Your analogy reverses the order of events... "overspent consistently while shopping" equates to the recent economic stimulus, and the drunken weekend in Vegas equates to the fraudulent war and the resulting oil price shock. You're right...the latter is much more dire, and one should be upset, though.
It's pretty trendy to complain about Wolfram's enormous ego, and I find that far more annoying than his ego ever was in the first place.
That said, I'll never forget my first impression of ANKOS: flipping through the pages I noticed that he managed to put his name on the top of each and every page. I laughed.
Re:Wow. Just Wow.
on
Oracle Buys Sun
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Java really doesn't make much sense for Oracle, either. A lot of databases might get use Java front-ends, but so what? Oracle hasn't been in that business.
You're joking, right? Oracle owns BEA now, and therefore both their Weblogic app server and the JRockit VM. Oracle has the TopLink implementation of the JPA-compliant ORM layer. They have the JDeveloper IDE. Those are just the things off the top of my head without searching.
In the long run, FOSS converges to one winner, challenged by many (much smaller) creatures. Try to build a new browser or new *nix kernel and see how many people you project gets.
I'm confused. Does this mean Gecko should bow down to the mighty WebKit, or vice-versa?
Notice how she's looking at you out of the side of her eyes. She's sizing you up. She's trying to see if you're man enough. This is an idealized, visual manifestation of bitch shields and shit tests. She's not angry...she's skeptical of the size of your sack.
That might work for LA and a few other cities, where congestion is the problem. But cutting tax money for highway maintenance would effect areas where private investors would never go.
You're probably right. Linux is safe until it gets a $79 commercial software package that people want so badly that they'll steal it...which could be a long, long time.
Exactly. And before Apple bought them, NeXT was almost entirely ignored by the trade rags. So was OS/2, and Be. Everything was framed as Apple-versus-MS, with MS being the "defacto standard". Apple was lucky to get a token mention as the only viable non-MS alternative.
I can remember longer. In the pre-www days the trade rags had a heavy MS bias. Apple was contantly "beleaguered", and didn't become the darling until the iPod was a hit, really.
Roger Kay's paper was a lot like the movie Supersize Me, wherein he accepted anything he was offered. Microsoft has a huge product line. If that standard were applied fairly one could easily make Windows PCs appear expensive. "Would you like Office with that?"
- Scala works out of the box. - Scala Actors do not work, because they are implemented using Threads (which are not supported). - The Lift web framework does not work out of the box, because it depends on Actors and JDBC.
Yes, exactly. Interesting historical anecdote from the 70s, I wasn't aware of that. I first encountered the idea from this paper, which makes it seem a close possible reality. In their case, they used the compact "bc" representation of the LLVM IR.
True, but the decoupling that you refer to is not the same as the one that I suggested. Your decoupling only benefits the internals of their designs. It does not decouple compiler writers from the ISA, nor does it decouple a user's binaries from the ISA. For that matter, it does not fully relieve Intel from honoring the contract that the ISA implies. I suppose it's a start, but if we find ourselves in a situation "where we'd have to invent something quite similar to it", I hope we'd do much better than reflexively extending both wrists towards the same set of handcuffs.
If we didn't use the x86 instruction set we'd have to invent something quite similar to it.
I agree that there would still need to be a set of primitive hardware operations. I also agree that there would need to be a way that binaries are persistently represented. But must the same thing perform both functions? Can't we decouple that with something somewhat like Transmeta's code-morphing layer? (link)
Exactly! Solaris and AIX wouldn't be an adequate substitute for MacOS X, either...yet they're all three UNIX, and it would be inappropriate for anybody to suggest that this is a reason that Solaris isn't UNIX. The only reason the reverse has superficial appeal is that those systems came first. A flavor of UNIX that runs a smartphone wouldn't be a substitute for Solaris, either. The UNIX designation is orthogonal to these issues.
Its also true that you are not really permitted to leave the Mislim faith.
What a perfectly bizarre thing to say. Since when has anybody's permission relevant to disbelief? Since when has any faith openly given blessings to apostasy? No one in the Christian world gave me permission to stop believing...not that I asked or cared, but I know they weren't happy about it.
There's more to Unix than just being minimally complaint to some written spec.
And yet nobody in this thread can seem to put their finger on it without demanding something that you can do with MacOS X. (Example: configuration from the command line...see the man page for 'defaults').
This whole thread smells bad to me. If a Solaris admin tried to claim that AIX wasn't UNIX because he couldn't run dtrace, he'd be laughed out of the room.
I shouldn't be surprised, though. NeXTstep was similarly ostracized back in the day, too. I think UNIX weenies must be a bunch of religious fanatics who view useable software as the work of the devil. Unix minus the arcana makes certs valueless, after all.
The command-line example that you gave happens to be the edge-case where the GUI is better. You're absolutely right about that. As soon as you need to perform something more repetitive, you can write loops and functions, or collect commands into a script, and suddenly you're in a scenario where the GUI would seem tedious by comparison. If you never encounter such a need, then a GUI is probably a better fit for your style of work. But both interface styles have areas where they shine above the other.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL... Right, it's because they discovered it wasn't a video game - not that it became evident that the justification was mere pretense.
In American english we have things like "God damned pig buttfucker"
Your analogy reverses the order of events... "overspent consistently while shopping" equates to the recent economic stimulus, and the drunken weekend in Vegas equates to the fraudulent war and the resulting oil price shock. You're right...the latter is much more dire, and one should be upset, though.
