And, even if the OS itself was not so good, it doesn't matter, because people often learn the subject from the mistakes, shortcomings. After all, Linus wrote the Linux to improve Minix on Minix.
Well, learning from other and correcting their mistakes by questioning everything is useful and important. However, its important to have second opinions to do that. Its good to go and read Tanenbaum's books on Operating Systems and browse the minix source to write your own, but one should also look at the source code of the TCP programs on OpenBSD to learn better tequniques to avoid buffer overflows. Now I've never read the minix sources, so they migh be 100% free of buffer overflow exploits. However, I've read through the OpenBSD source code while studying Beej's guide to socket programming. I'm a big C fan and enjoy exploring the finer points of casting, unions, and pointer math, but I wanted Theo's opinion on the matter. I may think I know everything about programming in C, but I know I know jack shit.
I wrote many enterprise C++ applications and found COM ugly enough to avoid learning it. I prefere static linking.
COM, from an application developers perspective, defines specificinterfaces for Classes to implement so they may be used by other programs. However, COM is not how dynamic binding happens on Win32. Dynamic Linking does not require COM. Dynamic linking can occur at load time via stub libraries, or at run time via calls to LoadLibraryEx() and GetProcAddress(). If you use COM these calls are just made indirectly and hidden behind layers of abstraction. Saying you don't like COM because of dynamic linking is like saying you don't like SWING because programs should be compiled into native binaries and not java byte code.
Well then I guess that means Yoda is Blue, and Obi Wan probally shit his pants when he saw Jango wearing the armor of a race that fought the jedi, and sometimes won.
By the way, Google Zeitgeist shows that about half of their visitors use Googles English interface. So i estimate that about half of the FC2 users will need the 4th CD.
Your equation is missing several variables. First, their seems to be a thriving South American Linux community. However, you dont take into account whether these people are using something linke Connectivtz thats specifically for Spanish Users or something like redhat or SuSe with internationalization support.Secondly, in Europe, SuSE is supposedly the Big Linux Player, Thirdly, in many countries, such as Egypt, it seems linux has no market penetration. Luckily people are changing that.
SecureCRT sux
I've used this and putty, and while I like putty better now that it supports X11/port fowarding, SecureCRT is a functional SSH client. Also, it supports serial port terminal emulation. Sure putty is "better", but SecureCRT far from sucks.
Couldnt a group just maintain the Longhorn version of the browser, much as the Windows version of GAIM is handled?
The thing about gaim is that it uses GTK on windows so the windows ports just deals with the issues that are different on windows and linux and not abstracted by GTK. Alot of the windows specific stuff is implemented as plugins and more look and feel oriented like the taskbar icon plugin. This microserf is proposing the mozilla team make changes to low level part of firefox.
When was the last time that anybody precalculated the jail time he/she will get as a deterrent to a certain illegal activity?
The last time someone decided against commiting a crime.
so i think mozilla is a bit more advanced than emacs;)
What about a psychologist? Emacs has some sort of doctor mode that emulates Freud. Kinda fitting lisp is supposed to be a good AI language.
Hate to break it to you, but Windows ACLs are more fine grained than Traditional Unix permissions. Granted you can do ACLs in several Linux flavors. However, its not "standard". Thats not to say Unix is more insecure, Unless your running VMS or an AS/400, server stuff tends to be run in god-mode and their is little initial security tuning. However, all the advanced permissions are no good if you don't use them.
You do if you want to use non-beta versions of X11 and Script Editor, as well as Xcode.
Well The beta version of X11 isn't lacking for me as far as features, stability or speed. Perhaps other people have experienced diffrently. Now that I have a beige G3 and my efforts to bitchslap Panther on via XPostFacto have failed, I'll probally be running more X apps than I did in the couple of months I had my ibook pre panther release.
As far as xcode and script editor, I'm a die hard vim guy so its not something that affects me personally. I also don't code in Coccoa or Carbon, so interface builder isn't that big a deal for me. However, those tools are definatly must haves for alot of people. However, look at it this way. People have coded just fine before these tools were released. Hell, there is no windows scripting host IDE and plenty of interesting and innovative scripts have been written for it. Unfortunatly, alot of that innivation is in malicious code.
