Have you ever looked at the BSD section on slashdot? Not only is it full of constant BSD bashing troll bullshit, but there's genuine FUD from linux users all the time about how BSD is so hard, and how its so slow, and how it can't do all sorts of things that it does just fine.
The BSD users who bash linux are a small minority of people who like to stir up shit for no reason. The linux users who bash BSD are a small minority of people who like to stir up shit for no reason. There is no reason to treat either group of tards differently, or to act as though the normal users of either OS are to blame for having idiots also use the same OS.
The syntax was "vile and full of syntactic salt"? That would be 100% a matter of opinion. Some people don't like ruby's syntax, but like some of the ideas behind rails. So they make rails-like frameworks for languages they do like. There's nothing wrong with that, and rails isn't magically better than them simply because you prefer ruby's syntax.
Corporations should be able to do anything and everything to make a buck, and unless enough consumers can organize a large enough boycott to hurt them financially, *AND* be lucky enough that the morons running the company realize this is why they are hurting financially, nothing should be done about it?
Corporations are given their charters to benefit society. When they are a detriment, it is the responsability of government to regulate them. Consumer protection prevents companies from selling me broken products, why shouldn't it prevent them from selling me products that I can only use in conjunction with other specific products? Or products which I cannot use anymore once they decide they don't want to write drivers anymore for new OSs?
"Finally... some real viable choices"? Come on, lots of different linux distros and all three BSDs have had AMD64 support for quite some time now. How much more blatent can you make a troll, and still get your "story" accepted?
You can use someone else's computer just fine. You don't just magically forget qwerty because you learned dvorak any more than you forget english because you learned spanish. And if you are typing for long enough on someone else's computer that the slower speed of your qwerty typing is a problem, then changing the keyboard map is very quick and easy.
There is no linux emulation, it is linux compatability. Its a simple syscall translation, there is nothing dodgy about it, and it doesn't cause any problems. It simply uses the same libs a linux machine would (typically taken from redhat), and maps linux syscall numbers to the native BSD syscall numbers.
And as I already pointed out, there IS FFS with journalling already. You just have to pay for it. Nobody does because journalling offers no advantage. Or did you have some kind of facts to back up your claims that journalling offers something?
You are the one taking the cop-out. The OS doesn't "have it", in BSD or linux. You are talking about people custom packaging the OS, and people do that with both linux and BSD, your point is complete bullshit. Your inability to work google is not a flaw of BSD.
And of course, 3d graphics is supported just fine. If ati doesn't release a driver, that doesn't make it BSDs fault. Or are we going to start claiming windows is superior to linux because it has more vendor supplied drivers?
I only mentioned that NetBSD runs on more hardware because Linus claimed otherwise, I personally don't think it matters how much obscure stuff nobody uses gets supported.
As for your list, you are very confused about what an OS is capable of, and what someone has decided to do. There are custom BSD distros for specialized purposes, and different installers. Just because the defaults included in the 3 mains BSDs aren't what you wanted, doesn't mean BSD can't do it. Go ahead and make a specialized BSD for whatever you want, its quite easy actually.
You also list stuff BSDs have, like hyperthreading, accelerated 3D, hotplugging, etc. And BSDs device driver support is quite good actually, try it instead of spouting the same tired old nonsense.
And of course, linux doesn't have a really good, mature, journalling filesystem either, just some new, immature ports of such filesystems. The 3 big BSDs don't use journalling by default, and don't need it. But if you insist on slowing down your disk IO for some reason you can purchase FFS+journalling from Wasabi Systems, but I'd rather just not use journalling thanks.
You are claiming that to install openbsd you must buy a cd or "do everything from scratch". This is completely false, and given that it would obviously deter people from using openbsd based on a made up fear of having to "do everything from scratch", that makes it FUD.
Of course mozilla is not included in the base system, its a huge bloated monster that most people don't want on say, a mail server. But you don't have to ftp anything by hand, or learn any complicated package management system, that's the point. The package management across the BSD is almost the same, so when you know one you know them all, and they are very simple and well documented. All you had to do was type pkg_add "whatever_software_you_want" and it will install it and any pre-requisites.
And FYI, printing is the same in linux and BSD, either BSD lpd or CUPs, both are available for both linux and BSD.
Obviously the thousands of people using mysql on BSDs are wrong and you are right, its easy to tell with the plethora of evidence you provided.
