Slashdot Mirror

Agreed. I think a lot of people confuse an end of production with an end of support. From their Merger FAQ page:

"We are committed to ensuring that HP and Compaq products are supported according to the terms and conditions under which they were purchased."

I truely believe they will follow through with that promise.

Here's a PA-RISC to Itanium roadmap Most big corporations prefer to wait and watch, and PA-RISC is good enough for those. And the migration path looks promising too; no code/data migration, just change the CPU board and you're done.

I'm glad I've still got my HP48G because I'm pretty sure they stopped making them. Such a great calculator!
I spent hours programming that thing (while I should've been doing my math homework).

And if it wasn't for the 48G introducing me to RPN, I wouldn't have known wtf to do when I discovered dc in my /usr/bin.

Ah, fond memories.

Interesting note: If the head of the math department has an HP48 program that he distributes (via IR) to all incoming students, and a student can get their hands on the teacher's calculator and replace said program with a slightly trojaned version that quietly installs a timebomb (as an "alarm", so even if the home directory is emptied it remains) with an offensive message to be displayed long after said student graduates from school, well, I wouldn't know what happens, because I don't go to school there anymore. But I bet that at 8.30am if a bunch of calculators started beeping and displaying anti-compulsory-education propaganda all at once, it would be a pretty funny sight.

I went to the new HP site, clicked on products, and I saw a link for calculators; looks like they're still there.

This sounds a bit like Cooltown which is HPs project to get everything connected. It's pretty Linux-centric too. The UK magazine has Cooltown as it's cover feature this month.

I thought HP had been looking into this for some time now in their CoolTown project (althgouh the HP tags aren't smart yet, because of cost issues).

8) Buy Compaq.

They already beat Sun to it. Sorry, Bowie. ;)

The HP Linux Strategy breafing is a very interesting video ... which I can't watch because it is in Windows Media Player format.

Linux support is kind of hit and miss right now with larger companies. For instance, HP is adding more linux support than ever to their printers, even the office jets, but if you go buy a scanner, they don't support it. Obviously, the community supports a lot of HP scanners, but not the company.

HP is also supporting RedHat on it's new Itanium servers, and also supports RedHat with its mid-range storage arrays. They seem to be testing the waters, and I think they are doing all right for such a large and slow moving company.

Samsung is also supporting their printers, by offering Linux drivers and Linux phone support (minimal, but it is there). This is a good thing.

Qlogic and Emulex both support linux with some of their fibre channel HBA's.


So as you can see, you kind of have to pick and choose who you get our stuff from. The corporations are still in the "test the waters" phase for the most part, before they dive in to linux head first. They don't want to get burned by wasting money doing all the work if it will not pay off. In another 3 years, I think Linux support will be fairly mainstream as far as business server and workstation equipment go, but it may still be hit and miss in the consumer market (i.e. webcams, cheap USB scanners, cheapo printers, etc.)

I own an HP Pavilion n5270. I've had it since Feb of 2001. I've had Windows 98, ME, and XP on it without a hitch. Mandrake 8.0 even worked fine.

Back when I bought it, I was basically sold on the 15" display, the 20GB hard drive, the DVD player and the video out. Up until Feb of 2002, everything worked fine (less the occational dvd player lockup). Then a support for a key broke off (a little plastic thinggy that holds the key on and level).



Let me back up for a sec here. Mid January of 2002, I was working on my g/f's uncle's notebook (IBM T series). He basically just got it and spilt pop all over it. To make a long story short, the only thing that was actually fried was his keyboard.

I called up IBM and told them I needed a replacement. They only needed a name, an address, and a serial number. All they asked in return was that the broken keyboard got sent back to them (with included prepaid shipping).



Now back to the HP notebook. I wrote to HP requesting a new keyboard, or a simple piece of interlocking plastic (worth less than $.01). They stated that I needed to send in my entire notebook so they could assess it. I replied stating that I have been working on computers for many years now and I just need a replacement (mainly due to the fact that they could not give me a repair time frame). I also said I'd pay for any cost or shipping needed.

I recieved a reply stating that "The keyboard is not a user replaceable part. The unit will need to go into service." Doing some searching led me to HP Partsurfer. Selecting United States, and entering "F2363M" for the model number will bring you to what I saw. You can purchase ANY parts for the notebook here. I replied to them stating that I found it odd that something that was not a user replacable part could be purchased by a user (ultimately to replace something).

Anyway, after going around with their "support" people, I finally decided to replace the key support with another and glue it down.

The most astonishing thing I discovered was that this partsurfer.hp.com was gouging unsuspecting customers. If you click on the arrow next to "List all parts", you can see what I mean. When was the last time you saw a 256MB so-dimm for $650 or $1188?? Or an 800Mhz Mobile Pentium III for $950??? How about an 802.11b access point for $1135????? I don't recall prices EVER being that high. I understand a markup, but this is rediculous.



