shit! Got a URL? The only reason I don't use linux is because I can't use my savage4(I use my computer for programming and gaming). Where can I find a savage4 mesa? I couldn't find anything like that when I searched for it!
It would be cool if they ported GTA to Linux. I found it much better than postal. If they beefed up the multiplayer(eg. co-op), I'd have to delete my windows partition once and for all.:)
Congratulations! You just learned about politics! There are almost 7 billion people on earth. Do you all expect them to have the same opinion? Tke a look; not all the same people are complaining about everything, different people are complaining about different things.
My stand? If the US kept it's nose COMPLETELY out of other countries business, they have no burden. If they do something (other than a completely benevolent role, such as giving aid), they automatically take a share of the blame. Sorry, there's no way to walk away from a mountain of dead people you helped create and end up looking like the hero in everyones eyes. Dead people will stay dead no matter what spin you'd like to have on the thing that killed them.
Since the US is the CAUSE of quite a bit of the suffering (think economic sanctions)which he is talking about, your arguement is invalid. Stop imposing sanctions, and many people (NOT soldiers, people.) get a better way of life. Or is starving a population to get to a dictator (who is eating well either way) a good idea somehow?
If you really think about it, it's Intel commiting fraud for selling a processor whose sole purpose seems to be high clock speeds at the cost of performance. Ever tried to convince someone that a Athlon is faster than a P4 at a much higher clock rate? It's a tough sell. Let them do this. At least it levels the playing field between fast processors and high MHZ processors.
www.be.com -- Beos may be dead corporately, but it's already a decent OS with all the tools a user needs, and the developer base doesn't seem to want to move. There is even a downloadable version for free, but windows is required to install it (DOS is fine to run it though).
www.redhat.com -- RedHat 7.1 seems to be a decent piece of software, despite my own personal bias against linux. It comes with some decent stuff out of the box and the price is right, so why not give it a shot?
www.microsoft.com -- Windows 98SE is fine (for a windows release, that is), and there's no real reason to upgrade when it comes to functionallity (ie. 32 bit apps don't run under windows 3.1)... It's certainly an alternative to XP...at home. I've heard that windows 2000 is a decent performer in the network arena, but I have to admit that nimda/code red (all of them)/sircam prove that they aren't infallable. While I wouldn't use any version of windows for a network node, it is an option.(and an alternative to XP)
And, if the latest and greatest aren't needed:
DOS(not nessesarily MS DOS):Has a variety of apps for networking, gaming, programming, productivity, and other stuff. One of my favourite operating systems because it lets programs interface directly with hardware very easily.
OS/2 Warp: Another decent OS, it has a lot of apps for it, and a decent developer community. If I owned warp 4 (I am looking for a copy), it'd have a place on my hard drive. Unfortunately, OS/2 Warp 3.0 is all I have, and can't run most newer apps.
If you don't feel too bad about using a non-x86 platform:
Commodore 64:Has word processing software, and can surf the internet via shell accounts and a slowass modem. plenty of games for it, and CP/M is available for it.
TRS 80:A variety of Operating Systems are available for these (ancient) computers, including OS/9, CP/M, TRSDOS, NEWDOS, and even more I don't know about.
...And if this whole computer thing is a craze to you:
Typewriter: The oldskool typewriter has excellent word processing software built in, and a decent sound effect is played every time you press a key. There is a very loyal user base, simply because of the decent 'look and feel' aspect.
Really...There are always useable alternatives, on the other hand, some aren't very new, and a lot have no real profit margin, but they do exist.
Yeah. Tell that beOS user off. he doesn't know shit. He must be a heathen who doesn't mind using netpositive or Opera. A guy who isn't bothered by the fact that all the webpages he visits work fine under those browsers. A guy who isn't troubled by the lack of crashes when surfing...
Why was there a problem surfing the web under beOS again?
No, no, no. BeOS failed for a very simple reason. There wasn't enough applications availablle to run on it. Lets investigate this.
