There is no Office97 for Mac... they are staggering releases between platforms, so Mac users got Office98 and Exlorer 4.5.
In any case, all their claims about Office98 being a Mac-native app are obviously bullshit, no app without 10 nested compatibility/abstractions layers would possibly be as slow and resource-hungry as it is. Its features are totally counter-intuitive, and forget about large documents or intensive uses, all the modules will crumble on the mightiest, and slablest, of machines. Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Yeah, no kidding.. now no one will be able to use the excuse "i hate seeing this crap on Slashdot so i submit flamebait" when they dont enjoy the articles... maybe the KDE and Gnome crowds will mutually exclude each other, as maybe all those ready to jump on any non-Linux OS story or editorial will exclude the BeOS and FreeBSD threads.
I personally wanna read every article on Slashdot... I mean, jeez, does it REALLY take that much time or energy to read an extra 200 words? Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Actually I think he made his point quite nicely, if not technically.. basically, yes, most Mac apps, even when "multithreaded", dont take advantage of SMP unless explicitly coded for it, though I do have a large number of apps that have some serious punch on my dual-604e motherboard, and these are the apps youd expect it from (ezcept servers). Most 3d apps have support for it, and i believe it scales pretty well up to 4 cpus... I dont know of any SMP-capable servers or databases for the legacy MacOS, but OS X is a different game.
Is it your belief that a monothreaded x86 app would somehow distribute its load across multiple processors? I very much doubt this...
As far as MacOS X supporting SMP *EVENTUALLY*, there seems to be a great deal of misunderstanding regarding this... OS X Server 1.0 should be fully SMP capable, though the current line of PPC 750s arent gonna be spawning any dual-cpu models because of a weakness of the 750 ("G3")... tho there have been some interesting demos of 750-based SMP systems.
In any case, there is absolutely nothing preventing SMP in MacOS X, just the current CPU line, which is coming close to be cycled out at the high-end anyways... and, thank GOD, one nice legacy ball-and-chain will be gone in that we will no longer have to choose between virtual memory (swap) and SMP... i dont care what happy-happy-joy-joy Mac Evangelist lays his touchy-feely crap on me, that is one pain Ive lived with for far too long (though its a great excuse to have every DIMM slot filled with the big ones).
No, this definitely isnt Mac Evangelism... it brought tears to my eyes to see the true potential of my SMP box the first time I loaded BeOS on it.
One GREAT app for these machines (dual 604e based boxes) is running Distributed.net clients... I just loved comparing my keyrates with my Intel brethren:) Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Long live Newton! The Newton is Dead!
on
OpenGL on Newton
·
· Score: 1
>> Rather than porting ANY Open Source OS to a company that is ANTI Open Source or to a dead >>platform, why not support the projects to port to LIVE hardware?
Well, there are lots of ports of great software to "dead" platforms, thats what keeps em alive... and no one ports anything to "a company that is ANTI Open Source...", just to its products, which provides value ONLY to the user, not the company (in this case Apple/Newton Inc.).
Why not just support any such ambitious projects? I have owned several Newtons, still carry my favorite of the bunch, a clear-case 110, an ancient beast yet it still provides me pleasurable use daily, and aside from the lack of backlighting and a little more heft (which is actually good, it feels solid when Im drawing on it), is WAY better than the Palm III I also carry. The Palm III is great for its compact size, but Ive never gotten used to its Graffiti and it always suprised me that their designs are so clunky (squared edges, awkard and everchanging serial port interface) and the stylus' so flimsy.
Hey, ever seen a web server running on a newton? nhttp i think its called... all those articles a while back about mini web servers gave me a good chuckle as id seen tiny devices (WITH LCD and powersupply) server pages long before:)
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Admiration != recognition
on
Wired on RMS
·
· Score: 1
I think Ill agree with you, as we certainly cannot force admiration of any particular object on the psyches of those who dont already admire said object.
However, admiration aside, I think there is a valid point to be made in that, while we are primarily a grassroots, user-fed community, there exists a small group of leaders without whom none of this would be possible... I think even limiting RMS' recognition to his contribution of the GNU portions of Linux is rather short-sighted, as he has also been one of the most vocal advocates of the very system we have built for much longer than it has formally existed.
I dont think we should start calling Linux GNU/Linux (and GOD, never GNUlix), its too late for that... but as this platform grows in size, the collective consciousness here becomes less aware of its roots, and less aware of its "debt" to people like RMS, and thats a shame. Maybe something as simple as a system of honors and awards is due.
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Whoa! WHOOAAA! Sorry :)
on
Wired on RMS
·
· Score: 1
Actually I completely agree with you... Im always happy to have a good discussion on the meaning of this movement, occassionally I just get fed up with the distasteful, and downright hypocritical, personal attacks.
I apologize for my own lack of tolerance, I only wish we could resist the infighting that will probably be the chief detractor, in the long-term, of the OSS and Linux movements.