I'm not saying use inferior tools. A whole chapter of The Mythical Man Month is dedicated to the topic of the software craftsman's tools. However, if you need these particular tools upgrade. Apple has done an excellen t job of becoming a "developer platformm." They're doing a good job of not alienating people that don't want to upgrade. It boggles my mond people that still are afraid to upgrade from 9. However, they have to pay for innovation, and unless your going to ask convince Jobs to Open Source the whole damn os, you gotta shell out cash for the newest fashizzle.
Now I'm not saying it would be a bad idea to open source OSX neccesserally, Steve Jobs would jsut have to stop having apple be the only successful benovolant fascist dictatorship ever.
Re:Vim is everywhere (even windows).
on
JOE Hits 3.0
·
· Score: 1
It does have multiple windows in windows. Well, their multiple processes, but you can have multiple editor windows open. I don't know much about programming in OSX, but if you could make an app bundle that started a wrapper program that in turn made calls to the gvim exedcutable embedded in said app bundle, you could have multiple windows probally.
Even if it is a bit of a waste of space, I'd rather just have the image program take a snapshot of the raw disk image, completly agnostic to the filesystem.
Several problems with that argument. First of all, if your ghosting an image to CD, your just going to give that CD a boot floppy image of norton ghost. The version that reasd your partition info.
Now in theory your old software might not run on newer hardware, especially DRMified hardware. However, I doubt DRM hardware would be norton ghost friendly.
Another problem is ghost isn't open source. If ghost were opensource, their would be a series of command line toold that made use of their special filesystem compression algorithims. Also, you could recompile said tools on whatever machine you have at the moment. However, due to afformentioned reason thats only a negligible issue.
Re:Vim is everywhere (even windows).
on
JOE Hits 3.0
·
· Score: 1
Vim will also let you look at stuff that is hard to get at under windows.
Can I get a hell yeah!!! While a few registry tweaks can allow you to right click on any file and open it up in whatever your favorite text/hex editor is, VIM gives you that right out of the box. GVIM on windows installs easily, has a very nice default setup, and is quite felxible. Vim.org also gives you plenty of extensions, support, and a forum. The OSX version of VIM ain't too shabby either. I'm using the first panther compatiable Coccoa build of vim 6.2 on my iBook. I wish that dragging a document on the doc icon when it was alreay open started a new vim window, but its only a matter of time befroe they work out the kinks. If I need to do "real" devopment on OSX, I jsut start up X11 and use the fink version of GVIM.
So you want research and "pure science" to occur. Well plenty of hardcore private research comes out of large private corporations. UNIX came out of a privae lab in New Jersey. Sure alot of what makes it still useful today came from Berkley and Military research, but the basics that make it the fun interesting system that it is came from research by capitalists for capitalists. If capitalists see money in space, and determine that pure science needs to occur to gain the money, then they will pay scientists for pure science to occur. They will then take this research and apply it so Steve Jobs can bring you the "Space iPod", WalMart can sell you tv dinners that can withstand the vacuum of space, and Intel can use nanobots to bring us the Pentium 5 (Pentium^2?).
Yes I am using really broad brush strokes to paint a very happy picture. But my argument is alot better then "damn those meddling capitalists bastards!" Their are going to be greedy evil people that will underpay and take advantage of poor people. However, thats a problem that is present in any real world economical ecosystem.
Capitalism was the system of the Industrial Age.
We are now in the Information Age. So things will have to change. Gates, Linus, McBride. RMS, ESR, Perens, Ashcrot and many other of the philisophers of today prove that as Dylan said, "The times they are a'changing." However, in terms of getting us up into space, were going to have to do a whole lot of manufacturing, transporting and exchanging of goods. Until some modern day philisopher produces a book the size of the wealth of nations that beats to death how we can apply Open Source ideas to the whole economy, as Adam Smith showed how capitalism could be applied to farming, capitalism is going to get us into space.
what a good little capitalist!
Exactly! As Adam Smith beat to death in The Wealth of Nations, Man will do whats in his best interests. In a currency based economy that means try to make billions of dollars. People want to be in space for a variety of reasons. Being in space is hard. Hard translates to expensive in economical terms. People ave to spend alot of effort to do stuff in space. Hence why the space shuttle launches are expensive.
Now, all you people that feel that we have to go into space for "non capitalistic" reasons, will pay money for a trip to space if someone sells it cheaper than you do it your self. In other words you the "altruistic space explorer" will benifit.
Now what are your alleged reasons to colonize space? Raw materials, manufacturing, and colonization? These are the reasons that europe colonized the new world, and are quite central to Adams version of capitalism.
