I am currently running a dual PII 266. Kernel 2.0.24 compiled for dual, embarased NT speed wise. Everything from quake2 to windows apps in wine ran better. The real change came when I upgraded to the experimental series around 2.1.121. Holy crap it eats everything for breakfast. The spinlock method really improves load handling (things like doing a make won't interfere with playing a video game.) Almost makes wish I still had NT on here to show people what I'm talking about...Nah no it dosn't.
I have to check out smp mesa!
Gnome will rule, but for now it's a good start.
on
GNOME 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Hello
By the admision of the people working on the GNOME project (in previous threads on the mailing list for one source.), GNOME is just getting started. It is now entering it's most important phase, public testing. I've been using gnome since the first (.rpm) release. The user interface is good but not revolutionary... but it could be.
System admins, net admins, gurus, programmers, 0.xers, and computer savvy people in general have a mission....
To listen to the moms, clerks, grandmas, kids, reporters, clowns, technophobics, crazy, and even uninterested people to find out how gnome can be a a better tool for making novice home system administration possible.
We should consider ourselves chalenged! Not finished. Not by a long shot! The Number One priority should be to help even if it is just listening to peoples complaints, and bouncing around possible solutions.
Lets stick up for everyone, and give everyone the opportunity to learn what the Linux philosphy is about. We would want the same for ourselves.
Just a thought, I have compiled wine on a dual PII 266 and it takes approximatly 10-16 minutes from scratch. Considering WINE is composed of gigantic chunks of Windows and Linux code (most of possible api and some hardware calls of both) it should be one of the longest compiles out there.
What are you building? Do you do a clean make every time? Do you need to do a make clean in order to compile correctly? Is the code 100% ANSI, or are there Windows specific features in it? If there are Windows specific calls in there how are they cross compiled, through wrapper(s) or preprocessor statments? Which is your native platform, and which is the port? Did you know there are other compilers availible for Linux?
Since you have now made this a public thing, I sure many would like to learn from your mistake(s). Why don't you post the makefile and details? I will likely not be able to help you but I am sure somone can.
`Any company is free not to do business with M$, and then they do not have to pay their "tax."'
Simply put it isn't that simple.
From what I understood, the root of the problem is that OEMs are strong armed into taking an all or nothing approach to bundling Windows, with any given line of machines they sell. With Windows at 90% of market (I don't remember the source of that figure, I think it's based on M$ licence sales) it is impossible for that OEM to sell two OSes one of which is non-MS, on any line. It dosn't take a marketing genius to figure that selling X machines on a given line, without Windows, could only be justified by guarenteed 50% of the sales(assuming the mark-up is the same) plus enough sales to offset the additional cost of buying unused licences for each of those machines. Again it dosn't take a MBA to figure out that any new, potentially competitive, (non-Windows) OS will have to overcome the burden of going from zero or close to zero users, to enough users to buy at least, say 80% of the computers, in a given line.
/* Begin rant code block
How would you suggest that a development team go about making an OS that is can beat the long term viability arguement(FUD) and robust enough to lure away enough people from M$ to take over 80 percent or more of any computer line? The only people capable of installing and using a brand new OS with a high number of new features and configurability are the geeks. Many uses of computers in the market require a high level of dependibility that M$ can't (or won't) deliver, so those businesses look away from M$ for solutions. The risk of direct punishment from is M$ is lessened because of the DOJ case, and many OEMs are in brave fashion. Risking server lines now is a bit like a desperate cry for help on the part of the OEMs to geeks and the business. If the DOJ case ends tommorow and there still is a M$ after the dust settles, they will be looking to punish deviants. The server lines offered now are a testement to the sheer numbers of Linux users and the desperation of companies like Dell and Compaq to be able to make their own rules.
The installation of any OS is a hard battle for most people to overcome. The masses don't know enough to know who to trust, so they go to the big OEM's to protect them. The day all OEM's are allowed to sell low end systems to the masses (under five hundred dollars) with a non-M$ OS preinstalled with M$ adding a total financial burden of 0 dollars to the cost, is the day you see M$ actually have to compete.
end rant code block*/
Hear is a relevent definition, see one of many mobster movies for useage.
rack'et, n.[probably echoic.]
