What's wrong with conservation of utility in software? Familiarity is rather important to productivity, and major changes reduce productivity, at least in the short term.
We all moved to Office 2010 last year. While everyone is doing okay now, I can tell you right now that the first few months was just fucking awful.
Heh. I remember Coherent. I had the 386 edition, which didn't support virtual memory, which heavily limited its usefulness. I had wanted to update from the old Tandy 6000 running Xenix (with two whopping 20mb MFM drives). At the end of the day, I abandoned the efforts, and the old Xenix box ran the show until the business closed. I inherited that old Xenix machine with the idea of running a BBS but by then one of the hard drives made a very high pitched squeeling sound (though it still booted), and I ended up giving it to a friend of mine.
I still had the Coherent floppies until about five or six years ago when I finally turfed them. It was a nice toy made utterly irrelevant by Slackware.
One of the (few remaining) movie rental stores where I live is still running it for the rental/POS software. He updated a few years ago from the Wyse terminals to PCs running terminal emulation software, but that's about it. On the one hand, wow that's archaic, but on the other hand, I guess as long as it works and the hardware keeps humming, there's not much reason to switch. Still, the day will come when the platters will seize and he'll be left trying to find tech support for it. I have no idea whether you can get an old install running in a VM or not, which would be the logical way to go.
I can see backup servers as one area. Considering most backup solutions for Windows have *nix plugins/agents, that makes some sense, although there are certainly *nix backup solutions just as comprehensive as any you'll get for Windows.
You can put Linux userland on most (unlocked) Android devices, and really Dalvik is, for the most part, just a userland layer itself. That's like saying someone who install Debian for the specific purpose of running Python or Java apps, somehow he's not running Linux.
I don't suppose there's a hard or fast definition, but if the kernel provides Unix-like services in a Unix-like way (in other words, supports Unix system calls) and is at least capable of running Unix or Unix-like userland utils, then I'd say its Unix. I know that might mean by a very loose definition that Cygwin makes Windows a Unix-like operating system, but as Cygwin is basically a compatibility layer that runs on top of then kernel like any other userland application, I think I'm on reasonably solid ground to state that Cygwin does NOT make Windows a Unix-like operating system, any more than running a Nintendo 64 emulator on my Windows box makes my Windows box a Nintendo 64.
The POSIX subsystem in Windows is partially POSIX 1 compliant. In other words, it's pretty much useless for any kind of meaningful port. You have to turn to Cygwin if you want something approaching full POSIX 2 compatibility.
All I can say is "I'm glad I don't work there." I can only imagine the nightmares they must be going through moving from HP-UX to a Windows Server cluster.
Other than to honor market doublespeak, so far as I'm concerned, you can lump Unix in with Linux, OS-X, QNX and the other variants and -likes that make up the *nix ecosystem. It's a helluva lot easier to port an application from Unix to, say, Linux, than it is to port from Unix to Windows, unless you use a compatibility layer like Cygwin. Man, I wouldn't want to use Cygwin too much on a production server. The only time I ever did it was to get a decent radius server running on a Windows machine. It worked reasonably well, but I was very happy to move to a Linux server due to glitches.
I'd be curious to know what exactly the HP-UX server did that could so easily be moved over to a cluster of Windows servers, myself. Apart from believing that one can buy eight servers with Windows Server licences and come out much less than $25k, I'm just trying to sort out what this server would have actually been running that one could simply go "Oh well, we're going to Windows now."
I've found damned few cases in my experience when wholesale moving from one platform ecosystem to another platform ecosystem was a viable activity in and of itself, unless it was part of a long term strategy of retooling and recoding. I've seen some organizations move from Unix to Linux, but generally with the notion that porting apps was relatively easy or had already been done. But to move from *nix to Windows is a big deal, unless you're running everything in Java EE, in which case why would you completely change your ecosystem with other *nix variants out there?
It's not that polygraph machines are sometimes unreliable, it's that they are utterly unreliable. For all the reliance law enforcement has had on them over the years, they are essentially voodoo. The simply fact is that they don't work, and what little they do do is placebic, in that the ignorant may fear being hooked up to a machine about as useful as L Ron Hubbard's e-meter and thus be spooked into confessing.
I'm not, because Congress long ago abandoned a key role as a check on the Executive in favor of near constant partisan bickering. The end result is little more than a bitching chamber, where the party on top pushes its agenda, the other party consumes itself in trying to fuck up that agenda and get to the top. They are basically blind to all other considerations, and a pure political animals, squared off into two warring tribes, who have no sense of civic duty, no sense of morality or any sense of their purpose.
No, but what a judge can do if he feels that those laying out their case in front of him can do is refuse any ruling, or indeed throw out the request, if he feels he's been fed partial or incorrect knowledge.
Slashdot Mirror
Yup. What I'd like to see is a series based on Sulu's time as captain of the Excelsior. That to me would kick some serious ass.
Yes, it was about this point that I stopped watching Enterprise.
Gawd yes. As bad as Voyager and Enterprise were, compared to the hideousness that is the reboot films, they're works of genius.
But frankly, I could give a s--t about another show in the TNG era. I'd much prefer to see a show with Sulu as captain.
What's wrong with conservation of utility in software? Familiarity is rather important to productivity, and major changes reduce productivity, at least in the short term.
We all moved to Office 2010 last year. While everyone is doing okay now, I can tell you right now that the first few months was just fucking awful.
