I think either I or you are misunderstanding the article. My understanding is that people are discussing a text-based (well, I suppose there's X support) Unix environment. This is does not contain the graphical stuff that's what Apple's selling.
Frankly, I'm pretty sure that they already have, when people requested "source" earlier, not "kernel source", you know?
The shame of all this is that it produces bad PR for Linux (other companies don't want to use it if they get bad articles about companies apparently getting screwed).
Tanenbaum is also notable for publically telling Linus in his early days that Linux had a piss-poor design, and that he would have failed Linux for it.
Now, a tiny minority of people know what Tanenbaum's Minix is, and everybody is impacted by Linux.
If filesharing is completely shutdown the need for higher bandwidth comes into question. I have known average users who say things like "$40/month for broadband isn't too bad b/c I can get free music."
Incidently, while P2P may produce losses for the music industry (seems pretty reasonable to assume so), I'm not entirely certain that as an absolute value, it's not causing people to spend more, if on other industries. It drove the broadband revolution -- a massive change in the telcos. It produced a huge boom in demand for storage -- Maxtor and WD enjoyed a massive surge in demand for hard drives. CD burners, which had seen only lackluster appeal (and high prices) before P2P sold like hotcakes. I remember walking into Office Depot and seeing fully half of the computer peripheral section being CDR-related.
Of course, while people may be spending less per album going to the music industry, they're listening to a lot more -- the average P2P sharer has far more music than in the old days.
I am totally against the DMCA, but how much of a chance do you think SBC has of winning?
Suppose they don't have any chance of winning. Which do you think is a better PR move -- simply rolling over, as some ISPs did, or dragging their heels in favor of their customers publically every step of the way?
If you like trading music and are about to get broadband, which company would *you* sign up with?
Putting more things into the kernel is not a good thing - things that can be run in unpriveledged userspace are best done there. How many exploits do you want to see today?
I'm curious -- so you feel that the lack of symlinks in Windows is desireable? And the Windows file locking semantics also so? MS had so many complaints from users about open files not being deletable or moveable that, that they had to do something. If you take a look, in XP's Explorer, you can move a folder that's open, even if it's on a share and another computer has it open. XP's Explorer will not pop up an error dialog, even if the unlinking fails. It will remove the folder from the window, giving the impression to the user that the operation has succeeded. If, however, you refresh said window, you will see the empty folder once again there -- the failure simply was silent, and the entire workaround in explorer.
As for explorer providing high-level widgets, I simply think that this should be part of a library not bundled with Explorer (obviously not part of the kernel).
And the memory leaks, from what I've seen, come from Explorer and other user-level apps, not the kernel leaking pages.
Don't know if you've noticed, but in the last ten years after the web browser was introduced and the JVM became common, there really hasn't been any innovation. Just, "hey! Let's take an existing concept and slap internet in it!"
No. It's always been like this. You've just become more cynical and knowledgeable about what's out there.
Almost all work is evolutionary. Slow and pretty obvious at the time.
No, that's not true. It's an investment in a patent portfolio, which is an enormously powerful weapon for an established company.
I do know a couple people from CMU that did work at MS Research, and it's considered sort of where you go when either you're done doing serious work and want to dick around and draw pay. Lots of old CMU profs headed on up there after they've established themselves.
The problem is mostly that these ideas are *old* ones that have been done before. Microsoft does a lot of research to lock up IP in patents. The idea of research is that companies start putting out amazing new tech to consumers, but despite years of spending lots of money and locking up IP, MS has put very little into actual products.
I think the title says it all. I mean, BOWLS? Who the hell is on crack at MS (besides the MS Software Security and Ethics divisions, if they even exist)? Excuse me, but why would looking at a picture of keys make a parent feel more comfortable?
Well...that was reasonable analysis there, but it still comes down to the fact that if Clippy was a good idea, one has to explain why Microsoft is throwing it out.
Hence, the whole argument about "the only intuitive interface is the nipple".
I'm dubious as to whether the nipple is particularly intuitive at all. If someone shoves a big, fleshy thing into *your* mouth, is *your* first reaction "Hmm, I think I'll suck hard on this for a while"?
