AFAIK, both IEEE 1394 ('firewire') and USB are based upon the low voltage differential signalling (LVDS) basic technology.
Their difference is in their specs/the standard, not the technology, so I wouldn't say a technology is dying here, 1394 is just a standard that isn't really taking off.
"Then he goes on to take a Linus Torvalds' quote out of context"
By showing his tremendous insight into the meaning and background of what Linus means when he says he's aiming for "world dominance", Mr Metcalfe is showing us to be one of the few people that believe that saying "We're going to chew them up and spit them out" by a sports coach to a team before a game actually has anything to do with the consumption of food.
Don't feed the trolls. I am assuming Mr Metcalfe is in full mental health and concluding he's not trying to specifically talk pro Windows or con Linux, he's just trying to make waves.
Have another one, Bob! Just take a cab when you're going back home.
Step one, more to come. Time is on our side. Linux doesn't rely on quarterly income to keep succeeding, while the alternatives to Linux (except for freeBSD) do. Hmm, come to think of it, now _that_ would be a nice OS dominance war, between the open source UNIXes of Linux and freeBSD. Only good can come of that!
(remember, Lotus Notes/Domino is owned by IBM also, and they are releasing a Linux version of the full R5 server edition this year).
If you read between the lines, you'll see that Linus wants more projects like the PCMCIA, isdn4linux, e2compr, etc, that develop separate (in parallel) from the kernel, and that go from proof-of-concept to kernel feature without especially being included in the development kernels untill they have become stable and popular patches, at which point it should not take much time to integrate it into Linus' release.
Such parallel development is necessary considering the amount of people working in parallel on kernel-related issues. In the old days, thing were tried out in the development kernels, nowadays people like andrea, rick, and the isdn4linux and pcmcia groups make their patches, and then ask on the mailing lists for people to test the patches. Such things start as hacks, tryouts, or proof-of-concept without hampering the development of any other part of the kernel. Once their patches, or sometimes just their idea's have been tested by some people and proven to be good, then Linus may decide to put the patch, or sometimes just the basic concept behind it, in the kernel.
You say 'unless everybody starts coding a lot faster', for which you assume that the number of people stays the same... which is not the case. There are a lot more people working on the kernel, or kernel-related projects right now then there were at the beginning of 2.1.x, and especially when compared to the old 1.3.x days.
With the patch archives maturing(kernelnotes, the patches at rock-projects, kernel traffic, and others), and with the support of Alan's -ac patches, such parallel developments will still be available to many for the testing and using, even before Linus decides to include it.
No more 2+ years of waiting for new stabilizing kernels, it's going to be great!
"A full-featured and efficient TrueType bytecode interpreter. The engine is able to produce excellent output at small point sizes. This component has been extremely difficult to get right, due to the ambiguous and misleadings TrueType specifications. However, we now match Windows and Mac qualities."
"I just put as many unix tools on them as I could.:)"
Right now that would mean: Set the BIOS to 'boot from CDROM', pop in that RH6.0 or Suse6.1 disk, fdisk it all, and all the unix tools you need are being pumped onto the HD.
...
My windows box at work is not much more that a Notes client, a VNC viewer to our Unix workstations, and a regular blue-screen displayer.
(The best quote I read in EET about engineer salaries: "Pay us like lawyers!". It says all there is to be said).
I think this is very good news for Linux, because now, for a software house to support users of all three of AIX, Solaris-x86, and Linux, all they need to do is make and support a single Linux version of their software.
Each platform is another one to support you know, and support is a big chunk of the cost of software (including the time&cost of regression testing on multiple platforms).
Now if NT were able to run Linux binaries, people could drop developing software for that wacky OS too...
Just disappeared with the release of RealPlayer G2 for Linux. No more reboots just to see an interview.
At work, more and more services move to Linux. The ancient NT server is toddling away at the Lotus Notes database, and with the upcoming release of Domino R5 Server for Linux that machine will be slaughered too...
I'll buy the OnStream 30GB drive as soon as there's a generic Linux driver for it.
There is enough market for Linux for it to be worth it's hype, for it to be significantly new (there is no alternative to Linux for my needs). Linux can be installed and used legally and for free by everybody (that is the 'show me something' that you asked for).
Because nobody will buy Linux from us anymore? Don't forget that we're not even selling...
Or because Men in Black will come into my house, take all my Linux CD's, put Windows on my PC's, and zap all of my memory of that great OS?
The worst MS can do is stop selling Windows, so that everybody turns to Linux in the multi-millions. The Linux support infrastructure isn't quite ready for 100 million clueless users... I'm still doubting, would that be a luxury problem or not?
Not true, apache is a generic web server. For serving static pages under Linux there are many web accelerators to choose from, one of them is squid (http://squid.nlanr.net), which is also used in the bigger part of the backbones that make up the global WWW proxy structures.
