Ah read the whole article please. Eric states at the very beggining.
"An autobiographical account of my `religious' beliefs and how they got that way. If you start this, please read it through. Stopping partway would probably leave you with some very silly misconceptions."
You my friend are as bad as the media with this crap
This version of mozilla rocks. It is very fast and appears very lightweight. You get the functionality of mozilla with the lightweightness of konqueror. Ver nice guys/girls...very nice.
My GOD I would hae thought that the slashdot community would have a little more brains than they apparently have. How can you say that humans don't have natural rights. Yeah maybe the Bill of Rights is the first bill to have put it in ink, but it was done so because it has been felt by all people for as long as their have been people. Let's talk about rights. What gives a dictator the right to treat others in an inhumane fashion....yes my definition of inhumane is widely accepted. Not all people agree, but must agree that some things are just wrong. If you think that people should have no rights then I think you my freind should be shipped to some third world country were your computer skills are worth nothing and you should be beaten and starved...after all it is only the strong that truely have rights....and last time I checked most of us hollier than tho computer geeks are the people that got kicked around through school. If you don't believe that others have certain rights then you should not have them.
IMHO I would say that linux is superior to both AIX, IRIX, and Solaris. I use all three on a semi regular basis. I use Linux and IRIX daily. I will say that the IRIX computers and setup and forget computers. They run some of our molecular modeling software. My Linux box however is used for e-mail, NFS server, web (few hits), license server fo rthe sofware IRIX runs, and serious development. I tax the limits of what an OS should do every single day. My LInux box at work had been up for 65 days last week. The shutdown before that was a power outage. Basically I think that all of the high end tools that other Unices claim are either not that necessary or over-exagerated. My linux box can do everything I need it to. Processor scalability could be a bit better, but heck even that has been fixed for the most part. As a developer there is no better choice that linux. It was made for the hacker by the hacker. Damn good OS.
About time...That is truely one fo the things that I have come to love about Linux....Not sure I could ever install windows on a home computer again until they got multiple desktops. Not that I am even entertaining the idea of gong back.
why won't this lame language just go die. Die Fortran...just go lay down and die. I work as a computational chemist and it is painful to me to watch me superiors write fortran code...I just can't understand why they won't take the time to at least learn C...although for the size of our projects C++ is the obvious lnaguage of choice.
I hate Fortran and wish that it would just go lay down and die.
The point that is being missed in these discussions is the size of the beetle population. Any one who works with genetic algorithms knows that the larger the population size you start with the more likely you are to reach a given evoultionary point in a given time. Thus if the population size is large enough then the simulatanoues evolution of all three chemical is very probable. Also it is equally likely that the inhibiter evolved first and liad dormant....it neither hurt nor helped the evolutionary line. Thus by not harming the line it is improbable that this same set of gene sequences would re-mutate....These now brings the siumultatneous mutation down to two gene sequences...which if the population size is large enough is not only likely, but probable.
We have IBM, houseing is amazingly affordable here, traffic is very light. I just moved to Albany and I loave it.
Later
Piss-on-the-perr review system
on
Wolframania
·
· Score: 1
I am a scientist, computational chemist. I have some serious issues with the peer review system. DO you know that in acedimc science you are only percieved as being a good scientis if you have many publications? DO you also know that when you submit a paper to be peer-reviewd, your name stays on the paper and often times people will not allow a paper to be published because they don't like the person. Yes this does happen occasionally. It doesn't always happen and there are some good sides to the perr review process. For those of you on this board that aren't in sciend or still in school I ask you to go get a copy of the Journal of Medicial chemistry. It will only cost you a couple thousand dollars/yr for a subscription. Yes their are other online peer-review journals that are popping up that I am greatly n favor of. Hoever if you publish in one of these journals people will think that your work is inferior and most will not take you seriously. Academia used to be about sharing knowledge. Well I can tell you..at least were I got my Ph.D., That it isn't like that any more. No-one wants to talk about their research for belief that others will steal thier ideas. Often time sinterscaool research groups don't even talk to each other.
With that said I am about half way through Woolframs book. I believe that he is both a crack pot and a genius. He is a ver arrogant man. He should give credit to work that others have done and not pretend to have come up with it all on his own. Yes I belive that he has pushed this field along, but He didn't come up with the idea for cellular automata on his own. Once one gets past the first, self riteous chapter, the book is a stimulating read. cool stuff and the coding involved to produce mose of the pictures in the book is trivial. I wrote severl small programs just so I could see the results for myself. I think the Wolfram is right. I think that this branch of science will grow. It won't replace differential equations tho. Probably work side by side. We will need a unyfied theoro for math and algorithmic study now...