I was in the market for a new workgroup laser printer (and some workstations). Even after mentioning that I would take HP off of the list of possible vendors, I was still treated like crap. I hope they're happy with a small piece of plastic causing a $20,000 loss. Oh well, HP and Compaq will never enter into our product lists again.

-Clif

Here's a link to their general recycling program for laser and ink cartridges and PC hardware: http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/community/environment/rec ycle/index.htm.

HP is a bit expensive - to take a single PC, monitor and inkjet printer they'll charge US$59. For more than 10 pieces (say 5 old PCs, 3 old monitors, and 3 old printers) they have a custom quote page, so I assume prices get lower from there.

Here's a link to their general recycling program for laser and ink cartridges and PC hardware: http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/community/environment/rec ycle/index.htm.

HP is a bit expensive - to take a single PC, monitor and inkjet printer they'll charge US$59. For more than 10 pieces (say 5 old PCs, 3 old monitors, and 3 old printers) they have a custom quote page, so I assume prices get lower from there.

The difference between a Pareto distribution and a power law distribution is that in a Pareto distribution, the probability P[X > x] ~ x^-k, (that is, the probability that a observed value is greater than x is proportional to the inverse power of x) whereas a power law is P[X == x].

And a Zipf law is a power law on ranks, rather than values.

Lada Adamic of HP has an excellent how-to on power law distibutions you might find interesting.

• http://www.hp.com/products1/servers/operating/hpux . tml

• http://www.hp.com./products1/servers/operating/hpu x.html

• http://www.hp.com/products1/servers/operating/hpux . tml

• http://www.hp.com./products1/servers/operating/hpu x.html

For sure, the stuff IBM is doing is really awesome. I wasn't really disputing that fact. However, you have to admit other companies are doing a lot of things too. The way I look at it, they're strikers on the same team.

Why don't you read this section of an article on Linux and Wireless networks before you conclude that AirPort cards are just rebadged WaveLAN cards. They changed the interface, and aren't driven by the WaveLAN drivers.
Of course, you're probably close enough for Slashdot.

And you're right about Windows/Linux emulating Linux/Windows - because Wine and VMWare are *so* fast.

What does VMWare have to do with this? It runs at a totally different level from any built-in executable support. A better comparison would be the Linux emulation in the BSD's, which runs at the same speed as running natively on Linux. At any rate, during CPU-bound tasks, even Wine and VMWare should run at the same speed as native code.

Furthermore, why would .NET run any faster? .NET has to use all the kludge ups that any system running foreign OS/native hardware code has to do.

endianness is the only portability issue I've seen with the executables

What uses big-endian x86? In case, portability to anything that runs .NET on x86 isn't exactly very portable.

You can buy an Itanium now...it will run 64 bit XP or Linux...oh wait, is that Linux ia64 port done yet???

I think that makes it apparent you're just a Microsoft shill.

HP's Itanium page supports Redhat 7.2 running on their Itanium systems. Debian woody will also include Itanium support. All of this Linux/Itanium support has been out for while.

HP has a DE100C out, since November 2001. Smilar product, expensive though!

ZDNet intro article

Slashdot Article #1

Slashdot Article #2

HP's web site

Open Source Info

HP has a DE100C out, since November 2001. Smilar product, expensive though!

ZDNet intro article

Slashdot Article #1

Slashdot Article #2

HP's web site

Open Source Info

• Every commercially available OS with the exception of Windows and its incarnations are based at their core with Unix.

Am I falling for a Troll? Oh well, here goes...

BZZZT! Wrong!

Here's a short list of commercially available OSs that are not based at their core with Unix:

• OpenVMS
• z/OS, z/OS.e, OS/390, z/VM, VM/ESA, TPF, VSE/ESA (discount Linux on this link)
• OS/400
• mpe/ix (don't let the name fool you, it's not based on Unix)
• NonStop-UX (don't let the name fool you, it's not based on Unix)
• Others? I'm sure I'm missing some.

Thanks for playing, though!

Hewlett-Packard also sells various NAS solutions.

I don't expect an issue for them because they can easily afford any licensing fees.

• Compaq
• HP
• IBM
• Silicon Graphics
• Sun

To respond to myself:

One way I think the site could be improved is to have a list of big companies that have converted to Linux/BSD recently. We could make a 'best of Linux users' listing from the following pages:

SUSE ccasestudies

Lufthansa

RedHat casestudies

Oracle, Amazon, Merrill Lynch

IBM case studies

Shell, NCSA


HP Case studies

Dreamworks, Boeing

I guess NASA should go on the list somewhere.

Any more?

Do a google search for 'Denning GPS'.

