You've used Safari 3 "extensively"?
It's been out for a day. Either you work for Apple, or you're mistaken. I can't speak to your experience with the others, obviously, but this doesn't give me much reason to trust your entirely anecdotal "real world performance" over benchmarks.
FWIW, I have no basis for comparing them. I'm a firefox/camino man, and I don't have the time to spend fooling around with a new browser.
Obviously companies cook their own benchmarks, so it's very possible that they chose bits of javascript which Safari handles particularly well. But they at least have acknowledged Opera as another option, and there's at least some evidence that Safari may perform better than it. It's not Apple's benchmark to cook. From the site you link to:
Performance measured in seconds. Testing conducted by Apple in June 2007 on a 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-based iMac system running Windows XP Professional SP2, configured with 1GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon X1600 with 128MB of VRAM. HTML and JavaScript benchmarks based on VeriTest's iBench Version 5.0 using default settings.
Care to explain why the difference between 30fps and 60fps matters in a game where you can only act once every 1.5 seconds? (ok, ok, it'll drop below 30fps, but really... it's not a twitchy game, anything over 10fps isn't going to affect gameplay at all)
Re:libgcc, libstdc++, and Bison
on
GPLv2 Vs. GPLv3
·
· Score: 1
On OS X, non-GPL C standard libraries are provided by default (though Bison is still used AFAIK). On other platforms non-GPL versions of most libraries you'd want working with GCC are available as well. I believe that most (all?) of the Intel libraries play well with GCC. Using any of these libraries frees you from dependence on GPL "exceptions". Yes, some of them cost money, but if you're coming at this from the viewpoint of a corporate developer who wants to avoid GPL "poisoning", well, you need to spend money to make money. If you're not out for profit, then the effects of the GPL on your code probably don't concern you as much, unless you're one of these odd people who hates the GPL just because.
This isn't so much directed at parent as at the general flow of posts in this neck of the woods.
What do you need that Accelerate.framework doesn't provide?
Have you filed a feature request? http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter/ You can use a free developer connection account to do so. If it's a feature that could be useful to multiple developers, there's a decent chance it will be added.
...so few by anyone who has the slightest idea what they're talking about. Seriously, if you have strong feelings about this issue, and you're not a kernel / high-performance computing / game engine / professional audio/video developer, then you need to get out more. This is just painful to read.
Functional programming makes multithreading easy, but multithreading != vectorization, and vectorization is the bulk of what is needed to take advantage of this type of processsor. I'm yet to encounter a language as suited to talking about vector code as Fortran is, sad as that may be.
1280x1024 is "standard" resolution?
1997 called. They want their CRTs back.
1. company buys you 2 20" widescreen LCDs (preferably 24", but that's clearly a pipe dream at your firm)
2. you can actually see your work
3. profit.
No, really. I run 3 20" widescreens at work (1 dedicated to each of two development machines, 1 on a switch between the two), and have my laptop (1440x960) and a 24" widescreen at home. Both setups are great. Both make me much more productive. At this point, I can't imagine how painful it would be to go back to 1280x1024. Everything about that aspect ratio is wrong for getting work done.
Well *this* mathematician predicts that the Red Sox will win the division this year. Pulling numbers out of my ass has been right more often than wrong, so my prediction meets the described standard for quality.
Clearly you've never tried small claims court. It's fun and easy. Well, not alway fun. But you're not a real american until you've sued someone. Keep the companies honest, don't roll over and take it.
Oh, I wouldn't suggest banning them for a second. I'm just saying that the owners are idiots. They're welcome to waste their money if they want to. (Of course, I would like to tax the hell out of them - the less money idiots have, the better off everyone else is - but that's another matter altogether).
What the hell do you do to your cars?
We've taken a Civic to 300k and an Accord to 400k. Both were still driving fine at that point (we sold the civic, and my father crashed the accord). No maintenance required beyond belt and oil changes. This sort of durability has been the norm that I've heard from friends, as well.
