One extra thing to consider would be configurability. My XF86Config file is a beast, since I have a laptop with three pointer devices, and S-Video and RGB connections out to the tv and projector. I can't reconfigure my video on the fly like I can with Windoze. Help!
>... Further, with Y's in-server knowledge > of widgets, applications run over a slow network > can appear almost as responsive as local > applications (especially when compared to an > X application).
Great idea - is this the same thing the are doing with Fresco? Fresco also has SVG.
> Y widgets use the currently loaded theme to > render themselves. Since all server widgets > are using the same theme, all widgets appear > consistent throughout the desktop.
This may be an SFQ, but shouldn't the application choose its own look and feel? I have various Java apps, some use the Metal L&F and others use the Windows one. Why force me?
In a 32-bit machine, each fetch from memory retrieves 4 bytes. Even if you only use one, the other three are cached. So, when reading sequentially, you get four bytes for the price of one.
In a 64-bit machine, each fetch returns 8 bytes, so you 8 for the price of one.
I am a big fan of CORBA, though I admit it has some issues.
> 1. object oriented
CORBA is definitely object-oriented. Much better than XML and SOAP (SOAP is -NOT- OO at all). I love the fact that once you have a reference to an object, it does not matter where that object is.
> 2. extensible
Yes. There are many useful (and optional) services available for CORBA. You don't pay for what you don't use with CORBA, so if you don't require a Naming Service or a Transaction Service, you don't have to include it.
> 3. platform independent
This is where CORBA wins. It is platform, language and network agnostic. I don't pay attention to new technologies unless they have a way to interface with CORBA.
> 4. supports signatures for integrity and > sender checking
Some ORBs can do CORBA over SSL for security, which can include certificate-checking if you wish.
> 5. supports privacy of the message contents > (i.e. encryption)
See previous comment.
> 6. time sensitive: I should be able to detect > a dead server and do failover while the > user is waiting for the response
Yes, CORBA calls will fail with a COMMUNICATIONS_EXCEPTION, which you can catch and take action. Some ORBs let you configure the timeout.
> 7. bandwidth efficient, as I am looking to > deploy it in wireless environments
CORBA is binary and fairly BW-efficient. Again, you don't pay for what you don't need.
On the downside of CORBA, there are issues with:
- complexity. It is definitely not for the beginner and has a large initial learning curve. If you write client-side stuff, it is heaven. If you write server-side stuff, prepare yourself. If you want to do CORBA-compliant fault tolerance or security, don't call me:)
- penetration. Not all ORB providers implement all the nifty services. Finding an ORB for your environment that provides what you need can be tricky (e.g. POA, Portable Interceptors)
- mindshare. So many people pushing alternate technologies with a few useful features and a promise of equalling CORBA, if only they get enough interest.
- Openness. The OMG process is lengthy and can only be crafted by consortium members. Maybe a W3C-style process would make it evolve more rapidly and get implemented quicker ?!?
> rest in peace, american software development. > long live global software development. > i can give you for a $1.00 what you pay someone > else $10.00 for. > >what would you do?
> If you don't have a Microsoft OS, you can't > get a digital certificate. If you can't get > a digital certificate, you can't get access > to anything from your home PC.
What are you saying?!? Anyone can get a digital certificate (from Verisign, Entrust,...) as long as you pay the yearly fee; it doesn't matter what OS you use.
Also, you can use SSH to get into your home PC and transfer files around.
I find this whole discussion about M$ and MIT very disturbing. The part that bothers me the most is MIT's ignorance.
I agree that there has to be an organization to push for establishment of a Profession. I assume that medicine and civil engineering became professions because the government(s) demanded it, for the good of public safety.
Governments will someday push IT into a profession when the stakes get high enough. Example Texas, as cited in Steve McConnell's 'After the Gold Rush'.
Meanwhile, only M$ has the clout. Despite how I feel about M$, one good thing they have done is to push PMP certification (see http://pmi.org) for their project management.
