Can't set the priority in BeOS?? Download ProcessController from bebits and love life! It slices, it dices, it also happens to do everything that pulse does, but also kills, renices, and cuddles up to all your processing needs. In other words, go now:-)
Archon is the game you are thinking about, and VICE is the emulator. VICE is GPL, and it also emulates the VI20, Pet, 128, and others. Yes, it is that cool:-) Check linuxapps or freshmeat, or most distro's ship with it (at least, debian does;-) and roms can be found all over the 'net. Look for an archive named frodo (not to be confused with the emulator of the same name). hth.
Hijacking web pages is the easiest thing in the world to do!!! In fact, I'm hijacking this thread right now. You are a captive reader to what I am saying and you can't leave until I get done typing!!! So, to prove my point, I will now ramble on Katz-like about the fact that only geeks can understand me because I was looked at funny when I was a kid because I'm a geek so I can install Linux now but not really because I have to post to slashdot to ask for installation help because even though I am a world renowned author (if you don't believe me, just ask me!) I can't be bothered to read the FAQ's or man pages because I'm busy being a geek. Ha! You were my prisoner for a total of... 8 seconds! Told you so...
When was the last time a *large* company came out and said "We made a bone-head manuever. We really wish our partner would pull it's head out of it's anal passageways and stop trying to screw everybody else."??? Maybe I'm having short-term memory problems, but I can't think of a single time that a company has been this fothright about something that *big*. I'm still going to be buying a Duron, mind you (hell, it's on the way), but my opinion of Intel has just risen a couple notches. Kudo's to you!
Apparently, someone else out there agrees with you:-) In fact, when I mod I generally do exactly what the poster asks me to do: at least when they mark their own posts flame bait or whatnot. I certainly didn't expect my little cold-medecine induced rant to get modded up to +4(Insightful). I think those moderators were on more drugs than I am;-)
On the subject though, using the GPL/BSD/Random Open Source license is completely not necessary to prevent vendor-lock in. The solution is simple: contract that the airport will own the code and they can do whatever they damn well please with it, wrt to having someone else work on it. I was mainly ranting about the fact that a "sourceforge" project, started and run by hobbiest who *haven't* studied what is necessary in a control program, had better not get anywhere close the my airport. If some company wants to release the source code to a program already in use to expose bugs, that's cool, but that isn't what Michael is shooting for. Well, I gotta go, but I enjoyed your post.
This reminds me of a survey that I once took regarding household appliances (supposedly 3rd party research): would you be willing to buy product-X which improves your life in so many ways and only costs $19.95 or are you so short-sighted and cheap that you won't even spend 2 hours wages on something this great? I mean, really, was that a question when he (Michael) answered it himself? Most of the time the/. editors try to be at least a *little* fair wrt closed-source software (note the mainly positive stuff said about BeOS). But this is over the top and arrogant. I for one sure as *hell* don't want open-source air traffic control software. How are you going to test it? Not at *my* airport!!! Custom written software like that is one instance where you *can* sue the people who wrote it if it fails, and you can be daggon sure that the people who do the grunt work are quite aware of that, and do a better job than most of the commercial crap that's out there. gah, next thing you know I'll be joining the ranks of people who claim/. is going downhill. I will admit that I remember with fondness the old Multia that used to run everything. That sucker got hot!! Well, I'm off to take my medicine.
Thank you! As you can probably tell, I have some experience with unix in general, but not very much with NT or Win2K. I didn't know how they worked at all. I feel that I have not wasted the day, as now I have learned something:-)
An AC made this point more succinctly, but I will reiterate with examples: *nix has had process control from the (very?) beginning. Next time you have access to a *nix box, run "ps -axf" or "ps -ef" depending on the version, and you will see a very similar list to what you see in Win2K. I have ftp, http, dns, and various others. Each proccess has it's PID, and by default runs at "nice" level 0. The round-robin scheduler then givees each process it's due allotment of CPU time, if it asks for it, and everything is hunkydory. However, if you have a process that you don't want to be interuppted while it is executing, you can "renice" the process, and set it's nice value lower. The range is -20 to +20, with the lower values bein executed with a higher priority. This is ecspecially (sp?) useful when running an mp3 player of some sort, as by giving it a lower nice value, you can (virtually) garuntee that it won't skip. Of course, the reason to set a higher nice value is for processes such as rc5 or seti@home, where you don't care how often it is preumpted, as long as you don't get interuppted in your work-flow. To sum up:by having per-process control on a forty point scale, you are enabled (management speak!!) to proactively fine-tune your machine. And *nix has been able to do this since the seventies. Apparently (and I will admit to ignorance) Win2K (what you were wishing *nix was like) only has the ability to control whether your forground or background apps have priority, without getting more detailed than that. Surely, you can see why the (here it comes again) *nix model is better. For a better and less rambling explanation of how process control works, I direct you to almost any paper/book/HOWTO covering (this is the last time, I swear) *nix shells. I hear the Linux-Newbie-HOWTO is particularly informative. HTH.
