Welcome to the Internet generation. Here are some signs you belong to the Internet Generation. If you agree with more than three of the following, you belong to the Internet Generation.
o I am under 25 years of age. o I constantly feel entitled to everything. If I don't have the money, it is mine for the taking. o Someone else's pain makes me feel uncontrolled happiness. The more painful it is, the more joy I feel. o I have no sense of style. I prove this daily by wearing clothes that do not fit my body shape/size properly. A belt is functional too? o Destruction of other people's property makes me feel like I belong. o I have no sense of style. I have copied almost every style from the past five generations hoping no one will notice. o If I like an artists, all their music is mine to steal. o Theft of music is not stealing.
He wants it to handle frequent power outages. ext3 has plenty of tools to recover data, but I've lost more data with ext3 than any other FS I've ever dealt with (save for possibly for DoubleSpace in DOS).
Normally when people lose data with a journaled FS, it is because they have bad hardware (often completely unknown), bad/loose cable, are experiencing a kernel bug which directly/indirectly causes some type of data loss. Additionally, most journaled FS can be told to operate in a mode which favors speed over reliability. This is also a common problem.
In the end, most journaled FS available for Linux are all very reliable and robust. If you find you are losing data with one specific file system, it's more likely a poor configuration or bad hardware rather than a failing of the FS it self.
His experiences are far from unique. The problem is the gnome guys have huge egos and anyone offering suggestions are often meet with disdain.
In the link provided above, it's not like Linus' comments are off base in the least. That's hardly egotistical. From the article it's obvious he already did the footwork. He already made an effort. The developers even confirmed it not only does not do what he wanted but they would not do it. He then went off to put his money where his mouth was. To summarize, this means Linus did the right thing and the Gnome developer are shamed and proved impotent, because of their own huge egos.
While I much prefer Gnome to KDE, it has long been screwed over by ignorance and huge egos from none other than Gnome's own Miguel Icaza.
George: "Hey Bob, look, it's that gang that raped your mother, killed your father, and was patted on the back by the government. They claim they have something new they want to share with us. They call it Silverlight."
Bob:It's really a shame that people haven't embraced Silverlight, as it really does have the potential to be a lot better than Flash. Unfortunately, the Open-source community treated it with outright hostility, and it looks unlikely to catch us.
George: "Ya, it's surprising how short sighted, gullible, and naive some people are. Some people are just so dumb, they never learn." [Rolls eyes while smacking head with left hand.]
The original complaint was that when the BIOS detected Linux, the ACPI informaiton back to Linux wasn't even close to being correct, whereas for Windows, it was. In fact, when the BIOS was reverse engineered, it turns out bad information was purposely placed into a table specifically for each OS and the only information which was correct, was the table for Windows.
Based on the vendor's original stance and what was discovered in the BIOS, it is very unlikely this was an accident or a simple bug.
Lobbyists that represent and monied interests that are, well, citizens entitled to petition government just the same as you.
I don't know which is scarier; the fact that you wrote this or the fact that it was modded insightful. It's not like your comment in any way reflects the actual state of affairs in government. At best, it should have been modded, "+1 ignorant yet wishful thinking". The sad FACT is, lobbyists bribe elected officials, effectively placing power over the entire country's policies and laws, in the hands of powerful corporations and select (wealthy/elite) citizenry. Lobbyists as they operate today have effectively created a hidden ruling class.
Your suggestion of creating our own PAC is laughable at best. The only REAL solution is to outlaw the practice; forcing our elected officials to actually communicate with the people that elected them i the first place. It is, after all, their fucking job in the first place. Despite it being their job, people somehow accept it is not. It's been suggested that fewer than 1% of our elected officials at the Federal level are not on the take in some form or fashion. This isn't surprising in the least considering it is almost impossible to get elected in the first place without some form of smudge on one's soul. Which is exactly why the system needs to be changed. All adults know the system is broken. The question is, which table will you be eating at tonight? The adults table or the children's table. The PAC suggestion is squarely at the later of the two.
