Actually it's the complete opposite, although your flagrant zealotry you revealed at the end of your post ("when your target market is non-scalable toy computers") sort of puts it into perspective.
An average page contains probably 20 or more separate items. What the author of the original analysis noticed was very likely nothing more than HTTP/1.1 keep alive persistence: Instead of making 20 connections, use just a couple and save the expensive set-up and tear-down of each TCP connection. Saying this is a big conspiracy between IE and IIS is just pure ignorance, and the fact that this story was posted is just baffling.
How does Opera "look like crap"? It looks pretty damn sweet to me (though you have to turn off most of the default garbage). Agreed that it isn't fully W3C compliant, especially in the realm of the dynamic DOM, though Opera 7 is supposedly changing that (I tried the beta and it crashed a few too many times).
This may sound very arrogant, but I think the developer should manage the DBA, often the DBA is a lone-wolf with too much power.
So instead you'd end up with a developer with too much power...
The thing about the separation of database design from "front-end" design (which could be middleware or front-end applications) is that in most cases the database scheme and I/O design has a shelf life far longer than most front-ends. i.e. Don't see that new web interface as a new system with a new database, but rather as a "one of many" front ends to the back-end database: i.e. the database is of much greater long term importance than any front-end.
Regarding your particular scenario: Is it possible that you're looking to shoehorn functionality for your particular front-end into a universal back-end where it might not be appropriate? Will every query on the person table suddenly have have the overhead of calculating the persons age because one page in one obscure part of one front end needs it?
Not really that amazing. Most C/C++ programmer jobs will likely have employees who have been there and on the project for many years: There isn't a lot of transition. Java, on the other hand, is more of an up and comer, especially J2EE and JSP, so more positions are opening up that didn't exist before.
ctually, if you really took the time to study things you'd find that Java borrowed from all sorts of languages
My point was not really a specific analysis of Java, but rather that many things "steal" from their predecessors. It's particularly ridiculous to claim that Windows "stole" from the Mac.
Then of course once Java had paved the way, along came C#
Paved the way? There are countless languages that have come and gone that took the best parts of prior languages. The only thing Java paved was that it was heavily pushed by a large organization.
But why anyone would switch to a platform that offers minor incremental improvement beyond a system with years of VM optimization and stabilizing is beyond me
Well already.NET applications run, at least in my experience, much more efficiently and tolerably than Java apps. This is on the Windows platform, of course, but given that that's the platform that I use it's what matters (obscurities about the performance on a esoteric chip is nice and all, as long as it doesn't come at the cost of performance on my platform). Of course.NET really is about transitioning the Windows developing world, rather than trying to steal over Java developers. Moving from ASP to ASP.NET is a no brainer.
Revisionist history, much as how Java fanatics claim that C# rips of Java (hint: Both Java and C# derive from C++, and both rip off significantly from object pascal. Indeed C# is more legitimate as one of the authors of object pascal worked on C#).
It is interesting that no one has mentioned this tidbit about the survey:
"Linux's share of paid shipments of the worldwide client operating-system market rose from 1.5 percent in 2000 to 1.7 in 2001, while Microsoft Windows grew from 92 to 94 percent in the same period."
Totally in agreement. To me this looks like nothing more than obvious PR coordination which any large company would do when the media has shown an interest in worldwide publicity to any Linux adoption over Microsoft: The memo basically says "Let's be prepared and ready to deal with it". Big deal.
Of course this is the same ESR who assured us some 3 years ago that Microsoft had less than a year to go.
If you were really interested, you`d already know, or you'd find out for yourself.
Huh? The original said "Wouldn't it be great to have the information online", to which you replied that those who wanted the information would "find out for yourself". How? Telepathetic prediction?
Having the information online is another way of disseminating the information to people who are looking to "find out". It's a hell of a lot better than a barrier to entry obscure system that encourages in-breeding and barriers to entry (which is how most of those systems work).
To be fair the McLaren F1 is naturally aspirated, whereas the Koenigsegg is supercharged. One could likely make a 900HP 4 cylinder with enough pressure.