Much has been made of the difference between men and women (or the lack thereof) but one difference that seems to pop up no matter what rag is running the latest "women in computing" story, is that as a general rule, women tend to see computers as means to an end, while men tend to see computers as an end unto themselves. Whether this is biological, phsychological, or imagined, isn't important. What it does do is explain why there are so many women who are *users* and not as many who are *hackers* (hackers, by definition, being the ones more likely to be interested in Alternative Operating systems). To sum up: to say that there is no woman *qualified* to be part of the BSD core group is blatantly false, I know too many female programmers myself. However, to say that there is a disproportionate ratio of women users vs. women hackers is undeniably true, and thereby leads to a shortage of women in *every* corner of Alt. Os. land. The qualified women are undoubtably programming some routers for Cisco, putting in 80 hour weeks like the rest of us, and just plain don't have the time. I, on the other hand, have the time and interest, but not the skill:-)
Hope this perspective clears things up a little, and I also hope I was PC enough (tho. I'll get flamed now for being too PC:-P)
Sorry, don't you mean Sawmill *with* Gnome for Xwindows for Linux? Now, out of those 3 layers, which should we remove? Should we integrate XWindows (or equiv) into the kernel and wind up with the infamous stability problems that Windows 9x and NT have? By all accounts NT is stable as hell if you use the standard VGA driver, but wandering too far away from it results in a crash happy machine (what your rant was apparently against). Should we integrate Gnome into XWindows (or equiv)? Without even going into the KDE vs. Gnome vs. 3 xterms and vi argument, one of the reasons that XWindows has survived this long is that you can update the backend and frontend seperately. Who else is able to use basically the same system for 15 years? AKAIK, everyone from Windows to the Mac has completely revamped their windowing system, and broken compatability by doing that. Whether or not you like the X way of doing things (and I know a lot of informed people don't) it has worked and worked well for many people for a very long time. Fortuntely or un, I don't see that changing very soon. And last-but-not-least, should we integrate Sawmill into Gnome? poof. It's now done. Sawmill is integrated with Gnome. Seeing as they serve two different functions, that is as close as you are going to get.
To address the last have of your rant, I have never personally experiened a situation where Netscape or Mozilla crashing brought down my system. If you have, and there really was no way to fix it other than a reboot, I will be fairly suprised. On the other hand, I don't see how a nebulous "module priority system" would help or hinder matters. Do you wish to explain further?
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to reading your response soon.
p.s. dear nitpicker (not you AFC), I know there is no such thing as Xwindows. I don't care.
LOL. I've already seen posts claiming that the answer to the question "are you being edited" was not a complete answer, so there he must be being edited, so therefore the short answers are a result of his complete answer being "chopped". I'm sorry, but if conspiracy theorists are going to be reading what you write, there is *NO* way to completely "idiot-proof" what you say. We are talking about people who think the black helicopters are coming for them every time their neighbor starts up the lawn mower...
Maybe it was just a bad day for him, but did anyone else get the idea that he was feeling a bit snippy when he answered these? Most answers are a bit *too* short and to the point to be merely an efficent way of communicating, bordering on "I think this is a stupid question, so I'll give it a stupid answer". On the other hand, if I had complete strangers impunging my professional reputation and personal morality, I would probably be snippy too. Far too many people on this site and on the web in general forget that there are real people on the other end of every email and post that we send out. </end of degrading personal politeness in today's society rant>
Reread my comment with . In particular, reread the part where I say "he needs to be cut some slack" and "he's a person too". I was just pointing out the fact that it seems very popular to flame rob for his "unprofessionalism" and propose theories that "he likes the trolls cuz it drives page counts, that's why he doesn't change moderation", and that that is stupid beyond belief. Sorry if it came across wrong, but what you said is exactly what I was going for.
