While HHGttG is what got me onto your writing, my favourites remain the Dirk Gently books. I have read Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency somewhere in the region of 10 times, and Long Dark TeaTime of the Soul almost as often.
Every time I read these books, I pick up on something I never got in any previous read, due to the beautiful interconnectedness of all things in the plot.
For instance, it took me several reads before I finally caught the clue that answered the question of the sofa stuck in the hallway. When I got it, I walked around the house in awe and with a desparate need to tell someone - only noone would really understand it if I did. Quite frustrating.
I don't want to go through this anymore. Please tell me what remaining plot elements I have yet to understand in each of these books.
I used to develop on QNX. I used to admin and support $BIGNUM QNX production servers, and until a recent employment change, I remember the struggle to bring our systems and our QNX-based software into the 90's (no points for spotting the irony). I may be biased, because I left hoping I'd never have to struggle with QNX again. If you happen to be thinking about setting up your house server with QNX, because it's so cute and tiny, allow me to provide the following arguments against doing so: QNX has one of the smallest array of available applications on it. The situation is better than it once was, however, you will have to face the fact that even with GNU or other open-source tools, you either port it yourself, or you remain a few versions behind. My servers, especially my own house server, ends up being a swiss-army-knife (sorry, leatherman) system providing more than an internet gateway, but also a miriad of different services internally. Linux is a wonderful choice for this, because it has some of the most flexible networking tools in it, most sources compile very nicely for it, etc. etc. QNX... can fit on a floppy (or a handful, for a full install with its (cough) optional TCP/IP module). Forget IPMasq, forget tcpwrappers, forget it all. Unless, of course, you port/find someone who's ported something more recently than '98. If you happen to be thinking about using QNX commercially: QNX is expensive. Actually, QNX was always expensive. It's even more expensive if you don't want thousands of licences - I think in terms of features per dollar, it's sucking pretty hard. Finally: if you happen to be thinking about using QNX in a realtime or timing-critical application/environment, GO FOR IT. That's QNX's specialty. It's a niche OS designed for this role, and it also has a nice fit for embedded uses (like iOpener). It is not, however, a general purpose OS. In the end, free QNX is kinda like free llama-skin pajamas. It doesn't cost any money, but I don't see it meeting any of my needs. And it might just cause me to itch. Here endeth my rant.
A few years ago, in my university days, I did jujitsu, and went through a lot of serious wrist-stretching exercises, and being the victim of other people's locks, throws, etc. I remember those days. Those were the days when I always hurt (and my wrists always hurt.) There may be something to be said for the basic wrist-stretches they teach you, and god knows the breakfall exercises may save your spine on some icy future day, but good lord - Subjecting yourself as training dummy for your classmates, who are no better than you at what they're doing, is a fast way to worsen your problem. The funny thing is, when you're always in pain you don't really notice it, until it's gone. When I discovered that the aches and pains had disappeared over final exams and christmas break, I decided I would not be returning to jujitsu. In recent times, ergonomic keyboards of the Microsoft variety (say what you like about their software, their hardware rocks) are the only concession to wrist strain I have had to make. --Tiger
That whole thing sounded like a sales pitch for QNX and their windowing stitch-on, Photon.
Gods, I have such a love-hate relationship with QNX. I think it'll make an amazing foundation to a new OS, but on the other hand I've developed under QNX for the last year and I hate it - it's a RTOS and gods help you if you aren't writing a specialised realtime app for thousands of installations. And I don't see much in that press release telling you what you get that you can't already have:
- QNX OS foundation - The QNX OS is already available for the x86. (A license'll cost you, at last check, $1K+ cdn unless you can get major volume discounts. A new pricing structure, actually, and the straw that broke our little software house's back and is pushing us to a free, full-featured OS that starts with an 'L')
- Photon Micro-GUI - I've never used their Photon. We have no licenses for it. QNX likes licenses. (Did you know that QNX requires a separate license for their TCP/IP package?) Oh, but Photon does already exist anyway.
- x86 architecture. So we're using the same machine guts too.
What Amiga? where? Is this going to be QNX on x86 with a slightly enhanced GUI with its own look-and-feel - and the Amiga label.
