Movies for airlines are (sometime) specialy edited as it is. If the region code is only a few bits on the DVD it seems to me that it wouldnt be a problem to make them up.
Just today in the office I was trying to upgrade a RH6.1 ws to 7.0. The RPMs were on another ws beside it, so I tried to make a boot disk.
The drive on the to-be-upgraded box was toast. So was another drive sitting on the shelf. So was, for matter of record another drive sitting in a w98 machine in the same room.
So I took a burnt 7.0 CD and tried to use that. Unfortunatly it was scratched all to hell.
At this point I realized that lilo was fucked, so I couldnt give up. I use a cheapbytes CD os rh6.2 to do the marginal upgrade, and repair lilo.
CDROMs are the tool of last resort. Hell, even Netware 5.0 CDs are bootable.
Nice, idea, but floppy technology is still the oldest, slowest, an least reliable part of computers today.
Even if this works, would you not still be bound by the transpher rate of the floppy bus? Is that not the most pathetic thing in the world? semaphore can move bits faster than that...
Ive been told (and have no reason to disbeleave) that the powers that be no longer ship computer memory by boat. It drops in value to much on the high seas. Memory is 'shipped' by plane.
Of course, memory has a weight:size:cost ratio that facilitates this.
Perhaps.. Ive never heard/though about it on the portability level before. (as a side note, I long for the 'bing gong' sound in PETSCII)
My point was that there were developing leaders, and eventualy economies of scale would have realy kicked in, so the basement manufacturing people just wouldnt have been able to compeate. We might have had two sets of compatable systems (three, I forget/ignore Atari); Commodore/Amiga and Apple/Macs.
Of course this brings up the interesting question of how long it would have taken Apple to develope their OS to have features like real multisking. Who knows.. With Steve at the helm of NeXT, and without IBM (dell, compaq...) , we could all have slabs on our desks today.
What IBM gave to the PC world was there name, and the legiticimy that it gives.
The PC revolution would still have happened, possibly at a slower pace, but Apple and Commodore had good products that would have sold to home users. I dont think IBM clones made any significant penetration into the Europe market until Windows 3.1: It was Amigas everwhere.
Even with Apple in the niche market of DTP, and Amiga/Commodore in Desktop Video (ala Video Toaster), the would have enough R&D money to progress as fast (or faster) then they did...
Magazines publish at 133lpi, maby 150lpi for artsy magazines. Since the way laser printers, bubble/inkjet printers, and lithography work is very different, resolution conversion is non-trivial.
And those filters are fucking hard to take off too..
While Im sure its possible, I wonder how difficult it would be for mortals to build in there basements a induction amplifer to hang beside the cable wire.
Im pretty sure not.. Back in my more foolish days I recovered a very obsolete (this was 1996) Iris 2400 (less power supply and drives), with a semi compleate set of documentation, which included, of course, programing docs.
While its possible that SGI renamed Graphics Library/GL to IrisGL sometime after the 2400 came out, there was definitly a period of time when there was just plan GL...
In any enviroment where performance and reliability are as importating as bleeding edge features, you always want some kind of nice package system.
Get a.rpm from redhat - it works. Get a patch from Sun it works.
Sure your going to have to compile stuff eventualy, but unless there is some r00t exploit, wait for the vendors package. Making things intentionaly hard is just crap.
Given the total global population today (~6billion), and the total number of people that have ever lived (~10billion by some estemates), its clear to me that the mortality rate is 60%.
I for one am planning on living forever. Clearly is possible - Im living proof:)
Of course there is. They are very different skill sets.
I myself, hate programing. Dispise it. I can deal with scripting up to a couple of hundred lines say, when its for making my life easier - like say automating sysadmin tasks.
Being able to program a IP stack is one thing. Being able to set up and configure a computer on a IP network is another.
The trades are as diffent as a profesional mechanic and a profesional driver. Mechanics can usaly drive, and drivers might have a mechanical backgroud, but there sure as hell not the same job.
I said utopia. Yes there are OSs built on microkernels. I dont think any of them are special because of that, excepy possible QNX. But its clearly a special case.
You are very much missing the point of what he is talking about.
OpenBSD is OpenBSD. Its ~300MB of sources, and applications that are not in those sources are not OpenBSD. The OpenBSD team is responsible for OpenBSD only, and what they produce is OpenBSD.
(are you noticing a pattern here?)
There souce is open, so if you 'upstreem' maintainers want to use the OpenBSD code they can - the same way that Mozilla hackers could use code from Opera if they wanted. Im sure the maintainers are told if there are massive problems, and probably with any changes either.
The packages that are part of OpenBSD vX are tested agianst each other, and are declared secure. I dont imagine that they start the code autit over for each package from the 'upstreem' maintainer when they go to vX+1. For some packages that have a friendly developement team, they might.
Sure OpenBSD would 'accept' it (as likely as anyone else would) if someone declared them the maintainers of make. Of course if make is currently in OpenBSD, they would continue to maintain it in//, choosing to ignore as much of the standard make as they do now.
He said that software should be 'good' not 'good enough'. While what he said about kernel design might boil down to 'good enough', he dose explain that its more complex then that.
Monolythic kernels have been the way that its always been, and he mentions in the 80s microkernels were being sold as a grand utopia. There hasent been a grand utopia built on a microkernel yet; his point is that while its possible that a microkernel design would be better, it probably wouldnt be (the proof being that there isnt a 'good' microkernel based OS around.
