The UltraSparc throughput is the answer to why the Sparc outperforms under load. The UltraSparc can handle nearly x6 the throughput of the Pentium III. The Sparc will be a much more stable under pressure than the Pentium, which will start to cave under a massive number of context switches. However, the Sparc's slower horsepower will start to smell if you are doing lots of SSL.
I. Operating Systems. Well (here comes the flamebait), there are pluses and minus to Solaris vs. BSD or Linux. In these simple systems performance wont vary much between the OS's. However, Solaris is the more reliable OS (better NFS implementation, etc). As far as the OS goes, I'd have to say Solaris, except for the sun compiler which is a complete piece of sh*t and a pain in the ass if you are doing some custom C stuff. Ultimately, if it were me, I'd prefer to work with Solaris here, especially if your running a Java middle-teir (servlets).
II. CPU. What matters here is the usage, and my first question would be are you going to be doing SSL. If so, are you using an accelerator in front of the cluster? If you are using an accelerator, I would lean towards the UltraSPARC IIe. The SPARC wont perform SSL as fast as the Pentiums and the Pentiums frankly have better caching layouts than these lowend SPARCs. Without a SSL accelerator appliance, the Pentiums will considerably outperform almost 2:1 over the Ultra.
III. Maintenance. This is the tough one. If you have to replace one of the Sun ethernet cards or hard drives get out your checkbook (we are talking Sun here). The Intel configs will be cheaper to maintain.
IV. Hard Drives. Drives for these guys really are for caching and virtual memory since you are going with a cluster. The reality is that IDE is perfect for this use, since your net connections are going to be the primary choke points. And the Sun IDE drive is faster than the VA box drive. The Dell is SCSI which is probably not economical for most purposes.
V. Networking. The key here is that the Sun box only has room for one network card. So, if you need 2 cards, the answer is pretty simple. Both the dell and VA box have room for two. Also, if you want something other than base 10/100 ethernet, you aint gettin it with the Sun box.
VI. Other Drives. The Sun box doesnt have a CD drive, (which is fine considering its a cluster) or a floppy drive, and the others do. This is a nice cost saving measure if your clustering.
VII. Memory. Sun's memory bug is no longer around, so memory is pretty much even ground here. All of these guys come with 128 Megs on the lowend, which is probably too little depending on your purpose.
VIII. Service/Support. Dell has very good service and support. Sun has bad support, but they honor warranties. I've never used VA, but heck they own/. (hmmm).
Summary. I'm sure I'm missing stuff, but this is a start. If you are just serving up flat files, I dont think I'd go with the sun, but I dont think I'd go with either of your other choices. I'd probably go with the VA 1120, or the low-end dell. (or look at another vendor like pengiun, etc). If you are running app servers, then I'd fork based on what the medium is. Mod perl stuff probably lends better for non-solaris environments (I could be fudding now), but Java definetly runs better on Solaris (I wonder why?). For C/C++ stuff, the toss up is with your compiler choice. If you are using other open source stuff, you probably dont want to be using gcc on Solaris (flamebait alert!) for optimal performance, but you'll have a nightmare of compatibility issues if you use the sun compiler. If you're using third-party binaries, who cares.
Its at work. However, have you every used AOL (let alone AOL email?) Its a disaster that predates the stone age. Hotmail has more features. In an office (marketing) environment like Time Warner, you need a fairly sofisticated Email system. Not one designed for residential use.
Ximian is the last fortress. These guys are clearly trying to compete in the office workstation environment with Microsuck. I downloaded Ximian 1.0 and of course it is no where near Win2k, and the office-like apps are still years behind Microsuck's. However, they have a long-term plan.
Your sad devotion to that ancient religion hasn't conjured up the stolen data plans nor given you clairvoyance enough to find the location of the rebel's hidden forghhghhhg.
Bill Gates dark life force is clearly sucking the energy out of these scientific projects. We must remember that these spacecraft have been an endevour of science and that the scientific process has often been linked as an inspiration for Open Source. Need to paint a picture people? Of course, the Gates-Effect doesnt bother the planets. I'm still trying to figure out the Intel angle, but I suspect they might be involved too.
Due to the fact that the size of the anomalous acceleration is of order cH, whereH is the Hubble
constant (see Eq. (56)), the Pioneer results have stimulated a number of new physics suggestions.
