Slashdot Mirror

I like KDE myself, & am more of a "Windows Zealot" than Linux... some of you guys may 'beat on me for that' but it's how it is here @ least. Why?

Wealth of applications & quality (here is where you'll beat on me, the latter term no doubt), but the fact of the matter is, there just is MORE out there for Windows folks' to choose from & use, with more hardwares. NOT only in commercially produces wares, but also shareware/freeware ones too!

E.G.-> Linux has come MANY A MILE since I used it in Slackware 1.02 iirc, around 1994, especially in terms of driver support/hardware & mostly imo, having Plug-N-Play.

Kernel function re-entrancy's a reality, thus enterprise-class competition from Linux is possible.

Using the ANCIENT Unix SELECT functions @ the kernel level for thread scheduling (correct me if I am wrong here, because I remember it was being used to 'work-around' asynchronous scheduling of threads I/O & less "wait-states", rather than using what NT-based Os' did in completion ports, no upper limits theoretically here) has been corrected afaik also!

I am TRULY impressed by what's been done from say, 2.2 to current 2.6 builds of Linux's core in effect.

However, I'm going to say (and use) what I wrote here, years ago, IF you care to read it, in regards to the old MindCraft tests (Linux vs. Windows NT etc.):

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:5UgbsPzJ2_8J:l inuxtoday.com/stories/5906.html+%22Alexander+Peter +Kowalski%22+and+%22Linux%22&hl=en

One of the Linux dudes said one of the SMARTEST things I ever heard from the Penguin crowd, and to his peers, when I stated something along the lines of "NT: Inevitable it will win" due to the tremendous ca$h & talent resources MS can acquire, & to my 'naysayers' he stated:

"SHUT UP, and start coding"

(And I heartily agreed.... talking accomplishes squat, building creates what you need!)

This IS what Linux needs: Less spreading of gossip like women spouting slogans & "F.U.D.", & more development & contribution to it by guys like yourselves. And, imo?

Making Linux & Windows interoperate SEAMLESSLY as is possible. Neither one's going away.

I.E.-> Learn to code, get into it (since it is an 'open-source effort', you truly DO have every opportunity to contribute...

(& before you say to yourself "I could never code as good as those guys do", don't bullshit yourselves: You could come up with something really nice that others have overlooked! It IS possible, & something folks would really like & use!))

Plus? I personally think KDE is wonderful. The best UNIX type desktop there is imo, is MacOS X's Aqua based stuff, but KDE is nice.

Easy 'turn-around time' to learn, especially if you came out of a Win32 based OS (9x-2003) type shell, as it is VERY like it.

KDE's going to grow/improve, not only by being modded further (e.g.-. Plasma etc.) & how? NOT only modding KDE itself, but building apps for & around it.

With folks contributing to it via the REALLY nice tools out there for development for it nowadays, which imo, for application building, are:

1.) Kylix

or

2.) RealBasic

Problem is: I think LINUX folks are TOO C/C++ (or even PERL) centric! Way too much so!

BUT, this makes sense: The OS is written largely in those languages/tools... but, for "RAD" app creation, which is what this OS needs imo @ least?

You cannot TOUCH rapid application development tools... why? Faster turn-around time, with pre-built "LEGOS" you can use to build interface functions that are PROVEN & STABLE/WORK, leaving you to concentrate on engine/algorithms work, rather than building the interface (or, other non-visible functions) by hand/from scratch! THAT, takes time, ti

For those that haven't seen it, there is a "review" comparing a Mac 128k vs. a brick. It's available here (Google cache).

AGP (1x) does 254.3MBps, PCI (v1.0) does 127.2MBps. CD data is 172.4KBps. So PCI does 738 CD streams, while AGP does 1475. At 128Kbps, each stream IO is 192.4KBps duplex, so AGP: 1322 encoder streams, PCI 661 encoder streams. A P4/3GHz does 6GFLOPS, including host apps (OS, etc), while a $115 GeForce FX5900 does 20GFLOPS; a $470 GeForce 6800 Ultra does 40GFLOPS. Even at the slowest AGP and PCI speeds, and the fastest theoretical GPGPU speeds, the GPU is still slower than the bus, and 5 of those cards in PCI would have to do over 100 streams each to fill the bus, even leaving 25% PCI capacity for the host P4. That's over 500 streams for about $1000, which can't be done any other way I know of.

Again and still, it's the object (nucleus) that has potential energy, not the force.

You stated: you get a lot more energy per nucleus from fission then from fusion.

I hope you didn't put that on your exam. The amount energy PER EVENT is greater for fission. But the amount PER NUCLEON is 7 TIMES GREATER for fusion than for fission.
A quick google search...
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:pY7eiZtxh8kJ:w ww.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae534.cfm+&hl =en

Their definition of "Customers want stuff" is much different from, say, a mom&pop electronics store, or Weird Stuff Warehouse or HalTed Specialties.

Unfortunately, Fry's seems to have stopped carrying 10-hour VHS tapes. Sure, they were only "standard quality" instead of higher-end tape, but they worked really well for setting the VCR to record when you're going to be gone for a while.

I use VHS to backup my computer.

Here is Google's cache of the actual Python script used to generate the wallpapers:

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:fWrAVd4XgzUJ:g merge.2ni.net/gmerge.py+gmerge.py&hl=en&client=fir efox-a

And here is a coralized version:

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:fWrAVd4XgzUJ:g merge.2ni.net/gmerge.py.nyud.net

For informational use only :)

Here is Google's cache of the actual Python script used to generate the wallpapers:

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:fWrAVd4XgzUJ:g merge.2ni.net/gmerge.py+gmerge.py&hl=en&client=fir efox-a

And here is a coralized version:

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:fWrAVd4XgzUJ:g merge.2ni.net/gmerge.py.nyud.net

For informational use only :)

Cache of the site.

But it might be slashdotted too.

I coincidently not long ago wrote a paper

Yeah, really? Which journal was your 'paper' published in...?

Because all I saw when I looked at it was:

"Describes how RSA is used for signle sign-on. This article is written [...]" (emphasis mine)

I'm not a cryptographer by any means, but IIRC DSA was put together by NSA as an algorithm that was "crippled" to only do signatures, but not encryption, and there was some controversy because at first NSA wouldn't admit to being the designer, instead NIST was pretending to be one, and then later someone discovered a way to somehow leak bits and it is still a mystery whether this was intentional on the part of NSA or not.