I think you were supposed to click the links and read for yourselves...
But now the flatplanet.net site got/.ed very fast... =/
--
Re:Netscape 6 sucks, but Mozilla's fine
on
Mozilla M17 Is Out
·
· Score: 1
I was refering to GNU/Linux, *BSD, BeOS, etc..
And I have to point out that I said "most non-Micros~1 OSes" - "most", not "all"... =)
(Btw, I think you can get IE for Solaris, HPUX, etc too)
--
Re:Netscape 6 sucks, but Mozilla's fine
on
Mozilla M17 Is Out
·
· Score: 1
IE5 is out there and it is better than anything else so why suffer through something of lesser quality when now we have a choice and do not have to.
Uhm... I don't see how people using most non-Micros~1 OSes have that choice. - they don't have any IE5 available!
I've been using Mozilla M16 most of the time since I downloaded it (I'm downloading M17-talkback right now) and I'm pretty happy with it - It's far from perfect, but it usually does a better job than Netscape 4.7x and is about as stable...
And yes, I guess I can run IE5 in a vmware session... that would work - I've tried... but i just don't like running my webbrowser non-natively... It just feels silly...
This is ONLY about what is reasonable - I insist that if you claim that the product is completely backwards compatible you should keep every single feature/bug that someone could utilize in their software... (according to this post your GNU/Linux related example actually was about libc and not the linux kernel, but still... if you removed those features from one libc version to another the new one was NOT completely backwards compatible, it doesn't matter if it's GNU hackers or Microsoft programmers who make the change...)
It's of course a completely different thing what is REASONABLE to do... It usually isn't a good thing to keep _complete_ backward compatibility - you have to draw the line somewhere... (I don't really have an opinion on whether what Microsoft did was "right" or "wrong", it sure didn't sound good though...)
Uhm... if you makes changes to a operating system and you want to claim that it's completely backwards compatible... shouldn't it then work with all programs that worked with the previous version of the OS?
One purpose of the OS is to control the execution of the applications, and if applications made for the previous version don't work with the current version I sure wouldn't say that it's backwards compatible...
From The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (07Oct99) [foldoc]:
boxen
/bok'sn/ (By analogy with {VAXen}) A fanciful plural of {box}
often encountered in the phrase "Unix boxen", used to describe commodity {Unix} hardware. The connotation is that any two
Unix boxen are interchangeable.
(1994-11-29)
From Jargon File (4.0.0/24 July 1996) [jargon]:
boxen/bok'sn//pl.n./ [by analogy with {VAXen}]
Fanciful plural of {box} often encountered in the phrase `Unix boxen', used to describe commodity {{Unix}} hardware. The connotation is that any two Unix boxen are interchangeable.
Sometimes what you say will work, but not all Makefiles have an uninstall option!
Also, you should try to run the program before running "make install" to see if you like it... - a lot of programs run just fine without having been "installed".
What you said was that you should replace the broader term "Free Software" with the more restrictive term "Open Source"... Could you explain how this should be done?
Changing names from "Open Source" to "Free Software" would work, as all "Open Source" software meets the criteria of "Free Software" as you stated yourself... But as "Open Source" is more clearly defined all "Free Software" may not meet the criteria of "Open Source" - and it'll therefore be impossible to do the change you wanted! (If I'm not terribly wrong)
This only measures how many hosts are listed within DNS, not the total number of machines on the internet. It doesn't measure IPs used by dialups, machines behind firewalls, IP masquaraded machines, etc. In other words, there are more than 87 million computers on the internet, quite a few more I would guess. In fact, I would say that the exact number is almost impossible to figure out.
I doubt that machines using IPs reserved for local networks (machines that therefore never can be reached directly from the Internet) really should be counted as "hosts on the internet"... (this is the case with masqueraded machines, etc)
slotA.com's motherboard list has a dual Athlon motherboard listed. It's named "Tyan Dolphin" and should be released Q4 '00. I don't know if this is based on information from Tyan though - I couldn't find any information on this on Tyans page.
Which version of chip are we meant to take this as? Intel have sensibly numbered pentiums 1,2,3,4,... but AMD seem to insist on going for 5, 6, 7, 6-2, 6-3,....
So is a K6 meant to be equivalent to a Pentium VI, or is a K6-III meant to be equivalent to a Pentium III? How are we meant to make sensible comparisons with such confusing numbers?
JFYI you can never compare those model names by looking at the numbers like you did...
The reason why AMD has K6-2 and K6-3 is that those CPUs are closer to the original K6 design (but of course improved) than to the Athlon (K7)... I don't know if the order you of when the AMD CPUs were released was correct (I would have thought that at least K6-2 would have been before K7, but then I'm no AMD-release-timeline-expert)
I tried to play with my ancient miraculously salvaged copy of Death Track, and as soon as I launched the race, I was dead because all the other cars have run already had time to run around the entire track a few times and frag me like there's no tomorow. Old games often don't anticipate newer hardware...