Another thought. QNX charges big bucks for their OS. More big bucks for development licenses. A new Amiga is going to be a consumer machine, right? So if this wonderful new OS/is/ different, and/is/ built on top of the QNX OS, what the heck are they going to rip out to justify charging consumer OS prices for Amiga and industry OS prices for their existing clients?
Of course, I may just be ranting, after spending another month working on a minor release number on QNX rather than the next major release on Linux. So take what I say with a grain of salt.
Yeah, suddenly it's "all so clear". Pardon me while I put down my pitchfork and kick the mud off my boots.
Any connection to enforced HTML standards is implied, not stated. "Standards" are to be "unveiled" - this could mean tighter compliance requirements so that crippled browsers (no pun intended) or it may mean a set of plaintext guidelines that bear resemblance to handicapped building access laws. It makes no connection at all to "clean code" in the article.
Hence my criticism. But, of course, with no understanding of technology, who am I to talk?
This sounds to me almost like someone misrepresenting an article to get his name up on/.
Did anyone actually read this? The article's simply about enforcing handicap access to websites - making sure that special multimedia content is accessible in alternate form by people who aren't capable of using that content.
Not one word did I see that said anything about HTML standards compliance. For all we know, they can still crapulate out those super-non-standard pages, and provide a little text link that says, "Go here to see all this in boring.txt file format."
Proof these articles, guys. Sure, forcing HTML standards compliance is a dream many/.ers may have. This is not an article about HTML compliance, however.
Having your name next to the words "Open Source" is turning into the computing world equivalent of a politician having his/her photo taken shaking the hand of the Pope. Though the two may have nothing in common with the other, nonetheless showing the two together lends an air of credibility and endorsement to one (often at the expense of the other!)
MS may also be muddying the water here. But after the "Al Gore" website, I think it's mostly word association. Muddying of "Open Source" is a secondary benefit on their part.
Slashdot Mirror
While HHGttG is what got me onto your writing, my favourites remain the Dirk Gently books. I have read Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency somewhere in the region of 10 times, and Long Dark TeaTime of the Soul almost as often.
Every time I read these books, I pick up on something I never got in any previous read, due to the beautiful interconnectedness of all things in the plot.
For instance, it took me several reads before I finally caught the clue that answered the question of the sofa stuck in the hallway. When I got it, I walked around the house in awe and with a desparate need to tell someone - only noone would really understand it if I did. Quite frustrating.
I don't want to go through this anymore. Please tell me what remaining plot elements I have yet to understand in each of these books.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
--Tiger
QNX4. 4.23, 4.24 and 4.25.
I used to develop on QNX. I used to admin and support $BIGNUM QNX production servers, and until a recent employment change, I remember the struggle to bring our systems and our QNX-based software into the 90's (no points for spotting the irony). I may be biased, because I left hoping I'd never have to struggle with QNX again.
If you happen to be thinking about setting up your house server with QNX, because it's so cute and tiny, allow me to provide the following arguments against doing so:
QNX has one of the smallest array of available applications on it. The situation is better than it once was, however, you will have to face the fact that even with GNU or other open-source tools, you either port it yourself, or you remain a few versions behind.
My servers, especially my own house server, ends up being a swiss-army-knife (sorry, leatherman) system providing more than an internet gateway, but also a miriad of different services internally. Linux is a wonderful choice for this, because it has some of the most flexible networking tools in it, most sources compile very nicely for it, etc. etc. QNX... can fit on a floppy (or a handful, for a full install with its (cough) optional TCP/IP module). Forget IPMasq, forget tcpwrappers, forget it all. Unless, of course, you port/find someone who's ported something more recently than '98.
If you happen to be thinking about using QNX commercially: QNX is expensive. Actually, QNX was always expensive. It's even more expensive if you don't want thousands of licences - I think in terms of features per dollar, it's sucking pretty hard.
Finally: if you happen to be thinking about using QNX in a realtime or timing-critical application/environment, GO FOR IT. That's QNX's specialty. It's a niche OS designed for this role, and it also has a nice fit for embedded uses (like iOpener). It is not, however, a general purpose OS.