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Read the whole thread
on
Wired on RMS
·
· Score: 1
Well, I certainly read the whole thread, I just take offense to anyone attempting to LIMIT the respect and recognition of the Gettys and Stallmans of the world rather than supporting their hopes for it... I see nothing negative about RMS, and would certainly, equally, support Gettys if he felt a need to emphasize his lack of acknoqledgement... i think these people have all done a great service to us and deserve hero-worship from ever one of us.
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
RE: No tears for Richard..
on
Wired on RMS
·
· Score: 1
Why dont you go screw yourself, maybe then YOULL have kids Mr Bronson.
But really, what fucking business is it of ANY of us whether he wants to have kids or not, how and when, why and with whom... WTF does that have to do with his obviously underappreciated, yet highly significant, contributions to the "Linux" world?
Just looking through todays posts I think we have ENOUGH unwanted children just on SlashDot, let alone on the streets... Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
All the same? I doubt it...
on
Wired on RMS
·
· Score: 1
So should we also look over jim Gettys, and not provide him proper community admiration, even WHEN WE KNOW BETTER?
Come on, its not like we havent ALL known ALL along that RMS is GNU, theres no excuse in anonmity because there never was any, the real reason is bitterness and plain, outright betrayal. Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance. -- Derek Bok,
Whoa! WHOOAAA! Slow down all you ingrates...
on
Wired on RMS
·
· Score: 1
I cant tell you how disgusted I am at the CONTINUING backstabbing within the community, the seeming LACK OF TOLERANCE, and general disdain for those who arent the leaders of the day (especially those who held the title yesterday).
Regardless of personality flaws, which I would bet we all share pretty equally, RMS has done a GREAT deal for the movement... shit, who cares if he doesnt own his own equipment, that to me is pretty straight inline with his stated philosophies, and no matter how counter-culture he is, WHY THE HELL cant we accept that.
Do you people REALLY care about him not wanting children, not wanting to work, not wanting to even own his own machine? The answer is NO!, strenuously... the chief concern here seems to be to kick him while hes down.
Id say the most important part of the GPL is its efforts to maintain proper credits for work done, not to control payment of licensing terms (or lack thereof), and I think, out of everyone, RMS and GNU seems to be the only crew we're willing to publicly deny that proper credit to...
I also absolutely BELIEVE that informed people primarly do not use the term "GNU/Linux" because it IS too damn awkward...
Give the man some credit, he had these ideas when most of us, Linus included, were eating dirt in the sandbox in kindergarten.
When we loook back in a few years, I believe we will see the ultimate loss of men like RMS and Bruce Perens from the flock as one of the turning points, and I dont think itll appear as the right turn...
Exactly... I tend to think that any Internet-oriented law will tend to be either dangerously vague, or worthlessly specific. I think, no matter what, a clear policy of jurisdiction and extradition needs to be established if the net is to be governed by a legal body.
Most of our problems could be solved by better application of technology and not legislation... spam is probably topof the list. Is it too much to ask for simple sender-authentication, for instance, instead of criminalizing a simple exploit?
I dont think this is so much a First Ammendment issue as First Ammendment has been shown to not stand up in many cases, including those of inciting violence or impeding the the fair conduct of business (some that could arguably be applied to spam).
The real issue is this: ALL you Linux-loving, peace-and-freedom, individualistic, anti-establishment people here have a responsibility to stand up to govt. intervention on principle EVEN when you happen to enjoy the fruits of that particular effort.
If you let them regulate the definition of spam, and provide legal and financial consequences for it, that is one major roadblock passed for them to control the entire net with legislation (before you jump, I know it takes the enforcement of laws as well, but the threat of idle, normally unenforced laws has always been the more evil form of passive enforcement).
I say that if we want to claim the Internet is its own society, with its own social contracts and means for dealing with internal problems, then we can let ANY laws such as these get passed, and instead elect to do what we've always promised: be completely self-sufficient and self-regulating... otherwise, guess who will go it for us? And just because you aren't in the US does NOT mean that you shouldnt care.
I hate spam as much as the next geek, every domain name I register is an invitation to 6 months of UCE, every post here, on usenet, anywhere in public... but Ive dealt with it, and I think in general we are much more capable of doing so than the govt., and won't welcome the day when we have state prisons jammed pack with no-collar Internet "criminals".
On yeah, and what makes you think this, or a related design, wont be incorporated into at least a limited-production, retail box? The press release (did you read before responding?) states clearly that LinuxPPC will be demonstrating the quad-750 single-board computer from Synergy at the show, that to me would certainly hint that there will be a mainstream product alliance based on the board, with LinuxPPC possibly cobranding the box (Id buy one!)...
Btw, while I wish they had options for 604e too (I wasnt sure if they are still offering them) because 604e-based SMP screams, as I can only assume the G4 SMP will.. but 750 SMP support is all new to me, and I would think the tax of turning off level-2 cache (if im right) would be severe, as that is where much of the 750's speed gains come from. Binary Boy
Just tell me why on earth you would WANT a PCI/PMC modem? Even when Ive had the option it always seemed like a waste, if not just plain stupid... call me crazy but for ten years at least, when I hear modem, I think serial.