What computer company in their right mind is going to bundle an OS that doesn't have a decent browser hmmm...Like Opera? or the browser that comes with beOS?
or office suite Like Gobe Productive or Abiword?
and doesn't have any games or applications available? Like Abuse, Quake, Quake II,Doom, Doom II, or scores of others?
Stop talking out of your ass. beOS has plenty of apps for it.
I'm sure that the regular user cares about the latest technology too. beOS is great for the people who don't give a shit about linux. People who use their computers to surf the internet and check their E-mail are perfect for beOS, and beOS is perfect for them.
Microsoft has convinced idiot users that somehow if it isn't windows it's inferior, which was NOT the case with beOS. The move to release a free version sold them at least *one* copy of it(I have a copy of R5 on my laptop, and I use it regularly). Linux users in paticular seem to have an inferiority complex when it comes to comparing themselves to windows (not all of them, but I always hear about 'why linux will never beat windows', when in reality, MS is a business company, not a software company, and that's why they dominate (I don't think they've ever released anything that wasn't somebody elses code)...
Business tactics don't dictate the quality of an OS. be made some mistakes, but they didn't deserve to go out of business. MS is brutal, but they do deserve to go out of business.
A lot of systems have POSIX compatibility, which is pretty close to what you are talking about. A recompile will make a lot of Linux apps (shell apps at least...) work under beOS, and BSD, but most of these apps are *recognised* by the OS, so if you were to perfectly port glib for linux to beos, you could run without a recompile.
contrary to what many seem to think, it's not so easy to monopolize an industry (MS won theirs through finance when all the other players were busy coding). I know that *I* wouldn't code for Ndiva cards only, and neither would any other programmer who had to put food on the table. Even games which were Glide driven had a software mode (and usually a d3d mode too)
The market has made much more money by being open and allowing competition than by using APIs meant for one system
Or are you still using S3 MeTaL?(I'm not)
One other thing to notice is that Nvidia made their fortune my making a video card *without a specific API*. Their card was designed specifically to run on windows d3d, which saved them money. I think the best way for Nvidia to keep making money is to keep making the fastest cards on the planet.
You may be thinking "This is only a couple of header files, what's the big deal?". As Søren says "The problem here is that the structures in the headers is the whole story. That info tells how you read the proprietary struct off the disks, and was reverse engineered and documented by me after a lot of effort." Søren's intellectual property is tied up in those files.
Am I the only one who found this strange? The idea that by reverse engineering a piece of hardware, you are suddenly the IP holder? I could see the hardware manufacturers making such a claim, but a third party driver writer? I did some engineering to make a fast video routine for modeX, and I hardly think that I can claim IP rights over the modeX architecture...
On the other hand, if the person who wrote it wants some credit, give him some credit. That's all I ask for when I give code away, so I can see why that could be annoying. It probably was an honest mistake on the part of the kernel developer though, I know that a couple times I've released a program and forgotten to put some copyright or some such in it. Incidently, that's why I usually just write my own code from scratch now.
sircam, not code red. OK, then by arguement goes "Why would anybody use Outlook + WINE + linux", because anybody stupid enough to check their e-mail under linux, see the file "I send to you to have your advice", and run it manually under wine deserve every virus on the planet.:)
The best part is the if we want to. heh, Don't want to be venerable? close WINE. Almost poetic...:)
On the other hand...Why run IIS under WINE under linux?:)
the PR rating system was unfair.
on
2.2 GHz Xeon
·
· Score: 1
Cyrix et. al. made some of the fastest 90 and 120 MHZ chips I've ever seen, then shot themselves in the foot by calling the chips by their PR ratings. The integer on a that 90 WAS as fast as the integer on a i166, but in most other tests, the fact that it was really just a 90 shone through. They only hurt themselves with the PR system. Intel should use it because their p4 2 gig would suddenly be a p4 P650:)
For the longest time, I played Quake on my s3 Virge. Ran sort of well(about 20 FPS@320x240), but I wonder today how a virge would run if you put a fast CPU under it? Not well perhaps, but better than a voodoo on a p166?
