Don't talk back?
Don't talk back?
So hairy you want MS html, MS Css, things that only work on win32, etc?
Bill Gates is what caused MS to focus on being proprietary and monopolistic! He was the one who broke ASCII so you needed dos2unix and unix2dos on purpose to make porting hard. He made Sco Xenix broken so it would be harder to port apps to solaris and irix.
You may hate the new CEO but he is open sourcing things, supporting Freebsd and Linux to azure, porting PowerShell to Linux and Ubuntu to Windows, creating ms code editor to Linux and Mac OSx, and Android and mono development to visual studio 2015.
Bill Gates would reverse this.
Personally MS is making much better applications. Windows is the only issue based on 2 things which a QA team and less spyware can fix. Keep in mind your phone and Browser do the same things. If MS needs to fund this they should sell different versions
Fanboy cheerleaders coming up
Freebsd 10.3 worked fine from your beloved OS before upgrading.
Never ever upgrade is a common SOP of IT since things always break. Sorry but just because you like BSD doesn't mean it's magical and laws of complexity do not apply.
Have any proof?
People not successful always quote this and blame others and not themselves for not being wealthy.
But fact is the so called inside doesn't care. They got theirs and that's all that matters. Go create a business or work like they do for the same results.
Mine is a 2011, and was due for replacement a year ago. I converted from Linux to Mac in '07, and am about ready to convert back. The hardest part will be replacing the iTunes files that are in m4a format. They may be DRM-free, but that doesn't mean players other than ipods can actually play them. Figure I can just buy the CD's I need, or download from Amazon MP3.
Not the most expensive mistake I've made.
If you don't have a job, "relocation" is a bus ticket. But very few people move to improve their circumstances.
Not true. If you don't believe me, look at the statistics for worker mobility - they correlate strongly with wealth. Poor people are a lot more reliant on their support networks (family, friends, and so on). If they're in a poorly paying job, then they probably can't afford to take a month to look for a new one in the new location (especially with the real possibility that they won't find one). If they don't have a job, then there's a strong psychological pressure not to move to places with fewer jobs and there's likely to be a delay in receiving unemployment benefit as these things are typically administered locally.
In contrast, someone like a typical Slashdot poster can afford to stay in a hotel room for a week or two (or have an employer willing to pay the cost) while they look for somewhere to live and will typically be able to find a job before they start moving.
Oh, if we're willing to tax the first dollar of earnings (over the UBI), it's far more credible. But right now the majority pays effectively no income tax, so that would be a massive change.
UBI itself is a massive change, so it's weird to think that you'd introduce it without introducing massive changes. Most proposals for UBI have it replace the tax-free allowance. You might have a very small tax-free allowance on top of it, but generally the way of balancing the books involves paying tax on all earned income.
But the good ones are either simply not there anymore because they left, or they are not working in coding outsourcing because it pays badly
That's not quite true. The problem is that most Indian outsourcing firms are really crap places to work. They have huge staff turnover (as in, close to 100% over the course of a month). If you set up an office in Bangalore, have a mixture of people who moved out there and know your company and locals who know the environment, then you can still hire a lot of competent people. You'll probably be paying them a few times more than the local outsourcing sweatshops, but it's still cheap. You can also do the same thing on a smaller scale if you work with individuals and build a long-term relationship (pay them a 10-20% of a Silicon Valley salary and they'll have a standard of living vastly better than they'd get if they moved to the USA, so there's no big incentive for them to leave India and their family / friends).
But if you go with one of the big outsourcing outfits, or just do short-term contracts, you're likely to get either people who don't have the skills, or ones that do but will be gone before the end of the project because they've got a much better offer from somewhere else.
Problem is, the math doesn't work. Lets say we pay out 100% of current federal revenue as UBI (setting aside the fact we'd still need Medicare etc). That's just over $10,000 per citizen. Is that even a subsistence wage?
In a lot of the country, yes. UBI would likely be accompanied by a redistribution of people. Currently, poor people are the least mobile: they aren't being headhunted by companies willing to pay relocation costs and they aren't able to speculatively move somewhere with lower costs of living and hope that there will be jobs waiting. With UBI, they would be able to guarantee that they'd have that $10K/year wherever they were and move to places where it would give them a higher standard of living.
You're also assuming that you'd be giving everyone a net increase of $10K/year. I'd expect that under a workable UBI proposal I'd have a bit less take-home income because my tax rate would go up slightly.
Tell that legend to the people who have jobs in the Bay Area but cannot afford to live there
Here's a secret: a lot of Bay Area companies will happily pay 80% of a Bay Area salary for competent people to live somewhere where the cost of living is 10% that of the Bay. They're happy, because they're paying you less than if you were local (even if they're paying for a few of you to rent an office, the cost will be a tiny fraction of the expense of a desk in the Bay Area). You're happy because your take-home pay is vastly more (and you don't have to live in the Bay Area).
Tell that to techs finding their entry level jobs simply don't exist any more.
That's really the problem, and it's been a problem for well over a decade (and not just in IT-related fields): companies want to hire experienced people, they don't want to hire inexperienced people and train them.
Yeah because of IE 6 - 8.
So yes if the site works don't break it! But, that doesn't mean it's used for new projects for modern browsers and mobile apps. Typescript and angular are what the cool kids are using these days
I did an apt-get install Apache2 and it installed
Now I didn't check to see if it worked as a have separate VM's of turnkey Linux appliances for those. MS wanted to include this because they are worried of becoming irrelevant to young millennials who make web pages and mobile apps so things like Apache was one of the goals of making WSL in the first place.
It doesn't seem like much of a surprise that starting a fight between POSIX and NT ACLs is going to end badly; but this 'review' fails pretty dramatically at answering the question of how much of a problem this is.
If you can't, in practice, let the Linux side touch the Windows side, or vice versa, lest ugly and inscrutable things happen, then you might as well just run a VM. If you can actually do a variety of interesting things across systems, so long as you avoid a few edge cases, that is potentially more useful.
Mod parent up.
I was thinking something similiar and not having CHMOD change an attribute is a feature.
NTFS and the NT kernel do not understand Unix ACLs and permissions. If you Chmod something you can break it as the NTFS.SYS driver will assume the data is corrupt.
While I think the WSL is a fun hack it is not practical as both systems were never designed to work with each other. Modern Windows is more akin to VMS than to Unix even if they do share some same features the implementations are different
To iterate is human, to recurse, divine. -- Robert Heller