I'm a windows user at home for the most part, so I haven't tried GNUCash Has anybody? Seems like it could be a nice alternative to Quicken/Quickbooks on a VM (Free or otherwise).
Re:Y2K compliant? Oh very Y2K compliant :)
on
Having Fun with Y2K
·
· Score: 2
Anyway, in all this, I can be assured in one thing: I know that my coffee mug is Y2K-compliant.
Yeah. But what you have to be worried about is the coffee you put into your pot and the coffee maker itself and carafe. Even if your coffee mug were not Y2K compliant, you could drink directly from the carafe if it is.
If on the other hand your coffee, coffee maker, or carafe is not compliant, you are screwed.
I've contacted my coffee supplier, my coffee pot manufacturer, and the manufacturer of the carafe (and mug too, since it's much more convenient to drink from a mug than it is to drink directly from the carafe) and luckily, all are compliant. I suggest you do the same.
Yah, but in another couple of weeks (however long it takes the sheep shorn by hand to grow back it's wool) the guy with the hand shears can shear again. The guy who has completely shorn the wool from the sheep will have to wait the same length of time to get the same additional wool from his sheep. Which means that there is no savings except initially. What happens if you don't have electricity? What happens if the electric shears break down? If the manual shears break, something _real_ bad has happened to them. Maybe you have to sharpen them from time to time, but do you have to sharpen the electric shears? Also, can you sharpen the electric shears with the same whetstone that you use to sharpen your axe, your knives, and your manual shears, or do you have to buy a special tool to sharpen the electric shears? (I'd rather have comfortable sheep and reliable tools than pay GE for the shears and for the shear sharpener, etc...)
But what this has to do with linux and NT, I don't know.
With the studies about the gaps in internet use between the haves and the have-nots, I wonder if this would change the face of politics (at least in the US). It seems that by making voting ultra easy to do, the haves would have a greater voice in government. Anybody know where there are breakdowns in voter participation by income levels?
The point is... there may be some resistance to this application of the web from those who represent the have-nots.
Without addressing the "some great elements of Microsoft's software, and there some elements of Linux that totally suck" comment, which is just plain wrong...
When I go into a bookstore, I always only look at the cover of books. I never open them up and see if they have anything useful in between the covers. Okay. That's sarcasm.
Mac advocacy had little or nothing to do with the Mac's failure in business. Apple keeping application development in house in a rapidly growing industry kept the Mac from succeeding.
By your argument, you could say that Microsoft has a community of users. Which is true I suppose, but it is in no way the same kind of community of users as Linux has.
The significant difference between the Linux development model and the MacIntosh development model is that Linux is OPEN. At the time that the Mac came out, IBM was still using DOS. The Mac OS was way ahead. Apple failed to gain a foothold because they kept all of their software development in-house. They did that for supposed "quality control" reasons, but the fact is it limited the amount of applications available drastically.
IBM, on the other hand, let others develop the code for their PC, and had many applications very quickly. That's why IBM got all the market share. The Mac technology was good, and there are several usability aspects about the Mac that I like. The Mac is still not too bad, but the whole idea that MacOS was developed in a community anything like Linux is hogwash.
Linux has taken the whole idea of opening up development to another level. Instead of merely supplying independent developers with the tools to develop applications, Linus has given the tools to work on the OS itself, and to see the actual source of the OS. Had either Apple or Microsoft done this, it's entirely possible that their OS's would have been a rock solid operating system by now. They have a huge installed base and they have a lot of problems in their code that could have been fixed rapidly when they were discovered. A lot of people use their OS. A lot of those people are coders who get sick of blue screens and freezes and are clever enough to fix the problem, and would have, given the tools to do so.
But the history of the Mac doesn't even come close to the history of Linux. Where Apple (and Microsoft) chose to keep stuff closed, Linux opened it up. That's what makes Linux special.
Two households, both alike in dignity...
on
Intel Undercuts AMD
·
· Score: 2
I know/. is a place for computer enthusiasts, but lets be real. If the PIII 600 serves your needs and it costs less than the Athlon, you'll buy the PIII. If you need more power (that is speculation--no independent tests yet), and you don't mind spending a few dollars more (again, speculation--I don't know what the chips will cost consumers), you'll buy the Athlon.
Me? I'm plugging away on a P5 150. All I do is HTML editing, usually with a little old text editor, some word processing, a few small spreadsheets, some coding, and websurfing. What the hell do I need a PIII or an Athlon for? (Umm, oh yeah, so I can get SETI@home blocks done in under 24 hours[snicker]) It'd be like buying a Ferrari to haul trash to the dump. The vehicle just doesn't fit the task.
Once in a while I catch myself saying, "Man, you've got to get a new machine." But then I remember that for a few seconds longer on boot and load of applications, I save myself a couple of hundred dollars. I just can't bring myself to spend the $ on a machine that'll do my text editing 10 times faster.
I may not get a new machine until the one I have just plain dies.
Is that cheap, or is it just sensible?