This (being the more interesting of the "interviews" by far) has no replies????? wtf? Where are all the people saying that he act's unprofessionaly here? Where are the people accusing cmdrtaco of "colluding" with the enemy? I mean, right there, he tells them to keep trolling!! Sure, he also says to cut their trolls in 1/2, but the point remains. Is it possible because people are starting to realize that Rob is human and needs to be cut a bit of slack just like the rest of us? Or maybe, just maybe, that flaming somebody to hell and gone *doesn't* generally produce the desired result? Come on, people, where's the flames????
Heh. I had forgotten about that. Well, yes. You are right. Those were pretty stupid examples of demagogourey (told you my spelling sucks). I retract any and all objections I had to you lamblasting the editors. Fire away:-)
ps. i and i are going to sleep now. down with babylon. cold medicine is cool. peace, out
Before I answer your question, I would like to ask one: where had slashdot *ever* "released a jihad" on a closed-source company for not opening their source? Before you start spluttering and calling me an idiot (not that you wouldn't be right) let me clarify: the position I think/. (as in the editors, they have no control over the comments) projects is this: open source projects are really good; closed-source projects have their place; companies who release "open source" projects under non-DFSG licenses for the express purpose of getting a few free bug-checkers and controlling a segment of the market *cough* sun *cough* suck; projects that choose licenses that conflict in subtle and not-so-subtle ways with the GPL and BSD licenses thus making it hard on distrobutions to include them, suck. I have *never* seen a post by a/. editor that says anything even *close* to "BeOS sucks cuz it's closed source", let alone "everyone flame Be 'till they give up and GPL everything, d00d". I am using BeOS as an example because that's what I use on a daily basis for my workstation, and I always pay more attention to Be stories. Even with KDE, the *main* problem has always been that a major open source project was being based on software that was under control of one company, under terms that make distributing binaries of that project *illegal*. The push to open-source QT was made because that was the easiest way to resolve the issue for good.
p.s. sorry if this rant comes out wrong. 1) I'm sick and on some pretty good cold medicine and 2) I'm tired and I get cranky when people don't make the distinction between/.-the-editors and/.-the-posters. Blaming the editors for all the looser script kiddies that hang around would be like blaming them for OOG or TrollMastah (both of whom I respect, btw). OOG for being funny and TrollMastah for actually making sense (some of the time).
I can't say as I'm familliar with the process of gaining access to Solaris's source code, but I assume (and you even make this point in your post) that you can do the same with NT. I remember reading a post from a gentleman who goes to school at a uni where they have all 5 cd's full of NT's source code. He even complimented Microsoft on it's readability. So I don't think that part of the argument holds true. I was just refering to the fact that it is completely different from unix in how it is put together and where things are. Call me a command-line commando, but I long for my three Eterms with bash, not cygnus-bash with ported vi. It doesn't feel right, and the file system layout is all wrong. Again, I'm not saying one way is bad and the other good, just that I'm very, very, used to/etc, vim, and HOW-TO's when it comes to setting something up, not technet, regedt32, and a prayer;-) If I missed your main point, please feel free to correct me and make me see the error of my ways...
You are spot-on with the rest of your comment, but the "Oh by the way I'm a Unix guy" *is* a valid argument. Unless there is an overwhelming need otherwise, go with what you know. Learning something new is great and all, but do it on your own time, not by installing something into production and saying "Cool! Now, everybody just hang out and take a smoke break while I reinstall because I screwed it up the first time."
For instance, I am in a mixed NT/*nix shop (mostly Solaris and AIX) and the company is interested in dropping linux in as DNS or Samba servers, but haven't given the go ahead because of lack of Linux experience in the admin dept. Note that they *want* to do it, and the boss is satisfied that linux is stable/secure/whatever enough, he just doesn't want to be woken up in the middle of the night while someone on the other end says: "well, I *thought* I knew how Linux handles slices, but, umm, we need to restore from backup".