First hit that comes up is a 1996 paper Location-based Authentication: Grounding cyberspace for better security, by Dorothy E. Denning and Peter F. MacDoran. Reading the paper, the idea looks to be that by knowing the location of a computer user one can define whether they are authorised to perform a particular action.

This makes marginal sense (if somebody who isn't in a bank office is playing with computer codes then they're probably not really permitted to play with them). However, to me this article reads like, 'Hey, if I mention copyright protection, I'll get funding'. And the whole idea reads like that - after all, for the person in the above example to perform an unauthorised action on bank accounts, they must already have broken through the protection placed around the system. Simply adding another authentication isn't going to magically fix that problem (hey, you want me to tell the system I'm in the White House? OK. It's no different to telling the system that I'm Bob, financial manager).

As for the use of said technology to control music distribution... what?!. If this woman is 'America's Cyberwarrior' then... be afraid. Very afraid. I'm sorry to say it, but whilst there are some very valid uses for GPS technology (something like HP's Cooltown project, mobile computing in general, augmented reality, etc), I don't think this is it.

On the one side, it's valid to argue that including un-spoofable - if that's a word - location data in all internet communication would help in some cases (finding malicious hackers, absolving the innocent) but given that it also destroys the whole concept of anonymity, it's plain not worth it. Location information has to be optional. This is just another step in the 'media programs phoning home'/WinXP DRM direction, and it's not a good one.

If I sound irritated, it's because I am; I have no idea what Denning's politics are or whether the spin on this story is merely unfortunate, but the article linked to in this story (somewhat unlike the paper) sounds like something the EFF will eventually find themselves fighting.

I particularly like the part of that paper marked 'privacy considerations', where they note "The use of location signatures has the potential of being used to track
the physical locations of individuals."

Their solution?

"Access to [this information] should be strictly limited." And, um, "Privacy can also be protected by using and retaining only that information which is needed for a particular application." Or you can "opt-out" of giving your information, although of course "some actions may be prohibited if location is not supplied".

You mean the MPAA/RIAA are only going to retain as much information on me as they need for marketing purposes, and I can opt out if I don't mind never listening to another RIAA-produced CD? Thank you, Denning and MacDoran.

Plus look here for HP's which aren't nearly as jazzed up as those Dell workstations:

http://www.hp.com/workstations/products/linux/inde x.html

So you can buy a desktop preloaded with linux. If you want a cheap one do it yourself. There isn't much benefit in HP or Dell providing one. Note that I didn't read this whole thread as I don't feel like wasting time doing so as the arguements are probably the same old regurgitated crap. So if you guys are argueing about cheap desktops oh well.

As far as "not buying the products", you tell me where to buy a Windows-free PC and I'll run there; oh wait, you guys are harassing white-box shops that do that, and you certainly won't be able to get one from the major companies like Compaq, HP, Dell, etc.

Some Dell models can be ordered preloaded with Linux

Look at:
dell.com/linux
compaq.com/linux
hp.com/linux
etc.

On the plus side, the new ones are more internet happy. They offer web based configuration and support IPP (Internet Printing Protocol). However, unlike their predecessors, these units are not flash upgradeable and thus they can't be patched for new features/bugfixes. We have some minor issues with our 1st generation 170X and DHCP, but can't fix it without replacing the box.

Anyhow, to answer the original poster's question. HP has a list of supported printers (all HP branded) at their site. Unclear if any other USB printer would work. Link below. http://www.hp.com/cposupport/networking/support_do c/bpj06867.html

Hewlett-Packard Company Chairman and CEO Carly Fiorina discussess the current course and what's ahead for Linux in enterprise and consumer applications. Ms. Fiorina highlights innovative solutions that customers are implementing today and talk about the contributions and responsibilities of the Linux and open source communities in increasing customer value for Linux users.

The end of Ms. Fiorina keynote speech is worth repeating here...

demand for linux

The company that brought us the green ogre with the thick Scottish accent and wicked sense of humor wants Linux. Companies that provide the dial tones when we pick up the phone want Linux. And in between the two are thousands and thousands more who are recognizing the power, the flexibility and the smart economics inherent in this platform - and who are attracted to its openness and the inventive spirit that is at its foundation.

We cannot disappoint customers who are clamoring for Linux solutions. Standing still is not, and will not, be our legacy - with Linux, or with any other invention that has the potential to transform this industry, as we certainly believe Linux does.

Which brings me to what I see as the real power of the Linux movement.

The secret to its success is based on a belief in what hundreds of thousands of inventors can do together when you make full use of their talents. And here again, just like all the other great inventions that came before it, like all other great steps forward, the skeptics out there said: It won't work. It won't sell. It can't be done. It won't succeed.

Your collective response: Never underestimate the power of a good idea.