3. (a) an obtaining of money illegally, as by bootlegging, fraud, or, especially, threats of violence;(b) any dishonest scheme or practice;
Anybody check out gnome 99.7 offical release? It kicks ass! I have been following it since the I first heard the rumors at the Red Hat Labs, and I could have only imagined how good it could get. It is well on it's way to eliminating the need for the command line for a new user working on a preconfigured box!
If I was asked if Red Hat would win the infoworld OS of the year this year I couldn't tell you, but I can tell you they will win for 99!
I don't understand why people bash Red Hat so bad.
Deep Thoughts(TM)...
Here is somthing to think about. What do you think Linus or RMS would say if you wtote them an email saying Alan Cox is a liability and should be locked out of the kernel project because he works for Red Hat. (Hint: They have ripped into people for far less.)
I agree with you. Letting the government fool with the inner workings of M$ is a bad idea. Ideally the DOJ case would drag on for a very long time, never resulting in a verdict. A long string of convictions and resulting appeals would allow the smaller players in the industry to compete without the threat of being squashed. Then the market could rise to the occation of creating supperior software to run many circles around M$es junky 9x kernel. We already see the market creating better software, with better long term viability.
Any situation dependant, government created, compition will not create a big enough window for other OSes to break through M$es iron curtain around the OEM's. If the DOJ wins the market will not be ready and OSS will be accused of having success that depends solely on govenment intervention.
I hope Judge Jackson's gaval does not squash the good reputation of OSS forever.
Directions to eventually demolish M$es unfair atvantages
step 1. Try 'em. step 2. Convict 'em. step 3. let 'em appeal. step 4. let 'em win the appeal. step 5. repeat steps.
If the government convicts, and all appeals are exausted, they should release all OS code under the WINE licence. May it never get to that step!
I saw a great deal of legitimate gripes with this article. One thing that was not mentioned yet was the growth of the internet's partial responsibility for the OSS revolution. I have to wonder if that was a stratigic omition. The net definatly makes it much more feasible for developers to spontainiously coordinate with little to no overhead. That flexibility of the internet, renders figures that do not weigh the recent popularity of ipv4 in fair proportion, slanted and antique in nature.
With the solid statistics just mentioned backing it up, I knew I knew the material in this article had originated from somewhere else. After a little searching I turned up a group who had done similar research and turned up similar results.
That group's transcript...
Did you dress her up like this?
No, no... no... yes. Yes, yes, a bit, a bit. She has got a wart. She Turned me into a newt.
A Newt?
I got better
what do you do with witches?
Burn! Burn, burn them up!
And what do you burn apart from witches?
More witches! Wood! So, why do witches burn? [pause]
B--... 'cause they're made of wood...?
Good!
We have found a witch, may we burn her? What also floats in water?
Bread!
Apples!
Uh, very small rocks! I'm not a witch, I'm not a witch!!
They dressed me up like this.
No we didn't!
No! No!
And this isn't my nose, it's a false one!
So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
Build a bridge out of her!! A duck! Exactly! So, logically... If she weighs the same as a duck, she's made of wood? And therefore?
A witch! A witch! A witch! A witch! Right, remove the supports! [whop] [creak]
A witch! A witch! It's a fair cop. Burn her! Burn her!
Since Garcia died I'm sure it won't be that great, but their name will likely propel this news into the mainstream!
This might change the minds of a few that think the RIAA is right to create a non-existant need, and prop up a dying industry, after all how can you think of thge Dead as the evil bad guy.
"Every change to Linux results in more and more problems. Its why real operating systems change very infrequently."
An articulate observation! That's why everyone should use MS-DOS 3.2. Without those annoying upgrades like multitasking, security fixes, and support for cdroms or hard drives bigger than 500 meg. It's so simple what could go wrong?
Aside from your grasping for straws (NT unchanged?), do you do have a good point. Support isn't going to be what drives the money in the relm of open source and GPLed software. It will be hardware manufacturers advertising a better option and writing drivers so the platform independant APIs/kernel can make their superior hardware run circles around the the status quo.
"1999 will be the year when IBM, Dell, Compaq and others expose this schit and we can get back to stability."
Who knows about Dell, they will likely play both sides off the middle until a winner becomes clear.
IBM wants to see M$ gone so they can take over and are our friends(at least in the short term), and Compaq is one of those companies with the superior hardware (Alpha) who can use the intrapolarity of Linux as a long term viability argument.
That ends our lesson on how to give both sides of an argument so you don't sound like a crazy fanatic. Incidentally do you stand to lose a job or stock value if M$ market share goes down?
