78 posts • joined 22 May 2008
I hate to break this to you, but it's sort of your fault for relying on one provider.
Even if you're a low-end provider (hosting sites on someone else's VPS setup is low-end IMHO) it's not hard to get at least one box somewhere else and regularly smuggle your data back and forth. Having all your boxes at one provider is stupid for all sorts of reasons what happens to your DNS, mail etc when the provider has down time, or goes bankrupt and gets their cables pulled?
Linux is a kernel, Linux is a kernel, Linux is a kernel....
> Until Linux embraces a lot of the stuff it laments windows for doing,
Linux is a kernel. Linux is a kernel. Linux is a kernel.
N.B. I never actually said anything negative about Java...
>The JVM that is kept running as a of part of the server.
In a Java application server the JVM is running the whole show, no JVM no Webapp full stop. Which is fine if your application is meaty enough to warrant having an application server around... if you're doing what probably 90% of PHP scripts do, which is replacing variables with text from a MySQL database, you probably don't need a whole Java EE stack around. ;)
> Everything with regards to the actually assembly of the response is passivated to cache
That depends on your application/application server... again, nothing against Java (I've been building a large application on top of Glassfish for the last year..) the exact same things exist for PHP. Look at xcache for example.
> The inertia people experience with Java comes in the first part of a deployment,
Yes, all the deployment stuff is nice in Java/<Insert some application server here>, but you don't need that stuff for most of what PHP is used for.
> where heavily used classes still needs to be JIT'ed and translated into
> native machine code.
I'm not sure that any JVM has the ability to compile all code down to machine code. From what I've read Sun's hotspot compiler does stuff like unrolling loops, and does compile "hotspots" down to native code where it can, but it's still a great leap away from being 100% native code. That's not to say you can't compile Java down to machine code,.. but not really in this scope. PHP does nothing clever and basically boils down to a great being switch statement that calls a bunch of FOSS libraries, but for a good deal of web 2.oh no applications that's all you need.
Anyhow, after all that... where did I say anything about Java being slow?
You can make just as many mistakes with Java as you can PHP. Actually PHP doesn't let you hang yourself in some ways that Java (When I say Java, I really mean the JVM/Application servers everyone is using) will, as far as I know neither modphp or php running under fastcgi allow for threads that can each call methods within the same instances of your classes and thus can cause everything to shit over itself if your code isn't thread safe. If you're writing bad PHP code it's probably best you stick to that instead of trying to forge even worse Java or Python wouldn't you say?
C would be lightweight. You could write your own http server and business logic in a tiny amount of code compared with Java or Python (Your code + Runtime). Also, all your code would be machine native, so would run a sight quicker too. But.. would you want to maintain it?
Java and Python both have huge support libraries that make it Easy to get stuff done(TM). Heavyweight != Hardcore. Hardcore would be writing the OS, TCP/IP stack and HTTP server and business logic in assembly.
Well, my timezone is a good 6 hours ahead of the UK. Still there's nothing that saves this article.
I've never said PHP was any good. But jumping on the back of something Microsoft are doing to poo poo PHP is a little childish.
You could run PHP on Google's stack using Quercus...
Mostly drivel and poor analogies.
What basically comes out of this article is that the author doesn't like PHP. That's about it.
Oh, and the author doesn't like FastCGI too. Blah blah. Microsoft implementing FastCGI somehow makes them bad but google only supporting heavy weight languages like Java and Python is fine?
With Java at least the point regarding PHP running under FastCGI keeping processes running is pretty moot you should have realised,... Java also requires that a few processes are kept running i.e. a JVM. Also I have a feeling keeping the processes running is so that your users don't have to wait for PHP to start up every time they make a request.
>Yahoo would never have happened.
I think back in the day, when Yahoo actually meant something, most of their stuff was written in Perl.
>then there would be no Digg
They would have written it in Perl instead.
> 1) Random documentation (poorly cross-referenced, often out of date etc;
> the amount of crap still kicking about for Dapper is depressing)
Well, the documentation in Debian is one of it's strong points,... So I wouldn't say Ubuntu's problem (according to you) is consistent across all the distributions..
