RAMBUS must know that there is prior art that weakens their claim.
Last time around AMD and DEC complained about certain anti-competitive aspects of Intel's behaviour regarding processor patents and other IP. Intel settled and promised to be good, but now they seem to be up to their old tricks again. I can smell another antitrust suit coming. --
1.Why is there a big, ugly union in the VFS rather than having all filesystems use the generic pointer?
This is a big ugly wart that has to be fixed. But there's another way to handle it than forcing everything through the generic pointer: just include the length of the fs-specific data in the fs registration struct. Then all the nasty includes can be unwound. I proposed this a few months ago but didn't get any feedback one way or the other so I didn't code the patch. After getting some email about it later along the lines of "good idea, where's the patch?" I decided to do it after all, but by that time 2.4 was getting too close and this really isn't the kind of change you want to make when you're on the putting green. As soon as 2.5 comes out I'll do it and submit it, we'll see what happens. All the filesystems have to be changed at the same time (though trivially) so basically the patch has to be coded and submitted all on the same day. And if it doesn't get accepted the first time around (the likely case) the process will have to be repeated a couple of times.
This is by way of saying that I hope that that particular issue hasn't got long to live. (on to the next...) --
Making noise is one of the things that keeps the open source system healthy. I think that in general the Linux kernel has had good stewardship, and though I personally have not had direct interactions with Al Viro, I think that extends to him as well.
On the other hand, I think the system could be improved a lot. There are some annoyances. For example, there is little, if any, documentation available on the one of the most critical aspects of the kernel, namely the buffer cache component of the VFS. It seems that you are expected to either learn about it yourself by reading every post on Linux Kernel, and every line of code in the filesystem tree, plus all patched versions. If you get stuck, you can play 20 questions on the kernel list, trying not to appear too clueless and at the same time trying not to appear so clueful that you will get flamed on grounds that you should have figured it out yourself. If your post to the kernel is phrased correctly then one of the VFS gurus will answer it - usually clearly and accurately, but not necessarily completely. And the game goes on.
The good news is that you *can* get the information you need. The bad news is that you are expected to jump through a lot of hoops to get it, and the information seems to be dolled out as a kind of payment for playing the game correctly and politely.
I think this should change. I think that the design documentation we need should be readily available - it has to be posted somewhere where everybody can get at it, and contribute to it. There's already a place for it: kernel.org. Why isn't there more there than just kernels and patches?
(The Linux Doc project is a good source of documentation, but not for in-progress kernel work.)
There's no shortage of people who would be willing to do this kind of documentation work if they were able to. Right now there seem to be some roadblocks in the way. --
I hack regularly on the fs layer and vfs, so I feel I'm qualified to comment. There is some truth in the VFS deficiencies you point out, but I doubt that this is intentional. As I understand it, the prime directive for VFS development at this point is stability and all other issues are secondary. Imagine how much hay Microsoft could make of a cutting-edge, yet unstable VFS.
the VFS has specific ext2 functionality built into it. It's a "virtual filesystem" as long as you can make your filesystem look and work like ext2.
It's easy to understand why. VFS started life as a simple refactoring of, um, EXT. Actually pretty naive in conception, but it has worked well. I was able to work with it, and I didn't ask anyone's help. There are a number of documents out there that deal with VFS, notably TLK (The Linux Kerne) though admittedly in a somewhat superficial way. The rest of VFS I learned about with grep - if I were to do it again I'd use LXR.
The problems you speak about (except for stacking) don't have a lot to do with VFS per se - they are really more problems with the buffer cache system. The buffer cache does its job pretty well as long as you're not doing something like journalling. As soon as you start journalling you run into questions about exactly what gets flushed to disk when and you expose areas in the buffer cache that were simply never designed with this in mind. What to do about them is an open question, and an interesting question. Look for this to be a main development center in 2.5
The reason 2.4 has no journaling filesystem is that there are roadblocks in place to keep it that way. Ext3 will be the first journaling filesystem in Linux. Not because it will be the first journaling filesystem, or the best, but because it will be the one properly supported by the VFS ("Viro File System").
I think a more accurate reason is that a journalling filesystem requires a massive development effort. EXT3 is being developed essentially by one man (perhaps this in itself supports your argument) and RieserFS by a team of about 3. I think they've done pretty well to move along as well as they have. 2.5 will have at least two journalling filesystems and they will no doubt be backported into 2.4 at an early stage.
