DirectFB already has font support and window management. Gtk+ already runs on it. I think it won't be long before DirectFB is a credible competitor to X11.
The Inquirer's take on this doesn't make any sense to me. Won't MS love HyperThreading because it will force people to buy 4-CPU licenses for 2-CPU machines? Or maybe customers will avoid the issue by disabling HyperThreading in the BIOS. Or maybe MS will release a patch for Windows that recognizes the difference between physical and logical CPUs. It doesn't seem like a huge problem.
The main gripe seems to be the lack of video mirroring, which means that when you hook the iBook up to an external monitor, it can't act as having dual displays.
The iBook has video mirroring, which is when the external monitor shows the same thing as the LCD. What it's missing is multihead.
I think that was referencing Linus's earlier comment that he wasn't worried about scheduling because it's so easy. It looks like Linus was right: Just wait around long enough and Ingo will write a new scheduler for you.:-)
Standardizing Unix has been tried; the results were things like POSIX and the Single Unix Spec. They cost millions to develop and didn't completely solve the portability problem. Why try again?
Re:Your explanation makes it even less compelling
on
Ximian Adds Subscription
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Seriously, we would love to see our users predominantly using our free mirror sites.
So why not add a little code to Red Carpet that automatically chooses a nearby mirror? I wasn't using the mirrors because until today I had never looked at the RC prefs.
I saw one site (I forget the name) using the Red Swoosh P2P CDN.
Re:BIOSes should not be operating system-specific.
on
LinuxBIOS Gains Steam
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No one's locking anyone into Linux. People who use LinuxBIOS know what they're getting into.
Re:BIOSes should not be operating system-specific.
on
LinuxBIOS Gains Steam
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Most current BIOSes are extremely biased toward DOS and DOS-derivatives like windows 95 - they're pretty ill suited to even Windows 2000, I'm sure microsoft now would prefer them to be replaced too (but with something that still ties you to MS, of course - no doubt MS will be prodding at x86 BIOS manufacturers to get this).
Intel is pushing a new BIOS standard called EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface?); it's not really clear why they're not just using Open Firmware except maybe the conspiracy theory you mentioned.
I went to the VP3 site to watch some movie trailers they have. When I started playing the trailer, QuickTime Player told me I didn't have the VP3 codec and offered to install it for me. I clicked OK a few times and the trailer started playing. It couldn't have been easier. It even installed the encoder, so I can encode VP3 from any QuickTime app.
There are "profiles" for MPEG-4 that specify certain combinations of codecs (and exclude anything else). Most MPEG-4 video will comply to one of the profiles that precludes random proprietary stuff from being embedded in the stream, thus you will be able to play them with open source tools like MPEG4IP.
USB networking is impossible because each USB port is either a host or device, and there can only be one host on the bus. Since the PS2 is hardwired as a host, you can't connect two PS2s using USB. Also, you'd need a USB A to USB A cable, which doesn't exist (because it would create an invalid bus topology).
I have seen devices that have two device ports and proxy traffic between them to create a USB network, but they're much slower and more expensive than just daisy-chaining with 1394 cables.
There is an extension in the works for USB 2.0 that will allow multiple hosts to network over USB, but by the time it is delivered I suspect 1394 will be pretty entrenched.
As to 1394 networking being more bandwidth than 100mbit networking that is incorrect. 1394 does have a 400mbit bus but due to all of the overhead involved it can only pump out about 70mbits of actual data per second.
I think you are incorrect; check out some actual numbers for 1394 networking.
Slashdot Mirror
What would your hypothetical wafer-chip cost? If it costs 136 times as much as a normal CPU, no one will be able to afford it.
Does anyone know how to package and cool a 12" wafer-chip? I doubt it.
Does anyone know how to write software to efficiently use hundreds of CPUs? Most programmers don't.
The CPU designers are doing as well as they can with the technology that exists today.
Claims like "New search technology, fastest search times yet" are nice, but where are the details? How do these systems actually work?
That's totally bogus. PCI is 32 bits * 33MHz = 1056 Mbps.
