I can't agree more. The game's "facts" are highly subjective. Also, I hate those stupid coltan people who argue that if you own something electronic then you support child slavery. Look the majority of Coltan comes from Brazil. In fact the Congo only produces 13% of the world's supply of Coltan without considering recycling (which provides 20% of the worlds supply might I add.)
I think the thing that makes me the hottest about it all is the fallacy in logic here. If a country has child slavery, is war torn, and has issues like "can't provide clean water to the population," then more than likely they aren't doing too well on the exporting crap out of their country. Anyway, I hate that Apple had a heavy hand in this, for the simple fact that it's one sided censorship, but the game sucked and the "facts" of the game are shaky at best.
when most apps require the Metro, that won't be a useful solution.
I concur. This whole Metro UI thing sets the stage for the future. At some point the "classic" desktop becomes a moot point in new versions of programs. Meaning it becomes a moot point for end-users too, unless you actually wanted to get work done.
Okay I know this may stoke a few flames, I'll take the heat sorry everyone. However, I think it should be said.
I see this as the rise of Linux on the Desktop
Unless GNOME and their wackiness continues to remove more of the traditional desktop metaphor from the computer. I have to give props where due, GNOME 3 could be a gem or useless, but its too early in the game to really know.
Unity isn't much better than GNOME 3. It is hard to "put things into other things." Look this is the most basic metaphor of modern computers. People want things to go into other things. Either as a way to organize, to get rid of, or to add to something. Neither GNOME 3 or Unity do this on the desktop. You don't have to go all out, not everything needs to go into everything else, that's why the folder metaphor was created.
Touchscreen and super-hyper-iPad-rip-off does not have to equal given up on traditional methods for getting work done on a computer, tablet, iThingy, or what not. I think we've gone off the deep end simply because now we have the technology to a cheap enough point, that permits touch based interfaces.
KDE at least hasn't dropped the desktop metaphor but they've added a whole slew of additional ideas on top of that. All of those ideas are paid for in the blood of your memory/hard drive/video card. Most of those ideas aren't presented clearly to the user and the user typically has no idea they exist. Most of the KDE end-users I know, use the little orange tear drop to add more useless widgets to their desktop. That's the only thing they know it to do!
If Linux, BSD, Solaris, whoever want to make big on the desktop, yes now is the time when everyone else is becoming an Apple clone. However, it's the DE that makes or breaks it for an end user. If anyone has a chance it's KDE (maybe), XFCE (likely), IceWM (highly likely), or LXDE (good contender). GNOME and Unity are just too unpolished, too not ready for the masses to take this opportunity.
It's a technique that had been used successfully in many organisms without any obvious effects.
Other than the 96% mortality rate for the procedure. Seriously, the process is incredibly far from a point of "no obvious effects."
Also if you RTFA you will see that they have a slightly modified method which yields only a 77% mortality rate.
Finally those that do go on to live have variations at the molecular level that still are poorly understood and side effects from those variations even less so. So let's not go simplifying this whole process by saying, "oh, ho hum just another insertion of genes into a cell." This whole process is about a trillion miles from normal. This trial was setup to see if they could insert genetic material that could prevent FIV. At least one live birth was hoped for and the fact that the yield was eleven live births is epic good news. With those that live the main goal of the trail can be conducted to see what happens when the kittens are given FIV and to see if they go on to develop AIDS. That being said a lot of people are going to be interested in the process with such a high yield, however I do want to point out, the high yield was a nice surprise not the condition that they were testing for in this trial.
Ah, someone mod this guy up. It seems like he truly believes the system still works. If only we had 6.72 million more copies of this guy, he might be right*.
*Also all 6.72 million would need to be filthy rich.
The only reason anyone would want to have this, is simply so no one else would have it. I know it sounds pretty crazy but if a company has the rights to WebOS, then who knows what might happen?! In reality, WebOS may just be a yawn and no one really wants it for an actual project, but then again the companies in question don't know that for sure, so why not get a piece of the action while the getting is good? That way if it does become something big they're on the bandwagon, and if it doesn't they got in early while the price was low.
In the end, the whole thing comes down to fear of a dark horse, rising up and stabbing the competition in the back. Really, does anyone think WebOS has that ability to topple HTC and Samsung's Android phones (with at least a 50% or better chance)? Most likely this is just a move to keep others from making a move, which is common in the cell phone market.
Most resources are recyclable, but simply end up in trash heaps
Believe it or not, over the long haul, putting the crap in one spot is pretty convenient recycling. Trash heap or not.
Now, as for oil and non-renewables: we'll have to find something else
Agreed, except we are long past the point where we should have found the something else, we are on borrowed time at this point for oil. I mean, really, who here thinks oil sands are a good idea?
The main reason people go hungry today is mostly local economics and government.
And the logistics of it all. It is pretty complicated to move an impactful amount of anything, anywhere on this Earth.
Monsanto should die a swift death... but that is somewhat tangential.
Don't worry, when push comes to shove in the future, Monsanto and their patents, and patent law on food for that matter, will be irrelevant (so to say.)
I usually don't feed trolls but I would dare say, that the majority of the Earth's population would not agree with you. Let's take a look at the two countries that make up over a third of the world. China and India... Well there's not much to look at. The people there are doing okay but far from all the nice USA vices that you have listed, except maybe the coal fired power plants.