Granted AltiVec is a juicy piece of silicon, and I personally cant wait for any package with such a specialized unit... however I am quite disappointed in the PPC triumvirates seeming inability to spell out a clear roadmap, or even come to a concensus on WHAT such fabled processors as the G4 and G5 will actually end up being... I can only think back to the major long-term hype of the PPC 620, and a few of its promised progenitors that never made the cut...
The fact that the G4 is now a single-core, enhanced G3 (more or less a G3 with 604-style FPU from what I understand), plus *HOPEFULLY* the most-impressive AltiVec, all running on an interim bus that is supposedly the stepping-stone to the REAL G4 implementation leaves me feeling as unsure as ever...
I also tend to think that we cannot defend the PPC platform based on any theoretical gains in efficiencies when the end-market prices end up being high due to the x86 platforms economies of scale... Intel will ALWAYS best PPC in market share as long as PPC is always within a questionable margin of performance... and with the collective engineering resources of the Intel flock you can bet your ass that they won't be caught too far offguard to lose their throne anytime soon... least not by anything less than a mindblowingly enticing incentive such as PPC doesnt seem ready to offer.
I have heard the promise for YEARS that CISC and x86 are DEAD, but that fiction is based on the assumption that Intel doesnt adapt technologically... yeah their chips may be HUGE, power-sucking case-heaters, but they are a FAR cry from the x86 of yore, the line between CISC and RISC is nonexistant, more just an argument of semantics... SIMD is hardly CISC, and AltiVec is surely not RISC.
Hmmmm... I love my PowerPCs, they kick some serious ass, i love the vindication of an alternative platform at least keeping pace with the mainstream offering, but dont fool yourself into seeing a great divide when there is none: my next box is x86, though Im sure I will never savor the dirty taste of Intel inside.
Why are we so irrationally emotional over hardware (let ALONE operation systems or programming languages)... oh yeah... we're geeks.;-)
No, Apple stands for big money, and it's naive, and even foolish, to suggest that they *SHOULD* or even *COULD* release a major product such as OS X with GPL'ed foundations... I cannot even IMAGINE their headaches results from trying to maintain proper licenses and seperation between the differently-licensed components within such a project.
don't get me wrong, I love the GPL, though I think there is a LOT more room in the world at this point for BSD-style licensing - while the big corps. still hold the lions share of markets the GPL will scare many away from full-swing implementations of Linux and Linux-based products.
In other words, as much as I like the rosy, hands-across-the-Internet vision of the post-proprietary computing world, occassionally I have to wake up and, *GASP*, produce on proprietary platforms because they run the tools that pay my bills.
>> Macintosh machines have crappy processors, but incredible bus architecture. That means that their 232Mhz (or whatever the fuck it is) can drive alongside a PII 300 (with the 66Mhz bus). >> Hhahah, theres a fine example of an informed opinion... getting all too common here.
Macs have traditionally lagged behind high-end Intel main bus speeds, and like Intel systems, rely on a high bus-to-cpu speed ratio to deal with todays high cpu clockspeeds.
As far as the high-speed bus you refer to, that is a result of the new trend in three-tiered caches... level 1 is on chip, level 2 is interconnected to CPU on a very fast dedicated bus, and level 3 is what used to be called level 2:) AFAIK, all current Pentiums also have a fast level 2 cache on a high-speed bus, which does wonders in relieving main buses of high loads of traffic... huge speed boost for any cpu that can pull it off.
Let me just make one point simply:
PowerPC DOES NOT EQUAL PowerMac, Apple, or MacOS... so dont bring out the Apple laundry unless its fair then to diss x86 because of Windows... as we all know well here, there are more than one (or two) OSes, and hardware architectures are seemingly taking a backseat to functionality... how many platforms do we have Linux running on? Ive got a dual-processor PowerMac here that rarely sees Mac OS and absolutely rocks on other OSes (BeOS screams on dual 604e chips).
What many people still dont seem to realize is that PPC 750 ("G3") is really descended from earlier low-power implementations, namely the 603 family.. its unfortunately lacks the high-end FPU of its bigger, older brother, the 604e, which packs one hell of a punch... as both Motorola and IBM are still making the things, I cannot understand the defocusing from that chip so early since the G3 really was no great replacement, and the G4 isnt here yet.
However, I know a few people that have touched the things and seen Altivec demos and its hard not to be impressed... too bad Exponential Technologies fell apart a few years ago, I heard of live demos back then at 500-600 mhz when PPC and Pentiums were just breaking 100.
Visible advocates like him are in fact what made the FSF/OSS movements so strong (it AINT just Linux folks).. however, with the increasing media focus, and big-business involvement, we will all find, with much dismay, that the culture clash between the geeks and the suits, between prosumers and consumers, will starting hurting.
We have already seen it this week with the Windows Refund Day rallys... I dont think anyone could dispute the cause, but JESUS, we really all did fall right into their trap, though you can hardly help it going up against the richest company on the planet with ruthless edge.
