well, the iPod video functionality is, in all respects, meant as an incremental change (5G? 6G?) from previous "plain vanilla" iPods, whereas the nano is a brand new (1G) product in the iPod line. I actually think the GP's comment was pretty reasonable in its assessment (if slighty swayed pro-apple)
well, from the readers' point of view, they still passed a biased piece of "news", and therefore they are biased. It is quite proper for them to apologize to not actually read into the article enough to understand the bias and to mark the article as potentially biased
The only thing broken in the security model you speak of is in the application layer. If software was actually written in such a way that it didn't require admin privileges, all would work quite well (minus bugs, but those happen to everyone). In fact, since Windows incorporates ACLs by default, one could even say the security model in windows is better than that of linux (by default -- no mainstream distro I know of configures ACLs by default). However, I do believe the bazaar model to be superior, and I do believe that linux is, as an environment, safer. But not because of the underlying kernel. It's safer because a competent administration system that doesn't require you to login as root has been put into place, it's because it promotes proper password/account usage.
say what?
Audigy 2? check.
SATA HDD? check.
USB? never heard of any problems.
So what, I did choose an nVidia card on purpose (approx. equal offerings, one works better in my selected OS? easy pick).
I installed Ubuntu, and the only trouble I had with all those "difficult components" was that the soundcard was muted by default. Yay. And I hear the ATi drivers are looking decent this time of the year
Hate to be a nag, but 3.14159 = 314159/100000, and therefore a rational number! Now, if you had said that we picked up pi users this week (or, for bonus style points, i users -- imaginary users indeed!) I'd have agreed:)
no. openSSH is BSD-licensed. If you need further information regarding the issue of using BSD-licensed code in commercial, closed source software, ask the Apple Computers legal department. They should be able to explain it to you.
my (admitedly somewhat limited) experience with the apple iCandy (couldn't resist) is that it actually works. They can publicize their eye candy all they want, because that's what makes exposé possible. And every single person I know with a mac has incorporated it into their normal usage patterns to reach a much smoother multi-tasking experience than I have right now, either with windows or with linux, even though I'm much more of a techie than most of them. Though I haven't really read all that much into avalon/aero glass/whatever, the only thing that seems to be said about the UI changes is that it looks good. Yay. If it were to offer new features, I'd appreciate it. But just looking good? My gnome desktop looks good enough in its simplicity. All I want is something that does for me what exposé does for my friends, and I haven't seen MS move that way.
the main point there is that LINUX is actually something vaguely like a highly organized and disciplined kernel. GNOME is an organized thing. X is another. You don't do a Linux nightly build. You do a kernel nightly, a whatever nightly and integrate the completely independent pieces of software to make a distro. The idea I get from the article is that windows development derives profit neither from the completely separate development development process enjoyed by the components of a full fledged gnu/linux system (which allows for very independent, my bugs don't affect your code sort of development), nor the tightly controlled process supposedly enjoyed by each individual small project (which would make uncoordinated efforts more complicated).
I apologize for the crap formatting. I forget that/. doesn't handle textbox line breaks as it should... **knocks himself in the head for not using the preview button**
Here's a properly formatted post:
I'd try and drop that funny stuff you're smoking, if I were you.
Let's use the example of Ubuntu Linux, which is a rather popular distribution at the moment.
1. Though it has some problems with manually adding shortcuts to the menu right now (which is, anyway, the sort of thing 99.9% of users don't actually do in windows), all software that you install in Ubuntu that's supposed to run in a graphical environment adds a shortcut to it in the applications menu, just like windows software does.
On a side note, windows doesn't have single click applications for many of the tasks involved in my day to day use of my computer. In fact, nor does linux. But linux gives me a powerful shell with which I can do those things. Before you bitch about the shell, ask yourself: "is it better to not be able to do something, or to have a moderately complex way of doing something?"
2. Software installation for Ubuntu is a simple process: open synaptic, select the program you want from a list (or search for it by description or name) and click apply. It is automatically downloaded from the internet and installed, without asking any more questions. It doesn't ask where to install it, even, thus not requiring the users to make decisions about their filesystem structure.
