I'm not sure what you mean here. Considering that I could use my Ericsson in Sweden, Norway, Finland, USA, the entire god damn Europe and most other parts of the world without a hitch tells me that GSM works just fine. CDMA coverage is... Well... Mostly zero around here. However - both standards work. Doesn't that mean that they both suck, but in different ways?
Actually, using "echo" and "Visual Basic" (or maybe "dd" and "Perl")would be a true clusterfuck. MySQL still *is* a database, even if it doesn't support sub-selects and views just yet. Java is easily the least worst language/environment for large server applications that has to be secure and maintained for $BIGNUM years. You don't write this stuff in C++ unless you are slightly insane and/or simply dislike Java.
Notice that the DB benchmarks were done under Linux. Please point me in the direction of the nearest Microsoft SQL Server XP2003.Net Home Edition that is available for Linux.
You got to be kidding. Selecing one working solution that doesn't suck isn't the way of Open Source. Instead, you get to choose between several solutions with various suckiness depending on what defect(s) you can live with. Just look at the X mess, where all applications look and behave different.
On a more serious note - yes, a standard library for sound handling would be superb. Such a simple thing as a global sound mixer is impossible right now, since you have to figure out a way to support *all* sound generation ways. I also agree that using/dev/dsp doesn't cut it for multichannel cards and such things. How do you read 13 tracks of audio at the same time from/dev/dsp? Or send your 32-channel ProTools project to the sound card?
Iraq is causing a general disruption to world peace
Last time I checked, it was the United States that were waging war. Iraq just sits there exporting oil.
Iraq is already breeding terrorists
If by terrorists you mean "people who are seriously mad about the US fucking with them contantly because of their religion", then yes.
Iraq already has WMD and has shown a propensity of using them
Hiroshima. Nagazaki. THAT'S what I call mass destruction. Who did that again? Besides that - where's your proof that they do have any WoMD at all? Not just some pictures of a truck that might contain weapons or maybe even soft, fluffy teddybears - real evidence.
Innocent civilians are already being killed
And more will be dead if you won't let them import medicine. Right now, they are performing operations without any anaesthetic because they can't get enough medicine. Why? Oh, it might be used to create chemical weapons. The civil uses aren't even mentioned.
Iraq should disarm for the same reasons Hitler was forced to disarm.
Hitler was punished because he invaded other countries. The Kuwait invasion was ten years from now, right? You've already attacked them for that. Get a new excuse.
That Apple would Aquafy X11 is really a great step forward
Isn't that an impossible task? First of all, no X11 apps use the menubar on top of my screen - they draw their own. Altering that behaviour for *all* applications, making them use standard Aqua controls and not self-drawn crap by Qt/GTK+/Athena/Motif and forcing default behaviour from shortcut keys...
If all of those things could be done - THEN I would call X11 Aquafied. I would also call it a miracle.
Let's see... If we transfer standard CD quality, you would get (16*44100)/1024 == 689 kbit data per second. Stepping up to 24*96000, 2250 kbit is used. The maximum limit for 802.11g is about 5400 kbit.
Think about what you just wrote for a second. Then try to imagine bolting on a 32-bit, multithreading, memory protected, virtual memory capable system onto DOS which is a 16-bit, one-task, 640kb system with no access restrictions at all. Add to that the concept of standardized drivers for everything including file systems, DLLs and all of the modern stuff that we take for granted today.
Using the word "impossible" would be appropriate here.
If Apple were to release a IBM PC compatible version of MacOS X, they wouldn't get a hardware sale. Therefore, they would have to raise the price considerably. Say that you have to pay $500 for it, and you would get an operating system with *zero* available applications at release. Now - do you still want to run OSX on your PC?
This is posted from my very own Powerbook. It is an incredible machine, and a superb operating system on it. Still, I don't want it on my PC. I *do* want a Linux distribution following the same path as MacOS X - hiding the/etc and/usr crap away, simplifying application installation, responsive and fluid UI... Unfortunately, nobody seems to like that idea.
Nope. The hardware is all checked stuff, two identical computer to his with Win2K runs just fine with no stability problems at all. He's a software engineer with ten years in the industry, and has a clean WinXp installation with Emacs and Sun JDK 1.4.1. He's no newbie, and therefore no spyware junk.
Don't look down on people knowing more than yourself.
Oh yes, it has. A computer that my friend owns is three weeks old, came with WinXP, and has already shown the BSOD twice. My own Win2K installation has done the same a couple of times since summer 2000. I've also had kernel panics in Linux about two or three times since 1997. My MacOS X installation hasn't paniced yet, for some odd reason.
WinXP isn't immune to BSOD:s in any way. It might be more stable than the Win9x series, but that comes as no real surprise.
If you include a web browser that can't be removed without destroying the operating system in general, that's a bad thing. The Warp browser (and Lynx, Mozilla, Konqueror and all coming with a Linux distro) can be removed without any consequences.
