They may not have been intentionally misleading you. I have a video capture card and if someone asked me if it worked under linux then I would say yes. Then if it later came out that there were different versions of that card being sold under the same name I suppose you could say I was misleading you. But it would be more accurate to say the manufacturer was misleading you by saying that your card was the same as my card when it wasn't.
Not sure why you'd blame Linux for lying to you when it was the manufacturer that lied to you. If I say that linux supports widget-2000 and then someone makes a completely different product named widget-2000 that isn't supportted by linux, does that make me a lier? I'd say the manufacturer is lying by claiming their product is a widget-2000 when it isn't.
Just checking the the ivtv supported hardware page there appears to be four different PVR-250s that they say will work. Is your card one of those? If you've tried to get it working recently or if your card is a different version from the ones they have listed maybe you could let them know so they can update the page.
Most likely Ubuntu has a newer version of the kernel that can detect and work around something weird in your USB keyboard and/or the USB chipset in your motherboard.
Anyway, good luck with linux... once you get to know it, you'll probably find yourself wanting to use windows less and less.
Well the problem with that is it seems like you're constantly tinkering with you user interface instead of getting work done. Gnome is usable as soon as its installed. To make KDE work properly, you have to tinker with it at least an hour before you can start doing anything. That's a real pain in the ass to do for each system you set up.
Gnome gives me the features I want without the clutter that KDE shows by default. So if I were to switch to KDE I'd spend an hour to reconfigure it to an interface that would end up being similar to gnome's default configuration.
You do know Clinton isn't president anymore, right? And saying "it didn't happen that way. Shame on you for fictionalizing historical events" isn't exactly censorship.
You don't get it. God has made the skies the sole property of the United States of America. So if an American fighter shoots down an enemy aircraft anywhere it is always defensive. America must defend its God given air superiority even if it is over foreign countries.
While I think you might be on to something there about MSs business practices in general, I'm not sure this is the case here.
Its not like PDF export is a hugely complex feature that would take hundreds of millions of dollars to implement. Its just another document format. So why didn't MS implement it like 10 years ago?
Well if you had a choice to attach a word document or a PDF document what would you do? The PDF document is much more portable so that's what you do. But MS wanted everyone attaching Word documents. So they "forgot" to support PDFs. Adobe added that support with an extension that costed a little money.
And it worked great for them. Everyone got used to attaching word documents so now everyone has to have an up to date copy of word.
But now you have Open Office nipping as Word's heels. It can open word documents AND export to PDF. A little more improvement to performance and a few more features, Open Office could be a real competitor. So MS has some potential competition, and since they've already succeeded in make word the defacto document standard, now it's time to add PDF support.
I really don't see a problem with this. Adobe made a lot of money because MS was playing games with document formats but there is no reason why MS should guarantee them a revenue stream by continuing to leave out a feature (that's trivial to implement) in one of their products.
And you are free, as a consumer, to not use the bundled products.
And apparently I'm also free to pay for these bundled apps as well. Now tell me why I should pay for Windows Vista + MS Defender and then just not use Defender and but and install Norton? I've already paid for MS Defender why would I buy Norton too?
This is Netscape all over again. What Symantec is complaining about is that Windows Defender will be installed automatically. If someone installs Norton, Norton will have to disable Windows Defender. Now Windows defender is going to report that "virus protection is disabled". This will make users think that their system isn't being protected anymore and will complain that Norton isn't working.
MS can't have it both ways. If windows Defender is a seperate product then it should be sold as seperate product. If its a part of windows then it should behave the same as the current XP security center behaves. That is when you install Norton or whatever then the security center tells the user that the system is being protected by Norton and give you its config options.
MS is basically arguing that Windows defender isn't like the XP security center in that its a separate product so they shouldn't have to allow other companies to alter it. But if its a seperate product why can't it be seperated from windows and sold on its own?
It's called fair use. I load any page on the internet and a copy of that is stored in my browser's memory and files are copied into the cache. Does that mean you can sue me for visiting your website?
Google is taking it a little further than my browser does, but its not really much different. They need to cache files so they can analyse them to determine how to rank them. They just allow the public to access this cache in addition to their search algorithms.
And if these news sites don't like people caching their stuff they have the option to set NOCACHE. I'm pretty sure that the specs on the WWW specify that you are allowed to cache content unless the nocache option is specified. And google is nice enough to give website operators additional options in the robots.txt, which legally they don't have to but they do anyway because they are nice guys.