While there is software that falls outside the repositories that allow this, this software is usually highly specialized and requires the user to have a greater degree of technical knowledge to even use. Those people are probably not scared or disturbed by writing two or three commands in a shell. The sole exception to this seems to be linux ports of windows games, which tend to have crap installers. But that is not the OS's fault, but rather the developers'
3. In linux you CAN recompile the kernel. But you don't have to. Just chose, or have suggested to you, a product that doesn't require it. Once again, in Ubuntu I'm yet to have to compile anything at all except university projects. And I've been using it almost exclusively since february.
4. Ubuntu software updates are literally 2-3 clicks away from installation, when needed. Single- (or double-, can't remember which right now) click the updates icon when it appears in the notification area (mostly the same as the windows system tray), click apply. That's literally 2 or 3 clicks (depending on single- or double-click). You can, of course, actually read what you are installing, and why (you have the changelog). But you don't have to. This update system also updates all software installed through the repositories (including everytyhing from the base system and office tools to games, and multimedia stuff like 3D modelers, renderers and much more).
5. Ubuntu doesn't require package selection. It allows it, but you can simply install a base system (which includes an office suite -- Open Office -- and much much more software)
6. I do confess that I had to manually unmute the sound card channels (the sound card was properly installed, but muted) in my Ubuntu installation. This is something that irks me to no end. But on the other hand, I didn't have to separately install a processor driver (had never heard of those 'til then) and configure my desktop to SAVE BATTERY POWER in order to have it throttle the processor speed and voltage like I did in windows. Nor does Ubuntu crash with a BSOD everytime I use my motherboard's primary network adapter (nForce4 NIC) in conjunction with bit torrent.
7. Well, you just said something curious: You can run Windows stuff on Linux. I'm yet to see viceversa. This said, I do agree that games in Linux are still a bit weak (especially for those of us that don't actually enjoy FPSs all that much), but I do find that I can play the games that matter the most in Linux. If not, I can reboot into
I'd try and drop that funny stuff you're smoking, if I were you. Let's use the example of Ubuntu Linux, which is a rather popular distribution at the moment.
1. Though it has some problems with manually adding shortcuts to the menu right now (which is, anyway, the sort of thing 99.9% of users don't actually do in windows), all software that you install in Ubuntu that's supposed to run in a graphical environment adds a shortcut to it in the applications menu, just like windows software does. On a side note, windows doesn't have single click applications for many of the tasks involved in my day to day use of my computer. In fact, nor does linux. But linux gives me a powerful shell with which I can do those things. Before you bitch about the shell, ask yourself: "is it better to not be able to do something, or to have a moderately complex way of doing something?"
2. Software installation for Ubuntu is a simple process: open synaptic, select the program you want from a list (or search for it by description or name) and click apply. It is automatically downloaded from the internet and installed, without asking any more questions. It doesn't ask where to install it, even, thus not requiring the users to make decisions about their filesystem structure. While there is software that falls outside the repositories that allow this, this software is usually highly specialized and requires the user to have a greater degree of technical knowledge to even use. Those people are probably not scared or disturbed by writing two or three commands in a shell. The sole exception to this seems to be linux ports of windows games, which tend to have crap installers. But that is not the OS's fault, but rather the developers'
3. In linux you CAN recompile the kernel. But you don't have to. Just chose, or have suggested to you, a product that doesn't require it. Once again, in Ubuntu I'm yet to have to compile anything at all except university projects. And I've been using it almost exclusively since february.
4. Ubuntu software updates are literally 2-3 clicks away from installation, when needed. Single- (or double-, can't remember which right now) click the updates icon when it appears in the notification area (mostly the same as the windows system tray), click apply. That's literally 2 or 3 clicks (depending on single- or double-click). You can, of course, actually read what you are installing, and why (you have the changelog). But you don't have to. This update system also updates all software installed through the repositories (including everytyhing from the base system and office tools to games, and multimedia stuff like 3D modelers, renderers and much more).
5. Ubuntu doesn't require package selection. It allows it, but you can simply install a base system (which includes an office suite -- Open Office)
6. I do confess that I had to manually unmute the sound card channels (the sound card was properly installed, but muted) in my Ubuntu installation. This is something that irks me to no end. But on the other hand, I didn't have to separately install a processor driver (had never heard of those 'til then) and configure my desktop to SAVE BATTERY POWER in order to have it throttle the processor speed and voltage like I did in windows. Nor does Ubuntu crash with a BSOD everytime I use my motherboard's primary network adapter (nForce4 NIC) in conjunction with bit torrent.
