Ever heard of the microkernel design? Whereas Linux is a monolithic vintage Unix design, HURD has much more potential in the long run. Better stability, modular easy-to-modify structure and so on.
Yeah, if they ever manage to get the damn thing out the door! They have been working on it for... what? 12 years? Ironically, "monolithic" is a good word to describe the speed of HURD's developement.
Furthermore, HURD is a truly pure Free Software operating system. Linux has become tainted by the use of non-free tools like BitKeeper and closed source binary 3rd party drivers. That is not Free Software.
BS! Linux in 100% pure, GPL-licensed software! Of course there are some drivers that are not open, but that does not make Linux "un-free". Linux is and will always be free. Of course, third-party companies have the right to write closed-source drivers for it (assuming they comply with GPL, and NVIDIA and others do) and you nor anyone else has the right to demand that they open their drivers.
Re:Kde3 better than OSX? What are you smoking?
on
Fresco M1 Released
·
· Score: 2
The future is stuff like EVAS and Longhorn
Rasterman has totally given up on Linux on the desktop, read the interview
Rasterman believes Linux on the desktop is dead simply because Rasterman doesn't work on the desktop anymore. He does belive that linux will rule the embedded market, and it just happens that he works on the embedded stuff these days. It seems to me that the things where Linux will rule according to Rasterman is the stuff Rasterman works on. The things he doesn't work on are doomed to fail.
She used Pine over Telnet in her university and learned to like it. One day I was putting together a new home-computer for her family (Windows, Outlook Express, the basic stuff). As I was configuring Outlook for her she commented "Outlook... blah! I hate it! Give me my Pine and Telnet back!". I asked her that is she serious, and she was!
At that moment, I came really close of asking her to marry me.
Can someone PLEASE explain to me what the deal is with 'smartphones'?
I have a nokia 5160, and I can place calls with it. I can receive calls with it. I can receive text messages too. Shit, I can play nibbles on the damn thing! WHY would I want more than that on a phone?
For some reason that reminds me of some things I have heard in the past:
"I get newspapers, why should I read news on the Internet?"
"Why send an e-mail when I could send a real letter?"
"I have regural phone, I don't need a cell-phone"
Nobody is forcing you to buy smartphones. You could use your 5160 for years to come. But I bet that in 10 years you will be wondering "How on earth did we manage with those phones 10 years ago?!". Every single time when some new technology emerges, there are some luddites arguing "Bah! We don't need that! We have xxxxxxxx that does the same thing already!". And in few years time that new technology has entrenched itself and everyone is using it.
You say that we don't need cell-phones for email, since we can use laptops or PDA's for that. Convince me: why should I carry big and heavy laptop with me just to check email, if I could do it with a 80gram device that fits in my pocket? Why should I carry a PDA for that matter, if I could use just one device instead?
That game was a close relative to Dragons Lair. except it was sci-fi, not fantasy. And there was spaceships, not horses and dragons. And they had lasers instead of swords...
Uh...what about Frodo and Bilbo and Gandalf departing from the Grey Havens?
Ummmm... What does that have to do with saving the shire? They can have Grey Havens just fine without fighting in the Shire.
The reason why Shire-thingy is out is pretty simple: movies must have a climax. There's the big finale, and then the movie winds down. In LoTR, that finale is the destruction of the ring. If we had the rape of Shire in the movie, it would diminish the destruction of the ring as THE event of the movie. It works in the book, but it wouldn't work in the movie.
"That ends with them throwing the ring in the volcano, right?" Well, it doesn't end there. They go home and some thugs have taken over the Shire and...I mean, yeah, that's how it ends.
Actually, that's exactly how it ends. There is no retaking of the Shire in the movie. Saruman dies in The Two Towers
Sharp's other new model is the SL-C300, previewed recently at CEATAC. The C300 has the same internal hardware and software as the SL-5600, but is slightly larger in each direction The device opens width-wise to reveal a landscape-mode full-VGA 640x480 color display, the same size as the display on the SL-5600, and a mini-sized QWERTY keyboard. The keyboard has larger, finger-friendly keys and separate numeric and alphabetic keys, as wel as traditional directional buttons. It has a smaller, 950 ma battery, as Sharp expects it to be used more as a laptop alternative than a handheld. Unfortunately,
the C300 is not slated for release outside of Japan.
I want C300! Hell, I would love to get the regural Zaurus, but they are not available here (Finland):(!
HURD is a microkernel right? Then what is Mach microkernel? People say that HURD uses the Mach Mircokernel, but isn't HURD kernel in itself? What is the relation between HURD and Mach (and the other microkernels out there)?
