The complete x86 ISA is exposed in the documentation. Nvidia or ATI don't provide docs for there hardware, therefore it's close to impossible to write open source software for it. A big difference.
If the complete driver was in the firmware of the hardware and it exposed somekind of API (like x86 is) it would be ok, because then we could use the full hardware just as good with open or closed software.
You are missing the point. The point is that a library or program (in the world of oss) should not need to depend on closed source software. If there are only binary 3d drivers the whole desktop becomes tainted by closed source software. Therefore we need good stable (They don't have to be as good as nvidia's offering though) open sorce drivers before OpenGL desktops in Free software can be a reality.
Remeber that while good binary drivers exists for Linux and FreeBSD other OSes are not that lucky, and free software is for everybody.
An new free sofware project should not need to talk to Nvidia and ATI (Who would not give a shit anyway) to get basic functionality going.
I like many others use binary GFX drivers today to drive my desktop but today it isn't needed except for some extra fluff like games.
Except they didn't gave it out to OSS, they gave it out to CDDL licenced projects which there currently only are some sourcecode from sub under. To the rest of the OSS world this is a non event.
It is FreeBSD 5.3 because from my understanding it is -STABLE now. The box wasn't a real production box (Not open on the internet), but a development server to see how things worked out.
I'm a long time Linux user who recently installed FreeBSD 5 on a development server, apart from the init scripts are a bit arcane to a Linux user my two problems have been.
Kernel crashes when using DMA. VIA chipset. A kernel recompile seems to have fixed that somehow. uptime on two weeks now with quite heavy disk use.
Because of a "bug/unimplemented feature" in Linux a FreeBSD 5 kernel can't lock files on a Linux NFS server (NLM cookie length > 8). Very recent Linux kernel have this issue sorted out (at least 2.6.10 works, 2.6.7 don't).
After sorting these two issues out it has been very nice to me. I usually run Gentoo Linux and so far I like portage better than ports, it feels a little more modern and easier to use but it could be what I'm used to.
As much as OSS advocates would not like to hear it, opening up the graphics card specifications to all and sundry would be the equivilant of pooring your R&D down the pan
They have found a company willing to produce an OSS friendly card, because that market is not taken at the moment. How is that "pooring your R&D down the pan".
Linux,t he BSDs and smaller OSes needs documented hardware. If the big players can't deliver new companies will fill that gap.
Let's say for a moment that this turns out to be true, that the source can't "go" anywhere (and it might very well be); So? What did you expect?
I do expect Sun to take their OSS initative seriosly and not just another checkbox in a advertisement somewhere. As it is now I really don't know why they are OSSing solaris. Let's not forget they have tried before to release source for solaris (at that time a non OSS licence though), Why did they do that? And what are their intentions this time around?
Whether the license is perfect or not ("perfect" meaning "to your personal liking" it seems)
They can use whatever licence they want. I just have a hard time beliving Open solaris will be a major force in the OSS world if they don't release GPL compatible (bigest possible audience, and a well understood licence). But maybe they don't want to be a major force. So what are their intentions then?
I'm fully aware Sun already are a major player in the OSS world and release alot of GPL compatible code. And their work on NFS and NIS is golden to all users of *nix software.
If solaris was closed source softawre nobody would give a rats as what the licence/EULA was as long as they where alowed to run the binaries. Not so with OSS. The GPL has traditionally been a good licence for corporations wanting to open source their stuff AND still retain copyright on the source.
The GPL is also very well understood by the users/distributers of GPL software, from what I understand Suns new licence is some kind of copyleft licence but of course incompatible with GPL. This pretty much forms a Solaris camp in the OSS world with source that can not enter any other open source software at all. How many open source programmers will program under Suns licence and howmany will stick to th GPL and or other well understood (BSD etc.) licences remains to be seen. I don't really think Solaris stand a chance to gain over developers without going at least GPL.
Some of us du serious work on *nix, it has nothing to do with satisfying geeks sides. We go to great length to find the *nix OS that are the right one for us, thats why there are different distributions of Linux for example. It mostly has to do with how configs are setup, package management, stuff like that. Why on earth does evey mac fanatic thinks that just their OS (which doesn't even include most basic packages without resorting to third party solutions like fink or portage) is the right one for every *nix user out there?
Stop treating the *nix part of OS X as a god dam checkbox in a product advertisement from Apple.
I like rdiff-backup because it makes reverse diffs, meaning the files on the backup disks are always the most recent ones with older changes in diff files. It works over standard ssh and is fairly easy to setup (Some scripting required, or at least doesn't hurt). No gui though.