[root@127 john]# uname -a Linux 127.0.0.1 2.4.8-26mdksmp #1 SMP Sun Sep 23 16:04:21 CEST 2001 i686 unknown
That is uptime. I write code and perform computations on this box on a regular basis. Oh since I am falling for the bait, let me grab the uptime of the Beuwolf cluster.
The cluster runs non-stop day and night. Full memeory application, all floating point. I also uses it as the gatewy for the entire lab. Bring those up times winBoys.
Uh. Maybe you should do a little programming and testing before making such ludicrous comments. x86 faster that SGI in floating point? Hell No. I have an Octane 2 with 350Mhz Processors. IT does seti packets twice as fast as my dual pentium III i GHz box. For both our sakes please don't mention the Athlon or the G4. They just aren't in the same class.
I just finished tearing down and re-building a twenty node linux cluster in less than half-a-day.
Also I set it up the first time by myself as my first experience. I did everything from builidnthe nodes to installing linux ans clustering software and that only took two days.
I almost laugh at the thought of a mac running parrallel. The whole point of cluster computing is to provide a cheap means of high performance computing. Hey not that macs wouldn't be great, but common man they are expensive. All you need fo r a cluster to work is descent RAM, motherboard, and harddrive, and a cheap (In my case $5) video card.
If I had better cooling in the room I probalby would have went with AMD as they have much better floating point performance than Intel.
I guess that If I just had the money to spend on a super-cluster I would go with twenty Octane 2 dual processors. At about 12000 apeice that is pretty damn expensive. Oh yeah my cluster top to bottom was under twenty thousand (includeing cisco router), and I had to re-buy RAM 'caues I cut corners there the first time.
It isn't even as close to as fast. nope. no race what so ever. Give you some perspective. I run seti at home packets on an Octane2 at around 3 hours. On my "pentium III dual 1Ghz" box I an ran them at 6 hrs. That is twice as slow. My Octane2 has dual 450Mhz processors.
Look at all the Cach these bad boys have. And graphics wize. Don't try and compare and Nividia card 'cause it isn't in the same league. No not even the Quatro 2, although it is getting damn close.
If you want a pure number crunching moster. That is probably the fastest desktop computer you can buy or build. Just my two cents
I read somewhere awhile back that Linus wanted to start trying to release newer kernel versions faster than revious. Personnally I like it. It gets things out to the community to test quicker. It really was pretty fast between 2.4.8 and 2.4.9. LIke less than a week I think. amazing.
you are an idiot. Mandrake is most certainly standard. It is the same as redhat. Also you say you lost controll. Please tell me what you can do with slack that you can't do with mandrake??
Mandrake is linux people. It has KDE and GNOME. IT is no more dumb-downed than and other distro running the new KDE or GNOME. If you don't believe me then please do a
Ctrl-alt-F3
You will now see the same thing you see with slack. Yes there are some minor differences. You still have all the control that you have with any distro.
Tell me did we all run from microsoft because it was easy or because they didn't give us control? For me it was the control. Hell I like easy.
I just finished installing and setting up a 10 boot system for work. I work at Sair and linux gnu certification. I assure you that the three easiest distros to get up and running are Redhat Suse, and Mandrake. Of these three Mandrake comes with the best set of tools IMHO.
For instance Mandrake gives you a hardware manager like windows. What? what is wrong with that. Geez people. It is not the easy use we fled from it is the lack of control.
Mandrake is both easy and powerful. It has the ease ofuse you expect from widoze. and the power that EVERY SINGLE LINUC DISTRO HAS. The all have the same power.
Yes. Building a cluster is fairly easy if you know a little linux and some programming.
Check out http://www.beowulf.org and some of the other sites about information.
I am getting ready to build a 20 node cluster with pentium III 1Ghz processors. I am playing the waiting game right now with the University and shipping company however.
If you don't mind writing your own distributed applications ( using CORBA or some other libriaries) then you can set up the cluster as four individual machines. Well actually if you have 4 then one will be the rserver node and 3 will be the slave nodes. the server node will need 2 ethernet cards. It will be the only node that connects to the outside world. The other nodes can then be connected by NFS.
One peice of advice. Before you build a cluster you should first decide what you are bui;lding it for. Not all software can scale to parallel computing. You must first design your problem then build your cluster. Many cluster are build and run tailored to the problem they are solving. For instance the cluster I am building will be more like a network of Workstations then a beowulf. But for my particular problem it will work in the same way.