Adding to the problem is that the VFS is very poorly documented. Changes are made without any foreshadowing. The best documentation available is the source code for the Ext2 filesystem. And that is sad.
Somebody who knows the VFS really well should go in and produce some definitive documentation. The trouble is, precisely the parts that need documenting are the ones that are in flux right now. The audience for this documentation is also tiny, though important. You also have to worry that if you document it thoroughly, you may be casting a bad design in stone. It's a problem. The payoff for better documentation will be more developers getting up to speed on the VFS quickly and as a result, more rapid filesystem evolution. Perhaps what we need is something more like a design manifesto for each new wave of VFS development. --
Couldn't let your troll go by. Sun sells hardware - if (when) Linux does eventually come to equal or exceed Solaris in all relevant respects Sun will simply adopt Linux and continue to sell hardware.
Sure, it surprised me too to see Sun turn in the growth figures they have, but in retrospect it was just because I didn't understand the market that well.
<petty> I guess for you guys at Microsoft Sun will be another company you can watch go by on your way down. How did it feel to watch Cisco go by? </petty> --
"Does anyone honestly believe that drug research would grind to a halt if there were no patents? If so, then why does open source software development not grind to a halt?"
Yes, drug research would grind (more-or-less) to a halt. The cost of developing a new medicine is staggering.
The tribute exacted by the drug company is even more staggering, resulting in a net loss to society versus some more efficient mechanism. Drug research should be funded by those with a strong interest in keeping people healthy. Notably health insurance companies. --
Kudos for your brilliant exposition. [*saves article for future reference*]
I'd like to add an observation of my own.
Patents are no longer a net benefit to society.
Supposedly, there was a time when many great innovations would never have happened if it were not for the patent system. That time, if indeed it ever existed, is long gone. Patents are now a net burden on society. The patent process has been almost completely subverted by large corporations - the days when a single inventor, acting alone could come up with something brilliant and be rewarded with riches are (again, if they ever actually existed) also long gone. What we have instead is a kind of a star system where every once in a long while a lone inventor *does* strike it rich, and is held up as a reason why the system should be perpetuated (much like the recording industry). But such tales are few and far between, and seem to be becoming rarer all the time.
Even with a few lone inventors benefiting, the patent system is a net burden on society (can anyone argue this?) Since we are a democratic society (I *still* believe that) then the patent system has only one way to go: the way of the dodo.
The time to tear down the system is now. Will we tear it down now? No - there are too many entrenched interests, almost exclusively on the corporate society. But knowing that the system must eventually die - to recap in darwinian terms: what is bad for society is not fit to survive - we can certainly hasten it's death. Some of us will work from within, becoming polititians, lawyers, businessmen, etc., and gain real power to make changes. Others will work from outside, for example, by ferreting out prior are and exposing technically indefensible patents. The best thing we can do is to make known to our non-technical friends and acquaintances just how much the patent system is hurting them, how much it is costing them in real dollars, and how much it is holding back real innovation.
Does anyone honestly believe that drug research would grind to a halt if there were no patents? If so, then why does open source software development not grind to a halt? --
One thing I found interesting is that Inferno, as well as being a stand-alone OS, can also be run as an application under Windows NT, Windows 95, Unix (Irix, Solaris, FreeBSD, Linux, AIX, HP/UX) and Plan 9.
How hard would it be to make Linux do that? I'd think that User Mode Linux would be a very good start. --
Locate is great for finding files. Problem with it is threefold:
1) Let's say I install something, like LessTif. The LessTif rpm doesn't modify my ld.so.conf so I have to put the path to libXm in there myself. Where did the RPM put it? Can't use locate because I haven't yet run updatedb.
Yes, that's actually a very interesting problem that's worth solving. What is needed is some kind of event supported by VFS; a program like locate can register to receive it; the event says "I just changed such-and-such directory [and optionally] in such-and-such a way". It doesn't really have to be any more than a notification of change - locate could pick these up and automatically do an incremental re-index on your next locate or locate -u cron job.
