which you should have read about before trying a port. I'm not even sure why you would bother in the first place when you can get a cheap Windows host for 10 bucks a month.
.NET is not made for idiots, it's made for professional developers who can utilize it properly. Professional developers who know what they are getting into and read faqs before porting to a platform that is filled with hacks:
Why does the memory consumed by the Mono process keep growing?
Mono currently uses a conservative, non-moving, non-compacting garbage collector. This means that the heap is not compacted when memory is released. This means that applications can produce memory Why does the memory consumed by the Mono process keep growing?
It is hence important to not get into patterns that would create these holes, for example such a hole could be created if you create a block of size SIZE, release it, and then create two blocks of size SIZE/2+1. patterns that will effectively make the process grow, just like C, C++, Perl, Python applications would. http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_ASP.NET
Windows can run on routers and smartphones and so can some other proprietary operating systems. I'm not sure why people think this ability is exclusive to Linux.
As for Microsoft they can afford to hire top talent to handle the creativity. FOSS advocates forget that creative people need to eat too.
Why haven't all these creative outsiders fixed Java? It still sucks on the desktop compared to.net and everyone knows it. But if you want to keep pushing it for non-technical reasons then go ahead, the business world has moved on and I don't see many FOSS applications being written in Java either.
Grand Central makes threading easier but so does.NET.
If you are going to write a 3D game for OSX you sure as hell can't just write it as single-threaded and have the OS figure the rest out. GCD is just an improved threading system. You still have to figure out how you are going to break the program up.
Grand Central doesn't address issues that the author went over. He's proposing a new OS that gives applications direct access to resources.
But I guess questioning Apple praise on Slashdot is a good way to get modded down.
"Responsiveness really is king," he said. "This is what people want."
The problem in being responsive, he noted, is "how does the OS know [which task] is the important thing?" You don't want to wait for Microsoft Word to get started because the antivirus program chose that moment to start scanning all your files.
Microsoft has made multi-threading easier for Windows programmers as well with.NET but the article isn't about.NET or Grand Central. The author wrote about how a completely new OS needs to be designed around multi-core machines.
The most popular consumer apps are based on old codebases that were written in c++. There are actually few.net apps in comparison and one of the most popular (Paint.net) is very light on resources. It's far lighter than The Gimp which is written in c++.
Oh and.net apps are compiled to native code, it's a myth that they use a virtual machine.
You can write a cpu-heavy program in any language..NET has nothing to do with heavy cpu usage.
that has nothing to do with dumb programmers.
Modern programs are not designed for old systems. People with old systems are not the targeted market for shiny new software.
This would be like calling Crytek programmers dumb for making a game that doesn't work well on your 5 year old computer. Modern software is designed for modern computers.
"For the talk, he set out to define what a new operating system, if designed by scratch, would look like today. He concluded it would be quite different from Windows or Unix."
But if you want to take the article as just an NT bash then go ahead, I suppose this is Slashdot.
You'd just be completing tasks faster that were never causing the program to appear slow in the first place.
Complex games and heavy apps like internet browsers need to be multi-threaded but not your typical business or consumer application when the typical laptop has a 2.0 ghz dual core cpu.
Most software sits and waits for a user response or data from a device. It's a tiny minority of software that can make use of multi-threading. Programs like AutoCad and Photoshop already do.
So programmers were dumb for designing an OS that was built around existing hardware and still meets the needs of most software users? Wow that was really dumb of them to design an OS that would be have been useless then and only useful to about 1% of the population today.
For consumer multitasking a dual core and Windows 7 is plenty responsive. The gains from this theoretical OS would be imperceptible to most.
Just draw a pentagram with your mouse to reveal it.
See now you can't say there is a bias. Oh but it only works during certain times.
But yes Slashdot supports the poor wittle billion dollar underdog Apple to that other billion dollar corporation. Sounds retarded? Yes, yes it is.
www.jerkfaceplayhouse.com
It's common sense.
