IP is the canonical example of a robust routing protocol. If an intermediate node drops off the net, IP will find a new route.
Actually, IP is not a routing protocol, and will not find new routes. This task is performed by routers, talking over specialized routing protocols to forward routing updates to each other. Examples of routing protocols are OSPF and BGP. Note that these protocols run on top of IP, but that does not make IP a routing protocol.
In short, our legal team and Red Hat both advised that we had to buy licences for our dev servers. They did discount these generously, but the mere fact that there was any cost in testing and developing on Linux while there wasn't for Windows (due to the organisation site license) was always a big black mark against Linux.
Which is where CentOS comes in. It is binary compatible with RHEL, in fact it is RHEL, but with the non-redistributable parts removed. Thus, you can very well have free dev machines that run essentially the same system as your production machines.
Still, how does this become compliant with the GPL? Redhat distributes the OS (the source form) on the terms of the GPL. This allows me full redistribution rights
You get full redistribution rights on those parts that are covered by the GPL. There are parts of RHEL that are not covered by the GPL, which is effectively those parts that CentOS strips out. That include the Red Hat artwork and Red Hat Network tools.
but it surely is LiPo and not the older Li-ion that has caused these fires.
Dell seems to disagree. My (Dell) laptop is slightly less than two years old. It was delivered with a Li-Ion battery. After the incidents with exploding Dell laptops, they exchanged my old battery of a new (also Li-Ion) battery. If Li-Ion didn't cause any fires, why would they have replaced them?
My idea? I don't even agree with it. You must have missed the "If the people that claim that..." part. Many people claim that Linux is only secure because it has a tiny marketshare, if it would go up, Linux would be as plagued by XP or worse. I don't agree with this claim. Now Vista supporters claim that Vista is almost invulnerable, but if the people making the claim about Linux security just being a function of its marketshare are right, the invulnerability of Vista will only last as long as Vista marketshare is low.
linux isn't less subject to malware because it is less popular (it is a good deal more popular than Windows for internet servers, for instance), it is more secure because the actual design of the operating system is completely different, and does not allow for the kinds of plug-in executables that Windows does as well as the fact that it doesn't run with privileges that aren't actually needed for any one task at hand. Modern linux isn't just secure, it is downright hardened.
I know, I know, I mostly use Linux myself (and did so since 1999). I keep Windows for the occasional game.
Please.. Even on older Windows versions, as long as you keep them up to date with Windows Update and take a bit of dilligence when you surf, its honestly not that difficult keeping it free from malware.
I know. It was several years since my Windows XP setup got infected by any malware whatsoever. Still, many users do get infected with a whole load of viruses, worms, spyware, etc (I know, I use to help my neighbors clean it up.), and thus it obviously isn't secure for Joe Luser.
This is more or less what the individual compute nodes of the Blue Gene are. The nodes consist of dual Power-PC processors, 512 MB RAM, network interface and supporting circuits, all integrated on one chip that draws around 17 Watts of power. That's essentially why you can get 1024 nodes into one 19" rack, which is capable of about five TFLOPS.
It is obviously way more secure. I feel pretty much invulnerable from malicious software, no matter which website I surf or what I get in the mail.
Until the malware bites you in your ass, that is. If the people that claim that Linux and other supposedly secure operating systems would have as much malware problems as XP if they had a similar marketshare are right, then Vista will be as plagued as XP in a few years when its marketshare has gone up.
Re:Will anyone gain anything from this?
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That attitude is precisely why Linux is having so much trouble gaining against Windows. For every weenie who likes to build the kernel five times a day, there are thousands of customers who just want the damn thing to work without having to mess with it.
Then they can choose another distro. There are good "click-n-go" Linux distros that the newcomers can use, every distro shouldn't be forced to cater to the point-and-click people if the don't want to.
Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
If I never see another RPM failed dependency due to having had to compile a lib from.tgz, I'll be happy.
