What part of Microsoft for the second time in a row blocked the Mono Birds-of-a-feathers (BOF) meeting do you not comprehend? Now, I don't know where Miguel would have gotten that impression, but he's a fuckload closer to what's happening than I am so I'm willing to go with his word on that.
You still don't need to give a guy grief for trying to make something alot of people might want, for FREE.
Actually, yes, I do. If Miguel locked himself into a basement and did nothing but hack mono then I could care less. But he's managed to drag a lot of people and mindshare into this whole.NET clusterfuck and I think it's a bad thing. The fact that (parts of) Microsoft also seems to think that a successful mono project is probably a bad thing should be a hint that maybe, just maybe, it's a bad thing.
Miguel has not only wasted his time, but he's suckered a large number of others developers in to expending massive effort on Mono
Miguel has always struck me as chasing the Latest Shiny Thing, and there's always going to be a bunch of people of like mind who are going to follow him off whenever he hears a new buzzword and decides that "his" project needs to be rewritten from scratch around this concept. Quite frankly, I think it's a good thing for the KDE project that he started GNOME rather than trying to "help" KDE.
If he was still working on the core GNOME project, they'd probably be rewriting everything around an AJAX approach right now...
Microsoft is behaving exactly the same way they've always behaved.
Look, Miguel, it's pretty simple. You go play in the sandbox with a reknown bully, you eat sand. Most people figure this out before their sixth birthday. You want to do this mono thing, fine, but you _are_ going to get screwed every time you venture into Microsoft's playground and you aren't going to get a lick of sympathy from the rest of the world when it happens.
IBM-funded report favoring Linux won't get treated with the same healthy scepticism that a Microsoft-funded report
While you're certainly right about the/. reception, it is worth pointing out that IBM makes a heck of a lot of money pushing Windows-based solutions. Sure, they're biased, but they're no Microsoft.
I usually turn my system off at night, too, and I never had a problem with these jobs in FC2 or FC3. It's FC4, and it doesn't matter if the machine was running for 30 minutes or 30 hours.
If you mostly care about desktop performance, I strongly recommend trying Debian 3.1. I can't even decribe the difference. Everything feels faster (and I'm not just comparing with FC4). Heck, I think my typing speed might have increased...
Yes, I know what it _is_. I can read man pages too.
What I don't know is why it's running. I don't use zeroconf. I don't need zeroconf. I don't really _want_ zeroconf. I sure didn't tell my system to run any of this stuff (and I'm almost positive I told it _not_ to in FC3). I certainly don't want it running by default. I don't even want it _installed_, but I gave up long ago on expecting sane dependency management in a Red Hat distro.
If you want statistics, run your own benchmarks. I just want a system where I'm not twiddling my thumbs waiting for stuff that was fast enough last week.
_Everything_ that I was doing in FC3 prior to upgrading to FC4 is at least twice as slow. In some cases, five times as slow. You name it. Booting, starting an X session, compiling. Video playback became effectively impossible.
Disabling selinux didn't have any noticeable effect. That was the first thing I tried. Turning off mDNSrepeater (?) for some reason made a big difference. Disabling all the network filesystem stuff (along with portmap and friends) made a slight difference. But overall... too damn slow.
And breaking Palm compatibility... I don't have time to deal with this stuff.
The description of FC4 that I gave to my coworkers was roughly "Bob Young snuck into my office, stole my processor and took a big dump." More than twice as slow as FC2, maybe four times slower FC3. After I turned off a heap of useless services. Palm synchronization is completely broken.
His analysis says pretty clearly that downloading through p2p is still considered legal. It always will be as long as there's still a levy on every blank media purchase.
Of course, being able to download legally isn't exactly worth much if it's not legal for someone else to upload. That was, IIRC, actually a point made by the original judge in the CRIA case up here, but the appeals court quashed that because it made a conclusion of legality far too early in the proceedings.
Unfortunate, although probably technically correct), because it was one of the most clueful things I've yet to see a court say about the media levy... If you make it legal to receive, you gotta make it legal to give or you didn't really accomplish anything.
Excellent. That's another case that just proves my original point... banning stuff, even if you think (or know) it's bad for you, is cause for NAFTA complaints. In this case, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of Americans would support a Canadian company in a NAFTA complaint against the DMCA.
Just need to find a Canadian company built around reverse engineering protection mechanisms...
Could the USA claim the Canadian rejection of the DMCA violates NAFTA somehow?