For example, Rosales and S anchez-Gomez [136] propose that aP is due to a local curvature in
light geodesics in the expanding spacetime universe. They argue that the Pioneer eect represents
a new cosmological Foucault experiment, since the solar system coordinates are not true inertial
coordinates with respect to the expansion of the universe. Therefore, the Pioneers are mimicking
the role that the rotating Earth plays in Foucault's experiment. Therefore, in this picture the
eect is not a \true physical eect" and a coordinate transformation to the co-moving cosmological
coordinate frame would entirely remove the Pioneer eect.
From a similar viewpoint, Guruprasad [137] nds accommodation for the constant term while
trying to explain the annual term as a tidal eect on the physical structure of the spacecraft
itself. In particular, he suggests that the deformations of the physical structure of the spacecraft
(due to external factors such as the eective solar and galactic tidal forces) combined with the
spin of the spacecraft are directly responsible for the detected annual anomaly. Moreover, he
proposes a hypothesis of the planetary Hubble's ow and suggests that Pioneer's anomaly does
not contradict the existing planetary data, but supports his new theory of relativistically elastic
space-time.
stvang [138] further exploits the fact that the gravitational eld of the solar system is
not static with respect to the cosmic expansion. He does note, however, that in order to be
acceptable, any non-standard explanation of the eect should follow from a general theoretical
framework. Even so, stvang still presents quite a radical model. This model advocates the use
of an expanded PPN-framework that includes a direct eect on local scales due to the cosmic
space-time expansion.
Belayev [139] considers a Kaluza-Klein model in 5 dimensions with a time-varying scale factor
for the compactied fth dimension. His comprehensive analysis led to the conclusion that a
variation of the physical constants on a cosmic time scale is responsible for the appearance of the
anomalous acceleration observed in the Pioneer 10/11 tracking data.
Modanese [140] considers the eect of a scale-dependent cosmological term in the gravitational
action. It turns out that, even in the case of a static spherically-symmetric source, the external
solution of his modied gravitational eld equations contains a non-Schwartzschild-like component
that depends on the size of the test particles. He argues that this additional term may be relevant
to the observed anomaly.
A proposal to modify the theory of gravity in order to provide an explanation of the Pioneer
anomaly has also appeared. Capozzielo et al. [141] discuss the possibility of determining the
stability and characteristic geometrical and kinematical properties of galaxies strictly based on a
minimal action whose value is on the order of the Plank constant.
Due to the fact that the size of the anomalous acceleration is of order cH, whereH is the Hubble
constant (see Eq. (56)), the Pioneer results have stimulated a number of new physics suggestions.
For example, Rosales and S anchez-Gomez [136] propose that aP is due to a local curvature in
light geodesics in the expanding spacetime universe. They argue that the Pioneer eect represents
a new cosmological Foucault experiment, since the solar system coordinates are not true inertial
coordinates with respect to the expansion of the universe. Therefore, the Pioneers are mimicking
the role that the rotating Earth plays in Foucault's experiment. Therefore, in this picture the
eect is not a \true physical eect" and a coordinate transformation to the co-moving cosmological
coordinate frame would entirely remove the Pioneer eect.
From a similar viewpoint, Guruprasad [137] nds accommodation for the constant term while
trying to explain the annual term as a tidal eect on the physical structure of the spacecraft
itself. In particular, he suggests that the deformations of the physical structure of the spacecraft
(due to external factors such as the eective solar and galactic tidal forces) combined with the
spin of the spacecraft are directly responsible for the detected annual anomaly. Moreover, he
proposes a hypothesis of the planetary Hubble's ow and suggests that Pioneer's anomaly does
not contradict the existing planetary data, but supports his new theory of relativistically elastic
space-time.
stvang [138] further exploits the fact that the gravitational eld of the solar system is
not static with respect to the cosmic expansion. He does note, however, that in order to be
acceptable, any non-standard explanation of the eect should follow from a general theoretical
framework. Even so, stvang still presents quite a radical model. This model advocates the use
of an expanded PPN-framework that includes a direct eect on local scales due to the cosmic
space-time expansion.
Belayev [139] considers a Kaluza-Klein model in 5 dimensions with a time-varying scale factor
for the compactied fth dimension. His comprehensive analysis led to the conclusion that a
variation of the physical constants on a cosmic time scale is responsible for the appearance of the
anomalous acceleration observed in the Pioneer 10/11 tracking data.
Modanese [140] considers the eect of a scale-dependent cosmological term in the gravitational
action. It turns out that, even in the case of a static spherically-symmetric source, the external
solution of his modied gravitational eld equations contains a non-Schwartzschild-like component
that depends on the size of the test particles. He argues that this additional term may be relevant
to the observed anomaly.