> 2) Obscure/Poorly explained architecture (GDM, X11, decorators,
> gstreamer, pulseaudio...ARG! What is all this crap?)
Eh? The X11 stuff is an industry standard and has been for decades. There is also tons of documentation specific to Xorg's X11 implementation. GDM, Window decorators etc are pretty simple things in comparison to X.
> 3) Needing a degree in computer science to get networking going
You can't operate <insert some network manager frontend here>???
>4) Needing a PhD in computer science to try (note the word "try") and set-up a firewall!
There are literally hundreds of iptables scripts that simplify the process, there are even GUI tools. I suggest you look up firehol which is a very good example of an iptables script.
> 5) Terrible printer support
Do a test print from a recent version of CUPS and read along the bottom where the copyright notices are. Look out for a certain type of fruit.
"Today, 20 plus parallel sessions are quite common; the browser is more of an operating system than a data display application;"
Which is exactly the problem.. why are people so intent on making browsers into the presentation layer for every application.... Why are people so against learning graphical toolkits and making decent native applications? You can even write portable graphical applications these days.
When will Nightmare 2.0 end?!?!
>The attraction (currently) would also be the ability (depending on your whether your hardware / >hypervisor supports it) to have different operating systems and their applications running on >one hardware platform.
That's fair enough.. but if your application runs on x86 metal it's going to run on top of Linux or Windows. If you actually need two small machines, buy two small machines. Buying one big machine and making it two sounds like a really great idea but from experience it doesn't work out as simple as that. When something fails in your "Box of all trades" you have to take all the VM's down or migrate them somewhere (so actually you needed more than one box.. ironically).
>This would allow businesses to have a strategic hardware platform, but some flexibility on the >operating systems deployed on LPAR's / VM's / Containers etcetera.
Again, the things you can mix will be limited by the hardware you had to start with. If you have x86 hardware you can't magically run all sorts of weird and wonderful OSes unless they have x86 ports that play nicely with whatever hypervisor you have chosen or you have an emulator to run them. Containers are a good idea, you have the ability to create seemingly separate environments (and with Linux Vserver you can run seemingly different OSes in those containers, as long as they're Linux coloured that is) but without the nightmare of trying to get Xen/similar not to throw up every 5 minutes. Still you only really have one machine and you have to down all the virtualised environments to do anything with it.
>You also have the potential of porting applications off older hardware, deploy into a LPAR / VM > / Container etcetera, and you can decommission the old kit.
Only if the old kit was the same arch as the new hardware, or you have an emulator.
>Although, if you were a masochist, you could have a pSeries server, running PowerVM >hypervisor (with HMC for admin), with an LPAR running RH Enterprise LINUX, with that RH >LPAR running VMWare, with a WIndows 2003 / 2008 Server 'guest' operating system installed. >Goodness knows how that would perform :)
Is pSeries hardware Power based by any chance? That would sort of explain why it won't run Windows. Does VMWare even have a PowerPC hypervisor?... VM != portable runtime.
I still can't work out how one machine running multiple processes on a single kernel can be "out utilized" by the same hardware running the same processes on top of multiple kernels. Unless using more memory and cpu time running those kernels counts as utilization? Useful work not happening because of everything waiting on IO is utilization too?
Containers are a good idea, virtualising the whole os isn't unless you have some legacy app that doesn't play nicely.
You could roam on DoCoMo instead? Or Vodafone could do a deal with Softbank (Vodafone Japan is now classed as a "company that ceases to exist" so it's not like Vodafone would be dealing with Vodafone.)
Maybe it's because Japan has zero GSM support... I can't find the list that the register is referring to, but on the page on Vodafone's site about the passport service the list only seems to contain GSM countries and one 3G country.. Japan.
Anyhow, I have o2's unlimited data plan thing (200MB) and never seem to get charged for roaming with it. Which is nice. :)
/me is sitting only a few foot away from a NTT cell site.
>some linuxfanboy said .
A little presumptuous aren't we? I have a feeling the AC was trying to pull legs...