Otherwise, you would have no applications. Let's say that an x86 version of MacOS X is released without PPC emulation. Now, there are *zero* applications available for it. Photoshop, Office, Quark and all of those... Not available. Porting them could take time, so you should prepare for at least a years wait (maybe longer). So, you have a great OS with absolutely no applications at all for a while. Ever heard of BeOS?
I've taken a quick look at PicoGUI for a project at work, and it is a great piece of code. Hats off.
I've talked to X developers about separating the video drivers into a layer that can be used directly by projects like PicoGUI, GGI, and Fresco, but they had no interest.
Fortunately, this is open-source. With the help of the community, the X code could be ripped out to a separate project to create this. I'm not familiar with the level of pain that you have to live through in order to achieve this - or how much the X people will have us all for making a good, modular solution. Do you have an estimate?
Ths is one thing that I haven't grasped yet. What are the advantages of making all applications look different, work different and feel different? I don't want to relearn the shortcut for minimizing a window for every application. It doesn't matter if I'm looking at KDevelop, Glade or XTerm - Alt+H should minimize them regardless of the toolkit being used by the developers.
Give me *one* good reason why all application should behave different from each other.
A simple name like/Applications would, of course, be horribly wrong. By suggesting something like that would mean that future OS releases might be as user friendly as MacOS X. Horrible, I say. What's next: creating a directory named/Settings instead of/etc for settings, or all applications looking and behaving the same despite using different class libraries?
The application non-uniformness in Linux and X is something that keeps getting on my nerves. Why in holy hell can't the guys from GTK+ and Qt join together and use the same widgets but with two different ways of accessing them? This is done by VCL and MFC created by Borland and Microsoft. Two radically different class libraries, one common interface.
What happened to the old and proven Unix approach of "Do only one thing, but do it well!"?
It was destroyed with the release of Emacs, as you might have noticed. By releasing a text editor that also could control your toaster, the Unix philosophy was dead.
fork()-ing in Java would be an incredibly expensive operation. Mostly because you have to start an entire new VM. I'm not sure why you would prefer a new process instead of a simple thread. After all, separate processes have a hard time sharing data in an effective manner, making a global object cache overly difficult to implement.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure what you mean here. Considering that I could use my Ericsson in Sweden, Norway, Finland, USA, the entire god damn Europe and most other parts of the world without a hitch tells me that GSM works just fine. CDMA coverage is... Well... Mostly zero around here. However - both standards work. Doesn't that mean that they both suck, but in different ways?
And there was me sitting happily with my 8" floppy hanging off the wall
One word: ouch.
Yes, these guys really need 64-bit data addressing. However - how many applications currently existing in this world occupies 4GB of executable code?
Increasing the instruction size seems foolish at this point. A hybrid 32-bit code/64-bit data seems more reasonable to me.
Actually, using "echo" and "Visual Basic" (or maybe "dd" and "Perl")would be a true clusterfuck. MySQL still *is* a database, even if it doesn't support sub-selects and views just yet. Java is easily the least worst language/environment for large server applications that has to be secure and maintained for $BIGNUM years. You don't write this stuff in C++ unless you are slightly insane and/or simply dislike Java.
Notice that the DB benchmarks were done under Linux. Please point me in the direction of the nearest Microsoft SQL Server XP2003.Net Home Edition that is available for Linux.
So... When did a fair fight mean that you could not use smart tactics and your own knowledge of the local terrain to outsmart a better armed foe?
No, they really ment Maserati.
http://www.maserati.it/
You got to be kidding. Selecing one working solution that doesn't suck isn't the way of Open Source. Instead, you get to choose between several solutions with various suckiness depending on what defect(s) you can live with. Just look at the X mess, where all applications look and behave different.
/dev/dsp doesn't cut it for multichannel cards and such things. How do you read 13 tracks of audio at the same time from /dev/dsp? Or send your 32-channel ProTools project to the sound card?
On a more serious note - yes, a standard library for sound handling would be superb. Such a simple thing as a global sound mixer is impossible right now, since you have to figure out a way to support *all* sound generation ways. I also agree that using
Iraq is causing a general disruption to world peace
Last time I checked, it was the United States that were waging war. Iraq just sits there exporting oil.
Iraq is already breeding terrorists
If by terrorists you mean "people who are seriously mad about the US fucking with them contantly because of their religion", then yes.
Iraq already has WMD and has shown a propensity of using them
Hiroshima. Nagazaki. THAT'S what I call mass destruction. Who did that again? Besides that - where's your proof that they do have any WoMD at all? Not just some pictures of a truck that might contain weapons or maybe even soft, fluffy teddybears - real evidence.
Innocent civilians are already being killed
And more will be dead if you won't let them import medicine. Right now, they are performing operations without any anaesthetic because they can't get enough medicine. Why? Oh, it might be used to create chemical weapons. The civil uses aren't even mentioned.
Iraq should disarm for the same reasons Hitler was forced to disarm.