You should really try MoSlo or something similar, it should be easy to find as it's all over the 'Net Here's a Google search for MoSlo downloads
First of all I think 180 megs for KDE sounds way too much (I don't run KDE myself though, so I can't be 100% sure)...
But my real point is... Who'd run KDE (or the X Window system at all) on a web/mail server anyway?!?
If you should compare these things you should compare *BSD/Linux/whatever running only what it needs to do the job and still be fully administrable against Win2k with what it needs to do the same...
My guess would be that you'd have more memory left on the *NIX machines...
And no, I'm not saying that Win2k is just crap and that *NIX beats the shit out of it in all fields........
Maybe it's because I'm an idiot but I dont' understand how using a packet sniffer is going to cause me to stop downloading stuff.
As long as you only log in anonymously you don't have to worry, but if you log in using FTP on a site where you want to be sure that noone is messing with your private files you should use another protocol (or some ftp+ssl solution).
That's "as easy to install as some GNU/Linux distributions" to you! =P
No, seriously... Are the BSDs harder to install than the not-so-newbie-targetted (GNU/) Linux distributions? (I.e. Would it be much harder to install than.. let's say Debian or Slackware? (Except of course being different))
posted by Simon on Thursday July 20, @06:12AM from the it-goes-or-I-do dept.
Well, the Perl 6 thing was funny for a while, but I'm kinda unconvinced now. See the rest of the article for why.
Oh, and if this isn't a joke - I quit.
OK, Perl 6 is starting to look implausible. In fact, I'm convinced it's an elaborate practical joke. Let's examine the evidence here.
The switch to Perl 6 was determined at a closed-door meeting of Perl porters at the conference - not on the mailing list. The first thing that happened was that Tom Christiansen was dropped from the project. Tom's a good friend of Larry, and they've just launched a book together. Suddenly thrown out like that? It's not very Larry-like. The perl6-porters mailing list was shut down with no explanation. The 'bootstrap' mailing list - I've tried posting to it. It doesn't send them on; I asked the list manager about this - no response. Adam Turoff has been posting "roles" and "goals" on the bootstrap list. His mails end with this disclaimer:
Any mistakes, errors, etc. are purely my own. Please send corrections, clarifications or requests for clarification directly to me as to reduce chatter on the bootstrap list.
So we're not to ask questions on the list? Come on... Development teams will be closed-subscription lists. This is, uhm, a little different to the way Perl works. Here are some of the roles Ziggy posted today:
These don't look real. Here are some of the explanations:
[2] brian d foy will work mostly behind the scenes in this role. This role involves gathering the position of the perl6 community and presenting it to the public in a single voice with a consistent message.
"A single voice with a consistent message"? A Perl spin doctor?
[3] Nathan Torkington has agreed to take the role of project manager for perl6 until he can find someone to take over.
OK so far.
This position involves controlling the release of information about perl6, messages about the project, etc.
"Controlling the release of information"? Uhm.
Early discussions about this role mentioned the possibility of recruiting someone with managerial experience but not necessarily coming from a technical background or even a Perl background.
Open source projects work on a meritocracy. This has to be a joke.
[4] Dick Hardt's role for perl6 will be to talk to customers with a significant interest in Perl's stability and growth (e.g. Yahoo, investment banks, etc.) and forward these concerns to the perl6 community.
"Investment banks" is a giveaway. It's so amazingly well contrived, it almost makes you forget that Perl doesn't have customers, it has users. Do you see a mention of the Perl user groups there? Does this sound like Larry with a concern for the community? 'Perl 6 To Be Complete Rewrite (But Not What You Think)' Not what you think indeed.
I could go on. Let me know if this doesn't convince you.
By the way, if this is true, I'll want nothing more to do with Perl. Tip: Sick and tired of these tips? Type "set tips 0" any time. > set tips 0
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think they were Open Source according to the Open Source definition... but in the sense that you got the source...
Or were those programs excluded from the general license terms of MS DOS?!
--
I think you were supposed to click the links and read for yourselves...
/.ed very fast... =/
But now the flatplanet.net site got
--
I was refering to GNU/Linux, *BSD, BeOS, etc..
And I have to point out that I said "most non-Micros~1 OSes" - "most", not "all"... =)
(Btw, I think you can get IE for Solaris, HPUX, etc too)
--
IE5 is out there and it is better than anything else so why suffer through something of lesser quality when now we have a choice and do not have to.
Uhm... I don't see how people using most non-Micros~1 OSes have that choice. - they don't have any IE5 available!