There are alot of sites out there pertaining to beowulf clusters. You need some inux experiance and some hacker ethics, but it is dooable by anybody for sure.
Have fun
Hey atleast these people have some rational basis for their religous beliefs. Strange, yes. But not out of the question. Hell we are only about 1000 years away from being able to d osuch things as create another civilization.
Obvioiusly they have no concept of what the GPL is. Nor do most people tho. There is no part of the GPL that say's you can't make money off your work.
Not only that there is no reason why they couldn't release the code for linux under the BSD lisence, or hell they could even **gasp** leave it closed source and linux compatable.
M$ is only doing this to gainsupport for their.NET strategy.
Fuck 'em
As I read through the article my initial response was one of suprise. I was impressed that micrsoft was actually do this. I have no problem with their concept of shared source. I am only against them making money off standards. While it seems in this case they are trying to release the standard without making money. I am suspicious tho. I can forsee Miscrosoft doing this to win support for the new technology, getting everyone to play by their rules, and then release some new standard based off the old, but this time it will be proprietary. I dunno. Maybe I need to crawl back under my tin hat.
I would love to see Microsoft do this. I am not against making money off source code, I am against limiting progress becuase you have the world by the balls and you are insisting that they use your standards.
Just my worthless 2 cents
My personnal opinion on open source is that it is a remarkable source of information. It has enabled me to learn things such as openGL by looking at examples of other people. It has made it possible for my to continue to refine my style of coding because I can surround myself with code written be great coders. Without the open-source software we have today it would be much harder for someone to learn the needed skills to break into the job of their dreams or whatever.
I am also not against making a profit off what you do. I mean what is the real harm in designing some really good software and then selling it for others to use. A good example is in the scientific software industry (of which I am apart). Without companies making software for sceintists, there would be very little descent software. I mean very few scientist can program much less write competent software packages.
Also there are not enough people (us the open source community) to collaborate on and pull of the quality of software needed for scientific computing.
I am not talking about all scientific computing, but a large portion of it.
So I se nothing wrong with getting a team of developers together, cranking out some usable software, and then selling it. You are still beniffiing others. But by open sourcing it you gaurantee that you will not have the funds to carry the project forward.
However in the areana of OS design and virtually all other software, this isn't true because we all need a good OS, and there for there are plenty of us out there willing to pitch in and make linux, BSD, and others what they are. We all need a good office product like star office, and those of us who have not contributed to it owe those that have a big thanks. good job everyone, keep up the good work.
So I guess my point is is that open source will survive where there is enough of a need that enough people will volunteer to collaborate on the project and pull it off. However it would not survive ( at least not now) in the arena of scientific computing.
So as my finish up my dissertaion I am torn between releasing my software to the open-source community of which I believe few would be interested in pitching in and helping to make it better, and actually trying to make a buck of what I have done.
Serious delima. I mean I have worked hard on this project, and my number one goal is to release something that will be highly useful, and continue to grow with changing needs. I am also a big supporter of open source software.
I don't think that one model fits all. is my finall answer.
p.s. yes microsoft is scared wouldn't you be.
Visit http://nehe.gamedev.net
These guy's have a class act openGL tutorial. The previous link from DanThe1Man is the source code from a book "progammin openGL for X Window" --I think the name is right.
Anyhow it is a good book and it is writen by the gy at SGI that developed the glut libraries for openGL. I have found that a combination of the book and the tutorial from NeHe have been the best for me.
NeHe covers alot of the relavent information to game design. You know the stuff that you want to know like texture mapping, loading 3D worlds, colision, particle engines, etc.. The book however gives you a good fundamental understanding of openGL. I personally think that there is likely to be a better book on the subject though.
Look around, I know there is the openGL Programmers Bible, and some others out there.
Well said. I have programmed in c/C++ for about 4 years now. It wasn't until I actually started using some C++ GUI toolkits that I realized that I wasn't really programming in C++. The toolkits forced an OO upon me and I realized the true power of OO programming once I took the time to learn how to think in OO terms. Just because you define a class doesn't mean that you have done anything OO.
Most people that I know that critasize OO programming and C++ don't really know how to programm in C++, instead they are C programmers which is good n it's own right. But C programmers shouldn't put down C++ until they have taken the time to learn the language the way the language is meant to be used.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow a truely insightful reply! I think you make a lot of very good points.
So what are you suggesting?
Ah read the whole article please. Eric states at the very beggining.
