Then again, there needs to be a budget for said ridiculous amounts of money.
I think Transmeta is doing a good job getting their chips marketed. HP is including them in their products; this seems to me to be a pretty good method of advertising in the first place -- if your product is already accepted by a major manufacturer, you're halfway there. Then again, I don't think they're in precisely the same market as Intel in the first place.
I'm sorry, I can't agree with you here. The bots are getting out of control, but that's where it ends. When I write and sell software, I don't want people "sharing" that software. They can damn well pay me for it. When I invent and patent something, somebody can damn well pay me what I will lose for them distributing my idea for free. This is NOT what the copyright/patent laws intend to do. How they are attempting to enforce these laws, however, is a completely different beast.
Does IPC count as a pipe? Do you run any filters on your email? How many times have you run | grep (granted that this is a one time thing)? I have a good number of shell scripts I use (for sed scripts, for instance) that make use of pipes (not extensively though). I'd suggest that pipes are used much more than you give credit for here.
I found this review to be lacking in content. It doesn't discuss the content of the book to any extent; instead it talks about how it got him a job promotion to UNIX Engineer. How did it do this? What did you learn from the book that gave you such an additional skillset to be promoted to UNIX Engineer? What are the differences between the UNIX Administrator and the UNIX Engineer you are referring to?
I am constantly amazed at Unix books that are mostly printed man files, and things that can easily be googled. This book explains with great precision why Unix is the way it is, and what separates it from other OS paradigms.
I've not found any books that are mostly printed man pages. Nor have I found any circumstances where the man pages don't cover things I need to know. In any case, what parts of UNIX does it explain? Is it explaining Linux or UNIX? What OS "paradigms" are you referring to? You are going by this definition aren't you?
I realized the importance of this book after reading it, and being forced to do interviews for a Unix Engineer at my office.
What importance did you realize this book serving after you had read it? Are you sure this gave you applicable knowledge to separate "UNIX Administrators" from "UNIX Engineers"? What is the difference here?
Although I appreciate any book that loosens the RFC style nature of so many technical books, sometimes it can go a little too far.
Why? If it's discussing that you need to know an RFC to understand why something works the way it does (you've stated that this book talks more about the why than how), how does it make it "not-so-good"?
So, depending on your threshold for python-esque puns or corny Elvis jokes, the book may not be for you...
Do the few puns in the book really take that much of the quality away?
I don't think that this book should be re-read from time to time. I think new editions should be published as UNIX and Linux continue to evolve in their own separate directions (yes, they're going in somewhat separate directions).
Your listing of the TOC didn't give me any idea about what was covered? WTF is "Now THAT'S Leverage" about? What "Lesser Tenants" are being referred to? What "One Thing" does UNIX do well?
You've left me with more questions about this book than I would have had otherwise. Please try to do a more thorough review next time.
And, to get on a technicality that will probably cost me this comment as a Troll, Linux IS NOT THE NEW FACE OF UNIX. Most distributions also don't even come close to being something that would compare to a UNIX certified system.
Finally, please excuse my harshness. I just feel you could have done a better, much more descriptive job. Don't take it personally.
It still takes a really long time to find documentation on writing stuff for X in the first place. For instance, I was getting into creating a window manager at one point and found it extremely difficult to find documents about how to acutally program for X. Widget toolkits are not enough in some cases. Some books about low-level X programming are at:
Unfortunately, I've lost the URLs for the X API docs and containing really good example documentation on X Windows programming in C. If anybody has these URLs, I'd appreciate it, since it took me several days of searching to dig them up and I can't find them anymore (harddrive crashes suck).
Re:I hope this will span out to other branches
on
The "Techie" Vote?
·
· Score: 1
I think you miss my point. I don't mean lobbying the judicial branch, per se, I mean electing judicial officials who express technological knowledge. You are aware that they are elected, aren't you? (Sorry for the sarcasm here, I'm just a bit pissed at your callous remark when my point is obvious).
