OK, let me give my personal thoughts of what "computers without Windows" could mean. First of all, what available operating systems are there to include on an x86 computer? We have Windows, BeOS, Linux, and seveal BSDs as well as several large commercial UNIX systems, maybe Solaris 7? Forget OS/2, it's more dead than BeOS!
But what would companies like Gateway and Compaq provide end-users with that would make connecting to the internet about as long as it takes to eat one doughnut (why, haven't you seen Gateway's hilarious commercial?)? Well, we could speculate that BeOS would be great for this, however, it lacks support for a lot of cool stuff, and it has no serious Office applications, etc. Even its internet applications are weak (no good ICQ, AIM, or even Web Browser, etc).
Next we take a look at the obvious UNIX systems that they could include. Linux is probably at the top of this list! And what Linux systems would they think of? Red Hat, as a first. Then maybe SuSE, TurboLinux, and obviously, the yet-to-be-released Corel Linux. Corel Linux seems like the first choice they would go with. Of course, we can't forget Caldera's flagship OpenLinux OS, which isn't so bad off either.
As far as including a BSD, I don't see that being very likely. Don't ask why, but BSD is probably one of the farthest OSes from "Desktopability" out there. Take a look at NetBSD and OpenBSD. And don't even mention FreeBSD, because its supports like, what, three popular hardware components (this being monitors, keyboards, and maybe mice, but defenitely SB16)?
Solaris 7 is quite a possible choice for this task, too. For home and personal use it doesn't cost a huge buck and I am sure companies like Compaq and Gateway can make great deals with Sun to chop off a huge amount of the price. And Solaris does have nice support for stuff, so it could indeed be a nice choice.
If all else fails, they can install QNX on these wonder internet machines!!!;-)
couln't they just like totally rip QT as it stands and switch a few things around and call it FreeQT? i mean it wouldn't TOTALLY be QT, just most of it...;o)
I am a high school senior right how. I am not the most social and high achieving person among my peers. The only things I am really good at are English (writing, etc) and Computers (programming, etc). I have never been a crowd guy. About three to five years ago, you would have thought that I was very "troubled" kid. If you asked me if I ever wanted to kill anyone, I would have ranted about who I wanted to kill, and maybe when and where I wanted to kill him (or her!). I was picked on a lot from 4th-8th grade and it was very tramatic on me. I could go off and do anything at an unexpected time. However, KiLL someone? For ReaL? That is a major negative. I could rant and talk all I want about everyone I hated and how I wanted to kill them, but it would have never crossed my mind to even lift a finger at a single person (even though I could whoop da ass of everyone who did mess with me during those five daunting years). That is why this bothers me, becasue they think that a computer program thought up and written by a bunch of pencil-pushing corporate guys can determine who is "troubled" and who is not. This has go to be the most absurd and insane thing I have ever heard of anyone doing. But, can you beat the great Public Relations behemoth? No, it's about as hard as taking down the entire Borg collective (even though it was done, don't you agree it was hard? And how many years it took for someone to do it!). To this little proggie, i whistle songs of "bah".
From what we have seen in the past, Athlon CPUs leave Pentium III CPUs in dust. They give Intel something to cry about. Pair a Pentium III 700 and an Athlon 650, and I think you will find that the Athlon is, if not as fast, faster than the competition. Nuff Said.
What the Cactus Juice does..
on
Linux After Y2K
·
· Score: 1
makes the beads slippery and easier to deal with... they're not going with oil because cactus juice ROCKS;-)
Intel to make Bead processors for Abacus
on
Linux After Y2K
·
· Score: 1
News Flash! Because of Intel's ongoing support for Linux, they have decided to work on Abacus Bead processors. Intel said they will quickly formulate a new Farm which will create 30,000 bead processors with multi-threading built-in, which means that Abacus Linux and Abacus programs won't have to do their own multi-threading. This is great because of the Abacus computers' limited support for certain things. Their first Abacus processor will be the Beadium, followed by the Beadium Pro, Beadium II, and Beadium III. There will be a 20,000-bead version of the Beadium II processor, which will be for users that don't need a lot of Abacus and bead power. The Beadium processors will all include AbacusMMX, AbacusSSE, and a new set of instructions, right now codenamed "Cactii". They say that they will be able to seamlessly integrate the use of Cactus Juice for faster bead operations of the Abacus. Intel has promised that the first release of the Beadium Pro will come out promptly way late after the initial release of Abacus Linux.