And why do you have to compile a lib from a.tgz? You want a newer version than is available as an RPM? Use the source RPM, modify it slightly to use the new version of the source, and build an RPM from it. It isn't harder than building and installing the software from the.tgz, and you also benefit from having the package in your RPM database.
Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
Argh, those stupid reminders that you need to restart. I updated my Windows XP yesterday, and when the update was complete, I told it that I will reboot later and went to play a little Supreme Commander. Every 10-15 minutes, it minimized the game to ask me if I would want to reboot now. After clicking "later" a few times, I just left it open so that it wouldn't interrupt me again.
Re:Will anyone gain anything from this? Not Linux
on
The End is Nigh for XP
·
· Score: 1
I'm just surprised that you weren't moderated into oblivion as -1 Troll/Flamebait.:)
LiPo(Lithium polymer, it's what's making laptops go up in flames the last few years). LiPo has the highest energy density, but is very unsafe when punctured in a crash(or when overcharged)
You must be thinking of Li-Ion. Li-Ion uses a flammable organic solvent as the electrolyte, while Li-Po uses a salt held in a solid non-flammable polymer. Li-Ion is usually used for higher-current applications like laptop computers, while Li-Po is usually used in low-current applications like mobile phones. The exploding laptops used Li-Ion batteries.
Re:Nowhere else for Palm to go...
on
Palm to go Linux
·
· Score: 1
What Microsoft brought to the table was a single software and hardware platform.
Ehrm, no. IBM brought the hardware platform and Microsoft brought the software. IBM left the system architecture open, and clones soon appeared, all of them more or less capable of running the same software. The PC evolved without Microsoft, and it would have been there even without them. The software would have been different, but it would certainly exist.
Advanced Access Content System, what a strange name. I'd think it would be much clearer if it was called the Advanced Content Access System or even better the Advanced Content Protection System.
Let's say you grant me a license to your software, and license it GPL. If I give or sell a copy to my competitor, I must give him the same chance to make changes that I had. How is that anti-competitive? It sounds like it levels the field, not the opposite.
The court that threw out Daniel Wallace lawsiut against the FSF more or less said the same thing:
[T]he GPL encourages, rather than discourages, free competition and the distribution of computer operating systems, the benefits of which directly pass to consumers. These benefits include lower prices, better access and more innovation.
so the only people who might like v2 but not v3 are those who want to exploit the v2 loopholes -- meaning those who want to exploit the open source community and don't care about their reputation in that community.
I would agree if saving is properly implemented, which in OpenOffice.org (2.0.x) it isn't. While working on a document, you save many more times than you load, and having the document lock up completely (which it does in said version of OO.o) while you are saving is a bigger issue than the load time. The proper way to do this would be to copy the data when you give the save command, and then do the saving in a separate thread, so that you could continue working while the document is being saved.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, IP is not a routing protocol, and will not find new routes. This task is performed by routers, talking over specialized routing protocols to forward routing updates to each other. Examples of routing protocols are OSPF and BGP. Note that these protocols run on top of IP, but that does not make IP a routing protocol.
If I used Word and lost a document just so that Microsoft could do some data collection, I'd think that they'd have their priorities seriously wrong.
Which is where CentOS comes in. It is binary compatible with RHEL, in fact it is RHEL, but with the non-redistributable parts removed. Thus, you can very well have free dev machines that run essentially the same system as your production machines.
You get full redistribution rights on those parts that are covered by the GPL. There are parts of RHEL that are not covered by the GPL, which is effectively those parts that CentOS strips out. That include the Red Hat artwork and Red Hat Network tools.
Dell seems to disagree. My (Dell) laptop is slightly less than two years old. It was delivered with a Li-Ion battery. After the incidents with exploding Dell laptops, they exchanged my old battery of a new (also Li-Ion) battery. If Li-Ion didn't cause any fires, why would they have replaced them?