We're talking about a feature here that touches the system in a few different places and you'd want to be very careful in how you went about it. Right now we really don't have anything that handles system-wide events/messages. The current state of the art is a kind of hierarchy where program results get passed up and down a tree of execute and a pretty unsophisticated and often inconvenient way. We need a system-wise messaging facility that can handle messages that cross between components, asynchronously. Ultimately such a system will exist in Linux - it's a better way of doing things, so it will happen.
2) Not portable. Maybe there is a locate workalike on AIX or Tru64, but I haven't found it.
Ah, seriously, I don't really care about that. It's good, so other platforms will adopt it if they haven't already. Just don't use it in a script that's supposed to be cross-platform. --
I really love it how Unix has 10000 text editors. But I'd prefer one that works
Try Nedit if you want it to make an easy switch from Windows.
And stability isn't an issue for many windows developers who use NT/2000.
That's funny. I developed on NT 4 for a few weeks and I had processes lock up on at least a dozen occasions - other times, I had the system start doing strange things that only a reboot would fix, like displaying the mouse at a displacement from where the hits were actually occuring. ActiveX controls would crash constantly, and couldn't be restarted - also requiring a reboot. On a number of occasions the mouse cursor just froze, for periods up to 30 seconds. Maybe your experience was different, after all, as a Microsoft Troll perhaps you spend most of your time camping on a web browser and not actually developing? --
Here's my opinion: I will quit my job before I will spend as much as a week coding on Windows again.
I *did* quit after it became clear management wasn't going to let me develop on Linux. I'm much happier and productive now - also better paid:-)
4) And then there's all the little things: DLLs. Installers. Command line tools. Now that I've learned how to use the "find" command...well, there's no superlative strong enough to get across how much I prefer Linux.
Hooboy, you're gonna cream when you discover "locate"! --
The food was completely wonderful - except the kimchee. I know, I'm a traitor -- but I have a very hard time getting behind rotten cabbage in hot sauce.
Remember when you didn't like beer?? Kimchee grows on you after a while. The cabbage isn't rotten - it's preserved - sometimes it's practically fresh. There are about 1,000,000 different kinds of kimchee. Kimchee is prepared in every imaginable way as well - my favorite is Kimchee Chonggul, a hot soup with ramyun noodles, pork and of course kimchee, shared between as many people as possible - you have to try it.
In Korea, you know you've been assimilated when the realization suddenly dawns on you: "I *like* kimchee!" --
Oh, and speaking of which, next time you're near a library, stop in and ask for the audio/video department. Look at all the music and movies they offer for anyone on the street to listen to for free.
I wasn't aware of that - shows you how long it's been since I've been in a library. Just a thought: it's a nobrainer to extend this to computer software. Is this happening? Probably not, because Microsoft would have a bird, wouldn't they. But Linus and RMS wouldn't. Libraries could start doing this right now, today, if they haven't already. Wouldn't it be great to be able to pick up the latest distros from your local library? Not to say I wouldn't buy the boxed set too, just to get the stuffed penguin, the printed manual and the CDs for backup without the hassle of copying and labeling. In fact, I'd be *more* likely to buy the boxed set after checking out the goods.
Wish I had moderator points right now to mark you up.
Your comment on fame as a commodity is +1 insightful too. I'd like to add to this the observation that what the RIAA really has is a monopoly on fame. What the internet is doing is dismantling that monopoly, and this is what really terrifies the RIAA. That's just too bad. I hate monopolies. --
Notwithstanding the fact that I wish the Chinese wouldn't abuse freedom in this way, it does serve a very useful purpose: it shows us what could happen if the essential freedoms of the internet are eroded in freer countries. It doesn't hurt to be able to counter some of the misguided "law an order" propositions we are seeing so much of with "and you want to make our internet more like China's, do you?".
I don't know the detailed specs of Intel's chip, but I do know market spin when I see it:
Intel's new chips for the ultraportable market will include a fixed-speed 500-MHz Celeron, whose 1.2-volt operating voltage will reduce power under 2 watts
It doesn't say power consumption will *stay* under 2 watts. --
Linux is powerful as hell, but the interface is still done mostly through command line.
Can't make up my mind whether you are a troll or not. If you are, you are smart because you have learned not to trash Linux where it is strong, but that strength does not *directly* affect a naive mom&pop user. If you are not a troll, then you are living on another planet, because on the planet I live on, virtually everything we do on Linux here is done through the GUI. Almost a year after she began using Linux I finally showed my wife how to use the command line (she *likes* it! - just like giving a command to her husband, I guess:-/ ).