He he sniff.. I kinda figured.. but some times you just can't be sure, he he..MS propiganda looks about as rational as that to me... all that static blurs the line. I guess there is still hope for me, I did find it really funny.
*giggle*
(keeping your threshhold at -2 does weird things to your brain!)
Hmmm I wish I could be sure if there is any supplemental-to-the-api action going on. (Anyone who worked on BFRIS reading this?) If not I might get some benifit from that smp mesa being worked on (I've got a dual). My last post was because I got the libc5 error and thought it was due to a failed 3dfx directive at the time.
Hey if smp mesa provides a signifigant speedup, maybe I can use it on quake as well. Then I could shout about undisputable video game improvment by switching to Linux.
I imagine most M$ers don't do this, but it only takes one or two full time anonymous propiganda artists to really disrupt an otherwise sane online forum.
If you work at MS and don't belive there are any such people doing this, think about this... why would Bill G, or the the people who lie like that tell you?
Doh! That sucks. I have a machine capible of smooth svgalib quake2 at 800x600 but no 3dfx card... Am I missing somthing? Can I run it through mesa using raw processor power or is it based strictly on the 3dfx/voodoo directives?
I was looking forward to giving these guys my money too.
I thought this quote was particularly interesting.
"I haven't heard anything on this [Windows 2000 Personal Edition] specifically. But you've got to wonder: How much Plug and Play and PCMCIA support can they get into NT? And the games compatibility issue could be huge [between the 9x and NT kernels]," said one Windows developer.
It seems they need to stop and think carefully in Redmond. It is not obvious, to at least the quoted Microsoft developer, and possibly to most Microsofians, that bloat will only burn them. If they limit what is in the NT kernel by default and allow users, or the system (or either) to load drivers as they need them, the drivers NT supports could be infinate, while not being impossiblly complex, huge, or slow.
Microsoft promised the world NT 5.0/Windows 2000 would be the solution. What will all those IT guys who staked the future of their networks on Windows 2000 do? Do you think this means MS is putting up the white flag in the war for control of the network OS? Alot can happen in three years.
OK, alot of people seem to disagree with the idea of having serial numbers on their chips. Running open source software myself, I am not to intimidated by this. I can understand how someone who has to use a closed source OS or application dosn't like this idea.
If Intel is really serious about this and wanted to get our support and do the right thing they would use all those lobbiests that we all know they have in Washington and get a bill passed. This law should force any program that uses hardware serial numbers to include compilable source code. It should make any other method of serial number access illegal. Then we can choose, without decption and abuse, what level of authentication to run programs encription etc, is acceptable. Accept no less.
Lets see if they care as much about their customers rights as much as they care about the damage overclocking does to their reputation.
This is Great news for FLAT and LILUG NY LUGs.
on
Update from thebazaar
·
· Score: 1
Being the president of one LUG and active in the other I am really glad to hear about the price change. I think this should cause the Bazaars attendance to grow signifigantly.
12 hundred dollars is the kind of money your company pays only if your entire network is pure linux already.
175 dollars is the type of money you can pay out of your pocket for three days of confrence. You won't get just professionals paying for speakers but curious onlookers too.
I don't remember meeting one person that didn't go to at least one talk at the Linux Expo last year. People will be willing to travel to NY to hear people speak, but not for just a booth tour.
I can't afford to pay $960US. As a student I can scrounge together 100 bucks. I'll see you there!
I can tell you that many of the assorted lug members will be there for those prices!(And probably more.)
-mp3's -check you email/internet -voice over modem/cellphone -gps/streets data -engine info/running stats/runtime tunning(saw someone working on universal car computer interface for Gnome.) -And best of all... pong for rush hour!
I can't wait to pick up the first Auto distro.
Two questions.
*Is their a driver for a GPS unit/card for linux?(does such a thing exist?)
*Will someone come out with a machine with at least 2 gigs of hd space. That fits in my radio slot. That will run a slightly striped down linux fast enough for the above mentioned things. For about 500 bucks.
Then again maybe I'm just a sucker for any car with a script configurable, turbo boost button.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
I am currently running a dual PII 266. Kernel 2.0.24 compiled for dual, embarased NT speed wise. Everything from quake2 to windows apps in wine ran better. The real change came when I upgraded to the experimental series around 2.1.121. Holy crap it eats everything for breakfast. The spinlock method really improves load handling (things like doing a make won't interfere with playing a video game.) Almost makes wish I still had NT on here to show people what I'm talking about...Nah no it dosn't.
