As for the why nobody ever found them, which of these cultures was actually looking for them? I don't think it is illogical to say that we are the first people to actually care and have the resources to do it. The Romans were a bit busy during their time, they had an empire to lose. Most of these cultures couldn't accomplish much digging, and even if they did stumble across a bone or two, they probably just dismissed it as an elephant or some other large creature. Which isn't surprissing considering that the Romans were deathly afraid of elephants. Beyond that I won't argue about dinosaurs, because I know nothing about them.
As for god creating the world.... Is it so much more illogical to say that in the beginning was a large ball of rock that exploded, creating the universe than to say, that in the beginning was an omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent being who decided to one day, in his infinite perfection, to created an entirely imperfect world, alone in a universe with lots to explore but nothing to find? I don't think so. And I don't see why Christians are able to discount having the great big ball of rock just existing, but can still say that God can just exists. Anyway, who is to say that God didn't create life on other planets? It makes more sense than leaving them all empty.
BTW, "the bible says so" is not a good argument. The bible says alot of things.
Well, I gotta say, it looks pretty. I think it could have potential, but they need to make everything optional. This loading of icons based on file information is far too slow (I'll admit my system is slow, but come on, this is a file manager). It doesn't really seem revolutianary, except perhaps in architecture (looks pretty standad to me, though the virtual folders sound intriguing). Unfortunately this preview doesn't seem to show much of that, as all the viewers didn't work. Also, it wouldn't load a web page, maybe thats because I'm using a nightly build though. I'll be playing with it more after finals, but right now 20 seconds to load a directory is way too much time. Pretty good for a preview though. For now, I'll stick with ROX Filer.
Tim
The problem is that as soon as the file is modified, it would be copied. Then the old problem re-emerges. It might be usefull if the system employed a binary patch system so that a modified copy of a former symlink just had the patch file, plus the symlink. When the file is requested, the system patches the two together and dilivers. This of course could put a horibble drain on the system though. This is the only way it would help out your example. I think the system MS has invented, could be usefull for a while, but I can see it falling apart later on, much like the registry. BTW, what happens if the database is corrupted? Its bad enough when the registry gets corrupted, but if a 'registry' of your file sysem gets corrupted, it could get very ugly. I don't think the idea is completely without merit, but it has to be strongly controlled, and not be overused.
I really hope that Be makes it, but lately I've not been too happy with them. I bought R3 as soon as it came out, and happily played with it for many months and starred at the pretty rotating cube that was playing movies. then R4 came out, and I bought that too, but this time it wouldn't even install. aparantley, one of the new features of the upgrade was the fact that most of the intel drivers were rewritten, unfortunately my specific (and rather old) motherboard wasn't fully supported. They were nice enough to send me a free copy of R4.5 though, but that didn't work either. I guess the point of this little story is this, Be will never make it anywhere if they don't take a step back and say, stop, we need to get this thing fully functional as it stands. support all the basic hardware we can (motherboards, ide controllers, etc...), and stabalize it all. then start adding the nifty new APIs. as it stands, BeOS is nothing more than a really big demo OS. until they stabalize development, and make sure it runs on most systems, it will remain this toy that people look at and say "damn, I wish my primary OS ran this fast and could do this neat little demo", then reboot to their primary OS and do some work. Linux was able to get by because it was completely open, so if it didn't do something, somebody with the proper skills could make it do it. BeOS doesn't have that luxury though. I really hope that Be can make it, but they have to reevaluate what their goals for each release are. anyway, I'll be ordering a copy of R5 even though its free, and even though R4.5 wouldn't run on my box, just to show my support, in hopes of a better OS (not that Linux isn't great). Tim Malone
Slashdot Mirror
As for the why nobody ever found them, which of these cultures was actually looking for them? I don't think it is illogical to say that we are the first people to actually care and have the resources to do it. The Romans were a bit busy during their time, they had an empire to lose. Most of these cultures couldn't accomplish much digging, and even if they did stumble across a bone or two, they probably just dismissed it as an elephant or some other large creature. Which isn't surprissing considering that the Romans were deathly afraid of elephants. Beyond that I won't argue about dinosaurs, because I know nothing about them.
As for god creating the world.... Is it so much more illogical to say that in the beginning was a large ball of rock that exploded, creating the universe than to say, that in the beginning was an omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent being who decided to one day, in his infinite perfection, to created an entirely imperfect world, alone in a universe with lots to explore but nothing to find? I don't think so. And I don't see why Christians are able to discount having the great big ball of rock just existing, but can still say that God can just exists. Anyway, who is to say that God didn't create life on other planets? It makes more sense than leaving them all empty.
BTW, "the bible says so" is not a good argument. The bible says alot of things.
Tim
Well, I gotta say, it looks pretty. I think it could have potential, but they need to make everything optional. This loading of icons based on file information is far too slow (I'll admit my system is slow, but come on, this is a file manager). It doesn't really seem revolutianary, except perhaps in architecture (looks pretty standad to me, though the virtual folders sound intriguing). Unfortunately this preview doesn't seem to show much of that, as all the viewers didn't work. Also, it wouldn't load a web page, maybe thats because I'm using a nightly build though. I'll be playing with it more after finals, but right now 20 seconds to load a directory is way too much time. Pretty good for a preview though. For now, I'll stick with ROX Filer. Tim
>Can't the Amiga do this using RTG?
No, RTG is more like VNC than X. It allows you to
open an Amiga screen into a PC window. At least thats what I've read about it.
Tim Malone
The problem is that as soon as the file is modified, it would be copied. Then the old problem re-emerges. It might be usefull if the system employed a binary patch system so that a modified copy of a former symlink just had the patch file, plus the symlink. When the file is requested, the system patches the two together and dilivers. This of course could put a horibble drain on the system though. This is the only way it would help out your example. I think the system MS has invented, could be usefull for a while, but I can see it falling apart later on, much like the registry. BTW, what happens if the database is corrupted? Its bad enough when the registry gets corrupted, but if a 'registry' of your file sysem gets corrupted, it could get very ugly. I don't think the idea is completely without merit, but it has to be strongly controlled, and not be overused.
I really hope that Be makes it, but lately I've not been too happy with them. I bought R3 as soon as it came out, and happily played with it for many months and starred at the pretty rotating cube that was playing movies. then R4 came out, and I bought that too, but this time it wouldn't even install. aparantley, one of the new features of the upgrade was the fact that most of the intel drivers were rewritten, unfortunately my specific (and rather old) motherboard wasn't fully supported. They were nice enough to send me a free copy of R4.5 though, but that didn't work either. I guess the point of this little story is this, Be will never make it anywhere if they don't take a step back and say, stop, we need to get this thing fully functional as it stands. support all the basic hardware we can (motherboards, ide controllers, etc...), and stabalize it all. then start adding the nifty new APIs. as it stands, BeOS is nothing more than a really big demo OS. until they stabalize development, and make sure it runs on most systems, it will remain this toy that people look at and say "damn, I wish my primary OS ran this fast and could do this neat little demo", then reboot to their primary OS and do some work. Linux was able to get by because it was completely open, so if it didn't do something, somebody with the proper skills could make it do it. BeOS doesn't have that luxury though. I really hope that Be can make it, but they have to reevaluate what their goals for each release are. anyway, I'll be ordering a copy of R5 even though its free, and even though R4.5 wouldn't run on my box, just to show my support, in hopes of a better OS (not that Linux isn't great). Tim Malone