I hope this will span out to other branches
on
The "Techie" Vote?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Regarding the pointing out that the next president would need to answer "POP3 or IMAP?" --
I hope that these "requirements" will span out to the judicial and legislative branches as well. It's great to have tech knowledge in the executive area; however, with all the (sorry for the cliche) checks and balances in place, this knowledge is moot without the knowledge in the judicial and legislative branches. For example, we're seeing many IP-related trials right now; while this knowledge could help bring about some of the changes we're hoping for in the TM/patent/IP fields, it will not help unless the knowledge is spanned out into ALL areas. We, as constituents, should not ONLY be lobbying the executive branch. We should be lobbying the others as well.
Without the good of the others, there's really no point in the good of one.
This is very true. People who build these sort of devices will almost certainly demand compliance with open standards. People who "couldn't care less" will care when the standard affects their privacy or security in some way. Standars make things easier. Mod parent up.
I don't really look at Windows security updates, but why the HELL don't they put these patches on Windows Update? The reason that these worms spread is because NORMAL people (and idiot sysadmins) don't go and read these security updates.
I have WinXP SP1 installed, with all the updates and critical security fixes installed. I just go look here and I see that there are 21 extra updates I should install. All of them are remote exploits as well.
I will say that I am surprised, I thought I had been staying up-to-date. I don't do Windows server administration, so I didn't know about these. I Windows for my desktop, naturally. But I really don't understand why they don't go ahead and put this crap on Windows Update? Are they afraid of the bad press? Everyone and their goldfish knows that MS is insecure anyway, they may as well put it there.
Bleh. Why didn't/. cover the other 20 of these things?
Subscribe to this list, and you had this story about 12 hours ago. You also downloaded and updated your src tree and fixed the bug in a matter of a few minutes. Why is it that a FreeBSD SA makes it to this site and Linux SAs don't?
I remember buying one of those silly "Teach Yourself Game Programming in 21 Days" books by this guy. I was like 12 at the time, and barely knew what QBasic was. I didn't care, I just wanted to make games because it sounded cool.
To my dismay, I didn't understand the C code. I recently opened the pages of this book and read it. It was surprisingly coherent and well written (and up-to-date for its time).
This sounds like a pretty neat thing and sounds like another plug for Andre to get another book deal, even if there's an eBook included (or it could be because someone wanted to play frogger and thought it'd be cool to get Andre's name on the console).
How does one transfer the software to the cartrige though? I don't see a programmer included in the hardware details on the about page, nor do I see that the console can be used to program the card.
This will be fun, though. As I'm only 19, I'm not old enough to remember the bringing out of the Atari 2600 (and other similar systems), but I have played games on it. I hope this brings out the games of "yesteryear" and encourages developers to write some cool games.
The complaint of many people who don't want to switch to BSD from Linux is that there aren't binary packages available and that they don't want to compile everything in ports. This article demonstrates that, indeed, using the ports collection, it is possible to check out and install binary packages using the pkg-* utilities.
There are tons of really neat things about FreeBSD; I won't list them here because they're probably quite off topic. But for anybody interested in learning more; feel free to contact me and/or check out the FreeBSD handbook and the FreeBSD diary.
Please spare me of all the "BSD SUCKS" and "BSD IS DEAD" flames. Kthx.
Ignoring the fact that IBM markets Linux and not BSD, why haven't corporations made genuine efforts to get it accepted in environments such as the government. The article doesn't make it clear whether or not they're talking about serving or usability.
It seems to me that if they're talking about security and such, there's still a bit to be left desired. Additionally, SuSE is by no means the most standard (IMO, it's the most backward) distribution of Linux.
I'd be interested in learning why more companies don't take a look into BSD environments. The security is there. The license is TOTALLY unrestrictive. It's stable, secure, well documented and well accepted (except on/.) -- why doesn't it get more corporate love?