A proposal to modify the theory of gravity in order to provide an explanation of the Pioneer
anomaly has also appeared. Capozzielo et al. [141] discuss the possibility of determining the
stability and characteristic geometrical and kinematical properties of galaxies strictly based on a
minimal action whose value is on the order of the Plank constant.
The interesting bit on US Gov Encryption Policy is the dramatic change that occured after the infamous Chineese spy case at Los Alamos and the missing US State Department Laptop case. Both cases involved top secret data being stored unencrypted. At that time, the US Gov actively discouraged commercially available encryption via the export legislation. After those incidents, the reports concluded that the individuals in the cases didn't encrypt the information because of the expense and difficultly involved with the current day encryption technologies. The findings advised that the commerical restraints on encryption be lifted in order to more cheaply secure government data.
It's humorous how pathetic the technical reporting is on the Yahoo/CNET/WSJ/NYTIMES/etc. These guys need to stick to the "just the facts" reporting instead of their "editorial" deductions.
Wow, I stand corrected in a pile of FUD. The national weather service puts gives Fairbanks a mean temp of 63 F in July. I've been to Alaska several times in the summer, and it was really warm when it wasnt raining. Anyway, sorry about the fud.
Alaskan summers are nice and warm with mean temp of 75 degrees. And of course 24 hours of daylight. So this facillity will have to have air as well as heat. Plus, if something goes wrong during a storm, the admin had better live in the building.
I agree. This is typical of/. to post an idiotic discussion topic in the shadow of a far more relevant topic. Nobody gives a shit about what Microsoft is bundling into XP. What is far more interesting is XP's new featureset.
Encrypted NTFS.
Quick login change.
Remote terminal access.
user/group file permissions.
NAT, IP firewalling (sort of)
etc.
Anyone see anything here that looks familiar. I wonder what they are up to?
Bones: "Damn it Jim! I'm a doctor not a [ bricklayer | magician | raving lunatic | chipindale dancer | trapeze artist | system administrator | kernel hacker | actor | latrine steward | sex maniac ]"
to have one shot careers, to get bad hair pieces and expose our large guts by wearing tight spandex uniforms, to spend our retirement selling airplane tickets and selling autographs to the socially-starved pantheon of the great unwashed, and to promote a niave political punch of social commentary worthy of the Love Boat and yet firmly laced with the accademic socialist tripe that appeals to the unemployed, and finaly to boldy go were we've been for the past 30 years.
I agree with your advice to think carefully on this issue which is a sticky one. Clearly, we don't want a "cradle to coffin" government. I'm not sure if the government is the answer. Clearly, the "personal privacy" argument is null and void when it comes to SPAM. However, the cost associated with SPAM should be considered. The internet is a resource that must be managed. As individual concerns compete for larger shares of that limited resource some decisions must be made. Whether the large companys will controlling positions in net or governmetns police this asset is debateble. However, someone has to limit excesses. We'd all agree that if I started DOSing an ISP that would be illegal. Is SPAM all that much different?
Alright, I admitt I should probably spend a few hours pouring over python literature, but hey, that's what/. is for, right?
So, my understanding is that Python is probably more useful for projects that involve lots of glue code (COM talking to CORBA talking to Java, etc). I also seem to get the impression that Python doesn't suffer from the "too chaotic for big project" problem that Perl has.
So help me out here. I'm writing a huge, scalable middle-tier in Java using servlets and JDBC. Why should I bother with Python?
Maybe I am ignorant, but for Redhat, why would anyone bother with Netscape 6.*? I mean who cares? You get the latest Mozilla and whatever plugins you need and all done. This is not news to RedHat users.
Slashdot Mirror
...learn about forking and most of what you need to know when programming unix by reading "Advanced Programming in the Unix Environment" by Stevens.
The UltraSparc throughput is the answer to why the Sparc outperforms under load. The UltraSparc can handle nearly x6 the throughput of the Pentium III. The Sparc will be a much more stable under pressure than the Pentium, which will start to cave under a massive number of context switches. However, the Sparc's slower horsepower will start to smell if you are doing lots of SSL.
