That page is a marketeer inventing buzzwords to help them sell the product. The logic here is that BOCH, which doesn't emulate the full CPU is an "emulator" while software that does emulate the full machine is a "native virtualization".
Uhh, no. The logic is that BOSCH, which does emulate the full CPU is an emulator, while software that runs other stuff on the bare hardware but nevertheless only within parameters determined by the software is a "native virtualization". As in "virtualizes stuff running on the native hardware", not "virtualizes the native hardware itself", which would be emulation.
So we're supposed to say that VirtualBox doesn't "emulate" the x86_64 instruction set, it "virtualizes" it! That's nonsense.
It isn't. VirtualBox doesn't "emulate" the x86_64 instruction set, it takes code compiled for the x86_64 instruction set and executes it on a x86_64 compatible CPU, but making sure the code only sees what they want it to see (for example, an ethernet card instead of a WiFi connection, etc). That's why it can't run 64-bit code on a 32-bit CPU no matter what, all this article says is that if you've got a 32-bit OS running on your 64-bit CPU, you can use VirtualBox to run a 64-bit OS on top of it and finally take advantage of the freakin' thing you paid for.
Ironic that now it seems that one of the major obstacles preventing a particular platform's wide level acceptance is the presence of games.
The fact that a couple of slashdotters say so doesn't make it true.
In my opinion, Linux's only obstacle to gaining a significant foothold on the desktop market is a better acceptance on the business sector, as it happened with both DOS and Windows before it, with games only being a side benefit of the aditional market share. However, I am also a mere slashdotter so don't assume my opinion as truth, though I believe its better supported than the games theory. Still, conclusive proof it isn't, so take it with a grain of salt.
Ohh, and personally, my gaming habits have expanded so nowadays I do most of it on Windows. But thankfully, everything else (from web browsing to software development) I do in Linux and while it would be nice to someday only need Linux for all my needs, I'm fairly comfortable with the current situation and don't see a pressing need to change. Well, other than the fact that the newest version of Windows sucks ass, but I believe there'll be enough 2K and XP-compatible games for me to wait until Microsoft redeems itself of Vista.
Your post is the textual equivalent of the Goatse man, and I shall now bleach my brain to remove the mental image produced from it. Thanks a lot, you bastard.
The thing is, both the iPhone app and the game cater to different needs, and while it's difficult to find a good Xbox360 game for $20, finding a free app for your phone that does what you want is significantly easier.
To put the requisite Slashdot car analogy, it's like a painting and a car. The car is a much more time-efficient method of transportation than simple walking, and it can easily take not only you but your family and your belongings as well. While all the painting does is serve as decoration. Yet, a Picasso is worth far more than your old Pinto.
Why is that? because there are few paintings at the level of Picasso's, while there are countless cars that serve just as well as your Pinto, and more are being made every day.
As to "home editions", Windows permission management has generally been more than adequate for the market Microsoft was serving.
They weren't. That's why Windows XP's security was so praised when it first came out, the amount of malware that took advantage of the "everything is an administrator" model used in Win9x was staggering.
As to MSDN--nice strawman. We weren't talking about administration. Google away; it works for me.
I wasn't talking about administration either. While I've had (or tried) to use MSDN for such things, most of the time it's browsing the documentation for the.NET Framework. And if that's the documentation Microsoft expects developers to use when writing apps for their own OS, God only knows how they keep the marketshare they still have.
Users don't like change, but they can be convinced to embrace change if the payoff is there; witness the rapid switch from command line to GUI, from usenet to web. Both of those happened in a matter of months and now only techies use command lines and usenet (it's interesting that nothing ever goes away--we just keep adding new stuff--the delete key is dying).
Months? months!? you didn't work in IT during the time of Windows 3.1, right? or Windows 95? good ol' DOS shell only became obsolete for 99% of Windows users around the time of Win98, before that it wasn't uncommon to see a normal (yes, non-techie) user using it, and during the days of Win3.1, they were even the majority. Usenet I never used, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case too.
There are two examples of having to "learn to use the damned thing all over again" for Windows and Office in the last 20 years: Windows 95 and Office 2007.
Definining use as "how to start an already-installed application", which is a bit restrictive. Try to configure a LAN on Windows 98. Then on 2000. Then on XP. Then come back and tell me it's the same thing on all of them.
