Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian.
on
Fedora 19 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Personally, I've found yum to be much much slower than apt under normal/default usage. However, rpm has been MUCH MUCH easier to use than dpkg and it runs quite well. I LOVE the syntax of rpm. I also love apt and its syntax for what it does. If those two could get married, I'd be very happy.
Another one that's pretty darn awesome is emerge. I feel like they got it right almost all around, except that it wasn't made with binary packages in mind, so that part isn't as elegant (IMO).
You couldn't even read the second sentence I wrote?
IMO, the only downside to making each theater a faraday cage is the edge cases where some people need to be able to get a text, page, call, etc (ex. doctors, on call IT, etc). Put those folks in their own section, and cage everyone else off.
There. Problem solved. Anyone that feels they can't go without service for 2 hrs can deal with all the other inconsiderate folks. Oh, and if you're on call somewhere, then don't go, or at least sit in the back on an isle seat so you're not walking past everyone anytime you get a txt (which would be like putting them in this box, so this should work fine).
Right, which is why I said it'd be quite a feat to make normal-ish looking clothing that would do it. If you had some outfit that had a bunch of sticks attached that held up sheets all around you about 2 ft away, that would probably do the job (assuming you left some nice overlapping gaps so air would still flow through), but you'd look like a walking tent and stand out in any crowd, if you could even fit in a crowd.
Carrying a bottle of compressed coolant (ie. the heat exchange part done before you put it on, so the A/C heat output part is not a factor while wearing it) could allow you to wear tighter cloths and keep a cooling layer between you and the outer layer. Should be possible to mask ones heat signature nearly completely.
if there was one feature that would get me to consolidate to a single browser it would be the ability to run multiple instances as different personalities at the same time.
firefox -ProfileManager firefox -P
Maybe i'm reading your request wrong, but that sounds like exactly what you are looking for. I do wish it was integrated into the firefox browser window menu's themselves though (ie. it'd be nice to hit: File->New Profile Window->Profile Name).
That said, I end up doing the same thing but I divide them up a little differently based on "long running stuff that I'm ok with restarting all at once but don't want to be interrupted by other stuff - ex. gmail, calendar, etc in chrome, and actual browsing in FF).
I am fairly sure he means a decent sized HDTV a BD player and a good 5.1 or 7.1 sound system all which can be purchased for less than $1000.00
NOTE: I'm not the original poster
I went the projector route a few years back. Only got a 720p, but it also does 3d, cost about $450 - $500, and easily puts out a 120" image. You can get a 1080p famous name brand for ~$700 these days. Whole system still less than or around $1000, and plenty of screen real estate to make a living room feel theater-like. Downsides: * it won't last as long (I'll probably get 4-6 years out of the bulb) * It uses more power (I don't care) * Have to turn off/down room lights or it's washed out, though still watchable (this really isn't that bad... only sucks a little when eating dinner and watching tv) * my ceiling fan light used to get in the way - I removed it.
I'd recommend it to anyone with a similar budget. I ended up getting a screen too, but only so I could hang stuff on the wall and roll it up when not in use. The picture was damn near the same on a plain wall (even used it on a maroon painted wall, and color calibration did a great job dealing with it).
I don't mean this as bragging.. just saying that a home theater can be quite the theater like experience for about the same price that most people plop down on a big HDTV.
What theaters should really be doing is taking a queue from churches. Put a sound proof booth in the back for those that can't help but disturb the people around them.
This, plus physically block cell reception in the quiet area.
IMO, the only downside to making each theater a faraday cage is the edge cases where some people need to be able to get a text, page, call, etc (ex. doctors, on call IT, etc). Put those folks in their own section, and cage everyone else off.
I only go to the movies once every couple months, but I've seen and heard phone calls multiple times a year, and these are nice theaters (ie. not the dollar shows). I'm sure some areas/theaters/cities/chance visits/etc see it more or less frequently or not at all, but it does happen, and it happens too much. It makes for a very awkward and frustrating social situation. If it happens, and if there is a confrontation, it's not going to go nicely (99% of the time - my made up stat), and if no one says anything to that person, then their behavior won't be curbed at all, and some others may even thing it's ok or feel justified in doing the same. Add to it that the movies are often a date or group outing place, and it makes it all the more ugly as the rest of that group will often defend their own. We have the tech, and it's far more simple and cheap than a single projector - just use it.
FWIW, texting doesn't really bother me, as long as the ringer was on silent or a vibrate that wasn't annoying as hell. It's a little annoying, but not enough for me to bitch about it. I've also been there when someones phone rings, they hold it up, stare at it, and just let it ring and ring and ring. WTF? There's absolutely no excuse for that. They can just hit the volume key to turn it down, send it to voicemail, hook flash, or answer it, and all of those are less annoying.
I'm rambling on too long now, but there is also a precedence for this stuff - strip clubs. I haven't been in ages, but back when I did go and camera phones were becoming the norm, they started holding them at the door. I hated it, and I wouldn't go through with that for a movie, but I don't remember seeing anyone opt to leave (except to drop the phone off in their car). Say what you will about strip clubs, but once a place enforces the social norm (don't use your phone in a $place), they'll lose few people, and make far more people more comfortable. I'm *ok* with rules like that, as long as it isn't a civil/criminal law such as what happened with smoking, which *should* have been solved by the bars and restaurants (let people vote with their wallets).
In other words, physically or strictly blocking it based on company/showing policy will work just fine, but should not be made a law, and compromises such as a the noisy room/section would easily accommodate the edge cases.
problem is that "breathing" air still shows up on the IR cam.