My idea? I don't even agree with it. You must have missed the "If the people that claim that..." part. Many people claim that Linux is only secure because it has a tiny marketshare, if it would go up, Linux would be as plagued by XP or worse. I don't agree with this claim. Now Vista supporters claim that Vista is almost invulnerable, but if the people making the claim about Linux security just being a function of its marketshare are right, the invulnerability of Vista will only last as long as Vista marketshare is low.
linux isn't less subject to malware because it is less popular (it is a good deal more popular than Windows for internet servers, for instance), it is more secure because the actual design of the operating system is completely different, and does not allow for the kinds of plug-in executables that Windows does as well as the fact that it doesn't run with privileges that aren't actually needed for any one task at hand. Modern linux isn't just secure, it is downright hardened.I know, I know, I mostly use Linux myself (and did so since 1999). I keep Windows for the occasional game.
I know. It was several years since my Windows XP setup got infected by any malware whatsoever. Still, many users do get infected with a whole load of viruses, worms, spyware, etc (I know, I use to help my neighbors clean it up.), and thus it obviously isn't secure for Joe Luser.
This is more or less what the individual compute nodes of the Blue Gene are. The nodes consist of dual Power-PC processors, 512 MB RAM, network interface and supporting circuits, all integrated on one chip that draws around 17 Watts of power. That's essentially why you can get 1024 nodes into one 19" rack, which is capable of about five TFLOPS.
Fred Phelps, is that you?
Or in other words, to paraphrase the, among Microsoft supporters, popular Linux meme: Vista is not ready for the desktop.
Until the malware bites you in your ass, that is. If the people that claim that Linux and other supposedly secure operating systems would have as much malware problems as XP if they had a similar marketshare are right, then Vista will be as plagued as XP in a few years when its marketshare has gone up.
Then they can choose another distro. There are good "click-n-go" Linux distros that the newcomers can use, every distro shouldn't be forced to cater to the point-and-click people if the don't want to.
And why do you have to compile a lib from a .tgz? You want a newer version than is available as an RPM? Use the source RPM, modify it slightly to use the new version of the source, and build an RPM from it. It isn't harder than building and installing the software from the .tgz, and you also benefit from having the package in your RPM database.
Argh, those stupid reminders that you need to restart. I updated my Windows XP yesterday, and when the update was complete, I told it that I will reboot later and went to play a little Supreme Commander. Every 10-15 minutes, it minimized the game to ask me if I would want to reboot now. After clicking "later" a few times, I just left it open so that it wouldn't interrupt me again.
I'm just surprised that you weren't moderated into oblivion as -1 Troll/Flamebait. :)
You must be thinking of Li-Ion. Li-Ion uses a flammable organic solvent as the electrolyte, while Li-Po uses a salt held in a solid non-flammable polymer. Li-Ion is usually used for higher-current applications like laptop computers, while Li-Po is usually used in low-current applications like mobile phones. The exploding laptops used Li-Ion batteries.
You obviously missed the humor in my post. :)
Ehrm, no. IBM brought the hardware platform and Microsoft brought the software. IBM left the system architecture open, and clones soon appeared, all of them more or less capable of running the same software. The PC evolved without Microsoft, and it would have been there even without them. The software would have been different, but it would certainly exist.
The thing about revolutions is that you don't usually see them coming.
That would be a reasonable expansion, but according to the AACS organization, AACS is really Advanced Access Content System, however stupid it is.
Of course it isn't. This time, it's called Soviet America.
Advanced Access Content System, what a strange name. I'd think it would be much clearer if it was called the Advanced Content Access System or even better the Advanced Content Protection System.
The court that threw out Daniel Wallace lawsiut against the FSF more or less said the same thing:
[T]he GPL encourages, rather than discourages, free competition and the distribution of computer operating systems, the benefits of which directly pass to consumers. These benefits include lower prices, better access and more innovation.
In other words, the SCOs of the world.
I would agree if saving is properly implemented, which in OpenOffice.org (2.0.x) it isn't. While working on a document, you save many more times than you load, and having the document lock up completely (which it does in said version of OO.o) while you are saving is a bigger issue than the load time. The proper way to do this would be to copy the data when you give the save command, and then do the saving in a separate thread, so that you could continue working while the document is being saved.