The fact is, Linux is percieved as the newcomer, and while geeks may hold on forever no matter what its ultimate success, there is an important window of opportunity here during which anything canhappen.
I deeply admire Bruce Perens for all that he has given, and wish him well, and I hope this doesnt turn into a backstab fest... et tu, slash dot, et tu?
We all need to band together, maybe kick this industry in the ass a few good ones... its amazing how quickly even the computer biz can stagnate. We need to send the message to the top that elitism is over, that this really is a grassroots movement, and that, above all, this world we maintain allows for free discourse and sharing of knowledge/data.. the old ways dont apply anymore
Sad day for me:) Plus Im hallucinating from sleep-dep
If you ask me, we need one central authority to help protect us... its not Linus' job, but it should be someones. If indeed we continue to pursue the purest ideals of FSF/OSS, and open standards ingeneral, then we also must know how to protect those constructs... as we have seen with so many software patents, theres NOT a whole lot that prevents anyone from broadly claiming patent over specific features of Linux. And which one of us has the money to take Microsoft (or their ilk) to court?
God, this shows how much the average Slashdot reeader actually understands about what they speak... seems to always come out real strong when BeOS gets mentioned.
In any case, highly pervasive multithreading is the target for Be apps BUT nothin to prevent you (and in faavt many reasons to need) one large thread. BeOS still breaks down driver calls, etc., into tiny, highly prioritzed threads, but it doesnt have the smarts to take a straight port of the source and spit out a highly scaleable app.
Not to be said that it couldnt done, but would likely require major rewrites to be more Be-like...
If things were that easy, we'd all be building Beowolf clusters and our software would majically restructure itself as neede (unless thats what TransMeta is working on...)
I shoulda checked the Sheepshaver site before I posted, theyve got status on their LinuxPPC port of Sheepshaver:
Status of the LinuxPPC version:
* PPC/68k run-time environment: partly done (interrupts only handled by 68k) * OS utilities: done * Time Manager: done * Mouse: not yet implemented * Keyboard: not yet implemented * Video: under development * Sound: not yet implemented * Floppy: done except for disk change detection * Disks: done except for disk change detection * SCSI: no suitable API in Linux * CD-ROM: done * Host filesystem access: done (no resource forks) * Ethernet: not yet implemented * Serial I/O: done
Im surpised at the disparity with the BeOS project, I imagine they werent doing much via a vm and instead did a lot of the original version as Beos drivers. In any case if they can get a version done providing low overhead and stability there will assuredly be Mac users migrating to Linux in droves, if for no other reason than to follow the trend.
Oh, and multithreaded for SMP Id hope, though I seem to remember Sheepshaver running in a single thread on Be, which was also a dissappoint me as I have an SMP card which screams on Be.
THANK you... I am not normally one to defend Microsoft (at best I keep my mouth shut), however in this case, while you may dispute the point of comparing Win98 to Win3.1 in terms of Internet access, they were comparing the time it takes to CONNECT to the Internet, including, presumably, the configuration of TCP stacks on each. This may actually (!!) be a valid point as difficulties in this process are what plague many users (do you remember the fucked up TCP stack in 3.1?), and making the setup faster and easier is certainly a plus.
What I dont get is the comparison: why compare technically distinct OSes when they had a perfect comparison between Win95 and Win98 (essentially the same product except for the features that are currently in question). Thats akin to an engine maker claiming its new model is faster and better in every way than its previous model, but then opting to compare it in lab tests to its 1927 model that doesnt even share a similar design.
Also, on a side note, even IF the Win98 machine was using a faster modem, and all other things were equal, it sure seems to me that with each successive generation of modem standards the handshakes take LONGER, therefore if Billy-boy had a 2400 in one box and a 56k in another, my bet is on the 2400 connecting faster.
With that said, I still hope someday thge Justice Dept. will pull their heads out of their collective bureaucratic ass and develop an actual strategy in this case... otherwise issues like this will continue to plague the trial until its dismissal.
Please dont post such obviously slanted articles (or respond to them) without thinking first.. being rabid Microsoft-haters will discredit us all in the long run... why nitpick when we have MORE than enough ammo already?
Actually it would seem quite a good reason to watch any company... after all what could posses and entice someone who by all accounts could get a job nearly anywhere in the industry (if for no other reason than for his name). Linus doesnt have a whole lot to gain in the end if it turns out he's cleverly manipulated his minions of loving Linux users into purchasing Transmeta technology because he gets stock options, or even if he just turns out to have been used as such.
I dont believe that their secrecy is merely marketing tactics (wouldnt be unheard of however) as I have yet to see any mainstream coverage which would be the only case where such market frenzy would really be effective.
As it is, theyve got a small part of the general computing audience drooling in anticipation like the pavlovian blobs we are for a product that is not likely to change the average persons life immediately upon introduction, therefore few people really care.
