Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bill Gates On Linux

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the stuff-to-read dept.

King-of-darkness writes "USA Today had an interview with Bill Gates on june the 30th. Gates seems to be considering Linux as a passing thru competition just like OS/2., and That Microsoft are the ones that keep pushing new technologies."

5 of 1,194 comments (clear)

  1. Re:But... by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 5, Informative

    Let me assure you, lots of banks STILL use OS/2 and they will do so for the foreseable future. The fact that you don't use os/2 does not mean it is dead. It is as dead as Fortran and Cobol.

    --
    Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
  2. Re:But... by bladernr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, J2EE is built using RMI-IIOP (or Internet-InterORB Protocol, or the CORBA protocol), not the original RMI-JRMP (Java Remote Message Protocol). J2EE transactions are CORBA transactions. J2EE security is CORBA security. JNDI naming is CORBA naming. That is how all of the cross-app-server compatability works (or rather, will work, in the future, hopefully, but thats an entirely different topic)

    You should read the J2EE specifications, its all in there. J2EE hides all of that CORBA stuff, but its in there.

    CORBA is quite alive and well, with new specifications arriving all the time, especially in the telco arena (for network management, etc, there is still lots of active work).

    --
    Sarcasm and hyperbole are the final refuges for weak minds
  3. Re:Typical by terkozer · · Score: 5, Informative

    As great of a quote as this is to bash on Bill.. it is simply not true, but is in fact an urban legend of sorts that has been widely circulated on the internet.

    Here is an interview with him clarifying the fact.

    There is also a good interview in the New York Review of Books that also attempts to shed a better light on the matter.

  4. Re:doesn't matter by zog+karndon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Get it right. IBM chopped 384K off the top. There were several other manufacturers (Victor, Zenith, Tandy) who had MS-DOS implementations with 900K usable memory.

    Microsoft didn't spec the IBM PC, and IBM didn't spec MS-DOS.

    Furthermore, since MS-DOS didn't provide a memory allocator, it's stupid to say that MS-DOS can't address non-contiguous memory.

  5. Re:doesn't matter by Trepalium · · Score: 5, Informative
    The x86 processors used a segment:offset addressing scheme, and could address a total of 1 megabyte of memory. The mapping of addresses to physical addresses was simply (segment*16)+offset (this actually gave a maximum addressable range of 1MB + 65516 bytes. This additional <64k range became known as the HMA in DOS 5+). IBM wisely reserved the upper 384kb of addressable memory for expansion, BIOS and video memory. For a system that was originally shipped with only 64 to 128kb of RAM, it left lots of room for expansion, and the EMS systems used that reserved memory area to provide a 'window' into the add-in memory. However, with most video cards occupying the region at A000h, it was impossible to use more than 640K of conventional memory.

    For the record, the 8088 had an 8-bit bus, 16-bit registers, and 20-bits of address space. The 8088 is to the 8086 as the 80386SX was to the 80386DX, and few people claim that the 80386SX was a 16-bit chip, otherwise we'd be claiming that current consumer CPUs are anywhere from 64-bit to 512-bit.

    --
    I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.