Thank you for the useful link to this page detailing Microsoft's operating systems. Without your help I would be left wondering: "What operating systems does this Microsoft company make? Do they make the Lunix?
I also appreciate the effort. I was unaware the MS does in fact make the Lunix.
I'm visualizing 10 robots sitting at a conference table, while the whole board of directors is sitting at home, naked, drinking their morning coffee, etc.
This does sort of imply that (a) social greeting has gotten out of hand, and (b) that we should consider the Japanese shallow bow instead of the handshake. More sanitary, quicker, less fatiguing.
MS stability isn't all that far from Linux stability. I'd pretty safe-feeling with both the NT kernel and the Linux kernel. GNOME software and Explorer -- *application software* both have instabilities.
Granted, so much crap is tied into Explorer that Explorer dying is generally worse than the GNOME panel crashing, but if you compare each chunk to its Linux equivalent, it's not *that* far away.
If MS hadn't made a couple of totally stupid moves, tying functionality into Explorer instead of doing it the right way, in the kernel, Explorer crashing away wouldn't be such a big deal (Explorer simulates symlinks, Explorer works around stupid MS file-locking semantics in XP, Explorer provides the high-level widgets for many other applications...)
Slashdot Mirror
You *do* use cash instead of a credit card to make the purchase, right? Otherwise you've gained essentially nothing.
Advertising doesn't work on me. It usually just makes me not want to buy things.
:-)
So things like the bandwagon tactic (convincing you to do/think what everyone else is because everyone else is doing so) don't work on you, eh?
As you sit on Slashdot and join half the people on here in griping about privacy?
Advertising definitely works. If you see a brand frequently, people tend to consider said brand more reputable.
You stop by CNN.com, and a pop-up flashes on screen: "Hello, Mr Thompson, you look like you could use a bigger penis!"
And Mrs. Smith, who is seeing the add, is quite shocked.
it sounds similar to price fixing to me
It's not.
Price fixing causes an artifical oligopoly.
Simply charging the most that people will bear screws the wealthy and benefits the poor.
Region coding, for example, screws USians but massively benefits Indonesians (since they can't afford to pay US prices).
Probably when it was developed, 2.4.21 wasn't out.
And 2.4.5 is not a development kernel. Anything of the format 2.X.Y, where X is an odd number, is a development kernel.
I think either I or you are misunderstanding the article. My understanding is that people are discussing a text-based (well, I suppose there's X support) Unix environment. This is does not contain the graphical stuff that's what Apple's selling.
Frankly, I'm pretty sure that they already have, when people requested "source" earlier, not "kernel source", you know?
The shame of all this is that it produces bad PR for Linux (other companies don't want to use it if they get bad articles about companies apparently getting screwed).
They run out and swipe Linux, the suits won't support Linux, and they've dragged their heels at every step and complying with the licensing terms.
I'm damned if I'm buying or recommending Linksys again. They have too many viable competitors.
Tanenbaum is also notable for publically telling Linus in his early days that Linux had a piss-poor design, and that he would have failed Linux for it.
Now, a tiny minority of people know what Tanenbaum's Minix is, and everybody is impacted by Linux.
If filesharing is completely shutdown the need for higher bandwidth comes into question. I have known average users who say things like "$40/month for broadband isn't too bad b/c I can get free music."
Incidently, while P2P may produce losses for the music industry (seems pretty reasonable to assume so), I'm not entirely certain that as an absolute value, it's not causing people to spend more, if on other industries. It drove the broadband revolution -- a massive change in the telcos. It produced a huge boom in demand for storage -- Maxtor and WD enjoyed a massive surge in demand for hard drives. CD burners, which had seen only lackluster appeal (and high prices) before P2P sold like hotcakes. I remember walking into Office Depot and seeing fully half of the computer peripheral section being CDR-related.
Of course, while people may be spending less per album going to the music industry, they're listening to a lot more -- the average P2P sharer has far more music than in the old days.
I am totally against the DMCA, but how much of a chance do you think SBC has of winning?
Suppose they don't have any chance of winning. Which do you think is a better PR move -- simply rolling over, as some ISPs did, or dragging their heels in favor of their customers publically every step of the way?
If you like trading music and are about to get broadband, which company would *you* sign up with?