The USA might make that argument. But it's just as likely that the DMCA ban on badly defined "circumvention" devices could be held to violate NAFTA, just like a Canadian ban on dangerous gasoline aditives was found to violate NAFTA.
if you train yourself not to use bash-specific features gratuitously
As a rule of thumb, if my shell script gets complicated enough that I need bash-specific features, I use perl.
developers absolutely need to feel pain for every dependency their software has
If managing dependencies is a pain, you're using the wrong tools. Modern FLOSS operating system distributions have already spent time working out that complicated dependency graphs and there's a plethora of tools out there that will help you manage packages. Point and clicky tools, even.
That said, I don't create dependencies gratuitously. When you're dealing with FLOSS software, that's just insane. I'd be doing continuous integration testing just trying to keep the O/S up-to-date. I don't fear dependencies because of the package management issues, but every minor release of ImageMagick sends a chill down my spine...
The inability to work in the other environment without trying to make it like what you're used to means that you have been living in a monoculture.
I started on Unix. HP-UX, SunOS, AIX, Ultrix, etc. But it's funny how my, and my employers, expectations and requirements grew. Or, perhaps more accurately, diverged from what Unix offered.
Proprietary Unix vendors have basically spent the last decade making better handplanes. Great handplanes, sure, and I personally appreciate a great handplane. But when the industry has moved on to the 20" helical blade planers and plywood that come standard in Linux, great handplanes are a niche tool.
anyone who tries to build some of the stuff from sourceforge on non-linux platforms and discovers it to be completely linux-centric and non-portable will probably agree with me here--we want code that runs on unix, not code that runs on linux
I'd love to write code that runs on Unix, but by the time I've paid for a development environment and installed it, finished hunting down and installing all the extra packages I need to get something that has parity with even the weakest Linux install, then finished grabbing the source and manually recompiling the packages (and dependencies) that were so far out of date to be useless...
By that time, I've likely realized that I don't give a shit about Unix.
Well, HP-UX, at least. Trying to work with FLOSS software on HP-UX is enough to make you loath the very concept of proprietary Unix.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I tried it but it didn't find anything...
c.What part of Microsoft for the second time in a row blocked the Mono Birds-of-a-feathers (BOF) meeting do you not comprehend? Now, I don't know where Miguel would have gotten that impression, but he's a fuckload closer to what's happening than I am so I'm willing to go with his word on that.
You still don't need to give a guy grief for trying to make something alot of people might want, for FREE.
Actually, yes, I do. If Miguel locked himself into a basement and did nothing but hack mono then I could care less. But he's managed to drag a lot of people and mindshare into this whole
c.
Miguel has always struck me as chasing the Latest Shiny Thing, and there's always going to be a bunch of people of like mind who are going to follow him off whenever he hears a new buzzword and decides that "his" project needs to be rewritten from scratch around this concept. Quite frankly, I think it's a good thing for the KDE project that he started GNOME rather than trying to "help" KDE.
If he was still working on the core GNOME project, they'd probably be rewriting everything around an AJAX approach right now...
c.
Microsoft is behaving exactly the same way they've always behaved.
Look, Miguel, it's pretty simple. You go play in the sandbox with a reknown bully, you eat sand. Most people figure this out before their sixth birthday. You want to do this mono thing, fine, but you _are_ going to get screwed every time you venture into Microsoft's playground and you aren't going to get a lick of sympathy from the rest of the world when it happens.
c.
While you're certainly right about the /. reception, it is worth pointing out that IBM makes a heck of a lot of money pushing Windows-based solutions. Sure, they're biased, but they're no Microsoft.
c.
Amen to that. The Canadian government has a set of web guidelines which, among other things, say:
I couldn't even begin to count the number of times I've been able to shoot something down because of CLF compliancy issues.
c.
They need to get Osama on the witness stand, but haven't been able to serve him the papers.
c.
Or, better yet, shut down all networking capabilities on any on any infringing copy.
Or non-infringing copy, if you wanted a +1 Funny.
c.
I usually turn my system off at night, too, and I never had a problem with these jobs in FC2 or FC3. It's FC4, and it doesn't matter if the machine was running for 30 minutes or 30 hours.
If you mostly care about desktop performance, I strongly recommend trying Debian 3.1. I can't even decribe the difference. Everything feels faster (and I'm not just comparing with FC4). Heck, I think my typing speed might have increased...
c.
Yes, I know what it _is_. I can read man pages too.
What I don't know is why it's running. I don't use zeroconf. I don't need zeroconf. I don't really _want_ zeroconf. I sure didn't tell my system to run any of this stuff (and I'm almost positive I told it _not_ to in FC3). I certainly don't want it running by default. I don't even want it _installed_, but I gave up long ago on expecting sane dependency management in a Red Hat distro.
c.