Single Point of Failure. Ever heard of the term? we who do Windows tech support have. A lot. Specially with regards to the attrocity inflicted upon mankind under the name of Windows Registry.
Also, whoever thought that it was a good idea to mix plaintext, hex, octal and binary variables in the same place needs to be shot, revived, then shot again for good measure. At least in Linux you know it's gonna be just text.
Your first paragraph answers your second paragraph beautifully: it breaks muscle memory. And personally, I despise any application that changes itself without explicit input from the user, be it pop-ups or auto-hiding toolbars or whatever, for the same reason.
Linux is designed as a server OS. The desktop versions are just a pretty face on top of the same server OS. If you are going to compare with Windows you need to compare with Windows server configurations.
No. If we're talking about Linux on the Desktop, then we need to compare it with what's actually in people's desktops, and that means good ol' Dell-ized, home-ready version of Windows, no NT or 2003 Server here. And in the desktop, Windows had a very shitty track record with permission management before Windows XP.
The linux advantage is low price (not zero; FOSS documentation is so appalling you have to buy books).
For me, there are four levels of documentation, in descending order: good, bad, none, and MSDN. At least with no documentation I don't waste two hours of my time trying to understand the POS that passes as documentation on Microsoft's website, before giving up and solving my problem with a quick Google search.
I have to agree with the suggestion that the linux community needs to do something revolutionary. Otherwise it's just another OS.
They do all the time. It's just that "Windows-born" users tend to cry away in pain from them, and run back to the comfy world of Windows-like clones. Let's face it, users *don't* like change, and anything revolutionary by definition changes the status quo in serious, very noticeable ways.
Or, it could mean that EA has finally seen the light and is trying to be an actual videogame company instead of the marketing-driven behemoth pushing yearly crap it has been until now, and is now trying to sell good games in consumer-friendly formats for a change.
Call me naive, but after Mirror's Edge I'm willing to give them the benefit of doubt, and if IBM could change, so can EA.
it can be perfectly legal without steam, it's just up to the distributer to be more reasonable with thier t&c's.
But they aren't, so Steam it is.
the question you need to ask yourself, is is piracy more or less of a problem now than before DRM? what's that, it's just as big of a problem??? that's right DRM isn't the solution. kthxbai.
The question you need to ask yourself, is piracy more or less of a problem now for Steam-only games than it is for non-Steam ones? and the answer is, from what I've seen, that it's much less of a problem now. Yes, pirated versions do exist but most of the people I've met who've played HL2 have done so on a legit copy, which I can't say for Crysis or CoD4 for example. Therefore, by your own argument, Steam *is* the solution.
Okay, By this far I have learned that "support" tends to mean security patches rather than Features. Except for the whopping ones, I'm kinda less interested in security quibbles.
Well, that goes for pretty much all home users though, but businesses have nightmares with applications where a button suddenly moves to another place on the toolbar or such, so they want bugfixes and *only* bugfixes, and LTS-style distros cater to them.
I'm starting to get the idea that I have to upgrade parts of the OS to enjoy new apps, which is still foreign to 10 years of Windows habits, where that's pretty rare.
That's because, all things considered, Windows doesn't come with much so every app has to bring its own set of libraries and such. Linux, on the other hand, has little libraries for pretty much anything you may ever want to do, with the problem that you 'tie' your app to those libraries and if you update them, you probably may have to update the app as well.
This is where the distro proliferation, while sounding fun once I finally get this, is unnerving for the moment. I don't exactly know what a set release of ubuntu provides compared to this apparently continuous stream of new items which appear in repositories like "Testing".
Think of Linux as a huge software ecosystem, constantly improving and evolving. So-called 'rolling' distros, like ArchLinux or, to a certain extent, Debian Testing are a recollection of such ecosystem, trying to 'tie' the releases together and stabilize them as much as they can, but with a focus on staying up-to-date. Normal distros, like Ubuntu or Fedora, take every couple months a 'snapshot' of the best apps of that ecosystem, and proceed to support them until the time comes to take a newer snapshot. And LTS-style distros like Debian Stable or RHEL take every couple of years a 'snapshot' of the most solid, reliable apps of that ecosystem (which may or may not be the 'best') and proceed to support them for a long time.