2) No Windows installer
The windows port is released seperatly by mingw and cygnus folks. But if you want lonks all I can offer you is a link to a REAL(tm) compiler, Open Watcom.
And for all you linux zealots out their reading slashdot with Internet Explorer, their working on the linux version. I believe they even hired some indians to help with the port. Thats sure to start a flame war on slashdot, offshore outsourcing to do open source programming.
Then again, my first job was programming on AS/400s for $10 (eventually $12) per hour, but I didn't know any better and at the time (17, right out of HS, welfare family) it seemed like I was rich.
I hope you realize now that the print operators and system operators running print jobs and backups were probally making more money than you. Speeking of which I gotta go check on my backups. Luckily I'm in a mixed shop so I got Winblows and Unix boxes to play with to to keep my sanity.
We all know Microsoft wouldn't give dog shit for free, much less a compiler.
What about Internet Explorer? Originally it was a seperate download that you added on to Windows 95 and NT. Of course they just did that to kill Netscape and become the One True(tm) web development platform.
So why give away the compiler? Well of course, as many here have pointed out, to be the One True(tm) development platform.
If your program has a noticeable performance benefit from using SIMD instructions, you can move the relevant functionality into a shared object, and distribute the program with several versions of it, and dlopen() the correct one at runtime.
I'm running windows so its LoadLibraryEx() you insensitive clod!!. Seriously though, that sounds like a really good idea. I've not done real programming in assembly, if I ever do I'll keep that in mind.
My defense for programming in windows. Programmers solve problems. Pick something with alot of problems.
Unfortunately what you don't realize is that, people know for a fact that majority of 5 point posts on slashdot really mean slashdot monkies.
What exactly is a slashdot monkey? Someone who plays the system to get +5 posts. Well moderations is meant to produce a certain behavior. Those attempting to get moderation would, under a perfect system, only be able to do so by being interesting, insightful, etc. If their is a way to abuse the system, attack the ststem not the trolls.
Slashdot Mirror
And, even if the OS itself was not so good, it doesn't matter, because people often learn the subject from the mistakes, shortcomings. After all, Linus wrote the Linux to improve Minix on Minix.
Well, learning from other and correcting their mistakes by questioning everything is useful and important. However, its important to have second opinions to do that. Its good to go and read Tanenbaum's books on Operating Systems and browse the minix source to write your own, but one should also look at the source code of the TCP programs on OpenBSD to learn better tequniques to avoid buffer overflows. Now I've never read the minix sources, so they migh be 100% free of buffer overflow exploits. However, I've read through the OpenBSD source code while studying Beej's guide to socket programming. I'm a big C fan and enjoy exploring the finer points of casting, unions, and pointer math, but I wanted Theo's opinion on the matter. I may think I know everything about programming in C, but I know I know jack shit.
I wrote many enterprise C++ applications and found COM ugly enough to avoid learning it. I prefere static linking.
COM, from an application developers perspective, defines specificinterfaces for Classes to implement so they may be used by other programs. However, COM is not how dynamic binding happens on Win32. Dynamic Linking does not require COM. Dynamic linking can occur at load time via stub libraries, or at run time via calls to LoadLibraryEx() and GetProcAddress(). If you use COM these calls are just made indirectly and hidden behind layers of abstraction. Saying you don't like COM because of dynamic linking is like saying you don't like SWING because programs should be compiled into native binaries and not java byte code.
Well then I guess that means Yoda is Blue, and Obi Wan probally shit his pants when he saw Jango wearing the armor of a race that fought the jedi, and sometimes won.
By the way, Google Zeitgeist shows that about half of their visitors use Googles English interface. So i estimate that about half of the FC2 users will need the 4th CD.
Your equation is missing several variables. First, their seems to be a thriving South American Linux community. However, you dont take into account whether these people are using something linke Connectivtz thats specifically for Spanish Users or something like redhat or SuSe with internationalization support.Secondly, in Europe, SuSE is supposedly the Big Linux Player, Thirdly, in many countries, such as Egypt, it seems linux has no market penetration. Luckily people are changing that.
Is Two Billion Years metric for 250 million American years?
I use sidereal time, you insensitive clod!!
SecureCRT sux
I've used this and putty, and while I like putty better now that it supports X11/port fowarding, SecureCRT is a functional SSH client. Also, it supports serial port terminal emulation. Sure putty is "better", but SecureCRT far from sucks.