I am a programmer and, other than when I am actually editing program text, I too do most of my work on Linux through the GUI. --
Re:Explain to stupid: Why faster?
on
Linux BIOS
·
· Score: 2
Quite apart from the actual boot speed, one of the *prime* advantages is not having to keep switching the processor into virtual 86 mode to execute 16 bit code in the BIOS. This is a *horribly* expensive operation and can leave the processor unresponsive to interrupts for extended periods. --
This may sound alarmist, but Linux on the mass desktop depends on Mozilla.
Mozilla will succeed - there's no question about that, in fact I'd go further and say that as a project, Mozilla has already succeeded. You can grab the code and prove that for yourself.
You are correct in saying that Mozilla is key to Linux on the mass desktop, but it's just one of many, many key issues. *All* of which are are being addressed. Not that Linux is that shabby a desktop right now. It beats heck out of early Microsoft efforts - remember, people have been using desktop computers successfully since the Dos days. It's already better than Microsoft's best in many departments and it's actually easier to enumerate the places where it still needs to catch up. These are getting fewer every month. Early adopters can jump in *now* with confidence - even business shops and non-technical people.
So don't panic. But don't relax either - the sooner Mozilla is out the sooner world domination will be achieved;-) --
...there are a plethora of SC opinions on the virtue of taking these cases through the appeals process, to isolate the true constitutional questions. In short, I highly doubt the SC will take this case away from the DC Circuit.
The AT&T case was expeditied, why shouldn't this one be? In the AT&T, both sides agreed to use the expediting act, but I don't see why that should make a difference either. --
Slashdot Mirror
RAMBUS must know that there is prior art that weakens their claim.
Last time around AMD and DEC complained about certain anti-competitive aspects of Intel's behaviour regarding processor patents and other IP. Intel settled and promised to be good, but now they seem to be up to their old tricks again. I can smell another antitrust suit coming.
--
1.Why is there a big, ugly union in the VFS rather than having all filesystems use the generic pointer?
This is a big ugly wart that has to be fixed. But there's another way to handle it than forcing everything through the generic pointer: just include the length of the fs-specific data in the fs registration struct. Then all the nasty includes can be unwound. I proposed this a few months ago but didn't get any feedback one way or the other so I didn't code the patch. After getting some email about it later along the lines of "good idea, where's the patch?" I decided to do it after all, but by that time 2.4 was getting too close and this really isn't the kind of change you want to make when you're on the putting green. As soon as 2.5 comes out I'll do it and submit it, we'll see what happens. All the filesystems have to be changed at the same time (though trivially) so basically the patch has to be coded and submitted all on the same day. And if it doesn't get accepted the first time around (the likely case) the process will have to be repeated a couple of times.
This is by way of saying that I hope that that particular issue hasn't got long to live. (on to the next...)
--
Making noise is one of the things that keeps the open source system healthy. I think that in general the Linux kernel has had good stewardship, and though I personally have not had direct interactions with Al Viro, I think that extends to him as well.
On the other hand, I think the system could be improved a lot. There are some annoyances. For example, there is little, if any, documentation available on the one of the most critical aspects of the kernel, namely the buffer cache component of the VFS. It seems that you are expected to either learn about it yourself by reading every post on Linux Kernel, and every line of code in the filesystem tree, plus all patched versions. If you get stuck, you can play 20 questions on the kernel list, trying not to appear too clueless and at the same time trying not to appear so clueful that you will get flamed on grounds that you should have figured it out yourself. If your post to the kernel is phrased correctly then one of the VFS gurus will answer it - usually clearly and accurately, but not necessarily completely. And the game goes on.
The good news is that you *can* get the information you need. The bad news is that you are expected to jump through a lot of hoops to get it, and the information seems to be dolled out as a kind of payment for playing the game correctly and politely.
I think this should change. I think that the design documentation we need should be readily available - it has to be posted somewhere where everybody can get at it, and contribute to it. There's already a place for it: kernel.org. Why isn't there more there than just kernels and patches?
(The Linux Doc project is a good source of documentation, but not for in-progress kernel work.)
There's no shortage of people who would be willing to do this kind of documentation work if they were able to. Right now there seem to be some roadblocks in the way.