The web has been established for a while now and the rules on caching are well defined. If you publish stuff on the Internet and are ignorant of those rules, that's your problem not Google's or anyone else that is browsing, spidering or linking.
It was too heavy on facts and everyone know that facts are the enemy of truthiness. It may have been a reasonable reply but it felt like a troll to the libertarians with modpoints.
Well it does burn fuel if it doesn't have battery power, so you don't have to plug it in for 15 hours or whatever. You can drive it as much as you want, just that you'll be using more fuel than electricity.
Yes it is expensive, but economies of scale will drop the price a bit. And if gas prices get any higher it will be worthwhile. Even with gas prices now, a if you could get a hybrid civic for $10,000 more than a regular civic you'll be saving money. When gas prices take another jump (which is guaranteed) and if they become more popular then the costs drop. It is very likely that the costs will cross and it will be more cost effective to buy a hybrid than a regular gas only vehicle.
When all you've got is a hammer all your problems start looking like nails. When you're a DBA you think all data should be stored in a database.
And MS tried to put everything in a database with WinFS. Problem was it too complicated.
In a web environment, you would almost NEVER use a flat file.
So you've never seen a.html file before? What do you think those contain? What about a.php file?.css?.jpg? These are all files that contain data. The contents of all of these files could easily be placed in a database. So why don't we? Because it's much easier to use files for these things. And then there's performance reasons.
And these are the same reasons to use MySQL. Easier to maintain. Better performance.
And simpler design and better performance aren't techincal merits?
MS won't agree to the CC license, so the CC will fall back to regular copyright.
This is really bizaro world here. Think about it, regular people suing a big corporation for copyright infringement. But it only gets stranger. Think about it: people sharing music with their friends for a limited time. Could it be... Fair use?
So we'll have regular people suing a big corporation for copyright infringement and the big corporation using fair use as a defense.
What is it about databases that make people disregard all the knowledge, experience, and expertise gained in the field over 40 years of study and implementation.
No one is disregarding anything. Just using the right tool for the job. Sometimes you need a flat file. Sometimes you need a Database. And then there's time you need to use MySQL.
Would it make you feel better if we said that MySQL isn't a database? We could call it a "constraintless transactionless data file accessible by SQL". Would that make you feel better?
Regardless of what you call it, its a nice little solution for situations where a flat file isn't enough and a database is too much. Is it really necessary to hire a DBA to maintain a database to store pictures of people's cats?
Yeah, well article submitters and the editors are the biggest trolls here. When I see an article here that makes someone seem like they're a complete asshole I go read what they really said immediately. Usually the difference between the article summary here and what someone actually says is day and night.
The worst thing is that he was saying some things about caching opcodes which was very interesting. I myself have always thought about doing exactly that since where I work now we develop websites in a very specific industry, so I've developed a little library so I can easily do the most common things. If that library was permanently compiled and stored in memory it would be much more efficient.
It would have been nice to have a discussion on opcode caching and what languages support it and the performance benefits of it. But instead we get a database trollfest. Oh well, maybe google will tell me more.
Yeah, for those rare cases where consistency isn't important. That covers almost every web app.
See, consistent data is pretty moot in most web apps. I can store the location of an image and then, oops, someone deletes the image file. What's the result? Well technically the data is still consistent within the database, all my foreign keys check out and everything. But I still end up with a broken web page.
So I have to write some code somewhere to make sure that all the images my database points to are real existing images. And then I'll have to so that for the hyperlinks too, nobody likes broken links. Oh and if someone renames a page in the database, we should make sure the address for the old page redirects to the new address.
With all that going on, do you really think data consistency is that big of a problem? Come on, writing a few scripts to make sure data in the MyISAM tables is dead simple. I mean really, really, really simple. I wish all my problems could be solved so easily.
Not necessarily. For the tables you need constraints and transactions you use Innodb. For the tables you need performance you use MyISAM. And you can use foreign keys between them. That's the real strength of Mysql, you can choose your features on a per table basis.
And yes both PostGres and Mysql are free. The software is free. The hardware is another matter, isn't it? If I have to buy twice as much hardware for PostGres to run as opposed to Mysql, its not exactly free anymore is it? I'm paying a lot of extra money for features I don't use.
What is it about databases that turns people into snobs?
You wouldn't happen to be using multiple masters in your replication are you? If you are the problem could be that data was being inserted into two masters at the same time so the insert gets replicated before the autoincrement. This is easily avoided by setting an offset for autoincrement. link here.