As is, laws in the US are made three way. First and foremost, laws are made to benefit corporations, almost always to the detriment of the population, having been directed by lobbying interests. The second way laws are made is reactionary; which is to address the rare occasion the "ignorant" population actually objects. While there are quotes around "ignorant", it's not altogether inaccurate either. The third way is to create a meaningless law which benefits nothing but hopes to win favor from the ignorant, vocal masses whom like to see something done, even if the result is meaningless and shallow.
Long story short, the only solution is to prevent any form of lobbying in any semblance as is commonly practiced today. Your PAC suggestion only serves to become part of the illness that is our current government. Just because everyone else is looting doesn't mean it is okay for you to do it too.
It wasn't so long ago that our elected representatives would travel back and forth from Washington and their home state to shake hands, listen, and learn what the people wanted, and to determine how to best serve those that elected them. That's the origin of the town hall meeting. These days, that's rare. These days, that same time is usually spent vacationing; often with the monies and/or benefits provided for by lobbyists. And usually, the rare occasion a town hall meeting is held, it's sole function is normally to pacify, as lip service is the only intent.
Long story short, any system which allows lobbyists to function anything close to its current form in utterly broken and without merit.
Well, hydrogen + oxygen + fossil fuel is said to be far more efficient, cleaner, and cooler burning than fossil fuel alone.
According to additional research productized by MIT, for gas engines, it's said to increase efficiency 30% and diesel engines are said to improve 50%. Furthermore, their head guy claims that's the tip of the iceberg. Sorry I don't have the link but likely someone else will know what I'm talking about. It was researched by MIT, spun off into a company, which was purchased by another company, which was purchased by yet another company. The company currently owning it is specifically targeting cleaner emissions and ignoring efficiency benefits in their marketing; so I'm not sure what to make of that. Last I heard, they were making headway with bus and semi sales.
And no, this is not a Geet plasma device. It works by creating plasma from sparking and mixing fuel in an environment which can not sustain combustion. I don't recall the details beyond that.
While true, the US military budget is still almost as large as that of all other countries combined, almost twice as much as EU military spending, 10 times as much as China, and almost 15 times as much as Russia.
Even so, I feel somewhat safer knowing that NATO is responsible for 2/3rd of the entire world military spending. I trust that entity more than, say, China or Russia.
I really wish people would stop using this as an example. It's obvious you understand the basic picture but allow me to pull it together. The reality is, most of EU is able to spend so little, despite having the most serious military concerns exactly because the US spends so much; thusly removing the burden from themselves. In turn this means it alleviates tensions while ensuring everyone's safety without additional pressure to create regional arms races.
In short, NO ONE is going to attack a NATO nation simply out of fear for US retaliation. Heck, the US can devastate most industrialized cities and economies without using a single plane or nuke. Would-be enemies of NATA nations are very aware of this fact.
Lastly, don't forget the US also wields its swords for nations outside of NATO, where it still has economic interests; in turn, saving those countries from arms races. People don't like to say it, but it is true, the US IS the world's police force. That fact, combined with the fact the US population demands little to no US causalities, the only solution is a strong technological divide. Now if you want the US to respect life like that of China, North Korea, various middle eastern countries, and even Russia, where loss of life in service to its country is demanded and expected by the population, other options become available.
Certainly a valid point. In my mind that reason was already excluded as they were only declaring Windows compatibility. So long as they don't declare Linux compatible, they have nothing extra to support. Which is why it's so odd. After all, Linux users already understand this which means they are purposely refusing sales where they are already more likely to have a lower cost to support.
I own my own company too. To clarify, the studie(s) were actually targeted at fortune 500. Since you're posting here, it's not likely you're including in that bunch. Needless to say, neither am I.
Besides, I said, "majority", not all. In hindsight, that's clearly not accurate. It should read, "majority of fortune 500 CEOs".