--
The good news is that Clinton was clueful enough to give an address on the net. The bad news is, he's still too clueless to use mp3.
--
I hack regularly on the fs layer and vfs, so I feel I'm qualified to comment. There is some truth in the VFS deficiencies you point out, but I doubt that this is intentional. As I understand it, the prime directive for VFS development at this point is stability and all other issues are secondary. Imagine how much hay Microsoft could make of a cutting-edge, yet unstable VFS.
the VFS has specific ext2 functionality built into it. It's a "virtual filesystem" as long as you can make your filesystem look and work like ext2.
It's easy to understand why. VFS started life as a simple refactoring of, um, EXT. Actually pretty naive in conception, but it has worked well. I was able to work with it, and I didn't ask anyone's help. There are a number of documents out there that deal with VFS, notably TLK (The Linux Kerne) though admittedly in a somewhat superficial way. The rest of VFS I learned about with grep - if I were to do it again I'd use LXR.
The problems you speak about (except for stacking) don't have a lot to do with VFS per se - they are really more problems with the buffer cache system. The buffer cache does its job pretty well as long as you're not doing something like journalling. As soon as you start journalling you run into questions about exactly what gets flushed to disk when and you expose areas in the buffer cache that were simply never designed with this in mind. What to do about them is an open question, and an interesting question. Look for this to be a main development center in 2.5
The reason 2.4 has no journaling filesystem is that there are roadblocks in place to keep it that way. Ext3 will be the first journaling filesystem in Linux. Not because it will be the first journaling filesystem, or the best, but because it will be the one properly supported by the VFS ("Viro File System").
I think a more accurate reason is that a journalling filesystem requires a massive development effort. EXT3 is being developed essentially by one man (perhaps this in itself supports your argument) and RieserFS by a team of about 3. I think they've done pretty well to move along as well as they have. 2.5 will have at least two journalling filesystems and they will no doubt be backported into 2.4 at an early stage.
Adding to the problem is that the VFS is very poorly documented. Changes are made without any foreshadowing. The best documentation available is the source code for the Ext2 filesystem. And that is sad.
Somebody who knows the VFS really well should go in and produce some definitive documentation. The trouble is, precisely the parts that need documenting are the ones that are in flux right now. The audience for this documentation is also tiny, though important. You also have to worry that if you document it thoroughly, you may be casting a bad design in stone. It's a problem. The payoff for better documentation will be more developers getting up to speed on the VFS quickly and as a result, more rapid filesystem evolution. Perhaps what we need is something more like a design manifesto for each new wave of VFS development.
--
Couldn't let your troll go by. Sun sells hardware - if (when) Linux does eventually come to equal or exceed Solaris in all relevant respects Sun will simply adopt Linux and continue to sell hardware.
Sure, it surprised me too to see Sun turn in the growth figures they have, but in retrospect it was just because I didn't understand the market that well.
<petty>
I guess for you guys at Microsoft Sun will be another company you can watch go by on your way down. How did it feel to watch Cisco go by?
</petty>
--
"Does anyone honestly believe that drug research would grind to a halt if there were no patents? If so, then why does open source software development not grind to a halt?"
Yes, drug research would grind (more-or-less) to a halt. The cost of developing a new medicine is staggering.
The tribute exacted by the drug company is even more staggering, resulting in a net loss to society versus some more efficient mechanism. Drug research should be funded by those with a strong interest in keeping people healthy. Notably health insurance companies.
--
there is nothing like Visio in the OSS world
What about Dia?
--
Kudos for your brilliant exposition. [*saves article for future reference*]
I'd like to add an observation of my own.
Patents are no longer a net benefit to society.
Supposedly, there was a time when many great innovations would never have happened if it were not for the patent system. That time, if indeed it ever existed, is long gone. Patents are now a net burden on society. The patent process has been almost completely subverted by large corporations - the days when a single inventor, acting alone could come up with something brilliant and be rewarded with riches are (again, if they ever actually existed) also long gone. What we have instead is a kind of a star system where every once in a long while a lone inventor *does* strike it rich, and is held up as a reason why the system should be perpetuated (much like the recording industry). But such tales are few and far between, and seem to be becoming rarer all the time.
Even with a few lone inventors benefiting, the patent system is a net burden on society (can anyone argue this?) Since we are a democratic society (I *still* believe that) then the patent system has only one way to go: the way of the dodo.