> Who the hell has a registry in the GB size ,
> if you don't know enough about windows to comment, don't
Only Windows users care about this magical "registry" thing that is the cause of all their computing issues, including and not limited to their ability to actually user a computer. Only Windows users' are stupid enough to spend money on tools that "Sweep" their machines.
Also FYI "Linux" is a kernel, I know it's been said a lot but if you're going to attempt one-up-manship you should do your research. There's no such thing as a "Linux fanboi"...
> FYI on my vista desktop which has been installed for over a year
> now and is probably as bloated as it is going to get the registry files
> come out at 82 MB
Well, it's not really the size of the registry file that matters ... it's the fact the Windows keeps most if not all of it's important configuration data there yet seems to lack the ability to manage it properly and then allows tools written by would-be-malware authors to go diddling around in there.
> On another note a basic install of OS X 10.5 is bigger than an install of Vista
Which edition of OSX and Vista? PPC binaries should be bigger than i386 ones due the smaller instruction set, and 32bit i386 binaries should be smaller than 64bit amd64 ones... what is the functionality/per megabyte of each? Without these details your statement means nothing... Sinclair Basic is like 16KB, should we all be running that instead?
> iPhone OS 3.
Which isn't out of beta yet.
> Rokr S9 headphones, check.,
IIRC (the iphone I have hasn't left my desk in a while...) the iPhone has a stupid "barrel" infront of the actual jack so unless your headphones are apple ones or have a connector that'll fit through the barrel you need a little adaptor. Thankfully I can just plug my AudioTechnica headphones that have a fairly standard 90 degree jack straight into my n95. Apparently someone at Nokia realised that all these proprietary connectors for headphones are a real head ache for consumers that just want to plug in a decent set of headphones that doesn't make their ears ring...
> and your iGo 8 and TomTom mobile software are made redundant.
Redundant actually meaning "because apple don't want those applications on their platform they must be bad."
>Tethering is available with iPhone OS 3 as well
Not out of beta yet. It's good that it should finally appear but ... drum roll .. other *cheaper* phones have done it for ages.
> it wasn't available before at the behest of the operators.
Even if that's true, the bluetooth hardware and software on the iPhone are fairly awful. I seem to remember the GPS also not being so hot in the 3G version when it was initially released. Yes, apple products are plagued by the same faults that all other vendors have, shock horror!
> Did you pay outright for your phone? Really?
Maybe he did? How can you be sure either way?
> Didn't think so. In caps so you understand.
For future reference; Writing in caps doesn't make what you write any more correct.
> - YOUR PHONE SOULD HAVE COST YOU AT LEAST £300 BUT IT HAS BEEN
>SUBSIDISED BY YOUR OPERATOR. YOU WILL NOT "OWN" IT UNTIL
>YOU CONTRACT IS UP. There. Quite simple to understand.
Only Apple knows what it should have cost. Chances are it costs around the same to actually produce as most other phones,... I have a feeling the price of SIM-Free phones is magically inflated well above production cost + sensible profit margin to stop people buying high-end handsets and sticking PAYG sims in them. Hint; You can buy high-end-not-bootleg-sim-free handsets cheaply in Asia.
Also, with O2 at least, you can change your contract from an expensive ~50 quid/month contract (you initially need an expensive contract to get one of the better handsets) to a cheaper ~20 quid/month one halfway through the term of the contract. Which would sort of suggest to me that O2 have recouped the money for SUBSIDISED handsets long before the contract ends. Could it be that providing telephony services is actually very cheap and providers dangle shiny things that cost very little to them but seem expensive to you because inflated market prices to sucker you into dropping 50 quid a month for services that cost the provider pennies?
> Besides the Omnia and this LG is just another cheap Korean iPhone rip-off.
Yes, because things made in Korea are bad. Full stop. I hope the iPhone doesn't have any cheap Korean technology inside like a Samsung produced ARM processor, Samsung flash memory ... doh!
>When are you people going to accept that the iPhone is a success
>and that these guy's are merely trying to produce cheap knock-offs?