In the end, free QNX is kinda like free llama-skin pajamas. It doesn't cost any money, but I don't see it meeting any of my needs. And it might just cause me to itch.
Here endeth my rant.
A few years ago, in my university days, I did jujitsu, and went through a lot of serious wrist-stretching exercises, and being the victim of other people's locks, throws, etc. I remember those days. Those were the days when I always hurt (and my wrists always hurt.) There may be something to be said for the basic wrist-stretches they teach you, and god knows the breakfall exercises may save your spine on some icy future day, but good lord - Subjecting yourself as training dummy for your classmates, who are no better than you at what they're doing, is a fast way to worsen your problem. The funny thing is, when you're always in pain you don't really notice it, until it's gone. When I discovered that the aches and pains had disappeared over final exams and christmas break, I decided I would not be returning to jujitsu. In recent times, ergonomic keyboards of the Microsoft variety (say what you like about their software, their hardware rocks) are the only concession to wrist strain I have had to make. --Tiger
So what exactly are we getting?
/is/ different, and /is/ built on top of the QNX OS, what the heck are they going to rip out to justify charging consumer OS prices for Amiga and industry OS prices for their existing clients?
That whole thing sounded like a sales pitch for QNX and their windowing stitch-on, Photon.
Gods, I have such a love-hate relationship with QNX. I think it'll make an amazing foundation to a new OS, but on the other hand I've developed under QNX for the last year and I hate it - it's a RTOS and gods help you if you aren't writing a specialised realtime app for thousands of installations. And I don't see much in that press release telling you what you get that you can't already have:
- QNX OS foundation - The QNX OS is already available for the x86. (A license'll cost you, at last check, $1K+ cdn unless you can get major volume discounts. A new pricing structure, actually, and the straw that broke our little software house's back and is pushing us to a free, full-featured OS that starts with an 'L')
- Photon Micro-GUI - I've never used their Photon. We have no licenses for it. QNX likes licenses. (Did you know that QNX requires a separate license for their TCP/IP package?) Oh, but Photon does already exist anyway.
- x86 architecture. So we're using the same machine guts too.
What Amiga? where? Is this going to be QNX on x86 with a slightly enhanced GUI with its own look-and-feel - and the Amiga label.
Another thought. QNX charges big bucks for their OS. More big bucks for development licenses. A new Amiga is going to be a consumer machine, right? So if this wonderful new OS
Of course, I may just be ranting, after spending another month working on a minor release number on QNX rather than the next major release on Linux. So take what I say with a grain of salt.
--Tiger
Like the title says. Why do I bother?
--Tiger
Yeah, suddenly it's "all so clear". Pardon me while I put down my pitchfork and kick the mud off my boots.
Any connection to enforced HTML standards is implied, not stated. "Standards" are to be "unveiled" - this could mean tighter compliance requirements so that crippled browsers (no pun intended) or it may mean a set of plaintext guidelines that bear resemblance to handicapped building access laws. It makes no connection at all to "clean code" in the article.
Hence my criticism. But, of course, with no understanding of technology, who am I to talk?
--Tiger
This sounds to me almost like someone misrepresenting an article to get his name up on /.
.txt file format."
/.ers may have. This is not an article about HTML compliance, however.
Did anyone actually read this? The article's simply about enforcing handicap access to websites - making sure that special multimedia content is accessible in alternate form by people who aren't capable of using that content.
Not one word did I see that said anything about HTML standards compliance. For all we know, they can still crapulate out those super-non-standard pages, and provide a little text link that says, "Go here to see all this in boring
Proof these articles, guys. Sure, forcing HTML standards compliance is a dream many
--Tiger
Having your name next to the words "Open Source" is turning into the computing world equivalent of a politician having his/her photo taken shaking the hand of the Pope. Though the two may have nothing in common with the other, nonetheless showing the two together lends an air of credibility and endorsement to one (often at the expense of the other!)
MS may also be muddying the water here. But after the "Al Gore" website, I think it's mostly word association. Muddying of "Open Source" is a secondary benefit on their part.
--Tiger