Too bad they don't offer an alternative to the proprietary real-audio format though... For AM-radio like quality, it shouldn't be too hard to code up a basic ADPCM codec (or find it on the net...).
Anybody knows of a freely available G.723.1a codec engine? (that's an ITU standard that needs only about 6kbit/s for telephone quality speech).
quite a lot of people have problems with realaudio (like I do), with it saying "This document is not a RealAudio or RealVideo document"... Error 11?... Which is almost as annoying as the stumbling over G2 streams that are not even supported for those fortunate enough to get the realplayer 5.0 for Linux to work. Those real* guys really should clean up their Linux act.
Jelle
Scheduler Enhancements
on
Linux 2.2.8
·
· Score: 4
Rumors say that this is the first version in the 2.2.x series where some problems with the scheduler (that existed since the late 2.1.1xx kernels) are finally ironed out.
I'd like to see what difference this one makes on the 'dreaded' Quad PIII/Quad 100mbit/Hardware RAID/>1GB RAM configuration that is soo popular lately in MS-sponsored 'benchmarks'...
Btw: Who thinks like me that it may be time for one or more larger Linux organisation (like Linux International, RedHat labs, and/or Suse) to setup a high-performance benchmark lab that can be used for in-house benchmarking, and kernel development and optimization of Linux by our cutting-edge Linux developers (linus, alan, david, andrea, donald, stephen, andre, richard, rick, and the o-so many others, including the samba, apache, and squid guys).
Server doesn't like the Squid anonymizer function
on
Open Source Survey
·
· Score: 1
I have the anonymizer function of Squid on, but I do let it pass through cookies and such, but still, this site gives me:
Access Forbidden to Rude Robots and No-Bots
We don't permit access to Web clients that are either known to be rude robots or that fail to identify themselves with User-Agent request header fields. If you think this shouldn't apply to you or your client, feel free to send a message to our Webmaster at the site you're trying to reach.
Are you referring to the larger amount of money and stockholders behind Microsoft, giving NT a better credibility for being enterprise-ready?
As in: 200 Million randomly typing monkey's can't be wrong?
(Windows2000 is bound to be typed by one of them soon, for all we know that's what MS depends on).
In the middle ages most people were sure that the earth was flat. Well, was it?
If Microsoft was erased from the planet Earth tonight, I'd still have a job tomorrow too. Luckily, my job doesn't depend on the existance of an OS...
However, if Linux was erased from the planet Earth tonight, I'd start typing "int main(argc,argv**){ printf("Welcome to the GNU kernel.\n"); return 0;}", as a start for making it again first thing in the morning... I wouldn't want to do without GNU and Linux anymore.
I hate BSOD's, I hate driver problems, I hate reboots, I hate performance problems, I hate 'undocumented features', I have not having the source code -> I'm not really fond of NT...
Just think about it. How many of us depend on Linux for our income? So why do we even bother to spread the word? How much does winNTmag depend on the succes of NT for their income? And why do you think they bother to spread the word?
Linux/Sparc not ready for deployment because PC's are not stable?
Anybody judging IA32 to be instable when compared to Sparc hardware must have been using bad hardware in IA32 systems or bad software on IA32 in the past. Claiming IA32 is an instable platform is just redicilous.
Linux/IA32 is at least as stable as Solaris/Sparc. Linux/Sparc may not be, but is not an economical solution anyway (Sparc is expensive when compared to Alpha or IA32). When converting existing boxes from Solaris to Linux, the time&effort to do this, including migration of all installed apps on the systems would be the major issue.
Stability is not the main concern for being 'enterprise ready'. If that were so, NT would never have been considered to be so.
I'm not telling anybody to use/. or any media as a reference for OS comparison -> I end by saying 'I do my own benchmark' and that is what I suggest everybody else to do.
-> Forget the hype, just test the technology (do your own benchmarks) and the methodology (discover what GNU really means).
> The fact is Linux is far from Solaris.
I use Linux, Solaris, HPUX, and NT daily at work. From my personal experience with Solaris, I must agree with you that Linux is far ahead from Solaris.
How more can an OS be 'enterprise ready' than it actually being used in the enterprise?
Slashdot Mirror
AFAIK, both IEEE 1394 ('firewire') and USB are based upon the low voltage differential signalling (LVDS) basic technology.
Their difference is in their specs/the standard, not the technology, so I wouldn't say a technology is dying here, 1394 is just a standard that isn't really taking off.
"Then he goes on to take a Linus Torvalds' quote out of context"
By showing his tremendous insight into the meaning and background of what Linus means when he says he's aiming for "world dominance", Mr Metcalfe is showing us to be one of the few people that believe that saying "We're going to chew them up and spit them out" by a sports coach to a team before a game actually has anything to do with the consumption of food.
