If such headers were commons, it'll take a couple of year until:
1/ Users will have only one link and the server will choose what content is best for him
2/ Users with browsers that don't give the info will be redirected to a please-use latest IE page.
It have been that way for most web [mis]features.
I even get (2) today by going to hotmail (with IE 5.5). It's wonderful what "referer rewrite" in a proxy can do.
No way in heck I want to let people know what browser I use. Like opera, where you can select which one, "Identify as MSIE 5":)
Cool
If people aren't capable of taking care of their own data, and cannot be bothered to get a CD-R or something to backup their data onto, too bad for them...
Not everything has to be usable for the stupid people of the world
Well, writing the driver for Linux, you most likely could recompile it for QNX (or reuse much of the code, anyway...). So therefore RTLinux doesn't really have a great benefit, since most of that code should also compile using QNX.
Yeah, Linux for real time. Soft real time requirements, is doable, probably. Hard real time with narrow time requirements for processing and such ?
I think I'll go back to work now, on my Linux box running GNOME with the micoGUI Photon-esque theme installed. I'm sure QNX is great and all, but It's about 5 years too late for the free UNIX market.
Since you have already proven it, I am just making sure you know. You don't know what you are talking about. QNX is not aiming for free UNIX. They are aiming for configurable, embedded devices that do things that you don't want to try with Linux.
Ok, sure. Embedded Linux. What about the products that actually are designed with embedded systems in mind. And actually work better...
And of course being hit by piracy means that they make crap ?
BTW: my Sony Minidisc player has lasted me a LOOONG time, the Discman I got early in the last decade still works.. I'd go with Sony over Phillips most days of the week... they just make better products.
But Sun doesn't explicitly work towards having people do illegal things. It is just possible, the same way it is possible to do something illegal with IE, Netscape, Mozilla....
So we should prosecute Microsoft, Netscape and others because they make programs that can download illegal stuff ??
Sun should advise people to stay within the GPL for things derived from GPL licensed stuff, but in the end it is the end developer who is responsible for the usage of such derivative works....
What if I leave the link out, but just tell you where it is. I have not linked to the document and the only thing I have given is a written description of where it is...
And in doing so, of course there will be no way for applications to mess with the OS structures in any way, to circumvent things like passwords or other form ?
How can you sa that things are "step backwards" when the products were not meant to be forward, like the 386SX, which was not intended to be better than the 386DX, clearly, but intended for other purposes, like making cheaper machines...
Not all new cpu releases are for improving speed, some are for improving availability, often linked to price...
Actually, the 386SX is not an improvement over the 386DX, but the 286 it was meant to replace. With things like v86 mode and other nice technological advances that you don't seem to care about, because they don't match your timeline.
Because we might just need to "move into space" on day. If something happens here, like some asteroid hitting us in the head or other mishaps, going under water might not help, but if we know there is life somewhere (or not), at least we will have learned something about the conditions for life there...
Sometimes there are more benefits than meets the eye...
CD prices have not been lowered much, which is needed, obviously.:)
There are two ways of fighting piracy...
1: Fight them with the law (doesn't work)
2: Fight them with prices, making the product "buyable"
To expand your horizons a bit... there are COUNTRIES that have made it illegal to drive while talking on a cell phone (without hands-free equipment for your phone)
If their inventory system (without data) fell into the competitors hands, I don't see how that can cause a heck of a lot of damage. If they were to go open source on an inventory manager software, they wouldn't necessarily have to include all the data, would they ?
Data != code
Open source (IMHO) does not require you to tell everyone WHAT you used it for...
"Personally, I really dislike having to look at a credits-list or a splash-screen or other such things every time I load a piece of software, which is why I don't inflict such things upon my own users."
Well, you don't HAVE to keep it there, but I think it would be a nice gesture to recognize that someone is actually helping this along. Without support many developers might be tempted to leave it at some "version 0.999b434" but never get to version 1.0 because they have other stuff to do. Don't let your "everything has to be free and open"-thoughts get in the way of recognizing those that help us.
I understand that there will never be a bugfree product that does not have anything which the user would like to have changed, but the point of this, I feel, is that they are shipping this product to customers and making money from selling a product which they know is buggy.
It doesn't take a whole lot of "real" bugs to annoy users. I mean, the ALMOST have NT 4 running so stable that it is at the point where it should have been shipped. The amount of code is not a valid excuse for a poorly debugged product. Seems like they forgot that even if you do solid testing, you actually have to fix those things found for the product to improve. Testing without fixing doesn't buy you a whole lot of cookies... (or, if you are running a monopoly, you'll get away with it).
The issue I feel is most pressing is the fact that major companies might want to change to this due to "marketing issues", when it might not offer them more and also introduces a whole new set of things to worry about.
BSOD should not be possible, by design of the system, but it is a fact of life (but why the heck can my soundcard kill the OS, did they forget why CPUs have the ability to run processes at different levels ????)
Oh well, that's my $2 worth (more than 2 cents, I feel)
Wonder where the supporting information for the claim "windows does not have this problem" is. You cannot run code on Windows ?
Certainly you can run (very) malicious code on Windows, even if you have to do some scripting stuff to place the code on the machine (say, ActiveX anyone ?)
We may not like MS, but I think a more "professional" attitude will get us further in this struggle. Also, I like the way they say that Linux does not support hardware and then goes on to mention USB, which doesn't work under NT either. Not to mention the fact that even though Linux security flaws are more "known" at least patches are rapidly being made available when something goes wrong...