Anyway, here's what HP has on their own site. Looks like most bridges have been burned in this one and if it doesn't actually go through HP's going to look like a pretty sorry mess. Too bad the combatants in this one didn't keep the vitriol out of the press, i.e. one page ads in the SJ Merc, or the 'dillitante' remarks.

IBM must be aware that even if it does go through, it's a house divided, which will take some time to come together, if ever.

You only use, copy, or distribute the Ximian Logo Files or Ximian Logo in conjunction with an unmodified official release of the Ximian Public Software as provided by Ximian, Inc.

Information on the free Boehm collector can be found here.

http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/

... memprof is based on the same Boehm [garbage collector] that Geodesic is, though Geodesic's is a closed source fork.

Which is pretty funny, because the Boehm-Demers-Weiser garbage collector is already used (cache) with Mozilla (cache) to detect leaks.

I'd wager money whether that the site didn't change a single word from the press release at all.

Actually, here's the press release from HP directly. Yep, exactly the same as the article.

Even if the DVD+ format wins out, there will still be quite a few people making disks down the road.

It's not that big a deal, actually. I've heard a lot of "Beta vs. VHS" talk, but since both formats are quite readable by each other's drives, all you have to worry about is availability (& perhaps price) of the media for writing.

Compatibility was a huge issue for me.

For drives bought today, sure. DVD-R is more compatible than DVD-RW or DVD+RW, since the rewritable formats have a different reflectivity which confuses older players into thinking the disc is dual layer.

However, since DVD+R/RW models were announced today by HP, available mid-April, and since DVD+R should be just as compatible as DVD-R (or perhaps more so, due to its lossless linking feature), that should no longer be an issue.

...companies promising DVD+R upgrades (HP included) have quietly removed this notice from their websites and their products.

Yeah, they did do this, and this did get a number of people upset. However, the word is that "HP will within the next week or so announce either a buy back or trade-up policy for existing 100i owners (they haven't decided which one at this point) to the next generation device (200i I assume) which is promised to have +R compatibility". So we'll see. From past experience, I personally held off purchasing until DVD+R writing was confirmed.

Best Buy had one on the shelf for $300 with an additional 10% off at the register.

Well, that's a good incentive, sure :-) I'm willing to pay a little extra for the faster burning speed, background formatting & more flexible rewriting of DVD+RWs, but not everyone needs that.

Given all the other advantages that DVD+R/RW has (greater compatibility, more flexible recording, faster recording, background formatting, etc etc), Panasonic are going to have to drop the prices on the DVD-RW units even more to stay in the market, IMHO.

The MacOS 9 driver is free for download, but the OS X driver is $10 by mail.

• Myth: KDE is more integrated than GNOME
  
  Reality: The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is given - the reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE, and the lack of this mystical quality in GNOME. It's nonsense of course. Neither desktop is particularly "integrated" compared to Windows XP, and certainly not compared any version of the Apple Mac.

• Myth: KDE is easier to use
  
  Reality: Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is expected to simply understand the truth. Both KDE and GNOME have user-interface irritations (indeed, all systems do) - but "ease of use" is not a simple thing to measure. What about application (see GNOME apps later) installation and removal: GNOME has the excellent RedCarpet by Ximian , which makes the installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE users are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle various very tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system configuration operations - KDE offers a few small half-assed Linux-only tools, which make no attempt at check-pointing to return to known working configurations.

• Myth: KDE is more popular
  
  Reality: In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE - but it is a close run thing. Most KDE zealots claim the results of online polls as proof of their superior userbase... which is, quite frankly, complete and utter nonsense. Online polls are the joke of the century; it doesn't even require a motivated script kiddie to render then worthless. A single post on a zealot-ridden site can reduce the result to a running joke. Popularity is also difficult to measure when both GNOME and KDE are frequently installed on the same system - and indeed, can co-exist except for certain applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME applications for their superior features and stability.

  One of the few solid measures of popularity is the adoption in commercial use - and here, GNOME is far ahead. Both Hewlett- Packard and Sun Microsystems have committed to using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems. This ties in with the previously mentioned ease of use - Sun's major contribution to the GNOME effort is in the areas of user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity and user-testing. Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development. The arrival of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach fruitition and allow GNOME to make a quantum leap ahead of KDE in most of the basic computer/user issues.

• Myth: Konqueror is the best Linux browser
  
  Reality: Oh for a penny every time this lie is told in any KDE story! Konqueror is a fine piece of software - it's authors deserve plently of praise - it is, however, quite unreliable and lax in its support of basic web standards compared to either Mozilla or Opera . It is also extremely slow - slower than the latest incarnations of the GNOME Nautilus filemanager/browser.

