Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done. 😛
Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.
Originally posted by: kamper
Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done. 😛
One is used for hauling away the other?Originally posted by: silverpig
What's the difference between a Honda Civic and a Peterbilt dump truck?
Originally posted by: kamper
Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done. 😛
I would have figured, *nix for the hard working, and Windumb for the lazy
Originally posted by: scottws
I recently set up a VMWare server with Debian Sarge. Then I proceeded to create a virtualized Samba fileserver and a virtualized LAMP server, both also based on Debian Sarge.
My prior Linux experience with Fedora Core 2 involved dependency hell and trying for a month to get 3D acceleration working for my 9800XT (I finally did, and then subsequently broke it again when I updated the kernel) and with Ubuntu involved me trying unsuccessfully for two weeks to get my Broadcom-based wireless card working.
But I was willing to try again from the standpoint of a server rather than a desktop. Honestly, it couldn't be much easier. I had both the VMWare server OS and application install and the virtualized filesharing guest OS and Samba application install both configured and completed in under five hours. The LAMP server was a bit more problematic because there were a lot more applications to install and configure there, but I have that running as well.
I probably wouldn't have been able to do any of it without help found via Google and on this board as well, but armed with the information it was actually quite easy.
So, I'm all for Linux as a server. As a desktop though, I've had a much less friendly experience.
Originally posted by: spikespiegal
I would have figured, *nix for the hard working, and Windumb for the lazy
I'm assuming from the arrogance of that remark that:
- Your parents paid for your college eduction
- You don't have one
- You couldn't run a small Windows network better than the company janitor
- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job
- Most of the above
I've been in the IT industry long enough to see small/mid/large companies I've worked with evolve in many directions from the early 90's. The most obvious demographics from a corporate standpoint are that a small/mid company can now run their entire infrastructure on Windows servers and clients with lightweight SQL clients that cost a fraction to maintain -vs- their Unix and AS400 systems of yester year. They might be held hostage by Microsoft's goofy licensing agreements, but they aren't held hostage by some fat, over-paid Unix developer who only knows the source code, and the MS licenses are cheaper.
What hasn't changed is many college IT departments are still run by old fart technology nazi's who promote Unix/Linux over evil Microsoft, which is another contributing factor to why many corporations would rather out-source to India and get better talent than recent college graduates. I mean, I run 70+ desktops and all applications off a single Windows server that hasn't gone down since it was built 4 years ago, and these punk college kids tell me how awesome Unix is because they have to reboot their XP laptop mommie and daddy got for them twice a day.
Next, most people I know who own Windows computers did not own a computer prior to that running a different OS. This fact alone makes me chuckle, and is akin to motorcycle owners complaining that cars had an illegal monopoly because first time vehicle owners choose 4 wheels over 2.
The rest is basically tripe. The amount of 'freeware' available for Linux has never impressed me much because most if the good stuff has Win32 ports anyways (Open Office, Apache, etc), and my license costs for real corporate applications cost the same regardless of what platform I'm running them on. I mean, you can't even run a basic Windows app like Photoshop on Linux without having to trick it into thinking it's running on Windows in the first place, and I'd get fired if I forced our graphics dept to use Gimp.
So, what we have here is if a company or user "chooses" to use Microsoft, then according to you they are stupid and lazy. So basically "choice" is choosing the platform that gives you a job supporting it.
Originally posted by: spikespiegal
I would have figured, *nix for the hard working, and Windumb for the lazy
I'm assuming from the arrogance of that remark that:
- Your parents paid for your college eduction
- You don't have one
- You couldn't run a small Windows network better than the company janitor
- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job
- Most of the above
I've been in the IT industry long enough to see small/mid/large companies I've worked with evolve in many directions from the early 90's. The most obvious demographics from a corporate standpoint are that a small/mid company can now run their entire infrastructure on Windows servers and clients with lightweight SQL clients that cost a fraction to maintain -vs- their Unix and AS400 systems of yester year. They might be held hostage by Microsoft's goofy licensing agreements, but they aren't held hostage by some fat, over-paid Unix developer who only knows the source code, and the MS licenses are cheaper.