I'm not disagreeing completely with your statement, but the mythbusters showed that simply holding up a bed sheet in front of you will hide you completely from a typical IR cam. Engineering normal-ish looking clothing that does the job would be quite a feat, but if we drop the simple convection limitation and add a small bottle of compressed coolant it'd be quite feasible.
The "https://www.facebook.com" in the URL didn't give it away?
Never click on links without looking at where they go, especially on slashdot. In addition, go to tinyurl.com, click on "Preview Feature", and enable preview. Change any tinyurl links to preview.tinyurl.com (the preview cookie doesn't always work).
Sony while advertising it had no intention of removing it. That makes it not a lie.
I disagree. They were sold on one set of features, and Sony later broke that feature group.
Bait and Switch... your definition is almost exactly what they did. They offered a software update that forced users to choose to have feature set A (stay on old firmware and use Other OS but lose new games, new blu rays, PSN) or feature set B (update and lose Other OS). Users had to choose to recover the sunk costs expended by their original purchase or, well, there was no or. It's really worse than bait and switch, because the switch happened after the purchase, acquisition, and use of the product. The user did have the option of attempting to return the device in an attempt to recoup their investment, but that doesn't count all the games that can't be returned, time put into it, etc etc.
Users were robbed. They were shafted. They were deceived. What phrase can we use to describe this that you or someone else won't pick apart and say it doesn't strictly apply? They weren't deceived because they didn't originally intend to deceive and had no intention of removing the feature, right? And yet the only reason they were able to pull this off is because the EULA says they can pretty much do whatever they want. It's a loophole to cover their asses, and they used it. Hiding the means to do this in an EULA (and then using it) is deceitful, and that's good enough for me to call it lying, for lack of a perfect term.
Yes. The kick back is that you get to use all the other wifi hotspots that are setup the same way by other customers for free (or, as part of your package). It actually seems like a decent little "give some, get a lot back" type of setup, except the part where they allow random users that aren't contributing hotspots to the system (but they do charge them and, at least hypothetically, that could be going towards maintenance/bandwidth/etc**).
** no, I'm not naive. This is the part they want to profit off of. The mutual agreement to share wifi networks could have been setup by anyone without a carriers involvement, or they could have set it up without an additional profit motivation, but that's not the case. This gives them a selling point; it keeps people from putting money into other networks pockets (keep them on comcast networks); it widens their grasp; it's a cheap grab at a potentially giant amount of wifi hotspots for nearly free; and it's a potential money maker on people that aren't participating; and later one, they can flip the switch and upcharge existing customers.
So. While Sony acted stupidly, anyone with any honesty that followed what happened knows that it was neither a lie nor was it "Bait and Switch".
How the hell is that not both lying and bait and switch!?!?
AFAICT, Other OS was an advertised feature right on the front of the box, and there was no mention that it was a temporary feature, nor was there any mention that they planned on disabling it. There was probably some "we can do anything we want with future system updates" type of verbage in the click through license, but all licenses have that, and no one with any honesty would claim that removing a widely advertised feature with an OS update is something that one should expect.
If they had instead removed the abilty to play PS3 games with an OS update that could not be rolled back, would you honestly be saying the same thing? What about blu ray movies? Since it's "primarily" a game machine (as the common argument goes), removing the ability to play blu rays would be on equal footing with removing Other OS, correct? Doing so would leave people with the choice of either: a) having a PS3 that only plays blu rays and no new games and all online aspects of existing games would cease to function b) having a PS3 that only plays games, but no longer plays blu rays
That's what it boiled down to, just with Other OS instead. That's deceitful behavior. It's bait and switch. The product isn't just one thing or the other. The product was sold as a sum of its features, and they neutered it.
An 8600? your standard for Macs is something from the pre-Jobs Stone Age? Get a Mac from this century and try again. I'll just consider this a flamebait post.
Ok, I know the GP was just a funny old repost, and your reply is either ignorant or meant to be ironic or some such, but... Steve Jobs was brought back on as CEO of Apple in 1997. The Power Macintosh 8600 was released in 1997, and the 300 Mhz version came out in 1998. Pre-Jobs stone age would be pre-Apple, unless you forgot to include Post-Jobs-Apple-First-Time and Pre-Jobs-Apple-Second-Time, and that would only apply if the GP said he had an 8500 (at the latest).
Just a couple big ones that don't support any Linux browsers: gotomeeting (http://community.gotomeeting.com/gotomeeting/topics/use_gotomeeting_online_on_linux) Microsoft office 365, lync, etc (some are partially supported, but voice/video meetings via lync are not)
I'm sure there's more, but the above suck because they're often foisted upon people by clients and/or the company you work for.
Oh, and many legal movie streaming sites, like: Netflix (http://movies.netflix.com/WiMessage?msg=51) vudu (https://vudu.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/319/kw/linux) Blockbuster (http://www.blockbusternow.com/)
The part I don't get is that someone else (a person) put their name on the copyright line (according to the summary). When doing work for a company, assuming the contract said all work created is theirs, then the company could put their name on it, but putting a different persons name on it seems pretty shady.
Personally, I'd have no problem defending the history of any piece of code I wrote. "Yeah, looks like they slapped someone elses name one it. All the more reason I'm glad I'm no longer working there. Ask me anything about it if you like... oh, and I have the revision history of it. If that's not enough for you to trust me, well.... " blah blah their paranoid and I don't want to work for someone quite that paranoid/untrusting. I'm glad I haven't had this problem yet, but I can't imagine it causing any issues with getting hired elsewhere.
