It seems that this company is publishing two OS's from Bell Labs - and is trying to enter the alternative OS market. I've played with the inferno emulation environment under Linux, and it was interesting but horridly slow. I hope the standalone version corrects that. However, I do have a few questions: What is it good for? What programs are for it? How easily can I port programs from *NIX?
While what this company is doing seems to be in line with the Amiga name, how much of what they're doing is actually based on Amiga technology? Is it just an old name on top of completely new technology, or is there still an Amiga hiding somewhere in there? Will original Amiga apps compile with this toolkit?
At one point in time, the new Amiga had a commitment to develop a Linux operating system that would still run old Amiga apps MacOSX-style. Does this technology still exist?
Actually, it's explicit in the constitution. The 1st admendment has nothing to do with this. They weren't in any way, shape, or form protecting the 1st adnmendment - just the constitution.
Yeah - I wasn't complaining about it not being law, but it's clearly not in the 1st admendment, but part of the constitution. Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to dig out their copy of the constitution? (It's right over there by the piles of advertising, if you're looking for it.)
Must be on the 5$ FUD, I suppose. There's quite a few BeOS applications (and generally of better quality than Linux applications - no knock, just true). Macs are still serious machines - a 450mHz G4 is a great machine for DV and DTP.
This is newer yet than 23098 - it's 202783, so there must be three signal 11's! I suspect how he did it is related to how I have my username - it's 11223^H^H^H^H^H, not 11223. I've been playing around with inserting special characters into usernames, and I've been noticing others doing the same.
I know my PC's as a solaris box and a Mac box. Microsoft didn't create anything (and before you mark me as flamebait) they just were the best accumulator of existing techniques and technologies. The PC that we know today is essentially the same as the Xerox PARC system, and an Apple II, or a VAX. Microsoft accumulated concepts to make their system - and to some degree, that's what's gotten them into trouble.
First of all, I propose the banning of the tag "insightful" from this discussion. It's no longer possible to be insightful about Microsoft.
Secondly, the Supreme Court has been (in all honesty) smoking crack lately. While I agree about 50% of the time with their decisions, their explanations are screwed up. The case about school prayer made reference to "protecting the first admendment" - but the first admendment makes no reference to seperation of church and state! It's as if they're just spewing blather instead of making a well-reasoned decision. I hate to see what's in store for the Microsoft ruling... mayhap Microsoft had a "1st admendment right" for this and they're protecting the "1st admendment?"
Either that or Microsoft has been shipping them the 3$ crack in preperation for this ruling...
Just to nitpick, I think you meant Turing complete. Waitaminit - you mean that's the reason PostScript is so slow - it's NP complete, and each possible display of the document has to be enumerated individually? Now I get it!
... that the government has taken the interests of business over the interest of technological advancement. The whole thing certainly resembles the patent problem.
Unfortunately, right now we (the USA) as a country judge ourselves based upon our economy. The 1790's weren't the time that we draw most from - we draw more from the industrial economy of the 1920's.
What Mr. Lessig said very eloquently is perfectly applicable to the 1790's. It's not to the 1920's, the time of the economy of the nation being the only priority. Except that our economy is now based on information - most of it entertainment information, but information nonetheless. It's the old "Mickey Mouse's copyright is expiring-let's extend the copyright term" situation.
It took major politics to bring workers rights up as an issue in the 1920's. Unfortunately no polititian wants to touch the copyright and patent issues - because what both parties stand for is money. There is no major political party concerned with issues of copyrights. (Does anybody know Mr. Nader's position on copyright law?)
In this situation, the consitution is an outmoded model. Instead consider the suffering worker of the 1920's as the model - except we don't suffer physically, only intellectually.
It's trivial for them to link with libwine - but anyway, does getting a foot in the door excuse making a product that's slower than StarOffice? At this time, don't buy it.
No, IANAT. I've used WPO2000 and it is slow. The reason Half-Life is at such a high framerate is because it's using your hard-accel OpenGL. The GDI and widget-set emulation for WINE is horridly slow.
If you're using the commercial Open Sound System, there is a program that comes with your distrobution that allows you to run another program on a different dsp. I don't know the name (don't use OSS myself), but check your documentation.
Every MS product prior to the era of Windows 95 had huge manuals and boxes to fit them. Case in point: Visual Basic 4 had all of the programming manuals in a good-size box. Visual Basic 5 had no programming manuals, but the box only shrunk a little bit. MS Dos 6 came with a huge (and very, very useful) manual. Windows 95 came with a quick-reference booklet and introduction to Windows.
Microsoft firmly believes that no manual is ever neccessary, but they'd be reduced to looking like Walnut Creek CDROM if they didn't have huge boxes.
Except that every last bit of code I'm running right now is written in C? Hmm, kernel, C library, shell, X windows, enlightenment, netscape... the list of >1000 line programs goes on and on. It's just that there's quite a few C programmers who don't understand how to modularize their programs so they can grow efficiently.
