This is nothing new, 3G (3rd Generation, not 3gig) has been offered in many US metropolitan areas (DC, LA, Chicago, Madison). 3G is still provided by standard cell towers, the problem is how to get that fatty pipe to each tower. There are a few ways. The expencive way is to run fiber from tower to tower. A cheaper route is Microwave (look for a 20' dish with LOS to another tower/20' dish), but it requires line of sight. Satelite allows the cell towers to connect via terestrial means, or in cases of isolated or expencive locations they can toss a small dish on the tower for a fraction of the cost.
This is not to be confussed with Magellon or other SatPhones that actually did communicate directly to the satelites. Those phones, while wikkid cool, were insanely expensive. And just how many phone calls are you going to make from the top of Everest when your minutes cost you $20 a pop?
I didn't say security through obscurity. I said vulnerbility through profit potential. Vista beta drew out the exploiters because it is going to be the next large market share OS. A zombie/spyware author is going to be working on cracking it as soon as its available. If the next Ubuntu release was predicted to hit 25% market share then you can bet those people profiting from spyware would target it.
"I expect that there are as many linux boxes now as there were DOS boxes in the eighties, so by your logic there should be as many linux viruses now as there were DOS viruses in the eighties"
No, that is specificly what I am NOT saying. Market share = %, not #. 1.5 million DOS based PCs out of 2 million PCs is 75% market share. 98.5 million Windows PCs out of 100 million PCs is 98.5%. Even though that leaves 1.5 million non-windows PCs (the same as the number of DOS PCs) they represent a significant smaller market share. [Note: All of those numbers are hypothetical for the purpose of demonstrating market percent, not actual market penetration]
"Stop being such a bigot in defending your OS in this way."
Its not "my" OS. It is the market leading OS. I dual boot at home, Ubuntu and XP. For a long time I used a FreeBSD firewall (recently switched to a hardware firewall/router)
"All you're saying is "Yeah sure other OS's are better, but nobody uses them"."
No, what I'm saying is that the market share of alternative OSs is small enough that they are not targeted as often as Microsoft. There is a proven financial gain to be made off of infecting Windows machines. If Linux had Window's market share it too would have a profit potential for these slim balls that infect our PCs.
"so why do you think they'll be jealous of your majority share argument?"
I don't. Every OS will have flaws and vulnerbilities. Any OS that permits user interaction is about 100 times more likely to have vulnerbilities. And which ever OS holds the majority of the market share will be the one most likely to get hacked. I hope that in 5 years Linux makes it to 40%+ penetration. And when it does I will gladly defend it against those claiming that it is weak and insecure.
How many hardware companies are going to invest manhours into developing drivers for each fork of Linux? Not many. How many companies will invest manhours into developing drivers that can be used on all Linux machines with out customizing?
"you'd be handing control of your kernel over to software that you cannot have the code for."
Just the opposite. Right now, if you use a closed source driver you are handing your kernel over. But if there was a driver extraction layer, you could use what ever driver you like and not have to worry about it breaking your kernel.
"You're at the mercy of the company."
And thus the joy of the free market takes over. If a company offers crappy Linux support and drivers, don't buy their product. But with the growth rate of Linux, you can bet there are hardware manufactures world wide waiting for some form of standard interface for them to plug into. Ready to sell their wares to a brand new market.
"What if that API does happen to change in the future?"
The company would have to build a new driver version and/or the driver abstraction layer would need to maintain backwards compatability.
"If it's GPL'ed, you at least have the opportunity to do something about it."
Me personally? Nah. My code work in in the business process level. Unless you have hardware that processes loans, I'm not going to be writing new drivers for it. And I doubt the vast majority of Linux users would have the ability to do anything about it either.
He most likely ran the binaries through an obfuscator to make sure that any hard coded strings were appropriatly mangled and the code was not easily recoverable. That way, the code is "protected" but not encrypted and this would not fall under the DCMA's jurisdiction.