It's not about managing it / being able to do it. It's about what was easiest and most reliable.
There are plenty of old OS's out there that don't get automatic TZ updates on the OS level. The olsen DB is freely available, but you have to download it and run a couple of commands to get your machine dependent tzdata built. Rather than leaving that up to the OS and sysadmins, they do the compile themselves and provide a tool to grab that copy and put it into your java install.
It's really not that bad of a way to go. It should also be incredibly easy to replace/rewrite (I'm not a java dev, but have worked with the tz data files directly many times).
One of the minor hurdles to making something that'll pull down the olsen db and compile to either the OS tzdata or to java's tz data is that the location of the olsen DB, while fairly standard, has and will change. It also used to be run by just one guy for ages, so if one makes a tool to update the local tzdata, they should really pull from a replica/mirror of the site (or go through the official OS repositories, like all good linux distros do).
Java doing it themselves avoided a lot of drama, and I've never heard anyone complain about it until now. Charging for that piece is stupid. At the least, they should provide an open version that takes any URL as a source option first (just my 2 cents on it)
I've been a supporter of X11 for some time, but only as a user. I know how to use it, and it's more or less the same as it was ages ago. That heritage will be difficult to break, especially the network transparency it has (which some claim it doesn't really have if you're using DRI2 etc, but you don't have to use those).
However, I've read enough of these rants from both camps to start looking at this differently.
Back when X.org started, I was surprised that it became the norm so quickly. It did so because it worked, could be dropped in, and had some improvements.
AFAICT, Wayland isn't done yet. As a user, we're judging too early. Right now, they really only need to be convincing toolkit, driver, and X developers to get that development on board.
Once Wayland is drop-in usable with all common apps, it won't matter to the user except for how it performs in their various tasks. Once it gets to the point that, for example, a Ubuntu user could "sudo apt-get install wayland-somethingorother && dpkg-reconfigure somethingorother" to try it out, then we'll see if it lives up to the hype.
There are plenty of things it's saying it'll do that sound good. The parts that worry me from my naive perspective will be answered when it's usable, such as: * apps having to do all the rendering. What about apps that don't do this now? Are we really going to force them through X, or will there be some middleware they can use, etc? * the mini x server solution... there was a problem noted due to the change in coordinate systems. How will that be solved? What other problems may we run into? etc. * the network transparency question. They haven't completed this yet. They may not ever do it (might be 3rd party). There's already some other attempts at this that show something can be done with it, but it's just not finalized yet. We just have to wait and see. * remoting apps, and how that will relate to interoperability. Sounds like I'll be able to pull an X app up on my local Wayland desktop and have it displayed using the built in mini x server (maybe). What about the reverse? How do you export a Wayland app to a client that is only running X.org?
Seems to me that those are all solvable. Will the solutions pan out? well.. seems like those are still a work in (early) progress.
It's far enough now that there's no point in asking, "why do this?" or "why not fix X?" etc.. they're doing it, period. I'm done reading these things now, cause it's just a matter of "will it succeed?" (and it won't unless all the stuff people have been bitching about are solved, so who cares for now?)
Just saying they can't doesn't make it so. It doesn't make GP true either, but there are so few details/parameters here that I'm sure it's absolutely true for some people with some vehicle models.
My own story is that I unlocked three different cars with just a coat hanger when I was only 13 or so and it only took me 15-20 minutes. I was a complete noob to it and was just helping a friend who locked themselves out, but was able to do it. One of those times, I picked a set of keys up off the seat with a coat hanger and pulled them through the window (damaging the lining... keys were locked in the old beat up pick up).
I'm sure someone who knew what they were doing with the right tools can pop open an older car/truck in moments, and it wouldn't surprise me if a pro could do most new cars almost as quickly (the tennis ball trick does work on a lot of models too).
Quoted from the article : "On any single monitor, more than two applications can be run simultaneously. Instead of Windows 8's fixed split, where one application gets 320 pixels and the other application gets the rest, the division between apps will be variable. It'll also be possible to have multiple windows from a single app so that, for example, two browser windows can be opened side-by-side"
Nothing more to say !
Nothing more except, "Yee gads! I had no idea Windows 8 metro interface was so bad!"
What's next for 8.2? Maybe introducing overlapping windows? More than two windows at a time?
FWIW, I'm not looking for a solution or work around. I'm sure there's some way to get it to do stuff that Windows was doing since 3.1. I'm just surprised these are being touted as new features/improvements to the latest and greatest interface they have.
Rather than being assholes like Apple, perhaps you could make this configurable in some fashion? Whatever the hell "this" is?
As long as he is willing to deal with any support nightmares that come with that decision.
He doesn't have to deal with it. Do it like "about:config" in firefox, and have a "restore defaults" button. If they break things because they said, "I know what I'm doing and want to be able to break things", and then things break, you just tell them they shouldn't have broke stuff... please see your local backup administrator:-)
In the Apple case, a simple checkbox burried in an advanced settings area that enabled other software sources would work fine. They could even treat them like apt sources - others could dsitribute their public signing keys in the apple store, and you'd have to enable that option to see those packages, and could then enable other stores. Anything installed from other stores would be unsupported. Any device with stuff installed from other stores could be unsupported (except for complete wipe/restore). Apple didn't do the walled garden to make it easy for users or support; they did it for control, money, power, etc.
It's absolutely far too ambiguous. If he has to do it by analogy because of NDA concerns he could have at least done it with an imaginary software feature that we could consider properly. But to compare it with the existence of a physical machine. Pointless.