I think this article has a lot of dumb stuff in it. Nothing is factual, it's not probable. And I'm not a geek like that and all, there are very few like THAT, but I still think the article is degrading. What is wrong with this woman? There is something majorly mental going on here. Geeks rule. Sure, bug collections and pocket protectors are out, but this article should go along with them. I'm done.
So, what are we gunna see now? Postings of how each bit of each kernel is doing?...
Oct 21, 1999: We're done with 10% of 2.3.23 Oct 22, 1999: We're done with 19% of 2.3.23 Oct 23, 1999: We're done with 43% of 2.3.23 Oct 24, 1999: We're done with 69% of 2.3.23 Oct 25, 1999: We're done with 85% of 2.3.23 Oct 25, 1999: We're done with 99% of 2.3.23 Oct 26, 1999: We're done with 2.3.23... woo! Oct 26, 1999: We released 2.3.23 and since it was still buggy, we're working on 2.3.24...
Oct 27, 1999: We're done with 11% of 2.3.24 etc, etc, etc...
OK OK OK!!! Hooray! We're getting more kernels! But do we have to see EACH AND EVERY LITTLE ONE publicised like its a whole new world every minor patch!!!! AGGGGHH!! I'm done.
I meant that the creators of Unreal (you know who you are!) favor Glide so much, that the only prequesite to running the game on a card that DOESN'T "support" Glide is to make sure that there is a glide2x file there. This means that the game is actually not a Glide-only game. ... Right?
I should be getting my own Viper 770 Ultra soon, and all I gotta say is, there should be an easy hack to get the game to work under Linux, maybe even as easy as the Windows hack, just make a dud glide2x.dll! Maybe we'll be able to get away with a dud.so for Linux? Or a soft link? Someone will figure it out...
Can we see a pattern here? Every game now in OpenGL should have no problem being ported to Linux... YES! No games in Linux? HaH! Think again! Linux: The gaming platform of tomorow! We will be able to do anything... Ah, this is just great.
I don't want to be repetitive and say the same thing that so many have already said. Instead, this is simply a "confirmation" that yes, AMD did announce works of an Athlon clocked at 1GHz without supercooling to get fabricated this year. It's very old news. I do like seeing Intel trying to say they are better by adding 100MHz to that number, when in fact an Athlon 1GHz will perform just as well or better than a 1.1GHz Intel (P3, whatever, etc.) CPU. The scariest thing about this is that I am still using 366MHz, and my cousin still has a Pentium 100!!! Sheesh, I'm just hoping for maybe 550MHz in my near future! People out there are raving about 1GHz, this is getting too silly. I would like to go back and say that our CPUs are all fast enough now, and the market should start concentrating on all of the other things slowing us down (hard disks, busses, memory, etc.) I'm done.
Hmm... I live in a crappy white trash red neck hick town in the middle of Nowhere County, Maryland, and I aggree, I won't have either of these services until we are well into Y2K. However, I am giving a generalization.
Yes, but, this digital camera also operates at exactly 2.4GHz... hmm... can i fry eggs on that camera? would it cook my hands when i hold it? can you say "sue!"?
If anyone can come up with good reasons WHY this should happen, then speak up. Otherwise, I think this will just choke the market badly. Although, we are moving onto Cable and DSL right? But mostly DSL, so this will affect DSL greatly. I just don't see why they have to do this. Would it be too much traffic? I don't think so.
Slashdot Mirror
Check out my post : here
eh
Check out my post : here
OK, let me give my personal thoughts of what "computers without Windows" could mean. First of all, what available operating systems are there to include on an x86 computer?