Despite my last paragraph, I agree that large corporations should not be the sponsor, because they have an obvious conflict of interest, and true innovation would indeed slow.
If we can make a Profession outside of any one corporation (or cartel), I believe innovation will accelerate. The reason is that the level of practice in IT could elevate to higher levels of maturity where we would enjoy higher profitability, higher customer satisfaction, and a higher project success rate.
Of course, if IT became a Profession (like engineering, medicine, law, real-estate, accounting,...) then there would be a regulating body with real power to stop people from practicing when they do not have the necessary credentials.
Such a body would also help educational institutions in preparing their curricula and would promote ethical practice.
A Profession of IT would also elevate the standard of practice and protect our careers a little better than the current 'wild west' system.
We are doing a project in Java and the target is the iPAQ with Windoze. We found a commercial JVM that supports javacomm and Swing, though we are experiencing flaky behaviour.
I am not sure if it is the O/S or the JVM, but our code seems to work fine on Win2K.
Has anyone out there had good results getting the full JVM (1.4) working under Linux on this device? Should we switch?
Yes, software -can- damage hardware if you don't know what you are doing.
When I first installed Slackware in '96, I had a brand new ViewSonic 17PS monitor which was not recognized by Linux by default. I had to research the monitor capabilities and I hand-crafted the XF86 modelines.
When I first ran X, the monitor made this horrible screeching noise. Yikes! I quickly dropped out of X and found someone else's modelines and put them in, then the monitor worked fine (still does).
Linux, hardware and standards are all improving, but ultimately things can go wrong - always read the hardware HOWTO first...
I have my own domain and run a MTA on my Linux box that is on DSL and gets its IP via DHCP. The IP almost never changes since the server is always on. I bet this is the same configuration as other/. readers.
Anyway, I am starting to get bounces from certain organizations (AOL, Primus) that seem to think my messages are spam. Seems to have something to do with coming from an IP that is known DHCP. This kind of sucks; whitelists and spam filters may seem good at first, but they are screening out some legitimate traffic.
Articles like this are totally subjective and always boil down to what one person likes or how much they know about their pet technology.
What I don't see here is an objective comparison of how many $$ or how many lines of code it takes in one or the other. You can wave your hands around all you want in a passionate argument about architectural 'grace', but I remain unconvinced until I see the code, and the person-hours.
It all drives me crazy, because our clients see these little religious wars and it drives down their level of confidence in us as professionals. I build something in Java/PHP, and some other contractor says 'I could do that better (faster,stronger) in PHP/Java'. In the eyes of our clients, we're both idiots when we do that.
At least in Civil Engineering they can do hardness and durability tests on different recipes of concrete. Maybe I should have done that.
Where I work, they have some sort of thing that detects keywords in the web pages that go through it. If it detects anything naughty, you get a red screen instead the page with a notice about acceptable use and warnings about accesses being logged.
In a former company I was at, an employee was disciplined for both quantity of web use and sites accessed.
If one really wants to get around it, just set up an SSH session to an outside computer and enable X11 forwarding. Then you can run your browser on the outside box and have the drawing commands sent to your current desktop. It is slower, but doable with broadband access.
Another thing people can do is an advanced image search on google with adult filtering disabled.
Not that I ever look at naughty pictures or anything... however there are times when the red screen comes up for legitimate sites.
The purpose of Bill G.'s comments is simply to announce to the computing world that M$ wants to repeat the cycle, starting at the first E.
We have seen all this before. M$ is always invited to the table when the world wants to make standards, they always walk away with the meal.
And the world -always- invites them back again, but that's another rant;-)
Slashdot Mirror
OMFG - so MSFT is the _good guy_ for once? Did hell just freeze over?
...
