Ofcourse not, theyre holding back innovation so they can make as much money as possible out of their old obsolete technology before they have to start offering something new.
Actually, the majority of SSL websites are using RC4.. If you use Mozilla and Apache, you can use 256-bit AES encryption for SSL (try loading up paypal with a mozilla based browser) but if either the server or client is microsoft-based your stuck with the much weaker 128bit RC4... MS - always behind the curve, no 256bit encryption, no 64bit os
NT was portable to other 32bit platforms, but it most definately wasn't 64bit clean. The port to the Alpha platform had to use a 32bit emulation feature of the DEC compiler and a lot of the NT code had to be rewritten to work on IA64/AMD64 in 64bit mode. Aside from that, MacOS has always been a 32bit os, the first cpu it ran on was the 32bit 68000, tho it's true Apple took their time porting it to PPC and ran most of the OS under 68k emulation for a few years.. Aside from that, it's funny to note that other companies came out with 64bit os's before ms came out with a 32bit one.
And the gamecube has a very small marketshare as a result. A lot of ps2/xbox owners don't buy any games, but they still contribute to the platforms market and mind share.
Firefox is based on the same codebase as mozilla, but is somewhat stripped down, theres no reason it would be slower than mozilla. As for ugliness, both mozilla and firefox can be themed and could easily be made to look the same.. As for the features, firefox has far more features than that simplistic shell that is IE.
Well, now that IE will no longer be distributed seperately from windows, and no updates will come out for the old versions, it will be necessary to buy an upgrade to windows in order to update IE.
Re:Opterons and PowerPC together
on
Cray XT-3 Ships
·
· Score: 1
And according to the last benchmarks i saw, the Alpha EV68 and EV7 chips, despite no development for years, beats the itanic at the same clockrate.. Ofcourse, HP are trying to de-emphasize the Alpha and won't be publishing the benchmarks showing what it can truly do.. As for huge multiprocessor systems, the interconnect has a HUGE impact on the overall performance, especially linpack benchmarks
It was ultimately price that drove me away from the Amiga... Mostly the price of basic internet software which is free or bundled on all other platforms, but also the high prices of hardware which is by no means cutting edge enough to demand such high price points. Most amiga hardware that's been available for the past 8 or so years has been equivalent to previous generation(s) x86 hardware but at a higher price point than mac hardware (which is usually of a far higher quality) infact some amiga hardware is price-competitive with high end risc hardware, while offering nowhere near the build quality or performance. As for software, I used to come online from the amiga, however i found that the internet software for the amiga was of a much lower quality than the free offerings on other platforms. Also many of these tools had backdoors in them which were used by the developers in the name of "anti piracy" but were often abused by fascist friends of developers to harass other users off the platform. Infact i know many more people who abandoned the amiga platform because of the attitude of people like this.
But OS4 is pricey and ultimately doomed to failure.. Not only do you need to pay for the OS, but you also need to pay for the hardware to run it on, you can`t run it on just any PPC machine. People won't be willing to splash out just to try OS4. Linux is slowly gaining acceptance because it costs nothing to try it and you can use your existing hardware, OS4 doesn't have that advantage, and also with a slow uptake then apps will be developed very slowly. The original Amiga was successfull as a games platform primarily because of the ease of game copying, and from there some people became interested in the other features the platform had to offer... OS4 offers nothing to tempt people in like the original amiga did. As for slow disk access on the original amiga, that really depended on your disk... The onboard scsi/ide controllers in the amigas were pretty slow, if you used an addin card some were very quick, also a disk caching tool (all modern os`s cache disk access by default) helped a lot.. True that network support was tacked on, just like it is with windows and macos 9 and below. What i wonder tho, is why did they have to make their own hardware and OS.. This new amiga hardware is still out of date, theyre shipping 800mhz G4's while apple is pushing out 2.5ghz dual G5s.. Does OS4 even support multiple processors? And 32bit 33mhz PCI... While the rest of the world is moving on amiga users are once again left behind... I have machines as old as 1996 with 64bit pci slots. OS4 may well be a great OS, but i will never know... I dont want to splash out so much money on hardware and software especially if it's likely to flop and leave me with an expensive, slow and pointless machine. If they really want to make an OS for PPC, why not make it run on Mac hardware? You can pick up a 2nd hand mac quite cheaply on ebay. I did so recently to try out OSX, i bought a cheap 2nd hand G4 and downloaded a copy of OSX (Yeah, i'm bad i know bla bla bla.. but i would never have tried it otherwise) and now having been impressed, am likely to buy new macs in the future. Hell, They could offer trial versions of OS4 that ran on macs, even microsoft offer 180 day trial versions of windows, not even microsoft have the nerve to demand money upfront for a product you've never seen before.