I have to check out smp mesa!
Hello
By the admision of the people working on the GNOME project (in previous threads on the mailing list for one source.), GNOME is just getting started. It is now entering it's most important phase, public testing. I've been using gnome since the first (.rpm) release. The user interface is good but not revolutionary... but it could be.
System admins, net admins, gurus, programmers, 0.xers, and computer savvy people in general have a mission....
To listen to the moms, clerks, grandmas, kids, reporters, clowns, technophobics, crazy, and even uninterested people to find out how gnome can be a a better tool for making novice home system administration possible.
We should consider ourselves chalenged! Not finished. Not by a long shot! The Number One priority should be to help even if it is just listening to peoples complaints, and bouncing around possible solutions.
Lets stick up for everyone, and give everyone the opportunity to learn what the Linux philosphy is about. We would want the same for ourselves.
Matthew Newhall
President of LILUG
Just a thought, I have compiled wine on a dual PII 266 and it takes approximatly 10-16 minutes from scratch. Considering WINE is composed of gigantic chunks of Windows and Linux code (most of possible api and some hardware calls of both) it should be one of the longest compiles out there.
What are you building? Do you do a clean make every time? Do you need to do a make clean in order to compile correctly? Is the code 100% ANSI, or are there Windows specific features in it? If there are Windows specific calls in there how are they cross compiled, through wrapper(s) or preprocessor statments? Which is your native platform, and which is the port? Did you know there are other compilers availible for Linux?
Since you have now made this a public thing, I sure many would like to learn from your mistake(s). Why don't you post the makefile and details? I will likely not be able to help you but I am sure somone can.
You said ...
`Any company is free not to do business with M$, and then they do not have to pay their "tax."'
Simply put it isn't that simple.
From what I understood, the root of the problem is that OEMs are strong armed into taking an all or nothing approach to bundling Windows, with any given line of machines they sell. With Windows at 90% of market (I don't remember the source of that figure, I think it's based on M$ licence sales) it is impossible for that OEM to sell two OSes one of which is non-MS, on any line. It dosn't take a marketing genius to figure that selling X machines on a given line, without Windows, could only be justified by guarenteed 50% of the sales(assuming the mark-up is the same) plus enough sales to offset the additional cost of buying unused licences for each of those machines. Again it dosn't take a MBA to figure out that any new, potentially competitive, (non-Windows) OS will have to overcome the burden of going from zero or close to zero users, to enough users to buy at least, say 80% of the computers, in a given line.
How would you suggest that a development team go about making an OS that is can beat the long term viability arguement(FUD) and robust enough to lure away enough people from M$ to take over 80 percent or more of any computer line? The only people capable of installing and using a brand new OS with a high number of new features and configurability are the geeks. Many uses of computers in the market require a high level of dependibility that M$ can't (or won't) deliver, so those businesses look away from M$ for solutions. The risk of direct punishment from is M$ is lessened because of the DOJ case, and many OEMs are in brave fashion. Risking server lines now is a bit like a desperate cry for help on the part of the OEMs to geeks and the business. If the DOJ case ends tommorow and there still is a M$ after the dust settles, they will be looking to punish deviants. The server lines offered now are a testement to the sheer numbers of Linux users and the desperation of companies like Dell and Compaq to be able to make their own rules.
The installation of any OS is a hard battle for most people to overcome. The masses don't know enough to know who to trust, so they go to the big OEM's to protect them. The day all OEM's are allowed to sell low end systems to the masses (under five hundred dollars) with a non-M$ OS preinstalled with M$ adding a total financial burden of 0 dollars to the cost, is the day you see M$ actually have to compete.
end rant code block*/
Hear is a relevent definition, see one of many mobster movies for useage.
rack'et, n.[probably echoic.]
3. (a) an obtaining of money illegally, as by bootlegging, fraud, or, especially, threats of violence;(b) any dishonest scheme or practice;
Anybody check out gnome 99.7 offical release? It kicks ass! I have been following it since the I first heard the rumors at the Red Hat Labs, and I could have only imagined how good it could get. It is well on it's way to eliminating the need for the command line for a new user working on a preconfigured box!
If I was asked if Red Hat would win the infoworld OS of the year this year I couldn't tell you, but I can tell you they will win for 99!
I don't understand why people bash Red Hat so bad.