A company with 10 billion in reserves and an existing marketshare is in a better position to deal with piracy than a small company that can go under if it has a 20% drop in sales.
Small software companies that depend entirely on sales would be destroyed by legalizing piracy while MS would just scale down and direct reserves towards profitable ventures that are immune to piracy.
If you hate record companies then don't buy their products.
If you hate Microsoft then support the alternatives.
Eroding copyright laws hurts small companies the most. The big ones already have buckets of cash with which they can find piracy-safe revenues.
and pretend that software like Autocad will be produced by basement GPL programmers if we eliminate copyright laws.
The only problem is that volunteer programmers are much more interested in creating yet another mp3 player by themselves instead of organizing into groups of 50 and tackling complex software engineering problems.
Copyright exists to protect intellectual property. It doesn't exist for people to ignore.
Er I mean RAH RAH RAH DOWN THE DA MAN.
God forbid we actually discuss the benefits of strong intellectual property laws. Or we can just pretend that the open source basement army will one day provide enough software for everyone.
There are clearly people that can afford the games but are choosing not to purchase them. Or did the millions of people that torrented Crysis all have basic computers with 56k modem connections and integrated gpus?
You can use politicized terms like "Big Media" but allowing piracy hurts content producers at all levels. When piracy rates get too high content producers and capital will leave for greener pastures.
People get mad at companies like Ubisoft for pushing this type of crap but the pirates are the real problem. They're the ones that have been driving pc developers to consoles and will continue to do so even if all pc developers get together and swear to never use DRM again. The World of Goo devs tried being nice and going DRM free and their game was pirated at 90% like everything else.
past. The iphone is actually a change from that.
It's a platform of millions of people that have no problem tossing a few bucks at a game which shouldn't be a surprise given how much the iphone data plan is.
But yea it must be bribes. That's the logical answer.
Slashdot Mirror
My local B&N sure has a lot of .net books for a platform that is limping along.
which you should have read about before trying a port. I'm not even sure why you would bother in the first place when you can get a cheap Windows host for 10 bucks a month.
.NET is not made for idiots, it's made for professional developers who can utilize it properly. Professional developers who know what they are getting into and read faqs before porting to a platform that is filled with hacks:
Why does the memory consumed by the Mono process keep growing? Mono currently uses a conservative, non-moving, non-compacting garbage collector. This means that the heap is not compacted when memory is released. This means that applications can produce memory Why does the memory consumed by the Mono process keep growing? It is hence important to not get into patterns that would create these holes, for example such a hole could be created if you create a block of size SIZE, release it, and then create two blocks of size SIZE/2+1. patterns that will effectively make the process grow, just like C, C++, Perl, Python applications would.
http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_ASP.NET
Windows can run on routers and smartphones and so can some other proprietary operating systems. I'm not sure why people think this ability is exclusive to Linux. As for Microsoft they can afford to hire top talent to handle the creativity. FOSS advocates forget that creative people need to eat too. Why haven't all these creative outsiders fixed Java? It still sucks on the desktop compared to .net and everyone knows it. But if you want to keep pushing it for non-technical reasons then go ahead, the business world has moved on and I don't see many FOSS applications being written in Java either.
it can't have anything to do with decisions based on cost/benefits.
Grand Central makes threading easier but so does .NET.
If you are going to write a 3D game for OSX you sure as hell can't just write it as single-threaded and have the OS figure the rest out. GCD is just an improved threading system. You still have to figure out how you are going to break the program up.
The myth is that .net apps run inside a virtual machine just like ye olden Java apps.
Grand Central doesn't address issues that the author went over. He's proposing a new OS that gives applications direct access to resources.
But I guess questioning Apple praise on Slashdot is a good way to get modded down.
"Responsiveness really is king," he said. "This is what people want." The problem in being responsive, he noted, is "how does the OS know [which task] is the important thing?" You don't want to wait for Microsoft Word to get started because the antivirus program chose that moment to start scanning all your files.
.NET but the article isn't about .NET or Grand Central. The author wrote about how a completely new OS needs to be designed around multi-core machines.
