The cold war is over and Russia isn't exactly on the opposite side. Give them some respect and do the right thing, buy Soyuz. The space program will keep going and USA will make friends which she so needs right now.
OSX/Darwin are based on FreeBSD. Samsung does produce ARM9 chips which have an integrated MMU, which FreeBSD requires.
I really don't think its quite a stretch to have OSX on an ARM9 chip. GCC will compile BSD for ARM9.
What I wont buy is the full set of Cocoa, Aqua and other graphic-heavy API in its full glory on the iPhone. The device probably uses Darwin compiled for ARM9 with mobile-Cocoa and mobile-Aqua (and others).
That's the whole idea. Setup honeypots and DDoS the cracker. In fact if you're being cracked, take a major chunk of IP address space and setup lots of virtual machines to keep the cracker real busy.
Apple's marketing dept is keeping their legal dept idle.
You have posted two questions, why are all free software developers headed towards Linux and why Linux has not supplanted Windows as a Desktop OS..
Answers: 1) Most free software developers I know gravitate towards standards, not an OS. Their programs will run well on a GNU BSD system and cygwin. That's their goal. Every developer whose motivation for development is philanthropy or ego will aim to maximize compatibility rather than being exclusive to Linux.
2) Linux cannot take over the desktop for a few simple reasons. First and foremost is the lack of standards. Theres gnome AND kde. And there are several popular distros to develop and test for to make sure installation is smooth and seamless like in Windows. Windows is a single distro and extremely predictable in that regard. Developing and deploying a desktop app for it is much easier.
Secondly there is a lack of opensourced drivers and directx doesnt exist. DirectX makes things much easier than opengl plus other api.
Once a real and effective standard is settled upon in Linux (api, distro, installation and package maintenance mechanism) I suspect Linux would be much more popular on the layman's desktop.
What they ship they will eventually sell. Even if at a major loss. Receiving the units back would be the biggest loss possible, so they'll definitely sell what they've shipped.
It also means stores have 'purchased' the units from Sony, so strictly speaking Sony has sold the units, when stores agree to receiving the shipments and paying Sony eventually.
I'm tempted to buy one just for the multiple cores and processing power in Linux.
Of course they care about money. That's the 'industry' part. It means they need to pay their bills and do not work out of a monastary (even that needs funds to function).
I do not quite understand the logic behind the choice of the CPU.
It is quite a specific operating system and environment (not quite windows xp). Linux has been ported to many arches. So why not go with Alchemy or ARM9 chips? Lower power lower price. Why x86? The only reason to stick to x86 is to run windows or standardized Linux distros like redhat.
And if they had to go with the geode and 128mb ram, why not use the lx800 chip which uses lower power?
I would imagine an ARM9 chip would take less cranking to last for a while and it will be $10 cheaper in quantity.
They would get bragging rights with 45nm. 65nm is so old that even AMD has 65nm chips now.
Heck philips/motorola I believe have been producing 65nm microcontrollers, and samsung is producing 50nm flash chips.
And 5GHz should not be difficult considering it doesnt have the x86 overhead, is more RISC and that generally PPC has a simpler core. I'll be interested if it comes with quad cores or more.
They're the real reason why we stick with x86. Should Microsoft release an ARM9 or PPC version of Windows, vendors will recompile their apps and games for the new arches and suddenly x86 will look too expensive. And no WindowsCE does not count.
As for Intel, they'll stay in the market. They are already owners of one of the best ARM (or almost ARM) implementations. Their strength lies in the system-on-chip design experience and the most bleeding edge fabs. They're by no means tied to x86.
I used to bitch and complain about X and other parts of Linux that were obstacles... I then worked at a company where I could move everything to Linux, in theory.
The question came up... why should we anyway? Every new computer comes with Windows and all the drivers preinstalled. We just have to spend 30 minutes uninstalling all the crap that comes with it.
And then how much of your infrastructure will you move to Linux? If you're not using an app that requires Windows you might in the future. The next version of that app might be dependent on.NET 2 which may not work under WINE, or newer versions of the computers you're using might not work with the Linux images you currently have on hand... more work to get things going..