And read Linus's words again. He is claiming linux is a superior system, because it can do "many" things BSD cannot. He doesn't say anything about commercial application support, as that would obviously be an area where both linux and the BSDs lose to obviously inferiour systems like windows.
So, you think you can compare arches linux supports to CPUs netbsd supports? What kind of logic is that? Those 22 architectures linux supports include different arches using the same CPUs too you know. There's nothing wrong with that for either system, arch is more than just CPU, and involves drivers for chipsets, BIOS/firmware/framebuffer/video, as well as common peripherals.
Mysql works fine, you are just plain spreading FUD now. Maya works fine under linux compatability, more FUD. And of course neither BSD nor linux supports any applications, the applications support whatever OS's their creators choose. Pretending that BSD is inferior because companies don't both releasing BSD native versions of their apps is rediculous. Or do you also believe that windows is superior to linux?
Don't mod something flamebait without reason. Linus even said he was a bad person to ask because he doesn't use BSD. I pointed out where he is incorrect. This is not flamebait, its reality. If you disagree, then grow some balls and tell us all why you think I'm wrong, don't just mod it down because you don't like it.
I didn't say anything bad about linux at all, I stated two simple facts. Maybe you could point out some of these things that linux does and BSD doesn't? Just because its Linus spreading the FUD doesn't make it ok.
Its very easy on openbsd, and I seriously doubt its much harder on freebsd. You have to download the distfiles manually because of Sun's stupid license, but then you just type "make install".
And of course, some company not making software for BSD is not a limitation of BSD. BSD is entirely capable of running the software, Sun just doesn't feel like releasing a BSD version.
First of all, you don't need to learn yet another ports systems, all 3 BSDs use a very similar ports tree. You just have to type "make install" in the directory of the software you want installed. They also have excellent documentation, so you could have found this out in less time than it took to find your knoppix CD.
And wether you buy an openbsd CD or do a network install makes no difference at all, they are the exact same installation procedure. There is no need to "do everything from scratch" anymore than there is with any linux distro. Leave your FUD at home.
He's obviously a bad person to ask since he thinks things like "you'll find a lot of areas where Linux is better (often a lot better -- as in "it works"), and then you'll find a few narrow areas where one particular BSD version will be better." and "Linux has a much wider audience, in many ways. That ranges from supporting much wider hardware (both in the driver sense and in the architecture sense) to actual uses.".
Sorry, NetBSD runs on more hardware that linux does, and apart from running on very large SMP systems, I can't think of *anything* that linux can do and BSD can't, much less "many" things.
Go read David's blog. He makes up completely and utterly false claims about rails vs java all the time, just to stir up shit with java people. Rails is not under any circumstances 10 times faster to develop in than any java framework, but that's the claim he's always making. In fact, having used both rails and RIFE, rails isn't actually faster to use at all, but David still makes misleading comparisons on his blog of best case rails examples vs worst case rife examples to make it seem like rails is 10 times faster to use.
If your sole criteria for "better" is "less keystrokes", then rails is better, and so is not commenting your code and using single letter variable names. If you instead consider things like time to develop, time to maintain, performance, scalability, security, reliability, etc, then you will realize that some java frameworks will be better for some things, and rails will be better for other things, and that there's plenty of other options in other languages that are perfectly viable too. Trying to pretend rails is simply "better" than everything is rediculous.
Keep in mind, rails "scales" by spawning processes, which is slow and uses lots of memory. It also means that if someone tried to actually run a big site on rails like the rails zealots falsly claim you can, then you would end up with literally THOUSANDS of connections to your database server. So much for scaling. How you can possibly claim that rails is universally better than anything java has is beyond me. Think for yourself for a change, maybe even go try a few java frameworks before you making such rediculous claims.
And again, "available to use" does matter. Because you are comparing a version of rails that only exists in your imagination, to a vague concept you don't understand (J2EE). Compare what rails has now, what is really there. And compare an actual framework in java, not a vague concept of stuffy "enterprise" java. Or did you not realize there's many different frameworks you can use in java, with different strengths and weaknesses, so you can pick the one that best suites what you are doing.
Re:No, you hold the hype for 3 months.