Well by that logic Innocenzo Manzetti's idea was a success and Apple is producing cheap knock-offs of his idea. Those cheeky barstewards!
Good idea, but..
I can see the point of this, there's no point running huge machines that aren't doing very much and as much as people like to bleat on and on about "VM's" being the best thing since sliced bread I'd say there's very much a place for small machines doing small tasks.
The problem is they went and whacked 2 gigabit NICs on there when there's no way in hell that the atom/chipset can deliver that level of throughput.
"with the (not unreasonable) claim that this improves security and simplicity."
If the OS is secure it shouldn't matter where apps come from, they shouldn't be allowed to do naughty things(tm). Running only signed binaries is a nice feature, but you should still sandbox binaries to stop them doing naugthy things(tm) because not all naugthy things(tm) are intentional. The OS/hardware can't be all that secure as "these guys" are still managing to get privileged access to the OS and run non-apple-signed binaries.
Also WTF is the comment about stolen software about? geez.
@RE: A bit obscure
init=/bin/sh .. or boot an os off of different media and mount the filesystem(s) there instead....
Surprise surprise local access or root access to a machine makes it vulnerable.
N.B. Listening to anything 90% of Mac users have to say is pointless. When Mac's were PPC, they were better for being PPC even though Intel had faster chips out for half the price. Mac OSX is the greatest thing since sliced bread because it's "UNIX" yet most of their populous can't operate bash. And Mac users love to flap their heads about "security" without having the faintest understand of how anything below the brushed metal style buttons works.
The "gay" community..
really do make quite considerable efforts to make themselves look A: Silly, B: "distinct" from "normal" people. Both of which are the reverse of what they would seem to be protesting for.
The best thing I have seen in recent months is two women suing the NHS for not supplying them IVF or something..
 Community meaning the loud minority that attempt to represent everyone with something in common, however minor.
Would anyone buy overpriced generic X86 hardware from Apple when they could get the same specs from a real vendor at better prices? I really doubt there is any application that would force you to run a rack of apple boxes.
And then X inc go bust and you have loads of files in X incs format that you can no longer get software to process,.. there are lots of reasons.
The original intention of Copyrights was the long term benefit of society; Artists, authors etc can protect their works for a "limited" period of time thus enabling them to fund more and more work.. all of which automatically falls into the public domain after the copyright expires and society benefits... All litigation against "pirates" so far has not been from the people you seem so concerned about no being able to make a living, it has been from massive corporate bodies. You know, the massive corporate bodies that take 90% or more of all the money the actual artist generates. So if anyone is ripping off the little man off it's the labels, publishers et al.
Software piracy is a little different I suppose. There are lots of people making money from open source though. So work that out. ;)
I have to agree with jake, unless you have some special app most things will run just fine on any generic i386/amd64 box running some Linux or BSD. You'd probably go for Linux simply because it can work with almost any weird and wonderful hardware you can throw at it.
On the Slowaris thing.... on 32bit SPARCs Linux is a good deal slower than Solaris or NetBSD. Something about the MMU code or something I seem to remember. There again 32bit sparcs were slow as shit in the first place.
What a monkey
"Microsoft followed up telling Forbes that Linux and open source violated 235 patents: 42 in the Linux kernel,"
Fair enough... there's nothing that MS has that doesn't have prior art though.... so they'd be really hard pushed to make any of it stick. Lets not forget a lot of "Linux" work is not done in the US and in countries that these sorts of patents aren't valid.
"Linux graphical user interfaces violated 65,"
As far as I'm aware .... there is no such thing. Oh, you mean desktop environments that run on top of some X implementation. So why not sue Sun?... Apple ship some sort of X11 these days too don't they?
"Open Office 45, various free/open e-mail programs violated another 15,"
Again, Open Office isn't "Linux". You can run openoffice on Windows. And again the people that would have infringed any patents would be Sun. That's if any of the patents could stand up in court, because again, there's a ton of prior art out there.
third or forth time in half a year...
that the register has reported some encryption standard as "broken" and when you read the article it turns out that the author either hasn't understood the attack enough to realise the encryption hasn't been exploited at all or knows that and is trying to cause a stir with the aim of creating traffic. The overall problem with this is that it makes the rest of the articles on the reg look like a joke too.