But netstumbler works by sending out broadcast packets to check for access points, which is likely to be illegal. Kismet is much better and will actually sniff traffic too (which is legal because its being broadcast) and won't transmit any data or try to connect to networks.
And this the same active directory that quite recently microsoft admitted was simply impossible to secure.. Yeah, we had 4 seperate engineers over from redmond until they admitted they couldn't lock it down to a satisfactory level.
Why VNC? X supports remote control features natively through such things as the XTEST extension (look for a tool called xremote) You can always do it the other way round, and use rdesktop to connect to a windows machine.... As for vmware on freebsd, i think only version 3 (old) works, but there was a similar tool made available for freebsd and posted to slashdot recently, but i forget the name.. I personally run linux at work, with a vmware image of windows which i haven't booted for months and only ever ran one or two tools.
VNC on X is totally pointless! It is much slower than the native remote display support X has.. And as for the virtual workspaces, virtually every window manager supports this natively... Why would you want to use anything like vnc when X11 can do everything natively and has done so for many years? The idea of multiple workspaces is an essential and integral part of X11, and the biggest reason i feel stifled when using windows or OSX..
And don't i know it.. I installed a default NT4 box and tried to connect to www.microsoft.com to download sp6a, boy was i outta luck.. I had to download it on another machine and make it available via samba... Does NT4/PPC have any compilers available? Maybe you could compile a recent version of mozilla on it, that might render it semi usefull... Also with the leak of the NT4 sourcecode, you could potentially compile your own sp6 and fix bugs etc..
Well, the CD boots on Alpha aswell.. But saying that, i don't think alpha needs a bootblock or anything, it supports the filesystem in the bios, mounts the drive and runs an installer program... I thought the IBM firmware worked in much the same way.
I'm sure it could boot from CD, wether or not the nt4 boot media is bootable on ppc is another matter, but i'm pretty sure those old ppc machines are capable of booting from any scsi block device, including a cdrom
Well the fact it doesn't install itself into the registry means it can install itself into its own dir and be self contained, and not conflict with newer versions or other stuff.
A huge missed marketting opportunity for DEC... An emulation environment that runs faster than the available native hardware would tempt people away from x86 and onto 64bit hardware... What's killing the itanic is the poor emulation of x86, and the biggest selling point of amd64 is the backwards compatibility. Back when the alpha could emulate an x86 machine faster than any real one, had DEC cut priced and aggressively marketted the alpha chips we could all be using alpha today. People would have run their old apps under emulation and new much faster native apps would have been written.
NT was originally meant to have a HAL like this. The problem was that, of the 4 architectures originally supported, only the alpha provided useable performance using this method (not just due to raw performance of the processor, but because of the PALcode feature - basically a programmable instruction set which is frequently used to emulate x86 and vax)
Slashdot Mirror
Ofcourse not, theyre holding back innovation so they can make as much money as possible out of their old obsolete technology before they have to start offering something new.
Actually, the majority of SSL websites are using RC4..
