Of course it's not going to happen. But if people want to really make Linux the biggest market then they're going to have to make that killer app. I'm kinda hoping someone does, but I'm not holding my breath.
Believe it or not, there was a day and time when Unix security was considered a bad joke,
I believe it, I've seen the old docs myself. I do know that Linux is just a clone and that bsd is a direct descendant of the original unix source. I also know that the NT kernel is a bit of a descendant of VMS. The old Unix vs. VMS debates were classic.
It's true that any OSS app written could be ported (I personally use The Gimp on Windows from time to time) but they run perfect on just a recompile. The Cygwin libraries are nice but they do add overhead and not all windowing libraries work right on different platforms (gaim had some weird window resizing issues on Windows that never seem to happen on Linux). Except for apps written in java or mono, oss apps that were originally written for Linux and then ported over always seem to be a little behind when compared to the native versions. It works both ways thou, native Windows apps ported to Linux seem to suffer from issues too.
What I'm advocating is the dreaded Vendor Lock In (tm). Something that only works on Linux. Something new and so cool you'd be stupid not to use and would take forever to port or recreate anywhere else.
I'm starting to believe that my ex was right, I am a jerk;)
I'm not saying that Gnome and Kde are a bad thing. In fact they're both very useful. What I'm trying to say is that there isn't very many "new" applications being created that only run in Linux. If a graphic designer were to move from Windows or Mac to Linux they could use The Gimp instead of Photoshop. An accountant could use GNUCash instead of Quickbooks. They'd be loosing features and usability but those issues are being sorted out. I'd imagine if Doom III or Half Life 2 came out on Linux first and then Windows later, if there was interest;), there would be a flood of gamers who'd switch to Linux. If Photoshop came out for Linux first and then got ported to Windows a few years later, Linux would be the defacto graphics design os.
What I'm trying to say is Linux needs a killer app. That Magic App X that everyone needs but doesn't exist on any other operating system. Something that would take months or years to reimplement on Windows, Mac or Operating System X.
Posting opinions on Slashdot is the geek equivalent of talking about politics in a bar. Neither actually change anything unless your a fascist dictator looking for easily lead goons.
It's not Linux that's good in servers, it's unix. Unix has always been used for servers. Linux is merely the latest version of unix. If Linux wasn't around servers would run on other variants of unix like they did in the past and still do today.
Sadly, Linux's biggest strength is that it implements ideas from other oses very well. It just just implements them a few years after everyone else. Kde and Gnome look a lot like very pretty versions Windows 98. The whole Windows on a Dos kernel and X Windows on Linux kernel is a great example. Another example would be how Open Office is slowly implementing everything that MS Office does. I can make a list of programs that run on Windows and programs that reimplement them on Linux all night.
To make Linux really cool, someone needs to create something for Linux that everyone needs but doesn't exist on Windows or the Mac. I'd do it but I'm on Slashdot waiting for the booze to kick in instead of codeing;) If someone comes up with anything I'd be willing to help...
But what of teachers and students? There's over 15 years of teachers with knowlage of Microsoft products. Most students (ie non-cs majors) are going to end up working in companies that are all Microsoft shops. The cost of getting a whole new teaching staff, having admins upgrade every machine to a different os and the cost of debugging a completely different network environment as well as the loss of students to other universities that will teach students the software employers use is way more than a Microsoft lock in. The free software seems attractive on the surface, but there's a huge hidden cost. Until employers start switching and there are more OSS teachers and admins, the human costs are too great.
There is hope thou, start small. Move a few computers over to OSS. For all the students who just want to check email or browse, set up simple locked down Linux or Freebsd based systems. Start offering classes like "Word Processing Using Open Office", "Computers 102: Advanced Computer Usage With Unix" or "Graphic Design Using The Gimp". Make them optional classes for majors like English, Art or Cultural Anthropology.
When non-geeks actually know something else other than Windows based programs, then real change will happen.
The 286 did have a flat address space in it's implementation of protected mode, it was just 24 bit flat addressing. The word size was still 16 bit thou.
And for the record, Intel chips are still a freaking nightmare;) Damn crap86's
Cha, I know. The good news is that there's no more dealing with that kinda hacking in protected mode and the amd 64 bit extention is just protected mode with an extended word size.
I know, I've been waiting for something like 2 years for it. While it's nice to not have to break out the emulators, I wouldn't mind something new;)
I've seen a few fan made games but... well, they never seem to get finished and really don't bring much to the table. Some are pretty good, but it's just not the same.
While I like Phantasy Star Online as much as the next Sega geek, I miss the old school rpg style. When will Sega make a new Rpg and not just another version of the online game with minor graphical updates?