It's not flying; it's falling with style.
Putting more things into the kernel is not a good thing - things that can be run in unpriveledged userspace are best done there. How many exploits do you want to see today?
I'm curious -- so you feel that the lack of symlinks in Windows is desireable? And the Windows file locking semantics also so? MS had so many complaints from users about open files not being deletable or moveable that, that they had to do something. If you take a look, in XP's Explorer, you can move a folder that's open, even if it's on a share and another computer has it open. XP's Explorer will not pop up an error dialog, even if the unlinking fails. It will remove the folder from the window, giving the impression to the user that the operation has succeeded. If, however, you refresh said window, you will see the empty folder once again there -- the failure simply was silent, and the entire workaround in explorer.
As for explorer providing high-level widgets, I simply think that this should be part of a library not bundled with Explorer (obviously not part of the kernel).
And the memory leaks, from what I've seen, come from Explorer and other user-level apps, not the kernel leaking pages.
You're looking for the excellent mtr.
Believe me, there isn't anything you can do on a network in Windows that you can't do better in Linux.
Too paranoid. That'd be way too expensive.
MS just wants lots and lots of patents that they can use to club other companies to death if they have to.
Don't know if you've noticed, but in the last ten years after the web browser was introduced and the JVM became common, there really hasn't been any innovation. Just, "hey! Let's take an existing concept and slap internet in it!"
No. It's always been like this. You've just become more cynical and knowledgeable about what's out there.
Almost all work is evolutionary. Slow and pretty obvious at the time.
Not making the stockholders money?
No, that's not true. It's an investment in a patent portfolio, which is an enormously powerful weapon for an established company.
I do know a couple people from CMU that did work at MS Research, and it's considered sort of where you go when either you're done doing serious work and want to dick around and draw pay. Lots of old CMU profs headed on up there after they've established themselves.
The problem is mostly that these ideas are *old* ones that have been done before. Microsoft does a lot of research to lock up IP in patents. The idea of research is that companies start putting out amazing new tech to consumers, but despite years of spending lots of money and locking up IP, MS has put very little into actual products.
I think the title says it all. I mean, BOWLS? Who the hell is on crack at MS (besides the MS Software Security and Ethics divisions, if they even exist)? Excuse me, but why would looking at a picture of keys make a parent feel more comfortable?
Well...parents that are key fetishists!
Up here at CMU, it's just where you go when you're tired of producing serious work and want to lie back with an easy salary.
Well...that was reasonable analysis there, but it still comes down to the fact that if Clippy was a good idea, one has to explain why Microsoft is throwing it out.
Hence, the whole argument about "the only intuitive interface is the nipple".
I'm dubious as to whether the nipple is particularly intuitive at all. If someone shoves a big, fleshy thing into *your* mouth, is *your* first reaction "Hmm, I think I'll suck hard on this for a while"?
Excellent! You've just done better research than Microsoft!
Didn't take too much work, did it?
Microsoft, like most successful companies in the United States, is primarily a marketing institution, not a technical one.
Thank you for the useful link to this page detailing Microsoft's operating systems. Without your help I would be left wondering: "What operating systems does this Microsoft company make? Do they make the Lunix?
I also appreciate the effort. I was unaware the MS does in fact make the Lunix.
I'm visualizing 10 robots sitting at a conference table, while the whole board of directors is sitting at home, naked, drinking their morning coffee, etc.
This does sort of imply that (a) social greeting has gotten out of hand, and (b) that we should consider the Japanese shallow bow instead of the handshake. More sanitary, quicker, less fatiguing.
MS stability isn't all that far from Linux stability. I'd pretty safe-feeling with both the NT kernel and the Linux kernel. GNOME software and Explorer -- *application software* both have instabilities.
Granted, so much crap is tied into Explorer that Explorer dying is generally worse than the GNOME panel crashing, but if you compare each chunk to its Linux equivalent, it's not *that* far away.
If MS hadn't made a couple of totally stupid moves, tying functionality into Explorer instead of doing it the right way, in the kernel, Explorer crashing away wouldn't be such a big deal (Explorer simulates symlinks, Explorer works around stupid MS file-locking semantics in XP, Explorer provides the high-level widgets for many other applications...)