I'm really surprised there wasn't an error somewhere. Did you check the replication logs? You wouldn't get one on the insert, because the inserts worked, its just the replication screwed things up.
Wow I didn't get that at all. Yeah the writer of the article tried to slant it that way but thats just a typical journalist trying to sensationalise an otherwise boring story.
First of all he was pointing out that its a mistake to trust any data from the client. Pretty obvious, but there are a lot of sites that ignore this. He didn't "just learn that", he is pointing that a lot of developers haven't learned it yet. And unfortunately this is all too true.
You yourself admit "MySQL is made for speed compromising to act like a database" and that is exactly what he is saying too. See, if you're web app doesn't require a full featured database, ie. "If you can fit your problem into what MySQL can handle", then Mysql is a good choice for performance reasons. And even if there's one or two features you need that Mysql doesn't support, then you can do a few hacks to make it work anyway and still be ahead performance-wise.
Nor was this a "slam". PostgreSQL is not made for specifically web use. If anything, Lerdorf merely publicly demonstrated his own immaturity.
I don't think he was intending to slam PostreSQL. He was only saying that MySQL has better performance for web apps than PostGreSQL, which you seem to agree with. He didn't say MySQL is better than PostgreSQL, he just said it gives better performance for web apps, and even added the caveat "If you can fit your problem into [it]".
What he is really talking about is the classic problem of elegance vs. performance, a dilemma programmers constantly have to grapple with. Postgres is more elegant, but Mysql has better performance in its niche.
The writer sensationalised it all a bit and then slashdot turned it into a troll. A mature reader would see through that and pay close attention to things actually between quotes, the things the dude actually said.
There is also a high correlation showing the higher the income level the higher the education level. And there's a high correlation between high edcuation level and people knowing that correlation is not causation.
Difference is you need a highly paid consultant to analyse the information on the CDR whereas a paper trail can be analysed by member of your community that you personally know and trust. The reason why people in democratic countries are generally more peaceful is that they have confidence in their elections. The ability to scrutinize elections is an essential part of that. Certainly worth printing out a piece of paper for anyway.
I had that book... its probably in a closet somewhere right now. There are also topless mermaids in it and someone accidentally opening a changing room door. It really was more of a where's the boobies book really.
Slashdot Mirror
They may not have been intentionally misleading you. I have a video capture card and if someone asked me if it worked under linux then I would say yes. Then if it later came out that there were different versions of that card being sold under the same name I suppose you could say I was misleading you. But it would be more accurate to say the manufacturer was misleading you by saying that your card was the same as my card when it wasn't.
Not sure why you'd blame Linux for lying to you when it was the manufacturer that lied to you. If I say that linux supports widget-2000 and then someone makes a completely different product named widget-2000 that isn't supportted by linux, does that make me a lier? I'd say the manufacturer is lying by claiming their product is a widget-2000 when it isn't.
Just checking the the ivtv supported hardware page there appears to be four different PVR-250s that they say will work. Is your card one of those? If you've tried to get it working recently or if your card is a different version from the ones they have listed maybe you could let them know so they can update the page.
Most likely Ubuntu has a newer version of the kernel that can detect and work around something weird in your USB keyboard and/or the USB chipset in your motherboard.
Anyway, good luck with linux... once you get to know it, you'll probably find yourself wanting to use windows less and less.
Well the problem with that is it seems like you're constantly tinkering with you user interface instead of getting work done. Gnome is usable as soon as its installed. To make KDE work properly, you have to tinker with it at least an hour before you can start doing anything. That's a real pain in the ass to do for each system you set up.
Gnome gives me the features I want without the clutter that KDE shows by default. So if I were to switch to KDE I'd spend an hour to reconfigure it to an interface that would end up being similar to gnome's default configuration.
You do know Clinton isn't president anymore, right? And saying "it didn't happen that way. Shame on you for fictionalizing historical events" isn't exactly censorship.
You don't get it. God has made the skies the sole property of the United States of America. So if an American fighter shoots down an enemy aircraft anywhere it is always defensive. America must defend its God given air superiority even if it is over foreign countries.
While I think you might be on to something there about MSs business practices in general, I'm not sure this is the case here.
Its not like PDF export is a hugely complex feature that would take hundreds of millions of dollars to implement. Its just another document format. So why didn't MS implement it like 10 years ago?
Well if you had a choice to attach a word document or a PDF document what would you do? The PDF document is much more portable so that's what you do. But MS wanted everyone attaching Word documents. So they "forgot" to support PDFs. Adobe added that support with an extension that costed a little money.