The first cater to power users, who like to use the newest and shiniest and are able to take advantage of that, the second cater to normal users, who prefer something more stable but not 'outdated', and the third of course caters to businesses which need the assurance that if something works today, it'll continue to work the same way three years from now.
I'm willing to consider Debian Proper in exchange for a wee less Newbie-fying if that's what it takes to get a more coherent rolling experience.
Debian proper isn't a 'rolling' experience. There's only one supported version of each software, and it stays that way 'til you update the whole OS, it's just that they provide security patches throughout the whole product life. But if what you want is install the OS today and be able to run Firefox 5 in two years with only a 'double click', look elsewhere (Debian Testing may be a good one, as the sibling post mentioned).
I did listen to some advice from a friend back then, and did settle on Drake on purpose as a LTS... but apparently it's for varying shades of "long".
No, it's for a business-level definition of "support": you get patches for vulnerabilities and bugs, but you *don't* get the newer-and-shinier versions.
Your other note had the crucial remark that the next version of uBuntu is the one with OO3. To me, THAT is THE killer App I need, so I will plan my entire strategy around that. I think I'm slowly evolving into the decision to use that as a trial run, and then get the NEXT LTS release (whatever animal that comes out to) as my Park distro that I camp out on and "just do work".
Then you do want a rolling release, in which case there's Debian testing, or simply following the latest Ubuntu, but certainly nothing LTS, unless it includes it out-of-the-box. And even then, you'd better hope you aren't tempted by the newer version of another software, or we're gonna have this discussion again.
I don't know about that, but it does send a message to a totalitarian and genocidal enemy (Pakistan) that they will have a tougher time in carrying out their goals.
You honestly believe putting up a law against photographing air bases will be an obstacle to a 'totalitarian and genocidal' country meaning to 'wipe [you] out' from carrying out their goals? that strikes me as putting a sheet of paper between you and a loaded gun, sorry.
I'd rather lose some freedoms than die in a nuclear fireball, or live in perpetual misery in the Dhimmitude of an Islamic theocracy.
Careful with that, plenty of people said that in the US in 2001 and you see where that got them. Honestly, if history has taught us anything, is that the government people should be most afraid of is always their own.
No, Pascal is like Atheism. Everyone claims to have known it at some point or another, yet no one can agree on what exactly it's supposed to be.
Objective C is like Protestantism. It started off as a grand fork of C/Judaism, but nowadays it's seldom used outside of the area it was born in and everyone else thinks it's the same as Java/Christianism.
I cannot even comprehend the mind that thinks that was fine, funny, or even remotely okay to do. I know they exist, but I can't imagine a worse excuse for a pathetic piece of womanhood.
I can imagine plenty worse. For starters she actually knew her victim, while we live in a world where some people support the murder of others solely due to their racial background or the country they were born in. And for another, she may have encouraged and manipulated the girl, but the decision to end the girl's life was ultimately hers, a luxury that people with a gun to the head seldom have.
I agree with the rest of your post, of course, but I do think it's funny that even you fell a bit into this "think of the children!" thing that we've had around this case.
Or perhaps you mean to say that all of life involves suffering? In that case it's equally valid to say that all of life is enjoyable, because in my experience, all of life involves enjoyment too.
From what I gather that was precisely his point, that if you try to eliminate anything that could cause you suffering you'll end up eliminating everything that gives you joy, and that therefore the only world devoid of suffering is that which is completely devoid of life.
(1) That's because they recalled that a previous Democracy in Athens had killed one of mankind's greatest thinkers, Socrates, simply because they didn't like him. They did not want the right to life to be taken-away by a simple 50% +1 vote.
Good point, but that was 2000 years ago. Things change.
(2) It's no more fucked-up then how the European Union operates - ya know, a Union of States where States elect ministers to the Council, not the people. You need to understand history, because in 1786 we were not a single nation - we were 13 indepentent nations coming together as an EU-type organization. Hence an election organized by States, not people.
You were. You aren't now.
(3) Hence we a Republic of 50 States, where LAW reigns and protects the individual, not a democracy where the majority squashes the individual underfoot.
And yet there's plenty of democratic republics around the world with the same advantages but without such an idiotic voting system in place. Plus, while we're on the topic of individual freedoms, your country has one of the lousiest track records of the civilized world, so in any case your system doesn't seem to be working very well.