• Myth: KDE applications are better/more advanced than GNOME ones due to the ease of developing in C++ using the Qt toolkit
  
  Reality: See also: Qt/TrollTech. Easily the most common wail heard by KDE developers - and yet it is easily disproved by looking at the actual applications for GNOME/GTK and KDE/Qt . KDE applications often have larger version numbers than GNOME ones... an old trick played by commerical software developers. Most KDE apps seem to jump for 1.x releases long before they are ready - KOffice being the best example. None of the components in Koffice are worthy of a 1.0 release, let alone 1.1 or 1.2. GNOME applications wait longer and get more testing in their 0.x stages and despite shorter development phases mature more quickly and reach stable featureful release states more quickly: the superb Evolution (groupware/email), Gnumeric (spreadsheet), Pan (newsreader), The GIMP (image manipulation), Abiword (word processing), RedCarpet ,X-Chat (IRC client), XMMS (media player), Galeon (web browser), and for developers: Glade , Anjuta . All of these packages ooze quality, far outclass and are, at least, 18 months ahead of their KDE/Qt counterparts. It's not only in the area of user applications that GNOME is lightyears ahead, with the forthcoming 2.x a number of impressive behind the scenes technology will finally mature: component technology (bonobo ), media (Gstreamer ), internationalisation (pango ). As a developement platform, GNOME 2.x is, frankly, years ahead of KDE. And what's more, it is not tied to a lowest common denominator cross-platform bloat-fest like Qt. Yet despite all this, we are still fed the lie that Qt and C++ makes development easier. Judge for yourself.

• Myth: KDE is faster and/or takes less memory than GNOME
  
  Reality: KDE is written in C++. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, it is when the programmers do not know enough to avoid certain pitfalls that can plague software projects. Stupid use of ++/-- with C++ objects; masses of unnecessary allocations and deallocations of memory, and the most cretinous of all, blaming the extremely slow startup times of KDE apps on GCC. The GNOME 1.x releases were hardly svelt (2.x fixes many of these issues), but GNOME is a fashion cat-walk superwaif when compared to KDE's 500lb fat-momma cheese-burger scoffing trailer trash. One need only look at the recent fuss over ugly KDE hacks (such as prelinking) to see the problem inherent in the KDE architecture and basic design.

• Myth: GNOME development is slower. KDE releases faster.
  
  Reality: Fundamental misunderstanding. KDE releases as one big lump of code due to its use of C++ and the consequent problems with libraries. It bumps the version number of the entire KDE system for the smallest modifications. GNOME, on the other hand is componentized and each component releases on a (almost) separate schedule, bumping it's own version number but not the main GNOME version. Occasional releases of the entire GNOME system are done, and that's when the GNOME version number is bumped (currently it is 1.4). To see this in action, use RedCarpet and you will regular updates to GNOME components. GNOME development is not slower, it is in fact faster and more advanced. Lamers and newbies, however, fail to understand the advantages and just see KDE 1.1.1 followed a few weeks later by KDE 1.1.2. Wow! KDE roolz.

• Myth: TrollTech is a friend of Free software.
  
  Reality: Qt started out as non-Free. KDE developers knew this violated the GPL and are therefore untrustworthy. KDE core developers work for TrollTech. Expensive per developer licensing for writing closed-source with Qt. Labyrinthine licensing nightmare.

• Myth: Most good GNOME apps are actually GTK applications.
  
  Reality: Most KDE apps, such as those from The Kompany are actually Qt apps because they want to port to the more lucrative Windows/Qt market.

• Myth: KDE is attractive/GNOME/GTK is ugly
  
  Reality: Mosfet liquid theme is an ugly and unstable hack. GNOME GTk icons are of a far higher quality than the cartoonish and confusing KDE ones. Qt is basically a Windows-look on a Unix platform.

I was searching the internet the other day and came across a few articles of interest.
For one, I found an article about how researchers over at Oswego State University (of New York)
found the largest prime number to date! Incredible!

As I continued on I went over to Amazon and found this book. It's mainly about how you can encrypt every email you send using Java. I didn't
believe it at first so I stopped over at java.sun.com to check it out and found this article in
their "press release" section which seems to confirm this.
Not bad, but that wasn't the only information I found today.

I was over at Yahoo News and learned about how HP's newest line of calculators
will be able to run linux. Again, this is hard to beleive so I checked it out and found it was true over.
The link they had on HP's website was dead so I went over to Google and found it cached here.

All in all - it's a good time to live!

...at work. Seems some folks here at work have too much time on thier hands and so our company has started blocking sites. The first sites to go were job posting sites... then there was competitor sites... Now there seems to be no rhyme or reason. If you want to access a blocked site you have to submit a business case (I had to do this for HP!). I don't like it (yes, I could work elsewhere). In my management days, if you had time to surf it was your supervisors fault - they didn't give you enough to do. If you were caught with some p0rn or such on your monitor, well, that was also a case for disciplinary (sp?) actions. Not blocking.

I don't plan on filtering what my kids can surf too. I plan on being involved with them and having an open enough relationship.

