Leo himself never seemed that bad, but he's not that intelligent in regards to technology. He's not someone I personally consider as a reputable source for technology news/discussion; I listened to a few episodes of This Week in Tech and unsubscribed. In general, the show often gave me the same feeling I get whenever I overhear someone saying something flat out wrong about computers, simply because they don't know better.
Re:...the same features we delivered seven years a
on
Windows 95 Turns 10
·
· Score: 1
In the first few posts, I've seen a lot of relatively lacking-in-clue replies asking how CherryPy is different from ASP.NET, mod_python, FastCGI, etc. With most Apache-based web platforms, one process will handle many requests, but you cannot guarantee that every request will be handled by the same process: by default, apache starts multiple (possibly multi-threaded) servers, and creates and destroys them as necessary.
ASP.NET uses a single process for each application. Every request is processed by the same process, both in Mono's implementation with mod_mono and on the IIS implementation. This is, as I said, nothing special, uncommon, or unique. My post was definitely not lacking in clue.
CherryPy, on the other hand, runs every request from the same process by using a thread pool instead of a process pool. This means that any global variables you change will be visible to any request. In many cases (keeping in mind memory restraints), you can share items in memory that would otherwise have to go through the database, which can help performance and make keeping track of state easier. Of course, multithreaded data sharing places its own demand on the programmer: the Python core is inherently thread-safe, but no programming language can protect you from race conditions and the like.
ASP.NET runs every request for an application within the same worker process. Static classes can be accessed from all threads throughout the application's lifetime (until it is stopped).
(On a side note: I don't know how the IIS/ASP.NET process model works.
Proving that you are indeed "lacking-in-clue"...
It does let you store data across an application, but you are limited to a single Application hashtable
This is not the only way to store data across an application in ASP.NET. Static classes, variables, etc. stick around for the entire time the application is running. ASP.NET also has its Cache object, which works like Application except Cached objects will expire at a programmer-defined time or after a programmer-defined timespan. The Cache object allows for callbacks for when an object is removed from the Cache, and cache dependencies.
I believe that ASP.NET's page and partial page caching uses this.
Do you know what COM does? (It's a lot more than interprocess communication or shared libraries)
DLLs are essentially shared libraries. Just because they are different does not make them a "weird hack". Guess what: Windows is DIFFERENT than Unix, and the Unix way is not the only way. What makes shared objects on Unix somehow better?
Furthermore, how does some Unixes having shared libraries and IPC for twenty years relate to Windows? Windows has been around for 20 years, and the NT line is less than 15 years old.
This is inaccurate. Your time estimate is wrong for two reasons:
it neglects the time to collect all laptops
it assumes only one laptop may be worked on at the same time, and that ane entire hour of the admin's time would be used.
Assuming, however, the tech people took a certain class's students' laptops every day (example: 1-2 homerooms per day), they could put all the laptops on a cart, take them to a room, and do whatever necessary to fix it. From what I hear from a Mac-using friend, a competent network administrator could netboot the Macs and reinstall the systems. The administrator could be doing other things while waiting for the installs to complete, and could easily do this to multiple systems at once.
Ultimately, I highly doubt that a) they'd have just one person working on this, and b) they'd only reinstall one system at a time. Even if only one person worked in the IT department, others could do tasks such as collecting and returning laptops and plugging them in and such. Depending on the complexitivity of the procedures to recover the systems, the IT employee(s) might not be needed once the procedures are explained.
The issue here is that the kids were _given_ these laptops to use for the school year. They were permitted to take them home and use them on networks other than the schools'.
A computer is NOT a house. A computer can essentially be restored to its original (software) state with minimal effort. I highly doubt all six hundred laptops were individually configured, and instead had some sort of imaging or automated network install, so any broken installations could be restored easily. From what I have been told about Mac OS X, there is an option to reinstall the system without deleting user profiles, so students wouldn't even have to lose files (if they weren't stored or backed up on a network.)
But if I walk into someone's (unlocked) house, and steal their TV, jewelry, and other items of value, they've lost them. They can't go restore the backup. They can't put in a few CDs and reinstall their stolen TV and jewelry. Their only hope is to have the items recovered somehow.
Oh, shut up. They did not do "reprehensible things". Your viewpoint is more extreme that those that think the students are completely innocent and never did anything wrong, ever.
