I can already program in C/C++/Obj-C for just about any hardware platform and many OSes using a little gem known as gcc. Far more platforms and OSes I dare say than this VM. Now, if I could only invoke gcc to compile my down-loaded source code, then we really would have something. Something like RPM or dpkg, say.
I've used Linux for about a year on my PowerBook G3, but haven't used it on that machine since OSX was released. Its my primary development machine for an open-source DB-Perl-Web app, which is deployed primarily on x86 Linux servers. Why did I switch? Simply, OSX is a better (much) desktop system than Linux. Yes, OSX has a noticeably more sluggish UI than Linux, but not annoyingly so. More importantly, its more powerfull and better integrated so it allows me to work faster despite being more sluggish. It is far more annoying dealing with X-Windows cut-and-paste, for example, and I do a lot of my typing by cut and paste. For the first time on a UNIX system, I've actually been using the file manager (Finder) to navigate directories rather than the command line (!). Its also nice (very) to plug in an 18" LCD monitor at work for additional (not mirrored) desktop realestate - a feat I couldn't manage in Linux despite much effort. It would be nicer still to have multiple work-spaces in addition to the dual monotors, but I haven't missed them as much as I was sure I would. Also, its very nice (critical in my case) to go on the road and be able to do live demos of a client-server app from a laptop connected to an LCD projector. Other road-related things are much better battery management (8 hours with twin batt. pack), sleep - someting not possible on PowerPC Linux as of 4 months ago, and much simpler management of multiple internet connection methods (dialup, DHCP, static IP, 802.11b - all with just a menu selection or with auto-detection). All that being said, as I mentioned above, the deplyment systems mostly run Linux (on x86). Why? because Linux is a great server platform, that's why - though I haven't played with OSX-Server, so I can't compare.
I guess its no longer surprising that a slashdot discussion about microkernels (and the Mach microkernel in particular) would not include any mention of the HURD. As far as I'm concerned I would take RMS's opinion on software architecture over Linus' any day. Writing one piece of software doesn't make Linus an authority on all software. In any case it is unfortunate that some youthful sparing with a stuffy professor would be dredged back up to form the basis of a discussion on this ostensibly tech-oriented site. So, can we have a technical discussion or have we all turned into script kiddies? Lets start by asking this: Presumably the linux kernel sucked when the comment was made compared to what it is today. Can the same be said of Mach? What about the implementation of threads on these two kernels? Seems like a microkernel would be better suited for multithreading. Am I wrong? Anybody home?
Uh, why not just do something like:
<string></string>
That looks like a NULL value to me (typed, even).
I think this even works in Perl and Java. Not sure what C does.
Re:Doesn't make sense
on
OS X on x86?
·
· Score: 1
emachines?? as a competitor to Apple? emachines has never made any money, and by the looks of it never will. If they ever look like they might, Apple could buy them with the change in between their couch cusions. There is probably a larger volume of used macs in the sub-$500 range that would be a superior computer in every way to a brand-new emachines PC - in performance, durability, etc. About the only thing they wouldn't do is run Windows.
Why put a next-generation OS on a deader than dead horse of a CPU? As for those of you that continue to shout "comodity" and "faster", why don't you look at latest specs and prices? The ONLY way to get a comparable x86 box cheaper is to build it yourself. Period.
Do you think its fun for Intel to build CPUs the size of a piza box that have to run at GHz speeds just to be credible? The rest of the CPU industry is just sitting on their thumbs while Intel sweats away. Its no big trick to run a RISC processor at those speeds with a die 1/8th the size, dissipating 10% of the power. Why don't they? Because they don't need to.
is a wireless router/bridge that includes a 56K modem, an ethernet port for Cable/DSL modems,and DHCP for up to 20 clients - $299. The wireless follows the iEEE 802.11 standard (Lucent WaveLAN, etc), for 10Mbps wireless comm. Has Linux drivers.