The time to tear down the system is now. Will we tear it down now? No - there are too many entrenched interests, almost exclusively on the corporate society. But knowing that the system must eventually die - to recap in darwinian terms: what is bad for society is not fit to survive - we can certainly hasten it's death. Some of us will work from within, becoming polititians, lawyers, businessmen, etc., and gain real power to make changes. Others will work from outside, for example, by ferreting out prior are and exposing technically indefensible patents. The best thing we can do is to make known to our non-technical friends and acquaintances just how much the patent system is hurting them, how much it is costing them in real dollars, and how much it is holding back real innovation.
Does anyone honestly believe that drug research would grind to a halt if there were no patents? If so, then why does open source software development not grind to a halt?
--
(I do OO dev since 1991. I love this, and I pretty know what I am talking about).
...
Inheritance lead to problems because it is easily messed and very difficult to undo.
Brilliant analysis! (*saves article*). Moderators, did you see it?
--
One thing I found interesting is that Inferno, as well as being a stand-alone OS, can also be run as an application under Windows NT, Windows 95, Unix (Irix, Solaris, FreeBSD, Linux, AIX, HP/UX) and Plan 9.
How hard would it be to make Linux do that? I'd think that User Mode Linux would be a very good start.
--
Locate is great for finding files. Problem with it is threefold:
1) Let's say I install something, like LessTif. The LessTif rpm doesn't modify my ld.so.conf so I have to put the path to libXm in there myself. Where did the RPM put it? Can't use locate because I haven't yet run updatedb.
Yes, that's actually a very interesting problem that's worth solving. What is needed is some kind of event supported by VFS; a program like locate can register to receive it; the event says "I just changed such-and-such directory [and optionally] in such-and-such a way". It doesn't really have to be any more than a notification of change - locate could pick these up and automatically do an incremental re-index on your next locate or locate -u cron job.
We're talking about a feature here that touches the system in a few different places and you'd want to be very careful in how you went about it. Right now we really don't have anything that handles system-wide events/messages. The current state of the art is a kind of hierarchy where program results get passed up and down a tree of execute and a pretty unsophisticated and often inconvenient way. We need a system-wise messaging facility that can handle messages that cross between components, asynchronously. Ultimately such a system will exist in Linux - it's a better way of doing things, so it will happen.
2) Not portable. Maybe there is a locate workalike on AIX or Tru64, but I haven't found it.
Ah, seriously, I don't really care about that. It's good, so other platforms will adopt it if they haven't already. Just don't use it in a script that's supposed to be cross-platform.
--
Nice troll.
I really love it how Unix has 10000 text editors. But I'd prefer one that works
Try Nedit if you want it to make an easy switch from Windows.
And stability isn't an issue for many windows developers who use NT/2000.
That's funny. I developed on NT 4 for a few weeks and I had processes lock up on at least a dozen occasions - other times, I had the system start doing strange things that only a reboot would fix, like displaying the mouse at a displacement from where the hits were actually occuring. ActiveX controls would crash constantly, and couldn't be restarted - also requiring a reboot. On a number of occasions the mouse cursor just froze, for periods up to 30 seconds. Maybe your experience was different, after all, as a Microsoft Troll perhaps you spend most of your time camping on a web browser and not actually developing?
--
Here's my opinion: I will quit my job before I will spend as much as a week coding on Windows again.
:-)
I *did* quit after it became clear management wasn't going to let me develop on Linux. I'm much happier and productive now - also better paid
4) And then there's all the little things: DLLs. Installers. Command line tools. Now that I've learned how to use the "find" command...well, there's no superlative strong enough to get across how much I prefer Linux.
Hooboy, you're gonna cream when you discover "locate"!
--
The food was completely wonderful - except the kimchee. I know, I'm a traitor -- but I have a very hard time getting behind rotten cabbage in hot sauce.
Remember when you didn't like beer?? Kimchee grows on you after a while. The cabbage isn't rotten - it's preserved - sometimes it's practically fresh. There are about 1,000,000 different kinds of kimchee. Kimchee is prepared in every imaginable way as well - my favorite is Kimchee Chonggul, a hot soup with ramyun noodles, pork and of course kimchee, shared between as many people as possible - you have to try it.