Unless the reverse-engineered "facts" (read: rumors) are nothing but cover for a more novel application of their patents and collective technologies, in which case the tease wouldnt be very effective either since they still wouldnt have a huge market waiting to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no Office97 for Mac... they are staggering releases between platforms, so Mac users got Office98 and Exlorer 4.5.
In any case, all their claims about Office98 being a Mac-native app are obviously bullshit, no app without 10 nested compatibility/abstractions layers would possibly be as slow and resource-hungry as it is. Its features are totally counter-intuitive, and forget about large documents or intensive uses, all the modules will crumble on the mightiest, and slablest, of machines.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Yeah, no kidding.. now no one will be able to use the excuse "i hate seeing this crap on Slashdot so i submit flamebait" when they dont enjoy the articles... maybe the KDE and Gnome crowds will mutually exclude each other, as maybe all those ready to jump on any non-Linux OS story or editorial will exclude the BeOS and FreeBSD threads.
I personally wanna read every article on Slashdot... I mean, jeez, does it REALLY take that much time or energy to read an extra 200 words?
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Actually I think he made his point quite nicely, if not technically.. basically, yes, most Mac apps, even when "multithreaded", dont take advantage of SMP unless explicitly coded for it, though I do have a large number of apps that have some serious punch on my dual-604e motherboard, and these are the apps youd expect it from (ezcept servers). Most 3d apps have support for it, and i believe it scales pretty well up to 4 cpus... I dont know of any SMP-capable servers or databases for the legacy MacOS, but OS X is a different game.
:)
Is it your belief that a monothreaded x86 app would somehow distribute its load across multiple processors? I very much doubt this...
As far as MacOS X supporting SMP *EVENTUALLY*, there seems to be a great deal of misunderstanding regarding this... OS X Server 1.0 should be fully SMP capable, though the current line of PPC 750s arent gonna be spawning any dual-cpu models because of a weakness of the 750 ("G3")... tho there have been some interesting demos of 750-based SMP systems.
In any case, there is absolutely nothing preventing SMP in MacOS X, just the current CPU line, which is coming close to be cycled out at the high-end anyways... and, thank GOD, one nice legacy ball-and-chain will be gone in that we will no longer have to choose between virtual memory (swap) and SMP... i dont care what happy-happy-joy-joy Mac Evangelist lays his touchy-feely crap on me, that is one pain Ive lived with for far too long (though its a great excuse to have every DIMM slot filled with the big ones).
No, this definitely isnt Mac Evangelism... it brought tears to my eyes to see the true potential of my SMP box the first time I loaded BeOS on it.
One GREAT app for these machines (dual 604e based boxes) is running Distributed.net clients... I just loved comparing my keyrates with my Intel brethren
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
>> Rather than porting ANY Open Source OS to a company that is ANTI Open Source or to a dead
:)
>>platform, why not support the projects to port to LIVE hardware?
Well, there are lots of ports of great software to "dead" platforms, thats what keeps em alive... and no one ports anything to "a company that is ANTI Open Source...", just to its products, which provides value ONLY to the user, not the company (in this case Apple/Newton Inc.).
Why not just support any such ambitious projects? I have owned several Newtons, still carry my favorite of the bunch, a clear-case 110, an ancient beast yet it still provides me pleasurable use daily, and aside from the lack of backlighting and a little more heft (which is actually good, it feels solid when Im drawing on it), is WAY better than the Palm III I also carry. The Palm III is great for its compact size, but Ive never gotten used to its Graffiti and it always suprised me that their designs are so clunky (squared edges, awkard and everchanging serial port interface) and the stylus' so flimsy.
Hey, ever seen a web server running on a newton? nhttp i think its called... all those articles a while back about mini web servers gave me a good chuckle as id seen tiny devices (WITH LCD and powersupply) server pages long before
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
This will probably be my shortest post of the day:
Well said!
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
I think Ill agree with you, as we certainly cannot force admiration of any particular object on the psyches of those who dont already admire said object.
However, admiration aside, I think there is a valid point to be made in that, while we are primarily a grassroots, user-fed community, there exists a small group of leaders without whom none of this would be possible... I think even limiting RMS' recognition to his contribution of the GNU portions of Linux is rather short-sighted, as he has also been one of the most vocal advocates of the very system we have built for much longer than it has formally existed.
I dont think we should start calling Linux GNU/Linux (and GOD, never GNUlix), its too late for that... but as this platform grows in size, the collective consciousness here becomes less aware of its roots, and less aware of its "debt" to people like RMS, and thats a shame. Maybe something as simple as a system of honors and awards is due.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Actually I completely agree with you... Im always happy to have a good discussion on the meaning of this movement, occassionally I just get fed up with the distasteful, and downright hypocritical, personal attacks.
