If you follow QNX at all, or even take the look at the rest of their site, you'd notice that this new and wonderful interface is merely Photon. This isn't anything new, custom designed for the as yet undescribed new Amiga Hardware, but their standard graphical interface. So all QNX appears to have lost was some marketing manhours, and a lot of face for what appears to be a premature press release.
I personally would be more interested in hearing about the hardware that comprises these new machines, first. Many of the tricks which made the old Amiga such a revolutionary design are now commonplace, and I'm curious to see how they justify the new machine. I'm afraid it's just going to appear, then disappear, like the BeBox, or stay vapor, like Apple's CHRP.
I especially found QNX's optimistic goal to start beta testing in Fall interesting.. Beta testing *what*, exactly? Noone would have the hardware, so they can't be testing drivers. And I'm fairly sure their kernel has been tested elsewhere.
Sheer, sick curiousity. I want to see exactly what makes that nightmare tick. Nothing professional, just that disgusting impulse to stare at wreckage on the side of the road.
The OSS movement isn't competetive, according to this article, making it seriously flawed and likely to collapse from rarification. These individuals haven't stopped by to see the holy wars on Slashdot, or the bitter interfactional fighting that goes on when a project forks. I think 'survival-of-the-fittest' is alive and well in the OSS community. As for it being a passing meme, it's a valid point, if you ignore the fact of how long it's been in the media background. Emacs, anyone? The BSD 4.4 Controversy? These things happened well before the Microsoft Hearings. Perhaps these thinktanks should do research outside what they read on USA Today, and take a look at the community which they are trying to assess, instead of accepting third-hand accounts.
I had a BSD box on my desk when Win3.1 was the 'standard', I've got a SuSE box on my desk now, and I will have whatever I bloody well choose, so long as I am efficient at what I do. Some employers understand that to keep technically proficient users, they have to keep their hands off. I just don't get tech support from I/T, which is no big loss, since they're all MCSE paper dummies.
And who exactly begged you to promote us?
on
ESR Wants to Retire
·
· Score: 1
Who exactly asked you to become our self-proclaimed Joan of Arc? What gives you the idea that we must resort to the tactics of our opponents, shameless chest-beating and self-promotion, in order to get our point across? You think Bill Gates still does what he does for money? No, he does it for ego. Take your theatrics elsewhere.
If you take a look at the size specs again, you'd realize that this little puppy is less than half the size. Of course, that isn't including a display or power supply. The real item of interest is that it is essentially a tiny AT-style motherboard, unlike the Pilot, which is a strange little beast to most x86 programmers.
Come call us when you get linux running on your pilot.;)
Okay, Bowie sold all his stock in his future earnings, right? Sounds like he doesn't care if he does well or not, just so long as he enjoys what he does. It looks to me like David Bowie's one of very few artists in the main arena who doesn't have a sword-of-damocles profit margin to watch out for.
Heck, I wasn't even looking for a symbolic victory. I just wanted to annoy the heck out of Microsoft and our vendors in revenge for all the time I've been on hold with them. =)
If you really want to cause a headache, let's see some of the more forward thinking I/T departments get behind this one. =) Our department has a massive site license for NT & 95, yet our hardware manufactures still pack in licenses for NT and 95. Could an I/T department refuse the EULA on grounds that it already has a license?
If so, we have a shipment of a hundred licenses coming in in a couple weeks. *WEG*
While I agree with RSA's assertion that we must test and examine this algorithm stringently; but how many times has Microsoft's FUD assertions been somewhat true, but angled in such a way to threaten the technology? I am merely pointing out that RSA has probably even more interest in scaring people away from a possible public-key encryption algorithm which could be freely licensed than they do in proving the frailties of 56-bit DES. (See also DES-III challenge.) This would break their stranglehold on public-key encryption algorithms in the public eye, making it possible to develop for-profit software that doesn't pay a royalty to them. The points they made were valid, it's just that we have to keep an eye on the reason *why* they made them. I don't know the people at RSA personally, but with business and profit comes marketing.
Ziff-Davis is living up to its reputation for being a mouthpiece for corporate interests. Did anyone else notice that RSA seems a little concerned by a public key encryption algorithm that they can't get royalties from? I think it's very obvious to everyone in the programming community that this new algorithm needs to go through the peer review process, but that doesn't make it any less remarkable. I especially loved the complaint that the ciphertext produced by the algorithm was larger than the one produced by RSA. I think RSA should simply accept the possibility that an algorithm could come from somewhere else than their ivory tower.
The only reason I considered college in the first place was credibility for possible employers. Most HR departments look for either college or job experience in candidates for their I/T departments, even in entry level positions. I took the other road, and joined the US Army Signal Corps for four years, which leveraged me into a comfy desktop support job at a major corporation making $36/hr. I'm not saying this is the easy way out, I spent a lot of those four years developing my personal skills in the field, and not sitting on my backside waiting for the Army to train me. You have to go out and get your education, but at least you have someone willing to vouch that you have experience in your field.
Just bought one a couple days ago. It feels like it has a lot of potential, but there's a *lot* of drift, and you can't recalibrate it. The drift isn't too bad in close combat, but it's a pain in the neck in sniper mode.
Also, the Vertical range for mouse emulation doesn't reach far enough. It has only a third of the play that a normal mouse has, making it really hard to look up.
I love the feel of the triggers and the thumb buttons are placed just right. I like the resistance a bit lower. I'm sure it'll get a little looser with use, but without the ability to calibrate, and the truncated Mouse-Y axis, this stick is destined for the closet.
