I am simply a Linux user who would like to know the advantages of using FreeBSD over Linux. I can think of one advantage: having a uniform system that is the same for everybody! I mean, there is only one FreeBSD distribution, right? Are there any technical reasons for using FreeBSD over Linux?
Thanks!
I agree. ATA drives by Seagate suck. I bought one thinking that it would be a reliable drive. I put all of my important stuff on it...every document I ever wrote in the last 5 years. At the time, I didn't have a backup mechanism because I was a poor college student. The drive crashed in 6 months. Meanwhile, my trusty Samsung has been spinning away for 5 years now. I realize there are always exceptions...but come on! I paid good money for that drive and I lost everything.
I agree with your statements. I do believe that applications should definitely move past C and possibly even C++. However application frameworks (Gnome) and Widget sets (GTK) could benefit from C++ today! C++ is still a system-level language and is capable of very good execution speeds. It should be used as such.
Someday applications will be written in higher-level languages (not JAVA!)...but not yet...
Simple, C++ makes OO programming easier through classes, inheritance, polymorphism, etc. You can do OO analysis and design independent of the programming language you choose, and implement that design in C. But the code is harder to maintain and is more complex.
I suggest you pick up Bjarne Stroustrup's book on C++
By saying this, I'm begging to be flamed...here goes...
One of the problems with Gnome is that its too complex, and one of the reasons it is too complex is that it uses C.
C++, used correctly, reduces complexity. Anyone who disagrees with this just doesn't understand C++ and OO-programming. I attribute this to some of the success of KDE. They can do more with less code. Writing a QT app is *much* easier than writing a GTK app for a competent C++ coder. Period.
C++ has its problems, especially with Linux. GCC is just starting to become ANSI C++ compliant. Also loading a QT app takes forever because the Linux Dynamic Linker is slow when it has to resolve a zillion vtable entries when everything is derived from QObject. However, C++ is progress in the right direction. C++ encourages OO programming which is the biggest software engineering productivity increase in the last 20 years.
The Linux community needs to move past the traditional Unix-realm and start embracing C++. Especially for GUIs and application frameworks! They need to solve the remaining issues with C++ such as incompatible libraries.
I don't understand why the Linux community shuns C++. If you ask me, GTK being based on C is a critical weakness. C++ has allowed the KDE team to be so efficient. C++, if used correctly, removes complexity.
C++ does make KDE load apps much slower because the Linux dynamic linker needs work. Any Qt needs to link zillions of vtable entries because everything is subclassed off of QObject.
One uniform worldwide standard will never happen until the FCC and the rest of the world agree on frequency use. The European GSM system can't work in the U.S. because 900/1800 MHz ranges are in use by the military.
Try covering the state of Texas with a GSM system. It would cost billions of dollars.
GSM also does not have very good density. It is not much better than NAMPS (not AMPS). With large geographic areas, you can't make heavy use of cells because of cost.
CDMA can use one chunk of AMPS frequencies and yet AMPS can still function on the other frequencies.
Unfortunately, Qualcomm got greedy with CDMA and patents. CDMA systems *are* expensive, but not entirely because of Qualcomm. So in less-populated areas, they rolled out TDMA instead of CDMA because of price!! Not because they were entirely greedy and wanted to control everything. TDMA systems are much cheaper.
GSM 900/1800 can't even work in the U.S. because those frequencies are reserved by the military.
So yes, the U.S. is messed up and doesn't have one unified system. But there are reasons for it beyond your "bullshit" reasoning and "greed" theories.
Hopefully the shit will come together with 3G (which is wideband CDMA).
The circumstances are not the same in the U.S. Alot of it comes down to geography. The U.S. has *much* more land to deal with. It is not reasonable, nor affordable, to provide 100% digital coverage in the U.S.
There are also good reasons why the U.S. did not adopt GSM. Again, some of these reasons have to do with geography. Analog systems have the range to cover areas like Wyoming. GSM was not designed for long-range coverage. Dual-mode GSM/analog phones were just not feasible at the time. The U.S. operators were waiting for CDMA because it integrates well with the U.S. AMPS networks.