Thanks for the perspective - I don't mean to come across as a pedantic C user. I prefer C because I can usally say what I want to say cleaner and more concisely, and when I look at C versus C++ solutions to the problems I'm involved with, C tends to be better. I'd also say for that some problems, C++ is better than C. But as an introduction to the universe of programming (and it's a big universe) I think that C is a better introduction. It's not globally better, but it's better across the board - and ultimately, if I were forced to choose one language to write every program in (which, thankfully, I'm not) I'd choose C (disregarding the fact that C++ compiles C code - it's totally irrelevant to this discussion, and I wish people would stop bringing it up. When I say C++, I mean the features of C++ that seperate it from C.)
Re:If Everybody had a basic discrete math class?
on
Who's Afraid Of C++?
·
· Score: 1
Posted by 11223:
Then teach them VB, not C++. There's too much math in real programming to have somebody who doesn't understand discrete math learning C++. That's not flamebait, but programming is (to me) an art of combining math and the workings of the computer - and nowhere in there is there an "object" - that's part of Software Engineering, which is not programming. VB (maybe Kylix - I'm showing my MS heritage) is a great teaching tool and a great tool for writing programs to get a job done. (BTW, I'm drinking an awful lot of caffine - look at how many posts I've done today).
Re:C++ as a teaching language/programming obscure?
on
Who's Afraid Of C++?
·
· Score: 1
Posted by 11223:
That was the point I was making. I'm being confused here - He said that C was about low-level memory functions. Malloc's and Free's are the same as New's and Delete's - except I'm married to realloc. (I know that's horrible, but realloc don't exist in C).
Somebody obvioulsy thinks I can speel. I've had enough of this discussion.
Methinks you are a software engineer. I'm more interested in how to write the best solution in the best method possible than how to write readable, maintainable code quickly. That's what the software engineers are for. I'm a programmer:-P. Perhaps this book would be better said as an introduction to Software Engineering?
Please note I'm trying desperately to get the discussion back on-topic. I didn't want a flame-war between C and C++ as bad as this. I just wanted some logical discussion about how learning C++ first influences the programmer's mind, vs. C first.
Slashdot Mirror
Posted by 11223:
You troll. Linus is ethnic Swedish.
Posted by 11223:
It seems that this company is publishing two OS's from Bell Labs - and is trying to enter the alternative OS market. I've played with the inferno emulation environment under Linux, and it was interesting but horridly slow. I hope the standalone version corrects that. However, I do have a few questions: What is it good for? What programs are for it? How easily can I port programs from *NIX?
While what this company is doing seems to be in line with the Amiga name, how much of what they're doing is actually based on Amiga technology? Is it just an old name on top of completely new technology, or is there still an Amiga hiding somewhere in there? Will original Amiga apps compile with this toolkit?
At one point in time, the new Amiga had a commitment to develop a Linux operating system that would still run old Amiga apps MacOSX-style. Does this technology still exist?
Was this R3 for Intel or something? Try on for size:
Every internal or external hardware modem.
Two of the most popular softmodem chipsets.
R5 is amazing in terms of driver support.
Posted by 11223:
Actually, it's explicit in the constitution. The 1st admendment has nothing to do with this. They weren't in any way, shape, or form protecting the 1st adnmendment - just the constitution.
Posted by 11223:
Yeah - I wasn't complaining about it not being law, but it's clearly not in the 1st admendment, but part of the constitution. Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to dig out their copy of the constitution? (It's right over there by the piles of advertising, if you're looking for it.)
Must be on the 5$ FUD, I suppose. There's quite a few BeOS applications (and generally of better quality than Linux applications - no knock, just true). Macs are still serious machines - a 450mHz G4 is a great machine for DV and DTP.
Yes, I know you are atroll.
Posted by 11223:
This is newer yet than 23098 - it's 202783, so there must be three signal 11's! I suspect how he did it is related to how I have my username - it's 11223^H^H^H^H^H, not 11223. I've been playing around with inserting special characters into usernames, and I've been noticing others doing the same.
Posted by 11223:
Drinking the 3$ FUD, I suppose? Try BeOS! And I suppose there's a good reason why you're forgetting the Macintosh...
Posted by 11223:
I know my PC's as a solaris box and a Mac box. Microsoft didn't create anything (and before you mark me as flamebait) they just were the best accumulator of existing techniques and technologies. The PC that we know today is essentially the same as the Xerox PARC system, and an Apple II, or a VAX. Microsoft accumulated concepts to make their system - and to some degree, that's what's gotten them into trouble.
Posted by 11223:
OT: why does your user info display some new user instead of yourself? How do I get your user info?
First of all, I propose the banning of the tag "insightful" from this discussion. It's no longer possible to be insightful about Microsoft.
Secondly, the Supreme Court has been (in all honesty) smoking crack lately. While I agree about 50% of the time with their decisions, their explanations are screwed up. The case about school prayer made reference to "protecting the first admendment" - but the first admendment makes no reference to seperation of church and state! It's as if they're just spewing blather instead of making a well-reasoned decision. I hate to see what's in store for the Microsoft ruling... mayhap Microsoft had a "1st admendment right" for this and they're protecting the "1st admendment?"
