QNX thrives in a single environment where it's strengths are important and it's weaknesses can be ignored - embedded systems
Linux is the opposite: it thrives just about everywhere: embedded systems, desktops, servers, high performance computing, ha clusters, etc. etc.
Yes, I realize that QNX _could_ do all the things I listed for Linux. But it's weaknesses (pretty much in line with Linus' points) have kept it from wide use outside of it's niche.
And as for crashing...my Linux systems only go down when the power does.
Tanenbaum as always makes a good conceptual case for his perspective, but as time has gone by his examples increasingly prove Linus' point.
Except for QNX the software he cites are either vaporware (Coyotos, HURD), esoteric research toys (L4Linux, Singularity), or brutally violate the microkernel concept (MacOSX, Symbian).
Even his best example, QNX is a very niche product and hard to compare to something like Linux.
IMO the open-source ATI drivers are excellent. As long as you don't need to play doom3 or UT2004 ATI is a fine choice.
If you do want to play such GL games, NVIDIA is the _only_ choice - the closed source Linux drivers are pretty much as good as the Windows drivers. The equivalent closed source ATI drivers are horrible - slow and buggy.
Comcast here has three tiers of service: analog (base $), SD digital (base + $), and HD digital (digital + $). So if you don't have a HDTV you can still get SD digital (which looks better than analog). All together I think it's about $50/mo.
Discovery HD does look great, but they also have this INHD channel and the content there (Japanese nature films, movie trailers, and other inexpensive material) is amazing.
Nonsense - you just need a better service provider. Comcast in the Wash DC area has around (too lazy to count) 20 channels of true (1080i or 720p depending on the channel) HD available, including HD versions of all the premium channels. On the HD versions of the regular channels (ABC/NBC/CBS/ESPN/etc.), most of the primetime and sports programming is in HD.
Me too. Outlook 2003 was the single most important thing I was waiting for in this release! I'll buy 5.0 to help support the work, but I am very disappointed.
That would be unbelievably stupid. Gnome is in the middle of culture wars over trying to move into this century's technology - either Java or C#/mono, because most on the project realize how high the costs of sticking with C are.
I do lots of number crunching, and don't find much of a difference (~2%) in my codebase between icc/gcc/mscc these days. ICC is great for code that hasn't been carefully written, but once you do the optimization stuff by hand the other compilers do fine. YMMV of course.
However, I haven't found anything to equal IPP (Intel Performance Primitives) for AMD...it offers a _huge_ value.
Mono and Java are running different races (client vs. server side), and both of the races are over.
Sun wrote off Java on the client and focused it as an enterprise server technology (which it is great at), which is why they've never done anything useful about the sucky AWT/Swing stuff.
Mono on the other hand seems mostly focused on the client side. While the technology really rocks, the taint of Microsoft licensing/patent fees will always make it problematic for many.
It's too bad but if Sun had open sourced Java and gotten on the SWT bandwagon it would have provided some competition and maybe kept Mono from getting momentum.
In the "driver deal", SCO gave Sun options to buy a bunch of SCO stock at $1.83 per share. This was shortly before SCO's big linux license FUD PR campaign started, and the stock went over $20/share shortly thereafter. Combine that with McNealy gloating about having the only legal version of linux right after the "driver deal" and there's a lot more here than a conspiracy theory.
I was a Red Hat guy back to 3.0 - I switched dozens of machines to SuSE around RH 9.
Switching was easier than I expected, and once done I was surprised at how much more polished and advanced SuSE is. Red Hat has absolutely nothing to compare to YaST, which totally rocks. Also, SuSE adds polish to KDE which I appreciate since it gets second class treatment at Red Hat.
I've tried to install the FC releases at home, just to see, but FC2 & FC3 wouldn't install on my AMD 64 system (SuSE >9 works no problem). Unless FC gets something like YaST and handles hardware as well as SuSE, I wouldn't consider a return.
It works for the very basic checkout - commit cycle. It's integrated with eclipse refactoring, although we had one mysterious problem that could have been either subclipse or user error.
Beyond those simple operations, I think there are lots of missing features.
About two years ago, I switched a large project from CVS (three years of revision history) to Subversion.