Yea and a decade ago that 'enterprise' stuff was steaming piles of VB. Now it's racks of big ass servers or blades groaning under badly designed layers and layers of Java 'middleware'. Not sure things have actually improved much.
If you had worked with either of them you'd know that yes, things have improved tremendously. Alas, it's evidently you haven't used Java for a real-world project of a respectable size so...
If you have insane amounts of CPU and memory to throw at it to cover up the slowness you can keep a team of medium skill code monkeys permantly employed maintaining all that interfacing between the various middleware products from different vendors.
Which is much better than C++, where you need obscene amounts of CPU and memory to throw at problems, or rather, to all of the "me too" libraries your medium skilled code monkeys used to build your nifty little problem-solver that only they can extend because the code is such a mess. Or were you suggesting Python, Ruby et al which, while excellent languages in their own right, can't beat Java's performance anywhere, anytime?
What? Must have missed it.
Yes, you did. Do you even work in IT? seriously.
Silly me, I thought the primary reason everybody rejected Java and Vista was the bloat and suck.
Silly me, I thought that nobody outside of the hardcore (read: fanatical) C coders rejected Java, but what do I know, I'm only somebody working in IT and looking at available job postings.
No, you notice when a small app starts sucking up all available memory.
And that's when you know the app was coded in C or C++, and the programmer sucked. Or was lazy. Or just a bit careless. Or had a bad day at home. Or one of the other million reasons a C/C++ app may leak.
I've got a cheap crappy basic cell phone. You can almost see individual pixels draw on the darned thing...
If I look for a firefox add-on, to continue the comparison, I can sort by type or keyword, and get a brief description of the application click it for a detailed explanation as well as reviews and comments...
Same with Synaptic, except without the user comments. I do think, however, that level of information tends to scare away the more shy users, so I'm also happy the default install/removal app doesn't have it.
Slashdot Mirror
They're obsessed with their operating systems more than what they can do with them. :)
Things to do with them? as in gaming, the entire point of the GP's post? or were you just trolling?
That page is a marketeer inventing buzzwords to help them sell the product. The logic here is that BOCH, which doesn't emulate the full CPU is an "emulator" while software that does emulate the full machine is a "native virtualization".
Uhh, no. The logic is that BOSCH, which does emulate the full CPU is an emulator, while software that runs other stuff on the bare hardware but nevertheless only within parameters determined by the software is a "native virtualization". As in "virtualizes stuff running on the native hardware", not "virtualizes the native hardware itself", which would be emulation.
So we're supposed to say that VirtualBox doesn't "emulate" the x86_64 instruction set, it "virtualizes" it! That's nonsense.
It isn't. VirtualBox doesn't "emulate" the x86_64 instruction set, it takes code compiled for the x86_64 instruction set and executes it on a x86_64 compatible CPU, but making sure the code only sees what they want it to see (for example, an ethernet card instead of a WiFi connection, etc). That's why it can't run 64-bit code on a 32-bit CPU no matter what, all this article says is that if you've got a 32-bit OS running on your 64-bit CPU, you can use VirtualBox to run a 64-bit OS on top of it and finally take advantage of the freakin' thing you paid for.
Ironic that now it seems that one of the major obstacles preventing a particular platform's wide level acceptance is the presence of games.
The fact that a couple of slashdotters say so doesn't make it true.
In my opinion, Linux's only obstacle to gaining a significant foothold on the desktop market is a better acceptance on the business sector, as it happened with both DOS and Windows before it, with games only being a side benefit of the aditional market share. However, I am also a mere slashdotter so don't assume my opinion as truth, though I believe its better supported than the games theory. Still, conclusive proof it isn't, so take it with a grain of salt.
Ohh, and personally, my gaming habits have expanded so nowadays I do most of it on Windows. But thankfully, everything else (from web browsing to software development) I do in Linux and while it would be nice to someday only need Linux for all my needs, I'm fairly comfortable with the current situation and don't see a pressing need to change. Well, other than the fact that the newest version of Windows sucks ass, but I believe there'll be enough 2K and XP-compatible games for me to wait until Microsoft redeems itself of Vista.
So is solving the problem of having a design that looks like spiderweb on steroids, though.