Either that or Microsoft has been shipping them the 3$ crack in preperation for this ruling...
Posted by 11223:
Just to nitpick, I think you meant Turing complete. Waitaminit - you mean that's the reason PostScript is so slow - it's NP complete, and each possible display of the document has to be enumerated individually? Now I get it!
... that the government has taken the interests of business over the interest of technological advancement. The whole thing certainly resembles the patent problem.
Unfortunately, right now we (the USA) as a country judge ourselves based upon our economy. The 1790's weren't the time that we draw most from - we draw more from the industrial economy of the 1920's.
What Mr. Lessig said very eloquently is perfectly applicable to the 1790's. It's not to the 1920's, the time of the economy of the nation being the only priority. Except that our economy is now based on information - most of it entertainment information, but information nonetheless. It's the old "Mickey Mouse's copyright is expiring-let's extend the copyright term" situation.
It took major politics to bring workers rights up as an issue in the 1920's. Unfortunately no polititian wants to touch the copyright and patent issues - because what both parties stand for is money. There is no major political party concerned with issues of copyrights. (Does anybody know Mr. Nader's position on copyright law?)
In this situation, the consitution is an outmoded model. Instead consider the suffering worker of the 1920's as the model - except we don't suffer physically, only intellectually.
Posted by 11223:
.exe file.
WordPerfect Office 2000 did that - the program you run (wordperfect, etc) are shell scripts that call wine on a
Posted by 11223:
It's trivial for them to link with libwine - but anyway, does getting a foot in the door excuse making a product that's slower than StarOffice? At this time, don't buy it.
Posted by 11223:
No, IANAT. I've used WPO2000 and it is slow. The reason Half-Life is at such a high framerate is because it's using your hard-accel OpenGL. The GDI and widget-set emulation for WINE is horridly slow.
Posted by 11223:
If you're using the commercial Open Sound System, there is a program that comes with your distrobution that allows you to run another program on a different dsp. I don't know the name (don't use OSS myself), but check your documentation.
Every MS product prior to the era of Windows 95 had huge manuals and boxes to fit them. Case in point: Visual Basic 4 had all of the programming manuals in a good-size box. Visual Basic 5 had no programming manuals, but the box only shrunk a little bit. MS Dos 6 came with a huge (and very, very useful) manual. Windows 95 came with a quick-reference booklet and introduction to Windows.
Microsoft firmly believes that no manual is ever neccessary, but they'd be reduced to looking like Walnut Creek CDROM if they didn't have huge boxes.
Posted by 11223:
Word Perfect Office 2000 betas. The Corel Draw betas (which I was accepted for, but didn't participate in) are done the same way.
Posted by 11223:
Except that every last bit of code I'm running right now is written in C? Hmm, kernel, C library, shell, X windows, enlightenment, netscape... the list of >1000 line programs goes on and on. It's just that there's quite a few C programmers who don't understand how to modularize their programs so they can grow efficiently.
Posted by 11223:
Thanks for the perspective - I don't mean to come across as a pedantic C user. I prefer C because I can usally say what I want to say cleaner and more concisely, and when I look at C versus C++ solutions to the problems I'm involved with, C tends to be better. I'd also say for that some problems, C++ is better than C. But as an introduction to the universe of programming (and it's a big universe) I think that C is a better introduction. It's not globally better, but it's better across the board - and ultimately, if I were forced to choose one language to write every program in (which, thankfully, I'm not) I'd choose C (disregarding the fact that C++ compiles C code - it's totally irrelevant to this discussion, and I wish people would stop bringing it up. When I say C++, I mean the features of C++ that seperate it from C.)
Posted by 11223:
Then teach them VB, not C++. There's too much math in real programming to have somebody who doesn't understand discrete math learning C++. That's not flamebait, but programming is (to me) an art of combining math and the workings of the computer - and nowhere in there is there an "object" - that's part of Software Engineering, which is not programming. VB (maybe Kylix - I'm showing my MS heritage) is a great teaching tool and a great tool for writing programs to get a job done. (BTW, I'm drinking an awful lot of caffine - look at how many posts I've done today).
Posted by 11223:
That was the point I was making. I'm being confused here - He said that C was about low-level memory functions. Malloc's and Free's are the same as New's and Delete's - except I'm married to realloc. (I know that's horrible, but realloc don't exist in C).
Somebody obvioulsy thinks I can speel. I've had enough of this discussion.
Methinks you are a software engineer. I'm more interested in how to write the best solution in the best method possible than how to write readable, maintainable code quickly. That's what the software engineers are for. I'm a programmer :-P. Perhaps this book would be better said as an introduction to Software Engineering?
Please note I'm trying desperately to get the discussion back on-topic. I didn't want a flame-war between C and C++ as bad as this. I just wanted some logical discussion about how learning C++ first influences the programmer's mind, vs. C first.