We were able to migrate it all easily. We have developers using both WinXP and Linux. The Eclipse client was kind of broken at first, but recent versions have been acceptable. I've been able to forget all the workarounds and weird issues that caused us headaches with CVS.
Overall a very good experience - I would say Subversion doesn't add anything groundbreaking to revision control, but rather is CVS done really really well.
Automagical only if it can make the identification; there are several things that can prevent it from doing so, and I managed to do several of them. VTune helps a lot with code like this - I've spent many happy hours tracking down hotspots with it.
It is built in but you don't automagically get full benefit unless you design your data structures and algorithms appropriately. In my case, I got no measurable benefit until I did a fairly extensive redesign.
Intel has a great book on performance tuning that has been extremely helpful, as has Intel's VTune.
When I was researching what HDTV to buy last year I watched my favorite movies on lots of different setups and (IMHO) for movies like Blade Runner with lots of dark settings LCDs just don't cut it at all.
So for me, it wasn't bang for the buck, it was just a better viewing choice for what I like to watch. Of course it weighs a ton and is on the small side, but...
And his lame attempt at propaganda is yet another example of why Sun is making a well-deserved dive into the dustbin of history.
Changes to the _Linus_ kernel are made exclusively by Linus. SuSE, RedHat, Andrew Morton, and many others all make their own decisions and *distribute* kernels that meet their goals. No one but Sun can do the same thing with the faux-open Sun JCP.
>
A bazaar doesn't require proposals and ratifications and approvals.
They've lost gamer sales because the AMD 64 processors are a much better value for gaming than Prescott spaceheaters. The mainboard chipset is a pretty marginal contributor to framerates.
Slashdot Mirror
QNX thrives in a single environment where it's strengths are important and it's weaknesses can be ignored - embedded systems
Linux is the opposite: it thrives just about everywhere: embedded systems, desktops, servers, high performance computing, ha clusters, etc. etc.
Yes, I realize that QNX _could_ do all the things I listed for Linux. But it's weaknesses (pretty much in line with Linus' points) have kept it from wide use outside of it's niche.
And as for crashing...my Linux systems only go down when the power does.
Tanenbaum as always makes a good conceptual case for his perspective, but as time has gone by his examples increasingly prove Linus' point.
Except for QNX the software he cites are either vaporware (Coyotos, HURD), esoteric research toys (L4Linux, Singularity), or brutally violate the microkernel concept (MacOSX, Symbian).
Even his best example, QNX is a very niche product and hard to compare to something like Linux.
IMO the open-source ATI drivers are excellent. As long as you don't need to play doom3 or UT2004 ATI is a fine choice.
If you do want to play such GL games, NVIDIA is the _only_ choice - the closed source Linux drivers are pretty much as good as the Windows drivers. The equivalent closed source ATI drivers are horrible - slow and buggy.
Comcast here has three tiers of service: analog (base $), SD digital (base + $), and HD digital (digital + $). So if you don't have a HDTV you can still get SD digital (which looks better than analog). All together I think it's about $50/mo.
Discovery HD does look great, but they also have this INHD channel and the content there (Japanese nature films, movie trailers, and other inexpensive material) is amazing.
Nonsense - you just need a better service provider. Comcast in the Wash DC area has around (too lazy to count) 20 channels of true (1080i or 720p depending on the channel) HD available, including HD versions of all the premium channels. On the HD versions of the regular channels (ABC/NBC/CBS/ESPN/etc.), most of the primetime and sports programming is in HD.
Me too. Outlook 2003 was the single most important thing I was waiting for in this release! I'll buy 5.0 to help support the work, but I am very disappointed.
SCO has no patents. It's a simple stock scam.
Patrick Ross == VP The Progress & Freedom Foundation == www.pff.org
http://www.pff.org/about/supporters.html
Why isn't CNET disclosing that this was a paid opinion piece funded by (among others):
Business Software Alliance
Disney
MGM
Microsoft
NBC Universal
Sony Music Entertainment Inc.
Time Warner
Vivendi
That would be unbelievably stupid. Gnome is in the middle of culture wars over trying to move into this century's technology - either Java or C#/mono, because most on the project realize how high the costs of sticking with C are.
This is another G2 news outlet. If you don't want to put money in MOG's pocket avoid this site.