Deep Thoughts(TM)...
Here is somthing to think about. What do you think Linus or RMS would say if you wtote them an email saying Alan Cox is a liability and should be locked out of the kernel project because he works for Red Hat. (Hint: They have ripped into people for far less.)
I agree with you. Letting the government fool with the inner workings of M$ is a bad idea. Ideally the DOJ case would drag on for a very long time, never resulting in a verdict. A long string of convictions and resulting appeals would allow the smaller players in the industry to compete without the threat of being squashed. Then the market could rise to the occation of creating supperior software to run many circles around M$es junky 9x kernel. We already see the market creating better software, with better long term viability.
Any situation dependant, government created, compition will not create a big enough window for other OSes to break through M$es iron curtain around the OEM's. If the DOJ wins the market will not be ready and OSS will be accused of having success that depends solely on govenment intervention.
I hope Judge Jackson's gaval does not squash the good reputation of OSS forever.
Directions to eventually demolish M$es unfair atvantages
step 1. Try 'em.
step 2. Convict 'em.
step 3. let 'em appeal.
step 4. let 'em win the appeal.
step 5. repeat steps.
If the government convicts, and all appeals are exausted, they should release all OS code under the WINE licence. May it never get to that step!
I saw a great deal of legitimate gripes with this article. One thing that was not mentioned yet was the growth of the internet's partial responsibility for the OSS revolution. I have to wonder if that was a stratigic omition. The net definatly makes it much more feasible for developers to spontainiously coordinate with little to no overhead. That flexibility of the internet, renders figures that do not weigh the recent popularity of ipv4 in fair proportion, slanted and antique in nature.
... yes. Yes, yes, a bit, a bit. She has got a wart.
With the solid statistics just mentioned backing it up, I knew I knew the material in this article had originated from somewhere else. After a little searching I turned up a group who had done similar research and turned up similar results.
That group's transcript...
Did you dress her up like this?
No, no... no
She Turned me into a newt.
A Newt?
I got better
what do you do with witches?
Burn! Burn, burn them up!
And what do you burn apart from witches?
More witches! Wood! So, why do witches burn? [pause]
B--... 'cause they're made of wood...?
Good!
We have found a witch, may we burn her?
What also floats in water?
Bread!
Apples!
Uh, very small rocks!
I'm not a witch, I'm not a witch!!
They dressed me up like this.
No we didn't!
No! No!
And this isn't my nose, it's a false one!
So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
Build a bridge out of her!!
A duck! Exactly! So, logically... If she weighs the same as a duck, she's made of wood? And therefore?
A witch! A witch! A witch! A witch!
Right, remove the supports!
[whop] [creak]
A witch! A witch!
It's a fair cop.
Burn her! Burn her!
Since Garcia died I'm sure it won't be that great, but their name will likely propel this news into the mainstream!
This might change the minds of a few that think the RIAA is right to create a non-existant need, and prop up a dying industry, after all how can you think of thge Dead as the evil bad guy.
"Every change to Linux results in more and more problems. Its why real operating systems change very infrequently."
An articulate observation! That's why everyone should use MS-DOS 3.2. Without those annoying upgrades like multitasking, security fixes, and support for cdroms or hard drives bigger than 500 meg. It's so simple what could go wrong?
Aside from your grasping for straws (NT unchanged?), do you do have a good point. Support isn't going to be what drives the money in the relm of open source and GPLed software. It will be hardware manufacturers advertising a better option and writing drivers so the platform independant APIs/kernel can make their superior hardware run circles around the the status quo.
"1999 will be the year when IBM, Dell, Compaq and others expose this schit and we can get back to stability."
Who knows about Dell, they will likely play both sides off the middle until a winner becomes clear.
IBM wants to see M$ gone so they can take over and are our friends(at least in the short term), and Compaq is one of those companies with the superior hardware (Alpha) who can use the intrapolarity of Linux as a long term viability argument.
That ends our lesson on how to give both sides of an argument so you don't sound like a crazy fanatic. Incidentally do you stand to lose a job or stock value if M$ market share goes down?
He he sniff.. I kinda figured.. but some times you just can't be sure,
he he..MS propiganda looks about as rational as that to me... all that static blurs the line. I guess there is still hope for me, I did find it really funny.
*giggle*
(keeping your threshhold at -2 does weird things to your brain!)