Well you have to give them credit: They spray painted the front of the DVD, CD, and Audigy front panel... Ugh. The idea of spray paint on the front of one's computer is not something that I would look forward too. Then again, it is "Viper Blue"...
I suppose if one is willing to wait an infinite amount of time, any processor is perfectly sufficient. Personally, however, I'm of the "playing around" variety and like to put things together and then see what they look like: I currently have a Athlon 1800+ and having recently gotten a MiniDV camera I was blown away by how overwhelmingly intensive it is. I'll be upgrading shortly.
I shouldn't even credit this whole line of questions with a response though: "Who needs it?" questions are not only ridiculously dumb, they're overwhelmingly redundant-> Every bloody piece of hardware yields a wanker spouting off about "who needs it?". Two years later they're using the hardware they were bitching about when they find it in the discount bin, still crying "Who needs it?" to whatever the latest hardware is. I have a wanker I know who continually assures me that no one ever needs more than a 386/33 -> We should pit him up against Mr. 333Mhz Mac guy (what a WASTE of cycles! Who needs 333Mhz?)
I also wonder if it helps to paint a target on me for potential theifs
Here in Southern Ontario even the lowest income areas have those micro-dishes all over the place: Either hanging precariously out of a window or on the side of the balcony. The pricing is comparable if not cheaper than cable in most cases. Having a dish says nothing more than "I have a TV" which is a pretty good bet for pretty much any house. I really don't see having a dish as some big sign of electronic prowess.
Having said that dishes are ugly little things. While people don't like Big Mean CableCo, the concept of cable, which is sharing a well positioned dish, seems like it's an intelligent proposition. i.e. When I see dozens of dishes all from the same vendor pointed at the same sat on the side of an apartment building, it really perplexes me why there isn't one nice dish on the roof sharing the signal. Alas.
This is one of the funniest trolls I've ever seen on Slashdot: A purportedly serious petitioning for congressional intervention into whether one can get the NFL Sunday Ticket. Bwahahahahahahaa. Fantastic.
Some companies have a ban on usage of cell phones while driving on company time because of the risk factor involved.
Of course what they really have is a ban on people suing them because a driver was talking on a cell phone and it's the easiest thing to pick out as a cause (rather than "he is an idiot").
Personally I drink coffee while driving all the time, and it has never adversely affected my driving at all. I also talk to passengers while driving, and again it doesn't adversely affect my driving. I don't, however, look at the passenger as I talk to them or they talk to me, and I find it baffling and fascinating when people do that: My eyes never leave the gauges and the road. The same thing goes for drinking coffee, or changing the station on the radio.
When am I most dangerous? a) When I'm deeply in thought about a problem: It has nothing to do with talking on a cell phone, listening to the radio, or drinking a coffee b) When very tired. I drove all the way from Florida to Ontario straight and I feel guilty about the risks I took when I literally was on the verge of blinking into sleep.
Re:Gag the PETA people, please.
on
Lab-Grown Steak
·
· Score: 1
I'm not sure who you're picking a battle with here, however indeed it was a drop-in replacement for "evolved along with from a common point", with a point that our evolution has been more successful from a "master of the planet" perspective.
Re:Gag the PETA people, please.
on
Lab-Grown Steak
·
· Score: 1
I wouldn't be surprised if some crazy PETA fool used this quote once.
Interesting: You make up a quote, and then go so far as to call a PETA member a "fool" for believing a quote that you just made up. Fascinating. Do you have imaginary conflicts with everyone that you know?
In any case PETA is a very large group. Are their kooks in it? Absolutely! Are there people who've made statements in the heat of a debating moment that they've wished they could take back? Absolutely. Are there people with a vested interest in animal cruelty who take PETA quotes grossly out of content and paraphrase them forever? Absolutely. Of course all anti-PETA people must basically be Jeffery Dahmers: He ate meat, so therefore he represents everything that the non-PETA society advocates. YOU DAMN CANNIBAL SICKO!
They are not sentient. Learn the differences between these things.