"An autobiographical account of my `religious' beliefs and how they got that way. If you start this, please read it through. Stopping partway would probably leave you with some very silly misconceptions."
You my friend are as bad as the media with this crap
This version of mozilla rocks. It is very fast and appears very lightweight. You get the functionality of mozilla with the lightweightness of konqueror. Ver nice guys/girls...very nice.
Thanks to everyone at the mozilla team.
My GOD I would hae thought that the slashdot community would have a little more brains than they apparently have. How can you say that humans don't have natural rights. Yeah maybe the Bill of Rights is the first bill to have put it in ink, but it was done so because it has been felt by all people for as long as their have been people. Let's talk about rights. What gives a dictator the right to treat others in an inhumane fashion....yes my definition of inhumane is widely accepted. Not all people agree, but must agree that some things are just wrong. If you think that people should have no rights then I think you my freind should be shipped to some third world country were your computer skills are worth nothing and you should be beaten and starved...after all it is only the strong that truely have rights....and last time I checked most of us hollier than tho computer geeks are the people that got kicked around through school. If you don't believe that others have certain rights then you should not have them.
IMHO I would say that linux is superior to both AIX, IRIX, and Solaris. I use all three on a semi regular basis. I use Linux and IRIX daily. I will say that the IRIX computers and setup and forget computers. They run some of our molecular modeling software. My Linux box however is used for e-mail, NFS server, web (few hits), license server fo rthe sofware IRIX runs, and serious development. I tax the limits of what an OS should do every single day. My LInux box at work had been up for 65 days last week. The shutdown before that was a power outage. Basically I think that all of the high end tools that other Unices claim are either not that necessary or over-exagerated. My linux box can do everything I need it to. Processor scalability could be a bit better, but heck even that has been fixed for the most part. As a developer there is no better choice that linux. It was made for the hacker by the hacker. Damn good OS.
About time...That is truely one fo the things that I have come to love about Linux....Not sure I could ever install windows on a home computer again until they got multiple desktops. Not that I am even entertaining the idea of gong back.
why won't this lame language just go die. Die Fortran...just go lay down and die. I work as a computational chemist and it is painful to me to watch me superiors write fortran code...I just can't understand why they won't take the time to at least learn C...although for the size of our projects C++ is the obvious lnaguage of choice.
I hate Fortran and wish that it would just go lay down and die.
The point that is being missed in these discussions is the size of the beetle population. Any one who works with genetic algorithms knows that the larger the population size you start with the more likely you are to reach a given evoultionary point in a given time. Thus if the population size is large enough then the simulatanoues evolution of all three chemical is very probable. Also it is equally likely that the inhibiter evolved first and liad dormant....it neither hurt nor helped the evolutionary line. Thus by not harming the line it is improbable that this same set of gene sequences would re-mutate....These now brings the siumultatneous mutation down to two gene sequences...which if the population size is large enough is not only likely, but probable.
We have IBM, houseing is amazingly affordable here, traffic is very light. I just moved to Albany and I loave it.
Later
I am a scientist, computational chemist. I have some serious issues with the peer review system. DO you know that in acedimc science you are only percieved as being a good scientis if you have many publications? DO you also know that when you submit a paper to be peer-reviewd, your name stays on the paper and often times people will not allow a paper to be published because they don't like the person. Yes this does happen occasionally. It doesn't always happen and there are some good sides to the perr review process. For those of you on this board that aren't in sciend or still in school I ask you to go get a copy of the Journal of Medicial chemistry. It will only cost you a couple thousand dollars/yr for a subscription. Yes their are other online peer-review journals that are popping up that I am greatly n favor of. Hoever if you publish in one of these journals people will think that your work is inferior and most will not take you seriously. Academia used to be about sharing knowledge. Well I can tell you..at least were I got my Ph.D., That it isn't like that any more. No-one wants to talk about their research for belief that others will steal thier ideas. Often time sinterscaool research groups don't even talk to each other.
With that said I am about half way through Woolframs book. I believe that he is both a crack pot and a genius. He is a ver arrogant man. He should give credit to work that others have done and not pretend to have come up with it all on his own. Yes I belive that he has pushed this field along, but He didn't come up with the idea for cellular automata on his own. Once one gets past the first, self riteous chapter, the book is a stimulating read. cool stuff and the coding involved to produce mose of the pictures in the book is trivial. I wrote severl small programs just so I could see the results for myself. I think the Wolfram is right. I think that this branch of science will grow. It won't replace differential equations tho. Probably work side by side. We will need a unyfied theoro for math and algorithmic study now...