DirectFB already has font support and window management. Gtk+ already runs on it. I think it won't be long before DirectFB is a credible competitor to X11.
I don't think Intel has solved the problem; that's why VMware is so expensive.
The Inquirer's take on this doesn't make any sense to me. Won't MS love HyperThreading because it will force people to buy 4-CPU licenses for 2-CPU machines? Or maybe customers will avoid the issue by disabling HyperThreading in the BIOS. Or maybe MS will release a patch for Windows that recognizes the difference between physical and logical CPUs. It doesn't seem like a huge problem.
Bram Cohen is coordinating it. PureFiction/coderman will be there, though.
I doubt that tiny Toshiba drive in the iPod can write 50MB/s.
Darwin is not BSD-licensed; it's under the APSL.
Linux can use non-advertising-clause BSD-licensed code, but that wouldn't help in the case of HFS+.
The main gripe seems to be the lack of video mirroring, which means that when you hook the iBook up to an external monitor, it can't act as having dual displays.
The iBook has video mirroring, which is when the external monitor shows the same thing as the LCD. What it's missing is multihead.
Almost all telco equipment runs on 48V DC. In particular, I know there are DC Sun Netras. Good luck affording them, though.
I think that was referencing Linus's earlier comment that he wasn't worried about scheduling because it's so easy. It looks like Linus was right: Just wait around long enough and Ingo will write a new scheduler for you. :-)
The LSB isn't telling Debian to drop apt; it's telling them that apt should be able to install RPMs in addition to native packages.
Standardizing Unix has been tried; the results were things like POSIX and the Single Unix Spec. They cost millions to develop and didn't completely solve the portability problem. Why try again?
Yes.
Seriously, we would love to see our users predominantly using our free mirror sites.
So why not add a little code to Red Carpet that automatically chooses a nearby mirror? I wasn't using the mirrors because until today I had never looked at the RC prefs.
I saw one site (I forget the name) using the Red Swoosh P2P CDN.
No one's locking anyone into Linux. People who use LinuxBIOS know what they're getting into.
Most current BIOSes are extremely biased toward DOS and DOS-derivatives like windows 95 - they're pretty ill suited to even Windows 2000, I'm sure microsoft now would prefer them to be replaced too (but with something that still ties you to MS, of course - no doubt MS will be prodding at x86 BIOS manufacturers to get this).
Intel is pushing a new BIOS standard called EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface?); it's not really clear why they're not just using Open Firmware except maybe the conspiracy theory you mentioned.
The data would be encrypted on the drive.
I went to the VP3 site to watch some movie trailers they have. When I started playing the trailer, QuickTime Player told me I didn't have the VP3 codec and offered to install it for me. I clicked OK a few times and the trailer started playing. It couldn't have been easier. It even installed the encoder, so I can encode VP3 from any QuickTime app.
There are "profiles" for MPEG-4 that specify certain combinations of codecs (and exclude anything else). Most MPEG-4 video will comply to one of the profiles that precludes random proprietary stuff from being embedded in the stream, thus you will be able to play them with open source tools like MPEG4IP.
USB networking is impossible because each USB port is either a host or device, and there can only be one host on the bus. Since the PS2 is hardwired as a host, you can't connect two PS2s using USB. Also, you'd need a USB A to USB A cable, which doesn't exist (because it would create an invalid bus topology).
I have seen devices that have two device ports and proxy traffic between them to create a USB network, but they're much slower and more expensive than just daisy-chaining with 1394 cables.
There is an extension in the works for USB 2.0 that will allow multiple hosts to network over USB, but by the time it is delivered I suspect 1394 will be pretty entrenched.
As to 1394 networking being more bandwidth than 100mbit networking that is incorrect. 1394 does have a 400mbit bus but due to all of the overhead involved it can only pump out about 70mbits of actual data per second.
I think you are incorrect; check out some actual numbers for 1394 networking.
That's why Evolution has the search bar. Type in the search bar, click "Find Now", Ctrl-A (select all), drag to where you want them.
I've used both PINE and Evo, and I call it a draw.