I've been using Mozilla M16 most of the time since I downloaded it (I'm downloading M17-talkback right now) and I'm pretty happy with it - It's far from perfect, but it usually does a better job than Netscape 4.7x and is about as stable...
And yes, I guess I can run IE5 in a vmware session... that would work - I've tried... but i just don't like running my webbrowser non-natively... It just feels silly...
--
This is ONLY about what is reasonable - I insist that if you claim that the product is completely backwards compatible you should keep every single feature/bug that someone could utilize in their software... (according to this post your GNU/Linux related example actually was about libc and not the linux kernel, but still... if you removed those features from one libc version to another the new one was NOT completely backwards compatible, it doesn't matter if it's GNU hackers or Microsoft programmers who make the change...)
It's of course a completely different thing what is REASONABLE to do... It usually isn't a good thing to keep _complete_ backward compatibility - you have to draw the line somewhere... (I don't really have an opinion on whether what Microsoft did was "right" or "wrong", it sure didn't sound good though...)
--
Uhm... if you makes changes to a operating system and you want to claim that it's completely backwards compatible... shouldn't it then work with all programs that worked with the previous version of the OS?
One purpose of the OS is to control the execution of the applications, and if applications made for the previous version don't work with the current version I sure wouldn't say that it's backwards compatible...
--
Ok, but then at least boxen ok! (?)
/bok'sn/ (By analogy with {VAXen}) A fanciful plural of {box}
often encountered in the phrase "Unix boxen", used to describe commodity {Unix} hardware. The connotation is that any two
Unix boxen are interchangeable.
/bok'sn/ /pl.n./ [by analogy with {VAXen}]
It's in two of my dictionaries at least:
From The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (07Oct99) [foldoc]:
boxen
(1994-11-29)
From Jargon File (4.0.0/24 July 1996) [jargon]:
boxen
Fanciful plural of {box} often encountered in the phrase `Unix boxen', used to describe commodity {{Unix}} hardware. The connotation is that any two Unix boxen are interchangeable.
--
Sometimes what you say will work, but not all Makefiles have an uninstall option!
Also, you should try to run the program before running "make install" to see if you like it... - a lot of programs run just fine without having been "installed".
--
What you said was that you should replace the broader term "Free Software" with the more restrictive term "Open Source"...
Could you explain how this should be done?
Changing names from "Open Source" to "Free Software" would work, as all "Open Source" software meets the criteria of "Free Software" as you stated yourself... But as "Open Source" is more clearly defined all "Free Software" may not meet the criteria of "Open Source" - and it'll therefore be impossible to do the change you wanted! (If I'm not terribly wrong)
--
Maybe you should take a look at this article?
It does show some examples of what the difference between the term "Open Source" and the term "Free Software" is...
--
This only measures how many hosts are listed within DNS, not the total number of machines on the internet. It doesn't measure IPs used by dialups, machines behind firewalls, IP masquaraded machines, etc. In other words, there are more than 87 million computers on the internet, quite a few more I would guess. In fact, I would say that the exact number is almost impossible to figure out.
I doubt that machines using IPs reserved for local networks (machines that therefore never can be reached directly from the Internet) really should be counted as "hosts on the internet"... (this is the case with masqueraded machines, etc)
--
slotA.com's motherboard list has a dual Athlon motherboard listed. It's named "Tyan Dolphin" and should be released Q4 '00.
I don't know if this is based on information from Tyan though - I couldn't find any information on this on Tyans page.
--
Which version of chip are we meant to take this as? Intel have sensibly numbered pentiums 1,2,3,4,... but AMD seem to insist on going for 5, 6, 7, 6-2, 6-3,....
So is a K6 meant to be equivalent to a Pentium VI, or is a K6-III meant to be equivalent to a Pentium III? How are we meant to make sensible comparisons with such confusing numbers?
JFYI you can never compare those model names by looking at the numbers like you did...
The reason why AMD has K6-2 and K6-3 is that those CPUs are closer to the original K6 design (but of course improved) than to the Athlon (K7)...
I don't know if the order you of when the AMD CPUs were released was correct (I would have thought that at least K6-2 would have been before K7, but then I'm no AMD-release-timeline-expert)
--
I tried to play with my ancient miraculously salvaged copy of Death Track, and as soon as I launched the race, I was dead because all the other cars have run already had time to run around the entire track a few times and frag me like there's no tomorow. Old games often don't anticipate newer hardware...
You should really try MoSlo or something similar, it should be easy to find as it's all over the 'Net
Here's a Google search for MoSlo downloads
--
not only woody, at least potato too... (and I wouldn't be surprised if xpdf is in slink too, although i doubt that the gs in slink has PDF support)
--
First of all I think 180 megs for KDE sounds way too much (I don't run KDE myself though, so I can't be 100% sure)...