Your message seems to be targeted to 1st world nations and I hate to break it to you, but the first world nations aren't the biggest, except maybe the US (who is 3rd in population) and Russia (who is 10th in population). The biggest nations in the world have an organic diet, basically whatever food they find. Swim only in non-chlorinated pools, or discharge channels whichever comes first. Exercise...Well that's not exactly top on their list when they are starving. Have never even heard the word chiropractor. Do not even have an option to "Big Pharma". (sarcasm) In fact look at how wonderful the people in India are doing.(/sarcasm)
When it comes down to it, if I had to choose between "clean" water and actual clean water. I'd choose the latter over crapping myself to death. I don't know where this idea of, "we're making the Earth worst," came from but the underlying point is that the Earth came built with all kinds of stuff to make our lives horrible, very, very horrible. It is through burning fossils, radiating ourselves, hacking birds with forty foot grinders, and pumping our food supply full of wonderful artificial crap; that you actually have survived long enough to type your rant on the things that have kept you alive. (AKA, it's real hard to take that jog though the fresh country air when some animal is tracking you for food, or to swim in a non-chlorinated pool when you have Polio from swimming in non-chlorinated pools)
Everything in this world has a trade-off, nothing is perfect and that includes the ecosystem with or without us. Intelligence breeds destruction as you may see it. I, however, believe that we have within our grasp the ability to ensure our own survival either on or off of this lump of rock we call Earth. There will be things that we must give up and there will be things we must accept going forward. There will always be people who cannot stand change, who fight advancement; either because they fear it or poorly understand it. You, dear troll, have no idea, nor do you care to understand. It's just easier that way isn't it? By all means, move out to the *real* country of the African savannah or the the south-central regions of Utah. Let me know how you like it.
Maybe you mean "there is 45 persons in Brasil, and they are all working on something else than the distribution" ?
No I mean that 45 engineers between France, USA, and Brazil. The Brazil comment was made because the majority of the engineers are located in Brazil (not all.) Brazil is a very KDE heavy country, therefore, that may have influenced the decision to go KDE only. Not trying to say anything else beyond that.
I wouldn't just write off Mandriva completely but they do look, at the current moment, pretty shaky as a distro. A lot of core contributors were shooed off by a lot of bad politics and management. Maybe they will see the writing on the wall and do something about it. This change of direction that they've taken in 2011 may be the first sign of that, maybe not. RosaLabs, the Russian outfit that you speak of, has been looking for a distro to showcase some of their ideas for quite some time. Mandriva 2011 will be the first time the RosaLabs concepts make it to prime time on a distro. What this all means in the grand scheme of things is still up in the air. Will Rosa and Mandriva forge some sort of community?
OpenSuSE is a pretty slick distro... The Evergreen project sounds awesome. Look I don't blame you on the whole Mandriva thing, but if you are going to write them off, at least do it on the fact that they may very well drive off the rest of their contributors, not on the fact that they have a small engineering team. Usually small teams get more done than large teams, YMMV.
Re:Mandriva isn't trusted by the community
on
Mandriva 2011 Out
·
· Score: 1
New Mandriva employees making significant (bad) changes to packages which are officially maintained by a community contributor, without consultation.
Yes, you are correct. That I think has been the biggest slap that Mandriva has made on the community. There's been some arguing about the point but I totally understand where you are coming from and I really don't blame you.
It has come to everyone's attention, painfully, that the release schedule needs something more than its current form which is just one shade shy from pure chaos. There is a lot of talk about that, some tentative plans have been made, but there again in pure Mandriva style things *could* be subject to change.
I'm not about to tell you that everything is changed and you should come back, Mandriva is still far from that, but they do realize, to an extent, that there is a problem. However, and I won't use this as a panacea, a lot of distros are having the same issue of not being very community friendly or community contribution friendly. I think what you all are doing with Mageia is awesome and I really hope to see a #2 release from you all soon. I really like RPM5 and I would love to see that in Mageia sometime down the road. I currently use Slackware but dabble with RPM based distros every so often. Mandriva has been one of my favorites back in the Mandrake days. Recently is has been delegated to install, click a few times, and then blow away VM. This recent change in focus has really piqued my attention, maybe Mandriva will come to their senses, may not.
I think forking is one of the most powerful and useful tools of FOSS, I think what you all are doing is amazing and I wish you the best on your community's project. I think once I see a #2 release I'll start hitting Mageia up with some VM time.
Will I hate my life if I try to stick with Mandriva + Gnome? Am I better off switching distros?
That's a hard call. The direction of Mandriva proper is not to support GNOME and I don't think they have a big community supported GNOME like Slackware. You may in the end switch distros if no clear direction for GNOME + Mandriva appears.
For now they still have packages for GNOME but there again, Mandriva won't support those packages.
It certainly can't be that many if they need to drop anything but KPW as available and supported desktops...
I wouldn't call dropping everything but KDE as proof that they have very few contributors left. SuSE includes GNOME but officially supports KDE, Slackware dropped GNOME long time ago and doesn't include them at all. GNOME 2 was tricky to build and maintain. GNOME 3 is in, "I don't even know" land. GNOME with all of its dependencies, vast array of configuration options for each dependency, and magic order of build instructions for each dependency; does not tend to be easy to maintain a workable tree from source. A couple of people have built build systems that do nothing but buildGNOME. Thankfully, most builders have given up on their own build systems and have gone to JHbuild.
KDE on the other hand is a pretty straight forward process to maintain a working tree. You can check it out here. Of course, that's something that the average user isn't going to do but there again we are talking about Mandriva. They have to maintain a working tree of the DE and still include their things. GNOME/KDE aren't targeting a single distro, they are making a DE for whoever. Distro have to take that and add and remove what works for their distro. To do this with GNOME is almost like putting stitches in yourself. KDE is very easy to customize distro-wise.
Red Hat and SUSE are successful because they have stuck to a single and coherent vision for their brand of Linux, because they have a good sales model that pushes support for their brand of Linux, because they have played major roles within the Linux community in general which attracts community contributors to use and support your distro, and because they have had strong word of mouth within the community.