This is what is called "moralizing": In this case by describing a vast chasm of difference between humans and "lower" beings. We have "sentience", whereas other animals are merely alive. Of course this is completely a subjective measure by someone use to treating every human behaviour as consciousness, and every animal (ignoring that we're "just" a highly evolved monkey, basically) behaviour as "instinct". If your baby smiles at you it's a magical consciousness, but when a baby kitten plays with a ball it's nothing more than training for the hunt further in life. Sorry but I am of the belief that all life is amazing and truly is a miracle, and I can see complexity in every life from an ant to a walrus.
Besides, if it is inhumane to Kill animals why is it humane to Kill plants?
People usually use this as a slippery slope, strawman sort of argument to discredit PETA and the like. The foundation, however, is perilous: If it's therefore okay to kill animals because it's okay to kills plants, well then I guess it's okay to eat little babies-I hear that China has a surplus. All meat eaters therefore must support the eating of little Chinese babies.
PETA, and organizations like it, strive to improve the world and the conditions of all living things in whatever way possible (which is more than can be said for most people who's life is nothing but self-centered greed), and the lowest hanging fruit obviously is to stop the suffering of high level mammals.
P.S. I'm not saying this preaching: I personally am a meat eater -- It was the way I was brought up and it is a tough habit to kick. However I have the reason and the perspective to appreciate the arguments of others rather than to simply accept whatever perspective justifies the way I live (which is basically the technique of 9/10ths of Slashdotters. Do you pirate? Down with IP laws!)
I love seeing these strawman attacks on PETA and the like. Comparing a steak grown in a test tube, which obviously no one would have a problem with the slaughter of an animal to eat its flesh is absolutely ridiculous. This "steak" may look and taste like a steak (though I doubt both), but it's akin to saying "I wonder if PETA will complain that someone eats tofurkey": It's absurd.
then one would expect that you would read the frucking article and know that the guy says he didn't write it !
Yeah, and the thug on the corner is just holding that crack pipe for his buddy: It ain't his, honest! Possession is 9/10ths of the law, and in this case the guy not only is a primary suspect as the author of it (for obvious reasons that any non-naive person understands), but secondarily is an active distributor. Thinking that he's magically skirted laws is just fantasty law imaginations.
Secondly, so what if he's in the UK? Last I saw the UK and the US, just like most of the free world, have pretty comprehensive extradition treaties. That's ignoring the fact that the UK likely does have applicable laws for the local branch of Microsoft, but if not the guy has basically just ensured that he can never leave home again (or at least not take connecting flights that touch down in North America).
Could you clarify a bit better when in the "early 80s" that you used this acronym? Microsoft was calling Windows "Windows" in 1984, around the same time that the Mac came out (and they both borrowed the concepts from Xerox).
This predates MS Windows.
Something called "windows" may be an element of a product, but that doesn't equal it being a generic name for a product. i.e. As I mentioned in another post if you named your software "SemaphoreTM" would it be fair for others to call their operating system semaphore? I mean, all OS' have semaphores, right? 15 years down the road we can claim "Oh, but Semaphores is a generic term for operating systems"... Of course that'd be weak and disingenous, but what the heck.
I'm sorry, but at $80 (no activation), you gotta be afraid of new technology or something to avoid a deal like that!
I personally don't have a PVR because a) it's clunky trying to get it to work with a digital cable box. Setting it up to transmit IR to record certain shows, etc, just doesn't seem right, b) the subscription thing: Most, if not all, of these boxes need to phone home to continue to function. Indeed I don't believe a single one of them is available where I live (Ontario, Canada).
If the HDD manufacturers are thinking that's going to save them, they're in for a surprise....
Well firstly there are only a very few hard drive makers in the business (indeed there really only ever have been a few), and the PVR market represents a _MASSIVE_ market. Indeed, having just bought a MiniDV video camera (finally took the plunge) boy was I surprized at the massive space that takes: DV format AVIs take about 400MB for 3 minutes...
Slashdot Mirror
it severly hampers IIS's scalability
Actually it's the complete opposite, although your flagrant zealotry you revealed at the end of your post ("when your target market is non-scalable toy computers") sort of puts it into perspective.