Btw, I post all this in the assumption that you wrote the "member of the elite crowd" line facetiously (sp?), cuz as an "elite unix guy" I am here to tell you NT is easy to use but hard to master, esp. if you are trying to start with no windows experience at all. I'm not saying it's better or worse than Unix, but it just *feels* weird. And this is after I installed cygnus tools and vi:-)
Just an FYI, a lot of people have that "slow to switch desktops" thing going on, and it can be solved on one of two ways: first upgrade your video card:-P Assuming that an HP Kayak == crappy integrated video, we'll move on to 2: choose a solid color as your background. If it speeds up significantly after doing that, then your problem is video ram, not sysem ram. If neither helps, report it to e-devel@enlightenment.org and lots of friendly people will be glad to help out.
Weeeellll, maybe. But really, in comparison to/., what's ZDNet? Just yet another place to be slashdotted..... I'm sure they don't have the same levels of readership, and I'm *defintely* sure that the quality of editorialship isn't even close to being on the same plane. On the other hand, you'll notice that the previous two sentences can be read two ways;-)
Did the slashdot article really have that much effect on Microsoft? I thought that their take on it would be rather the opposite: anything that ticked off the/. crowd *must* be good for business;-)
I see the original poster already replied, but here's my answer: sure. I have 3 boxes at home with a fourth being built, and I wish I had more. Not because one can't do everything I need it to, but because I want to play around with a real network, not the typical linux server + windows workstation that seems to be fairly common. I now have freebsd, debian, beos, redhat, qnx, and soon, windows me all loaded on different partitions, but how am I supposed to learn about the different ways they interact if I only have 1 or 2 machines? That, and I always load one machine as my server to handle email and internet access, and then don't touch it anymore, other than updates. I can then load and explode everything else with impunity, and not have to worry about whether or not someone is trying to send me email whilst I'm frantically reloading my drive after a failed experiment with dd or fsck:-) Anyways, just thought I'd drop a line explaining why *some* of us have no problem "wasting" gobs of electricity on multiple computers. Pure hack value;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, you shouldn't be using a cell while driving anyhow. I think my bumper sticker applies to you:
Hang up the cell phone and DRIVE*
*before I cram it up your tailpipe.
Can't set the priority in BeOS?? Download ProcessController from bebits and love life! It slices, it dices, it also happens to do everything that pulse does, but also kills, renices, and cuddles up to all your processing needs. In other words, go now :-)
Archon is the game you are thinking about, and VICE is the emulator. VICE is GPL, and it also emulates the VI20, Pet, 128, and others. Yes, it is that cool :-) Check linuxapps or freshmeat, or most distro's ship with it (at least, debian does ;-) and roms can be found all over the 'net. Look for an archive named frodo (not to be confused with the emulator of the same name). hth.
Hijacking web pages is the easiest thing in the world to do!!! In fact, I'm hijacking this thread right now. You are a captive reader to what I am saying and you can't leave until I get done typing!!! So, to prove my point, I will now ramble on Katz-like about the fact that only geeks can understand me because I was looked at funny when I was a kid because I'm a geek so I can install Linux now but not really because I have to post to slashdot to ask for installation help because even though I am a world renowned author (if you don't believe me, just ask me!) I can't be bothered to read the FAQ's or man pages because I'm busy being a geek. Ha! You were my prisoner for a total of ... 8 seconds! Told you so...
When was the last time a *large* company came out and said "We made a bone-head manuever. We really wish our partner would pull it's head out of it's anal passageways and stop trying to screw everybody else."??? Maybe I'm having short-term memory problems, but I can't think of a single time that a company has been this fothright about something that *big*. I'm still going to be buying a Duron, mind you (hell, it's on the way), but my opinion of Intel has just risen a couple notches. Kudo's to you!
Apparently, someone else out there agrees with you :-) In fact, when I mod I generally do exactly what the poster asks me to do: at least when they mark their own posts flame bait or whatnot. I certainly didn't expect my little cold-medecine induced rant to get modded up to +4(Insightful). I think those moderators were on more drugs than I am ;-)
On the subject though, using the GPL/BSD/Random Open Source license is completely not necessary to prevent vendor-lock in. The solution is simple: contract that the airport will own the code and they can do whatever they damn well please with it, wrt to having someone else work on it. I was mainly ranting about the fact that a "sourceforge" project, started and run by hobbiest who *haven't* studied what is necessary in a control program, had better not get anywhere close the my airport. If some company wants to release the source code to a program already in use to expose bugs, that's cool, but that isn't what Michael is shooting for. Well, I gotta go, but I enjoyed your post.
