. However this was a long time ago and they did not really have the market dominance they have today. You kids! Haven't you ever heard of MS-DOS? MS-DOS was the dominant operating system for PCs in the 1980s. Contrary to popular belief among people who are either too young to remember or were too computer illiterate in the 1980s to remember, Microsoft did not build its monopoly on Windows. The Microsoft juggernaut built its multi-billion dollar empire not on Windows, but on MS-DOS. Now you kids get off my lawn!
Not really. me@myhost:~$ python Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, May 2 2007, 16:56:35) [GCC 4.1.2 (Ubuntu 4.1.2-0ubuntu4)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> print ("test") test >>> print "test", 2.5 test 2.5 >>> print ("test", 2.5) ('test', 2.5)
This last one is because syntactically ("test", 2.5)is a tuple. Next, let's look at more precise way to do it: >>> print ("test %s" % 2.5) test 2.5
And this works exactly as before: >>> print "test %s" % 2.5 test 2.5
This is just not true. There will be a utility included with py3k that converts most purely syntactical differences from py2.x code into compatible running py 3.0 code. The official word on this is that the recommended upgrade path is to maintain your codebase as 2.x code that can also be converted into python 3.0 code in a completely automated way (that is, keep it compliant with py 2.6, but change things so that the automater script can generate py 3.0 code). When backwards compatability is no longer needed you can convert to the 3.0 codebase. I wish you could tag comments. I would tag this one 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong'.
Does anyone else here remember the Turbo Pascal 3.0 -> 4.0 upgrade fiasco? There were supposedly (3rd party, I think) applications that would look at your TP 3.0 code and upgrade it to 4.0. None of them worked, of course.
If you think naming closely-related languages the same thing is a kludge, what do you think of naming mostly-unrelated languages the same thing? You mean like VB.Net?
ASCII Should be replaced by UNICODE anyway. ASCII's dead, unless you're a lazy developer who doesn't have any foresight.
Pfft. Some networking standards absolutely require ASCII. Shows what you know.
Should be dead.
Should be dead and actually dead are two different things. The gasoline engine should also be dead, but it's not going away either.
Should be too niche
I have two PCs in my household, and both were purchased this year. Both include 9-pin RS-232 serial ports. Some UPSes make use of serial ports for auto-poweroff operation. Also, modems aren't dead yet.
Should be dead.
Should be, but isn't.
You're probably the type that thinks mainframes are dead.
Why does every computer "historian" ALWAYS forgets Commodore 64? I've seen LOTS of articles covering the C=64 on/. recently. The Apple II series of computers were really good as gaming machines, though. They were among the very first machines with color graphics and you could play the games on your television. The crappy green screen monitors (and later, paper white screens for the//c) they sold with the Apple II series didn't make for a good gaming experience. You really needed a TV and an RF modulator (or a TV with composite input) for the best experience.
Yeah, this might sound wacky to some, but it's actually right on the money. Integration is a key selling point for the desktop leaders, Microsoft's Windows and Apple's OS X. If I walk into CompUSA, Best Buy, or buy something off of NewEgg or whatever, it's pretty much a given that it's going to work with Windows. In addition, if I walk into an Apple store, it's pretty much a given that anything I walk out with will work with the latest version of OS X.
On Linux, we get a bad rap for poor hardware support. It's not really the case. We have good or, in many cases, excellent hardware support for a wide swath of popular hardware. But you have to do the necessary research to know what to buy and what not to buy when it comes to buying hardware for your Linux machine. In the Windows world, you stick with the big names -- they're guaranteed to work. In the Linux world, one scanner model from a vendor might be supported by SANE and another from the same vendor might not be.
A bright, enterprising individual would do well to come up with an online and -- even better -- a brick and mortar store that specializes in selling hardware that works well on Linux. Sure, it's been tried before and failed -- but that was then and this now and Linux has gotten much better support for hardware in recent years.
The same is true for any OS install that doesn't involve using the 'System Recovery Tool' that comes with the machine.
As for the wireless stuff, 9 times out of 10 the way to go is ndiswrapper. Installing ndiswrapper and getting it to work properly is a fairly straightforward process. If you follow the documentation, any self-respecting geek should be able to get it up and working correctly in less than an hour.
At least the disc it comes on is pretty and shiny. Unless it came preinstalled on your computer, in which case, you probably don't have a disc, so, errmmm...scratch that.
I was tryin' to say something nice about Vista! Honestly!
I agree. After the old Toshiba died recently, I bought a new dual-core notebook. Unfortunately, it was not offered with XP and I could not find all of the drivers, so I guess that I'm stuck with Vista. I will admit that Vista has a pleasing interface and now my XP machine's graphics look so old-timey, but damn is this Vista machine SLOW. The 32-bit Vista drivers might work on XP. You could give it a try. Or you could switch to a competing OS and use Windows XP running under something like VirtualBox for those Windows apps you can't live without. (SCNR!:))
I thought only SCO's pathetic supporters with their claims that Groklaw was an IBM front were this warped, but Microsoft, congrats, you've produced the same specimen of irony-meter destroying beastling. All of SCO's pathetic supporters have been shown, in one or another, to be on the Microsoft dole. Where do you think they got their warped viewpoint of the world?
Microsoft is actually one of the most paranoid organizations in the world. It is their culture of paranoia that allowed them to rise to the top and that same culture has kept them there.
Yup. Direct quote from an IBM official: "They are doing this because it is advancing their business model. Over 50 percent of Microsoft's revenues come from selling Microsoft Office."
WANs, yes. LANs based on 10MBit Ethernet was fairly popular -- but most of them ran proprietary protocols like IBM's NetBIOS and, later, Novell's IPX/SPX.