Mandrake had that as well, but as you can tell from some of the comments here on Slashdot, that all changed with when they purchased Conectiva. I don't know if they got inflated head syndrome or what, but the quality of software and the number of upstream contributions began to cool quite a bit. Bug reports were not being followed up by Mandriva engineers and the community wasn't taking up the slack either, so bug reports would go on for months and months with no answer. Hardware support issues abounded as not incredibly smart defaults were chosen, the most famous (infamous) example is the decision to ship the distro with the main volume on mute.
The distro has had its hard core followers and commercial users who have stuck around, but as I noted in my last post, the politics behind the distro have played out into two things: Focusing on KDE alone and better release schedule. Those two things will make it easier for the community and Mandriva to support the distribution.
Finally, you have to remember that we are talking LTS for their free product. If you are a company you can purchase their "enterprise" Linux which has a different support cycle than the community version. Also, Mandriva has forty-five engineers to date, most of them are in Brazil (which by the way is very KDE heavy country.)
Please note:
I've got no beef with the way Ubuntu, GNOME 3, KDE 4 work. If that's your cup of tea then still give Mandriva a try, you may in fact like it.
Real quick I want to address one thing...
Also Ubuntu has an LTS option, saves me having to do a complete upgrade so often.
Mandriva will have an LTS option hopefully by the end of this year. Tour of 2011
Politics in the Mandriva world have played out to start emulating the Ubuntu release cycle sans the two a year release. Instead we will see a normal Mandriva release once a year with regular patches for 1.5 years after release. Starting at the end of this year will be the LTS line. No word on how often a LTS will come out but 2011 LTS will receive patches for 3 years.
Any current experience with Mandriva? Are they still good? Worth trying again?
I would dare say that one of the big things that has held Mandriva back is KDE. Mandriva 2011 supports KDE only, no GNOME mess here. KDE's polish over the several iterations since the 4.0 disaster really shows here in Mandriva. Many things are being addressed and there are plans to make normal GTK+ applications more KDE friendly (like how SuSE has made their firefox integrate into KDE nicely.) The biggest thing I think is that Mandriva understands that a lot of people are getting annoyed with the sudden changes in favorite applications and desktops.
The standard kicker is replaced with a Mandriva specific kicker that I think is a good compromise between modern and classical application menus. Amarok is not present in this release, instead is Clementine, which is loosely based on the Amarok of 1.4 days. KMail (and everything it brings) is not present either, instead is Thunderbird from Mozilla. LibreOffice 3.4 is used, which I think is the best version out there thus far and the most useful for day to day operations. (side note:) A few Windows users at our company were switched off of Office 2007 to LibreOffice 3.4.2 and have had really great results in their day to day operations; so much so, we may be moving them off Windows altogether. The users only need TN5250 emulation, Microsoft Exchange support, modern web support, and an Office suite that can connect to DB2 and do Pivot Tables.
Finally, the package manager is what I would call sane for most Linux heads. Yeah it's not dumbed down like the Ubuntu store but I think most people will enjoy what they see here. Overall Mandriva 2011 offers a desktop that I think will rival Ubuntu. With all the compromises that they have made with KDE between new hotness and what we all enjoyed from the Linux desktop pre-Mac OS X copier era, I think this distro will start to fill a ever-growing niche of old school Linux users that enjoyed DE as they were.
Have you ever done any C++ programming? Does RAII ring a bell?
That's almost offensive. You use close in the destructor you idiot. Yes I know what RAII is since I made an example of its usage in the part of my comment that you did not quote, ye of limited sight and even shorter span of memory.
Yes, if you use it for things where C++ has better mechanisms, i.e. most of the cases.
Obviously that is that limited sight thing. Yes standard is good, but I would dare say not *most* of the cases. Boost comes to mind. However I doubt that to actually sink into your head based off of what you have thus far said. No matter if I wasted another five to six hundred words making my case. If you want to be arrogant that is fine. However, I have programmed sixteen years in C++, so please do me a favor and if you don't know me, don't try to comment on me or at least expect the same poor assumptions to be tossed in your direction, as I have done so in this reply.
Finally do your self a favor and get out whatever pent up aggression you may have here on this thread, since I have little time to reply back to an absolute single minded bigot such as yourself. I would hate for your vile language to be wasted on a thread that someone may actually reply back to.
One could say the exact same thing about VTables in C++, lookup pointers in C or RT-Code in Objective-C. Which bring me back to my point we could debate this at about the same rate we could debate compiler vs JIT. Machines are state based, OOP is artificial no matter the platform, a CPU is not made to natively understand the concept of an object be it C++, C#, VB, or Java.
At some point a machine will not natively do everything a language requires and thus extra "fluff" will need to be added. That's why Interpreted vs JIT is defined as who sends the executed code to the machine and when, not what is executed or how it goes about it. C++ compilers add machine code abstraction layers for all kinds of stuff like virtual pointers and polymorphism, does this suddenly classify every C++ compiler as JIT?
The problem with Java is that the startup time is poor, which is often ignored by benchmarks.
I can understand this poorly written application usually have very long start up times. Usually if you need to yank in a ton of stuff you can do that at runtime in the background. Dynamic loading.
Compare that to, say, ASP.NET, which if precompiled can launch in a few hundred milliseconds!
You can precompile EE applications as well and have them start up in milliseconds. I think the PHP guys are the ones who came up with this in the first place but then of course I am sure that at some point Xerox came up with the idea first.
There's no good reason for this. Oracle could use a container format that's uncompressed by default, pre-compile, cache, etc...