It is simply wrong to charge these students for using computers that they were _given_ to use. They were able to take them home, where they could ultimately do whatever they wanted without supervision. The laptops were not shared, and in the end, anything one student did to his laptop only affected that student, with the exception of the administrator that was allegedly 'monitored'. Assuming this alleged 'monitoring' is some sort of remote access/spy monitoring commonly used on students, this 'monitoring' could most likely easily be defeated by changing a password.
I find the quote "We are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom." at the bottom of the Borough's webpage inappropriate for this town.
I highly suspect it's one of the extensions. I have had Firefox extensions do bad things in the past, and in general watched Firefox get slower and slower as I added certain extensions.
I still have problems with Firefox from time to time, but they happen rarely enough that they don't bother me.
You may want to try one of the browsers that provide tabs for Internet Explorer, such as Maxthon, if you find Firefox unsuitable.
...no. MySQL is the "world's most popular open source database", and is fairly horrible compared to both free alternatives like PostgreSQL and commercial alternatives like Oracle.
No. You may want to read this page -- Sveasoft actively attempts to prevent distribution of software that is licensed under the GNU General Public License. (There are other similar stories out there.)
Also, based on the quality of Sveasoft releases (or lack thereof), I don't think they deserve the money, especially when there are freely distributed products that are more featureful.
I recently tried Opera and noticed no speed difference between Firefox, IE, and Opera. I did this on a Duron 1000 at work and a Athlon64 3000 at home.
As for mouse guestures and tab functionality, they can all be provided via extensions. While Opera does do all of that without any additional software -- Opera isn't free. Firefox is. If voice control is an important feature to someone, then maybe Opera would work well for them.
1.) It wins in speed, everytime, in the online tests/analysis I have seen out there for years now at numerous sites in most ALL categories run in said tests!
This would be important if everyone had slow computers. I remember using Opera way back on when I had a computer that needed a speed bost over IE/Netscape. That was five years ago. But Firefox's performance is more than adequate on every system I used, e.g. Firefox and IE can load pages faster than they can downloads them. Opera may, however, provide a benefit on an old 266MHz system I have, so I plan on trying it out.
2.) Opera is definitely the "least attacked/most secure" of the "big 3" browers'-wise (IE, FireFox/Mozilla/Opera) out there...
I don't see this as an issue. With Firefox, and what I've seen of IE6 SP2, it's not easy to install addons (ActiveX, XPIs.) Furthermore, the additional functionality that most extensions provide is worth the possible (yet unlikely) security issues.
3.) It is MASSSIVELY "multi-platform" & afaik? NOT just restricted to PC's either - there is a large body of handhelds out there which use Opera as their browser tool such as the Symbian 60 series handphone & most all OS' (including FreeBSD, Linux, etc. & more + Windows).
Firefox is available on FreeBSD, Linux, and Windows. Windows and Palm OS handhelds both can have NetFront, an excellent mobile browser, and Windows also has Pocket Internet Explorer. Opera is basically the best choice for Symbian.
However, some of its freeware model unfortunately (as evidenced by the recent XUL 3rd party addons like GreaseMonkey having to be fixed for security holes) may jeopardize it as did ActiveX DLL extensions to IE!
No. These are third party addons that have security holes. I think the additional functionality provided by extensions outweighs by far the *possible* security issues. Opera has no such functionality.
(E.G.-> ActiveX DLL extensions to IE were initially meant to be for "the good", but one bad apple(s) were all it took to make this featureset for IE a detriment rather than an asset)...
The biggest problem with ActiveX is that it became extremely easy for the addons to be installed. Users were easily tricked into installing them, and in some cases, extensions were installed without any user intervention. Both the latest versions of IE and Firefox make installing extensions much more difficult, and, as I said before, the benefit of extensions is well worth the risk.
Yeah, because the only reason anybody would buy an Xbox is to play movies that aren't even out yet in a format that only 10% of the US viewing audience will see any gain from.
.... assuming that 10% figures out/cares enough to use a high definition capable connection, or even svideo (instead of composite or a modulated signal.)
Mono works, now. I'm not sure how well a large application would work, but it definitely does serve ASP.NET pages and has some pretty significant followers.
ASP.NET contains so much more functionality that makes many tasks easier (although you can still use just the basic functionality that was in ASP, if you prefer.) ASP.NET is also compiled.
Also, a minor nitpick -- ASP can use any Windows Scripting language, which includes JScript and I think a few others via third party software.
After using ASP.NET and Web Forms, I couldn't go back to something simpler (like PHP without a framework.) Although, the object oriented nature of.NET and Java makes both much more appealing than PHP to me.