Agreed. However, going with the example, I'd just require a flying car test and license for any user that gets one. They get it free once they have that.
In the software realm, this could be exactly the same, where they have to pass a test or buy a license or etc. OR, it could just be a checkbox on the users profile that enables the feature, which is turned off by default. OR, it could be an optional feature per-user (or per-group, or per-acl, etc) that must be enabled by an admin (ie. a permissioning issue you leave up to some other group to manage, and put the onus of training on them).
In addition to that, you can also add a confirmation window when they do the action, and a checkbox on it to turn off that warning in the future (like is common with many things out there).
Doesn't seem like a hard problem at all... maybe more details would reveal why existing common solutions don't apply.
But there is no good reason to switch besides hypothetical future situations. If one is already on either product, just stay there until something happens... so long as they are both still compatible.
The performance issues noted in the article doesn't make any sense to me. From the article:
One common result of not coding these correctly is you’ll start out seeing an improvement in the first 8 or 16 threads, and after that you won’t get nearly the hoped-for improvement. When you see that problem, it means there’s likely trouble with the algorithms. (And this will be the case with either hyperthreads or hardware threads.) That’s what we’re seeing here with the MySQL benchmarks. To me, that’s an indication of trouble with MySQL scaling, and should be a cause for concern. MariaDB also has a slight problem in the same benchmark as the performance goes down slightly, but only barely; I would surmise that this isn’t a problem with the parallel algorithms.
...but the graph at the top of the article does NOT show that! What benchmark is he referring to? The one at the top of the article shows MySQL 5.5.29 performing almost exactly the same as both versions of MariaDB that were tested. MySQL 5.6.10 performed a little different, which is because... well, we don't know due to lack of information there (he even says it may not have been compiled correctly, and a few other possible reasons).
If MariaDB does perform noticably better on many core machines (> 32), I'd be interested to know that, and that could be a justifiable reason to consider it.Even so, why go through that effort? And if you're running >32 cores on your DB, chances are it's a large DB and would take a fair bit of time to smoothly cut over... not really worth it IMO.
If ANYONE hands off the package to the USPS before arrival at Texarkana, the shipment is going to be one to three days late.
Ditto here. I'm giving up on the free shipping from now on, so long as I can pick my shipper. I don't want SmartPost (which is an oxymoron). In theory, it should work well (USPS already goes by every house every weekday... let them handle local delivery), but I have yet to see it work in practice. It's significantly slower every time, much more difficult to track, and I've had multiple packages get returned simply because they didn't actually drop it off when they were here (and I was home, and signed the card to leave the next day, and spoke to the postman the following day, etc)... by the time I knew it wouldn't be delivered, it was no longer at the post office and was already on its way back to newegg - and WHAM, more restocking fees.
Lately, I've noticed both newegg and amazon sometimes limit the shipping options or don't say what type of shipment they'll use. That sucks more than anything, because there's no obvious way to vote with my wallet, so to speak.
While I think that the LibreOffice folks had some valid complaints, there has been an awful lot more stink made about it than was necessary. They could have stated their needs/complaints, proposed their forking plans should certain criteria not be met, and just went on their way when that didn't happen. Many of the members did just that, and didn't raise a big stink.
However, it's not helping anything to say that "Oracle... decided to be as uncooperative as possible". They just took over a very large and wide array of software and hardware. OOo didn't get the attention that some people wanted - fine. I'm not claiming Oracle did the best they could, but they weren't absolutely evil with it either.
"Oracle decided to dispense with it and carelessly tossed it aside to Apache"... don't be such a drama queen. IMO, the Apache Foundation is an amazing place, and is just about the ideal place for OOo to end up (assuming Oracle didn't want to manage it anymore). The could have carelessly tossed it aside to Microsoft or to Novel or Miguel de Icaza etc. The Apache Foundation seems like a pretty well thought out solution. The LibreOffice guys are the ones that forked... if they want to join back in, then can work out their licensing issues and do so (or just rewrite what's needed).
The good news for LibreOffice is that they can still pull in stuff from OOo (I think), so not all is lost.
Because programs are used to decode/encode the name.
...except that isn't the problem.
They are using an incremental number on the RHS (right hand side) of the "u" seperator, and that number may represent either a critial patch update or it might be a new minor version. The problem arrises when they attempt to associate FUTURE releases with stuff in bugtrackers and their ilk. They could have more CPU releases than normal releases, making the CPU minor release number much higher than the planned normal release, causing a bunch of confusion.
Their solution, IMO, blows. But it's not because of the format of the version string.
IMO, the easy solution would be to treat it as a 3 part number, and make the current minor version part MUCH larger. So, first increase the minor version:
5u40 becomes 5u00040000
That can be interpretted as: 5.00040.000
Then it's easy. Middle part is the normal incremental releases. Last 3 digit are for CPU releases on that incremental. FWIW, this provides FAR more room for CPU releases than this scheme they just announced, and it's very clear and easy to read. Most languages aslo support some character to allow the user to format the number within the codebase (in Perl, it could be written as 5.00040_000 and perl will just ignore the _), so it would still be crystal clear when written as well.
Anyway... this is NOT the same as Y2K, nor as user agent strings, and doesn't have anything to do with programs expecting the version string to be a specific format, except for the fact that they can't change the current format. How they plan to work within that limitation and the issues they have encounted is the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I've found yum to be much much slower than apt under normal/default usage.