Well, I guess I can always buy a Chromebook.
Between the large scale acceptance of touchscreens and Apple and Google licensing ActiveSync, that is what has made BlackBerry's irrelevant.
It's Unix-like, which is close enough these days.
Fart apps! Now three times as easy!
Heh. I remember Coherent. I had the 386 edition, which didn't support virtual memory, which heavily limited its usefulness. I had wanted to update from the old Tandy 6000 running Xenix (with two whopping 20mb MFM drives). At the end of the day, I abandoned the efforts, and the old Xenix box ran the show until the business closed. I inherited that old Xenix machine with the idea of running a BBS but by then one of the hard drives made a very high pitched squeeling sound (though it still booted), and I ended up giving it to a friend of mine.
I still had the Coherent floppies until about five or six years ago when I finally turfed them. It was a nice toy made utterly irrelevant by Slackware.
One of the (few remaining) movie rental stores where I live is still running it for the rental/POS software. He updated a few years ago from the Wyse terminals to PCs running terminal emulation software, but that's about it. On the one hand, wow that's archaic, but on the other hand, I guess as long as it works and the hardware keeps humming, there's not much reason to switch. Still, the day will come when the platters will seize and he'll be left trying to find tech support for it. I have no idea whether you can get an old install running in a VM or not, which would be the logical way to go.
I can see backup servers as one area. Considering most backup solutions for Windows have *nix plugins/agents, that makes some sense, although there are certainly *nix backup solutions just as comprehensive as any you'll get for Windows.
You can put Linux userland on most (unlocked) Android devices, and really Dalvik is, for the most part, just a userland layer itself. That's like saying someone who install Debian for the specific purpose of running Python or Java apps, somehow he's not running Linux.
I don't suppose there's a hard or fast definition, but if the kernel provides Unix-like services in a Unix-like way (in other words, supports Unix system calls) and is at least capable of running Unix or Unix-like userland utils, then I'd say its Unix. I know that might mean by a very loose definition that Cygwin makes Windows a Unix-like operating system, but as Cygwin is basically a compatibility layer that runs on top of then kernel like any other userland application, I think I'm on reasonably solid ground to state that Cygwin does NOT make Windows a Unix-like operating system, any more than running a Nintendo 64 emulator on my Windows box makes my Windows box a Nintendo 64.
The POSIX subsystem in Windows is partially POSIX 1 compliant. In other words, it's pretty much useless for any kind of meaningful port. You have to turn to Cygwin if you want something approaching full POSIX 2 compatibility.
All I can say is "I'm glad I don't work there." I can only imagine the nightmares they must be going through moving from HP-UX to a Windows Server cluster.
It's sufficiently compatible that sources can be compiled. It's as much a *nix as an oddball like, say, Coherent.
Other than to honor market doublespeak, so far as I'm concerned, you can lump Unix in with Linux, OS-X, QNX and the other variants and -likes that make up the *nix ecosystem. It's a helluva lot easier to port an application from Unix to, say, Linux, than it is to port from Unix to Windows, unless you use a compatibility layer like Cygwin. Man, I wouldn't want to use Cygwin too much on a production server. The only time I ever did it was to get a decent radius server running on a Windows machine. It worked reasonably well, but I was very happy to move to a Linux server due to glitches.
I'd be curious to know what exactly the HP-UX server did that could so easily be moved over to a cluster of Windows servers, myself. Apart from believing that one can buy eight servers with Windows Server licences and come out much less than $25k, I'm just trying to sort out what this server would have actually been running that one could simply go "Oh well, we're going to Windows now."
I've found damned few cases in my experience when wholesale moving from one platform ecosystem to another platform ecosystem was a viable activity in and of itself, unless it was part of a long term strategy of retooling and recoding. I've seen some organizations move from Unix to Linux, but generally with the notion that porting apps was relatively easy or had already been done. But to move from *nix to Windows is a big deal, unless you're running everything in Java EE, in which case why would you completely change your ecosystem with other *nix variants out there?
So the bulk of Unix's decline comes from competing *nixes, in particularly Linux.
News at 11.
"I kill for cybercriminals for fun, but for bath salts and hooch, I gonna carve him up real nice."
Sounds like The Who's failed Lifehouse album.
It's not that polygraph machines are sometimes unreliable, it's that they are utterly unreliable. For all the reliance law enforcement has had on them over the years, they are essentially voodoo. The simply fact is that they don't work, and what little they do do is placebic, in that the ignorant may fear being hooked up to a machine about as useful as L Ron Hubbard's e-meter and thus be spooked into confessing.
What makes you think I'm a conservative?
Christ, half the Republicans in Congress don't want any legislative changes that might "compromise" safety.
I'm not, because Congress long ago abandoned a key role as a check on the Executive in favor of near constant partisan bickering. The end result is little more than a bitching chamber, where the party on top pushes its agenda, the other party consumes itself in trying to fuck up that agenda and get to the top. They are basically blind to all other considerations, and a pure political animals, squared off into two warring tribes, who have no sense of civic duty, no sense of morality or any sense of their purpose.
Oh, I don't think the judges are being subjected to political pressure. Rather, I think they're being subjected to misinformation campaigns.
No, but what a judge can do if he feels that those laying out their case in front of him can do is refuse any ruling, or indeed throw out the request, if he feels he's been fed partial or incorrect knowledge.