Uhm... The JVM is a library, like libm is a library. Removing the JVM is like removing lib libgnome*. If you want to run program that use the features of gnome, you have to install the libraries. If you want to use the features of the JVM, it needs to be installed. If you want those features in another language, you'd need to install some other libraries (gc, gui, etc.), so it should be considered unreasonable.
Why does everyone keep assuring the users that 32 bits is enough. Filesystems are hacks because we are limited to 32 bits. If I want to address each byte of my 6 GB disk, I have to use a structure instead of a native type. This is a pain and an inefficiency. 64 chips can fix that (though I think we still address disk in Linux by (block, offset)).
Any PC with more than 4 GB is a hack. One of my clients has development and CAD machines maxed out at 4 GB of RAM. We could put more in with 64 bit CPUs.
I guess out big misunderstanding is the whole Win98 license. I haven't seen used computers with OS licenses. A new machine with XP is ~$400, an old machine will require almost $400 in software and will be 1/10 the speed. I don't see the labor being worth the result. In the case of installing Linux, I don't see the result as a managable system for schools that already have a rough time keeping win98 running on machines.
I guess I can't relate to English departments with computers. I'm used to schools that graduate 30-130 kids a year and have computers in the library administered by someone with a degree in library science. There are computers in the typing room, but they are dedicated to the typing program and aren't connected to the net. I live in the rural midwest.
I think Office 97 did indeed run very happily on an 133 Mhz system? My dear friend, applied computer use does not necessiate the use of the latest bleeding edge graphical OS with the latest bloated word-processing app. To get Office 97 to run on the used machines I have you would have to spend over $600 on software licenses.
What are the benefits? You have 8th grade kids who are familiar with the command line and 10th and 12th grade kids who can whip up Perl scripts. They have an environment to explore. And they are learning a technology that is here to stay.
I guess the difference is that here in the midwest USA, I would give the computer to an individual kid instead of the school. (As a kid I did receive and used old computer junk, but the school could not have nurtured that and the junk would have gone to waste.)
OK. In 20 years what do we do with all the 486s? At some point, we have to throw some computers away.
Because in the school systems I have experience with, the computer expert is too busy teaching band to mess with a Linux firewall. The firewalls are provided by the ISP (a state run organization) which has a IT personel.
WHAT IS A SCHOOL OR CHURCH GOING TO DO WITH AN OLD MACHINE?
You see, most schools can't keep ink in their printers, let alone figure out how to install Linux on an old PC. Hell, this is my hobby and it can take days to get an old PC running Linux. (I'm using a 386DX2/40, 486/66, and PP200 as firewalls and routers, so I'm experienced in using old junk.)
A school isn't going to teach word processing on anything less than a 500 Mh PIII. A school teaches applied computer use, not CS, so an account isn't much help. What is net access if it doesn't include a current graphical browser and anything less than a PIII/500 isn't going to run much of a browser. A school isn't going to use a linux firewall.
This still doesn't address the long term problem. What do we do with the old PCs in 5 more years (when all the schools have old PCs)?
Is that any better? What can a school or church do with a P133? (That's what I'm throwing out right now.) What are they going to do with it when they are done. We need a strategic plan, not a plan that makes us feel good today.
Yah. I heard someone say that "somecorp is only doing that for the money" like we should be surprised. Duh. Most of what I do between 8 am and 5 pm is for the money. Would my employer want it any other way?
Mr. Blaze has formalized a procedure for creating the master key (that will open the CEO's office, or the front door) from the bathroom key for sets of locks that have master keys (like office buildings or universities).
Pinto. Need I say more? The best of what was is better than the junk of today, the the best of today is much better that the best of yester year.
For the record, I was comparing apples to apples to apple pie. My 2000 Miata has had zero problems after 45k, while my 88 Chevy truck has had a fuel pump, brakes, condensor, and alternator in 80k (155k - 235k) and it burns oil. My 66 Chevy truck had everything that could be changed with a wrench in a parking lot changed with 45k (?20k - ?65k) and burned lots of oil.
I rear ended a minivan in the '66. I broke a $1.50 headlight while doing >$1500 in damage to the back of the minivan. I understand your frustration, but i think in the bigger picture, it is better for everyone if I drive the new miata instead of the old truck.
If I'm in a front end collision with the Miata I probably have a better chance of survival than with the '66. The Miata has airbags, ABS and a collapsable stearing column. I'll buy a new fender with what I save in medical bills.
Do you have any numbers to support your crazy claims?
