Poster says "in favor of the AMD based Sun Fire line" This means some products in the Sun Fire range, with Opterons. The poster's line sounds like all SF products will be sold with Opterons and the UltraSparc will be EOLd -- Not the case! You wont see a SF15k with Opterons any time soon;)
Surely, then, GNU Desktop System would be more accurate, if you're talking about the OS as a whole? The whole point behind the JDS is *hiding* the kernel... JDS is planned to run on Solaris x86 in the future, if I'm not mistaken.. that would require re-branding your "Linux Desktop System" to "Solaris Desktop System".
Remember the idea behind Java? Compile once, run anywhere? Same idea with JDS, in the long rung: be presented with a login screen yiu recognise; be damned if the kernel is linux or solaris, if the arch is x86 (32 or 64-bit!) or sparc..
Cue Sun Java Desktop (madhatter)
on
Longhorn in 2006
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
This is actually fantastic news for the alternatives to Microsoft, especially at the workplace. This three year gap gives madhatter excellent chance for growth, because the viable alternative people will have for *upgrades* (as opposed to service packs) is madhatter + star office.
Does MS really think people are going to be willing to run 5 year old technology on their work systems, when a cheaper and more current alternative is readily available?
I just hope Sun will be able to push madhatter well enough for companies to let go of their grip of Microsoft products and open the future of corporate desktops to any player with a plan; be it Sun or whoever. It's just that currently, Sun is the other company that can do it. Who knows what the corporate desktop will look like in two years.
Apparantly, it is (well it was at the time when I still was at the University) one of the only places in the world to teach this course. It was also my favourite module.
The only difference is that this module was intended to make undergrads see the failure and risk by means of software engineering, and we did this by looking at various procedures for writing secure code, and we looked at lots of examples from history (the challenger incident, for example, etc).
This course seems to be aimed more at specific coding practices - avoiding buffer overruns for example. It doesnt look like they'll be told how to deal with failure once it happens (because it *will* happen). I also fear that since Microsoft will be involved, it'll be specific to Windows & x86 -- not a real life view of computing.
Slashdot Mirror
Poster says "in favor of the AMD based Sun Fire line" ;)
This means some products in the Sun Fire range, with Opterons. The poster's line sounds like all SF products will be sold with Opterons and the UltraSparc will be EOLd -- Not the case! You wont see a SF15k with Opterons any time soon
Remember the idea behind Java? Compile once, run anywhere? Same idea with JDS, in the long rung: be presented with a login screen yiu recognise; be damned if the kernel is linux or solaris, if the arch is x86 (32 or 64-bit!) or sparc..
Does MS really think people are going to be willing to run 5 year old technology on their work systems, when a cheaper and more current alternative is readily available?
I just hope Sun will be able to push madhatter well enough for companies to let go of their grip of Microsoft products and open the future of corporate desktops to any player with a plan; be it Sun or whoever. It's just that currently, Sun is the other company that can do it. Who knows what the corporate desktop will look like in two years.
0.6 is meant to be released RSN, they're going to announce the new name shortly, in fact.
Just have some patience, and hopefully it'll be worth it!
You can find a description here.
The only difference is that this module was intended to make undergrads see the failure and risk by means of software engineering, and we did this by looking at various procedures for writing secure code, and we looked at lots of examples from history (the challenger incident, for example, etc).
This course seems to be aimed more at specific coding practices - avoiding buffer overruns for example. It doesnt look like they'll be told how to deal with failure once it happens (because it *will* happen). I also fear that since Microsoft will be involved, it'll be specific to Windows & x86 -- not a real life view of computing.