I apologize for my own lack of tolerance, I only wish we could resist the infighting that will probably be the chief detractor, in the long-term, of the OSS and Linux movements.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Well, I certainly read the whole thread, I just take offense to anyone attempting to LIMIT the respect and recognition of the Gettys and Stallmans of the world rather than supporting their hopes for it... I see nothing negative about RMS, and would certainly, equally, support Gettys if he felt a need to emphasize his lack of acknoqledgement... i think these people have all done a great service to us and deserve hero-worship from ever one of us.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Why dont you go screw yourself, maybe then YOULL have kids Mr Bronson.
But really, what fucking business is it of ANY of us whether he wants to have kids or not, how and when, why and with whom... WTF does that have to do with his obviously underappreciated, yet highly significant, contributions to the "Linux" world?
Just looking through todays posts I think we have ENOUGH unwanted children just on SlashDot, let alone on the streets...
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
So should we also look over jim Gettys, and not provide him proper community admiration, even WHEN WE KNOW BETTER?
Come on, its not like we havent ALL known ALL along that RMS is GNU, theres no excuse in anonmity because there never was any, the real reason is bitterness and plain, outright betrayal.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
I cant tell you how disgusted I am at the CONTINUING backstabbing within the community, the seeming LACK OF TOLERANCE, and general disdain for those who arent the leaders of the day (especially those who held the title yesterday).
Regardless of personality flaws, which I would bet we all share pretty equally, RMS has done a GREAT deal for the movement... shit, who cares if he doesnt own his own equipment, that to me is pretty straight inline with his stated philosophies, and no matter how counter-culture he is, WHY THE HELL cant we accept that.
Do you people REALLY care about him not wanting children, not wanting to work, not wanting to even own his own machine? The answer is NO!, strenuously... the chief concern here seems to be to kick him while hes down.
Id say the most important part of the GPL is its efforts to maintain proper credits for work done, not to control payment of licensing terms (or lack thereof), and I think, out of everyone, RMS and GNU seems to be the only crew we're willing to publicly deny that proper credit to...
I also absolutely BELIEVE that informed people primarly do not use the term "GNU/Linux" because it IS too damn awkward...
Give the man some credit, he had these ideas when most of us, Linus included, were eating dirt in the sandbox in kindergarten.
When we loook back in a few years, I believe we will see the ultimate loss of men like RMS and Bruce Perens from the flock as one of the turning points, and I dont think itll appear as the right turn...
Linus, save me from your followers.
Binary Boy
If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.
-- Derek Bok,
Exactly... I tend to think that any Internet-oriented law will tend to be either dangerously vague, or worthlessly specific. I think, no matter what, a clear policy of jurisdiction and extradition needs to be established if the net is to be governed by a legal body.
Most of our problems could be solved by better application of technology and not legislation... spam is probably topof the list. Is it too much to ask for simple sender-authentication, for instance, instead of criminalizing a simple exploit?
Binary Boy
I dont think this is so much a First Ammendment issue as First Ammendment has been shown to not stand up in many cases, including those of inciting violence or impeding the the fair conduct of business (some that could arguably be applied to spam).
The real issue is this: ALL you Linux-loving, peace-and-freedom, individualistic, anti-establishment people here have a responsibility to stand up to govt. intervention on principle EVEN when you happen to enjoy the fruits of that particular effort.
If you let them regulate the definition of spam, and provide legal and financial consequences for it, that is one major roadblock passed for them to control the entire net with legislation (before you jump, I know it takes the enforcement of laws as well, but the threat of idle, normally unenforced laws has always been the more evil form of passive enforcement).
I say that if we want to claim the Internet is its own society, with its own social contracts and means for dealing with internal problems, then we can let ANY laws such as these get passed, and instead elect to do what we've always promised: be completely self-sufficient and self-regulating... otherwise, guess who will go it for us? And just because you aren't in the US does NOT mean that you shouldnt care.
I hate spam as much as the next geek, every domain name I register is an invitation to 6 months of UCE, every post here, on usenet, anywhere in public... but Ive dealt with it, and I think in general we are much more capable of doing so than the govt., and won't welcome the day when we have state prisons jammed pack with no-collar Internet "criminals".
Binary Boy
On yeah, and what makes you think this, or a related design, wont be incorporated into at least a limited-production, retail box? The press release (did you read before responding?) states clearly that LinuxPPC will be demonstrating the quad-750 single-board computer from Synergy at the show, that to me would certainly hint that there will be a mainstream product alliance based on the board, with LinuxPPC possibly cobranding the box (Id buy one!)...
Btw, while I wish they had options for 604e too (I wasnt sure if they are still offering them) because 604e-based SMP screams, as I can only assume the G4 SMP will.. but 750 SMP support is all new to me, and I would think the tax of turning off level-2 cache (if im right) would be severe, as that is where much of the 750's speed gains come from.
Binary Boy
Just tell me why on earth you would WANT a PCI/PMC modem? Even when Ive had the option it always seemed like a waste, if not just plain stupid... call me crazy but for ten years at least, when I hear modem, I think serial.
Sorry, a little off-topic.