These are available here. This might give you ideas as to what kind of staff works on one of these machines.
I'd also like to point out that Cray has been vigorously searching for qualified individuals. I wouldn't know this officially; I check their site out every month or so. Positions get filled quickly!
Oh hell, just read their site. It has enough information about what they do:)
Paging is implemented in most main-stream operating systems to support legacy environments (even now some computers, namely laptops, come with 128MB RAM -- WinXP is the market OS... see below). There are several good reasons for this for every operating system.
Windows is RAM-intensive. I have XP and 256MB RAM. 128MB was definitely not enough, and 512 would be the lowest amount that would cut it without paging on my box. Problem is, my laptop doesn't support that much (it's an older Dell Latitude model). I would rather have paging turned on here than not be able to execute more applications/type more text/move my mouse to free an application.
UNIX and Linux systems obviously are used in many server environments. Without paging, it's not useful in stressful server environments.
Many hobby OSes are not using paging in their development. While it is a well documented part of OS design and development, most new hobby OS makers are simply leaving it out with the reason that, if their OS ever did evolve to take up that much RAM, it's so cheap that one could easily buy more.
For the multi-tiered model to work, there would need to be specific slots for swapping memory, which would cost space on the motherboard. Then OS developers would have to start supporting this model.
While this is a fun idea, it isn't practical because:
a) Memory is *CHEAP* and if you run out of it, you can always page to the hard drive,
b) All modern systems and OSes support 1-4GB RAM, which is definitely enough for most (any?) consumer (at the moment),
c) If you have 4GB of RAM being used, you should be upgrading to a more powerful computer, not adding 256MB swap. Chances are you're going to need a lot more swap space than that if you're doing work requiring more than 4GB RAM. d) Finally, if you use this extra 256MB RAM, you're still swapping anyway. So why not just make systems support more RAM in the first place?
As far as I can tell, this thing is only useful for professional photographers. When getting my picture taken for the cover of Pro. PHP4 MM Programming, I saw that the photographer had several 1GB CF cards strewn over his desk. Digital photos are becoming more popular because people can get them reprinted and such. There's not really a loss in quality either, since the photos are 5-7 megapixels. But you end up getting 27MB TIFF files (in B/W)! I'm sure there are other uses for this sort of storage, but this is the best example I could think of.
I think that the price to pay for CF is way too heavy for this card to fit into general use. CF cards don't have the longest lifespan in the world either. Until these prices go down, I don't think CF will become a really hot item. I mean, look at iPods. 20GB of storage at less than half the price (and it'll play your MP3s).
The other disappointment regarding the price is that it's too high to push the prices down on 1GB models, so we won't see these being shoved into consumer electronics anytime soon either.
I think that by the time CF gets to be reasonably priced, other devices of similar size and much higher capacity will be available. I don't have a good feeling about the lifespan of CF.
On the other hand, I'd like to know some of the uses that this card may see. I may be completely oblivious to its practical usage. Feel free to enlighten me as to where this could be used, what it will replace, and whether or not the price is right for that application.
Well, I've got Solaris 10 alpha test CDs. Solaris 10 is coming out and has some killer features. I don't think this is an "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" situation at all. Sun has spent years developing and marketing Solaris/SunOS, and I don't think they'll stop here. It's very profitable for them to sell a true UNIX OS.
I imagine it's also just as profitable for them to do support/development for Linux. And I think that they're expanding, not downsizing or rethinking an entire business model.
There's also a rich history to the development of the Egyptian writing style of hieroglyphics throughout the entirety of the Egyptian era. Indeed, the Rosetta Stone, the key to the translation of the hieroglyphics was written using no less than three different scripts of hieroglyphics. More information about the Rosetta Stone is available here.
Slashdot Mirror
Then again, there needs to be a budget for said ridiculous amounts of money.