I was overjoyed when the first 3 games were released for gameboy advanced. I hope they release the 4th one sometime soon but, more importantly, I hope they release a Real Phantasy Star game.
check out section 2.1. Nothing has changed all that drastic. There is some low level stuff that the os would have to take care of, but nothing to radical. The 128 bit floats are kinda neat thou.
The limit on the file size is actualy determined by the file system type, not the word size of the cpu archatechture. There's a reason it's called fat32.;) If it was based on cpu word size, we wouldn't have been able to have files larger than 64k on the x86 until the early 90's. Change file systems and your in the good. NTFS and ext3 all don't have that limit.
You may have been running 64 bit linux for a little while on the x86 but you strike me as a guy never seen the joys of real mode vs. protected mode. You should Google up some of the angst filled rants from programmers who had to deal with it back in the day. Some of that old code is just crazy.
We got it so easy these days almost makes me feel lazy.
That's not what I was asking. The difference between 16 bit real mode, weird ass vm mode and 32 bit protected mode are night and day. I did a quick scan of the amd docs and it looks like the only difference from the old 32 bit protected mode is they map 64 bits out of 58 bits of physical addresses (40 bits in the early implementations) and up the addressing word size. It also seems to keep a 32 bit compatibility mode around as well. The size of ram isn't that big of an issue when it comes to upgrading as much as the mode that the cpu runs in.
You should look at some of the really old code. It's amazing the crazy hacks people had to do just to access more than 64k in real mode.
Also, what the hell does word size have to do with file size? That makes no sense what so ever.
How is that different that the current 32 bit mode? If I remember correctly (and google still serves me right;) all Linux binaries start at 0x08048000. Windows does the same, just a different address. What exactly does the 64 bit add other than larger word sizes and a few extra registers?
If I remember my history right, it was the 286 that added this mode. Granted the addressing was in 24 bit but it tossed out haveing to split up your memory address across 2 pointer registers ( I still curse those damn data segments, when I'm drunk enough).
It wasn't just word size. The 16 bit mode on the x86 is way different than the 32 bit modes. There's a radical change in the way you address memory. I'm not exactly sure how amd's 64bit extention works, but I'd imagine it's not too different than your standard 32 bit protected mode. If it was, there'd be a lot more to upgradeing any app than a simple recompile(open source or not).
Actualy, you can do multipul desktops on windows. the first time I saw it was in a program called litestep (if that isn't up there's an older version here). Not only did it do multipule desktops it also skins them too. There's tons of other shell replacements like it at shell city. Some are better than others thou.....
Turns out ripping out the shell in windows isn't that hard.
These days I just use the normal shell and some random tool that came with my nvidia card that let's you have multipule desktops. Handy when some game blows up your refresh rate (civ 3).
Actually, I have looked at the security rating for both of them based on government sources. Turns out Linux is just as easy to crack. The thing that bugged me the most was that even thou windows had more issues, 80% of them could be firewalled out. Linux on the other hand...
Later, when we finally got away from doing government work *shudder*, we started working for a medical software company. Holy hackers batman, you want to know how easy to crack Linux is? Set up a server in Windows with the latest patches, get a really good firewall and set up a fake page for some medical software. Set IIS to say it's apache running on Linux. Make up a bunch of cards with the url on it and pass it out to all the software venders at a large medical software show. Later that night check the logs and see what fun comes down.
In my experience the only os that's secure is the one that doesn't have a tcp/ip stack, disk drive or cpu. Never say something is secure because you happen to know how to install a toy language on an insecure web server. Anybody who uses php is automatically disqualified from ever making any statement about security, ever. You might as well install asp 2.0 on an unpatched Windows XP box.
I wish. Diff is only good if you understand what's going on (ie you wrote both files). The files in question are apple's changes to the 3.1 code. If they were to diff apple's code against the 3.1 code, it would probably not be hard to see what changed. The problem is that KHTML isn't at 3.1 anymore. Safari is, thou. Every thing that's been fixed in KHTML hasn't been fixed in Safari. So haveing the code to Safari and trying to move it back in to KHTML code base would be a task of epic proportion with little to no real benifits.
As an example of why just diffing two forks that originated from the same code base doesn't just automagicaly fix everything, try diffing the Xemacs source and Emacs source and see if you can merge them. Have fun, but don't stay up too late worrying about it;)
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it's not going to happen. But if people want to really make Linux the biggest market then they're going to have to make that killer app. I'm kinda hoping someone does, but I'm not holding my breath.
That or a Linux only system that completely runs your Big Brother systems. Linux controlled Secret Robot Police and GNU Re-education Centers.