And it worked great for them. Everyone got used to attaching word documents so now everyone has to have an up to date copy of word.
But now you have Open Office nipping as Word's heels. It can open word documents AND export to PDF. A little more improvement to performance and a few more features, Open Office could be a real competitor. So MS has some potential competition, and since they've already succeeded in make word the defacto document standard, now it's time to add PDF support.
I really don't see a problem with this. Adobe made a lot of money because MS was playing games with document formats but there is no reason why MS should guarantee them a revenue stream by continuing to leave out a feature (that's trivial to implement) in one of their products.
And apparently I'm also free to pay for these bundled apps as well. Now tell me why I should pay for Windows Vista + MS Defender and then just not use Defender and but and install Norton? I've already paid for MS Defender why would I buy Norton too?
This is Netscape all over again. What Symantec is complaining about is that Windows Defender will be installed automatically. If someone installs Norton, Norton will have to disable Windows Defender. Now Windows defender is going to report that "virus protection is disabled". This will make users think that their system isn't being protected anymore and will complain that Norton isn't working.
MS can't have it both ways. If windows Defender is a seperate product then it should be sold as seperate product. If its a part of windows then it should behave the same as the current XP security center behaves. That is when you install Norton or whatever then the security center tells the user that the system is being protected by Norton and give you its config options.
MS is basically arguing that Windows defender isn't like the XP security center in that its a separate product so they shouldn't have to allow other companies to alter it. But if its a seperate product why can't it be seperated from windows and sold on its own?
It's called fair use. I load any page on the internet and a copy of that is stored in my browser's memory and files are copied into the cache. Does that mean you can sue me for visiting your website?
Google is taking it a little further than my browser does, but its not really much different. They need to cache files so they can analyse them to determine how to rank them. They just allow the public to access this cache in addition to their search algorithms.
And if these news sites don't like people caching their stuff they have the option to set NOCACHE. I'm pretty sure that the specs on the WWW specify that you are allowed to cache content unless the nocache option is specified. And google is nice enough to give website operators additional options in the robots.txt, which legally they don't have to but they do anyway because they are nice guys.
The web has been established for a while now and the rules on caching are well defined. If you publish stuff on the Internet and are ignorant of those rules, that's your problem not Google's or anyone else that is browsing, spidering or linking.
It was too heavy on facts and everyone know that facts are the enemy of truthiness. It may have been a reasonable reply but it felt like a troll to the libertarians with modpoints.
Well it does burn fuel if it doesn't have battery power, so you don't have to plug it in for 15 hours or whatever. You can drive it as much as you want, just that you'll be using more fuel than electricity.
Yes it is expensive, but economies of scale will drop the price a bit. And if gas prices get any higher it will be worthwhile. Even with gas prices now, a if you could get a hybrid civic for $10,000 more than a regular civic you'll be saving money. When gas prices take another jump (which is guaranteed) and if they become more popular then the costs drop. It is very likely that the costs will cross and it will be more cost effective to buy a hybrid than a regular gas only vehicle.
Wouldn't it be easier to get -100MPG by driving around in reverse?
When all you've got is a hammer all your problems start looking like nails. When you're a DBA you think all data should be stored in a database.
And MS tried to put everything in a database with WinFS. Problem was it too complicated.
So you've never seen a .html file before? What do you think those contain? What about a .php file? .css? .jpg? These are all files that contain data. The contents of all of these files could easily be placed in a database. So why don't we? Because it's much easier to use files for these things. And then there's performance reasons.
And these are the same reasons to use MySQL. Easier to maintain. Better performance.
And simpler design and better performance aren't techincal merits?
MS won't agree to the CC license, so the CC will fall back to regular copyright.
This is really bizaro world here. Think about it, regular people suing a big corporation for copyright infringement. But it only gets stranger. Think about it: people sharing music with their friends for a limited time. Could it be... Fair use?
So we'll have regular people suing a big corporation for copyright infringement and the big corporation using fair use as a defense.
No one is disregarding anything. Just using the right tool for the job. Sometimes you need a flat file. Sometimes you need a Database. And then there's time you need to use MySQL.
Would it make you feel better if we said that MySQL isn't a database? We could call it a "constraintless transactionless data file accessible by SQL". Would that make you feel better?
Regardless of what you call it, its a nice little solution for situations where a flat file isn't enough and a database is too much. Is it really necessary to hire a DBA to maintain a database to store pictures of people's cats?
