But can anybody tell me the difference between the full professional version and the upgrade?
I checked with my distributor, and the disk set is identical. No 'Check for previous version' sillyness. What differs are the manuals - you get an upgrade manual that (presumably) outlines the main differences from the previous version. I think this is in good Linux / Open Source spirit. The price diff is less than I'd pay for two Linux books at my bookstore anyway, and I'm very content to let the excess money go to a useful company (as opposed to.. well, nevermind:)
In my case, I have a 7.0 Personal on the shelf (had good manuals also), and am picking up a 9.0 Pro full version next week. The package list of the Pro version also appeals, there's some stuff in there (mostly video) I've tried to install independently before, with very limited luck.
Looks like we have happy competition between SuSE and RedHat - keep rockin'!
I sortof like the hitman depiction in the article. MeThinks the Open Source community needs to be thougher, not meeker, and the competent FSF people are doing a great, essential job here. That some companies try to join the game believing they can skip paragrahps in the GPL - their mistake. GPL is made to promote sharing - if you don't like it, use something else.
Being a die-hard libertarian, it does hurt me to see us depicted as commies singing 'Internationale'...:)
... is that, overall, ext2fs seems to perform better than ext3fs. I know journaling is an important advantage of ext3fs, but isn't it more important (for some applications) to have better performances?
Well, in some cases (which is why we have a choice in the first place). In most cases, that's easier solved by throwing hardware at the problem - you'll gain much more speed by using fast equipment than by changing FS.
And as the amount of data increases, features such as stability, journaling or guaranteed throughput become more important than raw top speed. A bit of performance is usually well worth these in most cases.
I'm a little confused-I have been told XFS is the best designed, highest performing file system, and I would hate to think SGI is getting into a lot of this crap with SCO for a relatively slow journaling file system...
IIRC, XFS is more about guaranteed performance under various stressful conditions than about getting the absolute peak speed in calm conditions.
Just found this article. The mainstream press is not blindly swollowing the SCO party line: CNN on SCO They state that the stock-dumping is of a noticeable scale and that it's very risky to buy any of that stock.
I'm sure Scott McNealy and Larry Ellison are not too content with their positions:) Jeff Bozos is obviously 'underrated', but that'll improve next year.
Worse yet, someone seems to have switched Bill Gates with Steve Ballmer - seems not many notice who's truely calling the shots at MS these days. It's Steve with his bullyness, not Bill with his nerdy curiosity.
As for Linus, I note that he's up from 21 last year. Things are going well.
The remark that his best work is in the past is just silly - his best work is not his coding (which is fine), but in his social skills which are phenomenal. If RMS would discover this, he might make it to the list one day, too:)
I'm editing the cover CD of a large computer magazine, and we recently had a serious discusstion about this subject in view of the latest Iraq war game (Conflict Desert Storm II) and the GTA-related shootings.
The bottom line is that we'll no longer feature game demos on our cover CD if they contain realistic scenes of humans killing humans. This implies that pretty much all war games are out, and many 1st person shooters.
Exceptions are things like Sci-Fi / Fantasy violence, that still passes (Serious Sam would be one of these), and strategic games where you guide small figures are also fine. Doom 3 is on the edge (I think it won't make it) due to very realistic horror scenes.
Personally I'm fine with this new party line, the only thing I might want exception for is historical wargames. We've had many Vietnam-style 'games' that have a very alternative approach to 'fun', in that they look and feel more like military training simulators than good old-fashioned fun. Am hoping this will promote more fun:)
But the folks who gave us Tiananmen still run the place.
Actually they left at the last party congress, it's a whole new generation of leaders. Not that I trust the new ones either, but I do give them the benefit of doubt.
But the whole 'See the source' thing looks more like a MS PR stunt to me. Chinese government gets to read, but not modify, some source. So what? They gain none of the real benefits of Open Source, and MS gets huge press...
I still find X (yes, it's XFree86) somewhat rubber-like compared to Windows, and don't like it. It's a minimal delay when activating widgets, marking text and stuff. Feels like reluctance.