Firstly Joe Public probably only has the vaguest idea of what NT is, so there is limited mileage on the "based on NT" bandwagon.
I was actually referring to the group of people who will start baking the latest microsoft acronyms at me and considering that to be final.
Win NT may run with stability on an old PC, but it can't say much else. I spent two years using it on various worksatations (from a p166 to a PII 333)and it was stable alright, but it was also brutally slow compared to even an older system using (even!) win9x. Stability at the cost of speed is not the answer. Linux et. al. can claim speed and robustness, why can't the financially daft microsoft?
Oh yes, and you have too much ram to really be considered low end. Try 32 or 64 megs. 64 megs of ram will run just about anything without swapping -- except under NT.
Lets see...Modified UI to make it look slightly different than the last version of windows? Yup. Lots of monopoly leveraging technologies designed to crush smaller companies ekeing out a living? Oh yeah. Requires an upgrade to the latest hardware? Bingo. Slower than the last release by a good factor? You bet. All I see, despite all the hype(that many slashdotters are buying into), is just another useless windows release. One that to the regular consumer, means more money down the tubes for hardware they don't really need to check their E-mail, and write letters in Wordpad. Of course, Microsoft will be kept afloat by the 'oh but this ones based on NT! It's stable!' fanboys out there, but anybody who has seen NT in action knows it's inadequacy on older hardware, and people are finally getting used to the idea that they don't really need the latest version of windows or the latest processor for what they do.
Personally, if support for windows 9x dropped to a certain level, I'd just stop using windows altogether. To be perfectly honest, as soon as I can play the majority of my windows games using linux and my savage4 accellerator on another, non MS OS, I'll drop windows altogether. I'm just sick and tired of seeing microsoft pushing it's competitors out the window by including it's own version of an existing utility.
I own original copies of OS/2, Beos, Caldera Opendos, and Linux Redhat. I also downloaded Xgui, Gimi, and a host of other shells. My opinion? I don't have enough choice still. I could run Xdos on my 8088 and still run dos apps. Why is it so hard for the US DOJ to crack this obviously abused (on a regular baisis) monopoly?
Oh yes, and look at every windows release -- you'll see a huge group trying to fool themselves that 'THIS one will be good!'. They existed in winME, why not this one?
Nobody in their right mind will pay that much for a console. The difference in price between other next-gen consoles is atrocious. With that 100-200 bucks american, you could probably buy a couple games for a ps2, and if you wanted to, you could even buy a *LOT* of bargin bin ps1 titles at 20 bucks a pop!
Goddamnit!
Goddamn windows lovers always talk about how linux isn't that good and that's why windows is on top. BULLSHIT!
beOS was the OS that should have been on top. It is a beautiful OS with everything a regular person would want -- a fast, robust system with plenty of applications for it (www.bebits.com), fantastic features, a simple yet beautiful UI with an even simpler configuration, and a shitload of other things going for it, such as posix compatibility and a free C compiler and IDE.
People, when you speak of an OS that should be on every regular users PC, this is it. BeOS was virtually flawless, and would have become moreso if the market wasn't so hideously monopolized that a good piece of code like beOS couldn't compete. WHO NEEDS A BETTER EXAMPLE OF HOW AN MS MONOPOLY HURTS THE INDUSTRY?
P.S. Sorry if this point has been brought up already -- I'd never get to the reply button in time if I read the articles *and* the posts.
Slashdot Mirror
shit! Got a URL? The only reason I don't use linux is because I can't use my savage4(I use my computer for programming and gaming). Where can I find a savage4 mesa? I couldn't find anything like that when I searched for it!