"and (as has been demonstrated by nvidia) the quality and currency of proprietary linux drivers will be intolerably poor since they are provided by vendors that will never consider linux to be worth their resources until linux systems provide for a definite majority of their sales."
Interestingly enough, I had no problems getting Ubuntu up on my NVidia card with good performance. But with my ATI card I finally gave up after 2 weeks and stuck with the VESA drivers.
"Why is it that other companies can prove that it is possible to develop secure and easy to use systems?"
I'm sorry, I must have missed that decade where some other company reached the market penetration of Microsoft. You could argue that BeOS is the most secure OS in the world because it has never been hacker or infected. But then again, there are what, 5 people using it? (Not to rag on Be, it was a great project)
"Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment, n'est-ce pas?"
Yes, Windows was so poorly architectured. I mean, what bafoon decided that a process should ever be able to listen to the keyboard. And who was the moron that thought running more then one process at a time was a good idea. I tell you what, if I couldn't type on my keyboard, then no one would have made a key listener. And if I could only run a single process at a time, then I'd be able to immediately know if something I didn't like was running.
"They designed Windows to be as easy and automatic to use as possible"
What were they thinking!?! We should line the designers up and shoot them, right next to the invetors of the Automatic Transmission, Speed Dial, and Milking machines. Those bastards. Making things easy for consumers to use.
There's only one thing left to do. Just close your eyes and follow Linux. Its okay, there is nothing to fear, just hold on to the coat tails infront of you and keep those eyes closed.
-Rick (Yeah, I'm expecting a Troll rating for this one)
"The idea behind Linux is that an Operating System should be Open, and Free (as in speech), and that nothing should hinder this."
And it is (would be). You could modify the OS, the kernal, and the driver layer. They are all open for you to do with as you please. But why force hardware developers to open their driver code? We already have closed source drivers for hardware on Linux. Its not like this would introduce a new 'evil'. What it would do is open the door to a large number of hardware developers. Which would result in more choices for consumers and (depending on the hardware developer) more stable drivers. Not to mention it would get these drivers out of the kernal resulting in a smaller footprint and more stability.
Wow, they're a bunch of limey bastards. But I still get a blazing rock solid connection and high quality digital cable, HD, and VoD. I had an intermitant issue over the last few weeks. I called out the techs a few times (outside inspection, inside inspection, and the 3rd visit). On the 3rd visit they made sure that every cable, joint, barrel and splitter was brand new throughout the house. The replaced our 4 year old set top with a brand new one. And line checked each jack and watched half an hour of CSI with us to make sure the problem was corrected. I was expecting to have to battle them the whole way to get a replacement box, but they brought it up and put in. And after 3 service calls, I have perfect service again with out paying a dime.
Interesting. My cable service is through Charter, which I thought was part of the Comcast conglomerate. Our digital box only connects to cable and we get full listings, Video on demand, and pay per view with out having to dial out.
Don't I wish! If printing weren't so important here I would have long since moved this whole process to the web.
"Key-value pair tables can't be flattned out. You can't use them as dimensions to filter or sort your queries. Well, not without a ton of sq"
They can be flattened out at the expense of denormalizing the database. In small lookup tables, the impact is minimal, but on more complexe joins you are right, it will add complexity to the SQL.
"oo databases pretty much died when it became clear that they couldn't handle the massive table scans involved in reporting."
Absolutely! And on a side note, my bust. I had the terms relational and OO reversed in my mind for some reason. That's what I get for posting late at night.
"hmmm, i've never encountered that. Do you mean oo applications sitting on top of relational databases? If so, I see that all the time. But if you mean an actual oo database, hmm, haven't even run into one in four years now..."
Correct again. While working on a historical invoice tracking system last month we were looking into an option of taking raw data from the relational database, running it through our business layer application, then writing it to a data warehouse for quick and historical retreival for the users. Instead we opted for a document storage solution (Kwik Tag) to save exact PDF copies of the invoices mailed to our customers.