Am running on a GeForce gfx card, that should be quite OK, I assume.
Will try out the latest 2.6 test kernel for interactivity patches, too.
This story has been up at Netcraft two times, the latest 4 weeks old. In both cases I was shaking my head over the misuse of statistics in the articles - the gains Apache made in the same months far outpaced the total number of Win2003 servers anyway. People experiment, and it's natural to change over a few servers to get to know the new stuff.
On both Netcraft and/. the news is presented as a loss for Linux. Anyone with any statistics knowledge and most without will recognize that the absolute numbers are insignificant, plain and simple.
Poor journalism that should never have made it's way to Slashdot.
That the 'News' is 4 weeks old (or 8 if you count the first time Netcraft ran it) adds insult to injury - this thing is not newsworthy - it's not even news at all.
Replacing X always sounded like a good idea - even back in the 80's I'd moan over the volume of network traffic and lag introduced by the stringent client-server design of X. And on a machine that's running both the server and the clients at one time, the overhead is just silly.
Now, one of the greater percieved advantages of Windows over Linux is that the user interface reacts faster - I readily admit I'm sold on snappy interfaces - the always-present slight delays of X bothers me.
Question now is: Does Y do anything to improve on X in this area? If not, it's just Eye Candy to me - nice, but the day I toss X I want something that fixes the lag problem.
Could somebody tell me the logic of why we destroy probes after their useful life is over?
Briefly, it's because it might otherwise crash into Europe (the moon, not the continent). It has itself discovered that conditions (water) exists on Europe that might habour life (however primitive), and crashing a sattelite from Earth with possible bacteria might contaminate Europe (the moon) with lethal bacteria.
It might sound like far-fetched science fiction - it ain't. It's the official reason for the Jupiter crash.
As others have noted, getting the client to accept the registration seems buggy. I've tried a dozen times, and my registration is now known to the server - but the client refuses to accept it, thus I cannot start calculating.
Either a bug in the registration process, or/. has hit hard again...
A huge chunk of the potential market has already been lost because of the large filesize.
Yadda, yadda...
We've got half the users, and the most active, broadbanded already - and for the rest, it's something like a 20 minute download. Not to mention that it'll probably appear on covermount CD's soon.
I've got this guy to read my inquiery. He probably doesn't like my request that they resolve their 'details' before any payment can take place:)
Hans Bayer: hansba@sco.com
I've written a lengthy letter that starts like this. E-mail me for full text:
Thank you for your reply. I shall fill in my details and will expect you to fill in yours.
My in-use Linux distributions are:
Caldera OpenLinux 2.4, running a straight file- and printserver. I was
given the installation CD at a conference with no restrictions on use or
requirements for license fees, and being published under the GNU GPL, I
assume that no additional license fees apply. I am considering changing
this, since you seem not to be upgrading this product further - which means
that support for USB and other new technologies is spotty at best.
RedHat 8.0.94, running kernel 2.6-test4, AMD Athlon workstation. This is
a public beta downloaded from the Internet, and updated with the latest
kernel from www.kernel.org. It is a kernel build without SMP, thus RCU is
not in use. NUMA does not apply to the i386 platform. It does use the Ext3
journaling file system, but since this has been developed as an extension of
the legacy Ext2 FS, and independently of the JFS from IBM, there is
presumably no SCO IP involved here. The heritage of IBM's JFS is being
discussed on the Internet, no need to go into details here.
The first piece of code you presented at the recent SCO conference has
been removed earlier by the Linux kernel programming team, as it was shown
to be of too poor quality for a modern OS. The second piece was developed
independently from published specs by a person never exposed to the Unix
source code - it must be a mistake that your chose this, thus I'll give it
no further consideration.
Summing up, I assume that you have no code in this kernel, and thus that
no licensing fees will apply. If you differ on this, please let me know the
details (modules / file names) and I'll look into not compiling it in, or
having it replaced by new code.