-When the world is running down you make the best of what's still around.
Slashdot Mirror
way back in 1998 somebody posted this article: /09/27/1847255.shtml
http://slashdot.org/articles/98
I'm a windows user at home for the most part, so I haven't tried GNUCash Has anybody? Seems like it could be a nice alternative to Quicken/Quickbooks on a VM (Free or otherwise).
Anyway, in all this, I can be assured in one thing: I know that my coffee mug is Y2K-compliant.
Yeah. But what you have to be worried about is the coffee you put into your pot and the coffee maker itself and carafe. Even if your coffee mug were not Y2K compliant, you could drink directly from the carafe if it is.
If on the other hand your coffee, coffee maker, or carafe is not compliant, you are screwed.
I've contacted my coffee supplier, my coffee pot manufacturer, and the manufacturer of the carafe (and mug too, since it's much more convenient to drink from a mug than it is to drink directly from the carafe) and luckily, all are compliant. I suggest you do the same.
Yah, but in another couple of weeks (however long it takes the sheep shorn by hand to grow back it's wool) the guy with the hand shears can shear again. The guy who has completely shorn the wool from the sheep will have to wait the same length of time to get the same additional wool from his sheep. Which means that there is no savings except initially. What happens if you don't have electricity? What happens if the electric shears break down? If the manual shears break, something _real_ bad has happened to them. Maybe you have to sharpen them from time to time, but do you have to sharpen the electric shears? Also, can you sharpen the electric shears with the same whetstone that you use to sharpen your axe, your knives, and your manual shears, or do you have to buy a special tool to sharpen the electric shears? (I'd rather have comfortable sheep and reliable tools than pay GE for the shears and for the shear sharpener, etc...)
But what this has to do with linux and NT, I don't know.
(Moderate me down)
With the studies about the gaps in internet use between the haves and the have-nots, I wonder if this would change the face of politics (at least in the US). It seems that by making voting ultra easy to do, the haves would have a greater voice in government. Anybody know where there are breakdowns in voter participation by income levels?
The point is... there may be some resistance to this application of the web from those who represent the have-nots.
Without addressing the "some great elements of Microsoft's software, and there some elements of Linux that totally suck" comment, which is just plain wrong...
When I go into a bookstore, I always only look at the cover of books. I never open them up and see if they have anything useful in between the covers. Okay. That's sarcasm.
Mac advocacy had little or nothing to do with the Mac's failure in business. Apple keeping application development in house in a rapidly growing industry kept the Mac from succeeding.
By your argument, you could say that Microsoft has a community of users. Which is true I suppose, but it is in no way the same kind of community of users as Linux has.
The significant difference between the Linux development model and the MacIntosh development model is that Linux is OPEN. At the time that the Mac came out, IBM was still using DOS. The Mac OS was way ahead. Apple failed to gain a foothold because they kept all of their software development in-house. They did that for supposed "quality control" reasons, but the fact is it limited the amount of applications available drastically.
IBM, on the other hand, let others develop the code for their PC, and had many applications very quickly. That's why IBM got all the market share. The Mac technology was good, and there are several usability aspects about the Mac that I like. The Mac is still not too bad, but the whole idea that MacOS was developed in a community anything like Linux is hogwash.
Linux has taken the whole idea of opening up development to another level. Instead of merely supplying independent developers with the tools to develop applications, Linus has given the tools to work on the OS itself, and to see the actual source of the OS. Had either Apple or Microsoft done this, it's entirely possible that their OS's would have been a rock solid operating system by now. They have a huge installed base and they have a lot of problems in their code that could have been fixed rapidly when they were discovered. A lot of people use their OS. A lot of those people are coders who get sick of blue screens and freezes and are clever enough to fix the problem, and would have, given the tools to do so.
But the history of the Mac doesn't even come close to the history of Linux. Where Apple (and Microsoft) chose to keep stuff closed, Linux opened it up. That's what makes Linux special.
I know /. is a place for computer enthusiasts, but lets be real. If the PIII 600 serves your needs and it costs less than the Athlon, you'll buy the PIII. If you need more power (that is speculation--no independent tests yet), and you don't mind spending a few dollars more (again, speculation--I don't know what the chips will cost consumers), you'll buy the Athlon.
Me? I'm plugging away on a P5 150. All I do is HTML editing, usually with a little old text editor, some word processing, a few small spreadsheets, some coding, and websurfing. What the hell do I need a PIII or an Athlon for? (Umm, oh yeah, so I can get SETI@home blocks done in under 24 hours[snicker]) It'd be like buying a Ferrari to haul trash to the dump. The vehicle just doesn't fit the task.
Once in a while I catch myself saying, "Man, you've got to get a new machine." But then I remember that for a few seconds longer on boot and load of applications, I save myself a couple of hundred dollars. I just can't bring myself to spend the $ on a machine that'll do my text editing 10 times faster.
I may not get a new machine until the one I have just plain dies.
Is that cheap, or is it just sensible?
-When the world is running down
you make the best of what's still around.