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
No, I'm not mixing anything up. The rails community, lead by David the professional troll, is constantly stirring up shit with the java people and making rediculous claims about how rails is better than java. But when someone points out things java handles, and rails does not, we hear "its not finished yet". I don't care if its finished or not, it has issues that make it clearly and obviously inferior to more mature java offerings, so quit lying to us and pretending otherwise, then trying to pretend your lies don't count because rails is still beta.
Rails may very well end up being just as good or better than other options, but until it is, quit lying to us. Comparing what you imagine rails will be like in the future with what java offers now is rediculous and dishonest. And don't forget that as rails improves, so does everything else. I don't see what rails could do to improve itself that RIFE couldn't do too.
Memcached exists for a reason.
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
Try it before talking out of your ass. Its not an ad-hoc network cache system, its a simple, VERY FAST cache that stores objects in RAM. If you are too stupid to grasp why this helps, go read about how it saved livejournal thousands of dollars that they would have had to spend buying a huge DB server and still had worse performance.
What are you talking about?
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I very clearly stated that you can cache over the network, and pointed out why a network cache like memcached is faster than an RDBMS. Your post has nothing to do with what I said, so why is it a reply to me? And you can just pull an object from the cache with memcached, because every time you update the db, you also update the cache.
I didn't say nobody uses it. I said almost never deployed. You can get lots of offers for PHP too, that doesn't change the fact that its slow. Like I said, comparing the fastest rails setup to one of the slowest possible java setups is dishonest.
Yes, you are talking out of your ass.
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
You can still cache over the network. Pulling an object out of a simple key/value hash which is stored entirely in RAM (memcached) is significantly faster than parsing an SQL query, retrieving all the data, and then making an object out of it. And it also allows your database to only have to deal with queries that MUST be done, instead of fetching the same things over and over again for no reason.
No, you hold the hype for 3 months.
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I am sick of seeing this excuse. You can't run around the internet screaming how rails is the greatest thing since the wheel, and how it renders java obsolete because its 100x faster to work with, and then say "its not done" when people actually try to use it. If you are ready to hype something and tell everyone how great it is, then you need to be ready to accept criticism too. If we can't compare it yet because it isn't finished, then stop running around telling us how great it is and how we should all be using it.
readline is also obsolete.
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
libedit is a free replacement for libreadline, which oracle could use without any problems at all. They choose not to because they do not care about making their product usable.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you ever looked at the BSD section on slashdot? Not only is it full of constant BSD bashing troll bullshit, but there's genuine FUD from linux users all the time about how BSD is so hard, and how its so slow, and how it can't do all sorts of things that it does just fine.
The BSD users who bash linux are a small minority of people who like to stir up shit for no reason. The linux users who bash BSD are a small minority of people who like to stir up shit for no reason. There is no reason to treat either group of tards differently, or to act as though the normal users of either OS are to blame for having idiots also use the same OS.
The syntax was "vile and full of syntactic salt"? That would be 100% a matter of opinion. Some people don't like ruby's syntax, but like some of the ideas behind rails. So they make rails-like frameworks for languages they do like. There's nothing wrong with that, and rails isn't magically better than them simply because you prefer ruby's syntax.
Google killed off a few search engines. Google's search engine was significantly better, by pretty much any possible standard.
Corporations should be able to do anything and everything to make a buck, and unless enough consumers can organize a large enough boycott to hurt them financially, *AND* be lucky enough that the morons running the company realize this is why they are hurting financially, nothing should be done about it?
Corporations are given their charters to benefit society. When they are a detriment, it is the responsability of government to regulate them. Consumer protection prevents companies from selling me broken products, why shouldn't it prevent them from selling me products that I can only use in conjunction with other specific products? Or products which I cannot use anymore once they decide they don't want to write drivers anymore for new OSs?
"Finally ... some real viable choices"? Come on, lots of different linux distros and all three BSDs have had AMD64 support for quite some time now. How much more blatent can you make a troll, and still get your "story" accepted?
You can use someone else's computer just fine. You don't just magically forget qwerty because you learned dvorak any more than you forget english because you learned spanish. And if you are typing for long enough on someone else's computer that the slower speed of your qwerty typing is a problem, then changing the keyboard map is very quick and easy.
There is no linux emulation, it is linux compatability. Its a simple syscall translation, there is nothing dodgy about it, and it doesn't cause any problems. It simply uses the same libs a linux machine would (typically taken from redhat), and maps linux syscall numbers to the native BSD syscall numbers.