However, rpm has been MUCH MUCH easier to use than dpkg and it runs quite well. I LOVE the syntax of rpm. I also love apt and its syntax for what it does. If those two could get married, I'd be very happy.
Another one that's pretty darn awesome is emerge. I feel like they got it right almost all around, except that it wasn't made with binary packages in mind, so that part isn't as elegant (IMO).
You couldn't even read the second sentence I wrote?
IMO, the only downside to making each theater a faraday cage is the edge cases where some people need to be able to get a text, page, call, etc (ex. doctors, on call IT, etc). Put those folks in their own section, and cage everyone else off.
There. Problem solved. Anyone that feels they can't go without service for 2 hrs can deal with all the other inconsiderate folks. Oh, and if you're on call somewhere, then don't go, or at least sit in the back on an isle seat so you're not walking past everyone anytime you get a txt (which would be like putting them in this box, so this should work fine).
Right, which is why I said it'd be quite a feat to make normal-ish looking clothing that would do it. If you had some outfit that had a bunch of sticks attached that held up sheets all around you about 2 ft away, that would probably do the job (assuming you left some nice overlapping gaps so air would still flow through), but you'd look like a walking tent and stand out in any crowd, if you could even fit in a crowd.
Carrying a bottle of compressed coolant (ie. the heat exchange part done before you put it on, so the A/C heat output part is not a factor while wearing it) could allow you to wear tighter cloths and keep a cooling layer between you and the outer layer. Should be possible to mask ones heat signature nearly completely.
if there was one feature that would get me to consolidate to a single browser it would be the ability to run multiple instances as different personalities at the same time.
firefox -ProfileManager
firefox -P
Maybe i'm reading your request wrong, but that sounds like exactly what you are looking for. I do wish it was integrated into the firefox browser window menu's themselves though (ie. it'd be nice to hit: File->New Profile Window->Profile Name).
That said, I end up doing the same thing but I divide them up a little differently based on "long running stuff that I'm ok with restarting all at once but don't want to be interrupted by other stuff - ex. gmail, calendar, etc in chrome, and actual browsing in FF).
I am fairly sure he means a decent sized HDTV a BD player and a good 5.1 or 7.1 sound system all which can be purchased for less than $1000.00
NOTE: I'm not the original poster
I went the projector route a few years back. Only got a 720p, but it also does 3d, cost about $450 - $500, and easily puts out a 120" image. You can get a 1080p famous name brand for ~$700 these days. Whole system still less than or around $1000, and plenty of screen real estate to make a living room feel theater-like. Downsides:
* it won't last as long (I'll probably get 4-6 years out of the bulb)
* It uses more power (I don't care)
* Have to turn off/down room lights or it's washed out, though still watchable (this really isn't that bad... only sucks a little when eating dinner and watching tv)
* my ceiling fan light used to get in the way - I removed it.
I'd recommend it to anyone with a similar budget. I ended up getting a screen too, but only so I could hang stuff on the wall and roll it up when not in use. The picture was damn near the same on a plain wall (even used it on a maroon painted wall, and color calibration did a great job dealing with it).
I don't mean this as bragging.. just saying that a home theater can be quite the theater like experience for about the same price that most people plop down on a big HDTV.
What theaters should really be doing is taking a queue from churches. Put a sound proof booth in the back for those that can't help but disturb the people around them.
This, plus physically block cell reception in the quiet area.
IMO, the only downside to making each theater a faraday cage is the edge cases where some people need to be able to get a text, page, call, etc (ex. doctors, on call IT, etc). Put those folks in their own section, and cage everyone else off.
I only go to the movies once every couple months, but I've seen and heard phone calls multiple times a year, and these are nice theaters (ie. not the dollar shows). I'm sure some areas/theaters/cities/chance visits/etc see it more or less frequently or not at all, but it does happen, and it happens too much. It makes for a very awkward and frustrating social situation. If it happens, and if there is a confrontation, it's not going to go nicely (99% of the time - my made up stat), and if no one says anything to that person, then their behavior won't be curbed at all, and some others may even thing it's ok or feel justified in doing the same. Add to it that the movies are often a date or group outing place, and it makes it all the more ugly as the rest of that group will often defend their own. We have the tech, and it's far more simple and cheap than a single projector - just use it.
FWIW, texting doesn't really bother me, as long as the ringer was on silent or a vibrate that wasn't annoying as hell. It's a little annoying, but not enough for me to bitch about it. I've also been there when someones phone rings, they hold it up, stare at it, and just let it ring and ring and ring. WTF? There's absolutely no excuse for that. They can just hit the volume key to turn it down, send it to voicemail, hook flash, or answer it, and all of those are less annoying.
I'm rambling on too long now, but there is also a precedence for this stuff - strip clubs. I haven't been in ages, but back when I did go and camera phones were becoming the norm, they started holding them at the door. I hated it, and I wouldn't go through with that for a movie, but I don't remember seeing anyone opt to leave (except to drop the phone off in their car). Say what you will about strip clubs, but once a place enforces the social norm (don't use your phone in a $place), they'll lose few people, and make far more people more comfortable. I'm *ok* with rules like that, as long as it isn't a civil/criminal law such as what happened with smoking, which *should* have been solved by the bars and restaurants (let people vote with their wallets).
In other words, physically or strictly blocking it based on company/showing policy will work just fine, but should not be made a law, and compromises such as a the noisy room/section would easily accommodate the edge cases.
problem is that "breathing" air still shows up on the IR cam.