Hitler was punished because he invaded other countries. The Kuwait invasion was ten years from now, right? You've already attacked them for that. Get a new excuse.
Isn't that an impossible task? First of all, no X11 apps use the menubar on top of my screen - they draw their own. Altering that behaviour for *all* applications, making them use standard Aqua controls and not self-drawn crap by Qt/GTK+/Athena/Motif and forcing default behaviour from shortcut keys...
If all of those things could be done - THEN I would call X11 Aquafied. I would also call it a miracle.
Let's see... If we transfer standard CD quality, you would get (16*44100)/1024 == 689 kbit data per second. Stepping up to 24*96000, 2250 kbit is used. The maximum limit for 802.11g is about 5400 kbit.
As a guitarist, that seems good enough.
Think about what you just wrote for a second. Then try to imagine bolting on a 32-bit, multithreading, memory protected, virtual memory capable system onto DOS which is a 16-bit, one-task, 640kb system with no access restrictions at all. Add to that the concept of standardized drivers for everything including file systems, DLLs and all of the modern stuff that we take for granted today.
Using the word "impossible" would be appropriate here.
If Apple were to release a IBM PC compatible version of MacOS X, they wouldn't get a hardware sale. Therefore, they would have to raise the price considerably. Say that you have to pay $500 for it, and you would get an operating system with *zero* available applications at release. Now - do you still want to run OSX on your PC?
/etc and /usr crap away, simplifying application installation, responsive and fluid UI... Unfortunately, nobody seems to like that idea.
This is posted from my very own Powerbook. It is an incredible machine, and a superb operating system on it. Still, I don't want it on my PC. I *do* want a Linux distribution following the same path as MacOS X - hiding the
Well, why do you use Emacs instead of vi? Or ed? Or writing to disk using very, very small magnets?
He installed the latest certified drivers for all the hardware, JDK 1.4.1 and Emacs. That's it. Now, mister know-it-all, what did he do wrong?
Nope. The hardware is all checked stuff, two identical computer to his with Win2K runs just fine with no stability problems at all. He's a software engineer with ten years in the industry, and has a clean WinXp installation with Emacs and Sun JDK 1.4.1. He's no newbie, and therefore no spyware junk.
Don't look down on people knowing more than yourself.
Oh yes, it has. A computer that my friend owns is three weeks old, came with WinXP, and has already shown the BSOD twice. My own Win2K installation has done the same a couple of times since summer 2000. I've also had kernel panics in Linux about two or three times since 1997. My MacOS X installation hasn't paniced yet, for some odd reason.
WinXP isn't immune to BSOD:s in any way. It might be more stable than the Win9x series, but that comes as no real surprise.
If you include a web browser that can't be removed without destroying the operating system in general, that's a bad thing. The Warp browser (and Lynx, Mozilla, Konqueror and all coming with a Linux distro) can be removed without any consequences.
Otherwise, you would have no applications. Let's say that an x86 version of MacOS X is released without PPC emulation. Now, there are *zero* applications available for it. Photoshop, Office, Quark and all of those... Not available. Porting them could take time, so you should prepare for at least a years wait (maybe longer). So, you have a great OS with absolutely no applications at all for a while. Ever heard of BeOS?
I've talked to X developers about separating the video drivers into a layer that can be used directly by projects like PicoGUI, GGI, and Fresco, but they had no interest.
Fortunately, this is open-source. With the help of the community, the X code could be ripped out to a separate project to create this. I'm not familiar with the level of pain that you have to live through in order to achieve this - or how much the X people will have us all for making a good, modular solution. Do you have an estimate?
Then why is it recommended to have seven different terminals, of which six are redundant and the last won't be approached by normal users?
Ths is one thing that I haven't grasped yet. What are the advantages of making all applications look different, work different and feel different? I don't want to relearn the shortcut for minimizing a window for every application. It doesn't matter if I'm looking at KDevelop, Glade or XTerm - Alt+H should minimize them regardless of the toolkit being used by the developers.
Give me *one* good reason why all application should behave different from each other.
A simple name like /Applications would, of course, be horribly wrong. By suggesting something like that would mean that future OS releases might be as user friendly as MacOS X. Horrible, I say. What's next: creating a directory named /Settings instead of /etc for settings, or all applications looking and behaving the same despite using different class libraries?
The application non-uniformness in Linux and X is something that keeps getting on my nerves. Why in holy hell can't the guys from GTK+ and Qt join together and use the same widgets but with two different ways of accessing them? This is done by VCL and MFC created by Borland and Microsoft. Two radically different class libraries, one common interface.
It was destroyed with the release of Emacs, as you might have noticed. By releasing a text editor that also could control your toaster, the Unix philosophy was dead.
fork()-ing in Java would be an incredibly expensive operation. Mostly because you have to start an entire new VM. I'm not sure why you would prefer a new process instead of a simple thread. After all, separate processes have a hard time sharing data in an effective manner, making a global object cache overly difficult to implement.