SuSE 7.0 Personal, boxed, running on a Pentium-based laptop. Since you
have a joint project with SuSE to develop UnitedLinux, SuSE customers should
(according to SuSE) be free from any additional licensing. This is currently
running kernel 2.5.70, and I offer you to remove any SCO IP from the kernel.
All I need to know is which elements of the kernel are in question.
Furthermore, I'm planning to set up a web/ftp server, based on Pentium
(possibly dual CPU). At this time, I'm undetermined which Linux
distribution/kernel version to use, and I am curious about which ones can be
used without violating any IP problems. Therefore, I kindly ask your advice
on the subject. Please be specific, however, any claims without sufficient
details to investigate the matter will be disregarded. We intend to use only
code that has been legally licensed and is free to use.
Since the pricing of your SCO IP Licenses is set quite high, I am mainly
interested in removing any and all SCO IP from our computers, which should
resolve the matter completely. Therefore, I ask you in good faith and well
in advance of any court decision to provide me with details on how to do so.
Please also note that all code in the Linux kernel has been licensed to me
under the GNU GPL by the copyright holders. I consider my licenses to be
complete and covering - if you have an IP issue, I think you should contact
the individual copyright holders first, to clear out any problems. Since IBM
has taken the SCO Group to court for breach of the GPL, any licensing issues
will of course be pending the courts opinion on the matter.
Seems our foes at SCO are at it again. I emailed them to inquire about why they'd request license for my two desktops, two servers. They actually replied, requesting name, address and info about my Linux installations (distribution etc.). I've written a very, very detailed explanation about it (quoting LOTS of material showing how wacky they are. Just facts), and this has in turn been forwarded to another sales representative. Now two of them have read my description of their sillyness.
If, based on this, they send me an invoice, I'll take them to court for fraud (it's just like those fake phone dictionaries sending out masses of bills).
And if sufficient many of us keem them busy like this, they'll be too busy to get any work done.
The letter is a bit too long to post here, but I'll email it to anyone interested. Just please do not send them a copy of this! Use it as inspiration, write your own.
"Hey, another reason NOT to upgrade to the new version!"
New version of what? The Microsoft or the OpenOffice?
New version of Microsoft Office. They're coming up with new incompatible file formats. Real bad for interoperability everywhere.
If OpenOffice, is there something wrong with it? Please, tell me, why shouldn't I upgrade?!
OpenOffice is just fine, and each new revision brings better MS Office compatibility.
That is, until the next version of MS Office, which has patented technology in its file formats. Even attempting to read/write that new version will be a patent violation! So much for limitless interoperability...
Slashdot Mirror
Furthermore, no license costs are incurred for the installation on multiple machines or for software subject to the GPL (General Public License).
on their 10 reasons to switch page. Cool.
I checked with my distributor, and the disk set is identical. No 'Check for previous version' sillyness. What differs are the manuals - you get an upgrade manual that (presumably) outlines the main differences from the previous version. I think this is in good Linux / Open Source spirit. The price diff is less than I'd pay for two Linux books at my bookstore anyway, and I'm very content to let the excess money go to a useful company (as opposed to .. well, nevermind :)
In my case, I have a 7.0 Personal on the shelf (had good manuals also), and am picking up a 9.0 Pro full version next week. The package list of the Pro version also appeals, there's some stuff in there (mostly video) I've tried to install independently before, with very limited luck.
Looks like we have happy competition between SuSE and RedHat - keep rockin'!
Being a die-hard libertarian, it does hurt me to see us depicted as commies singing 'Internationale'... :)
In stock options, that is. He'll need a bit more time to excercise those and then sell the resulting stock. Another 2Q's, I guess.
Well, in some cases (which is why we have a choice in the first place). In most cases, that's easier solved by throwing hardware at the problem - you'll gain much more speed by using fast equipment than by changing FS.
And as the amount of data increases, features such as stability, journaling or guaranteed throughput become more important than raw top speed. A bit of performance is usually well worth these in most cases.
IIRC, XFS is more about guaranteed performance under various stressful conditions than about getting the absolute peak speed in calm conditions.