I've found PRADO to make PHP development much more tolerable, although I still prefer to use.NET, and I plan on learning Java soon.
I'm sure they'd all work great with the Xbox's USB ports. That is, after you get an adapter for the controller ports. But why spend money on getting USB to work just to have Ethernet over USB 1, when there's already a builtin 10/100 Ethernet port right on the back?
Slashdot Mirror
Leo's podcast This Week in Tech features John C. Dvorak and Steve Gibson.
Leo himself never seemed that bad, but he's not that intelligent in regards to technology. He's not someone I personally consider as a reputable source for technology news/discussion; I listened to a few episodes of This Week in Tech and unsubscribed. In general, the show often gave me the same feeling I get whenever I overhear someone saying something flat out wrong about computers, simply because they don't know better.
Try Windows Services for Unix.
ASP.NET uses a single process for each application. Every request is processed by the same process, both in Mono's implementation with mod_mono and on the IIS implementation. This is, as I said, nothing special, uncommon, or unique. My post was definitely not lacking in clue.
CherryPy, on the other hand, runs every request from the same process by using a thread pool instead of a process pool. This means that any global variables you change will be visible to any request. In many cases (keeping in mind memory restraints), you can share items in memory that would otherwise have to go through the database, which can help performance and make keeping track of state easier. Of course, multithreaded data sharing places its own demand on the programmer: the Python core is inherently thread-safe, but no programming language can protect you from race conditions and the like.
ASP.NET runs every request for an application within the same worker process. Static classes can be accessed from all threads throughout the application's lifetime (until it is stopped).
(On a side note: I don't know how the IIS/ASP.NET process model works.
Proving that you are indeed "lacking-in-clue"...
It does let you store data across an application, but you are limited to a single Application hashtable
This is not the only way to store data across an application in ASP.NET. Static classes, variables, etc. stick around for the entire time the application is running. ASP.NET also has its Cache object, which works like Application except Cached objects will expire at a programmer-defined time or after a programmer-defined timespan. The Cache object allows for callbacks for when an object is removed from the Cache, and cache dependencies.
I believe that ASP.NET's page and partial page caching uses this.
This is nothing special. Just another framework that doesn't really do anything unique at all...
DLLs are essentially shared libraries. Just because they are different does not make them a "weird hack". Guess what: Windows is DIFFERENT than Unix, and the Unix way is not the only way. What makes shared objects on Unix somehow better?
Furthermore, how does some Unixes having shared libraries and IPC for twenty years relate to Windows? Windows has been around for 20 years, and the NT line is less than 15 years old.
- it neglects the time to collect all laptops
- it assumes only one laptop may be worked on at the same time, and that ane entire hour of the admin's time would be used.
Assuming, however, the tech people took a certain class's students' laptops every day (example: 1-2 homerooms per day), they could put all the laptops on a cart, take them to a room, and do whatever necessary to fix it. From what I hear from a Mac-using friend, a competent network administrator could netboot the Macs and reinstall the systems. The administrator could be doing other things while waiting for the installs to complete, and could easily do this to multiple systems at once.Ultimately, I highly doubt that a) they'd have just one person working on this, and b) they'd only reinstall one system at a time. Even if only one person worked in the IT department, others could do tasks such as collecting and returning laptops and plugging them in and such. Depending on the complexitivity of the procedures to recover the systems, the IT employee(s) might not be needed once the procedures are explained.
A computer is NOT a house. A computer can essentially be restored to its original (software) state with minimal effort. I highly doubt all six hundred laptops were individually configured, and instead had some sort of imaging or automated network install, so any broken installations could be restored easily. From what I have been told about Mac OS X, there is an option to reinstall the system without deleting user profiles, so students wouldn't even have to lose files (if they weren't stored or backed up on a network.)
But if I walk into someone's (unlocked) house, and steal their TV, jewelry, and other items of value, they've lost them. They can't go restore the backup. They can't put in a few CDs and reinstall their stolen TV and jewelry. Their only hope is to have the items recovered somehow.
It is simply wrong to charge these students for using computers that they were _given_ to use. They were able to take them home, where they could ultimately do whatever they wanted without supervision. The laptops were not shared, and in the end, anything one student did to his laptop only affected that student, with the exception of the administrator that was allegedly 'monitored'. Assuming this alleged 'monitoring' is some sort of remote access/spy monitoring commonly used on students, this 'monitoring' could most likely easily be defeated by changing a password.
I have screen on Windows... there's a package for Services for UNIX...