There again, when you see the amount of morons that come out to flame any "Linux" related article you can see how "sexing up" articles is a good idea for the regs profits.
Why not battery backed ram?
>> Windows is an operating system that retards can use,
So is ubuntu, your point sir?
>> yours isn't however it does have lots of software that's fun to use without an
>> BEng in software engineering.
If you had a BEng in software engineering you might know that an "Operating System" is technically only the part of the platform that runs in protected or supervisor mode, as it's a system that is managing the operation of everything else. Now, as for needing a BEng to use "Linux" software, well a lot of the tools you'd use on "Linux" are also in mainstream use on other platforms, including Windows. Does Firefox running on Linux, Solaris et. all suddenly require a BEng in software engineering to operate because it's not running on Windows?
>> In plain English 'NO ONE GIVES A FUCK ABOUT LINUX,
>> GO AWAY WE'RE TALKING TO GIRLS.'
As you're still "talking to girls", does that mean you haven't managed to get past that stage and actually got into their pants?
As I use Debian, my fiancée must be imaginary...
Why not just do away with "copyrights".
Everyone knows they're now a broken idea. Why not just put them to bed?
@Core Count versus BIOS Count
Yes, because all IO goes through the BIOS.... even on systems that have no "BIOS". doh.
You might want to actually read up on "how computers work" before you wade in next time.
@256 core limit?
That would be bank switching. So 256k of RAM would be 4 banks, which you can only see 64k of at a time. Switching banks isn't free.
He could teach malware authors a thing or two
His method of hiding his "malicious code" is awe inspiring... You would have thought he would have used to his root access to actually hide the payload properly. Deserved to get caught.
Well, maybe if you were talking about LFS. Most Linux distro's and to a lesser extent BSD's come bundled with or have the ability to install and maintain a few thousand applications alongside the base "OS" (Bad terminology as the whole user environment isn't an operating system). Hell, Xorg generally runs without any configuration at all these days.... so your joke, to put it bluntly is pretty shit.
Rich but uses GMail?
I would have thought any "celeb" would be investing in a some hosting for their shizzle. Apparently not.
Firewire is so amazing you managed to not spell it correctly each and every time you wrote it...
> USB vs Firewire
There probably aren't many drives that would like living in a little external box and overwhelm a USB2 port. ATA/SATA -> Firewire bridges seem pretty rare too, I think the only ones worth anything are made by Oxford Semiconductor (Actually a British company iirc) and even those aren't all that good. Well, unless you consider good to be not detecting the drive(s) half the time and not appearing on the Firewire bus the other half . I doubt there are any SoC's with firewire built in for devices like this.
> Gigabit Ethernet
200 MB/sec if you don't have any protocol overheads. Hint; You do.
I have a sneaky feeling the hardware inside this thing is fairly weak. Hence it only does FAT32.
>Hopefully these are little Linux firmware boxes which can be hacked to provide
>some better protocols ... like NFS 8-)
@What a review...
My thoughts exactly. I have a feeling the throughput is not going to be anywhere near either the network connection or the USB connection the drive is connected to. The innards are probably one of the recentish microcontrollers that have built in ethernet and USB hardware.
I would have thought removing totally removing IE from Windows would be impossible now.
I'm not sure how it works in the most recent versions of Windows (I've never been a windows user) but I'm pretty sure it's a fairly integrated part of the graphical shell now. So the best they can do to "unbundle" it is just delete the icon and associations to web-stuffage (tm).
@Snow leopard anyone?
Yes, apple will fix these fundamental architecture issues that Intel and AMD so far haven't. What's more they'll do it totally in software. But wait... once you have enough GPUs on XYZ bus to run OS X super mega edition don't you have the same problem that you have a contended bus and lots of headless chickens (GPUs) running around on that bus?
/me wonders if Mac people realise that a modern Mac is just an Intel reference design in an expensive box.