As far as EE goes you are not required to use WAR or whatever they are called. In SE that is being addressed in Java 8, but you can already do some of it with dynamic loading..NET is snazzy in the fact that the VM is loaded with the OS so you only incur the cost at startup and shutdown. Maybe that's why it seems to take ten minutes to turn off a Windows machine.
There's also still this attitude of having "User" vs "Server" JVMs
So does.NET, except it's not a switch away. Do you think they use the same.NET VM in Windows Server as they do in Windows Home whatever?
n my experience most of Java's performance improvements have had more to do with advances in hardware.
I can tell you that all compilers have advanced in step with hardware improvements. Also, I have easily ran Tomcat 6 and Linux on a Dell OptiPlex GX300. Trust me I have tons of 90's hardware that I am required to make work and enjoy hacking on. I still change DIP switches on ISA cards at my work place.
Interpreted code does the following: Bytecode is loaded by a native program into an Interpreter. The Interpreter reads the code and sends native code to the machine or to another piece of software that can do such.
JIT code does the following: Bytecode is loaded by a native program into a compiler. The bytecode is compiled into native code. The native code is sent to the machine.
The difference is the following, the bytecode in JIT eventually becomes the native code. Interpreted bytecode never makes it as native code. Both can be optimized by saving the bits of machine code that get generated, however JIT usually means that the native code follows closely what the original bytecode looked like. Interpreted usually has to make assumptions on how execution should happen and in what order.
If you're doing it right C++ needs very few destructors and memory leaks only happen once every blue moon.
Exactly. Usually deep in the code internals you'll see a couple of d-tors that do all the delete's. Everything else just seems to auto-magically happen and delete itself, sorta like Java.
Java simply doesn't scale. Try running your microbenchmarks with a million objects in memory...
That sounds like EE development and not SE development. If that is the case:
That sounds like a problem with the design. Try using more lock free structures, you can use the java.util.concurrent package to find tools that will help you build these easier in Java 5 and better.
If your are indeed talking SE development, why is your desktop application using millions of objects in memory? I do not think it is wise to juggle that many objects in any desktop platform. Usually, and this is just me, I flush objects out of memory and to disk, network host, database file, or something other than memory once I hit over more than I could keep in my head. Pagination designs help smooth this out for users and using task workers keeps everything moving smoothly. For the curious the pagination design pattern in Java SE looks exactly the same using the QT toolkit (if you use that toolkit.)
I don't know your situation and I won't pretend that I do, but in most cases I find it is the developer just assumed Java would do this or they are still following an old convention that doesn't work well with today's JVM. Either way, EE or SE, if you are dealing with millions of objects in memory, there are ways of moving that data around to keep space on the stack for responsiveness in your application. Just having a million objects in memory just because is not a good idea.
Just curious what use case do you have that requires you to have that many objects in system memory at once? Are we talking simple objects or pretty complex ones?
I am not sure why people keep saying this even in the light that Microsoft has said that they are bringing.NET even closer to the core API here.
HTML 5/JS is just being added onto what is already there. The fact that no one has heard about Silverlight has made everyone worried. Microsoft has talked about Silverlight just not to the degree that everyone had hope for. So since no one likes waiting until September, we'll just spread rumors and make Microsoft pay for suddenly wanting to do things like Apple and keep quiet.
Do you believe, not having to close unlock things makes you a better programmer?
No and that's not the point of these features. A car can have a manual or automatic transmission. Either one won't prevent the driver from being an ass to me on the road or make them a safer driver overall. Likewise, the features aren't there to make one a better programmer or a programmer who is bad at resource handling suddenly better. The features are there to handle certain cases automatically, cases where we've already had a solution (using finally) but would have preferred it to be less verbose.
Likewise, GC has been a favorite subject of C++. Should we have GC in the core of C++ or not? There is always a third party library that can add GC to your C++ project. Does using that library make you a bad coder?
Making your job easier is not equal to making you a bad coder. A bad coder *is* no matter the language, platform, or libraries used. When I develop applications that need to talk to a DB, I have to think about when I need to let that connection go, it doesn't matter if I am using Java or C++ or Python, when to let go of a connection is part of the design, not the language. The language part only dictates how many lines of code it will take to let the connection go, not when. If you are not thinking about how you handle resources it is not a problem of the platform so much as it is the design phase. Even in GC environments you have to keep track of what is happening to your resources, you just keep track of them in a different manner.
As a rough example: I open a file in Java or C++, I still have to think about how that file will be used and when I need to close it (no other option in C++) or just let it close by itself (an option in Java but not usually the best one.) If we are talking about a text file that only the current running application is going to use then yeah let it close by itself in Java and close the file in the destructor of the main delegate (or whatever you may have used to open the file) in C++. Both of those options function the exact same way, the file doesn't close until the application does. It's just syntax sugar that separates them, either way I've got to remember that I have a file open.
I did not say its currently the case, looking at the article I suggested/said it could be going there.
That's been an argument for decades for everything. Again, making something easy does not make a bad programmer. Bad programmers tend to not think things out fully and giving them a manual or automatic isn't going to change that.
once you have programed in Java for a few months you are incapable of writing functional C++ code
Having been a Java developer for eleven years now, I still write C++ with few memory leaks and a couple of passes through a debugger usually fixes that. I am not sure why people believe Java makes you a bad programmer. Java, C#, and C++ all follow the same design patterns, they just use different methods on getting there. It is really not that hard to remember, hey in this language the object is GC and in this one it isn't. A singleton design pattern in C++ and Java look exactly alike and function exactly the same. Java you don't have to worry about cleaning the mess up and in C++ you clean it up in the destructor, c'mon some people make it out to be the difference between gutting a fish and brain surgery. It's all syntax sugar, a lot of people need a new argument.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't agree more. The game's "facts" are highly subjective. Also, I hate those stupid coltan people who argue that if you own something electronic then you support child slavery. Look the majority of Coltan comes from Brazil. In fact the Congo only produces 13% of the world's supply of Coltan without considering recycling (which provides 20% of the worlds supply might I add.)