7. Well, you just said something curious: You can run Windows stuff on Linux. I'm yet to see viceversa. This said, I do agree that games in Linux are still a bit weak (especially for those of us that don't actually enjoy FPSs all that much), but I do find that I can play the games that matter the most in Linux. If not, I can reboot into Windows. After all, this isn't necessarily a winner takes all scenario.
8. Open Office fills most of my needs, feature-wise. The features I find it not to have are usually not available in MS-Office either. On the other hand, my college student budget appreciates that I don't have to spend something close to $400 to get a legal copy of Ope
I think the GP meant it was quite sad for the rest of us that they had to pick (2), rather than that they were sad for making the shift from computer company to gadget company
the slower part about the RAID system was the part where they are 7200 rpm drives rather than studly 10k drives like the primary one is. And he said slower, but RAIDed drives. As in, the actual drives are slower, but that's ok because we're using a RAID0 set that means that we actually make it be a wee bit faster. Being RAID0, it'll look like a 500GB drive. 500 gigs is a fine storage drive. Problem is, people tend to use storage and backup interchangeably. And Hemos apparently fits into the category of "people".
Oh, please note that I do agree that using a RAID0 system as main storage is retarded
I was under the impression that the "chips" are pretty bare things that still require your CPU to do the difficult stuff. The actualy full fledged card removes that bit of CPU charge.
Actually, since the major labels probably ALL demand copyright transfer, and they (as RIAA) have an effective stranglehold on the industry, well... I think you can see where this is going (think "an offer you can't refuse")
"Hey look! We have a scheme that prevents the users of 95% of computer users from copying our CDs. Aren't we dumb for not reaching the remaining 5%? Oh yeah, those are the blokes that would find a way around it either way..."
IF his methods are any good, and that's a very big if, then on any minimally decent university, with any minimally decent professor, you'd pass. As long as you could explain the reasons for such a deviation from the norm.
Now, why do I think this is such a big IF? I have plenty of maths in my background, and plenty of contact with loads of professors. If I were one, and I revolutionized geometry and found out that everybody in the last two millenia was completely wrong in their way of looking at it, my biggest concern wouldn't be patronizing school children by calling trig overly complicated for poor little ol' them. It'd be a bloody Fields Medal, or some stuff like that I'd have in mind. I'd be writing articles and papers, not books -- at least not yet. But that's just me. He apparently totally disregards the profound relation between trigonometry as-is and complex analysis. And he apparently feels that the Fourier series (and its applications) results from a daft way of looking at geometry. Or that when working with vectors, and cross/dot products, trig as-is actually makes life easier. Or even that the whole of measure theory sits on the notion of distance that he so plainly dismisses as wrong. For the past two thousand years we have relied on the false assumptions that distance is the best way to measure the separation of two points(...) -- I'd honestly like him to explain to someone why counting paces or using a ruler to measure "the separation between two points" is wrong. Inexact? Obviously. wrong? Hah!
To you, I have a piece of advice. Look through the proof strategies used in constructing the derivatives of the trig functions, and rebuild the actual proofs alone. You'll never, ever forget those derivatives again, because now you've understood them, rather than tried to memorize them. This works marvelously for all the differentiation and integration rules as well, which you're sure to find at some point. I, too, had trouble memorizing that sort of stuff (still do), but this is the way I found to solve that issue.
actually, this bit of code:
#include
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
printf("hello world!\n");
return 0;
}
just compiled to 12K with GCC under linux. go figure... those 3K hello worlds really are evil!
The Apple cinema displays, if you mean the 30" ones, don't have compatibility problems per se. They just need dual link dvi connectors. Saying they have compatibility problems is kind of like saying a regular dvi monitor has compatibility problems with plain vga cards (though in this case the connector is physically the same)
Slashdot Mirror
well, the iPod video functionality is, in all respects, meant as an incremental change (5G? 6G?) from previous "plain vanilla" iPods, whereas the nano is a brand new (1G) product in the iPod line. I actually think the GP's comment was pretty reasonable in its assessment (if slighty swayed pro-apple)
like this: http://povpod.com/main.html/ (VERY WORKSPACE UNFRIENDLY!) Really, the concept is stunning in its... weirdness. Put you iPod on your lap!
