Too bad its crippled. Even Carmack's mad skills can't save it. Without the info needed to program the triangle setup engine (which matrox has "no plans to release" in the near future), you have to treat that reasonably fast hardware like an old scan-line only card. If you want fast opensourced linux 3D, it would appear that nvidia is your only option.
The TNT2 and the hardware of the VW have different purposes. The TNT2 is optimized to render relatively few large, multi-textured polygons. The VW is optimized to render huge numbers of small, shaded polygons. TNT2s have absurdly high textured fillrates, but lower polygon throughput. VWs have somewhat of the opposite, although, their textured fillrate is nothing to sneeze at.
Thats why they force all the developers they hire to only release their software under the RHWDPL (RedHat World Domination Public License). Now that you're on to them, we can foil their evil plans!
In my personal view, GPL is only critical in the OS and LGPL in the important librarys. I have no problems with closed apps. I'd prefer GPLed ones, but it isn't nearly as important.
Microsoft CAN'T compete in the ISP market. The margins there are so slim, that there is simply no way for an expensive OS that requires more expensive hardware to do the same task can compete with a free one that can run acceptably on cheaper hardware.
On the VCF page they mention their plans to cluster 64 C64s. I don't suppose we can call this a beowulf since I doubt they can use Linux/PVM/MPI, but still, this has to get the award for most out of control cluster ever. So lets see, 64 C64s will have the blazing speed of a 12 Mhz 286, if your app is extra-parallel. These people are TRUE geeks.
Sure, and I'm sure all the space-geek HAMs just weren't paying attention to their radios during the launch. Radio is a broadcast, anyone with a reciever on the right frequencies (which are published by NASA) can listen in! NASA does NOT encrypt their transmissions, for obvious reasons.
BeOS schedules at a very high rate (4000Hz I think), while linux defaults to 100. So, BeOS can do realtime audio with a latency of about 4ms (they claim 3, but they're lying.. err.. marketing). Linux on the other hand can't beat 12ms in my tests, stock. Of course, the linux box I'm writing this on has HZ=3200 as an experiment in low latency audio. it works OK, but not quite good enough. Something like the KURT linux patches should be able to do 2-3ms latency audio, and with RTLinux, you could do microsecond latency, if you write your own soundcard driver. So assuming Amiga modifies the kernel some (at the very very least, jacking up the HZ), this could be a multimedia powerhouse.
Re:They'll stop making CDs are you currently know
on
SDMI as Dead As DivX
·
· Score: 1
you could patch your kernel so your sound driver writes the samples to a file. Or just delete/dev/dsp and put a fifo there.
when a program allocates memory, linux will free buffers and cache until enough is free, and only start swapping if it still doesn't have enough. Remember: Free memory is wasted memory!
This whole, "NT crashes 3 times a day" vs "my NT box hasn't crashed in 60 years" debate is quite silly. Obviously NT is going to be reasonably stable if all you do is use it to browse the web. Try running a dynamic site with IIS and SQLserver and see how often you need to reboot (and I mean a loaded server, not one on your own personal network to organize your cd collection). Of course, some rabit NT fan will dispute this, but there are rabid linux fans too, and rabid amiga fans, and mac fans, ad nausuem.
Bzzz... wrong. I've used Gnome with WindowMaker since well before Gnome 1.0, and all it takes is a quick unbinding of a desktop mouse button so gmc's desktop menus work. Notice that that is a change to WindowMaker's configuration, not gnome's!
Or the "Linux cheerleaders" will point out that just like NT is a from scratch OS influenced by an older design, but with many newer features, Linux is a from scratch OS influenced by UNIX, with new features and tweaks. The NT version of libc/X11/pthreads/sockets called win32 is just a wrapper around system calls. I can only assume your attempt at humor is to hide the fact that your argument is ridiculous.
Why should you have to limit yourself, and engage in fascist policys just to have your OS work? What I love about linux is that a old p90 can be a webserver, mail server, dns server, and more without any worries about reliability. I can freely install software without worrying about it breaking the OS. I enjoy the freedom to use my servers to do what I need them, without having to worry about a new daemon I'm installing causing the OS to crash. Or more simply, what good is a server OS that you have to jump through major hoops just to make it work at all? Is a pretty click and drool interface worth it?
I was right with you until the SMP part. Linux 2.2 SMP is signifigantly better, at least for the moment. FreeBSD's SMP support is similar to that of Linux 2.0. This is being worked on, but FreeBSD's SMP support is clearly not "as good, or perhaps better" than linux.
FreeBSD's SMP support is still new, and from my simple experimentation appears to be similar to Linux 2.0.x -- one big lock. I dunno about Net/Open. BSDers feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
NT is faster than Linux in this benchmark. It is far from real-world. In the real-world, Linux has proven itself to be faster than NT, repeatedly for many people. I suspect it was the 4 NIC cards that gave NT the advantage. In the real world, a) you would not be serving static web pages over 100Mbit ethernet, and b) you would be using 4 uniprocessor linux boxes, which would be much faster, much much cheaper, and more reliable than one big monolithic machine. Its funny that MS chooses to use a monster machine instead of a cluster of small ones, which is what they advocate when comparing NT to Solaris. This just shows that MS will pay for benchmarks that NT will win, no matter how contrived they are. MS wins by marketing to managers, who know nothing about servers, and believe this "real-world" benchmark. Techies everywhere got a good laugh from it.