;-)
We have Windows, BeOS, Linux, and seveal BSDs as well as several large commercial UNIX systems, maybe Solaris 7? Forget OS/2, it's more dead than BeOS!
But what would companies like Gateway and Compaq provide end-users with that would make connecting to the internet about as long as it takes to eat one doughnut (why, haven't you seen Gateway's hilarious commercial?)? Well, we could speculate that BeOS would be great for this, however, it lacks support for a lot of cool stuff, and it has no serious Office applications, etc. Even its internet applications are weak (no good ICQ, AIM, or even Web Browser, etc).
Next we take a look at the obvious UNIX systems that they could include. Linux is probably at the top of this list! And what Linux systems would they think of? Red Hat, as a first. Then maybe SuSE, TurboLinux, and obviously, the yet-to-be-released Corel Linux. Corel Linux seems like the first choice they would go with. Of course, we can't forget Caldera's flagship OpenLinux OS, which isn't so bad off either.
As far as including a BSD, I don't see that being very likely. Don't ask why, but BSD is probably one of the farthest OSes from "Desktopability" out there. Take a look at NetBSD and OpenBSD. And don't even mention FreeBSD, because its supports like, what, three popular hardware components (this being monitors, keyboards, and maybe mice, but defenitely SB16)?
Solaris 7 is quite a possible choice for this task, too. For home and personal use it doesn't cost a huge buck and I am sure companies like Compaq and Gateway can make great deals with Sun to chop off a huge amount of the price. And Solaris does have nice support for stuff, so it could indeed be a nice choice.
If all else fails, they can install QNX on these wonder internet machines!!!
couln't they just like totally rip QT as it stands and switch a few things around and call it FreeQT? i mean it wouldn't TOTALLY be QT, just most of it... ;o)
I was going to say, just make a law which forces all software to be GLPed? Or open sourced at least ...
(See this story)
Eh, just a thought.
I am a high school senior right how. I am not the most social and high achieving person among my peers. The only things I am really good at are English (writing, etc) and Computers (programming, etc). I have never been a crowd guy.
About three to five years ago, you would have thought that I was very "troubled" kid. If you asked me if I ever wanted to kill anyone, I would have ranted about who I wanted to kill, and maybe when and where I wanted to kill him (or her!). I was picked on a lot from 4th-8th grade and it was very tramatic on me. I could go off and do anything at an unexpected time.
However, KiLL someone? For ReaL? That is a major negative. I could rant and talk all I want about everyone I hated and how I wanted to kill them, but it would have never crossed my mind to even lift a finger at a single person (even though I could whoop da ass of everyone who did mess with me during those five daunting years).
That is why this bothers me, becasue they think that a computer program thought up and written by a bunch of pencil-pushing corporate guys can determine who is "troubled" and who is not. This has go to be the most absurd and insane thing I have ever heard of anyone doing.
But, can you beat the great Public Relations behemoth? No, it's about as hard as taking down the entire Borg collective (even though it was done, don't you agree it was hard? And how many years it took for someone to do it!).
To this little proggie, i whistle songs of "bah".
A prediction, yes?
Now as soon as this stuff starts blowing up in a big way, Linux will be one of the first OSes to get booted on Itanium as well.
From what we have seen in the past, Athlon CPUs leave Pentium III CPUs in dust. They give Intel something to cry about. Pair a Pentium III 700 and an Athlon 650, and I think you will find that the Athlon is, if not as fast, faster than the competition.
Nuff Said.
makes the beads slippery and easier to deal with ... they're not going with oil because cactus juice ROCKS ;-)
News Flash!