You definately seem to have a greator knowledge of databases then I do, but I think I'm in agrement with you on all of these points. Correct tool for the job and all that.
I can talk to.Net libs from DCOM and to DCOM libs from.Net. I've never tried Java libs either way, but it wouldn't suprise me if someone had a wrapper for it.
And even then, what's wrong with standardizing? You can have employees who can easily cross train and review eachothers code. You can use common libraries. You can have a sent documentation of standards.
I agree that in some situations, mostly legacy systems, it could be easiest to leave it there but I can't see any clear reason why at this point in time you would put it there
"1. business objects has a meta-driven reporting platform, and is one of the top three vendors in the OLAP marketplace."
True. I have not used the rest of the BI suit, so I can not comment on its quality. But the average business application developer is going to run into Crystal Reports before the run into the rest of the suit.
"2. it didn't get there by buying crystal reports"
True. Crystal Reports sucked before BO bought it, and while under the control of BO it has manage to achieve new levels of lesser suckitude.
"3. the Microsoft reporting solution is merely another low-end reporting solution, competes with Crystal Reports"
True again! And I still hope the MS solution winds up blowing the pants off of CR.
"4....the other commercial ones are sold by Cognos and Microstrategy."
I used Cognos Impromptu(sp?) a few years back. Its performance at the time was worse then CR. It seemed like a left over from Lotus Notes. Microstrategy sounds familiar, I may have priced out some software from them, but I can't recall anything good/bad about them.
"5. describing custom reporting solutions as piles of crap is about as reasonable as describing custom web sites as piles of crap."
Err, I'm afraid I don't follow your analogy there. Now, if there were like 4 available custom web site tool sets, and you had to pay $800 per dev seat up front, and a $300 yearly upgrade fee, and those tools all sucked. Then yes, I would agree with your analogy.
a) I don't b) Why not? c) another I don't d) Why not? e) so don't use MySQL f) So true. g1) Performance will suck, but your server should survive. g2) Entirely dependant on the database design.
You're a data warehouse guy, I get it. And I love being able to use warehouse designs in specific situations, but its not the end all be all solution. Warehousing is awesome for reporting, but it is a pain in the ass for data management, security, integrity, and space. That's why a lot of data warehouses are based off of summarized OO databases. Now, I've been beating my keyboard over the last year primarily on a leasing system that adds a lot of reporting functionality to a 3rd party app. The 3rd party app is OO and of a particularly crappy design. But even a slight modification request(adding a field to a table) cost $10k, and we were recently quoted $50k to get some APIs opened up (just for scope of this software). Now, I have a complete invoicing system built for this project, and two weeks ago our Leasing and Collections department heads requested the ability to print historical invoices (something not in the original requests). One look at the database and I said no. Sorry, but no. This database is not capable of presenting historical information that would be in any way comparable to the invoices you've mailed out.
But, we have another application. An internal/consultant developed Commission application. The thing is huge, tracks hundred of sale members, service agreements, commissions, splits, charge backs, payouts, etc... And it was designed from the ground up with and emphasis on historical data. They can pull up the exact and complete history on every item, sales person, accessory, department, office, order, etc. The trade off however is performance. Like you mentioned, even on a beefcake server, it is impossible to gather full real time data for reporting. So a series of data warehousing processes are run at night, or after changes to a record that alter multiple entities.
There are benefits and down sides to both OO and warehouse designs.
Oh my god do I feel sorry for you. Custom reporting solutions have often been descriped as a pile of crap. Business Objects, the current owners of Crystal Reports (Formerly of Seagate, Crystal Decision, and lord knows what other companies) has long been considered the best of these options. In otherwords, they were/are the best piece of crap solution available. Microsoft (insert booing and hissing here) has finally decided to create their own reporting solution (SQL Reporting) which from what I've heard is a significant improvement over CR XI (yes, 11 versions and there are still limitations on Cut and Paste)
-Rick
Code books in general?
on
Java Puzzlers
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Why bother? I have 1 HTML/CSS book I keep on hand just because I've used it so much. Everything else, I use google. Its faster (for me) to find designs, references, and code samples online then it is for me to get a book, look up the index and flip through the pages. I even gave up on my old SQL bible as Google can get me syntax and samples faster then I can find them in the book.