I think Transmeta is doing a good job getting their chips marketed. HP is including them in their products; this seems to me to be a pretty good method of advertising in the first place -- if your product is already accepted by a major manufacturer, you're halfway there. Then again, I don't think they're in precisely the same market as Intel in the first place.
I'm sorry, I can't agree with you here. The bots are getting out of control, but that's where it ends. When I write and sell software, I don't want people "sharing" that software. They can damn well pay me for it. When I invent and patent something, somebody can damn well pay me what I will lose for them distributing my idea for free. This is NOT what the copyright/patent laws intend to do. How they are attempting to enforce these laws, however, is a completely different beast.
Wake up...
Ah, I see. I'm sorry; I must have just misinterpreted your post. Thanks for this clarification.
...everybody who is trying to enforce the DMCA should be taken out and shot to put them out of their horrible misery.
Does IPC count as a pipe? Do you run any filters on your email? How many times have you run | grep (granted that this is a one time thing)? I have a good number of shell scripts I use (for sed scripts, for instance) that make use of pipes (not extensively though). I'd suggest that pipes are used much more than you give credit for here.
I found this review to be lacking in content. It doesn't discuss the content of the book to any extent; instead it talks about how it got him a job promotion to UNIX Engineer. How did it do this? What did you learn from the book that gave you such an additional skillset to be promoted to UNIX Engineer? What are the differences between the UNIX Administrator and the UNIX Engineer you are referring to?
I am constantly amazed at Unix books that are mostly printed man files, and things that can easily be googled. This book explains with great precision why Unix is the way it is, and what separates it from other OS paradigms.
I've not found any books that are mostly printed man pages. Nor have I found any circumstances where the man pages don't cover things I need to know. In any case, what parts of UNIX does it explain? Is it explaining Linux or UNIX? What OS "paradigms" are you referring to? You are going by this definition aren't you?
I realized the importance of this book after reading it, and being forced to do interviews for a Unix Engineer at my office.
What importance did you realize this book serving after you had read it? Are you sure this gave you applicable knowledge to separate "UNIX Administrators" from "UNIX Engineers"? What is the difference here?
Although I appreciate any book that loosens the RFC style nature of so many technical books, sometimes it can go a little too far.
Why? If it's discussing that you need to know an RFC to understand why something works the way it does (you've stated that this book talks more about the why than how), how does it make it "not-so-good"?
So, depending on your threshold for python-esque puns or corny Elvis jokes, the book may not be for you...
Do the few puns in the book really take that much of the quality away?
I don't think that this book should be re-read from time to time. I think new editions should be published as UNIX and Linux continue to evolve in their own separate directions (yes, they're going in somewhat separate directions).
Your listing of the TOC didn't give me any idea about what was covered? WTF is "Now THAT'S Leverage" about? What "Lesser Tenants" are being referred to? What "One Thing" does UNIX do well?
You've left me with more questions about this book than I would have had otherwise. Please try to do a more thorough review next time.
And, to get on a technicality that will probably cost me this comment as a Troll, Linux IS NOT THE NEW FACE OF UNIX. Most distributions also don't even come close to being something that would compare to a UNIX certified system.
Finally, please excuse my harshness. I just feel you could have done a better, much more descriptive job. Don't take it personally.
This is the documentation I was looking to post in my original post. Please feel free to mod this comment up!
As I said, there's a really great, linked API doc somewhere out there on the Internet and Google knows where it is. I'm trying to find it again.
It still takes a really long time to find documentation on writing stuff for X in the first place. For instance, I was getting into creating a window manager at one point and found it extremely difficult to find documents about how to acutally program for X. Widget toolkits are not enough in some cases. Some books about low-level X programming are at:
: //www.pconline.com/~erc/advxwnd.htm
http://www.pconline.com/~erc/xwind2nd.htm
http
Unfortunately, I've lost the URLs for the X API docs and containing really good example documentation on X Windows programming in C. If anybody has these URLs, I'd appreciate it, since it took me several days of searching to dig them up and I can't find them anymore (harddrive crashes suck).