Don't feed the trolls. I am assuming Mr Metcalfe is in full mental health and concluding he's not trying to specifically talk pro Windows or con Linux, he's just trying to make waves.
Have another one, Bob! Just take a cab when you're going back home.
IBM will start to run soon.
Step one, more to come. Time is on our side. Linux doesn't rely on quarterly income to keep succeeding, while the alternatives to Linux (except for freeBSD) do. Hmm, come to think of it, now _that_ would be a nice OS dominance war, between the open source UNIXes of Linux and freeBSD. Only good can come of that!
(remember, Lotus Notes/Domino is owned by IBM also, and they are releasing a Linux version of the full R5 server edition this year).
If you read between the lines, you'll see that Linus wants more projects like the PCMCIA, isdn4linux, e2compr, etc, that develop separate (in parallel) from the kernel, and that go from proof-of-concept to kernel feature without especially being included in the development kernels untill they have become stable and popular patches, at which point it should not take much time to integrate it into Linus' release.
Such parallel development is necessary considering the amount of people working in parallel on kernel-related issues. In the old days, thing were tried out in the development kernels, nowadays people like andrea, rick, and the isdn4linux and pcmcia groups make their patches, and then ask on the mailing lists for people to test the patches. Such things start as hacks, tryouts, or proof-of-concept without hampering the development of any other part of the kernel. Once their patches, or sometimes just their idea's have been tested by some people and proven to be good, then Linus may decide to put the patch, or sometimes just the basic concept behind it, in the kernel.
You say 'unless everybody starts coding a lot faster', for which you assume that the number of people stays the same... which is not the case. There are a lot more people working on the kernel, or kernel-related projects right now then there were at the beginning of 2.1.x, and especially when compared to the old 1.3.x days.
With the patch archives maturing(kernelnotes, the patches at rock-projects, kernel traffic, and others), and with the support of Alan's -ac patches, such parallel developments will still be available to many for the testing and using, even before Linus decides to include it.
No more 2+ years of waiting for new stabilizing kernels, it's going to be great!
I suspect those estimates forget that it's quite an investement for Intel to make the .25u or the upcoming .18u fabs.
.18u and coppermine? Celeron or PIII?
Guess which processor is paying for
That way I see it is that the Celeron is just Intel's 'trick' to keep AMD from making profits...
(Running a stable dual 300A/S370 @ 450 here, and happy with it).
Look at the website for more information.
A part from the 'features' list on the web site:
"A full-featured and efficient TrueType bytecode interpreter. The engine is able to produce excellent output at small point sizes. This component has been extremely difficult to get right, due to the ambiguous and misleadings TrueType specifications. However, we now match Windows and Mac qualities."
"I just put as many unix tools on them as I could. :)"
Right now that would mean: Set the BIOS to 'boot from CDROM', pop in that RH6.0 or Suse6.1 disk, fdisk it all, and all the unix tools you need are being pumped onto the HD.
...
My windows box at work is not much more that a Notes client, a VNC viewer to our Unix workstations, and a regular blue-screen displayer.
(The best quote I read in EET about engineer salaries: "Pay us like lawyers!". It says all there is to be said).
I think this is very good news for Linux, because now, for a software house to support users of all three of AIX, Solaris-x86, and Linux, all they need to do is make and support a single Linux version of their software.
Each platform is another one to support you know, and support is a big chunk of the cost of software (including the time&cost of regression testing on multiple platforms).
Now if NT were able to run Linux binaries, people could drop developing software for that wacky OS too...
Just disappeared with the release of RealPlayer G2 for Linux. No more reboots just to see an interview.
At work, more and more services move to Linux. The ancient NT server is toddling away at the Lotus Notes database, and with the upcoming release of Domino R5 Server for Linux that machine will be slaughered too...
I'll buy the OnStream 30GB drive as soon as there's a generic Linux driver for it.
There is enough market for Linux for it to be worth it's hype, for it to be significantly new (there is no alternative to Linux for my needs). Linux can be installed and used legally and for free by everybody (that is the 'show me something' that you asked for).
Just my 2ct.
Why be afraid?
Because nobody will buy Linux from us anymore? Don't forget that we're not even selling...
Or because Men in Black will come into my house, take all my Linux CD's, put Windows on my PC's, and zap all of my memory of that great OS?
The worst MS can do is stop selling Windows, so that everybody turns to Linux in the multi-millions. The Linux support infrastructure isn't quite ready for 100 million clueless users... I'm still doubting, would that be a luxury problem or not?
"For Linux that's Apache"
Not true, apache is a generic web server. For serving static pages under Linux there are many web accelerators to choose from, one of them is squid (http://squid.nlanr.net), which is also used in the bigger part of the backbones that make up the global WWW proxy structures.
Solaris X86? That raises the question: is there a way to run those binaries under Linux?