A search for asp on google reveals 557 000 000 hits A search for jsp on google reveals 115 000 000 hits A search for php on google reveals 864 000 000 hits
Yet the big players promote jsp and asp. Google is in no way scientific but php is very big without industry support from the big players.
I don't think they are copying either windows or mac, they are merely following what have been the unix way for the last 10 years. On unix we have virtual desktops and they are there to be used.
Why not read the article before boosting your total ignorance? Maybe that could give you some clues.
More codecs More games Better connectivity recording capabilities
Not to mention Linux is about 500 times more advanced than ipods normal firmware. Also you don't have to buy a new ipod to update to the latest firmware.
Of course some of these things are in its infancy, but thats how open source software works. At some point they might get there and have everyting working.
Don't for one moment think a Mac is a unbreakable fort. Doesn't Apple have software updates, security issues. What happens if you don't patch a Mac? Possible intrusion is what happens, Same as on Wndows. Do you think I don't keep my boxes updated just because I run Linux?
Tell your friend not to install all that stuff that gives him malware.
you don't have to worry so much about what comes in the main case.
This particular case (The eMac) was almost empty, Small HD, No DVD, slow CPU, small amount of ram. Thats why he thought it was a bad buy. Of course you can add stuff but then you probably should have bought another computer in the first place.
Windows XP on a Dell (or any OEM) is just not reliable.
This is your opinion, an opinion you base the rest of your argumentation on. Even if the Dell was $1 and the iBook was $50000 according to you the iBook would still be a better choice because I want a reliable computer and a Dell just is not reliable.
Stick to the facts next time and argument from there.
You can run the diNovo keyboard in USB mode. Just enable Legacy USB in BIOS. I don't know if the mouse works this way though, I don't use it because of it's bad update frequency (80hz).
Altough I'm not a hardcore gamer for me it would be a real "no buy" if it doesn't work with stock nvidia drivers. Who knows when gigabyte decides to not support there the card.
Slashdot Mirror
The complete x86 ISA is exposed in the documentation. Nvidia or ATI don't provide docs for there hardware, therefore it's close to impossible to write open source software for it. A big difference.
If the complete driver was in the firmware of the hardware and it exposed somekind of API (like x86 is) it would be ok, because then we could use the full hardware just as good with open or closed software.
You are missing the point. The point is that a library or program (in the world of oss) should not need to depend on closed source software. If there are only binary 3d drivers the whole desktop becomes tainted by closed source software. Therefore we need good stable (They don't have to be as good as nvidia's offering though) open sorce drivers before OpenGL desktops in Free software can be a reality.
Remeber that while good binary drivers exists for Linux and FreeBSD other OSes are not that lucky, and free software is for everybody.
An new free sofware project should not need to talk to Nvidia and ATI (Who would not give a shit anyway) to get basic functionality going.
I like many others use binary GFX drivers today to drive my desktop but today it isn't needed except for some extra fluff like games.
Stacking is not allowed
I keep that in mind, I don't wnat to get sued.
Except they didn't gave it out to OSS, they gave it out to CDDL licenced projects which there currently only are some sourcecode from sub under. To the rest of the OSS world this is a non event.
It is FreeBSD 5.3 because from my understanding it is -STABLE now. The box wasn't a real production box (Not open on the internet), but a development server to see how things worked out.
I'm a long time Linux user who recently installed FreeBSD 5 on a development server, apart from the init scripts are a bit arcane to a Linux user my two problems have been.
Kernel crashes when using DMA. VIA chipset. A kernel recompile seems to have fixed that somehow. uptime on two weeks now with quite heavy disk use.
Because of a "bug/unimplemented feature" in Linux a FreeBSD 5 kernel can't lock files on a Linux NFS server (NLM cookie length > 8). Very recent Linux kernel have this issue sorted out (at least 2.6.10 works, 2.6.7 don't).
After sorting these two issues out it has been very nice to me. I usually run Gentoo Linux and so far I like portage better than ports, it feels a little more modern and easier to use but it could be what I'm used to.
As much as OSS advocates would not like to hear it, opening up the graphics card specifications to all and sundry would be the equivilant of pooring your R&D down the pan
They have found a company willing to produce an OSS friendly card, because that market is not taken at the moment. How is that "pooring your R&D down the pan".
Linux,t he BSDs and smaller OSes needs documented hardware. If the big players can't deliver new companies will fill that gap.
Let's say for a moment that this turns out to be true, that the source can't "go" anywhere (and it might very well be); So? What did you expect?