An average page contains probably 20 or more separate items. What the author of the original analysis noticed was very likely nothing more than HTTP/1.1 keep alive persistence: Instead of making 20 connections, use just a couple and save the expensive set-up and tear-down of each TCP connection. Saying this is a big conspiracy between IE and IIS is just pure ignorance, and the fact that this story was posted is just baffling.
How does Opera "look like crap"? It looks pretty damn sweet to me (though you have to turn off most of the default garbage). Agreed that it isn't fully W3C compliant, especially in the realm of the dynamic DOM, though Opera 7 is supposedly changing that (I tried the beta and it crashed a few too many times).
So what you're really saying is "Opera is a really good browser". Opera, of course, pioneered tabbing and Mozilla and others quickly robbed it.
Of course Internet Explorer 7 is slated to have tabbed browsing.
(Posted from Opera 6.02)
This may sound very arrogant, but I think the developer should manage the DBA, often the DBA is a lone-wolf with too much power.
So instead you'd end up with a developer with too much power...
The thing about the separation of database design from "front-end" design (which could be middleware or front-end applications) is that in most cases the database scheme and I/O design has a shelf life far longer than most front-ends. i.e. Don't see that new web interface as a new system with a new database, but rather as a "one of many" front ends to the back-end database: i.e. the database is of much greater long term importance than any front-end.
Regarding your particular scenario: Is it possible that you're looking to shoehorn functionality for your particular front-end into a universal back-end where it might not be appropriate? Will every query on the person table suddenly have have the overhead of calculating the persons age because one page in one obscure part of one front end needs it?
Not really that amazing. Most C/C++ programmer jobs will likely have employees who have been there and on the project for many years: There isn't a lot of transition. Java, on the other hand, is more of an up and comer, especially J2EE and JSP, so more positions are opening up that didn't exist before.
This would make some marginal sense if it weren't for the fact that the author and maintainer of the page in question submitted the story.
ctually, if you really took the time to study things you'd find that Java borrowed from all sorts of languages
.NET applications run, at least in my experience, much more efficiently and tolerably than Java apps. This is on the Windows platform, of course, but given that that's the platform that I use it's what matters (obscurities about the performance on a esoteric chip is nice and all, as long as it doesn't come at the cost of performance on my platform). Of course .NET really is about transitioning the Windows developing world, rather than trying to steal over Java developers. Moving from ASP to ASP.NET is a no brainer.
My point was not really a specific analysis of Java, but rather that many things "steal" from their predecessors. It's particularly ridiculous to claim that Windows "stole" from the Mac.
Then of course once Java had paved the way, along came C#
Paved the way? There are countless languages that have come and gone that took the best parts of prior languages. The only thing Java paved was that it was heavily pushed by a large organization.
But why anyone would switch to a platform that offers minor incremental improvement beyond a system with years of VM optimization and stabilizing is beyond me
Well already
Revisionist history, much as how Java fanatics claim that C# rips of Java (hint: Both Java and C# derive from C++, and both rip off significantly from object pascal. Indeed C# is more legitimate as one of the authors of object pascal worked on C#).
It is interesting that no one has mentioned this tidbit about the survey:
"Linux's share of paid shipments of the worldwide client operating-system market rose from 1.5 percent in 2000 to 1.7 in 2001, while Microsoft Windows grew from 92 to 94 percent in the same period."
Linux' gain isn't at the cost of Windows.
Totally in agreement. To me this looks like nothing more than obvious PR coordination which any large company would do when the media has shown an interest in worldwide publicity to any Linux adoption over Microsoft: The memo basically says "Let's be prepared and ready to deal with it". Big deal.
Of course this is the same ESR who assured us some 3 years ago that Microsoft had less than a year to go.
If you were really interested, you`d already know, or you'd find out for yourself.
Huh? The original said "Wouldn't it be great to have the information online", to which you replied that those who wanted the information would "find out for yourself". How? Telepathetic prediction?
Having the information online is another way of disseminating the information to people who are looking to "find out". It's a hell of a lot better than a barrier to entry obscure system that encourages in-breeding and barriers to entry (which is how most of those systems work).