Simple: they're the ones paying for the bandwidth and the infrastructure necessary for showing those videos.
Judging from this, yet another product to sell.
Your post is the textual equivalent of the Goatse man, and I shall now bleach my brain to remove the mental image produced from it. Thanks a lot, you bastard.
The thing is, both the iPhone app and the game cater to different needs, and while it's difficult to find a good Xbox360 game for $20, finding a free app for your phone that does what you want is significantly easier.
To put the requisite Slashdot car analogy, it's like a painting and a car. The car is a much more time-efficient method of transportation than simple walking, and it can easily take not only you but your family and your belongings as well. While all the painting does is serve as decoration. Yet, a Picasso is worth far more than your old Pinto.
Why is that? because there are few paintings at the level of Picasso's, while there are countless cars that serve just as well as your Pinto, and more are being made every day.
As to "home editions", Windows permission management has generally been more than adequate for the market Microsoft was serving.
They weren't. That's why Windows XP's security was so praised when it first came out, the amount of malware that took advantage of the "everything is an administrator" model used in Win9x was staggering.
As to MSDN--nice strawman. We weren't talking about administration. Google away; it works for me.
I wasn't talking about administration either. While I've had (or tried) to use MSDN for such things, most of the time it's browsing the documentation for the .NET Framework. And if that's the documentation Microsoft expects developers to use when writing apps for their own OS, God only knows how they keep the marketshare they still have.
Users don't like change, but they can be convinced to embrace change if the payoff is there; witness the rapid switch from command line to GUI, from usenet to web. Both of those happened in a matter of months and now only techies use command lines and usenet (it's interesting that nothing ever goes away--we just keep adding new stuff--the delete key is dying).
Months? months!? you didn't work in IT during the time of Windows 3.1, right? or Windows 95? good ol' DOS shell only became obsolete for 99% of Windows users around the time of Win98, before that it wasn't uncommon to see a normal (yes, non-techie) user using it, and during the days of Win3.1, they were even the majority. Usenet I never used, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case too.
There are two examples of having to "learn to use the damned thing all over again" for Windows and Office in the last 20 years: Windows 95 and Office 2007.
Definining use as "how to start an already-installed application", which is a bit restrictive. Try to configure a LAN on Windows 98. Then on 2000. Then on XP. Then come back and tell me it's the same thing on all of them.
Single Point of Failure. Ever heard of the term? we who do Windows tech support have. A lot. Specially with regards to the attrocity inflicted upon mankind under the name of Windows Registry.
Also, whoever thought that it was a good idea to mix plaintext, hex, octal and binary variables in the same place needs to be shot, revived, then shot again for good measure. At least in Linux you know it's gonna be just text.
Your first paragraph answers your second paragraph beautifully: it breaks muscle memory. And personally, I despise any application that changes itself without explicit input from the user, be it pop-ups or auto-hiding toolbars or whatever, for the same reason.
Linux is designed as a server OS. The desktop versions are just a pretty face on top of the same server OS. If you are going to compare with Windows you need to compare with Windows server configurations.
No. If we're talking about Linux on the Desktop, then we need to compare it with what's actually in people's desktops, and that means good ol' Dell-ized, home-ready version of Windows, no NT or 2003 Server here. And in the desktop, Windows had a very shitty track record with permission management before Windows XP.
The linux advantage is low price (not zero; FOSS documentation is so appalling you have to buy books).
For me, there are four levels of documentation, in descending order: good, bad, none, and MSDN. At least with no documentation I don't waste two hours of my time trying to understand the POS that passes as documentation on Microsoft's website, before giving up and solving my problem with a quick Google search.
I have to agree with the suggestion that the linux community needs to do something revolutionary. Otherwise it's just another OS.
They do all the time. It's just that "Windows-born" users tend to cry away in pain from them, and run back to the comfy world of Windows-like clones. Let's face it, users *don't* like change, and anything revolutionary by definition changes the status quo in serious, very noticeable ways.
Or, it could mean that EA has finally seen the light and is trying to be an actual videogame company instead of the marketing-driven behemoth pushing yearly crap it has been until now, and is now trying to sell good games in consumer-friendly formats for a change.
Call me naive, but after Mirror's Edge I'm willing to give them the benefit of doubt, and if IBM could change, so can EA.
it can be perfectly legal without steam, it's just up to the distributer to be more reasonable with thier t&c's.