And as I already pointed out, there IS FFS with journalling already. You just have to pay for it. Nobody does because journalling offers no advantage. Or did you have some kind of facts to back up your claims that journalling offers something?
You are the one taking the cop-out. The OS doesn't "have it", in BSD or linux. You are talking about people custom packaging the OS, and people do that with both linux and BSD, your point is complete bullshit. Your inability to work google is not a flaw of BSD.
And of course, 3d graphics is supported just fine. If ati doesn't release a driver, that doesn't make it BSDs fault. Or are we going to start claiming windows is superior to linux because it has more vendor supplied drivers?
I only mentioned that NetBSD runs on more hardware because Linus claimed otherwise, I personally don't think it matters how much obscure stuff nobody uses gets supported.
As for your list, you are very confused about what an OS is capable of, and what someone has decided to do. There are custom BSD distros for specialized purposes, and different installers. Just because the defaults included in the 3 mains BSDs aren't what you wanted, doesn't mean BSD can't do it. Go ahead and make a specialized BSD for whatever you want, its quite easy actually.
You also list stuff BSDs have, like hyperthreading, accelerated 3D, hotplugging, etc. And BSDs device driver support is quite good actually, try it instead of spouting the same tired old nonsense.
And of course, linux doesn't have a really good, mature, journalling filesystem either, just some new, immature ports of such filesystems. The 3 big BSDs don't use journalling by default, and don't need it. But if you insist on slowing down your disk IO for some reason you can purchase FFS+journalling from Wasabi Systems, but I'd rather just not use journalling thanks.
You are claiming that to install openbsd you must buy a cd or "do everything from scratch". This is completely false, and given that it would obviously deter people from using openbsd based on a made up fear of having to "do everything from scratch", that makes it FUD.
Of course mozilla is not included in the base system, its a huge bloated monster that most people don't want on say, a mail server. But you don't have to ftp anything by hand, or learn any complicated package management system, that's the point. The package management across the BSD is almost the same, so when you know one you know them all, and they are very simple and well documented. All you had to do was type pkg_add "whatever_software_you_want" and it will install it and any pre-requisites.
And FYI, printing is the same in linux and BSD, either BSD lpd or CUPs, both are available for both linux and BSD.
Obviously the thousands of people using mysql on BSDs are wrong and you are right, its easy to tell with the plethora of evidence you provided.
And read Linus's words again. He is claiming linux is a superior system, because it can do "many" things BSD cannot. He doesn't say anything about commercial application support, as that would obviously be an area where both linux and the BSDs lose to obviously inferiour systems like windows.
So, you think you can compare arches linux supports to CPUs netbsd supports? What kind of logic is that? Those 22 architectures linux supports include different arches using the same CPUs too you know. There's nothing wrong with that for either system, arch is more than just CPU, and involves drivers for chipsets, BIOS/firmware/framebuffer/video, as well as common peripherals.
Mysql works fine, you are just plain spreading FUD now. Maya works fine under linux compatability, more FUD. And of course neither BSD nor linux supports any applications, the applications support whatever OS's their creators choose. Pretending that BSD is inferior because companies don't both releasing BSD native versions of their apps is rediculous. Or do you also believe that windows is superior to linux?
Don't mod something flamebait without reason. Linus even said he was a bad person to ask because he doesn't use BSD. I pointed out where he is incorrect. This is not flamebait, its reality. If you disagree, then grow some balls and tell us all why you think I'm wrong, don't just mod it down because you don't like it.
I didn't say anything bad about linux at all, I stated two simple facts. Maybe you could point out some of these things that linux does and BSD doesn't? Just because its Linus spreading the FUD doesn't make it ok.
Its very easy on openbsd, and I seriously doubt its much harder on freebsd. You have to download the distfiles manually because of Sun's stupid license, but then you just type "make install".
And of course, some company not making software for BSD is not a limitation of BSD. BSD is entirely capable of running the software, Sun just doesn't feel like releasing a BSD version.
First of all, you don't need to learn yet another ports systems, all 3 BSDs use a very similar ports tree. You just have to type "make install" in the directory of the software you want installed. They also have excellent documentation, so you could have found this out in less time than it took to find your knoppix CD.
And wether you buy an openbsd CD or do a network install makes no difference at all, they are the exact same installation procedure. There is no need to "do everything from scratch" anymore than there is with any linux distro. Leave your FUD at home.