Slashdot Mirror
Who is forcing him to work for the company?
Now, if a company implements a IP policy unilateraly, thats something different. But this was a voluntary matter.
Movies for airlines are (sometime) specialy edited as it is. If the region code is only a few bits on the DVD it seems to me that it wouldnt be a problem to make them up.
Since the whole idea of sending humans into space is to send humans into space, what would be the point of sending not-quite humans into space?
The drive on the to-be-upgraded box was toast. So was another drive sitting on the shelf. So was, for matter of record another drive sitting in a w98 machine in the same room.
So I took a burnt 7.0 CD and tried to use that. Unfortunatly it was scratched all to hell.
At this point I realized that lilo was fucked, so I couldnt give up. I use a cheapbytes CD os rh6.2 to do the marginal upgrade, and repair lilo.
CDROMs are the tool of last resort. Hell, even Netware 5.0 CDs are bootable.
Even if this works, would you not still be bound by the transpher rate of the floppy bus? Is that not the most pathetic thing in the world? semaphore can move bits faster than that...
This may be a very good reason to start to wonder if Cisco is asleap at the wheel, but their boxes route pretty close to all the traffic on the net.
Of course, memory has a weight:size:cost ratio that facilitates this.
My point was that there were developing leaders, and eventualy economies of scale would have realy kicked in, so the basement manufacturing people just wouldnt have been able to compeate. We might have had two sets of compatable systems (three, I forget/ignore Atari); Commodore/Amiga and Apple/Macs.
Of course this brings up the interesting question of how long it would have taken Apple to develope their OS to have features like real multisking. Who knows.. With Steve at the helm of NeXT, and without IBM (dell, compaq...) , we could all have slabs on our desks today.
The PC revolution would still have happened, possibly at a slower pace, but Apple and Commodore had good products that would have sold to home users. I dont think IBM clones made any significant penetration into the Europe market until Windows 3.1: It was Amigas everwhere.
Even with Apple in the niche market of DTP, and Amiga/Commodore in Desktop Video (ala Video Toaster), the would have enough R&D money to progress as fast (or faster) then they did...
Magazines publish at 133lpi, maby 150lpi for artsy magazines. Since the way laser printers, bubble/inkjet printers, and lithography work is very different, resolution conversion is non-trivial.
Here the filters need a special tool to remove them..
While Im sure its possible, I wonder how difficult it would be for mortals to build in there basements a induction amplifer to hang beside the cable wire.
The Secret of My Sucuess
You fool, its a mini golf course for the massive golf ball.
We get a more secure linux, and they get a realy secure linux.
While its possible that SGI renamed Graphics Library/GL to IrisGL sometime after the 2400 came out, there was definitly a period of time when there was just plan GL...
I suspect that there were always two streems of things called beta, the consumer version (now dead) and the pro version (still in wide use).
In any enviroment where performance and reliability are as importating as bleeding edge features, you always want some kind of nice package system.
Get a .rpm from redhat - it works. Get a patch from Sun it works.
Sure your going to have to compile stuff eventualy, but unless there is some r00t exploit, wait for the vendors package. Making things intentionaly hard is just crap.
Given the total global population today (~6billion), and the total number of people that have ever lived (~10billion by some estemates), its clear to me that the mortality rate is 60%.
I for one am planning on living forever. Clearly is possible - Im living proof :)
I myself, hate programing. Dispise it. I can deal with scripting up to a couple of hundred lines say, when its for making my life easier - like say automating sysadmin tasks.
Being able to program a IP stack is one thing. Being able to set up and configure a computer on a IP network is another.
The trades are as diffent as a profesional mechanic and a profesional driver. Mechanics can usaly drive, and drivers might have a mechanical backgroud, but there sure as hell not the same job.
I said utopia. Yes there are OSs built on microkernels. I dont think any of them are special because of that, excepy possible QNX. But its clearly a special case.
But a lot of other distirbutions do this too: Debian definatly does, and all the commercial unix's hack up things like bind and sendmail.
OpenBSD is OpenBSD. Its ~300MB of sources, and applications that are not in those sources are not OpenBSD. The OpenBSD team is responsible for OpenBSD only, and what they produce is OpenBSD.
(are you noticing a pattern here?)
There souce is open, so if you 'upstreem' maintainers want to use the OpenBSD code they can - the same way that Mozilla hackers could use code from Opera if they wanted. Im sure the maintainers are told if there are massive problems, and probably with any changes either.
The packages that are part of OpenBSD vX are tested agianst each other, and are declared secure. I dont imagine that they start the code autit over for each package from the 'upstreem' maintainer when they go to vX+1. For some packages that have a friendly developement team, they might.
Sure OpenBSD would 'accept' it (as likely as anyone else would) if someone declared them the maintainers of make. Of course if make is currently in OpenBSD, they would continue to maintain it in //, choosing to ignore as much of the standard make as they do now.
He said that software should be 'good' not 'good enough'. While what he said about kernel design might boil down to 'good enough', he dose explain that its more complex then that.
Monolythic kernels have been the way that its always been, and he mentions in the 80s microkernels were being sold as a grand utopia. There hasent been a grand utopia built on a microkernel yet; his point is that while its possible that a microkernel design would be better, it probably wouldnt be (the proof being that there isnt a 'good' microkernel based OS around.