To be fair the McLaren F1 is naturally aspirated, whereas the Koenigsegg is supercharged. One could likely make a 900HP 4 cylinder with enough pressure.
Well you have to give them credit: They spray painted the front of the DVD, CD, and Audigy front panel... Ugh. The idea of spray paint on the front of one's computer is not something that I would look forward too. Then again, it is "Viper Blue"...
Hell, non linear video editing doesnt need this.
I suppose if one is willing to wait an infinite amount of time, any processor is perfectly sufficient. Personally, however, I'm of the "playing around" variety and like to put things together and then see what they look like: I currently have a Athlon 1800+ and having recently gotten a MiniDV camera I was blown away by how overwhelmingly intensive it is. I'll be upgrading shortly.
I shouldn't even credit this whole line of questions with a response though: "Who needs it?" questions are not only ridiculously dumb, they're overwhelmingly redundant-> Every bloody piece of hardware yields a wanker spouting off about "who needs it?". Two years later they're using the hardware they were bitching about when they find it in the discount bin, still crying "Who needs it?" to whatever the latest hardware is. I have a wanker I know who continually assures me that no one ever needs more than a 386/33 -> We should pit him up against Mr. 333Mhz Mac guy (what a WASTE of cycles! Who needs 333Mhz?)
I also wonder if it helps to paint a target on me for potential theifs
Here in Southern Ontario even the lowest income areas have those micro-dishes all over the place: Either hanging precariously out of a window or on the side of the balcony. The pricing is comparable if not cheaper than cable in most cases. Having a dish says nothing more than "I have a TV" which is a pretty good bet for pretty much any house. I really don't see having a dish as some big sign of electronic prowess.
Having said that dishes are ugly little things. While people don't like Big Mean CableCo, the concept of cable, which is sharing a well positioned dish, seems like it's an intelligent proposition. i.e. When I see dozens of dishes all from the same vendor pointed at the same sat on the side of an apartment building, it really perplexes me why there isn't one nice dish on the roof sharing the signal. Alas.
This is one of the funniest trolls I've ever seen on Slashdot: A purportedly serious petitioning for congressional intervention into whether one can get the NFL Sunday Ticket. Bwahahahahahahaa. Fantastic.
Some companies have a ban on usage of cell phones while driving on company time because of the risk factor involved.
Of course what they really have is a ban on people suing them because a driver was talking on a cell phone and it's the easiest thing to pick out as a cause (rather than "he is an idiot").
Personally I drink coffee while driving all the time, and it has never adversely affected my driving at all. I also talk to passengers while driving, and again it doesn't adversely affect my driving. I don't, however, look at the passenger as I talk to them or they talk to me, and I find it baffling and fascinating when people do that: My eyes never leave the gauges and the road. The same thing goes for drinking coffee, or changing the station on the radio.
When am I most dangerous? a) When I'm deeply in thought about a problem: It has nothing to do with talking on a cell phone, listening to the radio, or drinking a coffee b) When very tired. I drove all the way from Florida to Ontario straight and I feel guilty about the risks I took when I literally was on the verge of blinking into sleep.
I'm not sure who you're picking a battle with here, however indeed it was a drop-in replacement for "evolved along with from a common point", with a point that our evolution has been more successful from a "master of the planet" perspective.
I wouldn't be surprised if some crazy PETA fool used this quote once.
Interesting: You make up a quote, and then go so far as to call a PETA member a "fool" for believing a quote that you just made up. Fascinating. Do you have imaginary conflicts with everyone that you know?
In any case PETA is a very large group. Are their kooks in it? Absolutely! Are there people who've made statements in the heat of a debating moment that they've wished they could take back? Absolutely. Are there people with a vested interest in animal cruelty who take PETA quotes grossly out of content and paraphrase them forever? Absolutely. Of course all anti-PETA people must basically be Jeffery Dahmers: He ate meat, so therefore he represents everything that the non-PETA society advocates. YOU DAMN CANNIBAL SICKO!
They are not sentient. Learn the differences between these things.