My 1966 was a pos compared to my 1988, which doesn't compare at all to my 2000. My 2000 has had zero repairs. The only thing wrong with the 2000 is the right speaker sometimes buzzes when it is cold. There is never a drop of oil under my 2000, it is quiet, it has an operating catalytic converter, it gets ~32 MPH, the oil when changed every 5kM is still clear, the ABS will stop the car much faster than brakes in the 66 or even the 88. When recycled, the 66 and 88 could be turned into 6 new cars.
I've had old cars. They work better than expected, but not better than new cars.
And, while we're at it, why not assign each individual a phone number that they keep for life, no matter where they move, like a domain name? I'd imagine that modern telco equipment could support this by now.
Due to spam, I have a high turn over rate on multiple email address. I like changing phone numbers. Hey, why don't you just use your SSN for a phone number.
I would like my temporary numbers to be bound to me and not geography.
Actually, instead of paying someone to install a pos browser, I'd pay $100 for a stable browser/email client. I'd pay for a nice video editing env, a compiler/profiler/debugger suite. The installation should be easy with good software.
I wont pay for crap software, but I will pay for robust good software. I purchased VMWare and am extrememly happy with it. VMWare is easy to install and use. I don't need any service help with it. I also purchased w2k to run on top of that, which is a bit more of a strain on my meager brain.
I am unhappy with Mozilla crashing, encredibly complex video editing, features of gcc/gdb/gprof failing to work.
I prefer the shareware model, because I don't trust any software vendor anymore. I have to test the software before I give you any money.
How is understanding a COM interface easier than understanding an equivalently expressive file format?
Is myRange.Font.Bold=1 obvious? Why 1 and not myRange.Font|=Bold, or myRange.Font.append(Bold), or myRange.Text.Style += Bold?
Writing LaTeX is just as easy as using your COM interface to Word.
I would create an OpenOffice file with the correct format, then cut and paste into a script to create that file from the Oracle data. (Actually, I would use LaTeX, because it is a very efficient renderer.)
The problem with JBoss is that all the docs suck. They are written from the JBoss developers perspective. (Don't get me wrong, I use and recommend JBoss, but there is a very steep learning curve.)
No, not my user space, but not in full control of kernel space either. (In Unix, there is only kernel space and user space.) I don't generally want drivers to have the ability to crash the OS. Some of them of course will be able to (if the IDE driver doesn't load the kernel correctly or fails to swap in part of the kernel correctly, then it will crash).
User space would require a context switch that we would want to avoid, so I mentioned the sandbox.
DOS had no protection, nor even multithreading/multiprocessing, so I'm a bit confused by your point.
I want an OS where I can confidently install a video driver and know that it doesn't have access to trash my filesystem. I've heard NT3.5-- had video drivers like that.
I can imagine that an easily readable description of the driver would include what resources the driver needs and the OS would only allow access to those resources. It couldn't be fullproof, but it could give a bit of confidence in binary drivers or even open source drivers that we don't want to audit first.
YOU ARE WRONG. Actually not really, I just like saying that.
The "kernel folks" don't give a rats tail end about your video driver or you when your video driver fails, so closed source isn't going to change things that much.
What I do wonder is why device drivers can't live in sandboxes or even user space. I know it would be difficult to design an efficient API, but it isn't impossible.
Mosix will migrate processes. How does that load balance 12 apache servers?
Mosix is good for CPU intensive batch number crunching using custom software. (no shared memory, no threads, smart use of IO and sockets, etc.). Don't get me wron. I think it is very cool, just not a load balancer the way most people use the term "load balancing".
Slashdot Mirror
Uhm... The JVM is a library, like libm is a library. Removing the JVM is like removing lib libgnome*. If you want to run program that use the features of gnome, you have to install the libraries. If you want to use the features of the JVM, it needs to be installed. If you want those features in another language, you'd need to install some other libraries (gc, gui, etc.), so it should be considered unreasonable.
Would it be better to link the apps statically?
Joe
Why does everyone keep assuring the users that 32 bits is enough. Filesystems are hacks because we are limited to 32 bits. If I want to address each byte of my 6 GB disk, I have to use a structure instead of a native type. This is a pain and an inefficiency. 64 chips can fix that (though I think we still address disk in Linux by (block, offset)).
Any PC with more than 4 GB is a hack. One of my clients has development and CAD machines maxed out at 4 GB of RAM. We could put more in with 64 bit CPUs.
Joe
I guess out big misunderstanding is the whole Win98 license. I haven't seen used computers with OS licenses. A new machine with XP is ~$400, an old machine will require almost $400 in software and will be 1/10 the speed. I don't see the labor being worth the result. In the case of installing Linux, I don't see the result as a managable system for schools that already have a rough time keeping win98 running on machines.
