > transfer files?
They already sort of do this on #c++/efnet. The bot there kickbans you if you're sitting in a warez/mp3/vcd/anything-they-deem-unfit channel while you're in #c++. Some of the regulars there are some of the most arrogant bunch of people you'll ever meet on IRC too.
> Mapping Software. You have to travel pretty > extensively to require a pocket atlas. Most > 'normal' people can take a quick look at a map > before they leave and maybe scribble a couple of > notes on a PostIt. If I have an appointment, it > is not unusual for someone to email me a local > map in advance.
I'll be getting something like this because my job will require me to be shipped off to all kinds of different places. However, I won't be getting this particular device but rather a StreetPilot III. My research has shown that the current PDA-based solutions really don't hold a candle to the SP3. And although the SP3 is a bit pricey (US$750 minimum), you really can't put a price tag on the peace of mind that being able to drive aorund in a strange place without fear of getting lost will give you.
Dumbass, you just don't fucking get it do you? To even get a shot at the hiring managers you got to get past HR. And 9 times out of 10, the HR automatons at any reasonable sized company shitcan the resumes which lack the coveted college degree on it. So unless you know people who know people who know people, your chances of getting in are next to nil with only a freakin' high school diploma.
Now keep in mind that since you're competing against people who not only have shit loads of experience but are also degree'd, where the fuck does that leave you? It leaves you flipping burgers at the local fast food joint thats where.
Actually, JavaScript is about as cut-down a version of Java as Perl is a cut-down version of C++. Other than a few similarities to the standard control structures used in the language and some keywords, JavaScript is a completely different language. Netscape only called it "JavaScript" to jump on the "Java" marketing bandwagon at the time.
Ya really. Not all people who are into "nerdy" things are fat slobs or rail thin stick boys. In fact, I think I read somewhere that statistically speaking, people who are above average in IQ are also physically fit people as well. So the stereotype that geeks must also be fat asses or walking toothpicks is just that - a stereotype. Healthy in body and in mind, I guess.
> You're a little confused. D has struct and class, > which just makes explicit what C++ does implicitly > - to create an object on the stack or in the heap > depending upon whether it has virtual methods and > is thus a candidate for polymorphism.
There is nothing implicit about where C++ creates objects. If you instantiate it using new, it's generally on the heap (unless you override the default behavior of operator new). Otherwise it is on the stack. It doesn't matter if it has virtual methods or not.
How is it that everybody in this thread knew what g4dget was talking about when he said "value classes" except for you? Clearly he meant "something that kind of looks like a class that at least has data members, except its allocated on the stack instead of the heap". Pascal has this via the use of RECORDs. C# has this via the use of structs.
Jebus christ... some jackass compares MSIE breaking RFC standards to running stop signs and he gets modded up to insightful? Insightful my ass... the mods here suck.
Slashdot Mirror
> In some other countries,there is no
> certification process to go through
You say that like it's a good thing or something.
> Remoting a video application is an idiotic
> basis for comparing the performance of network
> transparent graphics operations because it is
> so heavily dominated by the bitmaps that are
> being shipped around;
I used that example because you can do the same thing with X11 also (tho, minus the sound which is handled by something else if you wanna stick with X), but Citrix does it with less bandwidth. In fact, Citrix does everything you'd want to accomplish with X but with less bandwidth.
> it tells you nothing at
> all about how well the protocol is designed.
X may be a better designed protocol (I don't know because I don't know the details of the ICA protocol and since you are clearly biased I would take your word with several grains of salt), but Citrix can do what X can using less resources so who cares. Granted, X wasn't designed with low bandwidth usage in mind and ICA was. So I guess X has an excuse for being a network hog.
> And between Citrix and VNC, VNC is by far the
> more impressive hack.
More biased bullshit. Seeing as how VNC sucks ass going over my crappy Verizon(tm) DSL and using Word via Citrix over it is still very usable, I find that statement very hard to believe. Even when using TightVNC. So don't give me that shit that "VNC is a more impressive hack" because it is clearly not. Anybody who's used Metaframe for any length of time would laugh at that statement.
> So, yes, X11 uses more bandwidth than Citrix, but
... no. It is not. You can even watch a video in Media Player, with sound, over Citrix. If anything, they're about equal in performance. Not bad for something which wasn't designed for network transparency in the first place.
> its overall performance over a LAN is better than
> that of Citrix. And that is still the case today.
Umm
But when you consider that Citrix uses much less bandwidth than X11, it really puts plain vanilla X11 in perspective.
> Also, will this mean that OPs will start logging
> DCCs and crossreference with the channels you're
> on to determine if a channel is being used to
> transfer files?
They already sort of do this on #c++/efnet. The bot there kickbans you if you're sitting in a warez/mp3/vcd/anything-they-deem-unfit channel while you're in #c++. Some of the regulars there are some of the most arrogant bunch of people you'll ever meet on IRC too.
Well said. If I had mod points, I'd mod you up. But alas...
> Mapping Software. You have to travel pretty
> extensively to require a pocket atlas. Most
> 'normal' people can take a quick look at a map
> before they leave and maybe scribble a couple of
> notes on a PostIt. If I have an appointment, it
> is not unusual for someone to email me a local
> map in advance.
I'll be getting something like this because my job will require me to be shipped off to all kinds of different places. However, I won't be getting this particular device but rather a StreetPilot III. My research has shown that the current PDA-based solutions really don't hold a candle to the SP3. And although the SP3 is a bit pricey (US$750 minimum), you really can't put a price tag on the peace of mind that being able to drive aorund in a strange place without fear of getting lost will give you.
Dumbass, you just don't fucking get it do you? To even get a shot at the hiring managers you got to get past HR. And 9 times out of 10, the HR automatons at any reasonable sized company shitcan the resumes which lack the coveted college degree on it. So unless you know people who know people who know people, your chances of getting in are next to nil with only a freakin' high school diploma.
Now keep in mind that since you're competing against people who not only have shit loads of experience but are also degree'd, where the fuck does that leave you? It leaves you flipping burgers at the local fast food joint thats where.
Actually, JavaScript is about as cut-down a version of Java as Perl is a cut-down version of C++. Other than a few similarities to the standard control structures used in the language and some keywords, JavaScript is a completely different language. Netscape only called it "JavaScript" to jump on the "Java" marketing bandwagon at the time.
Ya really. Not all people who are into "nerdy" things are fat slobs or rail thin stick boys. In fact, I think I read somewhere that statistically speaking, people who are above average in IQ are also physically fit people as well. So the stereotype that geeks must also be fat asses or walking toothpicks is just that - a stereotype. Healthy in body and in mind, I guess.
> You're a little confused. D has struct and class,
> which just makes explicit what C++ does implicitly
> - to create an object on the stack or in the heap
> depending upon whether it has virtual methods and
> is thus a candidate for polymorphism.
There is nothing implicit about where C++ creates objects. If you instantiate it using new, it's generally on the heap (unless you override the default behavior of operator new). Otherwise it is on the stack. It doesn't matter if it has virtual methods or not.
How is it that everybody in this thread knew what g4dget was talking about when he said "value classes" except for you? Clearly he meant "something that kind of looks like a class that at least has data members, except its allocated on the stack instead of the heap". Pascal has this via the use of RECORDs. C# has this via the use of structs.
Jebus christ ... some jackass compares MSIE breaking RFC standards to running stop signs and he gets modded up to insightful? Insightful my ass ... the mods here suck.