Maybe you actually use your truck for real off-road purposes, but the vast majority of truck/suv owners don't do so. I grew up in Vermont (about 80% unimproved dirt roads), and one of the most common sights was some idiot yuppie from connecticut slid off the road in his 4WD SUV as the natives drove happily past in beat-up 1987 Saabs, Subarus, and Hondas. Even in California, I see this all the time: big fancy trucks and SUVs struggling to stay on the road in conditions better than anything I've ever seen in the winter. You'd be surprised where you can get a Prius to go if you have some idea of what you're doing.
I'm also not sure where "An average 4WD has a lifespan of 2-3 times that of a small private car" comes from; My father and I drove an Accord to 427,000 miles with only oil changes and new belts. It would still be on the road and pushing 600k if he hadn't rolled it over, haha.
I have nothing against people who genuinely use trucks / 4x4s where smaller cars wouldn't suffice. But I have big objections to idiots who live in the suburbs and "need a big SUV" because they go skiing once a year / need to carry stuff back from Home Depot / whatever.
If they're a computer science department (as opposed to a MS cert tradeskill factory), why wouldn't they?
Are TeX, Scheme, and C all windows-only now? In my experience, it's a hell of a lot easier to teach actual computer science on anything that's NOT windows. The only thing you need windows for is teaching your students VB.net or whatever so they can be underpaid code monkeys, until their jobs are outsourced to China.
That's fair. I guess my objection then is that the pitch makes it sound like a full-time job: "It's probably not the right fit for you if you're starting another internship", when it really shouldn't be considered as one.
While I agree that there are lots of great coders all over the world, and the average quality of american CS undergrads is pretty sorry, I'd also point out that of the programmers I know professionally whose work is really, truly, top-notch, all except one were undergrads at american universities (the other is Canadian). Most weren't born the the US, but they did go to school here.
$4500 for the summer is emphatically not approximately $30/hour.
$4500 / (12 weeks * 40 hours/week) = $9.38/hour.
$5000 a month is a little on the low end for PhD students, but certainly not unreasonable for north america or europe. My last few internships have been more, I'd work for less if the work were interesting enough. Note that that money's not going to be tax-free (in the US, at least): income is income, even if it's fellowship income from a non-profit or government agency. The IRS changed this rule a long time ago.
That's fine. I'm objecting to parent's assertion that saying that $4500 for a summer is crap pay is *whining*, not demanding that open-source projects pay me more. I'm merely explaining why it's infeasable for many students (in america) to take part in the summer of code.
FWIW, all of my work done as an intern for the last few years is open-sourced, despite being done for "large corporations", at a fair salary. Plenty of big companies do some/all open source development, and pay well for it. My consulting work, sadly, not so much.
I agree with you, it looks good on a resume, and $4500 certainly goes a long way in some parts of the world.
That said, you're eliminating a large pool of some of the best potential candidates by setting the pay so low. Perhaps it should factor in the local cost of living for the student? If I did this for the summer, and nothing else, I either wouldn't be able to afford to eat, or I'd need to find a much much cheaper apartment. Finally, it's emphatically not the case that those "800 students will produce more this summer than all the people who complain about the "low pay" combined". Between Microsoft, Microsoft Research, IBM, Apple, Sun, the NSA, various financial companies, and others, considerably more than 800 of the best programmers, scientists and mathematicians will have summer internships this year working on real problems, and generating high-quality solutions. Many of us would prefer to work on open-source projects if we could get paid a fair salary to do so (I certainly would). It wouldn't even need to match what I can get from any one of the companies listed. But it *would* need to be enough to pay my cost of living and allow me to put some cash in the bank for the next school year, contribute to my IRA, etc. In the bay area, that's about $3k a month, before taxes, considerably more than $4500.
Maybe you're not interested in finding top american programmers. That's fine. But say so if that's the case.
