As I look around my apartment, at all of the Apple hardware, including 4 different model iPads and an iPhone 6s Plus, I wonder if I was actually just called an irrational bigot for saying something bad about Apple.
Since you failed to answer the simple question in my post... Sheets of paper out of a filing cabinet or a file box kept at a warehouse are called pages.
The man said 30 years, is that number to big you?
The man also said:
You may be way too young to understand the difference between real-world practical and academic history, but the world wide web was not the start of the internet, the internet was not the start of networking, and networking was not the start of serving pages to clients.
He, then, continued on to say:
Caching's been around for a very long time. If you want to learn about the benefits of caching, and the pitfalls, you want to look at archive caches, not transmission caches. When access involves an elevator, or a truck, you quickly learn what does and does not make sense.
Further, he states the following:
So now you've got your reliable cache, that's only reliable under minimal load. Perfect. But some things get accessed often. So you keep a copy upstairs in the filing cabinet.
Sure sounds like he's talking about paper files. You know, sheets of paper. Or pages.
So, back to your first question:
The man said 30 years, is that number to big you?
No, not at all. It's absolutely minuscule in comparison to the number of years paper files, file boxes, warehouses, and file cabinets have been in use.
Do you think 30 is a big number? I'd venture a guess it's near, or greater than, your age.
This is your exact quote: "I wouldn't quite say it follows exactly what Linux does; with Linux, you get your FUSE drivers from your OS vendor and can reasonably expect them to continue working after an update, which is important if you happen to have programs or documents that you need reliable access to on a a FUSE partition." This contradicts what you wrote earlier.
Actually, the quote I was referring to was the following:
More to the point, on any sane Linux distro you can just go into your package manager and install FUSE and the NTFS drivers.
Yes, the NTFS driver in this case is a FUSE driver for the NTFS filesystem, so "FUSE drivers" is the correct term. And yes, you do get them from your package manager; whatever package manager, whether CLI or GUI, does not matter.
I feel you seem to ignore factually everything is exactly the same in Linux as it is in OS X when it comes to NTFS.
Except that they're not and I've explained why.
Both are 3rd party implementations
Indeed, both use ntfs-3g.
one seems better than the other but that's not on Apple or Linux kernel developers
The situation is better (e.g. doesn't just seem better) on Linux, where both FUSE and ntfs-3g are installed and updated via the same package manager that updates the rest of the OS, so it doesn't break with OS updates like it does on OS X. I'll remind you, I use both systems; my Macs' (apostrophe correctly placed, plural possessive) implementations break frequently with updates, while I've never experienced breakage on a Linux system, be it Debian, Ubuntu, CentOS, Red Hat, Fedora, or Slackware; I've used others, but not with NTFS. But, you're partly right: it's not on the kernel developers; it's on the distro maintainers. It's also on Apple, who could provide their own package that gets updated along with the OS.
The quality is on the 3rd party.
As demonstrated above, this is false. This should be obvious as ntfs-3g plugs in to FUSE and is provided by the same 3rd party on both platforms.
Where you get FUSE from (package manager that updates the rest of your OS as well on Linux, external source that breaks with OS updates on OS X) matters. They're not exactly the same, as you claim.
By the way FUSE is not what you need to use NTFS in Linux.
I think you meant to say its' not all you need.
and ntfs-3g to implement NTFS specifically
Yes, that's one implementation. Also of note, and I'm not sure when this changed, but Ubuntu now ships with ntfs-3g installed by default. I bet that cam to pass around the same time Windows 10 began including a cut-down version of the distro.
Again FUSE does not get you NTFS. FUSE sets up the framework so Linux can use other filesystems like NTFS, GmailFS, etc. You still need ntfs-3g or Captive NTFS which are 3rd party.
I know WTF FUSE is. You even quoted me mentioning FUSE and NTFS drivers separately, so I clearly understand that they are two different things and you clearly realize this, yet you frame your argument as if I do now - twice within the same post.
And you do so while completely ignoring the fact that FUSE and ntfs-3g installed via the same package manager as the rest of your typical sane Linux distro will be updated (and thus not break) along with the rest of your OS, while the same is not true of OS X or macOS.