In Korea, you know you've been assimilated when the realization suddenly dawns on you: "I *like* kimchee!"
--
Oh, and speaking of which, next time you're near a library, stop in and ask for the audio/video department. Look at all the music and movies they offer for anyone on the street to listen to for free.
I wasn't aware of that - shows you how long it's been since I've been in a library. Just a thought: it's a nobrainer to extend this to computer software. Is this happening? Probably not, because Microsoft would have a bird, wouldn't they. But Linus and RMS wouldn't. Libraries could start doing this right now, today, if they haven't already. Wouldn't it be great to be able to pick up the latest distros from your local library? Not to say I wouldn't buy the boxed set too, just to get the stuffed penguin, the printed manual and the CDs for backup without the hassle of copying and labeling. In fact, I'd be *more* likely to buy the boxed set after checking out the goods.
Wish I had moderator points right now to mark you up.
Your comment on fame as a commodity is +1 insightful too. I'd like to add to this the observation that what the RIAA really has is a monopoly on fame. What the internet is doing is dismantling that monopoly, and this is what really terrifies the RIAA. That's just too bad. I hate monopolies.
--
Notwithstanding the fact that I wish the Chinese wouldn't abuse freedom in this way, it does serve a very useful purpose: it shows us what could happen if the essential freedoms of the internet are eroded in freer countries. It doesn't hurt to be able to counter some of the misguided "law an order" propositions we are seeing so much of with "and you want to make our internet more like China's, do you?".
:-/
I sure hope this isn't preceived as a troll
--
Actually, that's less than 2 watts
I don't know the detailed specs of Intel's chip, but I do know market spin when I see it:
Intel's new chips for the ultraportable market will include a fixed-speed 500-MHz Celeron, whose 1.2-volt operating voltage will reduce power under 2 watts
It doesn't say power consumption will *stay* under 2 watts.
--
...is that you can run Linux on them. I wonder if you can get a discount by leaving out Windows?
--
Linux is powerful as hell, but the interface is still done mostly through command line.
:-/ ).
Can't make up my mind whether you are a troll or not. If you are, you are smart because you have learned not to trash Linux where it is strong, but that strength does not *directly* affect a naive mom&pop user. If you are not a troll, then you are living on another planet, because on the planet I live on, virtually everything we do on Linux here is done through the GUI. Almost a year after she began using Linux I finally showed my wife how to use the command line (she *likes* it! - just like giving a command to her husband, I guess
I am a programmer and, other than when I am actually editing program text, I too do most of my work on Linux through the GUI.
--
Quite apart from the actual boot speed, one of the *prime* advantages is not having to keep switching the processor into virtual 86 mode to execute 16 bit code in the BIOS. This is a *horribly* expensive operation and can leave the processor unresponsive to interrupts for extended periods.
--
This may sound alarmist, but Linux on the mass desktop depends on Mozilla.
;-)
Mozilla will succeed - there's no question about that, in fact I'd go further and say that as a project, Mozilla has already succeeded. You can grab the code and prove that for yourself.
You are correct in saying that Mozilla is key to Linux on the mass desktop, but it's just one of many, many key issues. *All* of which are are being addressed. Not that Linux is that shabby a desktop right now. It beats heck out of early Microsoft efforts - remember, people have been using desktop computers successfully since the Dos days. It's already better than Microsoft's best in many departments and it's actually easier to enumerate the places where it still needs to catch up. These are getting fewer every month. Early adopters can jump in *now* with confidence - even business shops and non-technical people.
So don't panic. But don't relax either - the sooner Mozilla is out the sooner world domination will be achieved
--
SSL, Shockwave, and Java?... If it replaces Communicator, how do you deal with these not being in Mozilla?
GPL Flash[tm] Plugin 0.4.9 is released !!!
Worry the not. All in progress. GPL shockwave... much better than a closed proprietary, single-platform plugin, don't you think?
--
So, Microsoft buys some time.
I wonder how much it cost?
--
...there are a plethora of SC opinions on the virtue of taking these cases through the appeals process, to isolate the true constitutional questions. In short, I highly doubt the SC will take this case away from the DC Circuit.
The AT&T case was expeditied, why shouldn't this one be? In the AT&T, both sides agreed to use the expediting act, but I don't see why that should make a difference either.
--