This IS a big defeat for MS! Sendo was the only cell-phone manufacturer that was dedicated to their platform. Samsung has also licensed it, but they have been focusing on Symbian and Series 60 lately. Sendo was 100% MS. Sendo was the company that was supposed to bring MS in to cell-phone business.
Macs generally shine in Photoshop (and it just happens that Photoshop is just about the only benchmark Apple uses when they compare PC's to Macs), but they usually lose in other benchmarks. Clock-for-clock Macs are faster than PC's. But that doesn't help when PC's have double the raw MHz than Macs do.
"In a project that's open in its true form, where people from all over the world work on the same project without restrictions, there isn't 1 king with more than 1 agenda.
However, in this case, there is: Linus. I fully agree that you can't include every patch supplied by every developer out there, but his trackrecord clearly shows that he refuses patches for other reasons than crappy coding. (read: political reasons)."
This IS Open Source. open SOurce does NOT mean that coders must accept all the code that they get offered. Do you have any idea what it would be like is GNOME, KDE, the Kernel etc. etc. had to accept all the code some l33t h4x0r gave them? It would be a disaster!
This is Linus'es tree. He get's to decide what goes in and what doesn't. But, because this is open source, others can make a copy of his tree and add whatever they want in to it. But they have exactly ZERO power to force their code in to Linus'es tree!
This really is no different from ReiserFS. It was used by SuSE and other for a long time in their kernels before it became part of Linus'es tree. Same thing will happen with LKCD. Vendors will make it part of their kernels, and it will be merged (propably) in 2.7-tree.
You want LKCD? Download the latest Linus kernel (2.5.46?) and apply the patch. Problem solved.
Why shouldn't they put Bil the Pony there? Bil doesn't distract from the main story (Bombadil would), Bil doesn't increase the length of the movie (something Bombadil would). Honestly, there are no drawbacks in having Bil there, there would be plenty of drawbacks of having Tom there.
If something doesn't add to the story doesn't automatically mean that it shouldn't be there. But if that "something" doesn't add a thing to the story, but it also requires alot of screen-time, would look stupid, would confuse the viewers... Then it has to go. Bil the Pony doesn't take screen-time, doesn't look stupid nor does it confuse the viewers, so it can stay.
What's wrong with PJ's LOTR? I think these are the main thing people complain about:
1. It's too fast! They left out too much stuff!
You need to keep one thing in mind: this movie is not a "book moved to the silver-screen". It's a movie adaptation of a book. Movies and books are completely different kinds of media. Movies are a visual media that can be only few hours long. Books rely on the imagination of the reader, and they can be of any length. You can spend, days, weeks, months reading a book. And because of that, the book can be full of characters and details. That's just not possible in a movie. Movie of a book WILL be different, that is a fact. They will be different for the simple reason that books and movies are completely different medias.
2. Where's Tom Bombadil?
Tom Bombadil had nothing to do with the story. He would have just made the movie longer (20 minutes?), and the movie was already as long as it could be. What would they then remove from the story in order to fit in a Bombadil-sidetrack? And I don't know about you, but Tom Bombadil would have looked stupid in the movie
3. What's the deal with Arwen/Glorfindel?
Glorfindel had no major role in the book. You could remove him, and it would not change the story one bit. Arwens character needed to be widened, so that viewers would have at least one female character. And besides, had they handled Arwen like they did in the books, they would have mentioned Arwen in one half-sentence, and then, in the third part, Aragorn suddenly marries her! Viewers would have been too confused.
4. But the movie ends differently than the book does!
Yes it does. For the simple reason that the books ending would not work in a movie. Movie needs a climax in the end. In the book, there was no real climax. It was spread between the end of first book and the beginning of the second. That would not work in a movie.
5. But they changes Saruman as well!
Read my first point. Saruman was a complex character. They needed to simplify him for the movie. a few hours long movie simply doesn't have the luxury a book does when it comes to complex characters.
Seriously: you seem like one of those fanatics who think that "any change to the book = bad!". They needed to make changes to the book in order to make a movie out of it. Had they not made any changes, each episode would be about 20 hours long, cost about one billion each and be a commercial flop.
And before GCC 3.2 they said "KDE3 will be in Unstable after we release Xfree4.2. Should be really soon now". FYI: they said that MONTHS ago! Now they have Xfree 4.2, but no KDE. I wonder what excuse they'll think of after they switch to GCC 3.2...
Well, I have already decided to vote with my feet. Gentoo, here I come!