Europe did not have one unified analog system like the U.S. did in the late 80's, so they could scrap what they had and go GSM-only.
You could easily calculate this. The numbers are available. I believe a PIII uses something like 20-30 Watts while an Athlon uses 60-80 Watts for 1Ghz. If you leave your machine on 24/7, then having an Athlon is probably equivalent to leaving an extra 40-Watt light bulb on 24/7. Over the course of several years, this adds up. This also only takes into account CPU power. For an Athlon PC, you also have to use a stronger CPU fan and a stronger Power Supply.
Why? So my electricity bill is cheaper. My 866 MHz PIII uses only a 200-Watt power supply and is stable as a rock.
Why? So I don't have to worry about operating system incompatibities. Scoff at this you may, but remember that VIA is one of the most prominent AMD motherboard suppliers. Windows 2000 out of the box does not work with some VIA chipsets. A service pack is required.
Why? My PIII doesn't even have a CPU cooling fan. CPU fans stop working! I've experienced this in the past. Your AMD Athlon just might fry if the fan stops spinning.
Why? If I ever want to sell my computer, which personally I never would, the average Joe Shmow will buy the Intel brand over the AMD brand. Intel appeals more to the masses. Intel has cool commercials. Does AMD even have any?
I suggest you read Intel's Annual Report. Buy a share of stock and you will get one for free.
Intel is not at all in financial difficulty. They have billions of dollars in cash.
Also recall that the original Pentium 60Mhz ran hot and even had a horrible floating point bug. They weathered that disaster. The P4 will do just fine given some time to mature. And Intel still as the world's number one PC manufacturer in their bag (Dell who doesn't sell AMD).
Another post stated that the statistics are based on a survey-- not on pre-installed sales. Thus, it all depends on who Gartner decided to survey. Did they choose only Fortune 500 companies? Did they choose universities?
Alas I may be talking out of my ass because I'm too lazy to read the details.
Saying that Tribes2 uses GSM is completely inaccurate. They may use the same, or similar vocoder. And why not? The vocoders used in digital cellular technologies manage great voice quality over such a small bandwidth (comparable to a 14.4 kbaud modem for CDMA...similar for GSM)
I don't think so. Even though it isn't cost-effective, these systems should not be on the Internet. Not even a VPN.
I used to work for GE, and they refused to use the Internet, and instead built their own world-wide Intranet. I asked why? They said 1) security, and 2) reliability
They also own the entire 3.x.x.x IP address range!
I actually tried that. I think the fan is indeed louder, but the HD noise is more annoying as it is higher pitched. Maybe its personal preference...I don't mind listening to a wall fan when I am sleeping at night...but the 7200 RPM hard drive drives me nuts!
Then again, I have a Western Digital drive and those are pieces of sh%*t IMHO
I believe that Hard Drives cause the most noise inside a computer...especially the annoying high-frequency spin noise.
Here are a couple ideas:
1) use a Pentium rather than AMD. Yes, I know that AMD gives you better bang for the buck and is the preferred processor for slashdot people. But the fact is, Pentiums dissipate much less heat than Athlons. You shouldn't need an extra high-powered CPU fan with a Pentium
2) Don't use 7200 RPM hard disk drives! They are higher-pitched!! Ok...that may be silly. But you can look at the tech-specs for many different hard drives and they will give the noise output. Use that data when you select a hard drive for your system
3) Don't mount the hard drive directly on the metal chassis. The metal acts like a soundboard. Put a piece of cardboard in between.
4) Get a case that uses only 1 fan for both the power supply and the CPU. I have a Dell 4100 that does this.
5) Forget the above and buy an iMac!!
Slashdot Mirror
THIS IS NOT A FLAME!
I am simply a Linux user who would like to know the advantages of using FreeBSD over Linux. I can think of one advantage: having a uniform system that is the same for everybody! I mean, there is only one FreeBSD distribution, right? Are there any technical reasons for using FreeBSD over Linux? Thanks!