They tried filters at the library but since they block proxy sites they really didn't block anything. The took the filters off and put the comptuers out in the open where folks could walk by and see what was going on. THAT was the best filter.

I work as a computer technician for a small private college, and I know exactly what this article is talking about. As the title of this post says, we are drowning in a see of dead equipment that we can't get rid of, and we only have 1,000 students! I'm scared to see the problem at a large university.

Being that we are located in a small town, there is literally no place to take the 14" and 15" monitors, motherboards, cases, etc., that are quickly piling up. We are running out of storage space for all of the broken and useless junk that has no place to go. So far, it seems our only option is to pay to have HP to take it. How we are going to get all of this crap to them is a whole other problem, however.

I, for one, would happily pay an extra fee per computer bought if the state, or a company designated by the state, would take the old equipment for free when it dies. My fear however, is that we'll be charged this extra amount on the purchase price and then have to pay again for someone to take the machine. That would be even worse than it is now. If this is done right, it could be a great program.

If its done right...

• Myth: KDE is more integrated than GNOME
  Reality: The oft-heard cry of the noisiest KDE advocates. No explanation is given - the reader is expected to simply grok the wholesomeness of KDE, and the lack of this mystical quality in GNOME. It's nonsense of course. Neither desktop is particularly "integrated" compared to Windows XP, and certainly not compared to any version of the Apple Mac. Whatever "integrated" really means.

• Myth: KDE is easier to use
  Reality: Again, such nebulous arguments are never explained, and the reader is expected to simply understand the truth of the zealots statement. Both KDE and GNOME have user-interface irritations (indeed, all systems do) - but "ease of use" is not a simple thing to measure. KDE has never been subjected to detailed user testing, unlike GNOME [gnome.org], and the claims of user-friendliness are from crazed supporters and not average users. Furthermore, the KDE faithful rarely look beyond simple-minded copying of Windows, and forget that administering a desktop system is just as important as having widgets in the correct place on the toolbar. For example: What about application installation and removal? GNOME has the excellent RedCarpet [ximian.com] by Ximian [ximian.com], which makes the installation, removal and updating of applications trivial. KDE users are expected to fend for themselves with brutal command line driven systems. GNOME also has the excellent Ximian setup tools to handle various very tricky cross-platform and potentially risky system configuration operations - KDE offers none of this, only a few small half-assed Linux-only tools, which make no attempt at check-pointing to return to known working configurations.

• Myth: KDE is more popular
  Reality: In what sense? Arguably more people use KDE - but it is a close run thing. Most KDE zealots claim the results of online polls as proof of their superior userbase - which is, quite frankly, complete and utter nonsense. Online polls are the joke of the century; it doesn't even require a motivated script kiddie to render then worthless. A single post alerting the faithful on a zealot-ridden site can skew the result so much it makes American presidential elections look fair and well organised. Popularity is also difficult to measure when both GNOME and KDE are frequently installed on the same system. Indeed, the systems can co-exist and even run at the same time, except for certain applications such as panels. Many KDE users actually run GNOME applications for their superior features and stability, not realising that by doing so they are barely running KDE at all.

  One of the few solid measures of popularity is the adoption in commercial use - and here, GNOME is far ahead, with both Hewlett-Packard [hp.com] and Sun Microsystems [sun.com] committing to using GNOME as the desktop for their Unix systems. This also ties in with the previously mentioned ease of use - Sun's major contribution to the GNOME project is in the areas of user/developer documentation, testing, accessiblity and user-testing. Three of the less glamourous parts of desktop development. The arrival of the GNOME 2.x series will see these contributions reach fruitition and allow GNOME to make a quantum leap ahead of KDE in most of the basic computer/user issues.

• Myth: Konqueror is the best Linux browser
  Reality: Oh for a penny every time this lie is told in any KDE story! Konqueror [konqueror.org] is not a bad piece of software - its authors deserve praise for the work done in it. However, the sheer amount of orgasmic praise lavished by the KDE faithful is completely out of proportion to its actual quality. It is quite unreliable and even simple standards compliant pages can crash it quite comprehensively. It is also lax in its support of basic web standards compared to either Mozilla [mozilla.org] or Opera [opera.com]. It is also extremely slow - much slower than the latest incarnations of the GNOME Nautilus [eazel.com] filemanager/browser (a target of much KDE FUD during its development).
  .

• Myth: KDE applications are better/more advanced than GNOME ones due to the ease of developing in C++ using the Qt toolkit
  Reality: Easily the most common wail heard by KDE developers, and yet it is easily disproved by looking at the actual applications for GNOME/GTK [gtk.org] and KDE/Qt [trolltech.com]. KDE applications often have larger version numbers than GNOME ones... an old trick played by commerical software developers. Most KDE apps seem to jump for 1.x releases long before they are ready - KOffice [koffice.org] being the best example. None of the components in Koffice are worthy of a 1.0 release, let alone 1.1 or 1.2.