I think you miss my point. I don't mean lobbying the judicial branch, per se, I mean electing judicial officials who express technological knowledge. You are aware that they are elected, aren't you? (Sorry for the sarcasm here, I'm just a bit pissed at your callous remark when my point is obvious).
Regarding the pointing out that the next president would need to answer "POP3 or IMAP?" --
I hope that these "requirements" will span out to the judicial and legislative branches as well. It's great to have tech knowledge in the executive area; however, with all the (sorry for the cliche) checks and balances in place, this knowledge is moot without the knowledge in the judicial and legislative branches. For example, we're seeing many IP-related trials right now; while this knowledge could help bring about some of the changes we're hoping for in the TM/patent/IP fields, it will not help unless the knowledge is spanned out into ALL areas. We, as constituents, should not ONLY be lobbying the executive branch. We should be lobbying the others as well.
Without the good of the others, there's really no point in the good of one.
This is very true. People who build these sort of devices will almost certainly demand compliance with open standards. People who "couldn't care less" will care when the standard affects their privacy or security in some way. Standars make things easier. Mod parent up.
I don't really look at Windows security updates, but why the HELL don't they put these patches on Windows Update? The reason that these worms spread is because NORMAL people (and idiot sysadmins) don't go and read these security updates.
/. cover the other 20 of these things?
I have WinXP SP1 installed, with all the updates and critical security fixes installed. I just go look here and I see that there are 21 extra updates I should install. All of them are remote exploits as well.
I will say that I am surprised, I thought I had been staying up-to-date. I don't do Windows server administration, so I didn't know about these. I Windows for my desktop, naturally. But I really don't understand why they don't go ahead and put this crap on Windows Update? Are they afraid of the bad press? Everyone and their goldfish knows that MS is insecure anyway, they may as well put it there.
Bleh. Why didn't
No, it is not. Like with identical twins (caused by a fissure in the ovum), it is an anomaly. For more information see this page.
Subscribe to this list, and you had this story about 12 hours ago. You also downloaded and updated your src tree and fixed the bug in a matter of a few minutes. Why is it that a FreeBSD SA makes it to this site and Linux SAs don't?
Sorry, just read the FAQ, estimated price is about $99.
I remember buying one of those silly "Teach Yourself Game Programming in 21 Days" books by this guy. I was like 12 at the time, and barely knew what QBasic was. I didn't care, I just wanted to make games because it sounded cool.
To my dismay, I didn't understand the C code. I recently opened the pages of this book and read it. It was surprisingly coherent and well written (and up-to-date for its time).
This sounds like a pretty neat thing and sounds like another plug for Andre to get another book deal, even if there's an eBook included (or it could be because someone wanted to play frogger and thought it'd be cool to get Andre's name on the console).
How does one transfer the software to the cartrige though? I don't see a programmer included in the hardware details on the about page, nor do I see that the console can be used to program the card.
This will be fun, though. As I'm only 19, I'm not old enough to remember the bringing out of the Atari 2600 (and other similar systems), but I have played games on it. I hope this brings out the games of "yesteryear" and encourages developers to write some cool games.
Any inside specs on the prices yet?
The complaint of many people who don't want to switch to BSD from Linux is that there aren't binary packages available and that they don't want to compile everything in ports. This article demonstrates that, indeed, using the ports collection, it is possible to check out and install binary packages using the pkg-* utilities.
There are tons of really neat things about FreeBSD; I won't list them here because they're probably quite off topic. But for anybody interested in learning more; feel free to contact me and/or check out the FreeBSD handbook and the FreeBSD diary.
Using a similar command in FreeBSD, I get this:
/usr/ports -type d -maxdepth 2 | wc -l :)
:)
$ find
9194
It's not a lot, but it's not a little either
Please spare me of all the "BSD SUCKS" and "BSD IS DEAD" flames. Kthx.