It's almost like you're getting irrationally defensive and ignoring the factual portions of my posts that disagree with your reality because you think I'm trying to tear down your beloved Apple. Friend, go review my posting history; my house is, largely, an Apple house and I speak from experience.
One thing I miss about Michigan... Michigan has Tim Hortons. When my buddy came to visit (before he moved down here) I made him bring me some Timbits. No joke, we almost got jumped by two Canadians on the way out of the airport.
Huh, yeah, I suppose it would. Might that be, then, why sjbe specifically mentioned features of the MacBook line, such as Magsafe and only having USB-C ports, in order to make it clear that this thread was discussing MacBooks?
Linux does so due to patent concerns; Apple, clearly, lacked those concerns when they implemented their own native NTFS support and shipped it with their OS as a default. More to the point, on any sane Linux distro you can just go into your package manager and install FUSE and the NTFS drivers. Where do you get the NTFS drivers for a Mac?
Does Apple provide them? No. Does Apple even provide a FUSE subsystem? No. Will your 3rd-party FUSE subsystem and filesystem drivers continue working after the next round of updates? Likely, no; certainly not after an OS upgrade. Do any of these issues plague the average Linux distro? No.
I wouldn't quite say it follows exactly what Linux does; with Linux, you get your FUSE drivers from your OS vendor and can reasonably expect them to continue working after an update, which is important if you happen to have programs or documents that you need reliable access to on a a FUSE partition.
No... when you're pushing 120 frames per second (8.33333ms per frame) and those frames are so complex that they take 8ms to render, there is no solution that allows you to get away with adding latency while still keeping user input, audio, and video in sync. I don't care how "new" and "advanced" a protocol might be, it simply can not work around the laws of physics.
OnLive was a great idea when framerates were low (60i, e.g. 30FPS or 33.33333ms per frame), scenes were less complex, 1024x768 was the pinnacle of gaming resolutions, and GPU power was expensive. None of that is true anymore.
Although the bandwidth is there for a high-end GPU over TB3, latency is a bitch. You're going from a few inches to a few feet, 12x latency in a very time-sensitive scenario. Might be fine for some CUDA apps which load the program and data once and don't communicate with the GPU again until it's done, but don't expect to be able to run the latest games at the highest setting, even if the card you're using could manage it on a desktop.
Do you carry that keyboard with you when you travel? Do you actually pull it out and plug it into your laptop on a train, bus, or plane? Or, do you do the more sensible thing and just use the laptop's built-in keyboard when away from your desk?
You started by attacking his (correct) usage of the word "while". Now, you're attacking his usage of the word "moment". Which is it? Yes, he used one of them incorrectly; I stepped in because you attacked the correct usage, rather than the incorrect one. I also pointed out (separate from the context of the sentence in which "moment" was used incorrectly) that, while redundant, a sentence using both "moment" and "while" can make sense. Note that i did not claim that it made sense in this specific instance, just that the fragment I quoted does, in fact, make sense.
Also, before you say your issue isn't with his use of the word "moment", you literally just wrote:
There's no reference to a ambiguous "moment in time" when something had to happen.
While, on the other hand, you started your argument with the following:
First, the term "while" implies a continuous passage of time.
You'll have to excuse me for thinking you took issue with the usage of the word "while", here.
And, for the record, yes, the way you stated it is clearer; but, then, I never said the original statement was clear. But, of course, it mustn't have been too exceedingly unclear either, as we both appear to be in agreement as to its intended meaning. Yup, clear enough for the average reader to understand.
Slashdot Mirror
As I look around my apartment, at all of the Apple hardware, including 4 different model iPads and an iPhone 6s Plus, I wonder if I was actually just called an irrational bigot for saying something bad about Apple.
a lot of the apps that work on phones are disabled on tablets - particularly on the Android side of things
Examples? I'm not saying that's not true, but I haven't encountered it; just a bit curious.
Every single app in the app store still works on my 5
Only because they haven't opened up the NFC APIs; once they do that, there'll be an entire class of app that won't work for you.
Oh, I'm sure there are games, and possibly other apps, which absolutely rely on force touch. You can't really use those, either.
In the future, maybe be careful with absolutes; there's no quicker way to be wrong than to only require one counterexample.