It would be cool if they ported GTA to Linux. I found it much better than postal. If they beefed up the multiplayer(eg. co-op), I'd have to delete my windows partition once and for all. :)
Congratulations! You just learned about politics! There are almost 7 billion people on earth. Do you all expect them to have the same opinion? Tke a look; not all the same people are complaining about everything, different people are complaining about different things.
My stand? If the US kept it's nose COMPLETELY out of other countries business, they have no burden. If they do something (other than a completely benevolent role, such as giving aid), they automatically take a share of the blame. Sorry, there's no way to walk away from a mountain of dead people you helped create and end up looking like the hero in everyones eyes. Dead people will stay dead no matter what spin you'd like to have on the thing that killed them.
Since the US is the CAUSE of quite a bit of the suffering (think economic sanctions)which he is talking about, your arguement is invalid. Stop imposing sanctions, and many people (NOT soldiers, people.) get a better way of life. Or is starving a population to get to a dictator (who is eating well either way) a good idea somehow?
So the final verdict is: Linux sucks because it has a shitty UI, and BeOS sucks because it has a pretty UI?
...
What did I miss?
...And Linux is a pretty useless product too. So is windows. I fail to see the point. Operating Systems are inherently useless. Get over it.
If you really think about it, it's Intel commiting fraud for selling a processor whose sole purpose seems to be high clock speeds at the cost of performance. Ever tried to convince someone that a Athlon is faster than a P4 at a much higher clock rate? It's a tough sell. Let them do this. At least it levels the playing field between fast processors and high MHZ processors.
www.be.com -- Beos may be dead corporately, but it's already a decent OS with all the tools a user needs, and the developer base doesn't seem to want to move. There is even a downloadable version for free, but windows is required to install it (DOS is fine to run it though).
www.redhat.com -- RedHat 7.1 seems to be a decent piece of software, despite my own personal bias against linux. It comes with some decent stuff out of the box and the price is right, so why not give it a shot?
www.microsoft.com -- Windows 98SE is fine (for a windows release, that is), and there's no real reason to upgrade when it comes to functionallity (ie. 32 bit apps don't run under windows 3.1)... It's certainly an alternative to XP...at home. I've heard that windows 2000 is a decent performer in the network arena, but I have to admit that nimda/code red (all of them)/sircam prove that they aren't infallable. While I wouldn't use any version of windows for a network node, it is an option.(and an alternative to XP)
And, if the latest and greatest aren't needed:
DOS(not nessesarily MS DOS):Has a variety of apps for networking, gaming, programming, productivity, and other stuff. One of my favourite operating systems because it lets programs interface directly with hardware very easily.
OS/2 Warp: Another decent OS, it has a lot of apps for it, and a decent developer community. If I owned warp 4 (I am looking for a copy), it'd have a place on my hard drive. Unfortunately, OS/2 Warp 3.0 is all I have, and can't run most newer apps.
If you don't feel too bad about using a non-x86 platform:
Commodore 64:Has word processing software, and can surf the internet via shell accounts and a slowass modem. plenty of games for it, and CP/M is available for it.
TRS 80:A variety of Operating Systems are available for these (ancient) computers, including OS/9, CP/M, TRSDOS, NEWDOS, and even more I don't know about.
...And if this whole computer thing is a craze to you:
Typewriter: The oldskool typewriter has excellent word processing software built in, and a decent sound effect is played every time you press a key. There is a very loyal user base, simply because of the decent 'look and feel' aspect.
Really...There are always useable alternatives, on the other hand, some aren't very new, and a lot have no real profit margin, but they do exist.
Yeah. Tell that beOS user off. he doesn't know shit. He must be a heathen who doesn't mind using netpositive or Opera. A guy who isn't bothered by the fact that all the webpages he visits work fine under those browsers. A guy who isn't troubled by the lack of crashes when surfing...
Why was there a problem surfing the web under beOS again?
beOS is better.
Running windows is like some sort of punishment
...