I feel the need to go home and take a bath
One extra thing to consider would be configurability. My XF86Config file is a beast, since I have a laptop with three pointer devices, and S-Video and RGB connections out to the tv and projector. I can't reconfigure my video on the fly like I can with Windoze. Help!
>... Further, with Y's in-server knowledge
> of widgets, applications run over a slow network
> can appear almost as responsive as local
> applications (especially when compared to an
> X application).
Great idea - is this the same thing the are doing with Fresco? Fresco also has SVG.
> Y widgets use the currently loaded theme to
> render themselves. Since all server widgets
> are using the same theme, all widgets appear
> consistent throughout the desktop.
This may be an SFQ, but shouldn't the application choose its own look and feel? I have various Java apps, some use the Metal L&F and others use the Windows one. Why force me?
In a 32-bit machine, each fetch from memory retrieves 4 bytes. Even if you only use one, the other three are cached. So, when reading sequentially, you get four bytes for the price of one.
In a 64-bit machine, each fetch returns 8 bytes, so you 8 for the price of one.
Here is an article that discusses some of the downsides of XP and Agile methods: http://www.softwarereality.com/lifecycle/xp/index. jsp
I am a big fan of CORBA, though I admit it has some issues.
:)
> 1. object oriented
CORBA is definitely object-oriented. Much better than XML and SOAP (SOAP is -NOT- OO at all). I love the fact that once you have a reference to an object, it does not matter where that object is.
> 2. extensible
Yes. There are many useful (and optional) services available for CORBA. You don't pay for what you don't use with CORBA, so if you don't require a Naming Service or a Transaction Service, you don't have to include it.
> 3. platform independent
This is where CORBA wins. It is platform, language and network agnostic. I don't pay attention to new technologies unless they have a way to interface with CORBA.
> 4. supports signatures for integrity and
> sender checking
Some ORBs can do CORBA over SSL for security, which can include certificate-checking if you wish.
> 5. supports privacy of the message contents
> (i.e. encryption)
See previous comment.
> 6. time sensitive: I should be able to detect
> a dead server and do failover while the
> user is waiting for the response
Yes, CORBA calls will fail with a COMMUNICATIONS_EXCEPTION, which you can catch and take action. Some ORBs let you configure the timeout.
> 7. bandwidth efficient, as I am looking to
> deploy it in wireless environments
CORBA is binary and fairly BW-efficient. Again, you don't pay for what you don't need.
On the downside of CORBA, there are issues with:
- complexity. It is definitely not for the beginner and has a large initial learning curve. If you write client-side stuff, it is heaven. If you write server-side stuff, prepare yourself. If you want to do CORBA-compliant fault tolerance or security, don't call me
- penetration. Not all ORB providers implement all the nifty services. Finding an ORB for your environment that provides what you need can be tricky (e.g. POA, Portable Interceptors)
- mindshare. So many people pushing alternate technologies with a few useful features and a promise of equalling CORBA, if only they get enough interest.
- Openness. The OMG process is lengthy and can only be crafted by consortium members. Maybe a W3C-style process would make it evolve more rapidly and get implemented quicker ?!?
> rest in peace, american software development.
> long live global software development.
> i can give you for a $1.00 what you pay someone
> else $10.00 for.
>
>what would you do?
Change the system.
> If you don't have a Microsoft OS, you can't
...) as long as you pay the yearly fee; it doesn't matter what OS you use.
> get a digital certificate. If you can't get
> a digital certificate, you can't get access
> to anything from your home PC.
What are you saying?!? Anyone can get a digital certificate (from Verisign, Entrust,
Also, you can use SSH to get into your home PC and transfer files around.
I find this whole discussion about M$ and MIT very disturbing. The part that bothers me the most is MIT's ignorance.
I agree that there has to be an organization to push for establishment of a Profession. I assume that medicine and civil engineering became professions because the government(s) demanded it, for the good of public safety.
Governments will someday push IT into a profession when the stakes get high enough. Example Texas, as cited in Steve McConnell's 'After the Gold Rush'.