Binary Boy
Granted AltiVec is a juicy piece of silicon, and I personally cant wait for any package with such a specialized unit... however I am quite disappointed in the PPC triumvirates seeming inability to spell out a clear roadmap, or even come to a concensus on WHAT such fabled processors as the G4 and G5 will actually end up being... I can only think back to the major long-term hype of the PPC 620, and a few of its promised progenitors that never made the cut...
;-)
The fact that the G4 is now a single-core, enhanced G3 (more or less a G3 with 604-style FPU from what I understand), plus *HOPEFULLY* the most-impressive AltiVec, all running on an interim bus that is supposedly the stepping-stone to the REAL G4 implementation leaves me feeling as unsure as ever...
I also tend to think that we cannot defend the PPC platform based on any theoretical gains in efficiencies when the end-market prices end up being high due to the x86 platforms economies of scale... Intel will ALWAYS best PPC in market share as long as PPC is always within a questionable margin of performance... and with the collective engineering resources of the Intel flock you can bet your ass that they won't be caught too far offguard to lose their throne anytime soon... least not by anything less than a mindblowingly enticing incentive such as PPC doesnt seem ready to offer.
I have heard the promise for YEARS that CISC and x86 are DEAD, but that fiction is based on the assumption that Intel doesnt adapt technologically... yeah their chips may be HUGE, power-sucking case-heaters, but they are a FAR cry from the x86 of yore, the line between CISC and RISC is nonexistant, more just an argument of semantics... SIMD is hardly CISC, and AltiVec is surely not RISC.
Hmmmm... I love my PowerPCs, they kick some serious ass, i love the vindication of an alternative platform at least keeping pace with the mainstream offering, but dont fool yourself into seeing a great divide when there is none: my next box is x86, though Im sure I will never savor the dirty taste of Intel inside.
Why are we so irrationally emotional over hardware (let ALONE operation systems or programming languages)... oh yeah... we're geeks.
Binary Boy
No, Apple stands for big money, and it's naive, and even foolish, to suggest that they *SHOULD* or even *COULD* release a major product such as OS X with GPL'ed foundations... I cannot even IMAGINE their headaches results from trying to maintain proper licenses and seperation between the differently-licensed components within such a project.
don't get me wrong, I love the GPL, though I think there is a LOT more room in the world at this point for BSD-style licensing - while the big corps. still hold the lions share of markets the GPL will scare many away from full-swing implementations of Linux and Linux-based products.
In other words, as much as I like the rosy, hands-across-the-Internet vision of the post-proprietary computing world, occassionally I have to wake up and, *GASP*, produce on proprietary platforms because they run the tools that pay my bills.
Binary Boy
>> Macintosh machines have crappy processors, but incredible bus architecture. That means that their 232Mhz (or whatever the fuck it is) can drive alongside a PII 300 (with the 66Mhz bus).
:) AFAIK, all current Pentiums also have a fast level 2 cache on a high-speed bus, which does wonders in relieving main buses of high loads of traffic... huge speed boost for any cpu that can pull it off.
>>
Hhahah, theres a fine example of an informed opinion... getting all too common here.
Macs have traditionally lagged behind high-end Intel main bus speeds, and like Intel systems, rely on a high bus-to-cpu speed ratio to deal with todays high cpu clockspeeds.
As far as the high-speed bus you refer to, that is a result of the new trend in three-tiered caches... level 1 is on chip, level 2 is interconnected to CPU on a very fast dedicated bus, and level 3 is what used to be called level 2
Let me just make one point simply:
PowerPC DOES NOT EQUAL PowerMac, Apple, or MacOS... so dont bring out the Apple laundry unless its fair then to diss x86 because of Windows... as we all know well here, there are more than one (or two) OSes, and hardware architectures are seemingly taking a backseat to functionality... how many platforms do we have Linux running on? Ive got a dual-processor PowerMac here that rarely sees Mac OS and absolutely rocks on other OSes (BeOS screams on dual 604e chips).
What many people still dont seem to realize is that PPC 750 ("G3") is really descended from earlier low-power implementations, namely the 603 family.. its unfortunately lacks the high-end FPU of its bigger, older brother, the 604e, which packs one hell of a punch... as both Motorola and IBM are still making the things, I cannot understand the defocusing from that chip so early since the G3 really was no great replacement, and the G4 isnt here yet.
However, I know a few people that have touched the things and seen Altivec demos and its hard not to be impressed... too bad Exponential Technologies fell apart a few years ago, I heard of live demos back then at 500-600 mhz when PPC and Pentiums were just breaking 100.
Visible advocates like him are in fact what made the FSF/OSS movements so strong (it AINT just Linux folks).. however, with the increasing media focus, and big-business involvement, we will all find, with much dismay, that the culture clash between the geeks and the suits, between prosumers and consumers, will starting hurting.
:) Plus Im hallucinating from sleep-dep
We have already seen it this week with the Windows Refund Day rallys... I dont think anyone could dispute the cause, but JESUS, we really all did fall right into their trap, though you can hardly help it going up against the richest company on the planet with ruthless edge.