I think the thing that makes me the hottest about it all is the fallacy in logic here. If a country has child slavery, is war torn, and has issues like "can't provide clean water to the population," then more than likely they aren't doing too well on the exporting crap out of their country. Anyway, I hate that Apple had a heavy hand in this, for the simple fact that it's one sided censorship, but the game sucked and the "facts" of the game are shaky at best.
when most apps require the Metro, that won't be a useful solution.
I concur. This whole Metro UI thing sets the stage for the future. At some point the "classic" desktop becomes a moot point in new versions of programs. Meaning it becomes a moot point for end-users too, unless you actually wanted to get work done.
I see this as the rise of Linux on the Desktop
Unless GNOME and their wackiness continues to remove more of the traditional desktop metaphor from the computer. I have to give props where due, GNOME 3 could be a gem or useless, but its too early in the game to really know.
Unity isn't much better than GNOME 3. It is hard to "put things into other things." Look this is the most basic metaphor of modern computers. People want things to go into other things. Either as a way to organize, to get rid of, or to add to something. Neither GNOME 3 or Unity do this on the desktop. You don't have to go all out, not everything needs to go into everything else, that's why the folder metaphor was created.
Touchscreen and super-hyper-iPad-rip-off does not have to equal given up on traditional methods for getting work done on a computer, tablet, iThingy, or what not. I think we've gone off the deep end simply because now we have the technology to a cheap enough point, that permits touch based interfaces.
KDE at least hasn't dropped the desktop metaphor but they've added a whole slew of additional ideas on top of that. All of those ideas are paid for in the blood of your memory/hard drive/video card. Most of those ideas aren't presented clearly to the user and the user typically has no idea they exist. Most of the KDE end-users I know, use the little orange tear drop to add more useless widgets to their desktop. That's the only thing they know it to do!
If Linux, BSD, Solaris, whoever want to make big on the desktop, yes now is the time when everyone else is becoming an Apple clone. However, it's the DE that makes or breaks it for an end user. If anyone has a chance it's KDE (maybe), XFCE (likely), IceWM (highly likely), or LXDE (good contender). GNOME and Unity are just too unpolished, too not ready for the masses to take this opportunity.
It's a technique that had been used successfully in many organisms without any obvious effects.
Other than the 96% mortality rate for the procedure. Seriously, the process is incredibly far from a point of "no obvious effects."
Also if you RTFA you will see that they have a slightly modified method which yields only a 77% mortality rate.
Finally those that do go on to live have variations at the molecular level that still are poorly understood and side effects from those variations even less so. So let's not go simplifying this whole process by saying, "oh, ho hum just another insertion of genes into a cell." This whole process is about a trillion miles from normal. This trial was setup to see if they could insert genetic material that could prevent FIV. At least one live birth was hoped for and the fact that the yield was eleven live births is epic good news. With those that live the main goal of the trail can be conducted to see what happens when the kittens are given FIV and to see if they go on to develop AIDS. That being said a lot of people are going to be interested in the process with such a high yield, however I do want to point out, the high yield was a nice surprise not the condition that they were testing for in this trial.
Ah, someone mod this guy up. It seems like he truly believes the system still works. If only we had 6.72 million more copies of this guy, he might be right*.
*Also all 6.72 million would need to be filthy rich.
expand their mobile market reach.
Reads as: "So no one else has this option."
The only reason anyone would want to have this, is simply so no one else would have it. I know it sounds pretty crazy but if a company has the rights to WebOS, then who knows what might happen?! In reality, WebOS may just be a yawn and no one really wants it for an actual project, but then again the companies in question don't know that for sure, so why not get a piece of the action while the getting is good? That way if it does become something big they're on the bandwagon, and if it doesn't they got in early while the price was low.
In the end, the whole thing comes down to fear of a dark horse, rising up and stabbing the competition in the back. Really, does anyone think WebOS has that ability to topple HTC and Samsung's Android phones (with at least a 50% or better chance)? Most likely this is just a move to keep others from making a move, which is common in the cell phone market.
Most resources are recyclable, but simply end up in trash heaps
Believe it or not, over the long haul, putting the crap in one spot is pretty convenient recycling. Trash heap or not.
Now, as for oil and non-renewables: we'll have to find something else
Agreed, except we are long past the point where we should have found the something else, we are on borrowed time at this point for oil. I mean, really, who here thinks oil sands are a good idea?
The main reason people go hungry today is mostly local economics and government.
And the logistics of it all. It is pretty complicated to move an impactful amount of anything, anywhere on this Earth.
Monsanto should die a swift death... but that is somewhat tangential.
Don't worry, when push comes to shove in the future, Monsanto and their patents, and patent law on food for that matter, will be irrelevant (so to say.)
I usually don't feed trolls but I would dare say, that the majority of the Earth's population would not agree with you. Let's take a look at the two countries that make up over a third of the world. China and India... Well there's not much to look at. The people there are doing okay but far from all the nice USA vices that you have listed, except maybe the coal fired power plants.