I guess I can't relate to English departments with computers. I'm used to schools that graduate 30-130 kids a year and have computers in the library administered by someone with a degree in library science. There are computers in the typing room, but they are dedicated to the typing program and aren't connected to the net. I live in the rural midwest.
Joe
I think Office 97 did indeed run very happily on an 133 Mhz system? My dear friend, applied computer use does not necessiate the use of the latest bleeding edge graphical OS with the latest bloated word-processing app.
To get Office 97 to run on the used machines I have you would have to spend over $600 on software licenses.
What are the benefits? You have 8th grade kids who are familiar with the command line and 10th and 12th grade kids who can whip up Perl scripts. They have an environment to explore. And they are learning a technology that is here to stay.
I guess the difference is that here in the midwest USA, I would give the computer to an individual kid instead of the school. (As a kid I did receive and used old computer junk, but the school could not have nurtured that and the junk would have gone to waste.)
OK. In 20 years what do we do with all the 486s? At some point, we have to throw some computers away.
Because in the school systems I have experience with, the computer expert is too busy teaching band to mess with a Linux firewall. The firewalls are provided by the ISP (a state run organization) which has a IT personel.
Joe
WHAT IS A SCHOOL OR CHURCH GOING TO DO WITH AN OLD MACHINE?
You see, most schools can't keep ink in their printers, let alone figure out how to install Linux on an old PC. Hell, this is my hobby and it can take days to get an old PC running Linux. (I'm using a 386DX2/40, 486/66, and PP200 as firewalls and routers, so I'm experienced in using old junk.)
A school isn't going to teach word processing on anything less than a 500 Mh PIII.
A school teaches applied computer use, not CS, so an account isn't much help.
What is net access if it doesn't include a current graphical browser and anything less than a PIII/500 isn't going to run much of a browser.
A school isn't going to use a linux firewall.
This still doesn't address the long term problem. What do we do with the old PCs in 5 more years (when all the schools have old PCs)?
Joe
Is that any better? What can a school or church do with a P133? (That's what I'm throwing out right now.) What are they going to do with it when they are done. We need a strategic plan, not a plan that makes us feel good today.
Joe
Yah. I heard someone say that "somecorp is only doing that for the money" like we should be surprised. Duh. Most of what I do between 8 am and 5 pm is for the money. Would my employer want it any other way?
Joe
Read it again.
Mr. Blaze has formalized a procedure for creating the master key (that will open the CEO's office, or the front door) from the bathroom key for sets of locks that have master keys (like office buildings or universities).
Joe
Pinto. Need I say more? The best of what was is better than the junk of today, the the best of today is much better that the best of yester year.
For the record, I was comparing apples to apples to apple pie. My 2000 Miata has had zero problems after 45k, while my 88 Chevy truck has had a fuel pump, brakes, condensor, and alternator in 80k (155k - 235k) and it burns oil. My 66 Chevy truck had everything that could be changed with a wrench in a parking lot changed with 45k (?20k - ?65k) and burned lots of oil.
I rear ended a minivan in the '66. I broke a $1.50 headlight while doing >$1500 in damage to the back of the minivan. I understand your frustration, but i think in the bigger picture, it is better for everyone if I drive the new miata instead of the old truck.
If I'm in a front end collision with the Miata I probably have a better chance of survival than with the '66. The Miata has airbags, ABS and a collapsable stearing column. I'll buy a new fender with what I save in medical bills.
Joe
Do you have any numbers to support your crazy claims?
My 1966 was a pos compared to my 1988, which doesn't compare at all to
my 2000. My 2000 has had zero repairs. The only thing wrong with the
2000 is the right speaker sometimes buzzes when it is cold. There is
never a drop of oil under my 2000, it is quiet, it has an operating
catalytic converter, it gets ~32 MPH, the oil when changed every 5kM
is still clear, the ABS will stop the car much faster than brakes in
the 66 or even the 88. When recycled, the 66 and 88 could be turned
into 6 new cars.
I've had old cars. They work better than expected, but not better
than new cars.
Joe
And, while we're at it, why not assign each individual a phone number that they keep for life, no matter where they move, like a domain name? I'd imagine that modern telco equipment could support this by now.
Due to spam, I have a high turn over rate on multiple email address. I like changing phone numbers. Hey, why don't you just use your SSN for a phone number.
I would like my temporary numbers to be bound to me and not geography.
Joe
Actually, instead of paying someone to install a pos browser, I'd pay $100 for a stable browser/email client. I'd pay for a nice video editing env, a compiler/profiler/debugger suite. The installation should be easy with good software.
