As I understand the current architecture, the admin is the owner of the drive on a shared machine, and it's also the admin's job to authenticate you as the owner of the disc.
You can only write to the media, not the drive. And why is it the admin's job to authenticate you as the owner of the disc? If you have physical access to the disc, you could destroy it very easily without burning it. Does the admin have to stop me from keying a CD without the owner's permission?
If Microsoft ever ported to PowerPC or MIPS and made a real cluster solution where the head node behaved a lot like Terminal Server and the users could just drag-and-drop their input and output files through an Explorer-like interface and didn't need to provide scripts for the batch queueing system, the profs and students would probably demand it be used in place of the current reasonably mature stuff everyone is using. I shudder at how ignorant of computers the following generations of supercomputer users would be in that world.
And the probability of Microsoft's doing this? Seriously, what was the last version of NT that ran on non-x86 hardware? And wasn't that Alpha? What was the last release of Windows that ran on PowerPC or MIPS?
Perhaps the OP did not mean that Microsoft was on a crusade against evil 9in the 80's (or that IBM is on such a crusade today). He might have agreed with Adam Smith in saying that Microsoft, by pursuing its own interests against IBM, promoted the public welfare better than if it had deliberately sought to promote the public welfare (unintended consequences).
First, a non-Windows operating system would probably free them from the anti-trust agreements. After all, the old Windows line, that was the monopoly -- this new OS is competing with Windows.
Except that it is companies, not products, that can be monopolies. This is why Linux (as opposed to Canonical, Red Hat, Novell/SuSE, etc.) is immune to antitrust laws.
...where 'we' are offended that Microsoft makes calculating and obviously self-serving moves to court open-source applications to run on Windows.
But, we applaud the efforts of the FOSS community to make every effort to run Windows apps on *nix operating systems.
And I think both approaches are equally sel-serving. We understand and support it in FOSS, since we assume FOSS is the underdog, righting wrongs, giving us choice, and generally being a hero.
But FOSS also works to run *nix applications on Windows.
So, no: the Spanish did not have anything to learn from the Mayans regarding number systems in the 1500s. They had already known it for 600 years! It was no longer an exciting new technology.
And you are correct only if the Mayans did not make further progress. What did they achieve in the intervening centuries?
(By comparison, calculus was found by Newton only 320 years ago.)
Not if Leibniz discovered it earlier! Now where did I put that flame-retardant suit?
The Mayans had a notation for zero centuries before the Hindus, and had a base-twenty numeral system (except for the twenties place, which went by eighteen). The Spanish (and we) might have learned something.
Of course, if you were rammed by another ship, you'd have a greater chance of being killed or sustaining horrible injury if you were in the hull seat...but since a rammed ship usually sank, and the galley slaves were usually chained to their oars, the outcome would probably be much the same, in the end...
And why would a ship be rammed by another ship except during battle? And who used galley slaves on warships? It's hard to whip slaves to row fast enough, and having them chained makes them useless for repelling boarders.
the internet has merely created lots of partisan fiefdoms with an agenda and user venting. much of it rambling, illiterate, unhinged, and mostly useless. usless to readers, not those who vent: that's the psychological value of catharsis. that is, user generated content is usually more useful for whomever is commenting than anyone who reads the comment.
But in the case of software, much of the fixed cost of software development is previous software, so the Free Software movement reduces even the fixed costs of software development.
Slashdot Mirror
And how would someone without physical access use the drive? Those CD's don't jump into the tray by themselves.
As I understand the current architecture, the admin is the owner of the drive on a shared machine, and it's also the admin's job to authenticate you as the owner of the disc.
You can only write to the media, not the drive. And why is it the admin's job to authenticate you as the owner of the disc? If you have physical access to the disc, you could destroy it very easily without burning it. Does the admin have to stop me from keying a CD without the owner's permission?
XP might run faster on machines with 256 MB of RAM. Obviously a huge concern with memory costing about $20 per GB.
Except that I don't have any free RAM slots.
