I priced one of those and decided I'd have to work my way up to that kind of toy. Instead I started with Buffalo's TeraStations which are affordable and have built-in RAID support. You can mount them in Linux and use LVM to span a single filesystem across several of them or just mount them normally depending on your needs. $1-$2 per GB for external, RAID, storage isn't bad at all.
Exactly why we should be looking seriously at putting a moonbase up this decade and not by the end of the century. If we don't then someone else will. I'd rather it be a democratic nation. I don't really want man's first reach into colonizing space to be by those who don't respect personal freedom.
I've ran a lot of different programs on Macs under both OS X and Linux and Linux certainly runs faster. I don't think it's just MySQL although that is the study I was referencing. I don't think there is anything wrong with the Mac hardware but something seems seriously wrong with OS X when it comes to speed and reliability. I saw OS X crash often on several different Macs (totally different models) and they were just slow especially when it came to using the network and file access. Transfering large files between two Macs over the network was slow and painful regardless of the program used. Windows has a similar problem - transfering the exact same file is MUCH faster under Linux. I transfer a lot of files under all the OS's so I've had a lot of experience in how long it takes. Literally I can transfer 5GB of files between two Linux boxes in the time it takes to move 500MB of files between Mac or Windows boxes.
I haven't tried Tiger yet. I heard it fixed some of those problems?
Cool, I'll check them out. I can see that it's good to stick to POSIX unless there is an even better reason to break POSIX compliance. What about the microkernel breaks POSIX? Not really sure what capability security is.. and I'm sure a lot of people are even less sure than I am.;)
I never really cared for either (BeOS was shit ugly IMO) but I'll agree that neither sucked. I'll have to look for some design studies to see how much the microkernel designed helped or hurt them. BeOS may have been able to become a major player if the top dogs there hadn't been so sure of how great they were. To bad they didn't go opensource early on.
It's often cheaper to throw more hardware at the problem than pay for more downtime because of poor reliability. Hardware is cheap. I'm fairly poor and I have a couple dozen systems laying around most of which are fairly new. Most problems are such that the extra 5% gained from a monolithic design won't matter anyway as more time is spent with the cpu waiting for one thing or another.
It sucked last time I tried it but that was a long time ago. Everything sucked back then. I'll give it another peek. Do they still have a free demo version? I glanced at their web page and I didn't see it.
OS X does not perform well. You can feel it when using it and testing seems to agree. Also it crashes fairly often. I am actually shocked at how often I've seen different OS X machines crash. I'd dare to say they crash at least as often as XP in my experience.
NT, 2000, and XP don't perform well either and aren't very stable (better than Win9x but that isn't much). Hardly anything I'd brag about.
Just about any code can be ran on top of a microkernel - that's sort of the point of a kernel isn't it? BSD and Linux can certainly run on top of it but they don't run as well when they are ran that way.
Certainly my Linux system isn't made of 95% of GNU programs and a lot of the programs distributed by the GNU project were not written by the GNU project but were donated to the GNU project. I was considering donating some of my projects to GNU before RMS went on his ranting but that was enough to decide me that I didn't want to fuel him. It's an utter waste of time to be going around telling other people to change their names.
Even if 100% of my car were made by Goodyear that doesn't mean the distributor needs to call it Goodyear/Focus. Case in point - the new Ford hybrid SUVs are based largely on technology licensed from Honda. Are they calling them Honda SUVs or Honda/Ford SUVs? Of course not. They're still Ford.
Your network is slow. Load balancing would be more impressive if your pipes were faster. What's your criteria for throwing my own server into your mix? My hosting provider has the best speeds I've ever seen and I'm used to having multiple OC-12 circuits to play with.
I tried it about 8 years ago so my experience is probably way outdated. Then it wouldn't even boot on about 7 of 10 of my PCs and the ones that did boot were pretty limited. I think it was QNX that had one feature I did find interesting though.. the ability to move your logged in GUI session from client machine to client machine without shutting apps down or logging out. It was a pretty cool feature similar to what we can do with VNC today but smoother. I'd love to see that work in X. (If that wasn't QNX then I have no idea what it was!)
Anyone that dares to write an OS in the age of Microsoft gets at least a C in my book if the damn thing can so much as boot and say Hello World. C'mon, give the guy some points for effort. How many students of OS design that got A's in the class have even bothered to write their own OS outside of school or work let alone post it for public review?
That's okay. My experience has been that RMS is never shy to give himself credit.