well, from the readers' point of view, they still passed a biased piece of "news", and therefore they are biased. It is quite proper for them to apologize to not actually read into the article enough to understand the bias and to mark the article as potentially biased
The only thing broken in the security model you speak of is in the application layer. If software was actually written in such a way that it didn't require admin privileges, all would work quite well (minus bugs, but those happen to everyone). In fact, since Windows incorporates ACLs by default, one could even say the security model in windows is better than that of linux (by default -- no mainstream distro I know of configures ACLs by default). However, I do believe the bazaar model to be superior, and I do believe that linux is, as an environment, safer. But not because of the underlying kernel. It's safer because a competent administration system that doesn't require you to login as root has been put into place, it's because it promotes proper password/account usage.
C - Do something, and make anti-virus software a niche requirement, a paranoid sysadmin's tool.
say what? Audigy 2? check. SATA HDD? check. USB? never heard of any problems. So what, I did choose an nVidia card on purpose (approx. equal offerings, one works better in my selected OS? easy pick). I installed Ubuntu, and the only trouble I had with all those "difficult components" was that the soundcard was muted by default. Yay. And I hear the ATi drivers are looking decent this time of the year
whiskey tango foxtrot? I actually saw the bloody thing for sale here in Portugal already. Unless it was just a show piece...
India? Pakistan? phooey! What about Hyrule?
Hate to be a nag, but 3.14159 = 314159/100000, and therefore a rational number! Now, if you had said that we picked up pi users this week (or, for bonus style points, i users -- imaginary users indeed!) I'd have agreed :)
no. openSSH is BSD-licensed. If you need further information regarding the issue of using BSD-licensed code in commercial, closed source software, ask the Apple Computers legal department. They should be able to explain it to you.
my (admitedly somewhat limited) experience with the apple iCandy (couldn't resist) is that it actually works. They can publicize their eye candy all they want, because that's what makes exposé possible. And every single person I know with a mac has incorporated it into their normal usage patterns to reach a much smoother multi-tasking experience than I have right now, either with windows or with linux, even though I'm much more of a techie than most of them. Though I haven't really read all that much into avalon/aero glass/whatever, the only thing that seems to be said about the UI changes is that it looks good. Yay. If it were to offer new features, I'd appreciate it. But just looking good? My gnome desktop looks good enough in its simplicity. All I want is something that does for me what exposé does for my friends, and I haven't seen MS move that way.
the main point there is that LINUX is actually something vaguely like a highly organized and disciplined kernel. GNOME is an organized thing. X is another. You don't do a Linux nightly build. You do a kernel nightly, a whatever nightly and integrate the completely independent pieces of software to make a distro. The idea I get from the article is that windows development derives profit neither from the completely separate development development process enjoyed by the components of a full fledged gnu/linux system (which allows for very independent, my bugs don't affect your code sort of development), nor the tightly controlled process supposedly enjoyed by each individual small project (which would make uncoordinated efforts more complicated).
I apologize for the crap formatting. I forget that /. doesn't handle textbox line breaks as it should... **knocks himself in the head for not using the preview button**
Here's a properly formatted post:
I'd try and drop that funny stuff you're smoking, if I were you.
Let's use the example of Ubuntu Linux, which is a rather popular distribution at the moment.
1. Though it has some problems with manually adding shortcuts to the menu right now (which is, anyway, the sort of thing 99.9% of users don't actually do in windows), all software that you install in Ubuntu that's supposed to run in a graphical environment adds a shortcut to it in the applications menu, just like windows software does.
On a side note, windows doesn't have single click applications for many of the tasks involved in my day to day use of my computer. In fact, nor does linux. But linux gives me a powerful shell with which I can do those things. Before you bitch about the shell, ask yourself: "is it better to not be able to do something, or to have a moderately complex way of doing something?"
2. Software installation for Ubuntu is a simple process: open synaptic, select the program you want from a list (or search for it by description or name) and click apply. It is automatically downloaded from the internet and installed, without asking any more questions. It doesn't ask where to install it, even, thus not requiring the users to make decisions about their filesystem structure.