I. Operating Systems. Well (here comes the flamebait), there are pluses and minus to Solaris vs. BSD or Linux. In these simple systems performance wont vary much between the OS's. However, Solaris is the more reliable OS (better NFS implementation, etc). As far as the OS goes, I'd have to say Solaris, except for the sun compiler which is a complete piece of sh*t and a pain in the ass if you are doing some custom C stuff. Ultimately, if it were me, I'd prefer to work with Solaris here, especially if your running a Java middle-teir (servlets).
/. (hmmm).
II. CPU. What matters here is the usage, and my first question would be are you going to be doing SSL. If so, are you using an accelerator in front of the cluster? If you are using an accelerator, I would lean towards the UltraSPARC IIe. The SPARC wont perform SSL as fast as the Pentiums and the Pentiums frankly have better caching layouts than these lowend SPARCs. Without a SSL accelerator appliance, the Pentiums will considerably outperform almost 2:1 over the Ultra.
III. Maintenance. This is the tough one. If you have to replace one of the Sun ethernet cards or hard drives get out your checkbook (we are talking Sun here). The Intel configs will be cheaper to maintain.
IV. Hard Drives. Drives for these guys really are for caching and virtual memory since you are going with a cluster. The reality is that IDE is perfect for this use, since your net connections are going to be the primary choke points. And the Sun IDE drive is faster than the VA box drive. The Dell is SCSI which is probably not economical for most purposes.
V. Networking. The key here is that the Sun box only has room for one network card. So, if you need 2 cards, the answer is pretty simple. Both the dell and VA box have room for two. Also, if you want something other than base 10/100 ethernet, you aint gettin it with the Sun box.
VI. Other Drives. The Sun box doesnt have a CD drive, (which is fine considering its a cluster) or a floppy drive, and the others do. This is a nice cost saving measure if your clustering.
VII. Memory. Sun's memory bug is no longer around, so memory is pretty much even ground here. All of these guys come with 128 Megs on the lowend, which is probably too little depending on your purpose.
VIII. Service/Support. Dell has very good service and support. Sun has bad support, but they honor warranties. I've never used VA, but heck they own
Summary. I'm sure I'm missing stuff, but this is a start. If you are just serving up flat files, I dont think I'd go with the sun, but I dont think I'd go with either of your other choices. I'd probably go with the VA 1120, or the low-end dell. (or look at another vendor like pengiun, etc). If you are running app servers, then I'd fork based on what the medium is. Mod perl stuff probably lends better for non-solaris environments (I could be fudding now), but Java definetly runs better on Solaris (I wonder why?). For C/C++ stuff, the toss up is with your compiler choice. If you are using other open source stuff, you probably dont want to be using gcc on Solaris (flamebait alert!) for optimal performance, but you'll have a nightmare of compatibility issues if you use the sun compiler. If you're using third-party binaries, who cares.
Its at work. However, have you every used AOL (let alone AOL email?) Its a disaster that predates the stone age. Hotmail has more features. In an office (marketing) environment like Time Warner, you need a fairly sofisticated Email system. Not one designed for residential use.
Ximian is the last fortress. These guys are clearly trying to compete in the office workstation environment with Microsuck. I downloaded Ximian 1.0 and of course it is no where near Win2k, and the office-like apps are still years behind Microsuck's. However, they have a long-term plan.
Your sad devotion to that ancient religion hasn't conjured up the stolen data plans nor given you clairvoyance enough to find the location of the rebel's hidden forghhghhhg.
Bill Gates dark life force is clearly sucking the energy out of these scientific projects. We must remember that these spacecraft have been an endevour of science and that the scientific process has often been linked as an inspiration for Open Source. Need to paint a picture people? Of course, the Gates-Effect doesnt bother the planets. I'm still trying to figure out the Intel angle, but I suspect they might be involved too.
New Physics Theory Highlights:
Due to the fact that the size of the anomalous acceleration is of order cH, whereH is the Hubble
constant (see Eq. (56)), the Pioneer results have stimulated a number of new physics suggestions.
For example, Rosales and S anchez-Gomez [136] propose that aP is due to a local curvature in
light geodesics in the expanding spacetime universe. They argue that the Pioneer eect represents
a new cosmological Foucault experiment, since the solar system coordinates are not true inertial
coordinates with respect to the expansion of the universe. Therefore, the Pioneers are mimicking
the role that the rotating Earth plays in Foucault's experiment. Therefore, in this picture the
eect is not a \true physical eect" and a coordinate transformation to the co-moving cosmological
coordinate frame would entirely remove the Pioneer eect.