I really appreciate and love the FSF, GPL, free software, and GNU tools but I'm never going to call Linux GNU/Linux. Let him put his adverts on his own damn stuff rather than trying to convince everyone else to do so. Just because my car sits on a foundation of Goodyear tires doesn't mean I'm going to call it a Goodyear/Focus. Sure that might sound like a new years resolution but it's still dumb and a nightmare in product advertising. I'd be shocked to see Ford advertising it that way.
That'd be more convincing if I could see a microkernel OS that didn't suck. The theory is great.. sort of like object oriented programming.. but doesn't always work out. The biggest problem seems to be that that extra layer of abstraction slows things down (which makes sense really). Then you have to weigh the benefits of running faster and leaner or easier programming. From a programmers point of view most will like the abstracted and easier option because you can spend more time writing code and less time debugging and fixing but real world usgae doesn't always work well with that.
Still.. as fast as modern computers are I think we may be reaching a point where raw speed is less important and well designed microkernels can probably run almost as fast as monolithic kernels. If heavy usage servers can be run as virtual machines in Xen then why not use a microkernel too?
So. Any examples of microkernel OS's that handle heavy server load, function well as a desktop, and can handle multimedia tasks like gaming? OS X uses BSD under a microkernel I think but my experience is that it is slow and the tests I've seen have shown that Linux performs a lot better on it than OS X (no idea if that was due to microkernel use). I'd find it hard to believe that with solid numbers showing that microkernel is just as fast and without additional overhead that someone like Linus wouldn't use it since it's an easier programming model (better for security, stability, etc).
I think cheap is better than gee-whiz perfection when it comes to highly experimental projects like space exploration. First what we should work on is sending unmanned packages into space on the ultra-cheap. So cheap that we can send thousands of such packages up if we want to. Ideally these packages would be able to not only get out of our atmosphere but also to self navigate and land on the moon. Then we could build experimental machines designed to study the moon and prepare it for mankind by burrowing out air-tight caves big enough to contain a moon base and maybe even organizing all that material bored out into something that'd be useful for astronauts when they get there. What we want is to send cheap machines up that can put into place everything we'll need to live there. If each machine is cheap enough to make and deliver then we can replace those which fall short of our goals or that fail. Trying to make expensive fail proof machines that are even more expensive to deliver is a sure way to put off getting there until the end of the century. Using cheaper machines and delivery we should be able to get there in the next decade.
As much as people might hate to hear it I'd cut corners on manned space vehicles too although not near as many corners. Exploration has always been a dangerous business. Let the bold take their chances and reap their rewards. Open being an astronaut to anyone that passes a basic phsyical and psych test and whom might be able to do something useful. Honestly we're going to need to send up some cheap manual labor. If 1 in 3 ships doesn't make it it really doesn't matter if the people going are replacable and the ship itself didn't cost much. Hell, fall back to the old system of taking recruits among prisions and the poor. It may be dangerous but it gives them a chance at a new life. Always exploration has been a chance for those with nothing to lose to risk everything for that chance. Do it again.
In the longer view I think the space elevator is going to be the delivery mechanism for the masses but for now ultra-cheap rockets is a good idea. The cheaper the better so long as they can still get the job done at a rate faster than what we're doing now. (Wasn't there a story recently on rockets that need 1/10th the fuel for the same lift? which means carrying less fuel weight which means needing less than 1/10th the amount of fuel to achieve the same work.)
Caution will not win us new frontiers. Let man go where no man has gone before.
Rotation is the best way to make sure everyone gets some, doesn't get bored with their partner, and reduces any chances of cheating or sexual jealousy. You could just encourage a general orgy atmosphere too I guess.
You might think you get by fine but it's unlikely. Hormones are mind altering chemicals. Unless you have some sort of damage to your system. My experience is that horniness is more damaging to your mental activity than drinking or using minor drugs (smoking, pot, caffine, over-the-counter meds, etc).
If you've gone decades without sex then no wonder you're so grumpy. Go get some. It isn't that hard. Heck, here in Nevada prostitution is legal if you get really desperate.
Personally I'd say to pick all bisexual people. I think in that kind of limited situation almost everyone would turn bi if encouraged a little. Encouraging sex would be just a part of encouraging general health. You wouldn't tell astronauts to just wing it when it comes to their fitness program and eatting habits so why would you for their sex habits?
Masturbation might clear year head for an hour or two. Sex can give you a day or two. Also masturbation doesn't fulfill any emotional needs. I think sex is more practical.
Slashdot Mirror
Why not burn the oxygen too?
I priced one of those and decided I'd have to work my way up to that kind of toy. Instead I started with Buffalo's TeraStations which are affordable and have built-in RAID support. You can mount them in Linux and use LVM to span a single filesystem across several of them or just mount them normally depending on your needs. $1-$2 per GB for external, RAID, storage isn't bad at all.