While there is software that falls outside the repositories that allow this, this software is usually highly specialized and requires the user to have a greater degree of technical knowledge to even use. Those people are probably not scared or disturbed by writing two or three commands in a shell. The sole exception to this seems to be linux ports of windows games, which tend to have crap installers. But that is not the OS's fault, but rather the developers'
3. In linux you CAN recompile the kernel. But you don't have to. Just chose, or have suggested to you, a product that doesn't require it. Once again, in Ubuntu I'm yet to have to compile anything at all except university projects. And I've been using it almost exclusively since february.
4. Ubuntu software updates are literally 2-3 clicks away from installation, when needed. Single- (or double-, can't remember which right now) click the updates icon when it appears in the notification area (mostly the same as the windows system tray), click apply. That's literally 2 or 3 clicks (depending on single- or double-click). You can, of course, actually read what you are installing, and why (you have the changelog). But you don't have to. This update system also updates all software installed through the repositories (including everytyhing from the base system and office tools to games, and multimedia stuff like 3D modelers, renderers and much more).
5. Ubuntu doesn't require package selection. It allows it, but you can simply install a base system (which includes an office suite -- Open Office -- and much much more software)
6. I do confess that I had to manually unmute the sound card channels (the sound card was properly installed, but muted) in my Ubuntu installation. This is something that irks me to no end. But on the other hand, I didn't have to separately install a processor driver (had never heard of those 'til then) and configure my desktop to SAVE BATTERY POWER in order to have it throttle the processor speed and voltage like I did in windows. Nor does Ubuntu crash with a BSOD everytime I use my motherboard's primary network adapter (nForce4 NIC) in conjunction with bit torrent.
7. Well, you just said something curious: You can run Windows stuff on Linux. I'm yet to see viceversa. This said, I do agree that games in Linux are still a bit weak (especially for those of us that don't actually enjoy FPSs all that much), but I do find that I can play the games that matter the most in Linux. If not, I can reboot into
I'd try and drop that funny stuff you're smoking, if I were you. Let's use the example of Ubuntu Linux, which is a rather popular distribution at the moment. 1. Though it has some problems with manually adding shortcuts to the menu right now (which is, anyway, the sort of thing 99.9% of users don't actually do in windows), all software that you install in Ubuntu that's supposed to run in a graphical environment adds a shortcut to it in the applications menu, just like windows software does. On a side note, windows doesn't have single click applications for many of the tasks involved in my day to day use of my computer. In fact, nor does linux. But linux gives me a powerful shell with which I can do those things. Before you bitch about the shell, ask yourself: "is it better to not be able to do something, or to have a moderately complex way of doing something?" 2. Software installation for Ubuntu is a simple process: open synaptic, select the program you want from a list (or search for it by description or name) and click apply. It is automatically downloaded from the internet and installed, without asking any more questions. It doesn't ask where to install it, even, thus not requiring the users to make decisions about their filesystem structure. While there is software that falls outside the repositories that allow this, this software is usually highly specialized and requires the user to have a greater degree of technical knowledge to even use. Those people are probably not scared or disturbed by writing two or three commands in a shell. The sole exception to this seems to be linux ports of windows games, which tend to have crap installers. But that is not the OS's fault, but rather the developers' 3. In linux you CAN recompile the kernel. But you don't have to. Just chose, or have suggested to you, a product that doesn't require it. Once again, in Ubuntu I'm yet to have to compile anything at all except university projects. And I've been using it almost exclusively since february. 4. Ubuntu software updates are literally 2-3 clicks away from installation, when needed. Single- (or double-, can't remember which right now) click the updates icon when it appears in the notification area (mostly the same as the windows system tray), click apply. That's literally 2 or 3 clicks (depending on single- or double-click). You can, of course, actually read what you are installing, and why (you have the changelog). But you don't have to. This update system also updates all software installed through the repositories (including everytyhing from the base system and office tools to games, and multimedia stuff like 3D modelers, renderers and much more). 5. Ubuntu doesn't require package selection. It allows it, but you can simply install a base system (which includes an office suite -- Open Office) 6. I do confess that I had to manually unmute the sound card channels (the sound card was properly installed, but muted) in my Ubuntu installation. This is something that irks me to no end. But on the other hand, I didn't have to separately install a processor driver (had never heard of those 'til then) and configure my desktop to SAVE BATTERY POWER in order to have it throttle the processor speed and voltage like I did in windows. Nor does Ubuntu crash with a BSOD everytime I use my motherboard's primary network adapter (nForce4 NIC) in conjunction with bit torrent. 7. Well, you just said something curious: You can run Windows stuff on Linux. I'm yet to see viceversa. This said, I do agree that games in Linux are still a bit weak (especially for those of us that don't actually enjoy FPSs all that much), but I do find that I can play the games that matter the most in Linux. If not, I can reboot into Windows. After all, this isn't necessarily a winner takes all scenario. 8. Open Office fills most of my needs, feature-wise. The features I find it not to have are usually not available in MS-Office either. On the other hand, my college student budget appreciates that I don't have to spend something close to $400 to get a legal copy of Ope
well, actually doing it isn't a problem. Having it be one of your grander goals in life? That's a different story, methinks.
