I fyou read the debates between Andrew Tanenbaum and Linus Torvalds, when Linus was developing Linux with the community, you will see that Linux does not have a microkernel. A microkernel seperates the kernel level services, system calls, interrupt handlers, etc... from the managment systems, like memory managers, file system managers, and drivers a like. To say anything with Linux and Microkernels in the same sentence, one should always include "does not have", or "is easier to implement", etc... There is a big debate because the Linux kernel is so huge because of all the modules that need to be loaded. A microkernel system would be much leaner, I do not know about faster. My time with Minux was short ( a semester ) and my performance tests comparing Minux and Linux would not be fair
The real solution to the browser wars is to make all browsers run around a java renderer. It makes no sense reinventing the whel for every platform, as a lot of the code requires poring, ifdefs and the like. A Java browser solves many problems and would be feasable with the JDK 1.2.2 release from Blackdown in the future, and the JIT compiler from Inprise. This way, the only upgrade to your browser you would need is a download of the new JDK from sun or Blackdown. Writing a functional browser in Java is very simple, and can be done in a few days by a skilled Java programmer. With this sort of system, we could worry less about who builds the better renderer. "Opera loads each page,.1% faster", "mozilla loads pages with applets.5 seconds faster" would be heard no more. If this was a sucessful mission, programmers could focus on actually putting something interesting into your browser. Like a page that went to slashdot in the morning for you and stripped away the articles and ads that do not fit your interest, or did other cool things.
Only a jerk would make the claim that Linux distrobutions use unstable kernels. This is overlooked because it is press for Linux, and the kind we like. If this writer were doing a peice on Coke or the latest NMike running shoe and he made such a gross error, he would be ghetting fired, or sued. We stand for it because we need press to get users. These news companioes should hire Linux consultants to proof these articles. I of course wouls make an error in this much prose, but that is why I am a programmer, everything I write (except slashdot sttuff) goes through a compiler which checks my writing!
First the article has typos, Carson City,Nev.-based SCO.He said the consulting arm ofSCO is Obviously the guy was writing this article in a hurry. Probably an intern who thinks he knows about all of this computer stuff which is just so hot these days. Do the folks at Computerworld think that online-journalism is allowed to get away with this sort of disrespectful writing.
Second, forking is the whole idea behind copyleftism. You allow people to make whatever changes to the OS they want as long as they make their changes public. That way we can see if TurboLinux has done something stupid. If it is good and is not the first high-availablity clustering kernel because they wanted to be the first, Linus will put the changes in the kernel. Linux does not benefit or get taken away from. Nothing has changed, and anyone that wishes to use TurboClustering is perfectly welcome to buy their distro. journalists should do their homework. this is not a crisis as the author makes would lead George Weiss' comments to infer. This would have been a much better article for a computer magazine if it had explained the internals of the technology annd let us decide what to do with the facts and make our own inferences as computer literate/savy/scientists (pick one) as to the implications of this new technology. This is a great technology to be available to the comunity and perhaps the reason that Sun released their source. Their clustering technology is no longer a secret. Does anyone else feel like their articles about linux and computers in general do not talk about anything interesting, just business (except for ACM, IEEE, Usenix, etc.... publications). We should be smart enough to make inferences to implications on distrobutions. Paraphrasing experts only makes confusion!
Maybe NT crashes because they have built the process infighting into the core of the OS in anticipation of this doom port. NT the first OS directed at the big iron market, where processes steal resources from each other and end up starving their friends. Windows 2000, extends this functionality, processes must now kill each other to fight for resources, quad speed process, memory boxes and exec vests. I always knew their was an explanation for Windows crashing
What is Q3 about? I have not really understood what is more fun about it. Sure the graphics use more colors and the weapons have more eye candy, but what is more fun about it? I play a lot of Q2 and have recently been playing a bunch of Q3 and cannot figure out what the craze is about. If you could shed some light upon this i would be most interested. I am not bagging on the game at all as I would love to see it rock the house, rather I was wondering on a higher level what the method to creating game with different playability was. Other than it having great graphics, what can change the woes that I have heard from the gaming community(devoted Q2 people) that say Q3 is rather dull? I know that mods will change significantly how things interact, but what will make Q2 fun out of the box?
I know that many companies use BSD to run secure servers and I know that BSD is more stable and secure than Linux, because it has been around for more years and is maintained by die hard server people. My question is, What is the performance difference between the two OSs? I have a feeling that BSD has superior SMP support, bu I do not know why exactly. Anyone have any input from experience?