But my real point is... Who'd run KDE (or the X Window system at all) on a web/mail server anyway?!?
If you should compare these things you should compare *BSD/Linux/whatever running only what it needs to do the job and still be fully administrable against Win2k with what it needs to do the same...
My guess would be that you'd have more memory left on the *NIX machines...
And no, I'm not saying that Win2k is just crap and that *NIX beats the shit out of it in all fields........
--
Maybe it's because I'm an idiot but I dont' understand how using a packet sniffer is going to cause me to stop downloading stuff.
As long as you only log in anonymously you don't have to worry, but if you log in using FTP on a site where you want to be sure that noone is messing with your private files you should use another protocol (or some ftp+ssl solution).
--
or why not Paypai? ;)
--
That's "as easy to install as some GNU/Linux distributions" to you! =P
No, seriously...
Are the BSDs harder to install than the not-so-newbie-targetted (GNU/) Linux distributions?
(I.e. Would it be much harder to install than.. let's say Debian or Slackware? (Except of course being different))
--
Then I think you should have your elephant's tusks removed so you won't have to worry about poachers either... =P
Myself I wonder if an elephant (or a gazelle) can do anything non-destructive in a server room =)
--
Exactly...
Can't possibly be Debian... he must be completely bored with it...
--
LOL... oops, sorry... .com instead of .org...
I accidently typed
Won't happen again.. I almost promise!! =)
--
To any OSS/Free Software advocates: trying to do this on MySQL is a Bad Idea.
;)
Them, how well would PostgreSQL handle this?
--
AIDE is a file checksum database thingy (similar to Tripwire [tm])
Portsentry is a portscan detection thingy...
And yes, both these things are good to have...
--
Worked for me...
Here's the story (if you still can't access it):
posted by Simon on Thursday July 20, @06:12AM
from the it-goes-or-I-do dept.
Well, the Perl 6 thing was funny for a while, but I'm kinda unconvinced now. See the rest
of the article for why.
Oh, and if this isn't a joke - I quit.
OK, Perl 6 is starting to look implausible. In fact, I'm convinced it's an elaborate practical joke. Let's
examine the evidence here.
The switch to Perl 6 was determined at a closed-door meeting of Perl porters at the conference -
not on the mailing list.
The first thing that happened was that Tom Christiansen was dropped from the project. Tom's a
good friend of Larry, and they've just launched a book together. Suddenly thrown out like that? It's
not very Larry-like.
The perl6-porters mailing list was shut down with no explanation.
The 'bootstrap' mailing list - I've tried posting to it. It doesn't send them on; I asked the list
manager about this - no response.
Adam Turoff has been posting "roles" and "goals" on the bootstrap list. His mails end with this
disclaimer:
Any mistakes, errors, etc. are purely my own. Please send corrections,
clarifications or requests for clarification directly to me as to reduce
chatter on the bootstrap list.
So we're not to ask questions on the list? Come on...
Development teams will be closed-subscription lists. This is, uhm, a little different to the way
Perl works.
Here are some of the roles Ziggy posted today:
quality assurance schwern@pobox.com
spokesdroid brian@sri.net [2]
project manager gnat@frii.com [3]
customer relations dickh@activestate.com [4]
These don't look real.
Here are some of the explanations:
[2] brian d foy will work mostly behind the scenes in this role.
This role involves gathering the position of the perl6 community
and presenting it to the public in a single voice with a consistent
message.
"A single voice with a consistent message"? A Perl spin doctor?
[3] Nathan Torkington has agreed to take the role of project manager
for perl6 until he can find someone to take over.
OK so far.
This position involves controlling the release of information about
perl6, messages about the project, etc.
"Controlling the release of information"? Uhm.
Early discussions about this role mentioned the possibility of
recruiting someone with managerial experience but not necessarily
coming from a technical background or even a Perl background.
Open source projects work on a meritocracy. This has to be a joke.
[4] Dick Hardt's role for perl6 will be to talk to customers with a
significant interest in Perl's stability and growth (e.g. Yahoo,
investment banks, etc.) and forward these concerns to the perl6
community.
"Investment banks" is a giveaway. It's so amazingly well contrived, it almost makes you forget
that Perl doesn't have customers, it has users. Do you see a mention of the Perl user groups there?
Does this sound like Larry with a concern for the community?
'Perl 6 To Be Complete Rewrite (But Not What You Think)' Not what you think indeed.
I could go on. Let me know if this doesn't convince you.
By the way, if this is true, I'll want nothing more to do with Perl.
Tip: Sick and tired of these tips? Type "set tips 0" any time.
> set tips 0