Oh what the hell.
[root@127 john]#uptime
1:37pm up 218 days, 2:18, 2 users, load average: 1.18, 1.13, 1.07
[root@127 john]# uname -a
Linux 127.0.0.1 2.4.8-26mdksmp #1 SMP Sun Sep 23 16:04:21 CEST 2001 i686 unknown
That is uptime. I write code and perform computations on this box on a regular basis. Oh since I am falling for the bait, let me grab the uptime of the Beuwolf cluster.
[root@alanine]# uptime
1:40pm up 45 days, 2:18, 3 users, load average: 1.28, 1.30, 1.32
The cluster runs non-stop day and night. Full memeory application, all floating point. I also uses it as the gatewy for the entire lab. Bring those up times winBoys.
Uh. Maybe you should do a little programming and testing before making such ludicrous comments. x86 faster that SGI in floating point? Hell No. I have an Octane 2 with 350Mhz Processors. IT does seti packets twice as fast as my dual pentium III i GHz box. For both our sakes please don't mention the Athlon or the G4. They just aren't in the same class.
I just finished tearing down and re-building a twenty node linux cluster in less than half-a-day.
Also I set it up the first time by myself as my first experience. I did everything from builidnthe nodes to installing linux ans clustering software and that only took two days.
I almost laugh at the thought of a mac running parrallel. The whole point of cluster computing is to provide a cheap means of high performance computing. Hey not that macs wouldn't be great, but common man they are expensive. All you need fo r a cluster to work is descent RAM, motherboard, and harddrive, and a cheap (In my case $5) video card.
If I had better cooling in the room I probalby would have went with AMD as they have much better floating point performance than Intel.
I guess that If I just had the money to spend on a super-cluster I would go with twenty Octane 2 dual processors. At about 12000 apeice that is pretty damn expensive. Oh yeah my cluster top to bottom was under twenty thousand (includeing cisco router), and I had to re-buy RAM 'caues I cut corners there the first time.
It isn't even as close to as fast. nope. no race what so ever. Give you some perspective. I run seti at home packets on an Octane2 at around 3 hours. On my "pentium III dual 1Ghz" box I an ran them at 6 hrs. That is twice as slow. My Octane2 has dual 450Mhz processors.
Look at all the Cach these bad boys have. And graphics wize. Don't try and compare and Nividia card 'cause it isn't in the same league. No not even the Quatro 2, although it is getting damn close.
If you want a pure number crunching moster. That is probably the fastest desktop computer you can buy or build. Just my two cents
Damn hippies!
I read somewhere awhile back that Linus wanted to start trying to release newer kernel versions faster than revious. Personnally I like it. It gets things out to the community to test quicker. It really was pretty fast between 2.4.8 and 2.4.9. LIke less than a week I think. amazing.
you are an idiot. Mandrake is most certainly standard. It is the same as redhat. Also you say you lost controll. Please tell me what you can do with slack that you can't do with mandrake?? Mandrake is linux people. It has KDE and GNOME. IT is no more dumb-downed than and other distro running the new KDE or GNOME. If you don't believe me then please do a Ctrl-alt-F3 You will now see the same thing you see with slack. Yes there are some minor differences. You still have all the control that you have with any distro. Tell me did we all run from microsoft because it was easy or because they didn't give us control? For me it was the control. Hell I like easy. I just finished installing and setting up a 10 boot system for work. I work at Sair and linux gnu certification. I assure you that the three easiest distros to get up and running are Redhat Suse, and Mandrake. Of these three Mandrake comes with the best set of tools IMHO. For instance Mandrake gives you a hardware manager like windows. What? what is wrong with that. Geez people. It is not the easy use we fled from it is the lack of control. Mandrake is both easy and powerful. It has the ease ofuse you expect from widoze. and the power that EVERY SINGLE LINUC DISTRO HAS. The all have the same power.
Yes. Building a cluster is fairly easy if you know a little linux and some programming. Check out http://www.beowulf.org and some of the other sites about information. I am getting ready to build a 20 node cluster with pentium III 1Ghz processors. I am playing the waiting game right now with the University and shipping company however. If you don't mind writing your own distributed applications ( using CORBA or some other libriaries) then you can set up the cluster as four individual machines. Well actually if you have 4 then one will be the rserver node and 3 will be the slave nodes. the server node will need 2 ethernet cards. It will be the only node that connects to the outside world. The other nodes can then be connected by NFS. One peice of advice. Before you build a cluster you should first decide what you are bui;lding it for. Not all software can scale to parallel computing. You must first design your problem then build your cluster. Many cluster are build and run tailored to the problem they are solving. For instance the cluster I am building will be more like a network of Workstations then a beowulf. But for my particular problem it will work in the same way. There are alot of sites out there pertaining to beowulf clusters. You need some inux experiance and some hacker ethics, but it is dooable by anybody for sure. Have fun
Hey atleast these people have some rational basis for their religous beliefs. Strange, yes. But not out of the question. Hell we are only about 1000 years away from being able to d osuch things as create another civilization.