  GNOME applications [gnome.org] wait longer and get more testing in their 0.x stages and despite shorter development phases mature more quickly and reach stable featureful release states more quickly. Some examples of this are the superb Evolution [ximian.com] (groupware/email), Gnumeric [gnome.org] (spreadsheet), Pan [rebelbase.com] (newsreader), The GIMP [gimp.org] (image manipulation), Abiword [abisource.com] (word processing), RedCarpet [ximian.com], X-Chat [xchat.org] (IRC client), XMMS [xmms.org] (media player), Galeon [sourceforge.net] (web browser), and for developers: Glade [gnome.org] and Anjuta [sourceforge.net]. All of these packages ooze quality, and far outclass the KDE counterparts. It is no understatement to say that GNOME is at least 18 months ahead of KDE in applications, and pulling still further ahead.

  It's not only in the area of user applications that GNOME is lightyears ahead. With the forthcoming 2.x a number of impressive behind the scenes technology will finally mature: component technology (bonobo [gnome.org]), media (Gstreamer [gstreamer.net]), internationalisation (pango [pango.org]). As a developement platform, GNOME 2.x is, conservatively, 2-3 years ahead of KDE. And what's more, because it is not tied to a lowest common denominator cross-platform bloat-fest like the Qt toolkit, the lead (as with applications) can only increase further.

  Yet despite all this, we are still regularly fed the lie that Qt and C++ makes application and desktop development easier. Judge for yourself.

• Myth: KDE is faster and takes less memory than GNOME
  Reality: KDE is written in C++. While this is not necessarily a problem, it can be when Visual Basic reject programmers (which the KDE project is overrun with) do not know enough to avoid important pitfalls that plague C++ software projects. Stupid use of autoincrementing operators and iteration with C++ objects, and masses of unnecessary allocations and deallocations of memory, are two of the most common. KDE suffers badly from both problems.

  Perhaps the most cretinous of all problems is blaming the extremely slow startup times of KDE apps on GCC. The GNOME 1.x releases were hardly svelt (2.x fixes many of these issues), but GNOME is a fashion cat-walk superwaif when compared to KDE's 500lb fat-momma cheese-burger scoffing trailer trash. One need only look at the recent fuss over ugly KDE hacks (such as prelinking) to see the problem inherent in the poor KDE architecture and basic design flaws.

• Myth: GNOME development is slower. KDE releases faster.
  Reality: Fundamental misunderstanding. KDE releases as one big lump of code due to its use of C++ and the many problems this causes with libraries. The project bumps the version number of the entire KDE system for the smallest modifications. GNOME, on the other hand is componentized and each component releases on a (almost) separate schedule, bumping it's own version number but not the main GNOME version (1.4, for example). Occasional releases of the entire GNOME system happen, and that's when the GNOME version number is bumped (currently it is at 1.4). To see this in action, use RedCarpet and you will see regular updates to GNOME components. GNOME development is not slower, it is in fact faster and more advanced. Lamers and newbies, however, fail to understand the advantages of this method and just see KDE 1.1.1 followed a few weeks later by KDE 1.1.2. Wow! KDE roolz.

• Myth: TrollTech is a friend of Free software.
  Reality: TO BE WROTE -- IDEAS Qt started out as non-Free. KDE developers knew this violated the GPL, didn't care, stole others' GPL code by porting it to link (in violation of the license) with Qt and are therefore untrustworthy. KDE core developers work for TrollTech. Expensive per developer licensing for writing closed-source with Qt. Trolltech only moved towards the GPL because of the success of GNOME. Labyrinthine licensing nightmare. Gradual migration of features into Qt (and so into TrollTech's IP portfolio), allowing easy porting of apps to the revenue generating Windows world (see TheKompany for a perfect example), thereby making KDE irrelevant.

• Myth: Most good GNOME apps are actually GTK applications.
  Reality: TO BE WROTE -- IDEAS Most KDE apps, such as those from The Kompany [thekompany.com] are actually Qt apps because they want to port to the more lucrative Windows/Qt market.

  Myth: KDE is more than attractive - GNOME/GTK is ugly
  Reality: Mosfet liquid theme is an ugly and unstable hack. GNOME GTk icons are of a far higher quality than the cartoonish and confusing KDE ones. Qt is basically a Windows-look on a Unix platform.

This troll was reposted from the Troll Library without permission of the original author. If you object to this post, or if you wish to add your troll to the Troll Library, please reply to this message.

When Apple transitioned from the M68K line to the PPC, they were in the same situation - 68K code would run faster on a 40Mhz 68040 than on a 40Mhz PPC 601. The reason consumers didn't mind was that the the PPC 601 started at 60Mhz (approximately the break-even point to the emulation layer), and (to the end user) didn't cost significantly more.