Email spammers are inherently and universally sociopaths. It is not unreasonable to consider that any given email spammer would, if it could be profitable, commit murder.
So what does this statement say about the majority of CEOs in corporate America. Keep in mind, several studies have show CEOs sociopathic behaviors in regard to their decisions.
This is more a case of *Microsoft* not being ACPI compliant.
We really don't know if this applies here. After all, the BIOS is feed wrong information to Linux, on purpose, which is different that what it provides to Win-OSs. For all we know, it may be providing correct capability information to Windows and simply providing bad information to Linux.
Ultimately, one has to wonder about the motives when a market segment is purposely excluded. No company in their right mind wants to exclude a potential sale unless there is money to be made elsewhere from that exclusion. Or perhaps, as you originally stated, they are nowhere near ACPI compliant and realized early on Linux highlights this fact. Even so - why add additional code to further break things if they are already broken without a monetary return elsewhere to justify the extra effort.
Is there an industry group that can be contacted in an attempt to force them to remove "ACPI Compliant"? If the original analysis is accurate, clearly they are not ACPI compliant.
Furthermore, since they clearly are breaking ACPI compliance when it detects Linux, and they state ACPI compliance, doesn't this mean they are fraudulently advertising? Seems both the State Attorney General and consumer watchdog groups would like to hear about this.
No! The cheapest code is the code that doesn't require support, maintenance, or bug fixes! Development costs are trivial compared to upkeep costs.
Good luck with that.
Let me know when something even close to that makes an appearance. In the meantime, people are forced to deal with support issues, maintenance issues, and bug fixes. They must deal with it either directly or indirectly (maintenance fees and/or personal to pick up the phone to get support on the other end). Either way, your counter argument simply does not exist.
Ever since the first Kennedy assassination, the Powers That Be have discovered that the best way to deal with leaks is to just have more and more leaks and bury the truth in a million similar sounding lies.
I wonder if the guy that proposed that policy gets a royalty every time its used to discredit someone. Hmmm.... Probably not because what is he going to do? At best, he'll be discredited as a crackpot.;)
Last I read there was some supporting evidence for this position. In fact, IIRC, the official position is that while vaccinations may cause other health risks, any associated side effects effect a much small population than an unvaccinated population. Simple fact is, there isn't enough information to disprove such positions. And, like cell phones, some studies do indicate their use may have negative side effects.
Now then, I'm not saying he's right. What I am saying, your statement seems to imply he's crazy for taking such a position while in reality, you taking such a position seems to imply the same about you. It's probably best to simply accept, while unlikely, it's still possible. The jury is still out.
The documentation is readily available and of high quality. Books are available. Third party support is also available. Unlike MySQL, it's easy to actually speak with and exchange emails of the actual core developers. In other words, third tier support is fast, friendly, easy, and accessible.
Thus far you seem to have made the case to try PostgreSQL.
If this were really true then a sufficient community of people looking to make it accessible would grow up around it.
You mean like what is already happening. You are also very confused with your position. Popularity is in no way a measure of merit or capability. Once you stop jumping off the bridge simply because that's what you've always done and that's what your friends tell you to do, you'll be happier for it.
The fact of the matter is that MySQL does what the vast majority wants it to do, and has better accessibility.
Hardly a fact. Have you tried it? It doesn't sound like you have.
Only functionality that is an order of magnitude better is going to overcome that - and while PostgreSQL may be better, it's simply not that much better.
It will likely take more than that because PostgreSQL, as is today, already exceeds your quantum. Maybe not in every area, but in most.
Seriously, stop making up reasons to stay in your comfort zone and give it a real look with an open mind. You'll be happy you did.
Given that tons of posts on PostgreSQL's merits over that MySQL every time MySQL is brought up, I'll not rehash the long list of merits and technical reasons. They are plenty easy to find and lengthy to boot. The fact that you ask really seems trollish at best. Nonetheless, I'll continue.