Meanwhile, only M$ has the clout. Despite how I feel about M$, one good thing they have done is to push PMP certification (see http://pmi.org) for their project management.
Despite my last paragraph, I agree that large corporations should not be the sponsor, because they have an obvious conflict of interest, and true innovation would indeed slow.
If we can make a Profession outside of any one corporation (or cartel), I believe innovation will accelerate. The reason is that the level of practice in IT could elevate to higher levels of maturity where we would enjoy higher profitability, higher customer satisfaction, and a higher project success rate.
Of course, if IT became a Profession (like engineering, medicine, law, real-estate, accounting,...) then there would be a regulating body with real power to stop people from practicing when they do not have the necessary credentials.
Such a body would also help educational institutions in preparing their curricula and would promote ethical practice.
A Profession of IT would also elevate the standard of practice and protect our careers a little better than the current 'wild west' system.
Thanks for the tip.
We looked at Savaje, but it only supports J2ME. We want full Java capability.
We are doing a project in Java and the target is the iPAQ with Windoze. We found a commercial JVM that supports javacomm and Swing, though we are experiencing flaky behaviour.
I am not sure if it is the O/S or the JVM, but our code seems to work fine on Win2K.
Has anyone out there had good results getting the full JVM (1.4) working under Linux on this device? Should we switch?
Yes, software -can- damage hardware if you don't know what you are doing.
When I first installed Slackware in '96, I had a brand new ViewSonic 17PS monitor which was not recognized by Linux by default. I had to research the monitor capabilities and I hand-crafted the XF86 modelines.
When I first ran X, the monitor made this horrible screeching noise. Yikes! I quickly dropped out of X and found someone else's modelines and put them in, then the monitor worked fine (still does).
Linux, hardware and standards are all improving, but ultimately things can go wrong - always read the hardware HOWTO first...
I have my own domain and run a MTA on my Linux box that is on DSL and gets its IP via DHCP. The IP almost never changes since the server is always on. I bet this is the same configuration as other
Anyway, I am starting to get bounces from certain organizations (AOL, Primus) that seem to think my messages are spam. Seems to have something to do with coming from an IP that is known DHCP. This kind of sucks; whitelists and spam filters may seem good at first, but they are screening out some legitimate traffic.
Articles like this are totally subjective and always boil down to what one person likes or how much they know about their pet technology.
What I don't see here is an objective comparison of how many $$ or how many lines of code it takes in one or the other. You can wave your hands around all you want in a passionate argument about architectural 'grace', but I remain unconvinced until I see the code, and the person-hours.
It all drives me crazy, because our clients see these little religious wars and it drives down their level of confidence in us as professionals. I build something in Java/PHP, and some other contractor says 'I could do that better (faster,stronger) in PHP/Java'. In the eyes of our clients, we're both idiots when we do that.
At least in Civil Engineering they can do hardness and durability tests on different recipes of concrete. Maybe I should have done that.
Where I work, they have some sort of thing that detects keywords in the web pages that go through it. If it detects anything naughty, you get a red screen instead the page with a notice about acceptable use and warnings about accesses being logged. In a former company I was at, an employee was disciplined for both quantity of web use and sites accessed. If one really wants to get around it, just set up an SSH session to an outside computer and enable X11 forwarding. Then you can run your browser on the outside box and have the drawing commands sent to your current desktop. It is slower, but doable with broadband access. Another thing people can do is an advanced image search on google with adult filtering disabled. Not that I ever look at naughty pictures or anything ... however there are times when the red screen comes up for legitimate sites.
The purpose of Bill G.'s comments is simply to announce to the computing world that M$ wants to repeat the cycle, starting at the first E. We have seen all this before. M$ is always invited to the table when the world wants to make standards, they always walk away with the meal. And the world -always- invites them back again, but that's another rant ;-)
done! (I always intended to login someday anyway)