Why not? Obviously you can't assemble much of anything at 1K, but you can assemble the structure at room temperature (or thereabouts), then cool it down quickly below freezing to avoid ice-crystals, then freeze-dry it or whatever. It won't fall apart at 1K if you can get it below freezing and get rid of the water. Its at high temperatures that the DNA strands denature (fall apart).
I use 3-button emulation on my PowerBook G3 when running linux. You can assign any mappable key to any button. I use fn/ctl and fn/alt. These don't clash with anything, and I LIKE using the trackpad with this button combo OVER using a 3-button mouse. Also, I end up using the trackpad "tap" over the existing button as the 'left' one.
Does it work? This is the main anoyance for me while otherwise happily running MacOS9 in an X Window on my PowerBook with LinuxPPC + mol (Mac-on-Linux).
Another question related to math-intensive computation. While doing performance comparisons between G3s/LinuxPPC and SGI/Irix, I noticed about a 2x performance improvement by linking against Motorola's libmoto math library on G3/LinuxPPC. I know that MacOS' math library is now on par with libmoto performance-wise. What is the status of LinuxPPC and libm? Is anyone working on this? How is Darwin's libm? Back in the day, I remember that a 350 MHz G3 was on-par with SGI Octanes for doing FFT-type claculations on very large (many hundreds MB) datasets. They were also about as fast as 750 MHz K7 - even though the K7 had nominally larger RAM throughput, and was about a year and a half newer machine than the G3.
Let me guess, you're writing this from a green-on-black text terminal, aren't you? And under the hood, I'll bet you've got that other vestige of '70s computer technology: The Intel 8086 series. How many floppy drives do you have within easy reach? I'll bet also that all the code you write is all cramped together with nary a whitespace for lack of maneuverability. Some call it compact, I call it ugly.
The only thing missing from NEdit is a popup menu to jump to function declarations. I use gTags for this, but its not as seamless as implemented in BBEdit.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget that every time you boot a Mac (or other Open Firmware hardware) you use a nice Forth interpreter rather a brain-dead BIOS.
I can already program in C/C++/Obj-C for just about any hardware platform and many OSes using a little gem known as gcc. Far more platforms and OSes I dare say than this VM. Now, if I could only invoke gcc to compile my down-loaded source code, then we really would have something. Something like RPM or dpkg, say.
I've used Linux for about a year on my PowerBook G3, but haven't used it on that machine since OSX was released. Its my primary development machine for an open-source DB-Perl-Web app, which is deployed primarily on x86 Linux servers. Why did I switch? Simply, OSX is a better (much) desktop system than Linux. Yes, OSX has a noticeably more sluggish UI than Linux, but not annoyingly so. More importantly, its more powerfull and better integrated so it allows me to work faster despite being more sluggish. It is far more annoying dealing with X-Windows cut-and-paste, for example, and I do a lot of my typing by cut and paste. For the first time on a UNIX system, I've actually been using the file manager (Finder) to navigate directories rather than the command line (!). Its also nice (very) to plug in an 18" LCD monitor at work for additional (not mirrored) desktop realestate - a feat I couldn't manage in Linux despite much effort. It would be nicer still to have multiple work-spaces in addition to the dual monotors, but I haven't missed them as much as I was sure I would. Also, its very nice (critical in my case) to go on the road and be able to do live demos of a client-server app from a laptop connected to an LCD projector. Other road-related things are much better battery management (8 hours with twin batt. pack), sleep - someting not possible on PowerPC Linux as of 4 months ago, and much simpler management of multiple internet connection methods (dialup, DHCP, static IP, 802.11b - all with just a menu selection or with auto-detection). All that being said, as I mentioned above, the deplyment systems mostly run Linux (on x86). Why? because Linux is a great server platform, that's why - though I haven't played with OSX-Server, so I can't compare.
So, Dick Armey will try to squeeze funding, huh? I wonder what the Vagina Airforce will have to say about that.