Bellsouth gets about 120KB/s max download, and 20-40KB/s max upload (Those capital B's mean Bytes). Its also only $40 a month and while you get some whack-ass hostname, it doesn't seem to change.
no it wont. it may even make it worse. His problem is latency, not bandwidth. Compression adds a small amount of latency (compressing and decompressing takes time) in return for less bandwidth. I must say for all the crap the phone company puts me through, I'm still glad I went with ADSL. Latency is usually under 100ms to sites with decent connections.
Re:Debian and KDE, the current situation (IIRC)
on
qt 2.0 released
·
· Score: 1
KDE included GPLed code, which means they can modify their license, but not that of the code they included. Which means they can't link with KDE. GNOME does not yet use NGLayout (at least in any distributed version, the GTK NGLayout component is just a proof of concept right now). When they do start using it, they will probably implement NGLayout as a component, accessible as a CORBA object, so it will be a seperate program, exporting services. Go read up on the relevant software before showing your ignorance of the GPL and GNOME and your own personal biases. It is anything but "simple as that."
Yeah, why can't any of these RFC complaint open source DHCP clients and servers deal with Microsoft's "standard" servers and clients? We all know that the only standard that matters is the one that M$ makes up/breaks. ugh.
Linux has both of these, as does windows NT. BeOS has some compelling advantages, but these are buzzwords. Be's forcing multithreading is an interesting concept, but one thread ends up doing all of the work usually. Of course, you can break some problems down even more, but you can do that with any modern OS (even win95). I'll agree that BeOS is fairly impressive, but it does not have me foaming at the mouth, and I even do a lot of audio application programming. (People like me are Be Inc's marketing department's primary targets).
Ok, when people say BeOS is a "Media OS" they mean it has a filesystem that can handle HUGE files (DV), a scheduler that will schedule with reasonable latency and precision (Realtime audio, although its still not good enough for my app), and a good "media framework" -- think QuickTime. None of these things make a better game platform than windows or linux. The only thing a game wants is low level (IE, OpenGL or D3D IM, not D3D RM or OpenInventor) hardware drivers, a decent TCP/IP stack, and a scheduler that can get set to a "Get the hell out of my way" mode. So it would appear that right now windows (ugh) is the best for games, and Linux is next in line.
Slashdot Mirror
Too bad its crippled. Even Carmack's mad skills can't save it. Without the info needed to program the triangle setup engine (which matrox has "no plans to release" in the near future), you have to treat that reasonably fast hardware like an old scan-line only card. If you want fast opensourced linux 3D, it would appear that nvidia is your only option.
The TNT2 and the hardware of the VW have different purposes. The TNT2 is optimized to render relatively few large, multi-textured polygons. The VW is optimized to render huge numbers of small, shaded polygons. TNT2s have absurdly high textured fillrates, but lower polygon throughput. VWs have somewhat of the opposite, although, their textured fillrate is nothing to sneeze at.
Thats why they force all the developers they hire to only release their software under the RHWDPL (RedHat World Domination Public License). Now that you're on to them, we can foil their evil plans!
In my personal view, GPL is only critical in the OS and LGPL in the important librarys. I have no problems with closed apps. I'd prefer GPLed ones, but it isn't nearly as important.
The fact that their server got slashdotted should tell them something about the demand. Heres to C++ Builder and Delphi on Linux!
Microsoft CAN'T compete in the ISP market. The margins there are so slim, that there is simply no way for an expensive OS that requires more expensive hardware to do the same task can compete with a free one that can run acceptably on cheaper hardware.
On the VCF page they mention their plans to cluster 64 C64s. I don't suppose we can call this a beowulf since I doubt they can use Linux/PVM/MPI, but still, this has to get the award for most out of control cluster ever. So lets see, 64 C64s will have the blazing speed of a 12 Mhz 286, if your app is extra-parallel. These people are TRUE geeks.
Sure, and I'm sure all the space-geek HAMs just weren't paying attention to their radios during the launch. Radio is a broadcast, anyone with a reciever on the right frequencies (which are published by NASA) can listen in! NASA does NOT encrypt their transmissions, for obvious reasons.
BeOS schedules at a very high rate (4000Hz I think), while linux defaults to 100. So, BeOS can do realtime audio with a latency of about 4ms (they claim 3, but they're lying.. err.. marketing). Linux on the other hand can't beat 12ms in my tests, stock. Of course, the linux box I'm writing this on has HZ=3200 as an experiment in low latency audio. it works OK, but not quite good enough. Something like the KURT linux patches should be able to do 2-3ms latency audio, and with RTLinux, you could do microsecond latency, if you write your own soundcard driver. So assuming Amiga modifies the kernel some (at the very very least, jacking up the HZ), this could be a multimedia powerhouse.
you could patch your kernel so your sound driver writes the samples to a file. Or just delete /dev/dsp and put a fifo there.
when a program allocates memory, linux will free buffers and cache until enough is free, and only start swapping if it still doesn't have enough.