I agree. ATA drives by Seagate suck. I bought one thinking that it would be a reliable drive. I put all of my important stuff on it...every document I ever wrote in the last 5 years. At the time, I didn't have a backup mechanism because I was a poor college student. The drive crashed in 6 months. Meanwhile, my trusty Samsung has been spinning away for 5 years now. I realize there are always exceptions...but come on! I paid good money for that drive and I lost everything.
Don't count *BSD out yet. Microsoft just announced that they are working on a CLI and a C# compiler for FreeBSD and Windows XP.
I agree with your statements. I do believe that applications should definitely move past C and possibly even C++. However application frameworks (Gnome) and Widget sets (GTK) could benefit from C++ today! C++ is still a system-level language and is capable of very good execution speeds. It should be used as such.
Someday applications will be written in higher-level languages (not JAVA!)...but not yet...
Simple, C++ makes OO programming easier through classes, inheritance, polymorphism, etc. You can do OO analysis and design independent of the programming language you choose, and implement that design in C. But the code is harder to maintain and is more complex.
I suggest you pick up Bjarne Stroustrup's book on C++
By saying this, I'm begging to be flamed...here goes...
One of the problems with Gnome is that its too complex, and one of the reasons it is too complex is that it uses C.
C++, used correctly, reduces complexity. Anyone who disagrees with this just doesn't understand C++ and OO-programming. I attribute this to some of the success of KDE. They can do more with less code. Writing a QT app is *much* easier than writing a GTK app for a competent C++ coder. Period.
C++ has its problems, especially with Linux. GCC is just starting to become ANSI C++ compliant. Also loading a QT app takes forever because the Linux Dynamic Linker is slow when it has to resolve a zillion vtable entries when everything is derived from QObject. However, C++ is progress in the right direction. C++ encourages OO programming which is the biggest software engineering productivity increase in the last 20 years.
The Linux community needs to move past the traditional Unix-realm and start embracing C++. Especially for GUIs and application frameworks! They need to solve the remaining issues with C++ such as incompatible libraries.
I don't understand why the Linux community shuns C++. If you ask me, GTK being based on C is a critical weakness. C++ has allowed the KDE team to be so efficient. C++, if used correctly, removes complexity.
C++ does make KDE load apps much slower because the Linux dynamic linker needs work. Any Qt needs to link zillions of vtable entries because everything is subclassed off of QObject.
One uniform worldwide standard will never happen until the FCC and the rest of the world agree on frequency use. The European GSM system can't work in the U.S. because 900/1800 MHz ranges are in use by the military.
Try covering the state of Texas with a GSM system. It would cost billions of dollars.
GSM also does not have very good density. It is not much better than NAMPS (not AMPS). With large geographic areas, you can't make heavy use of cells because of cost.
CDMA can use one chunk of AMPS frequencies and yet AMPS can still function on the other frequencies.
Unfortunately, Qualcomm got greedy with CDMA and patents. CDMA systems *are* expensive, but not entirely because of Qualcomm. So in less-populated areas, they rolled out TDMA instead of CDMA because of price!! Not because they were entirely greedy and wanted to control everything. TDMA systems are much cheaper.
GSM 900/1800 can't even work in the U.S. because those frequencies are reserved by the military.
So yes, the U.S. is messed up and doesn't have one unified system. But there are reasons for it beyond your "bullshit" reasoning and "greed" theories.
Hopefully the shit will come together with 3G (which is wideband CDMA).
The circumstances are not the same in the U.S. Alot of it comes down to geography. The U.S. has *much* more land to deal with. It is not reasonable, nor affordable, to provide 100% digital coverage in the U.S.
There are also good reasons why the U.S. did not adopt GSM. Again, some of these reasons have to do with geography. Analog systems have the range to cover areas like Wyoming. GSM was not designed for long-range coverage. Dual-mode GSM/analog phones were just not feasible at the time. The U.S. operators were waiting for CDMA because it integrates well with the U.S. AMPS networks.
Europe did not have one unified analog system like the U.S. did in the late 80's, so they could scrap what they had and go GSM-only.