I wont pay for crap software, but I will pay for robust good software. I purchased VMWare and am extrememly happy with it. VMWare is easy to install and use. I don't need any service help with it. I also purchased w2k to run on top of that, which is a bit more of a strain on my meager brain.
I am unhappy with Mozilla crashing, encredibly complex video editing, features of gcc/gdb/gprof failing to work.
I prefer the shareware model, because I don't trust any software vendor anymore. I have to test the software before I give you any money.
Joe
In case of a fire or some other emergency, a stranger to the building needs to be able to exit.
Joe
It only works with KDE. Doesn't sound like a new FS.
Joe
It's been done on shrink wrapped secure laptops running Linux/VMWare/W2K. The user only sees W2K, but everything is running in a vm on secure Linux.
I doubt that it is worth the trouble though. You generally only need to encrypt data, not executables.
Joe
How is understanding a COM interface easier than understanding an equivalently expressive file format?
Is myRange.Font.Bold=1 obvious? Why 1 and not myRange.Font|=Bold, or myRange.Font.append(Bold), or myRange.Text.Style += Bold?
Writing LaTeX is just as easy as using your COM interface to Word.
I would create an OpenOffice file with the correct format, then cut and paste into a script to create that file from the Oracle data. (Actually, I would use LaTeX, because it is a very efficient renderer.)
Joe
The problem with JBoss is that all the docs suck. They are written from the JBoss developers perspective. (Don't get me wrong, I use and recommend JBoss, but there is a very steep learning curve.)
Joe
Does anyone with a monster graphics card jacked up to max resolution use your site?
I like using large fonts on high resolution; it looks nice. Small fonts are too small to read on my monitor.
(I'm 31 and have better than 20/20 eyes.)
Joe
Ha Ha! He said "revolutions in turbine"s!
Joe
No, not my user space, but not in full control of kernel space either. (In Unix, there is only kernel space and user space.) I don't generally want drivers to have the ability to crash the OS. Some of them of course will be able to (if the IDE driver doesn't load the kernel correctly or fails to swap in part of the kernel correctly, then it will crash).
User space would require a context switch that we would want to avoid, so I mentioned the sandbox.
DOS had no protection, nor even multithreading/multiprocessing, so I'm a bit confused by your point.
I want an OS where I can confidently install a video driver and know that it doesn't have access to trash my filesystem. I've heard NT3.5-- had video drivers like that.
I can imagine that an easily readable description of the driver would include what resources the driver needs and the OS would only allow access to those resources. It couldn't be fullproof, but it could give a bit of confidence in binary drivers or even open source drivers that we don't want to audit first.
Joe
YOU ARE WRONG. Actually not really, I just like saying that.
The "kernel folks" don't give a rats tail end about your video driver or you when your video driver fails, so closed source isn't going to change things that much.
What I do wonder is why device drivers can't live in sandboxes or even user space. I know it would be difficult to design an efficient API, but it isn't impossible.
Joe
Now with all the < and > marks.
; ;
#!/bin/sh
if [ "$#" != "5" ]
then
echo Usage: $0 user host tmp_port proxy_host proxy_port
exit -1
fi
USER=$1
HOST=$2
TMP=/tmp/bo$$
F1=$T MP.1
F2=$TMP.2
PORT=$3
PROXY=$4
PROXY_PORT=$5
mkfifo $F1
mkfifo $F2
(
echo CONNECT $HOST:22 HTTP/1.0 >> $F2
echo >> $F2
nc $PROXY $PROXY_PORT ) < $F2 > $F1 &
nc -l -p $PORT > $F2 < $F1 &
ssh -p $PORT $USER@localhost
rm $F1 $F2
I'm sure there are more optimal ways to do this.
R OXY=$4
; ;
I use MindTerm, the applet ssh client.
Joe
#!/bin/sh
if [ "$#" != "5" ]
then
echo Usage: $0 user host tmp_port proxy_host proxy_port
exit -1
fi
USER=$1
HOST=$2
TMP=/tmp/bo$$
F1=$TMP.1
F2=$TMP.2
PORT=$3
P
PROXY_PORT=$5
mkfifo $F1
mkfifo $F2
(
echo CONNECT $HOST:22 HTTP/1.0 >> $F2
echo >> $F2
nc $PROXY $PROXY_PORT ) $F1 &
nc -l -p $PORT > $F2 $F1 &
ssh -p $PORT $USER@localhost
rm $F1 $F2
Mosix will migrate processes. How does that load balance 12 apache servers?
Mosix is good for CPU intensive batch number crunching using custom software. (no shared memory, no threads, smart use of IO and sockets, etc.). Don't get me wron. I think it is very cool, just not a load balancer the way most people use the term "load balancing".
Joe