Remember: Free memory is wasted memory!
This whole, "NT crashes 3 times a day" vs "my NT box hasn't crashed in 60 years" debate is quite silly. Obviously NT is going to be reasonably stable if all you do is use it to browse the web. Try running a dynamic site with IIS and SQLserver and see how often you need to reboot (and I mean a loaded server, not one on your own personal network to organize your cd collection). Of course, some rabit NT fan will dispute this, but there are rabid linux fans too, and rabid amiga fans, and mac fans, ad nausuem.
Bzzz... wrong. I've used Gnome with WindowMaker since well before Gnome 1.0, and all it takes is a quick unbinding of a desktop mouse button so gmc's desktop menus work. Notice that that is a change to WindowMaker's configuration, not gnome's!
Or the "Linux cheerleaders" will point out that just like NT is a from scratch OS influenced by an older design, but with many newer features, Linux is a from scratch OS influenced by UNIX, with new features and tweaks. The NT version of libc/X11/pthreads/sockets called win32 is just a wrapper around system calls. I can only assume your attempt at humor is to hide the fact that your argument is ridiculous.
Why should you have to limit yourself, and engage in fascist policys just to have your OS work? What I love about linux is that a old p90 can be a webserver, mail server, dns server, and more without any worries about reliability. I can freely install software without worrying about it breaking the OS. I enjoy the freedom to use my servers to do what I need them, without having to worry about a new daemon I'm installing causing the OS to crash. Or more simply, what good is a server OS that you have to jump through major hoops just to make it work at all? Is a pretty click and drool interface worth it?
I was right with you until the SMP part. Linux 2.2 SMP is signifigantly better, at least for the moment. FreeBSD's SMP support is similar to that of Linux 2.0. This is being worked on, but FreeBSD's SMP support is clearly not "as good, or perhaps better" than linux.
FreeBSD's SMP support is still new, and from my simple experimentation appears to be similar to Linux 2.0.x -- one big lock. I dunno about Net/Open. BSDers feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Does this mean the gnome WM compliance stuff is going to go away?
NT is faster than Linux in this benchmark. It is far from real-world. In the real-world, Linux has proven itself to be faster than NT, repeatedly for many people. I suspect it was the 4 NIC cards that gave NT the advantage. In the real world, a) you would not be serving static web pages over 100Mbit ethernet, and b) you would be using 4 uniprocessor linux boxes, which would be much faster, much much cheaper, and more reliable than one big monolithic machine. Its funny that MS chooses to use a monster machine instead of a cluster of small ones, which is what they advocate when comparing NT to Solaris. This just shows that MS will pay for benchmarks that NT will win, no matter how contrived they are. MS wins by marketing to managers, who know nothing about servers, and believe this "real-world" benchmark. Techies everywhere got a good laugh from it.
Bellsouth gets about 120KB/s max download, and 20-40KB/s max upload (Those capital B's mean Bytes). Its also only $40 a month and while you get some whack-ass hostname, it doesn't seem to change.
no it wont. it may even make it worse. His problem is latency, not bandwidth. Compression adds a small amount of latency (compressing and decompressing takes time) in return for less bandwidth. I must say for all the crap the phone company puts me through, I'm still glad I went with ADSL. Latency is usually under 100ms to sites with decent connections.
KDE included GPLed code, which means they can modify their license, but not that of the code they included. Which means they can't link with KDE. GNOME does not yet use NGLayout (at least in any distributed version, the GTK NGLayout component is just a proof of concept right now). When they do start using it, they will probably implement NGLayout as a component, accessible as a CORBA object, so it will be a seperate program, exporting services. Go read up on the relevant software before showing your ignorance of the GPL and GNOME and your own personal biases. It is anything but "simple as that."
Yeah, why can't any of these RFC complaint open source DHCP clients and servers deal with Microsoft's "standard" servers and clients? We all know that the only standard that matters is the one that M$ makes up/breaks. ugh.
Linux has both of these, as does windows NT. BeOS has some compelling advantages, but these are buzzwords. Be's forcing multithreading is an interesting concept, but one thread ends up doing all of the work usually. Of course, you can break some problems down even more, but you can do that with any modern OS (even win95). I'll agree that BeOS is fairly impressive, but it does not have me foaming at the mouth, and I even do a lot of audio application programming. (People like me are Be Inc's marketing department's primary targets).
Ok, when people say BeOS is a "Media OS" they mean it has a filesystem that can handle HUGE files (DV), a scheduler that will schedule with reasonable latency and precision (Realtime audio, although its still not good enough for my app), and a good "media framework" -- think QuickTime. None of these things make a better game platform than windows or linux. The only thing a game wants is low level (IE, OpenGL or D3D IM, not D3D RM or OpenInventor) hardware drivers, a decent TCP/IP stack, and a scheduler that can get set to a "Get the hell out of my way" mode. So it would appear that right now windows (ugh) is the best for games, and Linux is next in line.