Besides, you could always release your own version. (Ahem, "embrace and extend.") :)
) . In other words same shit just feels dirty because its of Redmond.
Or to draw and analogy:
fork():EmbraceAndExtend()::malloc()::GlobalAlloc(
Couldnt a group just maintain the Longhorn version of the browser, much as the Windows version of GAIM is handled? The thing about gaim is that it uses GTK on windows so the windows ports just deals with the issues that are different on windows and linux and not abstracted by GTK. Alot of the windows specific stuff is implemented as plugins and more look and feel oriented like the taskbar icon plugin. This microserf is proposing the mozilla team make changes to low level part of firefox.
When was the last time that anybody precalculated the jail time he/she will get as a deterrent to a certain illegal activity?
The last time someone decided against commiting a crime.
By $0 for a stable OS, do you mean downloading Solaris x86?
so i think mozilla is a bit more advanced than emacs ;)
What about a psychologist? Emacs has some sort of doctor mode that emulates Freud. Kinda fitting lisp is supposed to be a good AI language.
Hate to break it to you, but Windows ACLs are more fine grained than Traditional Unix permissions. Granted you can do ACLs in several Linux flavors. However, its not "standard". Thats not to say Unix is more insecure, Unless your running VMS or an AS/400, server stuff tends to be run in god-mode and their is little initial security tuning. However, all the advanced permissions are no good if you don't use them.
It doesn't even have a built in operating system. Or a lisp interperter, or a text editor!! Its a terrible emacs clone!
You do if you want to use non-beta versions of X11 and Script Editor, as well as Xcode.
Well The beta version of X11 isn't lacking for me as far as features, stability or speed. Perhaps other people have experienced diffrently. Now that I have a beige G3 and my efforts to bitchslap Panther on via XPostFacto have failed, I'll probally be running more X apps than I did in the couple of months I had my ibook pre panther release.
As far as xcode and script editor, I'm a die hard vim guy so its not something that affects me personally. I also don't code in Coccoa or Carbon, so interface builder isn't that big a deal for me. However, those tools are definatly must haves for alot of people. However, look at it this way. People have coded just fine before these tools were released. Hell, there is no windows scripting host IDE and plenty of interesting and innovative scripts have been written for it. Unfortunatly, alot of that innivation is in malicious code.
I'm not saying use inferior tools. A whole chapter of The Mythical Man Month is dedicated to the topic of the software craftsman's tools. However, if you need these particular tools upgrade. Apple has done an excellen t job of becoming a "developer platformm." They're doing a good job of not alienating people that don't want to upgrade. It boggles my mond people that still are afraid to upgrade from 9. However, they have to pay for innovation, and unless your going to ask convince Jobs to Open Source the whole damn os, you gotta shell out cash for the newest fashizzle.
Now I'm not saying it would be a bad idea to open source OSX neccesserally, Steve Jobs would jsut have to stop having apple be the only successful benovolant fascist dictatorship ever.
It does have multiple windows in windows. Well, their multiple processes, but you can have multiple editor windows open. I don't know much about programming in OSX, but if you could make an app bundle that started a wrapper program that in turn made calls to the gvim exedcutable embedded in said app bundle, you could have multiple windows probally.
Even if it is a bit of a waste of space, I'd rather just have the image program take a snapshot of the raw disk image, completly agnostic to the filesystem.
Several problems with that argument. First of all, if your ghosting an image to CD, your just going to give that CD a boot floppy image of norton ghost. The version that reasd your partition info.
Now in theory your old software might not run on newer hardware, especially DRMified hardware. However, I doubt DRM hardware would be norton ghost friendly. Another problem is ghost isn't open source. If ghost were opensource, their would be a series of command line toold that made use of their special filesystem compression algorithims. Also, you could recompile said tools on whatever machine you have at the moment. However, due to afformentioned reason thats only a negligible issue.
Vim will also let you look at stuff that is hard to get at under windows. Can I get a hell yeah!!! While a few registry tweaks can allow you to right click on any file and open it up in whatever your favorite text/hex editor is, VIM gives you that right out of the box. GVIM on windows installs easily, has a very nice default setup, and is quite felxible. Vim.org also gives you plenty of extensions, support, and a forum. The OSX version of VIM ain't too shabby either. I'm using the first panther compatiable Coccoa build of vim 6.2 on my iBook. I wish that dragging a document on the doc icon when it was alreay open started a new vim window, but its only a matter of time befroe they work out the kinks. If I need to do "real" devopment on OSX, I jsut start up X11 and use the fink version of GVIM.