Your message seems to be targeted to 1st world nations and I hate to break it to you, but the first world nations aren't the biggest, except maybe the US (who is 3rd in population) and Russia (who is 10th in population). The biggest nations in the world have an organic diet, basically whatever food they find. Swim only in non-chlorinated pools, or discharge channels whichever comes first. Exercise...Well that's not exactly top on their list when they are starving. Have never even heard the word chiropractor. Do not even have an option to "Big Pharma". (sarcasm) In fact look at how wonderful the people in India are doing.(/sarcasm)
When it comes down to it, if I had to choose between "clean" water and actual clean water. I'd choose the latter over crapping myself to death. I don't know where this idea of, "we're making the Earth worst," came from but the underlying point is that the Earth came built with all kinds of stuff to make our lives horrible, very, very horrible. It is through burning fossils, radiating ourselves, hacking birds with forty foot grinders, and pumping our food supply full of wonderful artificial crap; that you actually have survived long enough to type your rant on the things that have kept you alive. (AKA, it's real hard to take that jog though the fresh country air when some animal is tracking you for food, or to swim in a non-chlorinated pool when you have Polio from swimming in non-chlorinated pools)
Everything in this world has a trade-off, nothing is perfect and that includes the ecosystem with or without us. Intelligence breeds destruction as you may see it. I, however, believe that we have within our grasp the ability to ensure our own survival either on or off of this lump of rock we call Earth. There will be things that we must give up and there will be things we must accept going forward. There will always be people who cannot stand change, who fight advancement; either because they fear it or poorly understand it. You, dear troll, have no idea, nor do you care to understand. It's just easier that way isn't it? By all means, move out to the *real* country of the African savannah or the the south-central regions of Utah. Let me know how you like it.
Maybe you mean "there is 45 persons in Brasil, and they are all working on something else than the distribution" ?
No I mean that 45 engineers between France, USA, and Brazil. The Brazil comment was made because the majority of the engineers are located in Brazil (not all.) Brazil is a very KDE heavy country, therefore, that may have influenced the decision to go KDE only. Not trying to say anything else beyond that.
I wouldn't just write off Mandriva completely but they do look, at the current moment, pretty shaky as a distro. A lot of core contributors were shooed off by a lot of bad politics and management. Maybe they will see the writing on the wall and do something about it. This change of direction that they've taken in 2011 may be the first sign of that, maybe not. RosaLabs, the Russian outfit that you speak of, has been looking for a distro to showcase some of their ideas for quite some time. Mandriva 2011 will be the first time the RosaLabs concepts make it to prime time on a distro. What this all means in the grand scheme of things is still up in the air. Will Rosa and Mandriva forge some sort of community?
OpenSuSE is a pretty slick distro... The Evergreen project sounds awesome. Look I don't blame you on the whole Mandriva thing, but if you are going to write them off, at least do it on the fact that they may very well drive off the rest of their contributors, not on the fact that they have a small engineering team. Usually small teams get more done than large teams, YMMV.
New Mandriva employees making significant (bad) changes to packages which are officially maintained by a community contributor, without consultation.
Yes, you are correct. That I think has been the biggest slap that Mandriva has made on the community. There's been some arguing about the point but I totally understand where you are coming from and I really don't blame you.
It has come to everyone's attention, painfully, that the release schedule needs something more than its current form which is just one shade shy from pure chaos. There is a lot of talk about that, some tentative plans have been made, but there again in pure Mandriva style things *could* be subject to change.
I'm not about to tell you that everything is changed and you should come back, Mandriva is still far from that, but they do realize, to an extent, that there is a problem. However, and I won't use this as a panacea, a lot of distros are having the same issue of not being very community friendly or community contribution friendly. I think what you all are doing with Mageia is awesome and I really hope to see a #2 release from you all soon. I really like RPM5 and I would love to see that in Mageia sometime down the road. I currently use Slackware but dabble with RPM based distros every so often. Mandriva has been one of my favorites back in the Mandrake days. Recently is has been delegated to install, click a few times, and then blow away VM. This recent change in focus has really piqued my attention, maybe Mandriva will come to their senses, may not.
I think forking is one of the most powerful and useful tools of FOSS, I think what you all are doing is amazing and I wish you the best on your community's project. I think once I see a #2 release I'll start hitting Mageia up with some VM time.
Will I hate my life if I try to stick with Mandriva + Gnome? Am I better off switching distros?
That's a hard call. The direction of Mandriva proper is not to support GNOME and I don't think they have a big community supported GNOME like Slackware. You may in the end switch distros if no clear direction for GNOME + Mandriva appears.
For now they still have packages for GNOME but there again, Mandriva won't support those packages.
It certainly can't be that many if they need to drop anything but KPW as available and supported desktops...
I wouldn't call dropping everything but KDE as proof that they have very few contributors left. SuSE includes GNOME but officially supports KDE, Slackware dropped GNOME long time ago and doesn't include them at all. GNOME 2 was tricky to build and maintain. GNOME 3 is in, "I don't even know" land. GNOME with all of its dependencies, vast array of configuration options for each dependency, and magic order of build instructions for each dependency; does not tend to be easy to maintain a workable tree from source. A couple of people have built build systems that do nothing but build GNOME. Thankfully, most builders have given up on their own build systems and have gone to JHbuild.
KDE on the other hand is a pretty straight forward process to maintain a working tree. You can check it out here. Of course, that's something that the average user isn't going to do but there again we are talking about Mandriva. They have to maintain a working tree of the DE and still include their things. GNOME/KDE aren't targeting a single distro, they are making a DE for whoever. Distro have to take that and add and remove what works for their distro. To do this with GNOME is almost like putting stitches in yourself. KDE is very easy to customize distro-wise.
Red Hat and SUSE are successful because they have stuck to a single and coherent vision for their brand of Linux, because they have a good sales model that pushes support for their brand of Linux, because they have played major roles within the Linux community in general which attracts community contributors to use and support your distro, and because they have had strong word of mouth within the community.