I have a cell phone. I like having a cell phone. My cell phone has no MP3 player, no video, no camera.
I have a wireless PDA. I like my PDA. I can browse the web. I can use it as an MP3 player. I can watch videos from different video blogs over my lunch hour.
I would love to push these both into 1 product. But there is 1 major issue. If the battery in my PDA dies, I turn it off for the day. If the battery in my Cellphone dies, I'm screwed. Running a video player on your cell phone uses plenty of juice. If the video player and the cell phone are on the same power source, I'm screwing with my communication ability. So until someone comes out with a split battery phone/PDA or battery/micro-fuelcell technology that makes it a mute point, I just don't see the market potential beyond a nitch.
Its been a looong time since I sat through a physics lecture, but I thought that Newton's mechanics had been proved wrong and that Einstein's theories are considered correct. The reason for retaining Newton's laws was that they work in 99% of situations and where significantly easier to calculate.
I'm saying the oposite. Government welfare is the worst way to provide this. Allowing the free market, private corps, and venture capistalists make the calls on which projects get picked up is the best (and current) way.
I never said saving money is bad. I said spending money is good. Spending your money wisely is best. And I should clarify, saving money as in not spending it is bad. Saving money by reducing costs is capitalism in action.
-Rick
Slashdot Mirror
This is nothing new, 3G (3rd Generation, not 3gig) has been offered in many US metropolitan areas (DC, LA, Chicago, Madison). 3G is still provided by standard cell towers, the problem is how to get that fatty pipe to each tower. There are a few ways. The expencive way is to run fiber from tower to tower. A cheaper route is Microwave (look for a 20' dish with LOS to another tower/20' dish), but it requires line of sight. Satelite allows the cell towers to connect via terestrial means, or in cases of isolated or expencive locations they can toss a small dish on the tower for a fraction of the cost.
This is not to be confussed with Magellon or other SatPhones that actually did communicate directly to the satelites. Those phones, while wikkid cool, were insanely expensive. And just how many phone calls are you going to make from the top of Everest when your minutes cost you $20 a pop?
-Rick
"Your argument of 'security through obscurity'"
I didn't say security through obscurity. I said vulnerbility through profit potential. Vista beta drew out the exploiters because it is going to be the next large market share OS. A zombie/spyware author is going to be working on cracking it as soon as its available. If the next Ubuntu release was predicted to hit 25% market share then you can bet those people profiting from spyware would target it.
-Rick
"I expect that there are as many linux boxes now as there were DOS boxes in the eighties, so by your logic there should be as many linux viruses now as there were DOS viruses in the eighties"
No, that is specificly what I am NOT saying. Market share = %, not #. 1.5 million DOS based PCs out of 2 million PCs is 75% market share. 98.5 million Windows PCs out of 100 million PCs is 98.5%. Even though that leaves 1.5 million non-windows PCs (the same as the number of DOS PCs) they represent a significant smaller market share. [Note: All of those numbers are hypothetical for the purpose of demonstrating market percent, not actual market penetration]
-Rick
"Stop being such a bigot in defending your OS in this way."
Its not "my" OS. It is the market leading OS. I dual boot at home, Ubuntu and XP. For a long time I used a FreeBSD firewall (recently switched to a hardware firewall/router)
"All you're saying is "Yeah sure other OS's are better, but nobody uses them"."
No, what I'm saying is that the market share of alternative OSs is small enough that they are not targeted as often as Microsoft. There is a proven financial gain to be made off of infecting Windows machines. If Linux had Window's market share it too would have a profit potential for these slim balls that infect our PCs.