Ha HA heeee he ha ha ha lol rotf ha he he ha ha he he gpl software ha he he breath gasp he he he monopoly?.. heh HA HA HA he he crazy
*gasp* See earlier post "MS Employees making Fake posts in Forums?" He he HA CAN'T be serious.. He he ha ha lol..
He ha ha ha Dictator Bob Young? he he ha ha rotf he he he...
Hmmm I wish I could be sure if there is any supplemental-to-the-api action going on. (Anyone who worked on BFRIS reading this?) If not I might get some benifit from that smp mesa being worked on (I've got a dual). My last post was because I got the libc5 error and thought it was due to a failed 3dfx directive at the time.
Hey if smp mesa provides a signifigant speedup, maybe I can use it on quake as well. Then I could shout about undisputable video game improvment by switching to Linux.
Check my back posts for some examples.
I imagine most M$ers don't do this, but it only takes one or two full time anonymous propiganda artists to really disrupt an otherwise sane online forum.
If you work at MS and don't belive there are any such people doing this, think about this... why would Bill G, or the the people who lie like that tell you?
Doh! That sucks. I have a machine capible of smooth svgalib quake2 at 800x600 but no 3dfx card... Am I missing somthing? Can I run it through mesa using raw processor power or is it based strictly on the 3dfx/voodoo directives?
I was looking forward to giving these guys my money too.
I thought this quote was particularly interesting.
"I haven't heard anything on this [Windows 2000 Personal Edition] specifically. But you've got to wonder: How much Plug and Play and PCMCIA support can they get into NT? And the games compatibility issue could be huge [between the 9x and NT kernels]," said one Windows developer.
It seems they need to stop and think carefully in Redmond. It is not obvious, to at least the quoted Microsoft developer, and possibly to most Microsofians, that bloat will only burn them. If they limit what is in the NT kernel by default and allow users, or the system (or either) to load drivers as they need them, the drivers NT supports could be infinate, while not being impossiblly complex, huge, or slow.
Microsoft promised the world NT 5.0/Windows 2000 would be the solution. What will all those IT guys who staked the future of their networks on Windows 2000 do? Do you think this means MS is putting up the white flag in the war for control of the network OS? Alot can happen in three years.
YEEEEEHHHAAAAAAAAA....
Now we can add 2.2 party to the agenda next month at Long Island Linux Users Group.
OK, alot of people seem to disagree with the idea of having serial numbers on their chips. Running open source software myself, I am not to intimidated by this. I can understand how someone who has to use a closed source OS or application dosn't like this idea.
If Intel is really serious about this and wanted to get our support and do the right thing they would use all those lobbiests that we all know they have in Washington and get a bill passed. This law should force any program that uses hardware serial numbers to include compilable source code. It should make any other method of serial number access illegal. Then we can choose, without decption and abuse, what level of authentication to run programs encription etc, is acceptable. Accept no less.
Lets see if they care as much about their customers rights as much as they care about the damage overclocking does to their reputation.
Being the president of one LUG and active in the other I am really glad to hear about the price change. I think this should cause the Bazaars attendance to grow signifigantly.
12 hundred dollars is the kind of money your company pays only if your entire network is pure linux already.
175 dollars is the type of money you can pay out of your pocket for three days of confrence. You won't get just professionals paying for speakers but curious onlookers too.
I don't remember meeting one person that didn't go to at least one talk at the Linux Expo last year. People will be willing to travel to NY to hear people speak, but not for just a booth tour.
I can't afford to pay $960US. As a student I can scrounge together 100 bucks. I'll see you there!
I can tell you that many of the assorted lug members will be there for those prices!(And probably more.)
Actually air traffic control systems at various locations including NY have reported problems. Some timetables put the fixes after 2000.
My favorite was the prize. Maybe self heating meals will make them think twice.
"May you live in interesting times"
A chinese curse
-mp3's
-check you email/internet
-voice over modem/cellphone
-gps/streets data
-engine info/running stats/runtime tunning(saw someone working on universal car computer interface for Gnome.)
-And best of all... pong for rush hour!
I can't wait to pick up the first Auto distro.
Two questions.
*Is their a driver for a GPS unit/card for linux?(does such a thing exist?)
*Will someone come out with a machine with at least 2 gigs of hd space. That fits in my radio slot. That will run a slightly striped down linux fast enough for the above mentioned things. For about 500 bucks.
Then again maybe I'm just a sucker for any car with a script configurable, turbo boost button. ;-)