This reminds me of a survey that I once took regarding household appliances (supposedly 3rd party research): would you be willing to buy product-X which improves your life in so many ways and only costs $19.95 or are you so short-sighted and cheap that you won't even spend 2 hours wages on something this great? I mean, really, was that a question when he (Michael) answered it himself? Most of the time the /. editors try to be at least a *little* fair wrt closed-source software (note the mainly positive stuff said about BeOS). But this is over the top and arrogant. I for one sure as *hell* don't want open-source air traffic control software. How are you going to test it? Not at *my* airport!!! Custom written software like that is one instance where you *can* sue the people who wrote it if it fails, and you can be daggon sure that the people who do the grunt work are quite aware of that, and do a better job than most of the commercial crap that's out there. gah, next thing you know I'll be joining the ranks of people who claim /. is going downhill. I will admit that I remember with fondness the old Multia that used to run everything. That sucker got hot!! Well, I'm off to take my medicine.
proudly ignoring the preview button,
Thank you! As you can probably tell, I have some experience with unix in general, but not very much with NT or Win2K. I didn't know how they worked at all. I feel that I have not wasted the day, as now I have learned something :-)
An AC made this point more succinctly, but I will reiterate with examples: *nix has had process control from the (very?) beginning. Next time you have access to a *nix box, run "ps -axf" or "ps -ef" depending on the version, and you will see a very similar list to what you see in Win2K. I have ftp, http, dns, and various others. Each proccess has it's PID, and by default runs at "nice" level 0. The round-robin scheduler then givees each process it's due allotment of CPU time, if it asks for it, and everything is hunkydory. However, if you have a process that you don't want to be interuppted while it is executing, you can "renice" the process, and set it's nice value lower. The range is -20 to +20, with the lower values bein executed with a higher priority. This is ecspecially (sp?) useful when running an mp3 player of some sort, as by giving it a lower nice value, you can (virtually) garuntee that it won't skip. Of course, the reason to set a higher nice value is for processes such as rc5 or seti@home, where you don't care how often it is preumpted, as long as you don't get interuppted in your work-flow. To sum up:by having per-process control on a forty point scale, you are enabled (management speak!!) to proactively fine-tune your machine. And *nix has been able to do this since the seventies. Apparently (and I will admit to ignorance) Win2K (what you were wishing *nix was like) only has the ability to control whether your forground or background apps have priority, without getting more detailed than that. Surely, you can see why the (here it comes again) *nix model is better. For a better and less rambling explanation of how process control works, I direct you to almost any paper/book/HOWTO covering (this is the last time, I swear) *nix shells. I hear the Linux-Newbie-HOWTO is particularly informative. HTH.
Much has been made of the difference between men and women (or the lack thereof) but one difference that seems to pop up no matter what rag is running the latest "women in computing" story, is that as a general rule, women tend to see computers as means to an end, while men tend to see computers as an end unto themselves. Whether this is biological, phsychological, or imagined, isn't important. What it does do is explain why there are so many women who are *users* and not as many who are *hackers* (hackers, by definition, being the ones more likely to be interested in Alternative Operating systems). To sum up: to say that there is no woman *qualified* to be part of the BSD core group is blatantly false, I know too many female programmers myself. However, to say that there is a disproportionate ratio of women users vs. women hackers is undeniably true, and thereby leads to a shortage of women in *every* corner of Alt. Os. land. The qualified women are undoubtably programming some routers for Cisco, putting in 80 hour weeks like the rest of us, and just plain don't have the time. I, on the other hand, have the time and interest, but not the skill :-)
:-P)
Hope this perspective clears things up a little, and I also hope I was PC enough (tho. I'll get flamed now for being too PC
Sorry, don't you mean Sawmill *with* Gnome for Xwindows for Linux? Now, out of those 3 layers, which should we remove? Should we integrate XWindows (or equiv) into the kernel and wind up with the infamous stability problems that Windows 9x and NT have? By all accounts NT is stable as hell if you use the standard VGA driver, but wandering too far away from it results in a crash happy machine (what your rant was apparently against). Should we integrate Gnome into XWindows (or equiv)? Without even going into the KDE vs. Gnome vs. 3 xterms and vi argument, one of the reasons that XWindows has survived this long is that you can update the backend and frontend seperately. Who else is able to use basically the same system for 15 years? AKAIK, everyone from Windows to the Mac has completely revamped their windowing system, and broken compatability by doing that. Whether or not you like the X way of doing things (and I know a lot of informed people don't) it has worked and worked well for many people for a very long time. Fortuntely or un, I don't see that changing very soon. And last-but-not-least, should we integrate Sawmill into Gnome? poof. It's now done. Sawmill is integrated with Gnome. Seeing as they serve two different functions, that is as close as you are going to get.