/.) -- why doesn't it get more corporate love?
Ignoring the fact that IBM markets Linux and not BSD, why haven't corporations made genuine efforts to get it accepted in environments such as the government. The article doesn't make it clear whether or not they're talking about serving or usability.
It seems to me that if they're talking about security and such, there's still a bit to be left desired. Additionally, SuSE is by no means the most standard (IMO, it's the most backward) distribution of Linux.
I'd be interested in learning why more companies don't take a look into BSD environments. The security is there. The license is TOTALLY unrestrictive. It's stable, secure, well documented and well accepted (except on
What is a supercomputer? Look here for an explination. What can we use them for? Curing evil diseases.
:)
These are available here. This might give you ideas as to what kind of staff works on one of these machines.
I'd also like to point out that Cray has been vigorously searching for qualified individuals. I wouldn't know this officially; I check their site out every month or so. Positions get filled quickly!
Oh hell, just read their site. It has enough information about what they do
Many hobby OSes are not using paging in their development. While it is a well documented part of OS design and development, most new hobby OS makers are simply leaving it out with the reason that, if their OS ever did evolve to take up that much RAM, it's so cheap that one could easily buy more.
For the multi-tiered model to work, there would need to be specific slots for swapping memory, which would cost space on the motherboard. Then OS developers would have to start supporting this model.
While this is a fun idea, it isn't practical because:
a) Memory is *CHEAP* and if you run out of it, you can always page to the hard drive,
b) All modern systems and OSes support 1-4GB RAM, which is definitely enough for most (any?) consumer (at the moment),
c) If you have 4GB of RAM being used, you should be upgrading to a more powerful computer, not adding 256MB swap. Chances are you're going to need a lot more swap space than that if you're doing work requiring more than 4GB RAM.
d) Finally, if you use this extra 256MB RAM, you're still swapping anyway. So why not just make systems support more RAM in the first place?
I hope I adequately answered your question
As far as I can tell, this thing is only useful for professional photographers. When getting my picture taken for the cover of Pro. PHP4 MM Programming, I saw that the photographer had several 1GB CF cards strewn over his desk. Digital photos are becoming more popular because people can get them reprinted and such. There's not really a loss in quality either, since the photos are 5-7 megapixels. But you end up getting 27MB TIFF files (in B/W)! I'm sure there are other uses for this sort of storage, but this is the best example I could think of.
I think that the price to pay for CF is way too heavy for this card to fit into general use. CF cards don't have the longest lifespan in the world either. Until these prices go down, I don't think CF will become a really hot item. I mean, look at iPods. 20GB of storage at less than half the price (and it'll play your MP3s).
The other disappointment regarding the price is that it's too high to push the prices down on 1GB models, so we won't see these being shoved into consumer electronics anytime soon either.
I think that by the time CF gets to be reasonably priced, other devices of similar size and much higher capacity will be available. I don't have a good feeling about the lifespan of CF.
On the other hand, I'd like to know some of the uses that this card may see. I may be completely oblivious to its practical usage. Feel free to enlighten me as to where this could be used, what it will replace, and whether or not the price is right for that application.
Well, I've got Solaris 10 alpha test CDs. Solaris 10 is coming out and has some killer features. I don't think this is an "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" situation at all. Sun has spent years developing and marketing Solaris/SunOS, and I don't think they'll stop here. It's very profitable for them to sell a true UNIX OS.
I imagine it's also just as profitable for them to do support/development for Linux. And I think that they're expanding, not downsizing or rethinking an entire business model.
There's also a rich history to the development of the Egyptian writing style of hieroglyphics throughout the entirety of the Egyptian era. Indeed, the Rosetta Stone, the key to the translation of the hieroglyphics was written using no less than three different scripts of hieroglyphics. More information about the Rosetta Stone is available here.