Exactly why we should be looking seriously at putting a moonbase up this decade and not by the end of the century. If we don't then someone else will. I'd rather it be a democratic nation. I don't really want man's first reach into colonizing space to be by those who don't respect personal freedom.
Sadly licensing often plays that role. Things that should have changed computing didn't because people didn't want to give up the keys.
I've ran a lot of different programs on Macs under both OS X and Linux and Linux certainly runs faster. I don't think it's just MySQL although that is the study I was referencing. I don't think there is anything wrong with the Mac hardware but something seems seriously wrong with OS X when it comes to speed and reliability. I saw OS X crash often on several different Macs (totally different models) and they were just slow especially when it came to using the network and file access. Transfering large files between two Macs over the network was slow and painful regardless of the program used. Windows has a similar problem - transfering the exact same file is MUCH faster under Linux. I transfer a lot of files under all the OS's so I've had a lot of experience in how long it takes. Literally I can transfer 5GB of files between two Linux boxes in the time it takes to move 500MB of files between Mac or Windows boxes.
I haven't tried Tiger yet. I heard it fixed some of those problems?
Cool, I'll check them out. I can see that it's good to stick to POSIX unless there is an even better reason to break POSIX compliance. What about the microkernel breaks POSIX? Not really sure what capability security is.. and I'm sure a lot of people are even less sure than I am. ;)
I never really cared for either (BeOS was shit ugly IMO) but I'll agree that neither sucked. I'll have to look for some design studies to see how much the microkernel designed helped or hurt them. BeOS may have been able to become a major player if the top dogs there hadn't been so sure of how great they were. To bad they didn't go opensource early on.
It's often cheaper to throw more hardware at the problem than pay for more downtime because of poor reliability. Hardware is cheap. I'm fairly poor and I have a couple dozen systems laying around most of which are fairly new. Most problems are such that the extra 5% gained from a monolithic design won't matter anyway as more time is spent with the cpu waiting for one thing or another.
It sucked last time I tried it but that was a long time ago. Everything sucked back then. I'll give it another peek. Do they still have a free demo version? I glanced at their web page and I didn't see it.
OS X does not perform well. You can feel it when using it and testing seems to agree. Also it crashes fairly often. I am actually shocked at how often I've seen different OS X machines crash. I'd dare to say they crash at least as often as XP in my experience.
NT, 2000, and XP don't perform well either and aren't very stable (better than Win9x but that isn't much). Hardly anything I'd brag about.
Just about any code can be ran on top of a microkernel - that's sort of the point of a kernel isn't it? BSD and Linux can certainly run on top of it but they don't run as well when they are ran that way.
Certainly my Linux system isn't made of 95% of GNU programs and a lot of the programs distributed by the GNU project were not written by the GNU project but were donated to the GNU project. I was considering donating some of my projects to GNU before RMS went on his ranting but that was enough to decide me that I didn't want to fuel him. It's an utter waste of time to be going around telling other people to change their names.
Even if 100% of my car were made by Goodyear that doesn't mean the distributor needs to call it Goodyear/Focus. Case in point - the new Ford hybrid SUVs are based largely on technology licensed from Honda. Are they calling them Honda SUVs or Honda/Ford SUVs? Of course not. They're still Ford.
Your network is slow. Load balancing would be more impressive if your pipes were faster. What's your criteria for throwing my own server into your mix? My hosting provider has the best speeds I've ever seen and I'm used to having multiple OC-12 circuits to play with.
I tried it about 8 years ago so my experience is probably way outdated. Then it wouldn't even boot on about 7 of 10 of my PCs and the ones that did boot were pretty limited. I think it was QNX that had one feature I did find interesting though.. the ability to move your logged in GUI session from client machine to client machine without shutting apps down or logging out. It was a pretty cool feature similar to what we can do with VNC today but smoother. I'd love to see that work in X. (If that wasn't QNX then I have no idea what it was!)
I'm still looking for a FreeDOS image myself. Damn! I wanted to play Commander Keen in my glorious emulator!
Anyone that dares to write an OS in the age of Microsoft gets at least a C in my book if the damn thing can so much as boot and say Hello World. C'mon, give the guy some points for effort. How many students of OS design that got A's in the class have even bothered to write their own OS outside of school or work let alone post it for public review?
That's okay. My experience has been that RMS is never shy to give himself credit.