If you use Mozilla and Apache, you can use 256-bit AES encryption for SSL (try loading up paypal with a mozilla based browser) but if either the server or client is microsoft-based your stuck with the much weaker 128bit RC4...
MS - always behind the curve, no 256bit encryption, no 64bit os
NT was portable to other 32bit platforms, but it most definately wasn't 64bit clean. The port to the Alpha platform had to use a 32bit emulation feature of the DEC compiler and a lot of the NT code had to be rewritten to work on IA64/AMD64 in 64bit mode.
Aside from that, MacOS has always been a 32bit os, the first cpu it ran on was the 32bit 68000, tho it's true Apple took their time porting it to PPC and ran most of the OS under 68k emulation for a few years..
Aside from that, it's funny to note that other companies came out with 64bit os's before ms came out with a 32bit one.
And the gamecube has a very small marketshare as a result. A lot of ps2/xbox owners don't buy any games, but they still contribute to the platforms market and mind share.
Firefox is based on the same codebase as mozilla, but is somewhat stripped down, theres no reason it would be slower than mozilla.
As for ugliness, both mozilla and firefox can be themed and could easily be made to look the same..
As for the features, firefox has far more features than that simplistic shell that is IE.
Well, now that IE will no longer be distributed seperately from windows, and no updates will come out for the old versions, it will be necessary to buy an upgrade to windows in order to update IE.
And according to the last benchmarks i saw, the Alpha EV68 and EV7 chips, despite no development for years, beats the itanic at the same clockrate..
Ofcourse, HP are trying to de-emphasize the Alpha and won't be publishing the benchmarks showing what it can truly do..
As for huge multiprocessor systems, the interconnect has a HUGE impact on the overall performance, especially linpack benchmarks
It was ultimately price that drove me away from the Amiga... Mostly the price of basic internet software which is free or bundled on all other platforms, but also the high prices of hardware which is by no means cutting edge enough to demand such high price points. Most amiga hardware that's been available for the past 8 or so years has been equivalent to previous generation(s) x86 hardware but at a higher price point than mac hardware (which is usually of a far higher quality) infact some amiga hardware is price-competitive with high end risc hardware, while offering nowhere near the build quality or performance.
As for software, I used to come online from the amiga, however i found that the internet software for the amiga was of a much lower quality than the free offerings on other platforms. Also many of these tools had backdoors in them which were used by the developers in the name of "anti piracy" but were often abused by fascist friends of developers to harass other users off the platform. Infact i know many more people who abandoned the amiga platform because of the attitude of people like this.
But OS4 is pricey and ultimately doomed to failure.. Not only do you need to pay for the OS, but you also need to pay for the hardware to run it on, you can`t run it on just any PPC machine. People won't be willing to splash out just to try OS4. Linux is slowly gaining acceptance because it costs nothing to try it and you can use your existing hardware, OS4 doesn't have that advantage, and also with a slow uptake then apps will be developed very slowly. The original Amiga was successfull as a games platform primarily because of the ease of game copying, and from there some people became interested in the other features the platform had to offer... OS4 offers nothing to tempt people in like the original amiga did.
As for slow disk access on the original amiga, that really depended on your disk... The onboard scsi/ide controllers in the amigas were pretty slow, if you used an addin card some were very quick, also a disk caching tool (all modern os`s cache disk access by default) helped a lot..
True that network support was tacked on, just like it is with windows and macos 9 and below.
What i wonder tho, is why did they have to make their own hardware and OS.. This new amiga hardware is still out of date, theyre shipping 800mhz G4's while apple is pushing out 2.5ghz dual G5s.. Does OS4 even support multiple processors? And 32bit 33mhz PCI... While the rest of the world is moving on amiga users are once again left behind... I have machines as old as 1996 with 64bit pci slots.
OS4 may well be a great OS, but i will never know... I dont want to splash out so much money on hardware and software especially if it's likely to flop and leave me with an expensive, slow and pointless machine.