"so why do you think they'll be jealous of your majority share argument?"
I don't. Every OS will have flaws and vulnerbilities. Any OS that permits user interaction is about 100 times more likely to have vulnerbilities. And which ever OS holds the majority of the market share will be the one most likely to get hacked. I hope that in 5 years Linux makes it to 40%+ penetration. And when it does I will gladly defend it against those claiming that it is weak and insecure.
-Rick
"More choices? How?"
How many hardware companies are going to invest manhours into developing drivers for each fork of Linux? Not many. How many companies will invest manhours into developing drivers that can be used on all Linux machines with out customizing?
"you'd be handing control of your kernel over to software that you cannot have the code for."
Just the opposite. Right now, if you use a closed source driver you are handing your kernel over. But if there was a driver extraction layer, you could use what ever driver you like and not have to worry about it breaking your kernel.
"You're at the mercy of the company."
And thus the joy of the free market takes over. If a company offers crappy Linux support and drivers, don't buy their product. But with the growth rate of Linux, you can bet there are hardware manufactures world wide waiting for some form of standard interface for them to plug into. Ready to sell their wares to a brand new market.
"What if that API does happen to change in the future?"
The company would have to build a new driver version and/or the driver abstraction layer would need to maintain backwards compatability.
"If it's GPL'ed, you at least have the opportunity to do something about it."
Me personally? Nah. My code work in in the business process level. Unless you have hardware that processes loans, I'm not going to be writing new drivers for it. And I doubt the vast majority of Linux users would have the ability to do anything about it either.
-Rick
He most likely ran the binaries through an obfuscator to make sure that any hard coded strings were appropriatly mangled and the code was not easily recoverable. That way, the code is "protected" but not encrypted and this would not fall under the DCMA's jurisdiction.
-Rick
"and (as has been demonstrated by nvidia) the quality and currency of proprietary linux drivers will be intolerably poor since they are provided by vendors that will never consider linux to be worth their resources until linux systems provide for a definite majority of their sales."
Interestingly enough, I had no problems getting Ubuntu up on my NVidia card with good performance. But with my ATI card I finally gave up after 2 weeks and stuck with the VESA drivers.
-Rick
"Why is it that other companies can prove that it is possible to develop secure and easy to use systems?"
I'm sorry, I must have missed that decade where some other company reached the market penetration of Microsoft. You could argue that BeOS is the most secure OS in the world because it has never been hacker or infected. But then again, there are what, 5 people using it? (Not to rag on Be, it was a great project)
-Rick
"Spyware basically is malware takes advantage of a poorly architected Windows environment, n'est-ce pas?"
Yes, Windows was so poorly architectured. I mean, what bafoon decided that a process should ever be able to listen to the keyboard. And who was the moron that thought running more then one process at a time was a good idea. I tell you what, if I couldn't type on my keyboard, then no one would have made a key listener. And if I could only run a single process at a time, then I'd be able to immediately know if something I didn't like was running.
"They designed Windows to be as easy and automatic to use as possible"
What were they thinking!?! We should line the designers up and shoot them, right next to the invetors of the Automatic Transmission, Speed Dial, and Milking machines. Those bastards. Making things easy for consumers to use.
There's only one thing left to do. Just close your eyes and follow Linux. Its okay, there is nothing to fear, just hold on to the coat tails infront of you and keep those eyes closed.
-Rick (Yeah, I'm expecting a Troll rating for this one)
"The idea behind Linux is that an Operating System should be Open, and Free (as in speech), and that nothing should hinder this."
And it is (would be). You could modify the OS, the kernal, and the driver layer. They are all open for you to do with as you please. But why force hardware developers to open their driver code? We already have closed source drivers for hardware on Linux. Its not like this would introduce a new 'evil'. What it would do is open the door to a large number of hardware developers. Which would result in more choices for consumers and (depending on the hardware developer) more stable drivers. Not to mention it would get these drivers out of the kernal resulting in a smaller footprint and more stability.