Yeah, well article submitters and the editors are the biggest trolls here. When I see an article here that makes someone seem like they're a complete asshole I go read what they really said immediately. Usually the difference between the article summary here and what someone actually says is day and night.
The worst thing is that he was saying some things about caching opcodes which was very interesting. I myself have always thought about doing exactly that since where I work now we develop websites in a very specific industry, so I've developed a little library so I can easily do the most common things. If that library was permanently compiled and stored in memory it would be much more efficient.
It would have been nice to have a discussion on opcode caching and what languages support it and the performance benefits of it. But instead we get a database trollfest. Oh well, maybe google will tell me more.
Yeah, for those rare cases where consistency isn't important. That covers almost every web app.
See, consistent data is pretty moot in most web apps. I can store the location of an image and then, oops, someone deletes the image file. What's the result? Well technically the data is still consistent within the database, all my foreign keys check out and everything. But I still end up with a broken web page.
So I have to write some code somewhere to make sure that all the images my database points to are real existing images. And then I'll have to so that for the hyperlinks too, nobody likes broken links. Oh and if someone renames a page in the database, we should make sure the address for the old page redirects to the new address.
With all that going on, do you really think data consistency is that big of a problem? Come on, writing a few scripts to make sure data in the MyISAM tables is dead simple. I mean really, really, really simple. I wish all my problems could be solved so easily.
Not necessarily. For the tables you need constraints and transactions you use Innodb. For the tables you need performance you use MyISAM. And you can use foreign keys between them. That's the real strength of Mysql, you can choose your features on a per table basis.
And yes both PostGres and Mysql are free. The software is free. The hardware is another matter, isn't it? If I have to buy twice as much hardware for PostGres to run as opposed to Mysql, its not exactly free anymore is it? I'm paying a lot of extra money for features I don't use.
What is it about databases that turns people into snobs?
You wouldn't happen to be using multiple masters in your replication are you? If you are the problem could be that data was being inserted into two masters at the same time so the insert gets replicated before the autoincrement. This is easily avoided by setting an offset for autoincrement. link here.
I'm really surprised there wasn't an error somewhere. Did you check the replication logs? You wouldn't get one on the insert, because the inserts worked, its just the replication screwed things up.
Wow I didn't get that at all. Yeah the writer of the article tried to slant it that way but thats just a typical journalist trying to sensationalise an otherwise boring story.
First of all he was pointing out that its a mistake to trust any data from the client. Pretty obvious, but there are a lot of sites that ignore this. He didn't "just learn that", he is pointing that a lot of developers haven't learned it yet. And unfortunately this is all too true.
You yourself admit "MySQL is made for speed compromising to act like a database" and that is exactly what he is saying too. See, if you're web app doesn't require a full featured database, ie. "If you can fit your problem into what MySQL can handle", then Mysql is a good choice for performance reasons. And even if there's one or two features you need that Mysql doesn't support, then you can do a few hacks to make it work anyway and still be ahead performance-wise.
I don't think he was intending to slam PostreSQL. He was only saying that MySQL has better performance for web apps than PostGreSQL, which you seem to agree with. He didn't say MySQL is better than PostgreSQL, he just said it gives better performance for web apps, and even added the caveat "If you can fit your problem into [it]".
What he is really talking about is the classic problem of elegance vs. performance, a dilemma programmers constantly have to grapple with. Postgres is more elegant, but Mysql has better performance in its niche.
The writer sensationalised it all a bit and then slashdot turned it into a troll. A mature reader would see through that and pay close attention to things actually between quotes, the things the dude actually said.
There is also a high correlation showing the higher the income level the higher the education level. And there's a high correlation between high edcuation level and people knowing that correlation is not causation.
Difference is you need a highly paid consultant to analyse the information on the CDR whereas a paper trail can be analysed by member of your community that you personally know and trust. The reason why people in democratic countries are generally more peaceful is that they have confidence in their elections. The ability to scrutinize elections is an essential part of that. Certainly worth printing out a piece of paper for anyway.
Al Jazeera is actually a more reliable news source than CNN now. Sad but true.
Its a part of gaming culture now:
Group of people: EA Games!
Whisper: Challenge Everything...
Sound in the background of user pressing escape repeatedly to no avail.
The British didn't have agent orange and napalm either. Hiding behind trees doesn't work so well these days. Also its hard to find a tree in a desert.
I had that book... its probably in a closet somewhere right now. There are also topless mermaids in it and someone accidentally opening a changing room door. It really was more of a where's the boobies book really.