I'm not disagreeing completely with your statement, but the mythbusters showed that simply holding up a bed sheet in front of you will hide you completely from a typical IR cam. Engineering normal-ish looking clothing that does the job would be quite a feat, but if we drop the simple convection limitation and add a small bottle of compressed coolant it'd be quite feasible.
Can we label these links better?
The "https://www.facebook.com" in the URL didn't give it away?
Never click on links without looking at where they go, especially on slashdot.
In addition, go to tinyurl.com, click on "Preview Feature", and enable preview. Change any tinyurl links to preview.tinyurl.com (the preview cookie doesn't always work).
Sony while advertising it had no intention of removing it.
That makes it not a lie.
I disagree. They were sold on one set of features, and Sony later broke that feature group.
Bait and Switch... your definition is almost exactly what they did. They offered a software update that forced users to choose to have feature set A (stay on old firmware and use Other OS but lose new games, new blu rays, PSN) or feature set B (update and lose Other OS). Users had to choose to recover the sunk costs expended by their original purchase or, well, there was no or. It's really worse than bait and switch, because the switch happened after the purchase, acquisition, and use of the product. The user did have the option of attempting to return the device in an attempt to recoup their investment, but that doesn't count all the games that can't be returned, time put into it, etc etc.
Users were robbed. They were shafted. They were deceived. What phrase can we use to describe this that you or someone else won't pick apart and say it doesn't strictly apply?
They weren't deceived because they didn't originally intend to deceive and had no intention of removing the feature, right? And yet the only reason they were able to pull this off is because the EULA says they can pretty much do whatever they want. It's a loophole to cover their asses, and they used it. Hiding the means to do this in an EULA (and then using it) is deceitful, and that's good enough for me to call it lying, for lack of a perfect term.
So the customers get a kick back?
Yes. The kick back is that you get to use all the other wifi hotspots that are setup the same way by other customers for free (or, as part of your package). It actually seems like a decent little "give some, get a lot back" type of setup, except the part where they allow random users that aren't contributing hotspots to the system (but they do charge them and, at least hypothetically, that could be going towards maintenance/bandwidth/etc**).
** no, I'm not naive. This is the part they want to profit off of. The mutual agreement to share wifi networks could have been setup by anyone without a carriers involvement, or they could have set it up without an additional profit motivation, but that's not the case. This gives them a selling point; it keeps people from putting money into other networks pockets (keep them on comcast networks); it widens their grasp; it's a cheap grab at a potentially giant amount of wifi hotspots for nearly free; and it's a potential money maker on people that aren't participating; and later one, they can flip the switch and upcharge existing customers.
So. While Sony acted stupidly, anyone with any honesty that followed what happened knows that it was neither a lie nor was it "Bait and Switch".
How the hell is that not both lying and bait and switch!?!?
AFAICT, Other OS was an advertised feature right on the front of the box, and there was no mention that it was a temporary feature, nor was there any mention that they planned on disabling it. There was probably some "we can do anything we want with future system updates" type of verbage in the click through license, but all licenses have that, and no one with any honesty would claim that removing a widely advertised feature with an OS update is something that one should expect.
If they had instead removed the abilty to play PS3 games with an OS update that could not be rolled back, would you honestly be saying the same thing? What about blu ray movies? Since it's "primarily" a game machine (as the common argument goes), removing the ability to play blu rays would be on equal footing with removing Other OS, correct? Doing so would leave people with the choice of either:
a) having a PS3 that only plays blu rays and no new games and all online aspects of existing games would cease to function
b) having a PS3 that only plays games, but no longer plays blu rays
That's what it boiled down to, just with Other OS instead. That's deceitful behavior. It's bait and switch. The product isn't just one thing or the other. The product was sold as a sum of its features, and they neutered it.
An 8600? your standard for Macs is something from the pre-Jobs Stone Age? Get a Mac from this century and try again. I'll just consider this a flamebait post.
Ok, I know the GP was just a funny old repost, and your reply is either ignorant or meant to be ironic or some such, but...
Steve Jobs was brought back on as CEO of Apple in 1997.
The Power Macintosh 8600 was released in 1997, and the 300 Mhz version came out in 1998.
Pre-Jobs stone age would be pre-Apple, unless you forgot to include Post-Jobs-Apple-First-Time and Pre-Jobs-Apple-Second-Time, and that would only apply if the GP said he had an 8500 (at the latest).
Just a couple big ones that don't support any Linux browsers:
gotomeeting (http://community.gotomeeting.com/gotomeeting/topics/use_gotomeeting_online_on_linux)
Microsoft office 365, lync, etc (some are partially supported, but voice/video meetings via lync are not)
I'm sure there's more, but the above suck because they're often foisted upon people by clients and/or the company you work for.
Oh, and many legal movie streaming sites, like:
Netflix (http://movies.netflix.com/WiMessage?msg=51)
vudu (https://vudu.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/319/kw/linux)
Blockbuster (http://www.blockbusternow.com/)
The part I don't get is that someone else (a person) put their name on the copyright line (according to the summary).
When doing work for a company, assuming the contract said all work created is theirs, then the company could put their name on it, but putting a different persons name on it seems pretty shady.
Personally, I'd have no problem defending the history of any piece of code I wrote. "Yeah, looks like they slapped someone elses name one it. All the more reason I'm glad I'm no longer working there. Ask me anything about it if you like... oh, and I have the revision history of it. If that's not enough for you to trust me, well.... " blah blah their paranoid and I don't want to work for someone quite that paranoid/untrusting. I'm glad I haven't had this problem yet, but I can't imagine it causing any issues with getting hired elsewhere.
It's not about managing it / being able to do it. It's about what was easiest and most reliable.