-Rick
Wow, they're a bunch of limey bastards. But I still get a blazing rock solid connection and high quality digital cable, HD, and VoD. I had an intermitant issue over the last few weeks. I called out the techs a few times (outside inspection, inside inspection, and the 3rd visit). On the 3rd visit they made sure that every cable, joint, barrel and splitter was brand new throughout the house. The replaced our 4 year old set top with a brand new one. And line checked each jack and watched half an hour of CSI with us to make sure the problem was corrected. I was expecting to have to battle them the whole way to get a replacement box, but they brought it up and put in. And after 3 service calls, I have perfect service again with out paying a dime.
-Rick
Interesting. My cable service is through Charter, which I thought was part of the Comcast conglomerate. Our digital box only connects to cable and we get full listings, Video on demand, and pay per view with out having to dial out.
-Rick
"most people don't care about print any more."
Don't I wish! If printing weren't so important here I would have long since moved this whole process to the web.
"Key-value pair tables can't be flattned out. You can't use them as dimensions to filter or sort your queries. Well, not without a ton of sq"
They can be flattened out at the expense of denormalizing the database. In small lookup tables, the impact is minimal, but on more complexe joins you are right, it will add complexity to the SQL.
"oo databases pretty much died when it became clear that they couldn't handle the massive table scans involved in reporting."
Absolutely! And on a side note, my bust. I had the terms relational and OO reversed in my mind for some reason. That's what I get for posting late at night.
"hmmm, i've never encountered that. Do you mean oo applications sitting on top of relational databases? If so, I see that all the time. But if you mean an actual oo database, hmm, haven't even run into one in four years now..."
Correct again. While working on a historical invoice tracking system last month we were looking into an option of taking raw data from the relational database, running it through our business layer application, then writing it to a data warehouse for quick and historical retreival for the users. Instead we opted for a document storage solution (Kwik Tag) to save exact PDF copies of the invoices mailed to our customers.
You definately seem to have a greator knowledge of databases then I do, but I think I'm in agrement with you on all of these points. Correct tool for the job and all that.
-Rick
I can talk to .Net libs from DCOM and to DCOM libs from .Net. I've never tried Java libs either way, but it wouldn't suprise me if someone had a wrapper for it.
And even then, what's wrong with standardizing? You can have employees who can easily cross train and review eachothers code. You can use common libraries. You can have a sent documentation of standards.
I agree that in some situations, mostly legacy systems, it could be easiest to leave it there but I can't see any clear reason why at this point in time you would put it there
-Rick
"1. business objects has a meta-driven reporting platform, and is one of the top three vendors in the OLAP marketplace."
...the other commercial ones are sold by Cognos and Microstrategy."
True. I have not used the rest of the BI suit, so I can not comment on its quality. But the average business application developer is going to run into Crystal Reports before the run into the rest of the suit.
"2. it didn't get there by buying crystal reports"
True. Crystal Reports sucked before BO bought it, and while under the control of BO it has manage to achieve new levels of lesser suckitude.
"3. the Microsoft reporting solution is merely another low-end reporting solution, competes with Crystal Reports"
True again! And I still hope the MS solution winds up blowing the pants off of CR.
"4.
I used Cognos Impromptu(sp?) a few years back. Its performance at the time was worse then CR. It seemed like a left over from Lotus Notes. Microstrategy sounds familiar, I may have priced out some software from them, but I can't recall anything good/bad about them.
"5. describing custom reporting solutions as piles of crap is about as reasonable as describing custom web sites as piles of crap."
Err, I'm afraid I don't follow your analogy there. Now, if there were like 4 available custom web site tool sets, and you had to pay $800 per dev seat up front, and a $300 yearly upgrade fee, and those tools all sucked. Then yes, I would agree with your analogy.
a) I don't
b) Why not?
c) another I don't
d) Why not?
e) so don't use MySQL
f) So true.
g1) Performance will suck, but your server should survive.
g2) Entirely dependant on the database design.