Because of Intel's ongoing support for Linux, they have decided to work on Abacus Bead processors. Intel said they will quickly formulate a new Farm which will create 30,000 bead processors with multi-threading built-in, which means that Abacus Linux and Abacus programs won't have to do their own multi-threading. This is great because of the Abacus computers' limited support for certain things. Their first Abacus processor will be the Beadium, followed by the Beadium Pro, Beadium II, and Beadium III. There will be a 20,000-bead version of the Beadium II processor, which will be for users that don't need a lot of Abacus and bead power. The Beadium processors will all include AbacusMMX, AbacusSSE, and a new set of instructions, right now codenamed "Cactii". They say that they will be able to seamlessly integrate the use of Cactus Juice for faster bead operations of the Abacus. Intel has promised that the first release of the Beadium Pro will come out promptly way late after the initial release of Abacus Linux.
HELL YES! :-)
I think this article has a lot of dumb stuff in it. Nothing is factual, it's not probable. And I'm not a geek like that and all, there are very few like THAT, but I still think the article is degrading. What is wrong with this woman? There is something majorly mental going on here. Geeks rule. Sure, bug collections and pocket protectors are out, but this article should go along with them.
I'm done.
So, what are we gunna see now? Postings of how each bit of each kernel is doing?...
... woo!
Oct 21, 1999: We're done with 10% of 2.3.23
Oct 22, 1999: We're done with 19% of 2.3.23
Oct 23, 1999: We're done with 43% of 2.3.23
Oct 24, 1999: We're done with 69% of 2.3.23
Oct 25, 1999: We're done with 85% of 2.3.23
Oct 25, 1999: We're done with 99% of 2.3.23
Oct 26, 1999: We're done with 2.3.23
Oct 26, 1999: We released 2.3.23 and since it was still buggy, we're working on 2.3.24...
Oct 27, 1999: We're done with 11% of 2.3.24
etc, etc, etc...
OK OK OK!!! Hooray! We're getting more kernels! But do we have to see EACH AND EVERY LITTLE ONE publicised like its a whole new world every minor patch!!!! AGGGGHH!!
I'm done.
I meant that the creators of Unreal (you know who you are!) favor Glide so much, that the only prequesite to running the game on a card that DOESN'T "support" Glide is to make sure that there is a glide2x file there. This means that the game is actually not a Glide-only game.
...
Right?
I should be getting my own Viper 770 Ultra soon, and all I gotta say is, there should be an easy hack to get the game to work under Linux, maybe even as easy as the Windows hack, just make a dud glide2x.dll! Maybe we'll be able to get away with a dud .so for Linux? Or a soft link? Someone will figure it out...
Can we see a pattern here? ...
Every game now in OpenGL should have no problem being ported to Linux
YES! No games in Linux? HaH! Think again! Linux: The gaming platform of tomorow! We will be able to do anything...
Ah, this is just great.
I don't want to be repetitive and say the same thing that so many have already said. Instead, this is simply a "confirmation" that yes, AMD did announce works of an Athlon clocked at 1GHz without supercooling to get fabricated this year. It's very old news. I do like seeing Intel trying to say they are better by adding 100MHz to that number, when in fact an Athlon 1GHz will perform just as well or better than a 1.1GHz Intel (P3, whatever, etc.) CPU.
The scariest thing about this is that I am still using 366MHz, and my cousin still has a Pentium 100!!! Sheesh, I'm just hoping for maybe 550MHz in my near future! People out there are raving about 1GHz, this is getting too silly. I would like to go back and say that our CPUs are all fast enough now, and the market should start concentrating on all of the other things slowing us down (hard disks, busses, memory, etc.)
I'm done.
New .sig ;)
Hmm... I live in a crappy white trash red neck hick town in the middle of Nowhere County, Maryland, and I aggree, I won't have either of these services until we are well into Y2K. However, I am giving a generalization.
Yes, but, this digital camera also operates at exactly 2.4GHz ... hmm ... can i fry eggs on that camera? would it cook my hands when i hold it? can you say "sue!"?
If anyone can come up with good reasons WHY this should happen, then speak up. Otherwise, I think this will just choke the market badly. Although, we are moving onto Cable and DSL right? But mostly DSL, so this will affect DSL greatly. I just don't see why they have to do this. Would it be too much traffic? I don't think so.