And anyway, by your logic X/Y/Zmodem wouldn't have existed because these protocols also wasted bandwidth. These were the basis of early store-and-forward networks like FidoNet.
Oh, sure. Provided you don't want to install any Service Packs now or in the future, I'm sure it's fine. From the link in your post:
It came to my attention that some of you expected to install Service Pack on the lite Vista, without some components. Unfortunatelly that is not possible, nor it was ever expected to be because Service Pack is meant to update the whole installation, if it detects that something is missing it aborts.
So the only way to use vLite on SP1 is to use it on the preintegrated version, meaning you can configure the Vista DVD or ISO which already has SP1 in it. Until Microsoft releases one you can try making your own by following this guide. But be careful, it's not official nor easy method so it is recommended only for the experienced users.
Slashdot Mirror
duh. :-P
Argh! I left off a trailing parenthesis!!!
print (repr(("test", 2.5)))
Okay, this is just starting to look like LISP now. If I wanted to code LISP, I knew where to find it.
No, wait, that wouldn't work, would it?
:-P
It would have to be
print (repr(("test", 2.5))
Argh. I think you're right. This is annoying.
If you want to print the __repr__ of a tuple, wouldn't the most correct way just be:
print ("%s" % ("test", 2.5))
If you'd been doing that all along like the rest of us, you wouldn't be having any problems. *tongue firmly planted in cheek*
Not really.
me@myhost:~$ python
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, May 2 2007, 16:56:35)
[GCC 4.1.2 (Ubuntu 4.1.2-0ubuntu4)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> print ("test")
test
>>> print "test", 2.5
test 2.5
>>> print ("test", 2.5)
('test', 2.5)
This last one is because syntactically ("test", 2.5) is a tuple. Next, let's look at more precise way to do it:
>>> print ("test %s" % 2.5)
test 2.5
And this works exactly as before:
>>> print "test %s" % 2.5
test 2.5
So, no, parent is correct.
Does anyone else here remember the Turbo Pascal 3.0 -> 4.0 upgrade fiasco? There were supposedly (3rd party, I think) applications that would look at your TP 3.0 code and upgrade it to 4.0. None of them worked, of course.
"Code in Google Time" has a nice ring to it
Pfft. Some networking standards absolutely require ASCII. Shows what you know.
Should be dead and actually dead are two different things. The gasoline engine should also be dead, but it's not going away either.
I have two PCs in my household, and both were purchased this year. Both include 9-pin RS-232 serial ports. Some UPSes make use of serial ports for auto-poweroff operation. Also, modems aren't dead yet.
Should be, but isn't.
You're probably the type that thinks mainframes are dead.
I pronounce imminent the death of:
ASCII
UNIX
the mouse
the QWERTY keyboard
RS-232
SMTP
and lots of other completely useless technology.
Stuff that's really, really cool is only occasionally very practical.
Yeah, this might sound wacky to some, but it's actually right on the money. Integration is a key selling point for the desktop leaders, Microsoft's Windows and Apple's OS X. If I walk into CompUSA, Best Buy, or buy something off of NewEgg or whatever, it's pretty much a given that it's going to work with Windows. In addition, if I walk into an Apple store, it's pretty much a given that anything I walk out with will work with the latest version of OS X.
On Linux, we get a bad rap for poor hardware support. It's not really the case. We have good or, in many cases, excellent hardware support for a wide swath of popular hardware. But you have to do the necessary research to know what to buy and what not to buy when it comes to buying hardware for your Linux machine. In the Windows world, you stick with the big names -- they're guaranteed to work. In the Linux world, one scanner model from a vendor might be supported by SANE and another from the same vendor might not be.
A bright, enterprising individual would do well to come up with an online and -- even better -- a brick and mortar store that specializes in selling hardware that works well on Linux. Sure, it's been tried before and failed -- but that was then and this now and Linux has gotten much better support for hardware in recent years.
The same is true for any OS install that doesn't involve using the 'System Recovery Tool' that comes with the machine.
As for the wireless stuff, 9 times out of 10 the way to go is ndiswrapper. Installing ndiswrapper and getting it to work properly is a fairly straightforward process. If you follow the documentation, any self-respecting geek should be able to get it up and working correctly in less than an hour.
At least the disc it comes on is pretty and shiny. Unless it came preinstalled on your computer, in which case, you probably don't have a disc, so, errmmm...scratch that.
I was tryin' to say something nice about Vista! Honestly!
I run Windows 2000 under VirtualBox on Ubuntu when I need Windows apps.
Microsoft is actually one of the most paranoid organizations in the world. It is their culture of paranoia that allowed them to rise to the top and that same culture has kept them there.
Yup. Direct quote from an IBM official: "They are doing this because it is advancing their business model. Over 50 percent of Microsoft's revenues come from selling Microsoft Office."
WANs, yes. LANs based on 10MBit Ethernet was fairly popular -- but most of them ran proprietary protocols like IBM's NetBIOS and, later, Novell's IPX/SPX.
And anyway, by your logic X/Y/Zmodem wouldn't have existed because these protocols also wasted bandwidth. These were the basis of early store-and-forward networks like FidoNet.
Oh, but don't worry about that! You won't need to install any Service Packs because Microsoft ALWAYS gets it right the first time!
Unfortunatelly that is not possible, nor it was ever expected to be because Service Pack is meant to update the whole installation, if it detects that something is missing it aborts.
So the only way to use vLite on SP1 is to use it on the preintegrated version, meaning you can configure the Vista DVD or ISO which already has SP1 in it.
Until Microsoft releases one you can try making your own by following this guide.
But be careful, it's not official nor easy method so it is recommended only for the experienced users.
I *like* killing humans. It is the only way to be sure. Oh, sorry -- Hi, Skynet. Didn't recognize you for a sec.