Obvioiusly they have no concept of what the GPL is. Nor do most people tho. There is no part of the GPL that say's you can't make money off your work. Not only that there is no reason why they couldn't release the code for linux under the BSD lisence, or hell they could even **gasp** leave it closed source and linux compatable. M$ is only doing this to gainsupport for their .NET strategy.
Fuck 'em
As I read through the article my initial response was one of suprise. I was impressed that micrsoft was actually do this. I have no problem with their concept of shared source. I am only against them making money off standards. While it seems in this case they are trying to release the standard without making money. I am suspicious tho. I can forsee Miscrosoft doing this to win support for the new technology, getting everyone to play by their rules, and then release some new standard based off the old, but this time it will be proprietary. I dunno. Maybe I need to crawl back under my tin hat. I would love to see Microsoft do this. I am not against making money off source code, I am against limiting progress becuase you have the world by the balls and you are insisting that they use your standards. Just my worthless 2 cents
My personnal opinion on open source is that it is a remarkable source of information. It has enabled me to learn things such as openGL by looking at examples of other people. It has made it possible for my to continue to refine my style of coding because I can surround myself with code written be great coders. Without the open-source software we have today it would be much harder for someone to learn the needed skills to break into the job of their dreams or whatever. I am also not against making a profit off what you do. I mean what is the real harm in designing some really good software and then selling it for others to use. A good example is in the scientific software industry (of which I am apart). Without companies making software for sceintists, there would be very little descent software. I mean very few scientist can program much less write competent software packages. Also there are not enough people (us the open source community) to collaborate on and pull of the quality of software needed for scientific computing. I am not talking about all scientific computing, but a large portion of it. So I se nothing wrong with getting a team of developers together, cranking out some usable software, and then selling it. You are still beniffiing others. But by open sourcing it you gaurantee that you will not have the funds to carry the project forward. However in the areana of OS design and virtually all other software, this isn't true because we all need a good OS, and there for there are plenty of us out there willing to pitch in and make linux, BSD, and others what they are. We all need a good office product like star office, and those of us who have not contributed to it owe those that have a big thanks. good job everyone, keep up the good work. So I guess my point is is that open source will survive where there is enough of a need that enough people will volunteer to collaborate on the project and pull it off. However it would not survive ( at least not now) in the arena of scientific computing. So as my finish up my dissertaion I am torn between releasing my software to the open-source community of which I believe few would be interested in pitching in and helping to make it better, and actually trying to make a buck of what I have done. Serious delima. I mean I have worked hard on this project, and my number one goal is to release something that will be highly useful, and continue to grow with changing needs. I am also a big supporter of open source software. I don't think that one model fits all. is my finall answer. p.s. yes microsoft is scared wouldn't you be.
Visit http://nehe.gamedev.net These guy's have a class act openGL tutorial. The previous link from DanThe1Man is the source code from a book "progammin openGL for X Window" --I think the name is right. Anyhow it is a good book and it is writen by the gy at SGI that developed the glut libraries for openGL. I have found that a combination of the book and the tutorial from NeHe have been the best for me. NeHe covers alot of the relavent information to game design. You know the stuff that you want to know like texture mapping, loading 3D worlds, colision, particle engines, etc.. The book however gives you a good fundamental understanding of openGL. I personally think that there is likely to be a better book on the subject though. Look around, I know there is the openGL Programmers Bible, and some others out there.
Well said. I have programmed in c/C++ for about 4 years now. It wasn't until I actually started using some C++ GUI toolkits that I realized that I wasn't really programming in C++. The toolkits forced an OO upon me and I realized the true power of OO programming once I took the time to learn how to think in OO terms. Just because you define a class doesn't mean that you have done anything OO. Most people that I know that critasize OO programming and C++ don't really know how to programm in C++, instead they are C programmers which is good n it's own right. But C programmers shouldn't put down C++ until they have taken the time to learn the language the way the language is meant to be used.