This whole 'used to windows' thing really bugs me. What difference does it make what OS your browser is running on? You telling me people don't know how to use firefox on mac os x/eee's linux distro but do know how to use it on windows? That's absolutely ridiculous.
Asus themselves proved this with the first release of the Eee which didn't run windows, people were still buying it and I never heard anyone one of them complain that it wasn't windows so they didn't know how to use it. It just has 4 huge buttons named 'browser', 'email' and etc. Please explain how anyone can not know how to use that.
If the university is treating students as children it's probably because, on average, they are.
Their problem, not the university's. If they are being treated as children, then they will act like children. If someone does not attend and does not bother to even gauge the complexity of the course they will get what they deserve, nothing more nothing less
They can dual license it if the code author allows them to. It is common practice in these dual license scenarios to ask for the code author to do this. Whether they allow it or not is another matter entirely.
Also note that most countries have a minimum size (not well defined obviously) that a work must be in order to be considered copyright-worthy. A one byte patch for example would not be covered by copyright.
"The downside is that they can't just merge the open code back into the commercial database, and that is a significant downside."
Says who? As far as I know Oracle has no plans to change MySQL's license.
Since both MySQL and its forks are open source there's nothing stopping them from merging the two. In fact that is what Maria DB is doing, merging changes to MySQL into it.
Exactly, and besides that fact, how is it the language's fault if the programmer doesn't do proper checking? _Because_ C is not a type safe language is why programmers need to be extra careful in making proper checks when dealing with buffers _especially_ on a f***** passport reader...
Respect has to earned. Microsoft has done nothing to earn that respect, I'd hardly call "good marketing" worthy of respect. This is an understandably political comment but even so, it's the kind of thing you'd expect to hear from Microsoft, not the Linux Foundation...
Part of our genetic makeup? Religion? No. It is simply our lack of understanding things like what is that big red thing on the sky that stings your eyes when you look at it. The aztecs called it the sun god and worshiped it. Later we found out that its actually a star, part of the galaxy our planet revolves in and etc. The reason we make up gods is to explain things that we simply are not capable of understanding yet.
My question is regarding the technical reasons of using Windows based servers to run the cluster that EVE runs on. Is that because you've tried Unix or Linux or BSD or what not and found it lacking, is the code base not easily portable to a different architecture or is there some other reason? It seems to me from a purely technical perspective that using windows to run such a large cluster is a waste of resources and a very expensive one at that.
Does anyone take this guy seriously? He's not only the lowest life form known on this planet, a fanboi(with an "i") he's also a spammer and been known to abuse digg's(for example) system to get his articles on the first page. Just skip this one...
Well maybe you need to get a better video player, have had no problems whatsoever with those files under linux, using either mplayer or xine.
And im terribly sorry, real h.264 encoding takes forever and a day compared to divx encoding. Sometimes the extra time(its a lot) is not worth the better sound quality and marginal video quality h.264 offers over divx.
Why is it that to download and install IE7 you need to have WGA on your computer? If IE7 is the big security improvement that everyone is saying it should be then why do businesses in particular need to handle the daunting task of installing and maintaining a fairly controversial by anyones standards, piece of software?
In the months to come, do you expect to see a large amount of vulnerabilities for IE7 compared to, lets say the first few months of IE6s and Firefox's 1.5(to stick to one version) existance? If so then why(or why not)?
I suppose the fact that Apple doesn't make hardware(or ever has) is beside the point?
You're arguing that nothing except OSX can run on "Apple's hardware" but OSX can run on "PC hardware" when "Apple's hardware" and "PC hardware" are one and the same.(yes I know the BIOS is different, or non-existant rather, who here thinks a way around that won't come up?)
My 2c would be on Apple wanting people to break their security, if that is because they want to make it stronger on release(probably happen anyway) or to gauge whether or not it would be sensible for them to actually release OSX as a seperate purchase remains to be seen.
Slashdot Mirror
This whole 'used to windows' thing really bugs me. What difference does it make what OS your browser is running on? You telling me people don't know how to use firefox on mac os x/eee's linux distro but do know how to use it on windows? That's absolutely ridiculous.