I do lots of number crunching, and don't find much of a difference (~2%) in my codebase between icc/gcc/mscc these days. ICC is great for code that hasn't been carefully written, but once you do the optimization stuff by hand the other compilers do fine. YMMV of course.
However, I haven't found anything to equal IPP (Intel Performance Primitives) for AMD...it offers a _huge_ value.
Saying that it is faster than Swing for client side applications shows how clueless you are on the matter
Your reading skills could use some work. Where did I mention SWT or Swing speed? On my machine they're both blindingly fast.
I do agree about the pain of coding SWT. But the fact that I can write an app in SWT and not have it look & feel like cr4p makes it worth it.
The rest of your comments just tell me you need to put the crack pipe down.
Mono and Java are running different races (client vs. server side), and both of the races are over.
Sun wrote off Java on the client and focused it as an enterprise server technology (which it is great at), which is why they've never done anything useful about the sucky AWT/Swing stuff.
Mono on the other hand seems mostly focused on the client side. While the technology really rocks, the taint of Microsoft licensing/patent fees will always make it problematic for many.
It's too bad but if Sun had open sourced Java and gotten on the SWT bandwagon it would have provided some competition and maybe kept Mono from getting momentum.
...because now I have a nice neat list of vendors to never, ever consider buying anything from ever again.
In the "driver deal", SCO gave Sun options to buy a bunch of SCO stock at $1.83 per share. This was shortly before SCO's big linux license FUD PR campaign started, and the stock went over $20/share shortly thereafter. Combine that with McNealy gloating about having the only legal version of linux right after the "driver deal" and there's a lot more here than a conspiracy theory.
I was a Red Hat guy back to 3.0 - I switched dozens of machines to SuSE around RH 9.
Switching was easier than I expected, and once done I was surprised at how much more polished and advanced SuSE is. Red Hat has absolutely nothing to compare to YaST, which totally rocks. Also, SuSE adds polish to KDE which I appreciate since it gets second class treatment at Red Hat.
I've tried to install the FC releases at home, just to see, but FC2 & FC3 wouldn't install on my AMD 64 system (SuSE >9 works no problem). Unless FC gets something like YaST and handles hardware as well as SuSE, I wouldn't consider a return.
It works for the very basic checkout - commit cycle. It's integrated with eclipse refactoring, although we had one mysterious problem that could have been either subclipse or user error.
Beyond those simple operations, I think there are lots of missing features.
About two years ago, I switched a large project from CVS (three years of revision history) to Subversion.
We were able to migrate it all easily. We have developers using both WinXP and Linux. The Eclipse client was kind of broken at first, but recent versions have been acceptable. I've been able to forget all the workarounds and weird issues that caused us headaches with CVS.
Overall a very good experience - I would say Subversion doesn't add anything groundbreaking to revision control, but rather is CVS done really really well.
Automagical only if it can make the identification; there are several things that can prevent it from doing so, and I managed to do several of them. VTune helps a lot with code like this - I've spent many happy hours tracking down hotspots with it.
It is built in but you don't automagically get full benefit unless you design your data structures and algorithms appropriately. In my case, I got no measurable benefit until I did a fairly extensive redesign.
Intel has a great book on performance tuning that has been extremely helpful, as has Intel's VTune.
Do you want it punished as a stupid but annoying practical joke or as the attempted murder of hundreds of people?
I think the guy should be fried just to deter other clowns from putting it on their "Stupid People Tricks" audition tape.
When I was researching what HDTV to buy last year I watched my favorite movies on lots of different setups and (IMHO) for movies like Blade Runner with lots of dark settings LCDs just don't cut it at all.
So for me, it wasn't bang for the buck, it was just a better viewing choice for what I like to watch. Of course it weighs a ton and is on the small side, but...
>
And his lame attempt at propaganda is yet another example of why Sun is making a well-deserved dive into the dustbin of history.
Changes to the _Linus_ kernel are made exclusively by Linus. SuSE, RedHat, Andrew Morton, and many others all make their own decisions and *distribute* kernels that meet their goals. No one but Sun can do the same thing with the faux-open Sun JCP.
>
A bazaar doesn't require proposals and ratifications and approvals.
>>
They've lost gamer sales because the AMD 64 processors are a much better value for gaming than Prescott spaceheaters. The mainboard chipset is a pretty marginal contributor to framerates.