Slashdot Mirror
If you follow QNX at all, or even take the look at the rest of their site, you'd notice that this new and wonderful interface is merely Photon. This isn't anything new, custom designed for the as yet undescribed new Amiga Hardware, but their standard graphical interface. So all QNX appears to have lost was some marketing manhours, and a lot of face for what appears to be a premature press release.
I personally would be more interested in hearing about the hardware that comprises these new machines, first. Many of the tricks which made the old Amiga such a revolutionary design are now commonplace, and I'm curious to see how they justify the new machine. I'm afraid it's just going to appear, then disappear, like the BeBox, or stay vapor, like Apple's CHRP.
I especially found QNX's optimistic goal to start beta testing in Fall interesting.. Beta testing *what*, exactly? Noone would have the hardware, so they can't be testing drivers. And I'm fairly sure their kernel has been tested elsewhere.
Sheer, sick curiousity. I want to see exactly what makes that nightmare tick. Nothing professional, just that disgusting impulse to stare at wreckage on the side of the road.
The OSS movement isn't competetive, according to this article, making it seriously flawed and likely to collapse from rarification. These individuals haven't stopped by to see the holy wars on Slashdot, or the bitter interfactional fighting that goes on when a project forks. I think 'survival-of-the-fittest' is alive and well in the OSS community. As for it being a passing meme, it's a valid point, if you ignore the fact of how long it's been in the media background. Emacs, anyone? The BSD 4.4 Controversy? These things happened well before the Microsoft Hearings.
Perhaps these thinktanks should do research outside what they read on USA Today, and take a look at the community which they are trying to assess, instead of accepting third-hand accounts.
I had a BSD box on my desk when Win3.1 was the 'standard', I've got a SuSE box on my desk now, and I will have whatever I bloody well choose, so long as I am efficient at what I do. Some employers understand that to keep technically proficient users, they have to keep their hands off. I just don't get tech support from I/T, which is no big loss, since they're all MCSE paper dummies.
Who exactly asked you to become our self-proclaimed Joan of Arc? What gives you the idea that we must resort to the tactics of our opponents, shameless chest-beating and self-promotion, in order to get our point across? You think Bill Gates still does what he does for money? No, he does it for ego. Take your theatrics elsewhere.
I remember that book! I read it when I was kindergarten student! Hmm.. No wonder I turned out the way I did.
:p
Can someone tell me what the ring around Ping's neck to prevent Ping from swallowing whole fish meant in the metaphor?
If you take a look at the size specs again, you'd realize that this little puppy is less than half the size. Of course, that isn't including a display or power supply. The real item of interest is that it is essentially a tiny AT-style motherboard, unlike the Pilot, which is a strange little beast to most x86 programmers.
;)
Come call us when you get linux running on your pilot.
Okay, Bowie sold all his stock in his future earnings, right? Sounds like he doesn't care if he does well or not, just so long as he enjoys what he does. It looks to me like David Bowie's one of very few artists in the main arena who doesn't have a sword-of-damocles profit margin to watch out for.
Heck, I wasn't even looking for a symbolic victory. I just wanted to annoy the heck out of Microsoft and our vendors in revenge for all the time I've been on hold with them. =)
If you really want to cause a headache, let's see some of the more forward thinking I/T departments get behind this one. =) Our department has a massive site license for NT & 95, yet our hardware manufactures still pack in licenses for NT and 95. Could an I/T department refuse the EULA on grounds that it already has a license?
If so, we have a shipment of a hundred licenses coming in in a couple weeks. *WEG*
While I agree with RSA's assertion that we must test and examine this algorithm stringently; but how many times has Microsoft's FUD assertions been somewhat true, but angled in such a way to threaten the technology? I am merely pointing out that RSA has probably even more interest in scaring people away from a possible public-key encryption algorithm which could be freely licensed than they do in proving the frailties of 56-bit DES. (See also DES-III challenge.) This would break their stranglehold on public-key encryption algorithms in the public eye, making it possible to develop for-profit software that doesn't pay a royalty to them.
The points they made were valid, it's just that we have to keep an eye on the reason *why* they made them. I don't know the people at RSA personally, but with business and profit comes marketing.
Are we using the most-signifigant-bit as a modus? If so, then 0xFF is *less* than 255 decimal since it is actually -127. =)
Ziff-Davis is living up to its reputation for being a mouthpiece for corporate interests. Did anyone else notice that RSA seems a little concerned by a public key encryption algorithm that they can't get royalties from? I think it's very obvious to everyone in the programming community that this new algorithm needs to go through the peer review process, but that doesn't make it any less remarkable. I especially loved the complaint that the ciphertext produced by the algorithm was larger than the one produced by RSA. I think RSA should simply accept the possibility that an algorithm could come from somewhere else than their ivory tower.
The only reason I considered college in the first place was credibility for possible employers. Most HR departments look for either college or job experience in candidates for their I/T departments, even in entry level positions. I took the other road, and joined the US Army Signal Corps for four years, which leveraged me into a comfy desktop support job at a major corporation making $36/hr.
I'm not saying this is the easy way out, I spent a lot of those four years developing my personal skills in the field, and not sitting on my backside waiting for the Army to train me. You have to go out and get your education, but at least you have someone willing to vouch that you have experience in your field.
Just bought one a couple days ago. It feels like it has a lot of potential, but there's a *lot* of drift, and you can't recalibrate it. The drift isn't too bad in close combat, but it's a pain in the neck in sniper mode.
Also, the Vertical range for mouse emulation doesn't reach far enough. It has only a third of the play that a normal mouse has, making it really hard to look up.
I love the feel of the triggers and the thumb buttons are placed just right. I like the resistance a bit lower. I'm sure it'll get a little looser with use, but without the ability to calibrate, and the truncated Mouse-Y axis, this stick is destined for the closet.