Mandrake had that as well, but as you can tell from some of the comments here on Slashdot, that all changed with when they purchased Conectiva. I don't know if they got inflated head syndrome or what, but the quality of software and the number of upstream contributions began to cool quite a bit. Bug reports were not being followed up by Mandriva engineers and the community wasn't taking up the slack either, so bug reports would go on for months and months with no answer. Hardware support issues abounded as not incredibly smart defaults were chosen, the most famous (infamous) example is the decision to ship the distro with the main volume on mute.
The distro has had its hard core followers and commercial users who have stuck around, but as I noted in my last post, the politics behind the distro have played out into two things: Focusing on KDE alone and better release schedule. Those two things will make it easier for the community and Mandriva to support the distribution.
Finally, you have to remember that we are talking LTS for their free product. If you are a company you can purchase their "enterprise" Linux which has a different support cycle than the community version. Also, Mandriva has forty-five engineers to date, most of them are in Brazil (which by the way is very KDE heavy country.)
I've got no beef with the way Ubuntu, GNOME 3, KDE 4 work. If that's your cup of tea then still give Mandriva a try, you may in fact like it.
Real quick I want to address one thing...
Also Ubuntu has an LTS option, saves me having to do a complete upgrade so often.
Mandriva will have an LTS option hopefully by the end of this year. Tour of 2011
Politics in the Mandriva world have played out to start emulating the Ubuntu release cycle sans the two a year release. Instead we will see a normal Mandriva release once a year with regular patches for 1.5 years after release. Starting at the end of this year will be the LTS line. No word on how often a LTS will come out but 2011 LTS will receive patches for 3 years.
Any current experience with Mandriva? Are they still good? Worth trying again?
I would dare say that one of the big things that has held Mandriva back is KDE. Mandriva 2011 supports KDE only, no GNOME mess here. KDE's polish over the several iterations since the 4.0 disaster really shows here in Mandriva. Many things are being addressed and there are plans to make normal GTK+ applications more KDE friendly (like how SuSE has made their firefox integrate into KDE nicely.) The biggest thing I think is that Mandriva understands that a lot of people are getting annoyed with the sudden changes in favorite applications and desktops.
The standard kicker is replaced with a Mandriva specific kicker that I think is a good compromise between modern and classical application menus. Amarok is not present in this release, instead is Clementine, which is loosely based on the Amarok of 1.4 days. KMail (and everything it brings) is not present either, instead is Thunderbird from Mozilla. LibreOffice 3.4 is used, which I think is the best version out there thus far and the most useful for day to day operations. (side note:) A few Windows users at our company were switched off of Office 2007 to LibreOffice 3.4.2 and have had really great results in their day to day operations; so much so, we may be moving them off Windows altogether. The users only need TN5250 emulation, Microsoft Exchange support, modern web support, and an Office suite that can connect to DB2 and do Pivot Tables.
Finally, the package manager is what I would call sane for most Linux heads. Yeah it's not dumbed down like the Ubuntu store but I think most people will enjoy what they see here. Overall Mandriva 2011 offers a desktop that I think will rival Ubuntu. With all the compromises that they have made with KDE between new hotness and what we all enjoyed from the Linux desktop pre-Mac OS X copier era, I think this distro will start to fill a ever-growing niche of old school Linux users that enjoyed DE as they were.
Have you ever done any C++ programming? Does RAII ring a bell?
That's almost offensive. You use close in the destructor you idiot. Yes I know what RAII is since I made an example of its usage in the part of my comment that you did not quote, ye of limited sight and even shorter span of memory.
Yes, if you use it for things where C++ has better mechanisms, i.e. most of the cases.
Obviously that is that limited sight thing. Yes standard is good, but I would dare say not *most* of the cases. Boost comes to mind. However I doubt that to actually sink into your head based off of what you have thus far said. No matter if I wasted another five to six hundred words making my case. If you want to be arrogant that is fine. However, I have programmed sixteen years in C++, so please do me a favor and if you don't know me, don't try to comment on me or at least expect the same poor assumptions to be tossed in your direction, as I have done so in this reply.
Finally do your self a favor and get out whatever pent up aggression you may have here on this thread, since I have little time to reply back to an absolute single minded bigot such as yourself. I would hate for your vile language to be wasted on a thread that someone may actually reply back to.
One could say the exact same thing about VTables in C++, lookup pointers in C or RT-Code in Objective-C. Which bring me back to my point we could debate this at about the same rate we could debate compiler vs JIT. Machines are state based, OOP is artificial no matter the platform, a CPU is not made to natively understand the concept of an object be it C++, C#, VB, or Java.
At some point a machine will not natively do everything a language requires and thus extra "fluff" will need to be added. That's why Interpreted vs JIT is defined as who sends the executed code to the machine and when, not what is executed or how it goes about it. C++ compilers add machine code abstraction layers for all kinds of stuff like virtual pointers and polymorphism, does this suddenly classify every C++ compiler as JIT?
The problem with Java is that the startup time is poor, which is often ignored by benchmarks.
I can understand this poorly written application usually have very long start up times. Usually if you need to yank in a ton of stuff you can do that at runtime in the background. Dynamic loading.
Compare that to, say, ASP.NET, which if precompiled can launch in a few hundred milliseconds!
You can precompile EE applications as well and have them start up in milliseconds. I think the PHP guys are the ones who came up with this in the first place but then of course I am sure that at some point Xerox came up with the idea first.
There's no good reason for this. Oracle could use a container format that's uncompressed by default, pre-compile, cache, etc...
As far as EE goes you are not required to use WAR or whatever they are called. In SE that is being addressed in Java 8, but you can already do some of it with dynamic loading. .NET is snazzy in the fact that the VM is loaded with the OS so you only incur the cost at startup and shutdown. Maybe that's why it seems to take ten minutes to turn off a Windows machine.