@Eddie Edwards and @Does that include the cell
The difference with your GPU is that it has a real CPU sitting behind it to manage the work that each of the GPU's units is doing. And,... correct me if I'm wrong, the units within a GPU mostly aren't full "cores" but smaller functional units.
As for the Cell, that's almost the same case isn't it? Not all the units on a Cell are full free standing processors. I believe in Cell-language they're called "elements" and are connected via the Element Interface Bus. Anyways, you can read wikipedia as well as I can... it basically boils down to the Cell is a few actual processors managing the work of lots of co-processors. Remember when we used to use external FPU's?
The problem with current X86 SMP boxes is that you have X number of full-real-processors that have the ability to shit on what it's siblings are currently working on and managing that is not easy. ;)
Ubuntu doesnt have network-manager?
Maybe they missed it out when they mass rsync'd ftp.debian.org... muhahahaha joking!
Anyhow... @all the "I cant do linux" people;
Shouldn't you be looking for a different site to read? honestly, you're reading an "IT" related site and telling your "peers" you can't grasp the fairly simple concepts and methodologies that would allow you to operate pretty much any recent UNIX-ish operating system.
 A term used by people "in the know" to describe "the thing that puts icons on me screen" when it actually doesn't mean that all, again, if you don't understand computers why the hell are you reading an "IT" site.. sigh
immigration don't generally give you a proper reason why your application failed. So if they did give a reason there's probably a lot more to this then he's making out.
Hint; She's probably second/third/something generation Japanese.
I have a feeling a good majority of the applications intended to be run on those X million downloads of glassfish will find that the free version is good enough. So the mails that come from Sun once you've registered your application server trying to convince you to buy one of the paid for versions don't really amount to all that much. Who would pay for a "bigger badder" version they don't need when they can get the "does the job" version for free.
On the other hand, I think a lot of people would consider getting training for glassfish even if they are only running the free edition. Giving people a sample of what that training is sounds like a good idea.
If they haven't got enough power to run their applications on the hardware they have how is virtualising parts of their stack going to make things any better? Other than impose more overhead and administration issues? Running 10 applications + 10 Oses (One for each application) is always going to be slower than 10 applications running on one OS.. We need more container solutions (VServer, Sun's stuff) and less attempts to make x86 hardware do things it really shouldn't be.
Today at the reg... more oh noes!
Yet another story on the reg about some security being broken, "oh noes!!! we're all going to die! somebody think of the children".... and it turns out that it's not really broken at all.
@drivers for windows as well?
> this code would also be useful to create a driver for windows as well?
Unless you're going to use this code to see how the hardware works and write Windows and DirectX bits... which you can download from ATI's site already. ;)
This will be useful for people running some unix + Xorg though. Hopefully we'll see decent drivers across the board (Linux distro's, BSDs, OpenSolaris...)
>I mean, it's hardware control documentation right?
Maybe this should have been pasted from the Slashdot article ->
"This code consists of a demo program that feeds the commands to the hardware, updates to their RadeonHD driver, and a Direct Rendering Manager update. With this code comes working 2D EXA acceleration support..."
So you get some example code that shows you how to talk to the GPU (generic) and then ATI's existing but slightly updated X driver (X/Xorg specific, esp. all the acceleration bits) and their interface to the Linux DRM stuff (Linux specific).
>anyone find a problem with that? Might help us get better stability from windows as well as >linux :D
One driver doesn't instantly rewrite your whole OS... I always wonder who actually rated the stability of "Linux" (Read; any semi-popular distro). Hell, it's sort of silly to even mention the word around third party graphics drivers as they're usually the reason a Linux based desktop falls over.
It's interesting that EA go to such length to stop unauthorised distribution of their works when "back in the day"(TM) their business model worked on the basis that they reversed engineered stuff instead of paying console makers for licenses.
Really? On my broken-EFI macbook .... Mac on, EFI firmware loads grub.efi, select kernel, kernel and initramfs load, bootloader exits. Thats a little bit nicer than relying on the MBR to load this part of the os loader, that then loads that part of the os loader, if that worked it loads the next part of the os loader blah blah blah. It's not as nice as maybe uboot that can load Linux directly but EFI isn't meant to be tied to one operating system is it.