But they aren't, so Steam it is.
the question you need to ask yourself, is is piracy more or less of a problem now than before DRM? what's that, it's just as big of a problem??? that's right DRM isn't the solution. kthxbai.
The question you need to ask yourself, is piracy more or less of a problem now for Steam-only games than it is for non-Steam ones? and the answer is, from what I've seen, that it's much less of a problem now. Yes, pirated versions do exist but most of the people I've met who've played HL2 have done so on a legit copy, which I can't say for Crysis or CoD4 for example. Therefore, by your own argument, Steam *is* the solution.
Okay, By this far I have learned that "support" tends to mean security patches rather than Features. Except for the whopping ones, I'm kinda less interested in security quibbles.
Well, that goes for pretty much all home users though, but businesses have nightmares with applications where a button suddenly moves to another place on the toolbar or such, so they want bugfixes and *only* bugfixes, and LTS-style distros cater to them.
I'm starting to get the idea that I have to upgrade parts of the OS to enjoy new apps, which is still foreign to 10 years of Windows habits, where that's pretty rare.
That's because, all things considered, Windows doesn't come with much so every app has to bring its own set of libraries and such. Linux, on the other hand, has little libraries for pretty much anything you may ever want to do, with the problem that you 'tie' your app to those libraries and if you update them, you probably may have to update the app as well.
This is where the distro proliferation, while sounding fun once I finally get this, is unnerving for the moment. I don't exactly know what a set release of ubuntu provides compared to this apparently continuous stream of new items which appear in repositories like "Testing".
Think of Linux as a huge software ecosystem, constantly improving and evolving. So-called 'rolling' distros, like ArchLinux or, to a certain extent, Debian Testing are a recollection of such ecosystem, trying to 'tie' the releases together and stabilize them as much as they can, but with a focus on staying up-to-date. Normal distros, like Ubuntu or Fedora, take every couple months a 'snapshot' of the best apps of that ecosystem, and proceed to support them until the time comes to take a newer snapshot. And LTS-style distros like Debian Stable or RHEL take every couple of years a 'snapshot' of the most solid, reliable apps of that ecosystem (which may or may not be the 'best') and proceed to support them for a long time.
The first cater to power users, who like to use the newest and shiniest and are able to take advantage of that, the second cater to normal users, who prefer something more stable but not 'outdated', and the third of course caters to businesses which need the assurance that if something works today, it'll continue to work the same way three years from now.
I'm willing to consider Debian Proper in exchange for a wee less Newbie-fying if that's what it takes to get a more coherent rolling experience.
Debian proper isn't a 'rolling' experience. There's only one supported version of each software, and it stays that way 'til you update the whole OS, it's just that they provide security patches throughout the whole product life. But if what you want is install the OS today and be able to run Firefox 5 in two years with only a 'double click', look elsewhere (Debian Testing may be a good one, as the sibling post mentioned).
I did listen to some advice from a friend back then, and did settle on Drake on purpose as a LTS... but apparently it's for varying shades of "long".
No, it's for a business-level definition of "support": you get patches for vulnerabilities and bugs, but you *don't* get the newer-and-shinier versions.
Your other note had the crucial remark that the next version of uBuntu is the one with OO3. To me, THAT is THE killer App I need, so I will plan my entire strategy around that. I think I'm slowly evolving into the decision to use that as a trial run, and then get the NEXT LTS release (whatever animal that comes out to) as my Park distro that I camp out on and "just do work".
Then you do want a rolling release, in which case there's Debian testing, or simply following the latest Ubuntu, but certainly nothing LTS, unless it includes it out-of-the-box. And even then, you'd better hope you aren't tempted by the newer version of another software, or we're gonna have this discussion again.
I don't know about that, but it does send a message to a totalitarian and genocidal enemy (Pakistan) that they will have a tougher time in carrying out their goals.
You honestly believe putting up a law against photographing air bases will be an obstacle to a 'totalitarian and genocidal' country meaning to 'wipe [you] out' from carrying out their goals? that strikes me as putting a sheet of paper between you and a loaded gun, sorry.
I'd rather lose some freedoms than die in a nuclear fireball, or live in perpetual misery in the Dhimmitude of an Islamic theocracy.