45 Railroad St.
Kutztown, PA 19530
(610) 683-3545
Borough of Kutztown:
45 Railroad St.
Kutztown, PA 19530
(610) 683-6131
fax (610) 683-6729
Kutztown Area School District: District Administration
50 Trexler Ave.
Kutztown, PA 19530
(610) 683-7361
fax (610) 683-7230
more addresses and phone numbers for the District
I find the quote "We are a country awakened to danger and called to defend freedom." at the bottom of the Borough's webpage inappropriate for this town.
I still have problems with Firefox from time to time, but they happen rarely enough that they don't bother me.
You may want to try one of the browsers that provide tabs for Internet Explorer, such as Maxthon, if you find Firefox unsuitable.
I found that:
- Egghead and Onsale merged in 1999
- Egghead went out of business and purchased by Amazon in 2001
- The Newegg Wikipedia article refutes it
- ...and so do a few epinions comments.
Furthermore, I've seen many sites refuting this claim.ChiefValue is very close/the same company as Newegg, although it's denied; see here and here.
Please, mod parent up.
...no. MySQL is the "world's most popular open source database", and is fairly horrible compared to both free alternatives like PostgreSQL and commercial alternatives like Oracle.
Also, based on the quality of Sveasoft releases (or lack thereof), I don't think they deserve the money, especially when there are freely distributed products that are more featureful.
DD-WRT is most likely a much better choice; the new R23 will blow away Sveasoft's crap.
As for mouse guestures and tab functionality, they can all be provided via extensions. While Opera does do all of that without any additional software -- Opera isn't free. Firefox is. If voice control is an important feature to someone, then maybe Opera would work well for them.
This would be important if everyone had slow computers. I remember using Opera way back on when I had a computer that needed a speed bost over IE/Netscape. That was five years ago. But Firefox's performance is more than adequate on every system I used, e.g. Firefox and IE can load pages faster than they can downloads them. Opera may, however, provide a benefit on an old 266MHz system I have, so I plan on trying it out.
2.) Opera is definitely the "least attacked/most secure" of the "big 3" browers'-wise (IE, FireFox/Mozilla/Opera) out there...
I don't see this as an issue. With Firefox, and what I've seen of IE6 SP2, it's not easy to install addons (ActiveX, XPIs.) Furthermore, the additional functionality that most extensions provide is worth the possible (yet unlikely) security issues.
3.) It is MASSSIVELY "multi-platform" & afaik? NOT just restricted to PC's either - there is a large body of handhelds out there which use Opera as their browser tool such as the Symbian 60 series handphone & most all OS' (including FreeBSD, Linux, etc. & more + Windows).
Firefox is available on FreeBSD, Linux, and Windows. Windows and Palm OS handhelds both can have NetFront, an excellent mobile browser, and Windows also has Pocket Internet Explorer. Opera is basically the best choice for Symbian.
However, some of its freeware model unfortunately (as evidenced by the recent XUL 3rd party addons like GreaseMonkey having to be fixed for security holes) may jeopardize it as did ActiveX DLL extensions to IE!
No. These are third party addons that have security holes. I think the additional functionality provided by extensions outweighs by far the *possible* security issues. Opera has no such functionality.
(E.G.-> ActiveX DLL extensions to IE were initially meant to be for "the good", but one bad apple(s) were all it took to make this featureset for IE a detriment rather than an asset)...
The biggest problem with ActiveX is that it became extremely easy for the addons to be installed. Users were easily tricked into installing them, and in some cases, extensions were installed without any user intervention. Both the latest versions of IE and Firefox make installing extensions much more difficult, and, as I said before, the benefit of extensions is well worth the risk.
Mono works, now. I'm not sure how well a large application would work, but it definitely does serve ASP.NET pages and has some pretty significant followers.
ASP.NET contains so much more functionality that makes many tasks easier (although you can still use just the basic functionality that was in ASP, if you prefer.) ASP.NET is also compiled.
Also, a minor nitpick -- ASP can use any Windows Scripting language, which includes JScript and I think a few others via third party software.
I've found PRADO to make PHP development much more tolerable, although I still prefer to use .NET, and I plan on learning Java soon.
I'm sure they'd all work great with the Xbox's USB ports. That is, after you get an adapter for the controller ports. But why spend money on getting USB to work just to have Ethernet over USB 1, when there's already a builtin 10/100 Ethernet port right on the back?
...would refuse to honor any daylight savings time changes. It's definitely more trouble than it'd be worth.