You'll simply be less flexible. Not to mention if you get run over by a bus the next admin may not: (a) know what the heck is going on in that setup (b) know Linux in general (c) agree with the setup
In contrast if you're running your standard Windows 2003 Active Directory with Windows 2000 and Windows XP clients, you can pick any admin and place him there and he will hit the ground running. That predictability and repeatability is what is so valuable, and it comes straight from the fact that Windows is consistent (no distros).
Linux lacks such standards not only in companies but even on each desktop and across distros. It takes that much effort to know the system before fixing it and that much more difficult to write universal scripts and manage networks of disparate Linux workstations.
You've asked about how to create a device that can run Linux. That is an embedded question, nothing specific to Linux itself.
Look for embedded forums, start with the sparkfun, philips semiconductors, lpc2000 and similar forums.
Any hardware you work on or will build will highly depend on the type of CPU and system (including memory size and design constraints like power). I suggest you start with just making root and kernel images for something mundane like cisco 2500 routers and Linksys WRT54GS routers, then getting on with your own designs.
Slashdot Mirror
DOS-era game, one of the best sidescrolling games. At a certain fiery stage I think level 7 out of 10, it gets just too confusing and difficult.
I felt that way about prince of persia too. You just run out of time and need to play better all the way from the start. But I finished that one.
Neither I nor anyone else I've known who has attempted Zeliard has completed that game without cheating.
Great answer.
The cold war is over and Russia isn't exactly on the opposite side. Give them some respect and do the right thing, buy Soyuz. The space program will keep going and USA will make friends which she so needs right now.
Real men just used common pins and speaker wire thrown across the street to deathmatch.
14.4 modem? Wow you guys were rich!
So, to accept anything and resign from your current job, isn't it reasonable to get that all signed on paper?
So where are the papers?
Linux is free.
OSX/Darwin are based on FreeBSD. Samsung does produce ARM9 chips which have an integrated MMU, which FreeBSD requires.
I really don't think its quite a stretch to have OSX on an ARM9 chip. GCC will compile BSD for ARM9.
What I wont buy is the full set of Cocoa, Aqua and other graphic-heavy API in its full glory on the iPhone. The device probably uses Darwin compiled for ARM9 with mobile-Cocoa and mobile-Aqua (and others).
You forgot to ask the most important question.
How long will the battery last?
That's the whole idea. Setup honeypots and DDoS the cracker. In fact if you're being cracked, take a major chunk of IP address space and setup lots of virtual machines to keep the cracker real busy.
Apple's marketing dept is keeping their legal dept idle.
You have posted two questions, why are all free software developers headed towards Linux and why Linux has not supplanted Windows as a Desktop OS..
Answers:
1) Most free software developers I know gravitate towards standards, not an OS. Their programs will run well on a GNU BSD system and cygwin. That's their goal. Every developer whose motivation for development is philanthropy or ego will aim to maximize compatibility rather than being exclusive to Linux.
2) Linux cannot take over the desktop for a few simple reasons. First and foremost is the lack of standards. Theres gnome AND kde. And there are several popular distros to develop and test for to make sure installation is smooth and seamless like in Windows. Windows is a single distro and extremely predictable in that regard. Developing and deploying a desktop app for it is much easier.
Secondly there is a lack of opensourced drivers and directx doesnt exist. DirectX makes things much easier than opengl plus other api.
Once a real and effective standard is settled upon in Linux (api, distro, installation and package maintenance mechanism) I suspect Linux would be much more popular on the layman's desktop.
What they ship they will eventually sell. Even if at a major loss. Receiving the units back would be the biggest loss possible, so they'll definitely sell what they've shipped.
It also means stores have 'purchased' the units from Sony, so strictly speaking Sony has sold the units, when stores agree to receiving the shipments and paying Sony eventually.
I'm tempted to buy one just for the multiple cores and processing power in Linux.
