Well Motif is proprietary. Since most other distros won't have Motif, there is no choice but Redhat if you want Oracle. This causes fragmentation in the linux market.
Be is giving the linux community a desktop to run under a linux server. But BFS would be a bad choice because they made choices that make it really good for a desktop OS but not good at all for a server. Indexing attributes makes it much faster to find stuff and there are some great applications for it but it slows down creating/deleting files and directories by a great deal. This isn't such a big deal for the user who doesn't have to delete folders all the time but it's a big hit for a server. On the other hand, it would be nice if linux could read/write on BFS volumes
for awhile mozilla people were working on lesstif because it wouldn't be right to use motif. But then they decided to dump it completely and use GTK because it's open sourced and more popular, backed by Redhat and Gnome. So is Redhat changing their minds again?
Yeah but IE only runs on operating systems that are bug ridden, only works *sometimes*, tends to bring processor performance down, hogs memory and cpu...
One company shouldn't be allowed to affect the economy. So if hurting Microsoft today means we have a more robust economy in the future-I'm all for it.
I'm looking at both posts and 'uh oh here we go again.' People think that "their" OS can do everything. It's ridiculous to use linux as a mainframe OS but on the other hand, linux is light years ahead of solaris on pc's. Read my lips "L I G H T Y E A R S". So again, we have 2 operating systems that are great in what they do but absolutely suck in the other things.
Well if NT isn't used as a server, it's easier to use non-MS technologies on the client side as well. That doesn't mean they'll use linux on the desktop-that doesn't make any sense at this point. But it certainly leaves the door open to Corel, Lotus, Netscape, Sun, etc. But if NT is used as the server then it becomes more compelling to have an MS-only solution across the board.
linux offers other technologies that Be doesn't have. It's a better server. It's more configurable because it's under the GPL. Fine-BeOS is easier to use because it's _not_ under the GPL. 2 completely different OS's for 2 completely different users. Sometimes they need to share technologies. Linux needs a journalling FS to be a better server. That doesn't mean it's going to turn into BeOS! BeOS needs to integrate VM and disk cache to be better for users-that doesn't mean it's going to turn into freebsd or linux. In the end, it's all about implementation. Most people don't want to deal with 5 zillion patches, GUI's and distros. And some people _do_ and you have to accept that.
LSB won't solve the fragmentation of support that's already occurring. Fortunately, Redhat is so dominant right now which makes it easy -just use Redhat if you want to be sure you'll get support.
oh please. just look at all the security threats because of this IE integration. The only thing stopping me from 98lite is the MS EULA. But it definitely works and proves MS has no case.
NTFS was 64 bit and journaling for quite a while-I don't see what the big deal is here. On the other hand those benchmarks look good (ok benchmarks are just benchmarks but still)
Well there's freedom for users and freedom for developers. I think BSD increases freedom for both. With BSD users have 2 choices-the completely open source version or the proprietary version. With GPL you only have one choice. With BSD, developers can do whatever they wish with the code. They now have the option to incorporate 3rd party code such as OpenGL or Quicktime or whatever. If the developer wants to make money off the code, there's nothing standing in their way. They have a right to privacy which is an important aspect of freedom that many here seem to have forgotten. Freedom doesn't mean you have a right to enter my house/property without my permission
Slashdot Mirror
no you'd be a normal slashdotter if you liked Radio Shack for building your own radios from a kit
I know :) That's why I said read/write
What about compatibility with the other linux distros that don't (because they can't-not open/free) have Motif/CDE?
Well Motif is proprietary. Since most other distros won't have Motif, there is no choice but Redhat if you want Oracle. This causes fragmentation in the linux market.
you mean Oracle/Sun/AOL and _linux_. I think that tempers things out a bit don't you think?
yes but I thought the other Oracle unix ports use Motif
and only runs on Apple hardware
I am dot completely disturbed by iT
I think it's easier to work with Oracle
but they can't open source Motif. And if this is big news for Red Hat then it's bad news for GTK
Be is giving the linux community a desktop to run under a linux server. But BFS would be a bad choice because they made choices that make it really good for a desktop OS but not good at all for a server. Indexing attributes makes it much faster to find stuff and there are some great applications for it but it slows down creating/deleting files and directories by a great deal. This isn't such a big deal for the user who doesn't have to delete folders all the time but it's a big hit for a server. On the other hand, it would be nice if linux could read/write on BFS volumes
for awhile mozilla people were working on lesstif because it wouldn't be right to use motif. But then they decided to dump it completely and use GTK because it's open sourced and more popular, backed by Redhat and Gnome. So is Redhat changing their minds again?
Yeah but IE only runs on operating systems that are bug ridden, only works *sometimes*, tends to bring processor performance down, hogs memory and cpu...
One company shouldn't be allowed to affect the economy. So if hurting Microsoft today means we have a more robust economy in the future-I'm all for it.
I'm looking at both posts and 'uh oh here we go again.' People think that "their" OS can do everything. It's ridiculous to use linux as a mainframe OS but on the other hand, linux is light years ahead of solaris on pc's. Read my lips "L I G H T Y E A R S". So again, we have 2 operating systems that are great in what they do but absolutely suck in the other things.
Well if NT isn't used as a server, it's easier to use non-MS technologies on the client side as well. That doesn't mean they'll use linux on the desktop-that doesn't make any sense at this point. But it certainly leaves the door open to Corel, Lotus, Netscape, Sun, etc. But if NT is used as the server then it becomes more compelling to have an MS-only solution across the board.
linux offers other technologies that Be doesn't have. It's a better server. It's more configurable because it's under the GPL. Fine-BeOS is easier to use because it's _not_ under the GPL. 2 completely different OS's for 2 completely different users. Sometimes they need to share technologies. Linux needs a journalling FS to be a better server. That doesn't mean it's going to turn into BeOS! BeOS needs to integrate VM and disk cache to be better for users-that doesn't mean it's going to turn into freebsd or linux. In the end, it's all about implementation. Most people don't want to deal with 5 zillion patches, GUI's and distros. And some people _do_ and you have to accept that.
if it's not Redhat, nobody cares. You're not going to get Windows and Mac musicians to come to yet another obscure underground linux distro.
LSB won't solve the fragmentation of support that's already occurring. Fortunately, Redhat is so dominant right now which makes it easy -just use Redhat if you want to be sure you'll get support.
I wasn't able to reach that site (no response) but it's pretty strange to expect musicians to go out of their way to install an unsupported patch.
umm BeOS has a 250 microsecond scheduling latency. That's us not ms.
but you shouldn't be proud by merely catching up with NT. That's my point. The news should be about the technology that makes reiser fs unique.
oh please. just look at all the security threats because of this IE integration. The only thing stopping me from 98lite is the MS EULA. But it definitely works and proves MS has no case.
NTFS was 64 bit and journaling for quite a while-I don't see what the big deal is here. On the other hand those benchmarks look good (ok benchmarks are just benchmarks but still)
Well there's freedom for users and freedom for developers. I think BSD increases freedom for both. With BSD users have 2 choices-the completely open source version or the proprietary version. With GPL you only have one choice. With BSD, developers can do whatever they wish with the code. They now have the option to incorporate 3rd party code such as OpenGL or Quicktime or whatever. If the developer wants to make money off the code, there's nothing standing in their way. They have a right to privacy which is an important aspect of freedom that many here seem to have forgotten. Freedom doesn't mean you have a right to enter my house/property without my permission