From a similar viewpoint, Guruprasad [137] nds accommodation for the constant term while
trying to explain the annual term as a tidal eect on the physical structure of the spacecraft
itself. In particular, he suggests that the deformations of the physical structure of the spacecraft
(due to external factors such as the eective solar and galactic tidal forces) combined with the
spin of the spacecraft are directly responsible for the detected annual anomaly. Moreover, he
proposes a hypothesis of the planetary Hubble's ow and suggests that Pioneer's anomaly does
not contradict the existing planetary data, but supports his new theory of relativistically elastic
space-time.
stvang [138] further exploits the fact that the gravitational eld of the solar system is
not static with respect to the cosmic expansion. He does note, however, that in order to be
acceptable, any non-standard explanation of the eect should follow from a general theoretical
framework. Even so, stvang still presents quite a radical model. This model advocates the use
of an expanded PPN-framework that includes a direct eect on local scales due to the cosmic
space-time expansion.
Belayev [139] considers a Kaluza-Klein model in 5 dimensions with a time-varying scale factor
for the compactied fth dimension. His comprehensive analysis led to the conclusion that a
variation of the physical constants on a cosmic time scale is responsible for the appearance of the
anomalous acceleration observed in the Pioneer 10/11 tracking data.
Modanese [140] considers the eect of a scale-dependent cosmological term in the gravitational
action. It turns out that, even in the case of a static spherically-symmetric source, the external
solution of his modied gravitational eld equations contains a non-Schwartzschild-like component
that depends on the size of the test particles. He argues that this additional term may be relevant
to the observed anomaly.
A proposal to modify the theory of gravity in order to provide an explanation of the Pioneer
anomaly has also appeared. Capozzielo et al. [141] discuss the possibility of determining the
stability and characteristic geometrical and kinematical properties of galaxies strictly based on a
minimal action whose value is on the order of the Plank constant.
Due to the fact that the size of the anomalous acceleration is of order cH, whereH is the Hubble
constant (see Eq. (56)), the Pioneer results have stimulated a number of new physics suggestions.
For example, Rosales and S anchez-Gomez [136] propose that aP is due to a local curvature in
light geodesics in the expanding spacetime universe. They argue that the Pioneer eect represents
a new cosmological Foucault experiment, since the solar system coordinates are not true inertial
coordinates with respect to the expansion of the universe. Therefore, the Pioneers are mimicking
the role that the rotating Earth plays in Foucault's experiment. Therefore, in this picture the
eect is not a \true physical eect" and a coordinate transformation to the co-moving cosmological
coordinate frame would entirely remove the Pioneer eect.
From a similar viewpoint, Guruprasad [137] nds accommodation for the constant term while
trying to explain the annual term as a tidal eect on the physical structure of the spacecraft
itself. In particular, he suggests that the deformations of the physical structure of the spacecraft
(due to external factors such as the eective solar and galactic tidal forces) combined with the
spin of the spacecraft are directly responsible for the detected annual anomaly. Moreover, he
proposes a hypothesis of the planetary Hubble's ow and suggests that Pioneer's anomaly does
not contradict the existing planetary data, but supports his new theory of relativistically elastic
space-time.
stvang [138] further exploits the fact that the gravitational eld of the solar system is
not static with respect to the cosmic expansion. He does note, however, that in order to be
acceptable, any non-standard explanation of the eect should follow from a general theoretical
framework. Even so, stvang still presents quite a radical model. This model advocates the use
of an expanded PPN-framework that includes a direct eect on local scales due to the cosmic
space-time expansion.
Belayev [139] considers a Kaluza-Klein model in 5 dimensions with a time-varying scale factor
for the compactied fth dimension. His comprehensive analysis led to the conclusion that a
variation of the physical constants on a cosmic time scale is responsible for the appearance of the
anomalous acceleration observed in the Pioneer 10/11 tracking data.
Modanese [140] considers the eect of a scale-dependent cosmological term in the gravitational
action. It turns out that, even in the case of a static spherically-symmetric source, the external
solution of his modied gravitational eld equations contains a non-Schwartzschild-like component
that depends on the size of the test particles. He argues that this additional term may be relevant
to the observed anomaly.
A proposal to modify the theory of gravity in order to provide an explanation of the Pioneer
anomaly has also appeared. Capozzielo et al. [141] discuss the possibility of determining the
stability and characteristic geometrical and kinematical properties of galaxies strictly based on a
minimal action whose value is on the order of the Plank constant.
No, its after "Sexual Harassment Week" right before "Voluntary Leave Week" and "Office Shooting Day".