Slashdot Mirror
You've used Safari 3 "extensively"? It's been out for a day. Either you work for Apple, or you're mistaken. I can't speak to your experience with the others, obviously, but this doesn't give me much reason to trust your entirely anecdotal "real world performance" over benchmarks. FWIW, I have no basis for comparing them. I'm a firefox/camino man, and I don't have the time to spend fooling around with a new browser.
Performance measured in seconds. Testing conducted by Apple in June 2007 on a 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo-based iMac system running Windows XP Professional SP2, configured with 1GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon X1600 with 128MB of VRAM. HTML and JavaScript benchmarks based on VeriTest's iBench Version 5.0 using default settings.
http://www.apple.com/safari/ Next question?
The first digital cameras were mind-bogglingly expensive medium format digital backs for studio work.
Care to explain why the difference between 30fps and 60fps matters in a game where you can only act once every 1.5 seconds? (ok, ok, it'll drop below 30fps, but really... it's not a twitchy game, anything over 10fps isn't going to affect gameplay at all)
On OS X, non-GPL C standard libraries are provided by default (though Bison is still used AFAIK). On other platforms non-GPL versions of most libraries you'd want working with GCC are available as well. I believe that most (all?) of the Intel libraries play well with GCC. Using any of these libraries frees you from dependence on GPL "exceptions". Yes, some of them cost money, but if you're coming at this from the viewpoint of a corporate developer who wants to avoid GPL "poisoning", well, you need to spend money to make money. If you're not out for profit, then the effects of the GPL on your code probably don't concern you as much, unless you're one of these odd people who hates the GPL just because. This isn't so much directed at parent as at the general flow of posts in this neck of the woods.
What do you need that Accelerate.framework doesn't provide?
Have you filed a feature request? http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter/
You can use a free developer connection account to do so. If it's a feature that could be useful to multiple developers, there's a decent chance it will be added.
...so few by anyone who has the slightest idea what they're talking about. Seriously, if you have strong feelings about this issue, and you're not a kernel / high-performance computing / game engine / professional audio/video developer, then you need to get out more. This is just painful to read.
Functional programming makes multithreading easy, but multithreading != vectorization, and vectorization is the bulk of what is needed to take advantage of this type of processsor. I'm yet to encounter a language as suited to talking about vector code as Fortran is, sad as that may be.
1280x1024 is "standard" resolution? 1997 called. They want their CRTs back. 1. company buys you 2 20" widescreen LCDs (preferably 24", but that's clearly a pipe dream at your firm) 2. you can actually see your work 3. profit. No, really. I run 3 20" widescreens at work (1 dedicated to each of two development machines, 1 on a switch between the two), and have my laptop (1440x960) and a 24" widescreen at home. Both setups are great. Both make me much more productive. At this point, I can't imagine how painful it would be to go back to 1280x1024. Everything about that aspect ratio is wrong for getting work done.
Well *this* mathematician predicts that the Red Sox will win the division this year. Pulling numbers out of my ass has been right more often than wrong, so my prediction meets the described standard for quality.
mod parent up.
That's ok, you're not a real american until you're 18 either.
Clearly you've never tried small claims court. It's fun and easy. Well, not alway fun. But you're not a real american until you've sued someone. Keep the companies honest, don't roll over and take it.
I've met a few smart politicians. I've never met a smart idiot.
Oh, I wouldn't suggest banning them for a second. I'm just saying that the owners are idiots. They're welcome to waste their money if they want to. (Of course, I would like to tax the hell out of them - the less money idiots have, the better off everyone else is - but that's another matter altogether).
What the hell do you do to your cars? We've taken a Civic to 300k and an Accord to 400k. Both were still driving fine at that point (we sold the civic, and my father crashed the accord). No maintenance required beyond belt and oil changes. This sort of durability has been the norm that I've heard from friends, as well.
