Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
This isn't really news. The PS3 also ran FreeBSD, as did the PS2.
The PS2 didn't run FreeBSD, and while it has long been suspected that the PS3 operating system is derived from FreeBSD there's no categorical proof.
I don't notice a big boost to BSD given by the most popular unix derivative, OSX.
You didn't look very hard then. A lot of code from Darwin (the underlying Unix like part of OS X) has made it back into FreeBSD. This includes significant changes in the kernel, particularly around the VM subsystem - this has a lineage that stretches back to Mach, the BSD derived micro-kernel.
MacOS X is a FreeBSD-derivitive.
No it isn't. Both OS X and FreeBSD are BSD4.3 derivatives. They were then updated with code from BSD4.4. When NeXTSTEP / OpenStep was rebranded as OS X, the userland was updated with code from NetBSD (another BSD4.3 derivative) as that code had more recent features and was very portable. Later on, the userland started to be updated with code from FreeBSD, since it had become more portable in the meantime.
With the new Laravel PHP framework winning RoRs and CodeIgnitor converts by the thousands
Everyone and their brother seems to have moved to Git
I've seen a lot of proprietary development moving to Mercurial, but haven't heard of anyone moving to Git. The latter seems to be much more popular for Open Source stuff.
We never intended for a support contract to be required to keep JDK 7 up to date
Then provide bloody YUM and APT repos for easy upgrading on RedHat, CentOS and Debian based systems. Even Adobe can manage that for the poxy Flash plugin.
Since when did Slashdot become horribly biased in supporting Israel?
It's a US website, and having witnessed first hand how fucked up the teaching of history and reporting of foreign affairs is in that country I'm not surprised that it's biased. As an example, a couple of years ago a new book on the Anglo-American war of 1812 was published. It got a write up in a US paper where it was lambasted for not repeating the mantra that the British started the war. In actual fact, the documentary evidence proves that it was a war of aggression by the US that attempted to annex Canada while the British were struggling against Napoleon. The plan backfired, as the poorly organised US land forces were repeatedly defeated by determined Candian colonials backed later by hardened troops from Wellingtons Iberian army. Meanwhile the Royal Navy ravaged the US coast unopposed and Royal Marines torched Washington in revenge for similar actions by US forces at the start of the war. The war was subsequently portrayed as a victory by the US, despite achieving nothing more than a status quo ante bellum (the British could have pressed for concessions by threatening to use further forces freed up from the Napoleonic wars, but saw the whole thing as a sideshow and were content with the resultant treaty). The US maintained plans for annexing Canada as recent as the 1930s, and there was even strong public opinion in favour of putting the plan into action in the first two years of the Second World War.