Just found this article. The mainstream press is not blindly swollowing the SCO party line:
CNN on SCO
They state that the stock-dumping is of a noticeable scale and that it's very risky to buy any of that stock.
Worse yet, someone seems to have switched Bill Gates with Steve Ballmer - seems not many notice who's truely calling the shots at MS these days. It's Steve with his bullyness, not Bill with his nerdy curiosity.
As for Linus, I note that he's up from 21 last year. Things are going well.
The remark that his best work is in the past is just silly - his best work is not his coding (which is fine), but in his social skills which are phenomenal. If RMS would discover this, he might make it to the list one day, too :)
The bottom line is that we'll no longer feature game demos on our cover CD if they contain realistic scenes of humans killing humans. This implies that pretty much all war games are out, and many 1st person shooters.
Exceptions are things like Sci-Fi / Fantasy violence, that still passes (Serious Sam would be one of these), and strategic games where you guide small figures are also fine. Doom 3 is on the edge (I think it won't make it) due to very realistic horror scenes.
Personally I'm fine with this new party line, the only thing I might want exception for is historical wargames. We've had many Vietnam-style 'games' that have a very alternative approach to 'fun', in that they look and feel more like military training simulators than good old-fashioned fun. Am hoping this will promote more fun :)
Actually they left at the last party congress, it's a whole new generation of leaders. Not that I trust the new ones either, but I do give them the benefit of doubt.
But the whole 'See the source' thing looks more like a MS PR stunt to me. Chinese government gets to read, but not modify, some source. So what? They gain none of the real benefits of Open Source, and MS gets huge press...
I still find X (yes, it's XFree86) somewhat rubber-like compared to Windows, and don't like it. It's a minimal delay when activating widgets, marking text and stuff. Feels like reluctance.
Am running on a GeForce gfx card, that should be quite OK, I assume.
Will try out the latest 2.6 test kernel for interactivity patches, too.
On both Netcraft and /. the news is presented as a loss for Linux. Anyone with any statistics knowledge and most without will recognize that the absolute numbers are insignificant, plain and simple.
Poor journalism that should never have made it's way to Slashdot.
That the 'News' is 4 weeks old (or 8 if you count the first time Netcraft ran it) adds insult to injury - this thing is not newsworthy - it's not even news at all.
Now, one of the greater percieved advantages of Windows over Linux is that the user interface reacts faster - I readily admit I'm sold on snappy interfaces - the always-present slight delays of X bothers me.
Question now is: Does Y do anything to improve on X in this area? If not, it's just Eye Candy to me - nice, but the day I toss X I want something that fixes the lag problem.
Anyone digging Douglas Adams just has to wonder how this filesize came about. Divine intervention? Or just an auspicious sign :)
Interesting. Did you notice that hardly anything - no SYSV or SCO code clearly - goes into Linux? Only a little Minix, Ancient Unix and BSD stuff.
On the other hand, Linux seems to inspire the other Unix'es quite a bit.
Sorry :)
That's how we spell Europe in Denmark - should've stuck with that...
Briefly, it's because it might otherwise crash into Europe (the moon, not the continent). It has itself discovered that conditions (water) exists on Europe that might habour life (however primitive), and crashing a sattelite from Earth with possible bacteria might contaminate Europe (the moon) with lethal bacteria.
It might sound like far-fetched science fiction - it ain't. It's the official reason for the Jupiter crash.
Works now :)
Either a bug in the registration process, or /. has hit hard again...
Yadda, yadda...
We've got half the users, and the most active, broadbanded already - and for the rest, it's something like a 20 minute download. Not to mention that it'll probably appear on covermount CD's soon.
Lighten up, it's all pretty good
SCO has already givin up their right to be treated as professionals.
Which shouldn't keep us from being pro about the issue. Calmly and firmly crush those who are trying to disrupt the blooming business of others.
Heh - it even looks like good fun :)
Hans Bayer: hansba@sco.com
I've written a lengthy letter that starts like this. E-mail me for full text:
Thank you for your reply. I shall fill in my details and will expect you to fill in yours.
