There are certain activities in the kernel that must be completed undisturbed. If you are running some type of real-time application that must take action in a short time period, you have a conflict. Fully preemptive simply means that you can *always* interrupt the kernel to do whatever needs to be done rather than *sometimes* or even *most of the time*.
Even the units are suspect... If you're reading an ad in the paper for a computer, they will tell you that GB is one billion bytes (it wasn't long ago that the same ads were telling you MB is one million bytes) when referring to the hard disk size. And K, course is 1,000 (close enough, right?).
No that's not what I meant at all. Most people that have moved from MS to Linux did not like the lack of control over their computers and the lack of choice. Maybe it would be easier if everyone used the same distro and the same hardware and the same desktop, but I don't think it would be better.
I was attracted to Linux way back when it was a shell of what it is today. It wasn't better than the DOS/Win stuff (yet). But I could do things with my PC that were either difficult or impossible with MS products.
I value the freedom of having options/choices. If there's only one desktop there's less freedom in Linux. I think it's the same spirit that drives people to Linux that will keep BOTH desktops thriving.
Thanks for telling me that I make a lot of sense there - really. I participate here because I'm interested in the topics and because I think this medium will allow me to learn more about myself than I'll ever learn about Linux.
When everyone starts saying things like "you have to have Microsoft..." or "Redhat is the only rational distro to choose" or whatever - That's when I'm looking for something else to use. I prefer KDE.
I have no karma!
I too have an ethernet network at home. I do not have DSL and I don't even have a 56K modem (33.6?). I doubt I ever get that much bandwidth from Mindspring anyway. When I do get to the point that I can get DSL, I'm ready!
I don't think so. I think it is pure economics. The US economy depends heavily on cheap fossil fuel for growth. We'll go to war if needed. Why did we save Kuwait? Photovoltaics beat fossil fuel in every category except cost.
I just started reading a book "Solar Power" which proposes that we build large solar collectors in space, beam the energy to a point on earth via high freq. radio waves, then convert to electricity. Apparently the technology is all in place, but the guvment buried it in favor of spending money on atomic energy. The sun is always shining in space.
Encryption only solves part of the problem. They (anyone watching your traffic) still know who you are talking to. There are ways around that too. You just need a system of intermediaries along with strong encryption to stymie Carnivore.
Slashdot Mirror
There are certain activities in the kernel that must be completed undisturbed. If you are running some type of real-time application that must take action in a short time period, you have a conflict. Fully preemptive simply means that you can *always* interrupt the kernel to do whatever needs to be done rather than *sometimes* or even *most of the time*.
You should encourage your children to become lawyers. They seem to be the winners in the internet age.
Even the units are suspect... If you're reading an ad in the paper for a computer, they will tell you that GB is one billion bytes (it wasn't long ago that the same ads were telling you MB is one million bytes) when referring to the hard disk size. And K, course is 1,000 (close enough, right?).
No that's not what I meant at all. Most people that have moved from MS to Linux did not like the lack of control over their computers and the lack of choice. Maybe it would be easier if everyone used the same distro and the same hardware and the same desktop, but I don't think it would be better.
I was attracted to Linux way back when it was a shell of what it is today. It wasn't better than the DOS/Win stuff (yet). But I could do things with my PC that were either difficult or impossible with MS products.
I value the freedom of having options/choices. If there's only one desktop there's less freedom in Linux. I think it's the same spirit that drives people to Linux that will keep BOTH desktops thriving.
Thanks for telling me that I make a lot of sense there - really. I participate here because I'm interested in the topics and because I think this medium will allow me to learn more about myself than I'll ever learn about Linux.
When everyone starts saying things like "you have to have Microsoft..." or "Redhat is the only rational distro to choose" or whatever - That's when I'm looking for something else to use. I prefer KDE. I have no karma!
I too have an ethernet network at home. I do not have DSL and I don't even have a 56K modem (33.6?). I doubt I ever get that much bandwidth from Mindspring anyway. When I do get to the point that I can get DSL, I'm ready!
Why fight uphill? I would just accept a Red Hat system, verify it works, back it up, then customize as you see fit. Dual boot is even better.
I don't think so. I think it is pure economics. The US economy depends heavily on cheap fossil fuel for growth. We'll go to war if needed. Why did we save Kuwait? Photovoltaics beat fossil fuel in every category except cost.
I just started reading a book "Solar Power" which proposes that we build large solar collectors in space, beam the energy to a point on earth via high freq. radio waves, then convert to electricity. Apparently the technology is all in place, but the guvment buried it in favor of spending money on atomic energy. The sun is always shining in space.
Encryption only solves part of the problem. They (anyone watching your traffic) still know who you are talking to. There are ways around that too. You just need a system of intermediaries along with strong encryption to stymie Carnivore.