If they really want to make an OS for PPC, why not make it run on Mac hardware? You can pick up a 2nd hand mac quite cheaply on ebay. I did so recently to try out OSX, i bought a cheap 2nd hand G4 and downloaded a copy of OSX (Yeah, i'm bad i know bla bla bla.. but i would never have tried it otherwise) and now having been impressed, am likely to buy new macs in the future.
Hell, They could offer trial versions of OS4 that ran on macs, even microsoft offer 180 day trial versions of windows, not even microsoft have the nerve to demand money upfront for a product you've never seen before.
But netstumbler works by sending out broadcast packets to check for access points, which is likely to be illegal. Kismet is much better and will actually sniff traffic too (which is legal because its being broadcast) and won't transmit any data or try to connect to networks.
And this the same active directory that quite recently microsoft admitted was simply impossible to secure.. Yeah, we had 4 seperate engineers over from redmond until they admitted they couldn't lock it down to a satisfactory level.
Why VNC? X supports remote control features natively through such things as the XTEST extension (look for a tool called xremote)
You can always do it the other way round, and use rdesktop to connect to a windows machine....
As for vmware on freebsd, i think only version 3 (old) works, but there was a similar tool made available for freebsd and posted to slashdot recently, but i forget the name..
I personally run linux at work, with a vmware image of windows which i haven't booted for months and only ever ran one or two tools.
If you make an ISO image of that CD and try to burn more copies of it, do the new copies work in the same way?
You often can't help but run IE, you cannot remove it and lots of programs like to invoke it wether you like it or not.
VNC on X is totally pointless! It is much slower than the native remote display support X has..
And as for the virtual workspaces, virtually every window manager supports this natively... Why would you want to use anything like vnc when X11 can do everything natively and has done so for many years?
The idea of multiple workspaces is an essential and integral part of X11, and the biggest reason i feel stifled when using windows or OSX..
And don't i know it..
I installed a default NT4 box and tried to connect to www.microsoft.com to download sp6a, boy was i outta luck.. I had to download it on another machine and make it available via samba...
Does NT4/PPC have any compilers available? Maybe you could compile a recent version of mozilla on it, that might render it semi usefull...
Also with the leak of the NT4 sourcecode, you could potentially compile your own sp6 and fix bugs etc..
Well, the CD boots on Alpha aswell.. But saying that, i don't think alpha needs a bootblock or anything, it supports the filesystem in the bios, mounts the drive and runs an installer program... I thought the IBM firmware worked in much the same way.
The normal NT4 cd comes with a PPC version, also Mips and Alpha. You might need a boot disk of some kind however.
I'm sure it could boot from CD, wether or not the nt4 boot media is bootable on ppc is another matter, but i'm pretty sure those old ppc machines are capable of booting from any scsi block device, including a cdrom
Well the fact it doesn't install itself into the registry means it can install itself into its own dir and be self contained, and not conflict with newer versions or other stuff.
Those would be i960 processors, designed for embedded work.
A huge missed marketting opportunity for DEC...
An emulation environment that runs faster than the available native hardware would tempt people away from x86 and onto 64bit hardware...
What's killing the itanic is the poor emulation of x86, and the biggest selling point of amd64 is the backwards compatibility. Back when the alpha could emulate an x86 machine faster than any real one, had DEC cut priced and aggressively marketted the alpha chips we could all be using alpha today. People would have run their old apps under emulation and new much faster native apps would have been written.
Is IE4 even available for PPC? IE5 works on alpha atleast... But even if the virus exploits javascript it can hardly install an executeable payload.
NT was originally meant to have a HAL like this. The problem was that, of the 4 architectures originally supported, only the alpha provided useable performance using this method (not just due to raw performance of the processor, but because of the PALcode feature - basically a programmable instruction set which is frequently used to emulate x86 and vax)
There was office 97 for alpha, i have a copy somewhere round here... No idea about ppc/mips tho..