;)
That would be cool. Let's see Microsoft try making that run on Windows XP
Believe it or not, there was a day and time when Unix security was considered a bad joke,
;)
I believe it, I've seen the old docs myself. I do know that Linux is just a clone and that bsd is a direct descendant of the original unix source. I also know that the NT kernel is a bit of a descendant of VMS. The old Unix vs. VMS debates were classic.
Somethings never change, eh?
It's true that any OSS app written could be ported (I personally use The Gimp on Windows from time to time) but they run perfect on just a recompile. The Cygwin libraries are nice but they do add overhead and not all windowing libraries work right on different platforms (gaim had some weird window resizing issues on Windows that never seem to happen on Linux). Except for apps written in java or mono, oss apps that were originally written for Linux and then ported over always seem to be a little behind when compared to the native versions. It works both ways thou, native Windows apps ported to Linux seem to suffer from issues too.
;)
What I'm advocating is the dreaded Vendor Lock In (tm). Something that only works on Linux. Something new and so cool you'd be stupid not to use and would take forever to port or recreate anywhere else.
I'm starting to believe that my ex was right, I am a jerk
I'm not saying that Gnome and Kde are a bad thing. In fact they're both very useful. What I'm trying to say is that there isn't very many "new" applications being created that only run in Linux. If a graphic designer were to move from Windows or Mac to Linux they could use The Gimp instead of Photoshop. An accountant could use GNUCash instead of Quickbooks. They'd be loosing features and usability but those issues are being sorted out. I'd imagine if Doom III or Half Life 2 came out on Linux first and then Windows later, if there was interest ;), there would be a flood of gamers who'd switch to Linux. If Photoshop came out for Linux first and then got ported to Windows a few years later, Linux would be the defacto graphics design os.
What I'm trying to say is Linux needs a killer app. That Magic App X that everyone needs but doesn't exist on any other operating system. Something that would take months or years to reimplement on Windows, Mac or Operating System X.
Posting opinions on Slashdot is the geek equivalent of talking about politics in a bar. Neither actually change anything unless your a fascist dictator looking for easily lead goons.
I'm not just a troll, I'm a drunken troll.
It's not Linux that's good in servers, it's unix. Unix has always been used for servers. Linux is merely the latest version of unix. If Linux wasn't around servers would run on other variants of unix like they did in the past and still do today.
;) If someone comes up with anything I'd be willing to help...
Sadly, Linux's biggest strength is that it implements ideas from other oses very well. It just just implements them a few years after everyone else. Kde and Gnome look a lot like very pretty versions Windows 98. The whole Windows on a Dos kernel and X Windows on Linux kernel is a great example. Another example would be how Open Office is slowly implementing everything that MS Office does. I can make a list of programs that run on Windows and programs that reimplement them on Linux all night.
To make Linux really cool, someone needs to create something for Linux that everyone needs but doesn't exist on Windows or the Mac. I'd do it but I'm on Slashdot waiting for the booze to kick in instead of codeing
Anyone?
But what of teachers and students? There's over 15 years of teachers with knowlage of Microsoft products. Most students (ie non-cs majors) are going to end up working in companies that are all Microsoft shops. The cost of getting a whole new teaching staff, having admins upgrade every machine to a different os and the cost of debugging a completely different network environment as well as the loss of students to other universities that will teach students the software employers use is way more than a Microsoft lock in. The free software seems attractive on the surface, but there's a huge hidden cost. Until employers start switching and there are more OSS teachers and admins, the human costs are too great.
There is hope thou, start small. Move a few computers over to OSS. For all the students who just want to check email or browse, set up simple locked down Linux or Freebsd based systems. Start offering classes like "Word Processing Using Open Office", "Computers 102: Advanced Computer Usage With Unix" or "Graphic Design Using The Gimp". Make them optional classes for majors like English, Art or Cultural Anthropology.
When non-geeks actually know something else other than Windows based programs, then real change will happen.
The 286 did have a flat address space in it's implementation of protected mode, it was just 24 bit flat addressing. The word size was still 16 bit thou.
;)
And for the record, Intel chips are still a freaking nightmare
Damn crap86's
Cha, I know. The good news is that there's no more dealing with that kinda hacking in protected mode and the amd 64 bit extention is just protected mode with an extended word size.
I know, I've been waiting for something like 2 years for it. While it's nice to not have to break out the emulators, I wouldn't mind something new ;)
I've seen a few fan made games but... well, they never seem to get finished and really don't bring much to the table. Some are pretty good, but it's just not the same.
While I like Phantasy Star Online as much as the next Sega geek, I miss the old school rpg style. When will Sega make a new Rpg and not just another version of the online game with minor graphical updates?