Regular people don't deserve shit like windows.
No, no, no. BeOS failed for a very simple reason. There wasn't enough applications availablle to run on it.
Lets investigate this.
What computer company in their right mind is going to bundle an OS that doesn't have a decent browser
hmmm...Like Opera? or the browser that comes with beOS?
or office suite
Like Gobe Productive or Abiword?
and doesn't have any games or applications available?
Like Abuse, Quake, Quake II,Doom, Doom II, or scores of others?
Stop talking out of your ass. beOS has plenty of apps for it.
I'm sure that the regular user cares about the latest technology too. beOS is great for the people who don't give a shit about linux. People who use their computers to surf the internet and check their E-mail are perfect for beOS, and beOS is perfect for them.
Microsoft has convinced idiot users that somehow if it isn't windows it's inferior, which was NOT the case with beOS. The move to release a free version sold them at least *one* copy of it(I have a copy of R5 on my laptop, and I use it regularly). Linux users in paticular seem to have an inferiority complex when it comes to comparing themselves to windows (not all of them, but I always hear about 'why linux will never beat windows', when in reality, MS is a business company, not a software company, and that's why they dominate (I don't think they've ever released anything that wasn't somebody elses code)...
Business tactics don't dictate the quality of an OS. be made some mistakes, but they didn't deserve to go out of business. MS is brutal, but they do deserve to go out of business.
A lot of systems have POSIX compatibility, which is pretty close to what you are talking about. A recompile will make a lot of Linux apps (shell apps at least...) work under beOS, and BSD, but most of these apps are *recognised* by the OS, so if you were to perfectly port glib for linux to beos, you could run without a recompile.
beOS is a great consumer OS which was crushed by the infernal machine(MS). Don't forget it.
contrary to what many seem to think, it's not so easy to monopolize an industry (MS won theirs through finance when all the other players were busy coding). I know that *I* wouldn't code for Ndiva cards only, and neither would any other programmer who had to put food on the table. Even games which were Glide driven had a software mode (and usually a d3d mode too)
The market has made much more money by being open and allowing competition than by using APIs meant for one system
Or are you still using S3 MeTaL?(I'm not)
One other thing to notice is that Nvidia made their fortune my making a video card *without a specific API*. Their card was designed specifically to run on windows d3d, which saved them money. I think the best way for Nvidia to keep making money is to keep making the fastest cards on the planet.
You may be thinking "This is only a couple of header files, what's the big deal?". As Søren says "The problem here is that the structures in the headers is the whole story. That info tells how you read the proprietary struct off the disks, and was reverse engineered and documented by me after a lot of effort." Søren's intellectual property is tied up in those files.
Am I the only one who found this strange? The idea that by reverse engineering a piece of hardware, you are suddenly the IP holder? I could see the hardware manufacturers making such a claim, but a third party driver writer? I did some engineering to make a fast video routine for modeX, and I hardly think that I can claim IP rights over the modeX architecture...
On the other hand, if the person who wrote it wants some credit, give him some credit. That's all I ask for when I give code away, so I can see why that could be annoying. It probably was an honest mistake on the part of the kernel developer though, I know that a couple times I've released a program and forgotten to put some copyright or some such in it. Incidently, that's why I usually just write my own code from scratch now.
maybe you should spend a little bit less time being offended by honest mistakes on slashdot, and go take a walk to vent some steam...
sircam, not code red. OK, then by arguement goes "Why would anybody use Outlook + WINE + linux", because anybody stupid enough to check their e-mail under linux, see the file "I send to you to have your advice", and run it manually under wine deserve every virus on the planet. :)
The best part is the if we want to. heh, Don't want to be venerable? close WINE. Almost poetic... :)
:)
On the other hand...Why run IIS under WINE under linux?