There's that as well, which, well... makes LifesABeach wrong even if holophrastic wasn't talking about paper pages.
The man said 30 years, is that number to big you?
The man also said:
You may be way too young to understand the difference between real-world practical and academic history, but the world wide web was not the start of the internet, the internet was not the start of networking, and networking was not the start of serving pages to clients.
He, then, continued on to say:
Caching's been around for a very long time. If you want to learn about the benefits of caching, and the pitfalls, you want to look at archive caches, not transmission caches. When access involves an elevator, or a truck, you quickly learn what does and does not make sense.
Further, he states the following:
So now you've got your reliable cache, that's only reliable under minimal load. Perfect. But some things get accessed often. So you keep a copy upstairs in the filing cabinet.
Sure sounds like he's talking about paper files. You know, sheets of paper. Or pages.
So, back to your first question:
The man said 30 years, is that number to big you?
No, not at all. It's absolutely minuscule in comparison to the number of years paper files, file boxes, warehouses, and file cabinets have been in use.
Do you think 30 is a big number? I'd venture a guess it's near, or greater than, your age.
LMAO
You laugh now, I'll laugh longer, later.
Ah, but sheets of paper out of a filing cabinet or a file box kept at a warehouse are called... what, now?
Did you even read he post before you replied? No? I thought not.
This is your exact quote: "I wouldn't quite say it follows exactly what Linux does; with Linux, you get your FUSE drivers from your OS vendor and can reasonably expect them to continue working after an update, which is important if you happen to have programs or documents that you need reliable access to on a a FUSE partition." This contradicts what you wrote earlier.
Actually, the quote I was referring to was the following:
More to the point, on any sane Linux distro you can just go into your package manager and install FUSE and the NTFS drivers.
Yes, the NTFS driver in this case is a FUSE driver for the NTFS filesystem, so "FUSE drivers" is the correct term. And yes, you do get them from your package manager; whatever package manager, whether CLI or GUI, does not matter.
I feel you seem to ignore factually everything is exactly the same in Linux as it is in OS X when it comes to NTFS.
Except that they're not and I've explained why.
Both are 3rd party implementations
Indeed, both use ntfs-3g.
one seems better than the other but that's not on Apple or Linux kernel developers
The situation is better (e.g. doesn't just seem better) on Linux, where both FUSE and ntfs-3g are installed and updated via the same package manager that updates the rest of the OS, so it doesn't break with OS updates like it does on OS X. I'll remind you, I use both systems; my Macs' (apostrophe correctly placed, plural possessive) implementations break frequently with updates, while I've never experienced breakage on a Linux system, be it Debian, Ubuntu, CentOS, Red Hat, Fedora, or Slackware; I've used others, but not with NTFS. But, you're partly right: it's not on the kernel developers; it's on the distro maintainers. It's also on Apple, who could provide their own package that gets updated along with the OS.
The quality is on the 3rd party.
As demonstrated above, this is false. This should be obvious as ntfs-3g plugs in to FUSE and is provided by the same 3rd party on both platforms.
Where you get FUSE from (package manager that updates the rest of your OS as well on Linux, external source that breaks with OS updates on OS X) matters. They're not exactly the same, as you claim.
gah.. typo... "as if I do now" should read "as if I do not".
By the way FUSE is not what you need to use NTFS in Linux.
I think you meant to say its' not all you need.
and ntfs-3g to implement NTFS specifically
Yes, that's one implementation. Also of note, and I'm not sure when this changed, but Ubuntu now ships with ntfs-3g installed by default. I bet that cam to pass around the same time Windows 10 began including a cut-down version of the distro.
Again FUSE does not get you NTFS. FUSE sets up the framework so Linux can use other filesystems like NTFS, GmailFS, etc. You still need ntfs-3g or Captive NTFS which are 3rd party.
I know WTF FUSE is. You even quoted me mentioning FUSE and NTFS drivers separately, so I clearly understand that they are two different things and you clearly realize this, yet you frame your argument as if I do now - twice within the same post.
And you do so while completely ignoring the fact that FUSE and ntfs-3g installed via the same package manager as the rest of your typical sane Linux distro will be updated (and thus not break) along with the rest of your OS, while the same is not true of OS X or macOS.