The apps I use are designed to be write rarely, read often, and all I need is good performance on the read, a reasonable relational structure, and the
This used to be MySQL's sweet spot over that of PostgreSQL and is no longer. This rational alone is no longer reason enough to justify use of MySQL. Of course there are other factors, such as comfort, but this is no longer a MySQL advantage.
ability to do reasonably complex SQL queries.
MySQL's query planner/optimizer is well known to be primitive at best. PostgreSQL on the other hand has a very advanced, mature, highly configurable, and capable query planner. If you're doing complex SQL queries, very likely you'll be far better off with PostgreSQL.
As I originally said, unless you actually try PostgreSQL you'll never know what your missing out on. Ultimately your position is one of closing your eyes and humming so you don't have to leave your comfort zone. If you decide you want to expand your horizons and can approach it with an open mind, you'll very likely be kicking your self that you stayed with MySQL for so long.
The fact that PostgreSQL supports inheritance, a cool feature MySQL doesn't support, hardly makes it hackish. Likewise, different doesn't equate to bad.
A better question, why use Django over TurboGears? Seriously, I'd really like someone to clearly point out the benefits of one over the other. If you can a link of a comprehensive review and/or comparison, I'd love to see it.
Anyone arguing against stored procedures simply doesn't understand them or had never worked on complex projects requiring a RDBMS.
Stored/prepared queries are often faster, more secure, and standardize business rules and logic. This in turn simplifies and speeds application development while reducing bugs and eases maintainability; especially where multiple types of clients are required.
Arguing against stored procedures is the same thing as declaring, I love working harder, creating bugs, slow database access, hate scalability, hate security, and I have no idea what I'm talking about.
In reality, they are not a panacea and they are not perfect, but no serious DBA working on a non-trivial project dismisses them outright unless other issues (normally business) exist, preventing their use. Anyone who outright dismisses them should simply be ignored.
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome to the Internet generation. Here are some signs you belong to the Internet Generation. If you agree with more than three of the following, you belong to the Internet Generation.
o I am under 25 years of age.
o I constantly feel entitled to everything. If I don't have the money, it is mine for the taking.
o Someone else's pain makes me feel uncontrolled happiness. The more painful it is, the more joy I feel.
o I have no sense of style. I prove this daily by wearing clothes that do not fit my body shape/size properly. A belt is functional too?
o Destruction of other people's property makes me feel like I belong.
o I have no sense of style. I have copied almost every style from the past five generations hoping no one will notice.
o If I like an artists, all their music is mine to steal.
o Theft of music is not stealing.
He wants it to handle frequent power outages. ext3 has plenty of tools to recover data, but I've lost more data with ext3 than any other FS I've ever dealt with (save for possibly for DoubleSpace in DOS).
Normally when people lose data with a journaled FS, it is because they have bad hardware (often completely unknown), bad/loose cable, are experiencing a kernel bug which directly/indirectly causes some type of data loss. Additionally, most journaled FS can be told to operate in a mode which favors speed over reliability. This is also a common problem.
In the end, most journaled FS available for Linux are all very reliable and robust. If you find you are losing data with one specific file system, it's more likely a poor configuration or bad hardware rather than a failing of the FS it self.
His experiences are far from unique. The problem is the gnome guys have huge egos and anyone offering suggestions are often meet with disdain.
In the link provided above, it's not like Linus' comments are off base in the least. That's hardly egotistical. From the article it's obvious he already did the footwork. He already made an effort. The developers even confirmed it not only does not do what he wanted but they would not do it. He then went off to put his money where his mouth was. To summarize, this means Linus did the right thing and the Gnome developer are shamed and proved impotent, because of their own huge egos.
While I much prefer Gnome to KDE, it has long been screwed over by ignorance and huge egos from none other than Gnome's own Miguel Icaza.
George: "Hey Bob, look, it's that gang that raped your mother, killed your father, and was patted on the back by the government. They claim they have something new they want to share with us. They call it Silverlight."