Yeah, software companies should have "Stand Down" week, where the company goes off crisis mode for 7 days and people go home to sleep.
The interesting bit on US Gov Encryption Policy is the dramatic change that occured after the infamous Chineese spy case at Los Alamos and the missing US State Department Laptop case. Both cases involved top secret data being stored unencrypted. At that time, the US Gov actively discouraged commercially available encryption via the export legislation. After those incidents, the reports concluded that the individuals in the cases didn't encrypt the information because of the expense and difficultly involved with the current day encryption technologies. The findings advised that the commerical restraints on encryption be lifted in order to more cheaply secure government data.
the tally of the spare parts used plus labor puts the cost of the table at around 1.2 million dollars.
It's humorous how pathetic the technical reporting is on the Yahoo/CNET/WSJ/NYTIMES/etc. These guys need to stick to the "just the facts" reporting instead of their "editorial" deductions.
Wow, I stand corrected in a pile of FUD. The national weather service puts gives Fairbanks a mean temp of 63 F in July. I've been to Alaska several times in the summer, and it was really warm when it wasnt raining. Anyway, sorry about the fud.
Alaskan summers are nice and warm with mean temp of 75 degrees. And of course 24 hours of daylight. So this facillity will have to have air as well as heat. Plus, if something goes wrong during a storm, the admin had better live in the building.
"all your base belongs to us"
I agree. This is typical of /. to post an idiotic discussion topic in the shadow of a far more relevant topic. Nobody gives a shit about what Microsoft is bundling into XP. What is far more interesting is XP's new featureset.
Encrypted NTFS.
Quick login change.
Remote terminal access.
user/group file permissions.
NAT, IP firewalling (sort of)
etc.
Anyone see anything here that looks familiar. I wonder what they are up to?
Bones: "Damn it Jim! I'm a doctor not a [ bricklayer | magician | raving lunatic | chipindale dancer | trapeze artist | system administrator | kernel hacker | actor | latrine steward | sex maniac ]"
yeah but Tom Baker died.
to have one shot careers, to get bad hair pieces and expose our large guts by wearing tight spandex uniforms, to spend our retirement selling airplane tickets and selling autographs to the socially-starved pantheon of the great unwashed, and to promote a niave political punch of social commentary worthy of the Love Boat and yet firmly laced with the accademic socialist tripe that appeals to the unemployed, and finaly to boldy go were we've been for the past 30 years.
I agree with your advice to think carefully on this issue which is a sticky one. Clearly, we don't want a "cradle to coffin" government. I'm not sure if the government is the answer. Clearly, the "personal privacy" argument is null and void when it comes to SPAM. However, the cost associated with SPAM should be considered. The internet is a resource that must be managed. As individual concerns compete for larger shares of that limited resource some decisions must be made. Whether the large companys will controlling positions in net or governmetns police this asset is debateble. However, someone has to limit excesses. We'd all agree that if I started DOSing an ISP that would be illegal. Is SPAM all that much different?
1. First track down the culprit and remove their genitalia.
2. Shot all immediate family members including parents, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, children, grandchildren, neffews and nieces.
3. Seize all assets and distribute those assets to all politcal parties which the culprit was not a member.
4. Remove the culprits name from the voter rolls, remove the culprits social security number and destroy the culprits birth records.
5. Emmerse the culprit in honey.
6. Cover the culprit with Texas Red Ants.
7. Release a swarm of African Killer Bees near the culprit.
8. Take a flamethrower to the culprit while simultaneously unloaded a 12 gauge shotgun into the culprits knee caps.
9. Urinate on the culprit's charred remains.
10. Scoop up the remains into a small jar and place the jar on display in the "This is what happens to spammers" Department of Justice Building.
Alright, I admitt I should probably spend a few hours pouring over python literature, but hey, that's what /. is for, right?
So, my understanding is that Python is probably more useful for projects that involve lots of glue code (COM talking to CORBA talking to Java, etc). I also seem to get the impression that Python doesn't suffer from the "too chaotic for big project" problem that Perl has.
So help me out here. I'm writing a huge, scalable middle-tier in Java using servlets and JDBC. Why should I bother with Python?
Pros Cons etc. Whats the story here people?
Maybe I am ignorant, but for Redhat, why would anyone bother with Netscape 6.*? I mean who cares? You get the latest Mozilla and whatever plugins you need and all done. This is not news to RedHat users.
I think they are using Helix-Gnome for their development desktop too.