I guess its no longer surprising that a slashdot discussion about microkernels (and the Mach microkernel in particular) would not include any mention of the HURD. As far as I'm concerned I would take RMS's opinion on software architecture over Linus' any day. Writing one piece of software doesn't make Linus an authority on all software. In any case it is unfortunate that some youthful sparing with a stuffy professor would be dredged back up to form the basis of a discussion on this ostensibly tech-oriented site. So, can we have a technical discussion or have we all turned into script kiddies? Lets start by asking this: Presumably the linux kernel sucked when the comment was made compared to what it is today. Can the same be said of Mach? What about the implementation of threads on these two kernels? Seems like a microkernel would be better suited for multithreading. Am I wrong? Anybody home?
Uh, why not just do something like:
<string></string>
That looks like a NULL value to me (typed, even).
I think this even works in Perl and Java. Not sure what C does.
emachines?? as a competitor to Apple? emachines has never made any money, and by the looks of it never will. If they ever look like they might, Apple could buy them with the change in between their couch cusions. There is probably a larger volume of used macs in the sub-$500 range that would be a superior computer in every way to a brand-new emachines PC - in performance, durability, etc. About the only thing they wouldn't do is run Windows.
Why put a next-generation OS on a deader than dead horse of a CPU? As for those of you that continue to shout "comodity" and "faster", why don't you look at latest specs and prices? The ONLY way to get a comparable x86 box cheaper is to build it yourself. Period. Do you think its fun for Intel to build CPUs the size of a piza box that have to run at GHz speeds just to be credible? The rest of the CPU industry is just sitting on their thumbs while Intel sweats away. Its no big trick to run a RISC processor at those speeds with a die 1/8th the size, dissipating 10% of the power. Why don't they? Because they don't need to.
is a wireless router/bridge that includes a 56K modem, an ethernet port for Cable/DSL modems,and DHCP for up to 20 clients - $299. The wireless follows the iEEE 802.11 standard (Lucent WaveLAN, etc), for 10Mbps wireless comm. Has Linux drivers.
Why not? Obviously you can't assemble much of anything at 1K, but you can assemble the structure at room temperature (or thereabouts), then cool it down quickly below freezing to avoid ice-crystals, then freeze-dry it or whatever. It won't fall apart at 1K if you can get it below freezing and get rid of the water. Its at high temperatures that the DNA strands denature (fall apart).
I use 3-button emulation on my PowerBook G3 when running linux. You can assign any mappable key to any button. I use fn/ctl and fn/alt. These don't clash with anything, and I LIKE using the trackpad with this button combo OVER using a 3-button mouse. Also, I end up using the trackpad "tap" over the existing button as the 'left' one.
Does it work? This is the main anoyance for me while otherwise happily running MacOS9 in an X Window on my PowerBook with LinuxPPC + mol (Mac-on-Linux).
Another question related to math-intensive computation. While doing performance comparisons between G3s/LinuxPPC and SGI/Irix, I noticed about a 2x performance improvement by linking against Motorola's libmoto math library on G3/LinuxPPC. I know that MacOS' math library is now on par with libmoto performance-wise. What is the status of LinuxPPC and libm? Is anyone working on this? How is Darwin's libm? Back in the day, I remember that a 350 MHz G3 was on-par with SGI Octanes for doing FFT-type claculations on very large (many hundreds MB) datasets. They were also about as fast as 750 MHz K7 - even though the K7 had nominally larger RAM throughput, and was about a year and a half newer machine than the G3.
Let me guess, you're writing this from a green-on-black text terminal, aren't you? And under the hood, I'll bet you've got that other vestige of '70s computer technology: The Intel 8086 series. How many floppy drives do you have within easy reach? I'll bet also that all the code you write is all cramped together with nary a whitespace for lack of maneuverability. Some call it compact, I call it ugly. The only thing missing from NEdit is a popup menu to jump to function declarations. I use gTags for this, but its not as seamless as implemented in BBEdit.