He's obviously a bad person to ask since he thinks things like "you'll find a lot of areas where Linux is better (often a lot better -- as in "it works"), and then you'll find a few narrow areas where one particular BSD version will be better." and "Linux has a much wider audience, in many ways. That ranges from supporting much wider hardware (both in the driver sense and in the architecture sense) to actual uses.".
Sorry, NetBSD runs on more hardware that linux does, and apart from running on very large SMP systems, I can't think of *anything* that linux can do and BSD can't, much less "many" things.
Its a cut+paste troll, there is nobody to get fired.
Go read David's blog. He makes up completely and utterly false claims about rails vs java all the time, just to stir up shit with java people. Rails is not under any circumstances 10 times faster to develop in than any java framework, but that's the claim he's always making. In fact, having used both rails and RIFE, rails isn't actually faster to use at all, but David still makes misleading comparisons on his blog of best case rails examples vs worst case rife examples to make it seem like rails is 10 times faster to use.
If your sole criteria for "better" is "less keystrokes", then rails is better, and so is not commenting your code and using single letter variable names. If you instead consider things like time to develop, time to maintain, performance, scalability, security, reliability, etc, then you will realize that some java frameworks will be better for some things, and rails will be better for other things, and that there's plenty of other options in other languages that are perfectly viable too. Trying to pretend rails is simply "better" than everything is rediculous.
Keep in mind, rails "scales" by spawning processes, which is slow and uses lots of memory. It also means that if someone tried to actually run a big site on rails like the rails zealots falsly claim you can, then you would end up with literally THOUSANDS of connections to your database server. So much for scaling. How you can possibly claim that rails is universally better than anything java has is beyond me. Think for yourself for a change, maybe even go try a few java frameworks before you making such rediculous claims.
And again, "available to use" does matter. Because you are comparing a version of rails that only exists in your imagination, to a vague concept you don't understand (J2EE). Compare what rails has now, what is really there. And compare an actual framework in java, not a vague concept of stuffy "enterprise" java. Or did you not realize there's many different frameworks you can use in java, with different strengths and weaknesses, so you can pick the one that best suites what you are doing.
No, I'm not mixing anything up. The rails community, lead by David the professional troll, is constantly stirring up shit with the java people and making rediculous claims about how rails is better than java. But when someone points out things java handles, and rails does not, we hear "its not finished yet". I don't care if its finished or not, it has issues that make it clearly and obviously inferior to more mature java offerings, so quit lying to us and pretending otherwise, then trying to pretend your lies don't count because rails is still beta.
Rails may very well end up being just as good or better than other options, but until it is, quit lying to us. Comparing what you imagine rails will be like in the future with what java offers now is rediculous and dishonest. And don't forget that as rails improves, so does everything else. I don't see what rails could do to improve itself that RIFE couldn't do too.
Try it before talking out of your ass. Its not an ad-hoc network cache system, its a simple, VERY FAST cache that stores objects in RAM. If you are too stupid to grasp why this helps, go read about how it saved livejournal thousands of dollars that they would have had to spend buying a huge DB server and still had worse performance.
I very clearly stated that you can cache over the network, and pointed out why a network cache like memcached is faster than an RDBMS. Your post has nothing to do with what I said, so why is it a reply to me? And you can just pull an object from the cache with memcached, because every time you update the db, you also update the cache.
I didn't say nobody uses it. I said almost never deployed. You can get lots of offers for PHP too, that doesn't change the fact that its slow. Like I said, comparing the fastest rails setup to one of the slowest possible java setups is dishonest.
You can still cache over the network. Pulling an object out of a simple key/value hash which is stored entirely in RAM (memcached) is significantly faster than parsing an SQL query, retrieving all the data, and then making an object out of it. And it also allows your database to only have to deal with queries that MUST be done, instead of fetching the same things over and over again for no reason.
I am sick of seeing this excuse. You can't run around the internet screaming how rails is the greatest thing since the wheel, and how it renders java obsolete because its 100x faster to work with, and then say "its not done" when people actually try to use it. If you are ready to hype something and tell everyone how great it is, then you need to be ready to accept criticism too. If we can't compare it yet because it isn't finished, then stop running around telling us how great it is and how we should all be using it.
libedit is a free replacement for libreadline, which oracle could use without any problems at all. They choose not to because they do not care about making their product usable.