There have been patches for some time now, but it has not found its way into the main distrobution. I beleive Linus wanted the new stack to go into 2.4. Also the MindCraft debate is skewed by not putting in patches to make Linux faster, while using SP5 which was not released yet. The important thing is that there are many solutions for the faults in Linux that are compilable in the kernel which is open source. NT patches are not available except to Microsoft employees that can see the source files. Linux could probably be patched to go faster than NT. Most of the problems in the kernel have solutions, but Linus dosn't want just solutions, but waits for the best solution, which is not how MS works.
Why does Amiga need super high throughput from the kernel. 1 fast ethernet card or 1 gigabit ethernet card will surely suffice for video editing. I do not think many file servers could keep up witha faster system (in general)
There seems to be no reason for Amiga. I do not intend to cause a flame war, I am just curious. They are using the Linux Kernel, that will be connected to an X Server and window manager of some sort, so that people can use the Amiga tools on a G4 port of the Linux Kernel? Why don't they just port their apps to Linux. Hello, they can add to the community, or they can reinvent the UI for Linux. Why? What is really going on?
Half Life should be out for Quake 3 when it comes
on
Brian Hook leaving Id
·
· Score: 1
I do not work for a game company, but I have worked on a mod for quake2. As I understand it, Half-Life is a quake2 super-mod, it runs on the Quake2 engine so for all intents and purposes it is quake2. As far as I know quake3 will support quake2 mods with a small designer side adjustment time. So Half-Life for quake3 should come out some time in the near future. Probably a few months after the final release of quake3. Check out our quake2 mod at: www.aracnet.com/~jblabs/lox
The reason that intel boxes will never be as good as Risc chips from SUN SGI etc.. is that Risc chips run eerything better in terms of software written in C. I should know I wrote a compiler for the MIPS processor. If you go and use Intel boxes, things will be fine. The reason that Intel is talking about a Risc 64 architecture is because this needs to happen for their chips to be worth a damn in the future. No one wants code written in assembly anymore, no one needs this code. Without assembly program support Cisc chips are worthless, they have longer execution cycles and fewer registers. this is a bad thing for programs written in high level languages. A 64 bit structure is also helpful if one wants to run software that addresses huge drives, like terabytes and exabytes of RAM. This is not verey iumportant now, but you better watch out before you say when this will be important!
Slashdot Mirror
I fyou read the debates between Andrew Tanenbaum and Linus Torvalds, when Linus was developing Linux with the community, you will see that Linux does not have a microkernel. A microkernel seperates the kernel level services, system calls, interrupt handlers, etc... from the managment systems, like memory managers, file system managers, and drivers a like. To say anything with Linux and Microkernels in the same sentence, one should always include "does not have", or "is easier to implement", etc... There is a big debate because the Linux kernel is so huge because of all the modules that need to be loaded. A microkernel system would be much leaner, I do not know about faster. My time with Minux was short ( a semester ) and my performance tests comparing Minux and Linux would not be fair
The real solution to the browser wars is to make all browsers run around a java renderer. It makes no sense reinventing the whel for every platform, as a lot of the code requires poring, ifdefs and the like. A Java browser solves many problems and would be feasable with the JDK 1.2.2 release from Blackdown in the future, and the JIT compiler from Inprise. This way, the only upgrade to your browser you would need is a download of the new JDK from sun or Blackdown. Writing a functional browser in Java is very simple, and can be done in a few days by a skilled Java programmer. With this sort of system, we could worry less about who builds the better renderer. "Opera loads each page, .1% faster", "mozilla loads pages with applets .5 seconds faster" would be heard no more. If this was a sucessful mission, programmers could focus on actually putting something interesting into your browser. Like a page that went to slashdot in the morning for you and stripped away the articles and ads that do not fit your interest, or did other cool things.
Live Free or Die Trying
FIRST POST, YEAH
Only a jerk would make the claim that Linux distrobutions use unstable kernels. This is overlooked because it is press for Linux, and the kind we like. If this writer were doing a peice on Coke or the latest NMike running shoe and he made such a gross error, he would be ghetting fired, or sued. We stand for it because we need press to get users. These news companioes should hire Linux consultants to proof these articles. I of course wouls make an error in this much prose, but that is why I am a programmer, everything I write (except slashdot sttuff) goes through a compiler which checks my writing!
First the article has typos,
Carson City,Nev.-based
SCO.He said the consulting arm ofSCO is
Obviously the guy was writing this article in a hurry. Probably an intern who thinks he knows about all of this computer stuff which is just so hot these days. Do the folks at Computerworld think that online-journalism is allowed to get away with this sort of disrespectful writing.