If Microsoft ever ported to PowerPC or MIPS and made a real cluster solution where the head node behaved a lot like Terminal Server and the users could just drag-and-drop their input and output files through an Explorer-like interface and didn't need to provide scripts for the batch queueing system, the profs and students would probably demand it be used in place of the current reasonably mature stuff everyone is using. I shudder at how ignorant of computers the following generations of supercomputer users would be in that world.
And the probability of Microsoft's doing this? Seriously, what was the last version of NT that ran on non-x86 hardware? And wasn't that Alpha? What was the last release of Windows that ran on PowerPC or MIPS?
Hey, I like GNU emacs as much as the next guy, but is using Visual Studio really slower? :-)
Perhaps the OP did not mean that Microsoft was on a crusade against evil 9in the 80's (or that IBM is on such a crusade today). He might have agreed with Adam Smith in saying that Microsoft, by pursuing its own interests against IBM, promoted the public welfare better than if it had deliberately sought to promote the public welfare (unintended consequences).
So gay men never donate sperm? And lesbians never patronize sperm banks?
First, a non-Windows operating system would probably free them from the anti-trust agreements. After all, the old Windows line, that was the monopoly -- this new OS is competing with Windows.
Except that it is companies, not products, that can be monopolies. This is why Linux (as opposed to Canonical, Red Hat, Novell/SuSE, etc.) is immune to antitrust laws.
They could call it "doors"
That whirring sound you hear is Aldous Huxley and Jim Morrison spinning in their graves.
...where 'we' are offended that Microsoft makes calculating and obviously self-serving moves to court open-source applications to run on Windows.
But, we applaud the efforts of the FOSS community to make every effort to run Windows apps on *nix operating systems.
And I think both approaches are equally sel-serving. We understand and support it in FOSS, since we assume FOSS is the underdog, righting wrongs, giving us choice, and generally being a hero.
But FOSS also works to run *nix applications on Windows.
Yeah, well I don't get anywhere when I click a post using Konqueror 3.5.1.
So, no: the Spanish did not have anything to learn from the Mayans regarding number systems in the 1500s. They had already known it for 600 years! It was no longer an exciting new technology.
And you are correct only if the Mayans did not make further progress. What did they achieve in the intervening centuries?
(By comparison, calculus was found by Newton only 320 years ago.)
Not if Leibniz discovered it earlier! Now where did I put that flame-retardant suit?
The Mayans had a notation for zero centuries before the Hindus, and had a base-twenty numeral system (except for the twenties place, which went by eighteen). The Spanish (and we) might have learned something.
Oh sure, drag facts and logic into Slashdot.
Of course, if you were rammed by another ship, you'd have a greater chance of being killed or sustaining horrible injury if you were in the hull seat...but since a rammed ship usually sank, and the galley slaves were usually chained to their oars, the outcome would probably be much the same, in the end...
And why would a ship be rammed by another ship except during battle? And who used galley slaves on warships? It's hard to whip slaves to row fast enough, and having them chained makes them useless for repelling boarders.
The Hatch Act of 1939 prohibits Federal employees from certain political activities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939
Yeah, I think using M16s on journalists might have an effect.
We are Oceania. The question is, are we at war with East Asia, or Eurasia?
So if John Nash was a purposeless physicist, how did he get a Nobel Prize in economics?
the internet has merely created lots of partisan fiefdoms with an agenda and user venting. much of it rambling, illiterate, unhinged, and mostly useless. usless to readers, not those who vent: that's the psychological value of catharsis. that is, user generated content is usually more useful for whomever is commenting than anyone who reads the comment.
/. :-)
Thank goodness we don't have that on
Shouldn't you use valarray instead of vector?
Yes, at least according to this: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38673
But in the case of software, much of the fixed cost of software development is previous software, so the Free Software movement reduces even the fixed costs of software development.
Are you suggesting that Microsoft is more competent on briefing its managers on corporate policy than it is at writing software?
Yeah, when Linus triples the price of the kernel we'll come crawling back to Microsoft! :-)