My in-use Linux distributions are:
Caldera OpenLinux 2.4, running a straight file- and printserver. I was given the installation CD at a conference with no restrictions on use or requirements for license fees, and being published under the GNU GPL, I assume that no additional license fees apply. I am considering changing this, since you seem not to be upgrading this product further - which means that support for USB and other new technologies is spotty at best.
RedHat 8.0.94, running kernel 2.6-test4, AMD Athlon workstation. This is a public beta downloaded from the Internet, and updated with the latest kernel from www.kernel.org. It is a kernel build without SMP, thus RCU is not in use. NUMA does not apply to the i386 platform. It does use the Ext3 journaling file system, but since this has been developed as an extension of the legacy Ext2 FS, and independently of the JFS from IBM, there is presumably no SCO IP involved here. The heritage of IBM's JFS is being discussed on the Internet, no need to go into details here.
The first piece of code you presented at the recent SCO conference has been removed earlier by the Linux kernel programming team, as it was shown to be of too poor quality for a modern OS. The second piece was developed independently from published specs by a person never exposed to the Unix source code - it must be a mistake that your chose this, thus I'll give it no further consideration.
Summing up, I assume that you have no code in this kernel, and thus that no licensing fees will apply. If you differ on this, please let me know the details (modules / file names) and I'll look into not compiling it in, or having it replaced by new code.
SuSE 7.0 Personal, boxed, running on a Pentium-based laptop. Since you have a joint project with SuSE to develop UnitedLinux, SuSE customers should (according to SuSE) be free from any additional licensing. This is currently running kernel 2.5.70, and I offer you to remove any SCO IP from the kernel. All I need to know is which elements of the kernel are in question.
Furthermore, I'm planning to set up a web/ftp server, based on Pentium (possibly dual CPU). At this time, I'm undetermined which Linux distribution/kernel version to use, and I am curious about which ones can be used without violating any IP problems. Therefore, I kindly ask your advice on the subject. Please be specific, however, any claims without sufficient details to investigate the matter will be disregarded. We intend to use only code that has been legally licensed and is free to use.
Since the pricing of your SCO IP Licenses is set quite high, I am mainly interested in removing any and all SCO IP from our computers, which should resolve the matter completely. Therefore, I ask you in good faith and well in advance of any court decision to provide me with details on how to do so. Please also note that all code in the Linux kernel has been licensed to me under the GNU GPL by the copyright holders. I consider my licenses to be complete and covering - if you have an IP issue, I think you should contact the individual copyright holders first, to clear out any problems. Since IBM has taken the SCO Group to court for breach of the GPL, any licensing issues will of course be pending the courts opinion on the matter.
I'm turning 40 on Sept 21st. Does anyone know a more exact time for the plunge that I can make out a toast in memory of this wonderful machine?
Seems our foes at SCO are at it again. I emailed them to inquire about why they'd request license for my two desktops, two servers. They actually replied, requesting name, address and info about my Linux installations (distribution etc.). I've written a very, very detailed explanation about it (quoting LOTS of material showing how wacky they are. Just facts), and this has in turn been forwarded to another sales representative. Now two of them have read my description of their sillyness.
If, based on this, they send me an invoice, I'll take them to court for fraud (it's just like those fake phone dictionaries sending out masses of bills).
And if sufficient many of us keem them busy like this, they'll be too busy to get any work done.
The letter is a bit too long to post here, but I'll email it to anyone interested. Just please do not send them a copy of this! Use it as inspiration, write your own.
New version of what? The Microsoft or the OpenOffice?
New version of Microsoft Office. They're coming up with new incompatible file formats. Real bad for interoperability everywhere.
If OpenOffice, is there something wrong with it? Please, tell me, why shouldn't I upgrade?!
OpenOffice is just fine, and each new revision brings better MS Office compatibility.
That is, until the next version of MS Office, which has patented technology in its file formats. Even attempting to read/write that new version will be a patent violation! So much for limitless interoperability...