Bob:It's really a shame that people haven't embraced Silverlight, as it really does have the potential to be a lot better than Flash. Unfortunately, the Open-source community treated it with outright hostility, and it looks unlikely to catch us.
George: "Ya, it's surprising how short sighted, gullible, and naive some people are. Some people are just so dumb, they never learn." [Rolls eyes while smacking head with left hand.]
Same is true for the world of computer science.
The original complaint was that when the BIOS detected Linux, the ACPI informaiton back to Linux wasn't even close to being correct, whereas for Windows, it was. In fact, when the BIOS was reverse engineered, it turns out bad information was purposely placed into a table specifically for each OS and the only information which was correct, was the table for Windows.
Based on the vendor's original stance and what was discovered in the BIOS, it is very unlikely this was an accident or a simple bug.
Lobbyists that represent and monied interests that are, well, citizens entitled to petition government just the same as you.
I don't know which is scarier; the fact that you wrote this or the fact that it was modded insightful. It's not like your comment in any way reflects the actual state of affairs in government. At best, it should have been modded, "+1 ignorant yet wishful thinking". The sad FACT is, lobbyists bribe elected officials, effectively placing power over the entire country's policies and laws, in the hands of powerful corporations and select (wealthy/elite) citizenry. Lobbyists as they operate today have effectively created a hidden ruling class.
Your suggestion of creating our own PAC is laughable at best. The only REAL solution is to outlaw the practice; forcing our elected officials to actually communicate with the people that elected them i the first place. It is, after all, their fucking job in the first place. Despite it being their job, people somehow accept it is not. It's been suggested that fewer than 1% of our elected officials at the Federal level are not on the take in some form or fashion. This isn't surprising in the least considering it is almost impossible to get elected in the first place without some form of smudge on one's soul. Which is exactly why the system needs to be changed. All adults know the system is broken. The question is, which table will you be eating at tonight? The adults table or the children's table. The PAC suggestion is squarely at the later of the two.
As is, laws in the US are made three way. First and foremost, laws are made to benefit corporations, almost always to the detriment of the population, having been directed by lobbying interests. The second way laws are made is reactionary; which is to address the rare occasion the "ignorant" population actually objects. While there are quotes around "ignorant", it's not altogether inaccurate either. The third way is to create a meaningless law which benefits nothing but hopes to win favor from the ignorant, vocal masses whom like to see something done, even if the result is meaningless and shallow.
Long story short, the only solution is to prevent any form of lobbying in any semblance as is commonly practiced today. Your PAC suggestion only serves to become part of the illness that is our current government. Just because everyone else is looting doesn't mean it is okay for you to do it too.
It wasn't so long ago that our elected representatives would travel back and forth from Washington and their home state to shake hands, listen, and learn what the people wanted, and to determine how to best serve those that elected them. That's the origin of the town hall meeting. These days, that's rare. These days, that same time is usually spent vacationing; often with the monies and/or benefits provided for by lobbyists. And usually, the rare occasion a town hall meeting is held, it's sole function is normally to pacify, as lip service is the only intent.
Long story short, any system which allows lobbyists to function anything close to its current form in utterly broken and without merit.
Well, hydrogen + oxygen + fossil fuel is said to be far more efficient, cleaner, and cooler burning than fossil fuel alone.
According to additional research productized by MIT, for gas engines, it's said to increase efficiency 30% and diesel engines are said to improve 50%. Furthermore, their head guy claims that's the tip of the iceberg. Sorry I don't have the link but likely someone else will know what I'm talking about. It was researched by MIT, spun off into a company, which was purchased by another company, which was purchased by yet another company. The company currently owning it is specifically targeting cleaner emissions and ignoring efficiency benefits in their marketing; so I'm not sure what to make of that. Last I heard, they were making headway with bus and semi sales.
And no, this is not a Geet plasma device. It works by creating plasma from sparking and mixing fuel in an environment which can not sustain combustion. I don't recall the details beyond that.
While true, the US military budget is still almost as large as that of all other countries combined, almost twice as much as EU military spending, 10 times as much as China, and almost 15 times as much as Russia.