There are plenty of old OS's out there that don't get automatic TZ updates on the OS level. The olsen DB is freely available, but you have to download it and run a couple of commands to get your machine dependent tzdata built. Rather than leaving that up to the OS and sysadmins, they do the compile themselves and provide a tool to grab that copy and put it into your java install.
It's really not that bad of a way to go. It should also be incredibly easy to replace/rewrite (I'm not a java dev, but have worked with the tz data files directly many times).
One of the minor hurdles to making something that'll pull down the olsen db and compile to either the OS tzdata or to java's tz data is that the location of the olsen DB, while fairly standard, has and will change. It also used to be run by just one guy for ages, so if one makes a tool to update the local tzdata, they should really pull from a replica/mirror of the site (or go through the official OS repositories, like all good linux distros do).
Java doing it themselves avoided a lot of drama, and I've never heard anyone complain about it until now. Charging for that piece is stupid. At the least, they should provide an open version that takes any URL as a source option first (just my 2 cents on it)
I've been a supporter of X11 for some time, but only as a user. I know how to use it, and it's more or less the same as it was ages ago. That heritage will be difficult to break, especially the network transparency it has (which some claim it doesn't really have if you're using DRI2 etc, but you don't have to use those).
However, I've read enough of these rants from both camps to start looking at this differently.
Back when X.org started, I was surprised that it became the norm so quickly. It did so because it worked, could be dropped in, and had some improvements.
AFAICT, Wayland isn't done yet. As a user, we're judging too early. Right now, they really only need to be convincing toolkit, driver, and X developers to get that development on board.
Once Wayland is drop-in usable with all common apps, it won't matter to the user except for how it performs in their various tasks. Once it gets to the point that, for example, a Ubuntu user could "sudo apt-get install wayland-somethingorother && dpkg-reconfigure somethingorother" to try it out, then we'll see if it lives up to the hype.
There are plenty of things it's saying it'll do that sound good. The parts that worry me from my naive perspective will be answered when it's usable, such as:
* apps having to do all the rendering. What about apps that don't do this now? Are we really going to force them through X, or will there be some middleware they can use, etc?
* the mini x server solution... there was a problem noted due to the change in coordinate systems. How will that be solved? What other problems may we run into? etc.
* the network transparency question. They haven't completed this yet. They may not ever do it (might be 3rd party). There's already some other attempts at this that show something can be done with it, but it's just not finalized yet. We just have to wait and see.
* remoting apps, and how that will relate to interoperability. Sounds like I'll be able to pull an X app up on my local Wayland desktop and have it displayed using the built in mini x server (maybe). What about the reverse? How do you export a Wayland app to a client that is only running X.org?
Seems to me that those are all solvable. Will the solutions pan out? well.. seems like those are still a work in (early) progress.
It's far enough now that there's no point in asking, "why do this?" or "why not fix X?" etc.. they're doing it, period. I'm done reading these things now, cause it's just a matter of "will it succeed?" (and it won't unless all the stuff people have been bitching about are solved, so who cares for now?)
Just saying they can't doesn't make it so. It doesn't make GP true either, but there are so few details/parameters here that I'm sure it's absolutely true for some people with some vehicle models.
My own story is that I unlocked three different cars with just a coat hanger when I was only 13 or so and it only took me 15-20 minutes. I was a complete noob to it and was just helping a friend who locked themselves out, but was able to do it. One of those times, I picked a set of keys up off the seat with a coat hanger and pulled them through the window (damaging the lining... keys were locked in the old beat up pick up).
I'm sure someone who knew what they were doing with the right tools can pop open an older car/truck in moments, and it wouldn't surprise me if a pro could do most new cars almost as quickly (the tennis ball trick does work on a lot of models too).
Quoted from the article : "On any single monitor, more than two applications can be run simultaneously. Instead of Windows 8's fixed split, where one application gets 320 pixels and the other application gets the rest, the division between apps will be variable. It'll also be possible to have multiple windows from a single app so that, for example, two browser windows can be opened side-by-side"
Nothing more to say !
Nothing more except, "Yee gads! I had no idea Windows 8 metro interface was so bad!"
What's next for 8.2? Maybe introducing overlapping windows? More than two windows at a time?
FWIW, I'm not looking for a solution or work around. I'm sure there's some way to get it to do stuff that Windows was doing since 3.1. I'm just surprised these are being touted as new features/improvements to the latest and greatest interface they have.
Rather than being assholes like Apple, perhaps you could make this configurable in some fashion? Whatever the hell "this" is?
As long as he is willing to deal with any support nightmares that come with that decision.
He doesn't have to deal with it. Do it like "about:config" in firefox, and have a "restore defaults" button. If they break things because they said, "I know what I'm doing and want to be able to break things", and then things break, you just tell them they shouldn't have broke stuff... please see your local backup administrator :-)
In the Apple case, a simple checkbox burried in an advanced settings area that enabled other software sources would work fine. They could even treat them like apt sources - others could dsitribute their public signing keys in the apple store, and you'd have to enable that option to see those packages, and could then enable other stores. Anything installed from other stores would be unsupported. Any device with stuff installed from other stores could be unsupported (except for complete wipe/restore). Apple didn't do the walled garden to make it easy for users or support; they did it for control, money, power, etc.
It's absolutely far too ambiguous. If he has to do it by analogy because of NDA concerns he could have at least done it with an imaginary software feature that we could consider properly. But to compare it with the existence of a physical machine. Pointless.