The fact is, Linux is percieved as the newcomer, and while geeks may hold on forever no matter what its ultimate success, there is an important window of opportunity here during which anything canhappen.
I deeply admire Bruce Perens for all that he has given, and wish him well, and I hope this doesnt turn into a backstab fest... et tu, slash dot, et tu?
We all need to band together, maybe kick this industry in the ass a few good ones... its amazing how quickly even the computer biz can stagnate. We need to send the message to the top that elitism is over, that this really is a grassroots movement, and that, above all, this world we maintain allows for free discourse and sharing of knowledge/data.. the old ways dont apply anymore
Sad day for me
If you ask me, we need one central authority to help protect us... its not Linus' job, but it should be someones. If indeed we continue to pursue the purest ideals of FSF/OSS, and open standards ingeneral, then we also must know how to protect those constructs... as we have seen with so many software patents, theres NOT a whole lot that prevents anyone from broadly claiming patent over specific features of Linux. And which one of us has the money to take Microsoft (or their ilk) to court?
God, this shows how much the average Slashdot reeader actually understands about what they speak... seems to always come out real strong when BeOS gets mentioned.
In any case, highly pervasive multithreading is the target for Be apps BUT nothin to prevent you (and in faavt many reasons to need) one large thread. BeOS still breaks down driver calls, etc., into tiny, highly prioritzed threads, but it doesnt have the smarts to take a straight port of the source and spit out a highly scaleable app.
Not to be said that it couldnt done, but would likely require major rewrites to be more Be-like...
If things were that easy, we'd all be building Beowolf clusters and our software would majically restructure itself as neede (unless thats what TransMeta is working on...)
I shoulda checked the Sheepshaver site before I posted, theyve got status on their LinuxPPC port of Sheepshaver:
Status of the LinuxPPC version:
* PPC/68k run-time environment: partly done (interrupts only handled by 68k)
* OS utilities: done
* Time Manager: done
* Mouse: not yet implemented
* Keyboard: not yet implemented
* Video: under development
* Sound: not yet implemented
* Floppy: done except for disk change detection
* Disks: done except for disk change detection
* SCSI: no suitable API in Linux
* CD-ROM: done
* Host filesystem access: done (no resource forks)
* Ethernet: not yet implemented
* Serial I/O: done
Im surpised at the disparity with the BeOS project, I imagine they werent doing much via a vm and instead did a lot of the original version as Beos drivers. In any case if they can get a version done providing low overhead and stability there will assuredly be Mac users migrating to Linux in droves, if for no other reason than to follow the trend.
Oh, and multithreaded for SMP Id hope, though I seem to remember Sheepshaver running in a single thread on Be, which was also a dissappoint me as I have an SMP card which screams on Be.
THANK you... I am not normally one to defend Microsoft (at best I keep my mouth shut), however in this case, while you may dispute the point of comparing Win98 to Win3.1 in terms of Internet access, they were comparing the time it takes to CONNECT to the Internet, including, presumably, the configuration of TCP stacks on each. This may actually (!!) be a valid point as difficulties in this process are what plague many users (do you remember the fucked up TCP stack in 3.1?), and making the setup faster and easier is certainly a plus.
What I dont get is the comparison: why compare technically distinct OSes when they had a perfect comparison between Win95 and Win98 (essentially the same product except for the features that are currently in question). Thats akin to an engine maker claiming its new model is faster and better in every way than its previous model, but then opting to compare it in lab tests to its 1927 model that doesnt even share a similar design.
Also, on a side note, even IF the Win98 machine was using a faster modem, and all other things were equal, it sure seems to me that with each successive generation of modem standards the handshakes take LONGER, therefore if Billy-boy had a 2400 in one box and a 56k in another, my bet is on the 2400 connecting faster.
With that said, I still hope someday thge Justice Dept. will pull their heads out of their collective bureaucratic ass and develop an actual strategy in this case... otherwise issues like this will continue to plague the trial until its dismissal.
Please dont post such obviously slanted articles (or respond to them) without thinking first.. being rabid Microsoft-haters will discredit us all in the long run... why nitpick when we have MORE than enough ammo already?
Actually it would seem quite a good reason to watch any company... after all what could posses and entice someone who by all accounts could get a job nearly anywhere in the industry (if for no other reason than for his name). Linus doesnt have a whole lot to gain in the end if it turns out he's cleverly manipulated his minions of loving Linux users into purchasing Transmeta technology because he gets stock options, or even if he just turns out to have been used as such.
I dont believe that their secrecy is merely marketing tactics (wouldnt be unheard of however) as I have yet to see any mainstream coverage which would be the only case where such market frenzy would really be effective.
As it is, theyve got a small part of the general computing audience drooling in anticipation like the pavlovian blobs we are for a product that is not likely to change the average persons life immediately upon introduction, therefore few people really care.
Unless the reverse-engineered "facts" (read: rumors) are nothing but cover for a more novel application of their patents and collective technologies, in which case the tease wouldnt be very effective either since they still wouldnt have a huge market waiting to happen.