Even so, I feel somewhat safer knowing that NATO is responsible for 2/3rd of the entire world military spending. I trust that entity more than, say, China or Russia.
I really wish people would stop using this as an example. It's obvious you understand the basic picture but allow me to pull it together. The reality is, most of EU is able to spend so little, despite having the most serious military concerns exactly because the US spends so much; thusly removing the burden from themselves. In turn this means it alleviates tensions while ensuring everyone's safety without additional pressure to create regional arms races.
In short, NO ONE is going to attack a NATO nation simply out of fear for US retaliation. Heck, the US can devastate most industrialized cities and economies without using a single plane or nuke. Would-be enemies of NATA nations are very aware of this fact.
Lastly, don't forget the US also wields its swords for nations outside of NATO, where it still has economic interests; in turn, saving those countries from arms races. People don't like to say it, but it is true, the US IS the world's police force. That fact, combined with the fact the US population demands little to no US causalities, the only solution is a strong technological divide. Now if you want the US to respect life like that of China, North Korea, various middle eastern countries, and even Russia, where loss of life in service to its country is demanded and expected by the population, other options become available.
Certainly a valid point. In my mind that reason was already excluded as they were only declaring Windows compatibility. So long as they don't declare Linux compatible, they have nothing extra to support. Which is why it's so odd. After all, Linux users already understand this which means they are purposely refusing sales where they are already more likely to have a lower cost to support.
I own my own company too. To clarify, the studie(s) were actually targeted at fortune 500. Since you're posting here, it's not likely you're including in that bunch. Needless to say, neither am I.
Besides, I said, "majority", not all. In hindsight, that's clearly not accurate. It should read, "majority of fortune 500 CEOs".
Email spammers are inherently and universally sociopaths. It is not unreasonable to consider that any given email spammer would, if it could be profitable, commit murder.
So what does this statement say about the majority of CEOs in corporate America. Keep in mind, several studies have show CEOs sociopathic behaviors in regard to their decisions.
This is more a case of *Microsoft* not being ACPI compliant.
We really don't know if this applies here. After all, the BIOS is feed wrong information to Linux, on purpose, which is different that what it provides to Win-OSs. For all we know, it may be providing correct capability information to Windows and simply providing bad information to Linux.
Ultimately, one has to wonder about the motives when a market segment is purposely excluded. No company in their right mind wants to exclude a potential sale unless there is money to be made elsewhere from that exclusion. Or perhaps, as you originally stated, they are nowhere near ACPI compliant and realized early on Linux highlights this fact. Even so - why add additional code to further break things if they are already broken without a monetary return elsewhere to justify the extra effort.
Is there an industry group that can be contacted in an attempt to force them to remove "ACPI Compliant"? If the original analysis is accurate, clearly they are not ACPI compliant.
Furthermore, since they clearly are breaking ACPI compliance when it detects Linux, and they state ACPI compliance, doesn't this mean they are fraudulently advertising? Seems both the State Attorney General and consumer watchdog groups would like to hear about this.
And there are at least two studies that show a link does exist. Even the CDC will tell you what I'm telling you because THEY ARE ON RECORD SAYING IT.
Shesh...dolts!
No! The cheapest code is the code that doesn't require support, maintenance, or bug fixes! Development costs are trivial compared to upkeep costs.
Good luck with that.
Let me know when something even close to that makes an appearance. In the meantime, people are forced to deal with support issues, maintenance issues, and bug fixes. They must deal with it either directly or indirectly (maintenance fees and/or personal to pick up the phone to get support on the other end). Either way, your counter argument simply does not exist.
Ever since the first Kennedy assassination, the Powers That Be have discovered that the best way to deal with leaks is to just have more and more leaks and bury the truth in a million similar sounding lies.
I wonder if the guy that proposed that policy gets a royalty every time its used to discredit someone. Hmmm.... Probably not because what is he going to do? At best, he'll be discredited as a crackpot. ;)
Jim Carey think vaccinations give you autism.
