He obviously ran out of arguments for his software so he has to claim that all existing software (and most DNS-Server right now are open source) is bad and _therefore_ his software must be great.
It's a train of arguments used by many people in the past: "Witches are bad, therefore we are good when we burn them." "The terrorists are evil, therefore we are good whatever we do."
Now this is paired with an idiot who doesn't even know the difference between free software and freeware.

So you're convinced that hanging on to connectors created 10 or more years ago on laptops is a good engineering design call?

They are a good design call until more people than not don't NEED it.

Here's some light reading on the topic for ya.

I have nothing against displayport. I have nothing against the progress it represents. You seem to think I somehow dislike displayport or progress in general. That couldn't be further from the truth. All 3 monitors on my desk are hooked up via DVI. And my newest one supports both displayport and hdmi as well, so it should be forward compatible with my next video card too.

But it ALSO has a VGA port, which has proven useful on many occasions. And its good to have that legacy option, because despite the fact that its 'obsolete' its still MASSIVELY IN USE. And that's on a stationery device that never goes anywhere, where having an adapter or two isn't actually inconvenient, nor apt to be left behind or misplaced. Virtually all monitors and projectors you encounter right now take VGA and will have a VGA cable hanging off them ready to plug into your laptop... so yes that is the most sensible port to put on the laptop.

If they want to add displayport too, that's awesome.

Oh yeah, that article ends with three or four advertisements for places that sell cables... cheaper than Apple's.

Glad to see you are coming around to my original argument then. That Apple grossly overcharges for them.

Locking is a solved problem in most Database Management Systems. I think you are worried about the wrong layer of your application. Web and Application code is most often agnostic to how records are retrieved, updated, and locked for concurrency. For reference, look up the ACID properties of a typical RDBMS.

Absolutely correct, but that just means that there has to be server-side locks for the commitment phase (4-6), it doesn't impact the client-side. This has an implication for performance of the commitment phase, but luckily, database vendors have been struggling with efficient implementation of commit for years, so using the transaction features of whatever database is used for storage should resolve most of those problems (i.e. check and update the version number in the database in a single transaction).

We ran into the same problem.
What we finally did is lock the editing page, so that if someone else had it opened you were not allowed to update it until they removed the lock on that page.
Or the user could over ride the page lock if they felt pretty sure that the other user was not using it for editing ( Maybe they just had it open on their desktop).
In a table we put the page, user identification, and timestamp when the lock was created.
So whenever the page was opened, it checked the table to see if it was locked. If it was locked, then it displayed header showing who had it locked and how long they have had it.
We generally only have 3 to 4 users that may open a page for editing and they soon learn that if you are going to edit something after it has been sitting for some time to update the page.
We should probably update this with ajax so that at least the header of the page tells the user someone else has taken the lock.
But currently happens though is that the page won't update if it doesn't have a lock and the user has to go back if and start over if someone stole the lock. So far I haven't heard of it happening, because they usually open or update right before they start editing so they know they have the lock.
But handling it in this manner has greatly reduced our problems.


Yeah, it's amazing how if you think it could happen it will. And most of our problems, I think, were caused by users opening the same page on multiple computers and then instead of closing the page, they were updating the page with the old information.

That depends on which way you are crossing and if you are a citizen of the nation your are crossing into. If you are an American citizen then the laws about search and seizure do apply so there are some limits. That said I don't think that these would in all likelihood violate those limits.

They lost the time value of the revenue over 18 months. If you were smart, and anticipated it, you paid the debt *and* collected interest.

960GB of RAM should be enough for anybody!

Pretty cool huh? it shows in clear to you, but stars to us!

I don't know about you, but I think the "shot in the arm" PC gaming needs is a serious divergence from console gaming in terms of titles, but it needs to take a big cue from console games in terms of fitting game design to the platform at hand.

Here's a useless antecdote: Need for Speed Shift just came out. Yay me, I love Need for Speed. So I bought it for my PC, which has an SLI pair of not-to-terribly-old nVidia graphics cards and should be pefectly capable of playing Shift. Surprise! It doesn't work. Presents me with a cute little "shift.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close" dialog every time I try to run it. Tried reinstalling video drivers, changing driver versions, updating Windows, reinstalling the game, reinstalling Windows entirely. No go.

Meanwhile, the kids with their Xboxes (those that aren't red-ringing) and their PS3's (that may have cost a zillion dollars) can just stick the disk in the drive, press power, and play the damn game.

Why can't we do this with PC games? Every major PC title I can think of in recent years has suffered from a pile porting, control, stability, and feature issues from launch, some of them continuing to this day. (GTA4 on the PC, anyone?) PC gaming needs to diverge from the "blockbuster title" mentality of current console games, and more importantly break away from just being a pile of (usually lousy) ports of games that are already available on consoles. I should not have to hack around, troll forums, download patches, and sacrifice a chicken to my video card drivers just to be able to play a recently released game. And when I get it working, I should not wind up with a lousy watered-down console port that isn't optimized in any way for my hardware, limits my control schemes, handles mouse and joystick input all weird (if it supports mouse or joystick input at all!), yet is still somehow incapable of playing online against the version of the same title running on everyone else's console.

Games need to be tailored to the hardware. And not just the video hardware or operating system or what have you for speed and stability, but to the control hardware (mouse and keyboard), display hardware (high resolution monitor relatively close to the user), and operating environment (running along with other applications, probably competing with torrent, IM, browser, and other software).

Pretty much the only outfit doing this properly is Valve, with the Steam platform. Steam is (relatively) stable, the Source engine runs on all kinds of hardware, all of the Valve designed games on it are designed foremost for the PC taking advantage of mouse-and-keyboard, it plays nice with other applications running alongside it, and it provides a community, downloadable content, free games, updates, and other shit people actually want via its network connection and not just more DRM (though it has that, too).

As much as it pains me to admit it and as much as I liked Bioshock, Fallout 3, Grid, NFS: Carbon, etc., the last game I really had a good PC gaming experience with was Half Life 2. Well, that and Plants Vs. Zombies. But you get the idea.

Forget the hardware. Let's get the software right.

Persistence of Vision is a ray tracing application that has a cluster version - that was used for a while for demoing and benchmarking the performance and scalability of clusters. It's a damn fine way to demo a Beowulf cluster, and if you actually need a bunch of images rendered it is pretty nice once you have it configured and running.

I did exactly that for a project in school a few years ago. It was pretty sweet demo, and it felt good to finally have built a Beowulf cluster of my own.

Actually, you are mistaken. Breaking the law does not make you a criminal. There are criminal offences and non-criminal offenses.

If I remember correctly, you CAN make a modern violin sound just as good as a Strativarius, but it takes extremely meticulous work to build such a violin from wood. I believe that Samuel Zygmuntowicz in Brooklyn, NY is one of a very few select people that could pull it off; indeed, it takes nearly a year just to build ONE Zygmuntowicz violin.

Now, I wonder why nobody has bothered to equal the sound of a Strativari instrument by building one out of all composite materials such as carbon fiber, epoxy resins, advanced plastics and aerospace-quality ceramics....

and more women. Plus a whole new level of drunkenness.

Thank you. I understand. As many times as I read the sentence I kept interpreting it as "dropping OPENSTEP / Obj-C for [i.e. in favor of] Windows." Was that before or after M$ dropped a bunch of dollar bills on Apple?