You could easily calculate this. The numbers are available. I believe a PIII uses something like 20-30 Watts while an Athlon uses 60-80 Watts for 1Ghz. If you leave your machine on 24/7, then having an Athlon is probably equivalent to leaving an extra 40-Watt light bulb on 24/7. Over the course of several years, this adds up. This also only takes into account CPU power. For an Athlon PC, you also have to use a stronger CPU fan and a stronger Power Supply.
Why? So my electricity bill is cheaper. My 866 MHz PIII uses only a 200-Watt power supply and is stable as a rock.
Why? So I don't have to worry about operating system incompatibities. Scoff at this you may, but remember that VIA is one of the most prominent AMD motherboard suppliers. Windows 2000 out of the box does not work with some VIA chipsets. A service pack is required.
Why? My PIII doesn't even have a CPU cooling fan. CPU fans stop working! I've experienced this in the past. Your AMD Athlon just might fry if the fan stops spinning.
Why? If I ever want to sell my computer, which personally I never would, the average Joe Shmow will buy the Intel brand over the AMD brand. Intel appeals more to the masses. Intel has cool commercials. Does AMD even have any?
I suggest you read Intel's Annual Report. Buy a share of stock and you will get one for free.
Intel is not at all in financial difficulty. They have billions of dollars in cash.
Also recall that the original Pentium 60Mhz ran hot and even had a horrible floating point bug. They weathered that disaster. The P4 will do just fine given some time to mature. And Intel still as the world's number one PC manufacturer in their bag (Dell who doesn't sell AMD).
GE has not produced weapons of mass destruction for more than 20 years. They sold off that division long ago.
I recall that the Gartner Group really hyped up the "Y2K bug".
You are a moron if you think any OS should support XML in the kernel. Obviously you don't know what a kernel is.
Another post stated that the statistics are based on a survey-- not on pre-installed sales. Thus, it all depends on who Gartner decided to survey. Did they choose only Fortune 500 companies? Did they choose universities?
Alas I may be talking out of my ass because I'm too lazy to read the details.
read more carefully. He said QT embedded and GTK framebuffer , not QT and GTK.
Saying that Tribes2 uses GSM is completely inaccurate. They may use the same, or similar vocoder. And why not? The vocoders used in digital cellular technologies manage great voice quality over such a small bandwidth (comparable to a 14.4 kbaud modem for CDMA...similar for GSM)
I don't think so. Even though it isn't cost-effective, these systems should not be on the Internet. Not even a VPN.
I used to work for GE, and they refused to use the Internet, and instead built their own world-wide Intranet. I asked why? They said 1) security, and 2) reliability
They also own the entire 3.x.x.x IP address range!
Microsoft adds e-mail encryption to Microsoft Outlook. Then encryption will be standard enough for the everyday user to use.
Of course that probably won't happen because the NSA has Microsoft in their pocket.
I actually tried that. I think the fan is indeed louder, but the HD noise is more annoying as it is higher pitched. Maybe its personal preference...I don't mind listening to a wall fan when I am sleeping at night...but the 7200 RPM hard drive drives me nuts!
Then again, I have a Western Digital drive and those are pieces of sh%*t IMHO
I believe that Hard Drives cause the most noise inside a computer...especially the annoying high-frequency spin noise.
Here are a couple ideas:
1) use a Pentium rather than AMD. Yes, I know that AMD gives you better bang for the buck and is the preferred processor for slashdot people. But the fact is, Pentiums dissipate much less heat than Athlons. You shouldn't need an extra high-powered CPU fan with a Pentium
2) Don't use 7200 RPM hard disk drives! They are higher-pitched!! Ok...that may be silly. But you can look at the tech-specs for many different hard drives and they will give the noise output. Use that data when you select a hard drive for your system
3) Don't mount the hard drive directly on the metal chassis. The metal acts like a soundboard. Put a piece of cardboard in between.
4) Get a case that uses only 1 fan for both the power supply and the CPU. I have a Dell 4100 that does this.
5) Forget the above and buy an iMac!!
In that case, I would like access to take the B-2 bomber for a test ride! My taxes paid for it...