I'm not sure where I said that EFI has a smaller footprint.... but does it really matter in this day and age when we have very large flash memory devices readily available? I'd rather have something bigger that is more robust.
Mac users should feel smug...
because their EFI implementation is fairly busted .... and only just about works? i.e. 64bit machines not being able to run 64bit EFI executables etc and so forth.
Anyhow, you shouldn't want EFI because you can add pretty menu's but because you no longer have to work around 1980's BIOS features, i.e you don't have to have 6 million incremental boot straps to get to a point at which you can load and jump into a kernel. It seems tech people are getting more and more "oh shinny things!" than actually being tech-savvy. *sigh*
Lots of bleating, close to zero facts.
Every article about DS flash carts focuses on the R4... which sort of proves journos do little or no research as there are a wide range of both Slot 1 and Slot 2 flash carts for the DS, and the R4 isn't even that popular any more. You're more likely to see the DSTT being sold at a car boot sale near you(tm).
N.B. A slot 1 device alone is incapable of "copying roms"...
@RE: Clarification please...
>There are kits out there with PC software that let you rip the game from a cartridge and then >put it on an SD micro card.
Unless the kit you're talking about is a usenet or bittorrent client... I think its still necessary to have a DS around to rip the data from the carts because of the process required to unlock the cart before they are read.
Whether these carts are illegal or not would really depend on if they contain any Nintendo IP... The slot2 devices certainly do because they require the Nintendo logo bitmap in the ROM header to boot into GBA mode. In the GB days there were some carts generating that algorithmically apparently, but I've never seen one... The slot one devices are all based around the discoveries of the no$gba author and I don't think they actually infringe any of Nintendo's rights.... if you decide to load infringing material onto the device that's totally up to you, but I'm pretty sure there isn't much in a Slot 1 device that Nintendo can complain about.
scared the shit out of me.
O2 3g coverage
I used to use my n95 on o2 with some ppp script as my main internet connection. I got over 100k/sec on downloads most of the time and I never got told off for using a few gigs a month when the policy says the max is 200mb.
Maybe the antenna design/radio hardware in the iphone is crap? Apple's stuff does look pretty but the build quality is generally only skin deep.
"But a tools developer will see a huge difference, as their market has suddenly grown hugely," Phipps said.
In other words, their tools will now be easily available on Linux as well as Windows."
Most Java development tools are written in Java and thus run on any platform that has a decent JRE/JDK. That's always been the case, I don't see anything different now from the days when non-solaris *nix users had to use the Blackdown Java kit.
For me openjdk has taken the pain out of getting a working Java development environment on a Debian box. Netbeans and Glassfish are in Debian too... for me life is now good.
Stopped reading at..
"Apple produces solid, reliable hardware"
That is hilarious! I wonder what part of anything Apple produce is rock solid? Most of the laptops have cases so flimsy that if you actually move the machine around the screen will crack. You pay a premium to for the prettiness factor and your membership of team mac fanboi and nothing else.
I hate to side with apple...
"The 3G iPhones demand too much power from the 3G bandwidths and the AT&T infrastructure is insufficient to handle this overwhelming 3G signal based on the high volume of 3G iPhones it and Apple have sold."
This guy is an idiot and obviously spends far too much time reading forums on the intaweb... hopefully the *huge 3g signal* coming out of the cult of mac's iphones will give them all brain cancer and this sort of bollocks doesn't keep propagating. I want my 3G bandwidths back!
- Vid Google opens Inbox – email for people too thick to handle email
- RUMPY PUMPY: Bone says humans BONED Neanderthals 50,000 years B.C.
- Pic Forget the $2499 5K iMac – today we reveal Apple's most expensive computer to date
- Geek's Guide to Britain Kingston's aviation empire: From industry firsts to Airfix heroes
- Is your home or office internet gateway one of '1.2 MILLION' wide open to hijacking?