You're a data warehouse guy, I get it. And I love being able to use warehouse designs in specific situations, but its not the end all be all solution. Warehousing is awesome for reporting, but it is a pain in the ass for data management, security, integrity, and space. That's why a lot of data warehouses are based off of summarized OO databases. Now, I've been beating my keyboard over the last year primarily on a leasing system that adds a lot of reporting functionality to a 3rd party app. The 3rd party app is OO and of a particularly crappy design. But even a slight modification request(adding a field to a table) cost $10k, and we were recently quoted $50k to get some APIs opened up (just for scope of this software). Now, I have a complete invoicing system built for this project, and two weeks ago our Leasing and Collections department heads requested the ability to print historical invoices (something not in the original requests). One look at the database and I said no. Sorry, but no. This database is not capable of presenting historical information that would be in any way comparable to the invoices you've mailed out.
But, we have another application. An internal/consultant developed Commission application. The thing is huge, tracks hundred of sale members, service agreements, commissions, splits, charge backs, payouts, etc... And it was designed from the ground up with and emphasis on historical data. They can pull up the exact and complete history on every item, sales person, accessory, department, office, order, etc. The trade off however is performance. Like you mentioned, even on a beefcake server, it is impossible to gather full real time data for reporting. So a series of data warehousing processes are run at night, or after changes to a record that alter multiple entities.
There are benefits and down sides to both OO and warehouse designs.
-Rick
Oh my god do I feel sorry for you. Custom reporting solutions have often been descriped as a pile of crap. Business Objects, the current owners of Crystal Reports (Formerly of Seagate, Crystal Decision, and lord knows what other companies) has long been considered the best of these options. In otherwords, they were/are the best piece of crap solution available. Microsoft (insert booing and hissing here) has finally decided to create their own reporting solution (SQL Reporting) which from what I've heard is a significant improvement over CR XI (yes, 11 versions and there are still limitations on Cut and Paste)
-Rick
Why bother? I have 1 HTML/CSS book I keep on hand just because I've used it so much. Everything else, I use google. Its faster (for me) to find designs, references, and code samples online then it is for me to get a book, look up the index and flip through the pages. I even gave up on my old SQL bible as Google can get me syntax and samples faster then I can find them in the book.
-Rick
And for the vast majority of computer users who are not on KDE...
-Rick
Well, >I thought it was funny!
-Rick
I have a cell phone. I like having a cell phone. My cell phone has no MP3 player, no video, no camera.
I have a wireless PDA. I like my PDA. I can browse the web. I can use it as an MP3 player. I can watch videos from different video blogs over my lunch hour.
I would love to push these both into 1 product. But there is 1 major issue. If the battery in my PDA dies, I turn it off for the day. If the battery in my Cellphone dies, I'm screwed. Running a video player on your cell phone uses plenty of juice. If the video player and the cell phone are on the same power source, I'm screwing with my communication ability. So until someone comes out with a split battery phone/PDA or battery/micro-fuelcell technology that makes it a mute point, I just don't see the market potential beyond a nitch.
-Rick
"It would improve startup times, memory consumption, etc."
Only on the 2nd and later instances. The initial java application startup would still be slow.
-Rick
Its been a looong time since I sat through a physics lecture, but I thought that Newton's mechanics had been proved wrong and that Einstein's theories are considered correct. The reason for retaining Newton's laws was that they work in 99% of situations and where significantly easier to calculate.
-Rick
My bust. ...initiate shell script.
;
open mouth();
insert(foot);
echo("Internally");
end
-Rick
I'm saying the oposite. Government welfare is the worst way to provide this. Allowing the free market, private corps, and venture capistalists make the calls on which projects get picked up is the best (and current) way.
-Rick
I never said saving money is bad. I said spending money is good. Spending your money wisely is best. And I should clarify, saving money as in not spending it is bad. Saving money by reducing costs is capitalism in action. -Rick