Cheers.
Nice site.
... Which is almost as annoying as the stumbling over G2 streams that are not even supported for those fortunate enough to get the realplayer 5.0 for Linux to work. Those real* guys really should clean up their Linux act.
Too bad they don't offer an alternative to the proprietary real-audio format though... For AM-radio like quality, it shouldn't be too hard to code up a basic ADPCM codec (or find it on the net...).
Anybody knows of a freely available G.723.1a codec engine? (that's an ITU standard that needs only about 6kbit/s for telephone quality speech).
quite a lot of people have problems with realaudio (like I do), with it saying "This document is not a RealAudio or RealVideo document"... Error 11?
Jelle
Rumors say that this is the first version in the 2.2.x series where some problems with the scheduler (that existed since the late 2.1.1xx kernels) are finally ironed out.
I'd like to see what difference this one makes on the 'dreaded' Quad PIII/Quad 100mbit/Hardware RAID/>1GB RAM configuration that is soo popular lately in MS-sponsored 'benchmarks'...
Btw: Who thinks like me that it may be time for one or more larger Linux organisation (like Linux International, RedHat labs, and/or Suse) to setup a high-performance benchmark lab that can be used for in-house benchmarking, and kernel development and optimization of Linux by our cutting-edge Linux developers (linus, alan, david, andrea, donald, stephen, andre, richard, rick, and the o-so many others, including the samba, apache, and squid guys).
I have the anonymizer function of Squid on, but I do let it pass through cookies and such, but still, this site gives me:
Access Forbidden to Rude Robots and No-Bots
We don't permit access to Web clients that are either known to be rude robots or that fail to identify themselves with User-Agent request header
fields. If you think this shouldn't apply to you or your client, feel free to send a message to our Webmaster at the site you're trying to reach.
Am I a rude Robot?
> Who's got the better credibility
Are you referring to the larger amount of money and stockholders behind Microsoft, giving NT a better credibility for being enterprise-ready?
As in:
200 Million randomly typing monkey's can't be wrong?
(Windows2000 is bound to be typed by one of them soon, for all we know that's what MS depends on).
In the middle ages most people were sure that the earth was flat. Well, was it?
If Microsoft was erased from the planet Earth tonight, I'd still have a job tomorrow too. Luckily, my job doesn't depend on the existance of an OS...
However, if Linux was erased from the planet Earth tonight, I'd start typing "int main(argc,argv**){ printf("Welcome to the GNU kernel.\n"); return 0;}", as a start for making it again first thing in the morning... I wouldn't want to do without GNU and Linux anymore.
I hate BSOD's, I hate driver problems, I hate reboots, I hate performance problems, I hate 'undocumented features', I have not having the source code -> I'm not really fond of NT...
I've heard that the TCP/IP stack was already bypassed by IIS.. -> for performance reasons!!!
> I wonder why all of the Top500 supercomputers in the world are non-NT machines?
And why two of them are Linux machines...
(make one wonder what the other 498 run, and why).
Sure it is, generally.
The difference with winNTmag is the reason why.
Just think about it. How many of us depend on Linux for our income? So why do we even bother to spread the word? How much does winNTmag depend on the succes of NT for their income? And why do you think they bother to spread the word?
Linux/Sparc not ready for deployment because PC's are not stable?
Anybody judging IA32 to be instable when compared to Sparc hardware must have been using bad hardware in IA32 systems or bad software on IA32 in the past. Claiming IA32 is an instable platform is just redicilous.
Linux/IA32 is at least as stable as Solaris/Sparc. Linux/Sparc may not be, but is not an economical solution anyway (Sparc is expensive when compared to Alpha or IA32). When converting existing boxes from Solaris to Linux, the time&effort to do this, including migration of all installed apps on the systems would be the major issue.
Stability is not the main concern for being 'enterprise ready'. If that were so, NT would never have been considered to be so.
I'm not telling anybody to use /. or any media as a reference for OS comparison -> I end by saying 'I do my own benchmark' and that is what I suggest everybody else to do.
-> Forget the hype, just test the technology (do your own benchmarks) and the methodology (discover what GNU really means).
> The fact is Linux is far from Solaris.
I use Linux, Solaris, HPUX, and NT daily at work. From my personal experience with Solaris, I must agree with you that Linux is far ahead from Solaris.
How more can an OS be 'enterprise ready' than it actually being used in the enterprise?
WinNTmag obviously has a lot to loose when NT looses [marketshare]. It's not so strange that they resort to propaganda...
Who really thinks that WinNTmag is the place where you will find people who know best about Operating System kernel matters anyway?
I'm doing my own benchmarks, and make my own conclusions.
...
Look at what page? -> It's heavily slashdotted right now...
The host is reachable, port 80 connects, but the httpd does not respond. Looks like the system is trashing.