Careful with that, plenty of people said that in the US in 2001 and you see where that got them. Honestly, if history has taught us anything, is that the government people should be most afraid of is always their own.
No, Pascal is like Atheism. Everyone claims to have known it at some point or another, yet no one can agree on what exactly it's supposed to be.
Objective C is like Protestantism. It started off as a grand fork of C/Judaism, but nowadays it's seldom used outside of the area it was born in and everyone else thinks it's the same as Java/Christianism.
I cannot even comprehend the mind that thinks that was fine, funny, or even remotely okay to do. I know they exist, but I can't imagine a worse excuse for a pathetic piece of womanhood.
I can imagine plenty worse. For starters she actually knew her victim, while we live in a world where some people support the murder of others solely due to their racial background or the country they were born in. And for another, she may have encouraged and manipulated the girl, but the decision to end the girl's life was ultimately hers, a luxury that people with a gun to the head seldom have.
I agree with the rest of your post, of course, but I do think it's funny that even you fell a bit into this "think of the children!" thing that we've had around this case.
Or perhaps you mean to say that all of life involves suffering? In that case it's equally valid to say that all of life is enjoyable, because in my experience, all of life involves enjoyment too.
From what I gather that was precisely his point, that if you try to eliminate anything that could cause you suffering you'll end up eliminating everything that gives you joy, and that therefore the only world devoid of suffering is that which is completely devoid of life.
Just goes to show how anxious US citizens are to see Bush out of the office.
And I, for one, can't blame them.
(1) That's because they recalled that a previous Democracy in Athens had killed one of mankind's greatest thinkers, Socrates, simply because they didn't like him. They did not want the right to life to be taken-away by a simple 50% +1 vote.
Good point, but that was 2000 years ago. Things change.
(2) It's no more fucked-up then how the European Union operates - ya know, a Union of States where States elect ministers to the Council, not the people. You need to understand history, because in 1786 we were not a single nation - we were 13 indepentent nations coming together as an EU-type organization. Hence an election organized by States, not people.
You were. You aren't now.
(3) Hence we a Republic of 50 States, where LAW reigns and protects the individual, not a democracy where the majority squashes the individual underfoot.
And yet there's plenty of democratic republics around the world with the same advantages but without such an idiotic voting system in place. Plus, while we're on the topic of individual freedoms, your country has one of the lousiest track records of the civilized world, so in any case your system doesn't seem to be working very well.
Yea and a decade ago that 'enterprise' stuff was steaming piles of VB. Now it's racks of big ass servers or blades groaning under badly designed layers and layers of Java 'middleware'. Not sure things have actually improved much.
If you had worked with either of them you'd know that yes, things have improved tremendously. Alas, it's evidently you haven't used Java for a real-world project of a respectable size so...
If you have insane amounts of CPU and memory to throw at it to cover up the slowness you can keep a team of medium skill code monkeys permantly employed maintaining all that interfacing between the various middleware products from different vendors.
Which is much better than C++, where you need obscene amounts of CPU and memory to throw at problems, or rather, to all of the "me too" libraries your medium skilled code monkeys used to build your nifty little problem-solver that only they can extend because the code is such a mess. Or were you suggesting Python, Ruby et al which, while excellent languages in their own right, can't beat Java's performance anywhere, anytime?
What? Must have missed it.
Yes, you did. Do you even work in IT? seriously.
Silly me, I thought the primary reason everybody rejected Java and Vista was the bloat and suck.
Silly me, I thought that nobody outside of the hardcore (read: fanatical) C coders rejected Java, but what do I know, I'm only somebody working in IT and looking at available job postings.
No, you notice when a small app starts sucking up all available memory.
And that's when you know the app was coded in C or C++, and the programmer sucked. Or was lazy. Or just a bit careless. Or had a bad day at home. Or one of the other million reasons a C/C++ app may leak.
I've got a cheap crappy basic cell phone. You can almost see individual pixels draw on the darned thing...
Try to find the problem. Hint: it's not Java.
If I look for a firefox add-on, to continue the comparison, I can sort by type or keyword, and get a brief description of the application click it for a detailed explanation as well as reviews and comments...
Same with Synaptic, except without the user comments. I do think, however, that level of information tends to scare away the more shy users, so I'm also happy the default install/removal app doesn't have it.