Cyrix et. al. made some of the fastest 90 and 120 MHZ chips I've ever seen, then shot themselves in the foot by calling the chips by their PR ratings. The integer on a that 90 WAS as fast as the integer on a i166, but in most other tests, the fact that it was really just a 90 shone through. They only hurt themselves with the PR system. Intel should use it because their p4 2 gig would suddenly be a p4 P650 :)
For the longest time, I played Quake on my s3 Virge. Ran sort of well(about 20 FPS@320x240), but I wonder today how a virge would run if you put a fast CPU under it? Not well perhaps, but better than a voodoo on a p166?
Let me clairify a fow things.
Firstly Joe Public probably only has the vaguest idea of what NT is, so there is limited mileage on the "based on NT" bandwagon.
I was actually referring to the group of people who will start baking the latest microsoft acronyms at me and considering that to be final.
Win NT may run with stability on an old PC, but it can't say much else. I spent two years using it on various worksatations (from a p166 to a PII 333)and it was stable alright, but it was also brutally slow compared to even an older system using (even!) win9x. Stability at the cost of speed is not the answer. Linux et. al. can claim speed and robustness, why can't the financially daft microsoft?
Oh yes, and you have too much ram to really be considered low end. Try 32 or 64 megs. 64 megs of ram will run just about anything without swapping -- except under NT.
Lets see...Modified UI to make it look slightly different than the last version of windows? Yup. Lots of monopoly leveraging technologies designed to crush smaller companies ekeing out a living? Oh yeah. Requires an upgrade to the latest hardware? Bingo. Slower than the last release by a good factor? You bet. All I see, despite all the hype(that many slashdotters are buying into), is just another useless windows release. One that to the regular consumer, means more money down the tubes for hardware they don't really need to check their E-mail, and write letters in Wordpad. Of course, Microsoft will be kept afloat by the 'oh but this ones based on NT! It's stable!' fanboys out there, but anybody who has seen NT in action knows it's inadequacy on older hardware, and people are finally getting used to the idea that they don't really need the latest version of windows or the latest processor for what they do.
Personally, if support for windows 9x dropped to a certain level, I'd just stop using windows altogether. To be perfectly honest, as soon as I can play the majority of my windows games using linux and my savage4 accellerator on another, non MS OS, I'll drop windows altogether. I'm just sick and tired of seeing microsoft pushing it's competitors out the window by including it's own version of an existing utility.
I own original copies of OS/2, Beos, Caldera Opendos, and Linux Redhat. I also downloaded Xgui, Gimi, and a host of other shells. My opinion? I don't have enough choice still. I could run Xdos on my 8088 and still run dos apps. Why is it so hard for the US DOJ to crack this obviously abused (on a regular baisis) monopoly?
Oh yes, and look at every windows release -- you'll see a huge group trying to fool themselves that 'THIS one will be good!'. They existed in winME, why not this one?
Nobody in their right mind will pay that much for a console. The difference in price between other next-gen consoles is atrocious. With that 100-200 bucks american, you could probably buy a couple games for a ps2, and if you wanted to, you could even buy a *LOT* of bargin bin ps1 titles at 20 bucks a pop!
Goddamnit!
Goddamn windows lovers always talk about how linux isn't that good and that's why windows is on top.
BULLSHIT!
beOS was the OS that should have been on top. It is a beautiful OS with everything a regular person would want -- a fast, robust system with plenty of applications for it (www.bebits.com), fantastic features, a simple yet beautiful UI with an even simpler configuration, and a shitload of other things going for it, such as posix compatibility and a free C compiler and IDE.
People, when you speak of an OS that should be on every regular users PC, this is it. BeOS was virtually flawless, and would have become moreso if the market wasn't so hideously monopolized that a good piece of code like beOS couldn't compete.
WHO NEEDS A BETTER EXAMPLE OF HOW AN MS MONOPOLY HURTS THE INDUSTRY?
P.S. Sorry if this point has been brought up already -- I'd never get to the reply button in time if I read the articles *and* the posts.