This is what is called "moralizing": In this case by describing a vast chasm of difference between humans and "lower" beings. We have "sentience", whereas other animals are merely alive. Of course this is completely a subjective measure by someone use to treating every human behaviour as consciousness, and every animal (ignoring that we're "just" a highly evolved monkey, basically) behaviour as "instinct". If your baby smiles at you it's a magical consciousness, but when a baby kitten plays with a ball it's nothing more than training for the hunt further in life. Sorry but I am of the belief that all life is amazing and truly is a miracle, and I can see complexity in every life from an ant to a walrus.
Besides, if it is inhumane to Kill animals why is it humane to Kill plants?
People usually use this as a slippery slope, strawman sort of argument to discredit PETA and the like. The foundation, however, is perilous: If it's therefore okay to kill animals because it's okay to kills plants, well then I guess it's okay to eat little babies-I hear that China has a surplus. All meat eaters therefore must support the eating of little Chinese babies.
PETA, and organizations like it, strive to improve the world and the conditions of all living things in whatever way possible (which is more than can be said for most people who's life is nothing but self-centered greed), and the lowest hanging fruit obviously is to stop the suffering of high level mammals.
P.S. I'm not saying this preaching: I personally am a meat eater -- It was the way I was brought up and it is a tough habit to kick. However I have the reason and the perspective to appreciate the arguments of others rather than to simply accept whatever perspective justifies the way I live (which is basically the technique of 9/10ths of Slashdotters. Do you pirate? Down with IP laws!)
I love seeing these strawman attacks on PETA and the like. Comparing a steak grown in a test tube, which obviously no one would have a problem with the slaughter of an animal to eat its flesh is absolutely ridiculous. This "steak" may look and taste like a steak (though I doubt both), but it's akin to saying "I wonder if PETA will complain that someone eats tofurkey": It's absurd.
Oh god is this the beginning of a long running, never ending Firewire versus USB2 (akin to SCSI versus IDE) debate? :-)
then one would expect that you would read the frucking article and know that the guy says he didn't write it !
Yeah, and the thug on the corner is just holding that crack pipe for his buddy: It ain't his, honest! Possession is 9/10ths of the law, and in this case the guy not only is a primary suspect as the author of it (for obvious reasons that any non-naive person understands), but secondarily is an active distributor. Thinking that he's magically skirted laws is just fantasty law imaginations.
Secondly, so what if he's in the UK? Last I saw the UK and the US, just like most of the free world, have pretty comprehensive extradition treaties. That's ignoring the fact that the UK likely does have applicable laws for the local branch of Microsoft, but if not the guy has basically just ensured that he can never leave home again (or at least not take connecting flights that touch down in North America).
early 80s
Could you clarify a bit better when in the "early 80s" that you used this acronym? Microsoft was calling Windows "Windows" in 1984, around the same time that the Mac came out (and they both borrowed the concepts from Xerox).
This predates MS Windows.
Something called "windows" may be an element of a product, but that doesn't equal it being a generic name for a product. i.e. As I mentioned in another post if you named your software "SemaphoreTM" would it be fair for others to call their operating system semaphore? I mean, all OS' have semaphores, right? 15 years down the road we can claim "Oh, but Semaphores is a generic term for operating systems"... Of course that'd be weak and disingenous, but what the heck.
I'm sorry, but at $80 (no activation), you gotta be afraid of new technology or something to avoid a deal like that!
I personally don't have a PVR because a) it's clunky trying to get it to work with a digital cable box. Setting it up to transmit IR to record certain shows, etc, just doesn't seem right, b) the subscription thing: Most, if not all, of these boxes need to phone home to continue to function. Indeed I don't believe a single one of them is available where I live (Ontario, Canada).
If the HDD manufacturers are thinking that's going to save them, they're in for a surprise....
Well firstly there are only a very few hard drive makers in the business (indeed there really only ever have been a few), and the PVR market represents a _MASSIVE_ market. Indeed, having just bought a MiniDV video camera (finally took the plunge) boy was I surprized at the massive space that takes: DV format AVIs take about 400MB for 3 minutes...