So you want research and "pure science" to occur. Well plenty of hardcore private research comes out of large private corporations. UNIX came out of a privae lab in New Jersey. Sure alot of what makes it still useful today came from Berkley and Military research, but the basics that make it the fun interesting system that it is came from research by capitalists for capitalists. If capitalists see money in space, and determine that pure science needs to occur to gain the money, then they will pay scientists for pure science to occur. They will then take this research and apply it so Steve Jobs can bring you the "Space iPod", WalMart can sell you tv dinners that can withstand the vacuum of space, and Intel can use nanobots to bring us the Pentium 5 (Pentium^2?).
Yes I am using really broad brush strokes to paint a very happy picture. But my argument is alot better then "damn those meddling capitalists bastards!" Their are going to be greedy evil people that will underpay and take advantage of poor people. However, thats a problem that is present in any real world economical ecosystem.
Capitalism was the system of the Industrial Age. We are now in the Information Age. So things will have to change. Gates, Linus, McBride. RMS, ESR, Perens, Ashcrot and many other of the philisophers of today prove that as Dylan said, "The times they are a'changing." However, in terms of getting us up into space, were going to have to do a whole lot of manufacturing, transporting and exchanging of goods. Until some modern day philisopher produces a book the size of the wealth of nations that beats to death how we can apply Open Source ideas to the whole economy, as Adam Smith showed how capitalism could be applied to farming, capitalism is going to get us into space.
what a good little capitalist!
Exactly! As Adam Smith beat to death in The Wealth of Nations, Man will do whats in his best interests. In a currency based economy that means try to make billions of dollars. People want to be in space for a variety of reasons. Being in space is hard. Hard translates to expensive in economical terms. People ave to spend alot of effort to do stuff in space. Hence why the space shuttle launches are expensive.
Now, all you people that feel that we have to go into space for "non capitalistic" reasons, will pay money for a trip to space if someone sells it cheaper than you do it your self. In other words you the "altruistic space explorer" will benifit.
Now what are your alleged reasons to colonize space? Raw materials, manufacturing, and colonization? These are the reasons that europe colonized the new world, and are quite central to Adams version of capitalism.
2) No Windows installer
The windows port is released seperatly by mingw and cygnus folks. But if you want lonks all I can offer you is a link to a REAL(tm) compiler, Open Watcom.
And for all you linux zealots out their reading slashdot with Internet Explorer, their working on the linux version. I believe they even hired some indians to help with the port. Thats sure to start a flame war on slashdot, offshore outsourcing to do open source programming.
Then again, my first job was programming on AS/400s for $10 (eventually $12) per hour, but I didn't know any better and at the time (17, right out of HS, welfare family) it seemed like I was rich.
I hope you realize now that the print operators and system operators running print jobs and backups were probally making more money than you. Speeking of which I gotta go check on my backups. Luckily I'm in a mixed shop so I got Winblows and Unix boxes to play with to to keep my sanity.
We all know Microsoft wouldn't give dog shit for free, much less a compiler. What about Internet Explorer? Originally it was a seperate download that you added on to Windows 95 and NT. Of course they just did that to kill Netscape and become the One True(tm) web development platform.
So why give away the compiler? Well of course, as many here have pointed out, to be the One True(tm) development platform.
Hey questions like that should be submitted to ask slashdot!!!
If your program has a noticeable performance benefit from using SIMD instructions, you can move the relevant functionality into a shared object, and distribute the program with several versions of it, and dlopen() the correct one at runtime.
I'm running windows so its LoadLibraryEx() you insensitive clod!!. Seriously though, that sounds like a really good idea. I've not done real programming in assembly, if I ever do I'll keep that in mind.
My defense for programming in windows. Programmers solve problems. Pick something with alot of problems.
Unfortunately what you don't realize is that, people know for a fact that majority of 5 point posts on slashdot really mean slashdot monkies.
What exactly is a slashdot monkey? Someone who plays the system to get +5 posts. Well moderations is meant to produce a certain behavior. Those attempting to get moderation would, under a perfect system, only be able to do so by being interesting, insightful, etc. If their is a way to abuse the system, attack the ststem not the trolls.