Microsoft has made multi-threading easier for Windows programmers as well with
The most popular consumer apps are based on old codebases that were written in c++. There are actually few .net apps in comparison and one of the most popular (Paint.net) is very light on resources. It's far lighter than The Gimp which is written in c++.
.net apps are compiled to native code, it's a myth that they use a virtual machine.
.NET has nothing to do with heavy cpu usage.
Oh and
You can write a cpu-heavy program in any language.
that has nothing to do with dumb programmers. Modern programs are not designed for old systems. People with old systems are not the targeted market for shiny new software. This would be like calling Crytek programmers dumb for making a game that doesn't work well on your 5 year old computer. Modern software is designed for modern computers.
"For the talk, he set out to define what a new operating system, if designed by scratch, would look like today. He concluded it would be quite different from Windows or Unix."
But if you want to take the article as just an NT bash then go ahead, I suppose this is Slashdot.
You'd just be completing tasks faster that were never causing the program to appear slow in the first place. Complex games and heavy apps like internet browsers need to be multi-threaded but not your typical business or consumer application when the typical laptop has a 2.0 ghz dual core cpu.
Most software sits and waits for a user response or data from a device. It's a tiny minority of software that can make use of multi-threading. Programs like AutoCad and Photoshop already do.
The author is talking about a complete OS redesign, not a new threading system.
The article is about gaining even greater power from multicore systems by redesigning the OS.
So programmers were dumb for designing an OS that was built around existing hardware and still meets the needs of most software users? Wow that was really dumb of them to design an OS that would be have been useless then and only useful to about 1% of the population today. For consumer multitasking a dual core and Windows 7 is plenty responsive. The gains from this theoretical OS would be imperceptible to most.
Just draw a pentagram with your mouse to reveal it. See now you can't say there is a bias. Oh but it only works during certain times. But yes Slashdot supports the poor wittle billion dollar underdog Apple to that other billion dollar corporation. Sounds retarded? Yes, yes it is. www.jerkfaceplayhouse.com
He's actually a highly advanced A.I. bot that is designed to make Linux look like it is the hobby of insane cult members.
It's common sense. A company with 10 billion in reserves and an existing marketshare is in a better position to deal with piracy than a small company that can go under if it has a 20% drop in sales. Small software companies that depend entirely on sales would be destroyed by legalizing piracy while MS would just scale down and direct reserves towards profitable ventures that are immune to piracy.
If you hate record companies then don't buy their products. If you hate Microsoft then support the alternatives. Eroding copyright laws hurts small companies the most. The big ones already have buckets of cash with which they can find piracy-safe revenues.
and pretend that software like Autocad will be produced by basement GPL programmers if we eliminate copyright laws. The only problem is that volunteer programmers are much more interested in creating yet another mp3 player by themselves instead of organizing into groups of 50 and tackling complex software engineering problems.
Copyright exists to protect intellectual property. It doesn't exist for people to ignore. Er I mean RAH RAH RAH DOWN THE DA MAN. God forbid we actually discuss the benefits of strong intellectual property laws. Or we can just pretend that the open source basement army will one day provide enough software for everyone.
Would you have told them that it would be a waste of time?
There are clearly people that can afford the games but are choosing not to purchase them. Or did the millions of people that torrented Crysis all have basic computers with 56k modem connections and integrated gpus? You can use politicized terms like "Big Media" but allowing piracy hurts content producers at all levels. When piracy rates get too high content producers and capital will leave for greener pastures. People get mad at companies like Ubisoft for pushing this type of crap but the pirates are the real problem. They're the ones that have been driving pc developers to consoles and will continue to do so even if all pc developers get together and swear to never use DRM again. The World of Goo devs tried being nice and going DRM free and their game was pirated at 90% like everything else.
past. The iphone is actually a change from that. It's a platform of millions of people that have no problem tossing a few bucks at a game which shouldn't be a surprise given how much the iphone data plan is. But yea it must be bribes. That's the logical answer.