Second, forking is the whole idea behind copyleftism. You allow people to make whatever changes to the OS they want as long as they make their changes public. That way we can see if TurboLinux has done something stupid. If it is good and is not the first high-availablity clustering kernel because they wanted to be the first, Linus will put the changes in the kernel. Linux does not benefit or get taken away from. Nothing has changed, and anyone that wishes to use TurboClustering is perfectly welcome to buy their distro. journalists should do their homework. this is not a crisis as the author makes would lead George Weiss' comments to infer. This would have been a much better article for a computer magazine if it had explained the internals of the technology annd let us decide what to do with the facts and make our own inferences as computer literate/savy/scientists (pick one) as to the implications of this new technology. This is a great technology to be available to the comunity and perhaps the reason that Sun released their source. Their clustering technology is no longer a secret. Does anyone else feel like their articles about linux and computers in general do not talk about anything interesting, just business (except for ACM, IEEE, Usenix, etc.... publications). We should be smart enough to make inferences to implications on distrobutions. Paraphrasing experts only makes confusion!
More research in Computer Science should be executed in this manner. Overclocking a 486 / 25 Mhz to a 486 / 247Mhz is a noble feat.
Maybe NT crashes because they have built the process infighting into the core of the OS in anticipation of this doom port. NT the first OS directed at the big iron market, where processes steal resources from each other and end up starving their friends. Windows 2000, extends this functionality, processes must now kill each other to fight for resources, quad speed process, memory boxes and exec vests. I always knew their was an explanation for Windows crashing
What is Q3 about? I have not really understood what is more fun about it. Sure the graphics use more colors and the weapons have more eye candy, but what is more fun about it? I play a lot of Q2 and have recently been playing a bunch of Q3 and cannot figure out what the craze is about. If you could shed some light upon this i would be most interested. I am not bagging on the game at all as I would love to see it rock the house, rather I was wondering on a higher level what the method to creating game with different playability was. Other than it having great graphics, what can change the woes that I have heard from the gaming community(devoted Q2 people) that say Q3 is rather dull? I know that mods will change significantly how things interact, but what will make Q2 fun out of the box?
I know that many companies use BSD to run secure servers and I know that BSD is more stable and secure than Linux, because it has been around for more years and is maintained by die hard server people. My question is, What is the performance difference between the two OSs? I have a feeling that BSD has superior SMP support, bu I do not know why exactly. Anyone have any input from experience?
There have been patches for some time now, but it has not found its way into the main distrobution. I beleive Linus wanted the new stack to go into 2.4. Also the MindCraft debate is skewed by not putting in patches to make Linux faster, while using SP5 which was not released yet. The important thing is that there are many solutions for the faults in Linux that are compilable in the kernel which is open source. NT patches are not available except to Microsoft employees that can see the source files. Linux could probably be patched to go faster than NT. Most of the problems in the kernel have solutions, but Linus dosn't want just solutions, but waits for the best solution, which is not how MS works.
Why does Amiga need super high throughput from the kernel. 1 fast ethernet card or 1 gigabit ethernet card will surely suffice for video editing. I do not think many file servers could keep up witha faster system (in general)
There seems to be no reason for Amiga. I do not intend to cause a flame war, I am just curious. They are using the Linux Kernel, that will be connected to an X Server and window manager of some sort, so that people can use the Amiga tools on a G4 port of the Linux Kernel? Why don't they just port their apps to Linux. Hello, they can add to the community, or they can reinvent the UI for Linux. Why? What is really going on?
I do not work for a game company, but I have worked on a mod for quake2. As I understand it, Half-Life is a quake2 super-mod, it runs on the Quake2 engine so for all intents and purposes it is quake2. As far as I know quake3 will support quake2 mods with a small designer side adjustment time. So Half-Life for quake3 should come out some time in the near future. Probably a few months after the final release of quake3. Check out our quake2 mod at:
www.aracnet.com/~jblabs/lox
The reason that intel boxes will never be as good as Risc chips from SUN SGI etc.. is that Risc chips run eerything better in terms of software written in C. I should know I wrote a compiler for the MIPS processor. If you go and use Intel boxes, things will be fine. The reason that Intel is talking about a Risc 64 architecture is because this needs to happen for their chips to be worth a damn in the future. No one wants code written in assembly anymore, no one needs this code. Without assembly program support Cisc chips are worthless, they have longer execution cycles and fewer registers. this is a bad thing for programs written in high level languages. A 64 bit structure is also helpful if one wants to run software that addresses huge drives, like terabytes and exabytes of RAM. This is not verey iumportant now, but you better watch out before you say when this will be important!
This si only 2d support. The drivers work O.K. as they are beta. They ship with all of the major disributions SuSe, Rh, etc...
Geez, people, I was not saying "only palefaced "only palefaced nerds with no girlfriends read slashdot."
but you should have. That is what we all are aren't we?