I think the GP meant it was quite sad for the rest of us that they had to pick (2), rather than that they were sad for making the shift from computer company to gadget company
the slower part about the RAID system was the part where they are 7200 rpm drives rather than studly 10k drives like the primary one is. And he said slower, but RAIDed drives. As in, the actual drives are slower, but that's ok because we're using a RAID0 set that means that we actually make it be a wee bit faster. Being RAID0, it'll look like a 500GB drive. 500 gigs is a fine storage drive. Problem is, people tend to use storage and backup interchangeably. And Hemos apparently fits into the category of "people". Oh, please note that I do agree that using a RAID0 system as main storage is retarded
I was under the impression that the "chips" are pretty bare things that still require your CPU to do the difficult stuff. The actualy full fledged card removes that bit of CPU charge.
Actually, since the major labels probably ALL demand copyright transfer, and they (as RIAA) have an effective stranglehold on the industry, well... I think you can see where this is going (think "an offer you can't refuse")
"Hey look! We have a scheme that prevents the users of 95% of computer users from copying our CDs. Aren't we dumb for not reaching the remaining 5%? Oh yeah, those are the blokes that would find a way around it either way..."
All you have to do is (...)
But all you WANT to do is just stick the legally bought DVD into your computer and watch it. Such a remarkable concept, isn't it?
IF his methods are any good, and that's a very big if, then on any minimally decent university, with any minimally decent professor, you'd pass. As long as you could explain the reasons for such a deviation from the norm.
Now, why do I think this is such a big IF? I have plenty of maths in my background, and plenty of contact with loads of professors. If I were one, and I revolutionized geometry and found out that everybody in the last two millenia was completely wrong in their way of looking at it, my biggest concern wouldn't be patronizing school children by calling trig overly complicated for poor little ol' them. It'd be a bloody Fields Medal, or some stuff like that I'd have in mind. I'd be writing articles and papers, not books -- at least not yet. But that's just me. He apparently totally disregards the profound relation between trigonometry as-is and complex analysis. And he apparently feels that the Fourier series (and its applications) results from a daft way of looking at geometry. Or that when working with vectors, and cross/dot products, trig as-is actually makes life easier. Or even that the whole of measure theory sits on the notion of distance that he so plainly dismisses as wrong.
For the past two thousand years we have relied on the false assumptions that distance is the best way to measure the separation of two points(...) -- I'd honestly like him to explain to someone why counting paces or using a ruler to measure "the separation between two points" is wrong. Inexact? Obviously. wrong? Hah!
To you, I have a piece of advice. Look through the proof strategies used in constructing the derivatives of the trig functions, and rebuild the actual proofs alone. You'll never, ever forget those derivatives again, because now you've understood them, rather than tried to memorize them. This works marvelously for all the differentiation and integration rules as well, which you're sure to find at some point. I, too, had trouble memorizing that sort of stuff (still do), but this is the way I found to solve that issue.
I'm sorry. That should've been
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{ printf("hello world!\n");
return 0;
}
actually, this bit of code: #include int main(int argc, char** argv) { printf("hello world!\n"); return 0; } just compiled to 12K with GCC under linux. go figure... those 3K hello worlds really are evil!
The Apple cinema displays, if you mean the 30" ones, don't have compatibility problems per se. They just need dual link dvi connectors. Saying they have compatibility problems is kind of like saying a regular dvi monitor has compatibility problems with plain vga cards (though in this case the connector is physically the same)