I really appreciate and love the FSF, GPL, free software, and GNU tools but I'm never going to call Linux GNU/Linux. Let him put his adverts on his own damn stuff rather than trying to convince everyone else to do so. Just because my car sits on a foundation of Goodyear tires doesn't mean I'm going to call it a Goodyear/Focus. Sure that might sound like a new years resolution but it's still dumb and a nightmare in product advertising. I'd be shocked to see Ford advertising it that way.
That'd be more convincing if I could see a microkernel OS that didn't suck. The theory is great.. sort of like object oriented programming.. but doesn't always work out. The biggest problem seems to be that that extra layer of abstraction slows things down (which makes sense really). Then you have to weigh the benefits of running faster and leaner or easier programming. From a programmers point of view most will like the abstracted and easier option because you can spend more time writing code and less time debugging and fixing but real world usgae doesn't always work well with that.
Still.. as fast as modern computers are I think we may be reaching a point where raw speed is less important and well designed microkernels can probably run almost as fast as monolithic kernels. If heavy usage servers can be run as virtual machines in Xen then why not use a microkernel too?
So. Any examples of microkernel OS's that handle heavy server load, function well as a desktop, and can handle multimedia tasks like gaming? OS X uses BSD under a microkernel I think but my experience is that it is slow and the tests I've seen have shown that Linux performs a lot better on it than OS X (no idea if that was due to microkernel use). I'd find it hard to believe that with solid numbers showing that microkernel is just as fast and without additional overhead that someone like Linus wouldn't use it since it's an easier programming model (better for security, stability, etc).
I think cheap is better than gee-whiz perfection when it comes to highly experimental projects like space exploration. First what we should work on is sending unmanned packages into space on the ultra-cheap. So cheap that we can send thousands of such packages up if we want to. Ideally these packages would be able to not only get out of our atmosphere but also to self navigate and land on the moon. Then we could build experimental machines designed to study the moon and prepare it for mankind by burrowing out air-tight caves big enough to contain a moon base and maybe even organizing all that material bored out into something that'd be useful for astronauts when they get there. What we want is to send cheap machines up that can put into place everything we'll need to live there. If each machine is cheap enough to make and deliver then we can replace those which fall short of our goals or that fail. Trying to make expensive fail proof machines that are even more expensive to deliver is a sure way to put off getting there until the end of the century. Using cheaper machines and delivery we should be able to get there in the next decade.
As much as people might hate to hear it I'd cut corners on manned space vehicles too although not near as many corners. Exploration has always been a dangerous business. Let the bold take their chances and reap their rewards. Open being an astronaut to anyone that passes a basic phsyical and psych test and whom might be able to do something useful. Honestly we're going to need to send up some cheap manual labor. If 1 in 3 ships doesn't make it it really doesn't matter if the people going are replacable and the ship itself didn't cost much. Hell, fall back to the old system of taking recruits among prisions and the poor. It may be dangerous but it gives them a chance at a new life. Always exploration has been a chance for those with nothing to lose to risk everything for that chance. Do it again.
In the longer view I think the space elevator is going to be the delivery mechanism for the masses but for now ultra-cheap rockets is a good idea. The cheaper the better so long as they can still get the job done at a rate faster than what we're doing now. (Wasn't there a story recently on rockets that need 1/10th the fuel for the same lift? which means carrying less fuel weight which means needing less than 1/10th the amount of fuel to achieve the same work.)
Caution will not win us new frontiers. Let man go where no man has gone before.
Rotation is the best way to make sure everyone gets some, doesn't get bored with their partner, and reduces any chances of cheating or sexual jealousy. You could just encourage a general orgy atmosphere too I guess.
You might think you get by fine but it's unlikely. Hormones are mind altering chemicals. Unless you have some sort of damage to your system. My experience is that horniness is more damaging to your mental activity than drinking or using minor drugs (smoking, pot, caffine, over-the-counter meds, etc).
If you've gone decades without sex then no wonder you're so grumpy. Go get some. It isn't that hard. Heck, here in Nevada prostitution is legal if you get really desperate.
Personally I'd say to pick all bisexual people. I think in that kind of limited situation almost everyone would turn bi if encouraged a little. Encouraging sex would be just a part of encouraging general health. You wouldn't tell astronauts to just wing it when it comes to their fitness program and eatting habits so why would you for their sex habits?
Dude, where's my spaceship? Hot chicks, drugs, weird happenings, and outer space. Sounds like Red Dwarf. Gotta love British comedy.
Masturbation might clear year head for an hour or two. Sex can give you a day or two. Also masturbation doesn't fulfill any emotional needs. I think sex is more practical.
Nope, got a gf. Not a problem.
I'm handing out copies of porno DVD's to the big kids and cartoon DVD's to the kids. Gotta love sharing the media.