Last I read there was some supporting evidence for this position. In fact, IIRC, the official position is that while vaccinations may cause other health risks, any associated side effects effect a much small population than an unvaccinated population. Simple fact is, there isn't enough information to disprove such positions. And, like cell phones, some studies do indicate their use may have negative side effects.
Now then, I'm not saying he's right. What I am saying, your statement seems to imply he's crazy for taking such a position while in reality, you taking such a position seems to imply the same about you. It's probably best to simply accept, while unlikely, it's still possible. The jury is still out.
Just some food for thought.
The documentation is readily available and of high quality. Books are available. Third party support is also available. Unlike MySQL, it's easy to actually speak with and exchange emails of the actual core developers. In other words, third tier support is fast, friendly, easy, and accessible.
Thus far you seem to have made the case to try PostgreSQL.
If this were really true then a sufficient community of people looking to make it accessible would grow up around it.
You mean like what is already happening. You are also very confused with your position. Popularity is in no way a measure of merit or capability. Once you stop jumping off the bridge simply because that's what you've always done and that's what your friends tell you to do, you'll be happier for it.
The fact of the matter is that MySQL does what the vast majority wants it to do, and has better accessibility.
Hardly a fact. Have you tried it? It doesn't sound like you have.
Only functionality that is an order of magnitude better is going to overcome that - and while PostgreSQL may be better, it's simply not that much better.
It will likely take more than that because PostgreSQL, as is today, already exceeds your quantum. Maybe not in every area, but in most.
Seriously, stop making up reasons to stay in your comfort zone and give it a real look with an open mind. You'll be happy you did.
Better how?
Given that tons of posts on PostgreSQL's merits over that MySQL every time MySQL is brought up, I'll not rehash the long list of merits and technical reasons. They are plenty easy to find and lengthy to boot. The fact that you ask really seems trollish at best. Nonetheless, I'll continue.
The apps I use are designed to be write rarely, read often, and all I need is good performance on the read, a reasonable relational structure, and the
This used to be MySQL's sweet spot over that of PostgreSQL and is no longer. This rational alone is no longer reason enough to justify use of MySQL. Of course there are other factors, such as comfort, but this is no longer a MySQL advantage.
ability to do reasonably complex SQL queries.
MySQL's query planner/optimizer is well known to be primitive at best. PostgreSQL on the other hand has a very advanced, mature, highly configurable, and capable query planner. If you're doing complex SQL queries, very likely you'll be far better off with PostgreSQL.
As I originally said, unless you actually try PostgreSQL you'll never know what your missing out on. Ultimately your position is one of closing your eyes and humming so you don't have to leave your comfort zone. If you decide you want to expand your horizons and can approach it with an open mind, you'll very likely be kicking your self that you stayed with MySQL for so long.
The fact that PostgreSQL supports inheritance, a cool feature MySQL doesn't support, hardly makes it hackish. Likewise, different doesn't equate to bad.
A better question, why use Django over TurboGears? Seriously, I'd really like someone to clearly point out the benefits of one over the other. If you can a link of a comprehensive review and/or comparison, I'd love to see it.
Can you expand on what you mean? Some databases have a more expanded view of what partitioning means but PostgreSQL does support partitioning.
Anyone arguing against stored procedures simply doesn't understand them or had never worked on complex projects requiring a RDBMS.
Stored/prepared queries are often faster, more secure, and standardize business rules and logic. This in turn simplifies and speeds application development while reducing bugs and eases maintainability; especially where multiple types of clients are required.
Arguing against stored procedures is the same thing as declaring, I love working harder, creating bugs, slow database access, hate scalability, hate security, and I have no idea what I'm talking about.
In reality, they are not a panacea and they are not perfect, but no serious DBA working on a non-trivial project dismisses them outright unless other issues (normally business) exist, preventing their use. Anyone who outright dismisses them should simply be ignored.