If you want statistics, run your own benchmarks. I just want a system where I'm not twiddling my thumbs waiting for stuff that was fast enough last week.
_Everything_ that I was doing in FC3 prior to upgrading to FC4 is at least twice as slow. In some cases, five times as slow. You name it. Booting, starting an X session, compiling. Video playback became effectively impossible.
Disabling selinux didn't have any noticeable effect. That was the first thing I tried. Turning off mDNSrepeater (?) for some reason made a big difference. Disabling all the network filesystem stuff (along with portmap and friends) made a slight difference. But overall... too damn slow.
And breaking Palm compatibility... I don't have time to deal with this stuff.
c.
Bad examples.
I use "apropos" and "locate" pretty much daily. And it's not like either of those processes _should_ be any slower going from FC3 to FC4.
c,
The description of FC4 that I gave to my coworkers was roughly "Bob Young snuck into my office, stole my processor and took a big dump." More than twice as slow as FC2, maybe four times slower FC3. After I turned off a heap of useless services. Palm synchronization is completely broken.
It was bad... I wiped FC4 and installed Debian.
c.
Of course, being able to download legally isn't exactly worth much if it's not legal for someone else to upload. That was, IIRC, actually a point made by the original judge in the CRIA case up here, but the appeals court quashed that because it made a conclusion of legality far too early in the proceedings.
Unfortunate, although probably technically correct), because it was one of the most clueful things I've yet to see a court say about the media levy... If you make it legal to receive, you gotta make it legal to give or you didn't really accomplish anything.
c.
Well, if the processor is x86 you do get to use wine for those (admittedly few) Windows apps which work well with wine.
I wouldn't be too surprised to see Apple put a pile of money into CodeWeavers or TransGaming sometime in the next couple years...
c.
Uh, winter will be over by the time these guys get you out and you'll owe about $12,000,000.
c.
Yeah, and I'm still in shock. I mean, a Slashdot editor with common sense? Isn't that one of the signs of the Apocalypse?
c.
Translation: Knowing how to deal with bullshit is a heck of a lot more important than being able to write Hello World in Java.
c.If you can actually fly to Australia without the iPod, maybe you don't really need it...
Well, sure, but those aren't really allowed on planes.
On the other hand, I've heard that if you soak an iPod in the bathroom sink and then stick it with a piece of metal you can make a bomb...
c.
Excellent. That's another case that just proves my original point... banning stuff, even if you think (or know) it's bad for you, is cause for NAFTA complaints. In this case, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of Americans would support a Canadian company in a NAFTA complaint against the DMCA.
Just need to find a Canadian company built around reverse engineering protection mechanisms...
c.
The USA might make that argument. But it's just as likely that the DMCA ban on badly defined "circumvention" devices could be held to violate NAFTA, just like a Canadian ban on dangerous gasoline aditives was found to violate NAFTA.
c.As a rule of thumb, if my shell script gets complicated enough that I need bash-specific features, I use perl.
developers absolutely need to feel pain for every dependency their software has
If managing dependencies is a pain, you're using the wrong tools. Modern FLOSS operating system distributions have already spent time working out that complicated dependency graphs and there's a plethora of tools out there that will help you manage packages. Point and clicky tools, even.
That said, I don't create dependencies gratuitously. When you're dealing with FLOSS software, that's just insane. I'd be doing continuous integration testing just trying to keep the O/S up-to-date. I don't fear dependencies because of the package management issues, but every minor release of ImageMagick sends a chill down my spine...
The inability to work in the other environment without trying to make it like what you're used to means that you have been living in a monoculture.
I started on Unix. HP-UX, SunOS, AIX, Ultrix, etc. But it's funny how my, and my employers, expectations and requirements grew. Or, perhaps more accurately, diverged from what Unix offered.
Proprietary Unix vendors have basically spent the last decade making better handplanes. Great handplanes, sure, and I personally appreciate a great handplane. But when the industry has moved on to the 20" helical blade planers and plywood that come standard in Linux, great handplanes are a niche tool.
c.
I'd love to write code that runs on Unix, but by the time I've paid for a development environment and installed it, finished hunting down and installing all the extra packages I need to get something that has parity with even the weakest Linux install, then finished grabbing the source and manually recompiling the packages (and dependencies) that were so far out of date to be useless...
By that time, I've likely realized that I don't give a shit about Unix.
Well, HP-UX, at least. Trying to work with FLOSS software on HP-UX is enough to make you loath the very concept of proprietary Unix.
c.
Aw, shucks. Lesbians are, like, totally hot!
c.