Of course they care about money. That's the 'industry' part. It means they need to pay their bills and do not work out of a monastary (even that needs funds to function).
We can FINALLY switch to Democracy.
I do not quite understand the logic behind the choice of the CPU.
It is quite a specific operating system and environment (not quite windows xp). Linux has been ported to many arches. So why not go with Alchemy or ARM9 chips? Lower power lower price. Why x86? The only reason to stick to x86 is to run windows or standardized Linux distros like redhat.
And if they had to go with the geode and 128mb ram, why not use the lx800 chip which uses lower power?
I would imagine an ARM9 chip would take less cranking to last for a while and it will be $10 cheaper in quantity.
You may not have an AS400 like I do, but your kids might ask for the next Xbox.
They would get bragging rights with 45nm. 65nm is so old that even AMD has 65nm chips now.
Heck philips/motorola I believe have been producing 65nm microcontrollers, and samsung is producing 50nm flash chips.
And 5GHz should not be difficult considering it doesnt have the x86 overhead, is more RISC and that generally PPC has a simpler core. I'll be interested if it comes with quad cores or more.
Yup I know,
I have a LX64 21164 Alpha motherboard running Windows 2000. I cant run much else on it
But look at the number of vendors releasing apps for Linux/OSX and x64. They are recompiling stuff.
They're the real reason why we stick with x86. Should Microsoft release an ARM9 or PPC version of Windows, vendors will recompile their apps and games for the new arches and suddenly x86 will look too expensive. And no WindowsCE does not count.
As for Intel, they'll stay in the market. They are already owners of one of the best ARM (or almost ARM) implementations. Their strength lies in the system-on-chip design experience and the most bleeding edge fabs. They're by no means tied to x86.
Blame it on Microsoft.
Even better is when you get to 99% and write error, followed by a disk full error and the services freezing because they cannot write to their logs.
Its more than just the immediate costs.
.NET 2 which may not work under WINE, or newer versions of the computers you're using might not work with the Linux images you currently have on hand... more work to get things going..
I used to bitch and complain about X and other parts of Linux that were obstacles... I then worked at a company where I could move everything to Linux, in theory.
The question came up... why should we anyway? Every new computer comes with Windows and all the drivers preinstalled. We just have to spend 30 minutes uninstalling all the crap that comes with it.
And then how much of your infrastructure will you move to Linux? If you're not using an app that requires Windows you might in the future. The next version of that app might be dependent on
You'll simply be less flexible. Not to mention if you get run over by a bus the next admin may not:
(a) know what the heck is going on in that setup
(b) know Linux in general
(c) agree with the setup
In contrast if you're running your standard Windows 2003 Active Directory with Windows 2000 and Windows XP clients, you can pick any admin and place him there and he will hit the ground running. That predictability and repeatability is what is so valuable, and it comes straight from the fact that Windows is consistent (no distros).
Linux lacks such standards not only in companies but even on each desktop and across distros. It takes that much effort to know the system before fixing it and that much more difficult to write universal scripts and manage networks of disparate Linux workstations.
You've asked about how to create a device that can run Linux. That is an embedded question, nothing specific to Linux itself.
Look for embedded forums, start with the sparkfun, philips semiconductors, lpc2000 and similar forums.
Any hardware you work on or will build will highly depend on the type of CPU and system (including memory size and design constraints like power). I suggest you start with just making root and kernel images for something mundane like cisco 2500 routers and Linksys WRT54GS routers, then getting on with your own designs.
Go buy a cirrus logic board from Olimex.
Carmen Sandiego where are you?
I sense smart rectal probes coming to a pharmaceutical shelf near you. Bluetooth enabled no less.
Add a few virii infecting its programs and let the games begin.
So you do not know how many watts your dryer is, yet take the liberty to 'estimate' the $25 figure.
I would start with reading the wattage close to the handle.
Nice sig.
Its Genghis Khan (really: Chinggis Khan) , and he fell off a horse, not a pony.
Female slashdotters should not appear as Anonymous Cowards. You're the stars around here.