Agreed. However, going with the example, I'd just require a flying car test and license for any user that gets one. They get it free once they have that.
In the software realm, this could be exactly the same, where they have to pass a test or buy a license or etc.
OR, it could just be a checkbox on the users profile that enables the feature, which is turned off by default.
OR, it could be an optional feature per-user (or per-group, or per-acl, etc) that must be enabled by an admin (ie. a permissioning issue you leave up to some other group to manage, and put the onus of training on them).
In addition to that, you can also add a confirmation window when they do the action, and a checkbox on it to turn off that warning in the future (like is common with many things out there).
Doesn't seem like a hard problem at all... maybe more details would reveal why existing common solutions don't apply.
But there is no good reason to switch besides hypothetical future situations. If one is already on either product, just stay there until something happens... so long as they are both still compatible.
The performance issues noted in the article doesn't make any sense to me. From the article:
One common result of not coding these correctly is you’ll start out seeing an improvement in the first 8 or 16 threads, and after that you won’t get nearly the hoped-for improvement. When you see that problem, it means there’s likely trouble with the algorithms. (And this will be the case with either hyperthreads or hardware threads.) That’s what we’re seeing here with the MySQL benchmarks. To me, that’s an indication of trouble with MySQL scaling, and should be a cause for concern. MariaDB also has a slight problem in the same benchmark as the performance goes down slightly, but only barely; I would surmise that this isn’t a problem with the parallel algorithms.
...but the graph at the top of the article does NOT show that! What benchmark is he referring to? The one at the top of the article shows MySQL 5.5.29 performing almost exactly the same as both versions of MariaDB that were tested. MySQL 5.6.10 performed a little different, which is because... well, we don't know due to lack of information there (he even says it may not have been compiled correctly, and a few other possible reasons).
If MariaDB does perform noticably better on many core machines (> 32), I'd be interested to know that, and that could be a justifiable reason to consider it.Even so, why go through that effort? And if you're running >32 cores on your DB, chances are it's a large DB and would take a fair bit of time to smoothly cut over... not really worth it IMO.
...been superseded by a much more informative comparison—one that gave the “opposite” result—before it ever became public.
Sounds eerily familiar to every discussion of quantum mechanics I've heard! ("opposite" result; gave it before even knew it existed; etc).
If ANYONE hands off the package to the USPS before arrival at Texarkana, the shipment is going to be one to three days late.
Ditto here. I'm giving up on the free shipping from now on, so long as I can pick my shipper. I don't want SmartPost (which is an oxymoron). In theory, it should work well (USPS already goes by every house every weekday... let them handle local delivery), but I have yet to see it work in practice. It's significantly slower every time, much more difficult to track, and I've had multiple packages get returned simply because they didn't actually drop it off when they were here (and I was home, and signed the card to leave the next day, and spoke to the postman the following day, etc)... by the time I knew it wouldn't be delivered, it was no longer at the post office and was already on its way back to newegg - and WHAM, more restocking fees.
Lately, I've noticed both newegg and amazon sometimes limit the shipping options or don't say what type of shipment they'll use. That sucks more than anything, because there's no obvious way to vote with my wallet, so to speak.
While I think that the LibreOffice folks had some valid complaints, there has been an awful lot more stink made about it than was necessary. They could have stated their needs/complaints, proposed their forking plans should certain criteria not be met, and just went on their way when that didn't happen. Many of the members did just that, and didn't raise a big stink.
However, it's not helping anything to say that "Oracle ... decided to be as uncooperative as possible". They just took over a very large and wide array of software and hardware. OOo didn't get the attention that some people wanted - fine. I'm not claiming Oracle did the best they could, but they weren't absolutely evil with it either.
"Oracle decided to dispense with it and carelessly tossed it aside to Apache"... don't be such a drama queen. IMO, the Apache Foundation is an amazing place, and is just about the ideal place for OOo to end up (assuming Oracle didn't want to manage it anymore). The could have carelessly tossed it aside to Microsoft or to Novel or Miguel de Icaza etc. The Apache Foundation seems like a pretty well thought out solution. The LibreOffice guys are the ones that forked... if they want to join back in, then can work out their licensing issues and do so (or just rewrite what's needed).
The good news for LibreOffice is that they can still pull in stuff from OOo (I think), so not all is lost.
Because programs are used to decode/encode the name.
...except that isn't the problem.
They are using an incremental number on the RHS (right hand side) of the "u" seperator, and that number may represent either a critial patch update or it might be a new minor version. The problem arrises when they attempt to associate FUTURE releases with stuff in bugtrackers and their ilk. They could have more CPU releases than normal releases, making the CPU minor release number much higher than the planned normal release, causing a bunch of confusion.
Their solution, IMO, blows. But it's not because of the format of the version string.
IMO, the easy solution would be to treat it as a 3 part number, and make the current minor version part MUCH larger. So, first increase the minor version:
5u40 becomes 5u00040000
That can be interpretted as: 5.00040.000
Then it's easy. Middle part is the normal incremental releases. Last 3 digit are for CPU releases on that incremental. FWIW, this provides FAR more room for CPU releases than this scheme they just announced, and it's very clear and easy to read. Most languages aslo support some character to allow the user to format the number within the codebase (in Perl, it could be written as 5.00040_000 and perl will just ignore the _), so it would still be crystal clear when written as well.
Anyway... this is NOT the same as Y2K, nor as user agent strings, and doesn't have anything to do with programs expecting the version string to be a specific format, except for the fact that they can't change the current format. How they plan to work within that limitation and the issues they have encounted is the problem.