To address the last have of your rant, I have never personally experiened a situation where Netscape or Mozilla crashing brought down my system. If you have, and there really was no way to fix it other than a reboot, I will be fairly suprised. On the other hand, I don't see how a nebulous "module priority system" would help or hinder matters. Do you wish to explain further?
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to reading your response soon.
p.s. dear nitpicker (not you AFC), I know there is no such thing as Xwindows. I don't care.
LOL. I've already seen posts claiming that the answer to the question "are you being edited" was not a complete answer, so there he must be being edited, so therefore the short answers are a result of his complete answer being "chopped". I'm sorry, but if conspiracy theorists are going to be reading what you write, there is *NO* way to completely "idiot-proof" what you say. We are talking about people who think the black helicopters are coming for them every time their neighbor starts up the lawn mower...
Maybe it was just a bad day for him, but did anyone else get the idea that he was feeling a bit snippy when he answered these? Most answers are a bit *too* short and to the point to be merely an efficent way of communicating, bordering on "I think this is a stupid question, so I'll give it a stupid answer". On the other hand, if I had complete strangers impunging my professional reputation and personal morality, I would probably be snippy too. Far too many people on this site and on the web in general forget that there are real people on the other end of every email and post that we send out. </end of degrading personal politeness in today's society rant>
for once I didn't preview, and it swallowed my <sarcastic> </sarcastic> tags. oh well
Reread my comment with . In particular, reread the part where I say "he needs to be cut some slack" and "he's a person too". I was just pointing out the fact that it seems very popular to flame rob for his "unprofessionalism" and propose theories that "he likes the trolls cuz it drives page counts, that's why he doesn't change moderation", and that that is stupid beyond belief. Sorry if it came across wrong, but what you said is exactly what I was going for.
This (being the more interesting of the "interviews" by far) has no replies????? wtf? Where are all the people saying that he act's unprofessionaly here? Where are the people accusing cmdrtaco of "colluding" with the enemy? I mean, right there, he tells them to keep trolling!! Sure, he also says to cut their trolls in 1/2, but the point remains. Is it possible because people are starting to realize that Rob is human and needs to be cut a bit of slack just like the rest of us? Or maybe, just maybe, that flaming somebody to hell and gone *doesn't* generally produce the desired result? Come on, people, where's the flames????
Heh. I had forgotten about that. Well, yes. You are right. Those were pretty stupid examples of demagogourey (told you my spelling sucks). I retract any and all objections I had to you lamblasting the editors. Fire away :-)
ps. i and i are going to sleep now. down with babylon. cold medicine is cool. peace, out
Before I answer your question, I would like to ask one: where had slashdot *ever* "released a jihad" on a closed-source company for not opening their source? Before you start spluttering and calling me an idiot (not that you wouldn't be right) let me clarify: the position I think /. (as in the editors, they have no control over the comments) projects is this: open source projects are really good; closed-source projects have their place; companies who release "open source" projects under non-DFSG licenses for the express purpose of getting a few free bug-checkers and controlling a segment of the market *cough* sun *cough* suck; projects that choose licenses that conflict in subtle and not-so-subtle ways with the GPL and BSD licenses thus making it hard on distrobutions to include them, suck. I have *never* seen a post by a /. editor that says anything even *close* to "BeOS sucks cuz it's closed source", let alone "everyone flame Be 'till they give up and GPL everything, d00d". I am using BeOS as an example because that's what I use on a daily basis for my workstation, and I always pay more attention to Be stories. Even with KDE, the *main* problem has always been that a major open source project was being based on software that was under control of one company, under terms that make distributing binaries of that project *illegal*. The push to open-source QT was made because that was the easiest way to resolve the issue for good.