What hasn't changed is many college IT departments are still run by old fart technology nazi's who promote Unix/Linux over evil Microsoft, which is another contributing factor to why many corporations would rather out-source to India and get better talent than recent college graduates. I mean, I run 70+ desktops and all applications off a single Windows server that hasn't gone down since it was built 4 years ago, and these punk college kids tell me how awesome Unix is because they have to reboot their XP laptop mommie and daddy got for them twice a day.
Next, most people I know who own Windows computers did not own a computer prior to that running a different OS. This fact alone makes me chuckle, and is akin to motorcycle owners complaining that cars had an illegal monopoly because first time vehicle owners choose 4 wheels over 2.
The rest is basically tripe. The amount of 'freeware' available for Linux has never impressed me much because most if the good stuff has Win32 ports anyways (Open Office, Apache, etc), and my license costs for real corporate applications cost the same regardless of what platform I'm running them on. I mean, you can't even run a basic Windows app like Photoshop on Linux without having to trick it into thinking it's running on Windows in the first place, and I'd get fired if I forced our graphics dept to use Gimp.
So, what we have here is if a company or user "chooses" to use Microsoft, then according to you they are stupid and lazy. So basically "choice" is choosing the platform that gives you a job supporting it.
- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job
Actually, don't have any problems 🙂Originally posted by: Nothinman
Will it? I don't know off the top of my head. But can it? I'm sure it's possible if someone wanted to put the time into writing the code to handle it. But you should look at fixing your first two problems first,Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.
Thanks for bringing that up. I will seriously consider your advice.the main problem being that you're using Java
I don't really want to use emacs, I'm just trolling.and the second being that you want to use emacs. =)
I can offer at least one concrete example to the contrary. Last summer I worked at a very large financial institution which was in a full scale movement from *IBM to *Microsoft, mostly because it's way cheaper. Oddly, "linux" is still a bit of dirty word there.Originally posted by: drag
- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job
You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.
Originally posted by: kamper
I can offer at least one concrete example to the contrary. Last summer I worked at a very large financial institution which was in a full scale movement from *IBM to *Microsoft, mostly because it's way cheaper. Oddly, "linux" is still a bit of dirty word there.Originally posted by: drag
- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job
You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.
The bits of it that I saw were AIX/MQ/DB2 out in favour of IIS/.NET/SQL Server. The .net backend with webservices has been way more reliable than the old mq/powerbuilder stuff (granted, pb is not IBM's fault). The front end of what I worked on still runs on websphere, but I got the sense that it was only still there because the migration cost would be too big.Originally posted by: drag
Originally posted by: kamper
I can offer at least one concrete example to the contrary. Last summer I worked at a very large financial institution which was in a full scale movement from *IBM to *Microsoft, mostly because it's way cheaper. Oddly, "linux" is still a bit of dirty word there.Originally posted by: drag
- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job
You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.
I bet it won't be cheaper in the long run though. And I bet it was a desicion made by generally non-technical people also. Were I work they'd laugh at you if you wanted the business to depend on something very important that would have to run on Windows. Actually I have a higher opinion of Windows then the administrators were I work.
Ancedotal evidence isn't realy usefull. For every thing you hear one way, you'll hear another the other way.
I know for financial institutions you have a big push for removing things like cutting down on the mail and moving to more pure electronic transfers and such. For example you can take pictures of checks in a high speed sorting machine and make that information directly aviable to customers online or at a ATM/Koisk or whatever. A lot of this IBM stuff that is getting replaced is just legacy hardware and people are selling slicker-looking stuff that uses Windows OS for console and automation control.
I have a freind that works at a place like that. In his case it's mostly IBM mail sorting machines and related items getting replaced by more modern stuff that uses Windows for the terminal or whatever. In that case it's not AIX being replaced by Windows, it's OS/2 Warp being replaced by Windows.
But I don't know what they run for big databases backends or whatnot. I don't know what exactly is being replaced in your case either.