I do expect Sun to take their OSS initative seriosly and not just another checkbox in a advertisement somewhere. As it is now I really don't know why they are OSSing solaris. Let's not forget they have tried before to release source for solaris (at that time a non OSS licence though), Why did they do that? And what are their intentions this time around?
Whether the license is perfect or not ("perfect" meaning "to your personal liking" it seems)
They can use whatever licence they want. I just have a hard time beliving Open solaris will be a major force in the OSS world if they don't release GPL compatible (bigest possible audience, and a well understood licence). But maybe they don't want to be a major force. So what are their intentions then?
I'm fully aware Sun already are a major player in the OSS world and release alot of GPL compatible code. And their work on NFS and NIS is golden to all users of *nix software.
If solaris was closed source softawre nobody would give a rats as what the licence/EULA was as long as they where alowed to run the binaries. Not so with OSS. The GPL has traditionally been a good licence for corporations wanting to open source their stuff AND still retain copyright on the source.
The GPL is also very well understood by the users/distributers of GPL software, from what I understand Suns new licence is some kind of copyleft licence but of course incompatible with GPL. This pretty much forms a Solaris camp in the OSS world with source that can not enter any other open source software at all. How many open source programmers will program under Suns licence and howmany will stick to th GPL and or other well understood (BSD etc.) licences remains to be seen. I don't really think Solaris stand a chance to gain over developers without going at least GPL.
Unix OS to satisfy your geek side
Some of us du serious work on *nix, it has nothing to do with satisfying geeks sides. We go to great length to find the *nix OS that are the right one for us, thats why there are different distributions of Linux for example. It mostly has to do with how configs are setup, package management, stuff like that. Why on earth does evey mac fanatic thinks that just their OS (which doesn't even include most basic packages without resorting to third party solutions like fink or portage) is the right one for every *nix user out there?
Stop treating the *nix part of OS X as a god dam checkbox in a product advertisement from Apple.
So I for one can't really advocate this.
Judging from the rest of your post if I aked you "Why" you would only answer "Because".
If they use a 1.2ghz cpu instead of 2.8ghz they could probably squeeze it back to $499, another known company did.
I like rdiff-backup because it makes reverse diffs, meaning the files on the backup disks are always the most recent ones with older changes in diff files. It works over standard ssh and is fairly easy to setup (Some scripting required, or at least doesn't hurt). No gui though.
I bet it's pretty hot right now...
A search for asp on google reveals 557 000 000 hits
A search for jsp on google reveals 115 000 000 hits
A search for php on google reveals 864 000 000 hits
Yet the big players promote jsp and asp. Google is in no way scientific but php is very big without industry support from the big players.
I don't think they are copying either windows or mac, they are merely following what have been the unix way for the last 10 years. On unix we have virtual desktops and they are there to be used.
with VB You have to pay to an american company to release under ANY licence.
Why not read the article before boosting your total ignorance? Maybe that could give you some clues.
More codecs
More games
Better connectivity
recording capabilities
Not to mention Linux is about 500 times more advanced than ipods normal firmware. Also you don't have to buy a new ipod to update to the latest firmware.
Of course some of these things are in its infancy, but thats how open source software works. At some point they might get there and have everyting working.
When can we start the looting?
Don't for one moment think a Mac is a unbreakable fort. Doesn't Apple have software updates, security issues. What happens if you don't patch a Mac? Possible intrusion is what happens, Same as on Wndows. Do you think I don't keep my boxes updated just because I run Linux?
Tell your friend not to install all that stuff that gives him malware.
you don't have to worry so much about what comes in the main case.
This particular case (The eMac) was almost empty, Small HD, No DVD, slow CPU, small amount of ram. Thats why he thought it was a bad buy. Of course you can add stuff but then you probably should have bought another computer in the first place.
Windows XP on a Dell (or any OEM) is just not reliable.
This is your opinion, an opinion you base the rest of your argumentation on. Even if the Dell was $1 and the iBook was $50000 according to you the iBook would still be a better choice because I want a reliable computer and a Dell just is not reliable.
Stick to the facts next time and argument from there.
You can run the diNovo keyboard in USB mode. Just enable Legacy USB in BIOS. I don't know if the mouse works this way though, I don't use it because of it's bad update frequency (80hz).
Altough I'm not a hardcore gamer for me it would be a real "no buy" if it doesn't work with stock nvidia drivers. Who knows when gigabyte decides to not support there the card.
Valentino Rossi has never made an F1 start. Thats entirely diferent from a test driving without competitors.
I sure hope he gets his shot though.