Maybe you actually use your truck for real off-road purposes, but the vast majority of truck/suv owners don't do so. I grew up in Vermont (about 80% unimproved dirt roads), and one of the most common sights was some idiot yuppie from connecticut slid off the road in his 4WD SUV as the natives drove happily past in beat-up 1987 Saabs, Subarus, and Hondas. Even in California, I see this all the time: big fancy trucks and SUVs struggling to stay on the road in conditions better than anything I've ever seen in the winter. You'd be surprised where you can get a Prius to go if you have some idea of what you're doing.
I'm also not sure where "An average 4WD has a lifespan of 2-3 times that of a small private car" comes from; My father and I drove an Accord to 427,000 miles with only oil changes and new belts. It would still be on the road and pushing 600k if he hadn't rolled it over, haha.
I have nothing against people who genuinely use trucks / 4x4s where smaller cars wouldn't suffice. But I have big objections to idiots who live in the suburbs and "need a big SUV" because they go skiing once a year / need to carry stuff back from Home Depot / whatever.
If they're a computer science department (as opposed to a MS cert tradeskill factory), why wouldn't they? Are TeX, Scheme, and C all windows-only now? In my experience, it's a hell of a lot easier to teach actual computer science on anything that's NOT windows. The only thing you need windows for is teaching your students VB.net or whatever so they can be underpaid code monkeys, until their jobs are outsourced to China.
Nobody wants AC's either. If you're going to make ad hominem attacks, have the gumption to stand behind them.
That's fair. I guess my objection then is that the pitch makes it sound like a full-time job: "It's probably not the right fit for you if you're starting another internship", when it really shouldn't be considered as one.
While I agree that there are lots of great coders all over the world, and the average quality of american CS undergrads is pretty sorry, I'd also point out that of the programmers I know professionally whose work is really, truly, top-notch, all except one were undergrads at american universities (the other is Canadian). Most weren't born the the US, but they did go to school here.
Anecdotal, I know.
$4500 for the summer is emphatically not approximately $30/hour.
$4500 / (12 weeks * 40 hours/week) = $9.38/hour.
$5000 a month is a little on the low end for PhD students, but certainly not unreasonable for north america or europe. My last few internships have been more, I'd work for less if the work were interesting enough. Note that that money's not going to be tax-free (in the US, at least): income is income, even if it's fellowship income from a non-profit or government agency. The IRS changed this rule a long time ago.
That's fine. I'm objecting to parent's assertion that saying that $4500 for a summer is crap pay is *whining*, not demanding that open-source projects pay me more. I'm merely explaining why it's infeasable for many students (in america) to take part in the summer of code. FWIW, all of my work done as an intern for the last few years is open-sourced, despite being done for "large corporations", at a fair salary. Plenty of big companies do some/all open source development, and pay well for it. My consulting work, sadly, not so much.
I agree with you, it looks good on a resume, and $4500 certainly goes a long way in some parts of the world. That said, you're eliminating a large pool of some of the best potential candidates by setting the pay so low. Perhaps it should factor in the local cost of living for the student? If I did this for the summer, and nothing else, I either wouldn't be able to afford to eat, or I'd need to find a much much cheaper apartment. Finally, it's emphatically not the case that those "800 students will produce more this summer than all the people who complain about the "low pay" combined". Between Microsoft, Microsoft Research, IBM, Apple, Sun, the NSA, various financial companies, and others, considerably more than 800 of the best programmers, scientists and mathematicians will have summer internships this year working on real problems, and generating high-quality solutions. Many of us would prefer to work on open-source projects if we could get paid a fair salary to do so (I certainly would). It wouldn't even need to match what I can get from any one of the companies listed. But it *would* need to be enough to pay my cost of living and allow me to put some cash in the bank for the next school year, contribute to my IRA, etc. In the bay area, that's about $3k a month, before taxes, considerably more than $4500. Maybe you're not interested in finding top american programmers. That's fine. But say so if that's the case.