1. The resolutions. CRT's have better resolutions and you can freely change resolutions. LCD's are limited when it comes to max-resolutions (the ones that can do 1600x1200 cost too much) and the image-quality deteriorates if you use a "non-native" resolution
2. Response time. It's just too high on LCD's. Luckily this is getting better all the time.
3. The price. They cost quite a bit more than CRT's.
When those three points are fixed, I might consider it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, if they ever manage to get the damn thing out the door! They have been working on it for... what? 12 years? Ironically, "monolithic" is a good word to describe the speed of HURD's developement.
BS! Linux in 100% pure, GPL-licensed software! Of course there are some drivers that are not open, but that does not make Linux "un-free". Linux is and will always be free. Of course, third-party companies have the right to write closed-source drivers for it (assuming they comply with GPL, and NVIDIA and others do) and you nor anyone else has the right to demand that they open their drivers.
Rasterman believes Linux on the desktop is dead simply because Rasterman doesn't work on the desktop anymore. He does belive that linux will rule the embedded market, and it just happens that he works on the embedded stuff these days. It seems to me that the things where Linux will rule according to Rasterman is the stuff Rasterman works on. The things he doesn't work on are doomed to fail.
I have this very same trailer on my computer. Have had it for a long time now. Slashdot is only about 1.5 months late with this one ;)
She used Pine over Telnet in her university and learned to like it. One day I was putting together a new home-computer for her family (Windows, Outlook Express, the basic stuff). As I was configuring Outlook for her she commented "Outlook... blah! I hate it! Give me my Pine and Telnet back!". I asked her that is she serious, and she was!
At that moment, I came really close of asking her to marry me.
For some reason that reminds me of some things I have heard in the past:
"I get newspapers, why should I read news on the Internet?"
"Why send an e-mail when I could send a real letter?"
"I have regural phone, I don't need a cell-phone"
Nobody is forcing you to buy smartphones. You could use your 5160 for years to come. But I bet that in 10 years you will be wondering "How on earth did we manage with those phones 10 years ago?!". Every single time when some new technology emerges, there are some luddites arguing "Bah! We don't need that! We have xxxxxxxx that does the same thing already!". And in few years time that new technology has entrenched itself and everyone is using it.
You say that we don't need cell-phones for email, since we can use laptops or PDA's for that. Convince me: why should I carry big and heavy laptop with me just to check email, if I could do it with a 80gram device that fits in my pocket? Why should I carry a PDA for that matter, if I could use just one device instead?
http://www.solarphysics.kva.se/NatureNov2002/image s/AR10030_4877_color.jpeg
I know that. I did say "they are close relatives"
That game was a close relative to Dragons Lair. except it was sci-fi, not fantasy. And there was spaceships, not horses and dragons. And they had lasers instead of swords...
Ummmm... What does that have to do with saving the shire? They can have Grey Havens just fine without fighting in the Shire.
The reason why Shire-thingy is out is pretty simple: movies must have a climax. There's the big finale, and then the movie winds down. In LoTR, that finale is the destruction of the ring. If we had the rape of Shire in the movie, it would diminish the destruction of the ring as THE event of the movie. It works in the book, but it wouldn't work in the movie.
Actually, that's exactly how it ends. There is no retaking of the Shire in the movie. Saruman dies in The Two Towers
I want C300! Hell, I would love to get the regural Zaurus, but they are not available here (Finland)
They have a survey with one question being "What music format would you like Neuros to support besides mp3?". One choice is Ogg Vorbis.
They mentioned in the end of the Robert Love's presentation that the slides are available online. What's the URL, I missed it.
HURD is a microkernel right? Then what is Mach microkernel? People say that HURD uses the Mach Mircokernel, but isn't HURD kernel in itself? What is the relation between HURD and Mach (and the other microkernels out there)?
This IS a big defeat for MS! Sendo was the only cell-phone manufacturer that was dedicated to their platform. Samsung has also licensed it, but they have been focusing on Symbian and Series 60 lately. Sendo was 100% MS. Sendo was the company that was supposed to bring MS in to cell-phone business.
Macs generally shine in Photoshop (and it just happens that Photoshop is just about the only benchmark Apple uses when they compare PC's to Macs), but they usually lose in other benchmarks. Clock-for-clock Macs are faster than PC's. But that doesn't help when PC's have double the raw MHz than Macs do.
nt
"In a project that's open in its true form, where people from all over the world work on the same project without restrictions, there isn't 1 king with more than 1 agenda.