While that's a valid point, it also bears pointing out that Pentium IV is at 2200 MHz whereas Itanium is at 800MHz -- about 1/3rd the clock speed. That ratio is going to remain for awhile too -- McKinley will come out at 1000 MHz, while Pentium IV continues its mad march toward 3000MHz and beyond. You acknowledge this fact implicitly with your next statement (re: Itanium not viable until approx same speed at approx same cost), but I felt it'd be interesting to point out just how large a gap there is.

These ratios spell doom for hardware-level emulation of the Pentium on the Itanium. Unless Intel has some serious magic, having a 100% cycle-for-cycle perfect emulation of the Pentium III or even Pentium IV on the Itanium die will never run better than 1/3rd the speed of the real thing, since the fundamental clock rate is so far off. The only real way to get close is to do a software-level translation and get a boost from scheduling for the native hardware.

It's interesting to note, BTW, that HP's Dynamo project does a software translation of PA-8000 code targeting (guess what) a PA-8000 CPU, and rather than slowing things down, it actually gets 20% speedups! Ars Technica also did a piece on this. Perhaps that's why HP doesn't have hardware-level translation from PA-RISC to Itanium on the die like Intel does -- they (HP) are in a better position to just translate the PA-RISC code to IA-64 when needed. (Also, in the UNIX world, it's just simply less necessary.)

A client needed some work done on a few of their Linux systems. They allow incoming traffic onto their LAN only through their Intel NetStructure VPN appliance. No problem, "send me the client software" I said, and they did. It was for Windows only!

So I undertook some research. Intel bought their NetStructure line from Shiva some time ago. After a few of their (Intel's) chip customers complained long and hard about competitive issues a la pre-packaged devices such as NetStructure, Intel decided to get out of the appliance biz. Then stopped making the NetStructure VPN appliance. They sold it to HP. Here's Intel's announcement and here's HP's announcement. Here's an IT World story about the same thing. They all tell how Intel's NetStructure 31xx VPN Gateway product line will still be available through HP as the HP VPN Server Appliance SA3xxx series. These are basically old Shiva products - hence their use of SST (Shiva Secure Tunnel) tunnels which are AFAIK unique to these products.

Here's the catch: while these server appliances run Linux (I know I saw that somewhere but I can't remember where) they have no Linux client software! Here's Intel's support page (look for their client software support) and HP's support page - don't have the URL handy but I'm sure of it - contains the same information.

The upshot of all this is that in order to work on Linux systems at a remote location from my local PC, I have to pass through a VPN Gateway which also runs Linux, but I have to use Windows on my end for the VPN client. What a crock! I looked into free/Swan but it doesn't do Shiva Secure Tunnels. Until HP gets serious about this one particular product line and gets some Linux client sotware into the picture, I'm steering clear of anything else they may trumpet as part of their "We do Linux" hype.

The hp workstation x1000 with Intel® Pentium® 4 processor running at 1.7GHz. This minitower configuration includes Windows 2000 Professional®, 20GB IDE Hard Drive, 128MB SDRAM, 48X CD-ROM, Matrox G450 graphics plus keyboard, mouse, power cord and recovery media.

$1,166.00

hp workstations x1000 - Linux
Red Hat Linux 7.1, Intel Pentium 4 processor at 1.7GHz, 20GB IDE HDD, Matrox G450, 128MB SDRAM, 48X CD, power cord, media and manuals.:

$1,211

The hp workstation x1000 with Intel® Pentium® 4 processor running at 1.7GHz. This minitower configuration includes Windows 2000 Professional®, 20GB IDE Hard Drive, 128MB SDRAM, 48X CD-ROM, Matrox G450 graphics plus keyboard, mouse, power cord and recovery media.

$1,166.00

hp workstations x1000 - Linux
Red Hat Linux 7.1, Intel Pentium 4 processor at 1.7GHz, 20GB IDE HDD, Matrox G450, 128MB SDRAM, 48X CD, power cord, media and manuals.:

$1,211

I should also note, the old Visualize Linux workstations were optionally offered with the insanely cool fx5 and fx10 video cards, which were equipped with 3 and 6 PA-RISC geometry engines respectively (foggy memory of mine, though; correct me if i'm wrong). These cards are not listed as available options for the new models, though, perhaps because HP had to provide a separate X server and kernel module for those cards.

More info on the cards can be found here.

HP has been selling Linux workstations for a long time now. Their first ones were the Visualize xl and pl, and came with RedHat 6.something preinstalled. Only now they have been replaced with the x**00 series; some more information about them is available here.

For much more information on ia-64 and McKinley, see the HP cpus website at http://cpus.hp.com under technical references.