Slashdot Mirror
If people aren't capable of taking care of their own data, and cannot be bothered to get a CD-R or something to backup their data onto, too bad for them...
Not everything has to be usable for the stupid people of the world
Well, writing the driver for Linux, you most likely could recompile it for QNX (or reuse much of the code, anyway...). So therefore RTLinux doesn't really have a great benefit, since most of that code should also compile using QNX.
Yeah, Linux for real time. Soft real time requirements, is doable, probably. Hard real time with narrow time requirements for processing and such ?
Not really...
How is this FUD ?
The linux kernel is monolithic. BeOS and QNX (AFAIK) are not.
since when is (FUD == FACT)
Since you have already proven it, I am just making sure you know. You don't know what you are talking about. QNX is not aiming for free UNIX. They are aiming for configurable, embedded devices that do things that you don't want to try with Linux.
Ok, sure. Embedded Linux. What about the products that actually are designed with embedded systems in mind. And actually work better...
And of course being hit by piracy means that they make crap ?
BTW: my Sony Minidisc player has lasted me a LOOONG time, the Discman I got early in the last decade still works.. I'd go with Sony over Phillips most days of the week... they just make better products.
But Sun doesn't explicitly work towards having people do illegal things. It is just possible, the same way it is possible to do something illegal with IE, Netscape, Mozilla....
So we should prosecute Microsoft, Netscape and others because they make programs that can download illegal stuff ??
Sun should advise people to stay within the GPL for things derived from GPL licensed stuff, but in the end it is the end developer who is responsible for the usage of such derivative works....
C# ?
Just not a vacuum cleaner...
What if I leave the link out, but just tell you where it is. I have not linked to the document and the only thing I have given is a written description of where it is...
Still illegal ?
And in doing so, of course there will be no way for applications to mess with the OS structures in any way, to circumvent things like passwords or other form ?
Debian is NOT free. It costs way more than $0, since you or someone else has to pay for the 1GB+ that you intend to push down the 'net.
So, until you give me a free ADSL or something or other, don't claim that downloading stuff is free.
And even the "free ISPs" require you to spend some money, in the form of hardware or other
Math question: How many cds can you order from cheapbytes before it makes sense to buy the modem ?
But the 3D API you mention would have to live somewhere. Where do you intend to stick it, since you want to get rid of the OS ?
And stuff like memory management ? file I/O ?
you also want to get back to the good old days of having raw file i/o for your programs, or is this all supposed to be standardized in hardware ?
How can you sa that things are "step backwards" when the products were not meant to be forward, like the 386SX, which was not intended to be better than the 386DX, clearly, but intended for other purposes, like making cheaper machines...
Not all new cpu releases are for improving speed, some are for improving availability, often linked to price...
Actually, the 386SX is not an improvement over the 386DX, but the 286 it was meant to replace. With things like v86 mode and other nice technological advances that you don't seem to care about, because they don't match your timeline.
Because we might just need to "move into space" on day. If something happens here, like some asteroid hitting us in the head or other mishaps, going under water might not help, but if we know there is life somewhere (or not), at least we will have learned something about the conditions for life there...
Sometimes there are more benefits than meets the eye...
CD prices have not been lowered much, which is needed, obviously. :)
There are two ways of fighting piracy...
1: Fight them with the law (doesn't work)
2: Fight them with prices, making the product "buyable"
To expand your horizons a bit... there are COUNTRIES that have made it illegal to drive while talking on a cell phone (without hands-free equipment for your phone)
(Norwegian text only, sorry)
http://www.dep.no/sd/publ/forskrift er/veil.html
If their inventory system (without data) fell into the competitors hands, I don't see how that can cause a heck of a lot of damage. If they were to go open source on an inventory manager software, they wouldn't necessarily have to include all the data, would they ?
Data != code
Open source (IMHO) does not require you to tell everyone WHAT you used it for...
Just my thoughts..
I understand that there will never be a bugfree product that does not have anything which the user would like to have changed, but the point of this, I feel, is that they are shipping this product to customers and making money from selling a product which they know is buggy.
It doesn't take a whole lot of "real" bugs to annoy users. I mean, the ALMOST have NT 4 running so stable that it is at the point where it should have been shipped. The amount of code is not a valid excuse for a poorly debugged product. Seems like they forgot that even if you do solid testing, you actually have to fix those things found for the product to improve. Testing without fixing doesn't buy you a whole lot of cookies... (or, if you are running a monopoly, you'll get away with it).
The issue I feel is most pressing is the fact that major companies might want to change to this due to "marketing issues", when it might not offer them more and also introduces a whole new set of things to worry about.
BSOD should not be possible, by design of the system, but it is a fact of life (but why the heck can my soundcard kill the OS, did they forget why CPUs have the ability to run processes at different levels ????)
Oh well, that's my $2 worth (more than 2 cents, I feel)
Wonder where the supporting information for the claim "windows does not have this problem" is. You cannot run code on Windows ?
Certainly you can run (very) malicious code on Windows, even if you have to do some scripting stuff to place the code on the machine (say, ActiveX anyone ?)
We may not like MS, but I think a more "professional" attitude will get us further in this struggle.
Also, I like the way they say that Linux does not support hardware and then goes on to mention USB, which doesn't work under NT either. Not to mention the fact that
even though Linux security flaws are more "known" at least patches are rapidly being made available when something goes wrong...