I was overjoyed when the first 3 games were released for gameboy advanced. I hope they release the 4th one sometime soon but, more importantly, I hope they release a Real Phantasy Star game.
pdf with description of the changes and if that doesn't worku rces/0,,30_182_739_7044,00.html
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalReso
check out section 2.1. Nothing has changed all that drastic. There is some low level stuff that the os would have to take care of, but nothing to radical. The 128 bit floats are kinda neat thou.
no worries man
The limit on the file size is actualy determined by the file system type, not the word size of the cpu archatechture. There's a reason it's called fat32. ;) If it was based on cpu word size, we wouldn't have been able to have files larger than 64k on the x86 until the early 90's. Change file systems and your in the good. NTFS and ext3 all don't have that limit.
You may have been running 64 bit linux for a little while on the x86 but you strike me as a guy never seen the joys of real mode vs. protected mode. You should Google up some of the angst filled rants from programmers who had to deal with it back in the day.
Some of that old code is just crazy.
We got it so easy these days almost makes me feel lazy.
That's not what I was asking. The difference between 16 bit real mode, weird ass vm mode and 32 bit protected mode are night and day. I did a quick scan of the amd docs and it looks like the only difference from the old 32 bit protected mode is they map 64 bits out of 58 bits of physical addresses (40 bits in the early implementations) and up the addressing word size. It also seems to keep a 32 bit compatibility mode around as well. The size of ram isn't that big of an issue when it comes to upgrading as much as the mode that the cpu runs in.
You should look at some of the really old code. It's amazing the crazy hacks people had to do just to access more than 64k in real mode.
Also, what the hell does word size have to do with file size? That makes no sense what so ever.
How is that different that the current 32 bit mode? If I remember correctly (and google still serves me right ;) all Linux binaries start at 0x08048000. Windows does the same, just a different address. What exactly does the 64 bit add other than larger word sizes and a few extra registers?
If I remember my history right, it was the 286 that added this mode. Granted the addressing was in 24 bit but it tossed out haveing to split up your memory address across 2 pointer registers ( I still curse those damn data segments, when I'm drunk enough).
It wasn't just word size. The 16 bit mode on the x86 is way different than the 32 bit modes. There's a radical change in the way you address memory. I'm not exactly sure how amd's 64bit extention works, but I'd imagine it's not too different than your standard 32 bit protected mode. If it was, there'd be a lot more to upgradeing any app than a simple recompile(open source or not).
Actualy, you can do multipul desktops on windows.
the first time I saw it was in a program called litestep (if that isn't up there's an older version here).
Not only did it do multipule desktops it also skins them too. There's tons of other shell replacements like it at shell city. Some are better than others thou.....
Turns out ripping out the shell in windows isn't that hard.
These days I just use the normal shell and some random tool that came with my nvidia card that let's you have multipule desktops. Handy when some game blows up your refresh rate (civ 3).
Actually, I have looked at the security rating for both of them based on government sources. Turns out Linux is just as easy to crack. The thing that bugged me the most was that even thou windows had more issues, 80% of them could be firewalled out. Linux on the other hand...
Later, when we finally got away from doing government work *shudder*, we started working for a medical software company. Holy hackers batman, you want to know how easy to crack Linux is? Set up a server in Windows with the latest patches, get a really good firewall and set up a fake page for some medical software. Set IIS to say it's apache running on Linux. Make up a bunch of cards with the url on it and pass it out to all the software venders at a large medical software show. Later that night check the logs and see what fun comes down.
In my experience the only os that's secure is the one that doesn't have a tcp/ip stack, disk drive or cpu. Never say something is secure because you happen to know how to install a toy language on an insecure web server. Anybody who uses php is automatically disqualified from ever making any statement about security, ever. You might as well install asp 2.0 on an unpatched Windows XP box.
yeah, cause linux never gets rooted.....
I wish. Diff is only good if you understand what's going on (ie you wrote both files). The files in question are apple's changes to the 3.1 code. If they were to diff apple's code against the 3.1 code, it would probably not be hard to see what changed. The problem is that KHTML isn't at 3.1 anymore. Safari is, thou. Every thing that's been fixed in KHTML hasn't been fixed in Safari. So haveing the code to Safari and trying to move it back in to KHTML code base would be a task of epic proportion with little to no real benifits.
;)
As an example of why just diffing two forks that originated from the same code base doesn't just automagicaly fix everything, try diffing the Xemacs source and Emacs source and see if you can merge them. Have fun, but don't stay up too late worrying about it
Now crappy programmers who use Linux can write truely awful applications just like their Windows brothers.
Can't wait to see all the wonderful new stuff written in PHP apps that use Knoda that are ment to replace the VB6 that use Access.