There's also still this attitude of having "User" vs "Server" JVMs
So does .NET, except it's not a switch away. Do you think they use the same .NET VM in Windows Server as they do in Windows Home whatever?
n my experience most of Java's performance improvements have had more to do with advances in hardware.
I can tell you that all compilers have advanced in step with hardware improvements. Also, I have easily ran Tomcat 6 and Linux on a Dell OptiPlex GX300. Trust me I have tons of 90's hardware that I am required to make work and enjoy hacking on. I still change DIP switches on ISA cards at my work place.
Let's look at the fundamental differences here:
Interpreted code does the following: Bytecode is loaded by a native program into an Interpreter. The Interpreter reads the code and sends native code to the machine or to another piece of software that can do such.
JIT code does the following: Bytecode is loaded by a native program into a compiler. The bytecode is compiled into native code. The native code is sent to the machine.
The difference is the following, the bytecode in JIT eventually becomes the native code. Interpreted bytecode never makes it as native code. Both can be optimized by saving the bits of machine code that get generated, however JIT usually means that the native code follows closely what the original bytecode looked like. Interpreted usually has to make assumptions on how execution should happen and in what order.
If you're doing it right C++ needs very few destructors and memory leaks only happen once every blue moon.
Exactly. Usually deep in the code internals you'll see a couple of d-tors that do all the delete's. Everything else just seems to auto-magically happen and delete itself, sorta like Java.
Disclaimer: Yes, interpreted. Bytecode is interpreted, even with stuff like JIT.
Um, no, it is not. There really isn't much to debate here. This is like debating if JIT is the same thing as a compiler.
Java simply doesn't scale. Try running your microbenchmarks with a million objects in memory...
That sounds like EE development and not SE development. If that is the case:
That sounds like a problem with the design. Try using more lock free structures, you can use the java.util.concurrent package to find tools that will help you build these easier in Java 5 and better.
If your are indeed talking SE development, why is your desktop application using millions of objects in memory? I do not think it is wise to juggle that many objects in any desktop platform. Usually, and this is just me, I flush objects out of memory and to disk, network host, database file, or something other than memory once I hit over more than I could keep in my head. Pagination designs help smooth this out for users and using task workers keeps everything moving smoothly. For the curious the pagination design pattern in Java SE looks exactly the same using the QT toolkit (if you use that toolkit.)
I don't know your situation and I won't pretend that I do, but in most cases I find it is the developer just assumed Java would do this or they are still following an old convention that doesn't work well with today's JVM. Either way, EE or SE, if you are dealing with millions of objects in memory, there are ways of moving that data around to keep space on the stack for responsiveness in your application. Just having a million objects in memory just because is not a good idea.
Just curious what use case do you have that requires you to have that many objects in system memory at once? Are we talking simple objects or pretty complex ones?
I am not sure why people keep saying this even in the light that Microsoft has said that they are bringing .NET even closer to the core API here.
HTML 5/JS is just being added onto what is already there. The fact that no one has heard about Silverlight has made everyone worried. Microsoft has talked about Silverlight just not to the degree that everyone had hope for. So since no one likes waiting until September, we'll just spread rumors and make Microsoft pay for suddenly wanting to do things like Apple and keep quiet.
Do you believe, not having to close unlock things makes you a better programmer?
No and that's not the point of these features. A car can have a manual or automatic transmission. Either one won't prevent the driver from being an ass to me on the road or make them a safer driver overall. Likewise, the features aren't there to make one a better programmer or a programmer who is bad at resource handling suddenly better. The features are there to handle certain cases automatically, cases where we've already had a solution (using finally) but would have preferred it to be less verbose.
Likewise, GC has been a favorite subject of C++. Should we have GC in the core of C++ or not? There is always a third party library that can add GC to your C++ project. Does using that library make you a bad coder?
Making your job easier is not equal to making you a bad coder. A bad coder *is* no matter the language, platform, or libraries used. When I develop applications that need to talk to a DB, I have to think about when I need to let that connection go, it doesn't matter if I am using Java or C++ or Python, when to let go of a connection is part of the design, not the language. The language part only dictates how many lines of code it will take to let the connection go, not when. If you are not thinking about how you handle resources it is not a problem of the platform so much as it is the design phase. Even in GC environments you have to keep track of what is happening to your resources, you just keep track of them in a different manner.
As a rough example: I open a file in Java or C++, I still have to think about how that file will be used and when I need to close it (no other option in C++) or just let it close by itself (an option in Java but not usually the best one.) If we are talking about a text file that only the current running application is going to use then yeah let it close by itself in Java and close the file in the destructor of the main delegate (or whatever you may have used to open the file) in C++. Both of those options function the exact same way, the file doesn't close until the application does. It's just syntax sugar that separates them, either way I've got to remember that I have a file open.
I did not say its currently the case, looking at the article I suggested/said it could be going there.
That's been an argument for decades for everything. Again, making something easy does not make a bad programmer. Bad programmers tend to not think things out fully and giving them a manual or automatic isn't going to change that.
once you have programed in Java for a few months you are incapable of writing functional C++ code
Having been a Java developer for eleven years now, I still write C++ with few memory leaks and a couple of passes through a debugger usually fixes that. I am not sure why people believe Java makes you a bad programmer. Java, C#, and C++ all follow the same design patterns, they just use different methods on getting there. It is really not that hard to remember, hey in this language the object is GC and in this one it isn't. A singleton design pattern in C++ and Java look exactly alike and function exactly the same. Java you don't have to worry about cleaning the mess up and in C++ you clean it up in the destructor, c'mon some people make it out to be the difference between gutting a fish and brain surgery. It's all syntax sugar, a lot of people need a new argument.
Warning goatse link in parent!