/.-the-editors and /.-the-posters. Blaming the editors for all the looser script kiddies that hang around would be like blaming them for OOG or TrollMastah (both of whom I respect, btw). OOG for being funny and TrollMastah for actually making sense (some of the time).
p.s. sorry if this rant comes out wrong. 1) I'm sick and on some pretty good cold medicine and 2) I'm tired and I get cranky when people don't make the distinction between
p.p.s My spelling really sucks. deal with it.
I can't say as I'm familliar with the process of gaining access to Solaris's source code, but I assume (and you even make this point in your post) that you can do the same with NT. I remember reading a post from a gentleman who goes to school at a uni where they have all 5 cd's full of NT's source code. He even complimented Microsoft on it's readability. So I don't think that part of the argument holds true. I was just refering to the fact that it is completely different from unix in how it is put together and where things are. Call me a command-line commando, but I long for my three Eterms with bash, not cygnus-bash with ported vi. It doesn't feel right, and the file system layout is all wrong. Again, I'm not saying one way is bad and the other good, just that I'm very, very, used to /etc, vim, and HOW-TO's when it comes to setting something up, not technet, regedt32, and a prayer ;-) If I missed your main point, please feel free to correct me and make me see the error of my ways...
You are spot-on with the rest of your comment, but the "Oh by the way I'm a Unix guy" *is* a valid argument. Unless there is an overwhelming need otherwise, go with what you know. Learning something new is great and all, but do it on your own time, not by installing something into production and saying "Cool! Now, everybody just hang out and take a smoke break while I reinstall because I screwed it up the first time."
:-)
For instance, I am in a mixed NT/*nix shop (mostly Solaris and AIX) and the company is interested in dropping linux in as DNS or Samba servers, but haven't given the go ahead because of lack of Linux experience in the admin dept. Note that they *want* to do it, and the boss is satisfied that linux is stable/secure/whatever enough, he just doesn't want to be woken up in the middle of the night while someone on the other end says: "well, I *thought* I knew how Linux handles slices, but, umm, we need to restore from backup".
Btw, I post all this in the assumption that you wrote the "member of the elite crowd" line facetiously (sp?), cuz as an "elite unix guy" I am here to tell you NT is easy to use but hard to master, esp. if you are trying to start with no windows experience at all. I'm not saying it's better or worse than Unix, but it just *feels* weird. And this is after I installed cygnus tools and vi
Just an FYI, a lot of people have that "slow to switch desktops" thing going on, and it can be solved on one of two ways: first upgrade your video card :-P Assuming that an HP Kayak == crappy integrated video, we'll move on to 2: choose a solid color as your background. If it speeds up significantly after doing that, then your problem is video ram, not sysem ram. If neither helps, report it to e-devel@enlightenment.org and lots of friendly people will be glad to help out.
Weeeellll, maybe. But really, in comparison to /., what's ZDNet? Just yet another place to be slashdotted..... I'm sure they don't have the same levels of readership, and I'm *defintely* sure that the quality of editorialship isn't even close to being on the same plane. On the other hand, you'll notice that the previous two sentences can be read two ways ;-)
Yeah no one here would get off on tech. And that's just the last 2 days.... p.s. sorry about the crappy html, but /. really ins't cooperating...
Did the slashdot article really have that much effect on Microsoft? I thought that their take on it would be rather the opposite: anything that ticked off the /. crowd *must* be good for business ;-)
I see the original poster already replied, but here's my answer: sure. I have 3 boxes at home with a fourth being built, and I wish I had more. Not because one can't do everything I need it to, but because I want to play around with a real network, not the typical linux server + windows workstation that seems to be fairly common. I now have freebsd, debian, beos, redhat, qnx, and soon, windows me all loaded on different partitions, but how am I supposed to learn about the different ways they interact if I only have 1 or 2 machines? That, and I always load one machine as my server to handle email and internet access, and then don't touch it anymore, other than updates. I can then load and explode everything else with impunity, and not have to worry about whether or not someone is trying to send me email whilst I'm frantically reloading my drive after a failed experiment with dd or fsck :-) Anyways, just thought I'd drop a line explaining why *some* of us have no problem "wasting" gobs of electricity on multiple computers. Pure hack value ;-)