It's almost like you're getting irrationally defensive and ignoring the factual portions of my posts that disagree with your reality because you think I'm trying to tear down your beloved Apple. Friend, go review my posting history; my house is, largely, an Apple house and I speak from experience.
A....ar......
Are you..... me?
One thing I miss about Michigan... Michigan has Tim Hortons. When my buddy came to visit (before he moved down here) I made him bring me some Timbits. No joke, we almost got jumped by two Canadians on the way out of the airport.
Timshare? Sounds like a San Francisco startup to me.
Actually the thing that annoys me the most about their laptops is the lack of a proper delete key
That makes it pretty clear he's talking, specifically, about laptops.
Huh, yeah, I suppose it would. Might that be, then, why sjbe specifically mentioned features of the MacBook line, such as Magsafe and only having USB-C ports, in order to make it clear that this thread was discussing MacBooks?
Linux does so due to patent concerns; Apple, clearly, lacked those concerns when they implemented their own native NTFS support and shipped it with their OS as a default. More to the point, on any sane Linux distro you can just go into your package manager and install FUSE and the NTFS drivers. Where do you get the NTFS drivers for a Mac?
Does Apple provide them? No. Does Apple even provide a FUSE subsystem? No. Will your 3rd-party FUSE subsystem and filesystem drivers continue working after the next round of updates? Likely, no; certainly not after an OS upgrade. Do any of these issues plague the average Linux distro? No.
I wouldn't quite say it follows exactly what Linux does; with Linux, you get your FUSE drivers from your OS vendor and can reasonably expect them to continue working after an update, which is important if you happen to have programs or documents that you need reliable access to on a a FUSE partition.
No... when you're pushing 120 frames per second (8.33333ms per frame) and those frames are so complex that they take 8ms to render, there is no solution that allows you to get away with adding latency while still keeping user input, audio, and video in sync. I don't care how "new" and "advanced" a protocol might be, it simply can not work around the laws of physics.
OnLive was a great idea when framerates were low (60i, e.g. 30FPS or 33.33333ms per frame), scenes were less complex, 1024x768 was the pinnacle of gaming resolutions, and GPU power was expensive. None of that is true anymore.
Er, what? That's news to me as I've written to an NTFS today. And a EXT4 one.
Why yes, you can install FUSE drivers to do that. You used to be able to write to NTFS drives out of the box, though.
Make the desktop GREAT again!
The year Adobe releases their creative suite for Linux will be the year of the Linux desktop. Period.
Although the bandwidth is there for a high-end GPU over TB3, latency is a bitch. You're going from a few inches to a few feet, 12x latency in a very time-sensitive scenario. Might be fine for some CUDA apps which load the program and data once and don't communicate with the GPU again until it's done, but don't expect to be able to run the latest games at the highest setting, even if the card you're using could manage it on a desktop.
Do you carry that keyboard with you when you travel? Do you actually pull it out and plug it into your laptop on a train, bus, or plane? Or, do you do the more sensible thing and just use the laptop's built-in keyboard when away from your desk?
Hydrogen Lives Anti-Matter
I don't think there's anything left to hurry along; I've already run out of popcorn.
So which moment is he referring to?
You started by attacking his (correct) usage of the word "while". Now, you're attacking his usage of the word "moment". Which is it? Yes, he used one of them incorrectly; I stepped in because you attacked the correct usage, rather than the incorrect one. I also pointed out (separate from the context of the sentence in which "moment" was used incorrectly) that, while redundant, a sentence using both "moment" and "while" can make sense. Note that i did not claim that it made sense in this specific instance, just that the fragment I quoted does, in fact, make sense.
Also, before you say your issue isn't with his use of the word "moment", you literally just wrote:
There's no reference to a ambiguous "moment in time" when something had to happen.
While, on the other hand, you started your argument with the following:
First, the term "while" implies a continuous passage of time.
You'll have to excuse me for thinking you took issue with the usage of the word "while", here.
And, for the record, yes, the way you stated it is clearer; but, then, I never said the original statement was clear. But, of course, it mustn't have been too exceedingly unclear either, as we both appear to be in agreement as to its intended meaning. Yup, clear enough for the average reader to understand.
Haha, well, I don't think you'll be disappointed... sadly.