Asus themselves proved this with the first release of the Eee which didn't run windows, people were still buying it and I never heard anyone one of them complain that it wasn't windows so they didn't know how to use it. It just has 4 huge buttons named 'browser', 'email' and etc. Please explain how anyone can not know how to use that.
Yeah. Cause no-one has ever thought of doing that
Attendance is no measure of academic ability.
If the university is treating students as children it's probably because, on average, they are.
Their problem, not the university's. If they are being treated as children, then they will act like children.
If someone does not attend and does not bother to even gauge the complexity of the course they will get what they deserve, nothing more nothing less
They can dual license it if the code author allows them to. It is common practice in these dual license scenarios to ask for the code author to do this. Whether they allow it or not is another matter entirely.
Also note that most countries have a minimum size (not well defined obviously) that a work must be in order to be considered copyright-worthy. A one byte patch for example would not be covered by copyright.
"The downside is that they can't just merge the open code back into the commercial database, and that is a significant downside."
Says who? As far as I know Oracle has no plans to change MySQL's license.
Since both MySQL and its forks are open source there's nothing stopping them from merging the two. In fact that is what Maria DB is doing, merging changes to MySQL into it.
Psst, check this out. Do not comment http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population+of+brazil&asynchronous=false&equal=Submit
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8046564.stm The BBC version of this story, in english
Don't know if anyone has mentioned this but the full episodes are US only. Not that you can't get around that but still...
Exactly, and besides that fact, how is it the language's fault if the programmer doesn't do proper checking? _Because_ C is not a type safe language is why programmers need to be extra careful in making proper checks when dealing with buffers _especially_ on a f***** passport reader...
Respect has to earned. Microsoft has done nothing to earn that respect, I'd hardly call "good marketing" worthy of respect. This is an understandably political comment but even so, it's the kind of thing you'd expect to hear from Microsoft, not the Linux Foundation...
Part of our genetic makeup? Religion? No. It is simply our lack of understanding things like what is that big red thing on the sky that stings your eyes when you look at it. The aztecs called it the sun god and worshiped it. Later we found out that its actually a star, part of the galaxy our planet revolves in and etc. The reason we make up gods is to explain things that we simply are not capable of understanding yet.
My question is regarding the technical reasons of using Windows based servers to run the cluster that EVE runs on. Is that because you've tried Unix or Linux or BSD or what not and found it lacking, is the code base not easily portable to a different architecture or is there some other reason? It seems to me from a purely technical perspective that using windows to run such a large cluster is a waste of resources and a very expensive one at that.
Isn't sharing original work with others(with no fee or record contract or w/e) illegal under the DMCA?
Does anyone take this guy seriously? He's not only the lowest life form known on this planet, a fanboi(with an "i") he's also a spammer and been known to abuse digg's(for example) system to get his articles on the first page. Just skip this one...
Well maybe you need to get a better video player, have had no problems whatsoever with those files under linux, using either mplayer or xine. And im terribly sorry, real h.264 encoding takes forever and a day compared to divx encoding. Sometimes the extra time(its a lot) is not worth the better sound quality and marginal video quality h.264 offers over divx.
Why is it that to download and install IE7 you need to have WGA on your computer? If IE7 is the big security improvement that everyone is saying it should be then why do businesses in particular need to handle the daunting task of installing and maintaining a fairly controversial by anyones standards, piece of software?
In the months to come, do you expect to see a large amount of vulnerabilities for IE7 compared to, lets say the first few months of IE6s and Firefox's 1.5(to stick to one version) existance? If so then why(or why not)?
I suppose the fact that Apple doesn't make hardware(or ever has) is beside the point? You're arguing that nothing except OSX can run on "Apple's hardware" but OSX can run on "PC hardware" when "Apple's hardware" and "PC hardware" are one and the same.(yes I know the BIOS is different, or non-existant rather, who here thinks a way around that won't come up?) My 2c would be on Apple wanting people to break their security, if that is because they want to make it stronger on release(probably happen anyway) or to gauge whether or not it would be sensible for them to actually release OSX as a seperate purchase remains to be seen.