I agree. Pulling funding for glassfish would be a horrible move.
It's pretty trendy to complain about Wolfram's enormous ego, and I find that far more annoying than his ego ever was in the first place.
That said, I'll never forget my first impression of ANKOS: flipping through the pages I noticed that he managed to put his name on the top of each and every page. I laughed.
Java really doesn't make much sense for Oracle, either. A lot of databases might get use Java front-ends, but so what? Oracle hasn't been in that business.
You're joking, right? Oracle owns BEA now, and therefore both their Weblogic app server and the JRockit VM. Oracle has the TopLink implementation of the JPA-compliant ORM layer. They have the JDeveloper IDE. Those are just the things off the top of my head without searching.
In the long run, FOSS converges to one winner, challenged by many (much smaller) creatures. Try to build a new browser or new *nix kernel and see how many people you project gets.
I'm confused. Does this mean Gecko should bow down to the mighty WebKit, or vice-versa?
I agree completely, save one minor quibble about the tacit assumption that idioms in porn are in any way associated with wifely attributes.
Notice how she's looking at you out of the side of her eyes. She's sizing you up. She's trying to see if you're man enough. This is an idealized, visual manifestation of bitch shields and shit tests. She's not angry...she's skeptical of the size of your sack.
This is most certainly not intentional simply because it's so dumb and in-your-face.
You must have never seen the Gates/Seinfeld commercials they unintentionally made.
That might work for LA and a few other cities, where congestion is the problem. But cutting tax money for highway maintenance would effect areas where private investors would never go.
You're probably right. Linux is safe until it gets a $79 commercial software package that people want so badly that they'll steal it...which could be a long, long time.
Exactly. And before Apple bought them, NeXT was almost entirely ignored by the trade rags. So was OS/2, and Be. Everything was framed as Apple-versus-MS, with MS being the "defacto standard". Apple was lucky to get a token mention as the only viable non-MS alternative.
I can remember longer. In the pre-www days the trade rags had a heavy MS bias. Apple was contantly "beleaguered", and didn't become the darling until the iPod was a hit, really.
Roger Kay's paper was a lot like the movie Supersize Me, wherein he accepted anything he was offered. Microsoft has a huge product line. If that standard were applied fairly one could easily make Windows PCs appear expensive. "Would you like Office with that?"
Hmm...I wonder why they never complained about the limited subset of classes that GWT supports in client-side code.
Scala
- Scala works out of the box.
- Scala Actors do not work, because they are implemented using Threads (which are not supported).
- The Lift web framework does not work out of the box, because it depends on Actors and JDBC.
Yes, exactly. Interesting historical anecdote from the 70s, I wasn't aware of that. I first encountered the idea from this paper, which makes it seem a close possible reality. In their case, they used the compact "bc" representation of the LLVM IR.
True, but the decoupling that you refer to is not the same as the one that I suggested. Your decoupling only benefits the internals of their designs. It does not decouple compiler writers from the ISA, nor does it decouple a user's binaries from the ISA. For that matter, it does not fully relieve Intel from honoring the contract that the ISA implies. I suppose it's a start, but if we find ourselves in a situation "where we'd have to invent something quite similar to it", I hope we'd do much better than reflexively extending both wrists towards the same set of handcuffs.
If we didn't use the x86 instruction set we'd have to invent something quite similar to it.
I agree that there would still need to be a set of primitive hardware operations. I also agree that there would need to be a way that binaries are persistently represented. But must the same thing perform both functions? Can't we decouple that with something somewhat like Transmeta's code-morphing layer? (link)
Exactly! Solaris and AIX wouldn't be an adequate substitute for MacOS X, either...yet they're all three UNIX, and it would be inappropriate for anybody to suggest that this is a reason that Solaris isn't UNIX. The only reason the reverse has superficial appeal is that those systems came first. A flavor of UNIX that runs a smartphone wouldn't be a substitute for Solaris, either. The UNIX designation is orthogonal to these issues.
Its also true that you are not really permitted to leave the Mislim faith.
What a perfectly bizarre thing to say. Since when has anybody's permission relevant to disbelief? Since when has any faith openly given blessings to apostasy? No one in the Christian world gave me permission to stop believing...not that I asked or cared, but I know they weren't happy about it.
There's more to Unix than just being minimally complaint to some written spec.
And yet nobody in this thread can seem to put their finger on it without demanding something that you can do with MacOS X. (Example: configuration from the command line...see the man page for 'defaults').
This whole thread smells bad to me. If a Solaris admin tried to claim that AIX wasn't UNIX because he couldn't run dtrace, he'd be laughed out of the room.
I shouldn't be surprised, though. NeXTstep was similarly ostracized back in the day, too. I think UNIX weenies must be a bunch of religious fanatics who view useable software as the work of the devil. Unix minus the arcana makes certs valueless, after all.
Try running a mac os x server and a solaris server, side by side, running the same application, and tell me that mac os x is truly unix.
You're right. The application I used to test your hypothesis was "uname". It gave me totally different results on each machine.
Any OS requiring >90% of configuration changes to be made in a GUI does not count as UNIX, in my book.
man defaults(1), weenie.
The command-line example that you gave happens to be the edge-case where the GUI is better. You're absolutely right about that. As soon as you need to perform something more repetitive, you can write loops and functions, or collect commands into a script, and suddenly you're in a scenario where the GUI would seem tedious by comparison. If you never encounter such a need, then a GUI is probably a better fit for your style of work. But both interface styles have areas where they shine above the other.