However, in this case, there is: Linus. I fully agree that you can't include every patch supplied by every developer out there, but his trackrecord clearly shows that he refuses patches for other reasons than crappy coding. (read: political reasons)."
This IS Open Source. open SOurce does NOT mean that coders must accept all the code that they get offered. Do you have any idea what it would be like is GNOME, KDE, the Kernel etc. etc. had to accept all the code some l33t h4x0r gave them? It would be a disaster!
This is Linus'es tree. He get's to decide what goes in and what doesn't. But, because this is open source, others can make a copy of his tree and add whatever they want in to it. But they have exactly ZERO power to force their code in to Linus'es tree!
This really is no different from ReiserFS. It was used by SuSE and other for a long time in their kernels before it became part of Linus'es tree. Same thing will happen with LKCD. Vendors will make it part of their kernels, and it will be merged (propably) in 2.7-tree.
You want LKCD? Download the latest Linus kernel (2.5.46?) and apply the patch. Problem solved.
"To accept this much larger conspiracy theory in the place of evidence to support the original, much more limited conspiracy theory would be lunacy."
:)
I believe the correct word is "lunarcy"
"The EU also has a long history of setting ridiculous tariffs"
You mean something like steel tariffs?
Why shouldn't they put Bil the Pony there? Bil doesn't distract from the main story (Bombadil would), Bil doesn't increase the length of the movie (something Bombadil would). Honestly, there are no drawbacks in having Bil there, there would be plenty of drawbacks of having Tom there.
If something doesn't add to the story doesn't automatically mean that it shouldn't be there. But if that "something" doesn't add a thing to the story, but it also requires alot of screen-time, would look stupid, would confuse the viewers... Then it has to go. Bil the Pony doesn't take screen-time, doesn't look stupid nor does it confuse the viewers, so it can stay.
What's wrong with PJ's LOTR? I think these are the main thing people complain about:
1. It's too fast! They left out too much stuff!
You need to keep one thing in mind: this movie is not a "book moved to the silver-screen". It's a movie adaptation of a book. Movies and books are completely different kinds of media. Movies are a visual media that can be only few hours long. Books rely on the imagination of the reader, and they can be of any length. You can spend, days, weeks, months reading a book. And because of that, the book can be full of characters and details. That's just not possible in a movie. Movie of a book WILL be different, that is a fact. They will be different for the simple reason that books and movies are completely different medias.
2. Where's Tom Bombadil?
Tom Bombadil had nothing to do with the story. He would have just made the movie longer (20 minutes?), and the movie was already as long as it could be. What would they then remove from the story in order to fit in a Bombadil-sidetrack? And I don't know about you, but Tom Bombadil would have looked stupid in the movie
3. What's the deal with Arwen/Glorfindel?
Glorfindel had no major role in the book. You could remove him, and it would not change the story one bit. Arwens character needed to be widened, so that viewers would have at least one female character. And besides, had they handled Arwen like they did in the books, they would have mentioned Arwen in one half-sentence, and then, in the third part, Aragorn suddenly marries her! Viewers would have been too confused.
4. But the movie ends differently than the book does!
Yes it does. For the simple reason that the books ending would not work in a movie. Movie needs a climax in the end. In the book, there was no real climax. It was spread between the end of first book and the beginning of the second. That would not work in a movie.
5. But they changes Saruman as well!
Read my first point. Saruman was a complex character. They needed to simplify him for the movie. a few hours long movie simply doesn't have the luxury a book does when it comes to complex characters.
Seriously: you seem like one of those fanatics who think that "any change to the book = bad!". They needed to make changes to the book in order to make a movie out of it. Had they not made any changes, each episode would be about 20 hours long, cost about one billion each and be a commercial flop.
"When gcc 3.2 becomes the default."
And before GCC 3.2 they said "KDE3 will be in Unstable after we release Xfree4.2. Should be really soon now". FYI: they said that MONTHS ago! Now they have Xfree 4.2, but no KDE. I wonder what excuse they'll think of after they switch to GCC 3.2...
Well, I have already decided to vote with my feet. Gentoo, here I come!
"Porting or developing their own projects -- JFS is an often pointed to as an example"
Also EVMS (Enterprise Volume Management System).
...When they fix these problems:
1. The resolutions. CRT's have better resolutions and you can freely change resolutions. LCD's are limited when it comes to max-resolutions (the ones that can do 1600x1200 cost too much) and the image-quality deteriorates if you use a "non-native" resolution
2. Response time. It's just too high on LCD's. Luckily this is getting better all the time.
3. The price. They cost quite a bit more than CRT's.
When those three points are fixed, I might consider it.