Of course, since it's somebody with the name 'OddWeapon' who made the correction, it has about as much credibility as any other uncooraborated fact posted in a comment on this site...
Okay, bruiser. So tell me where I buy a fucking PPC motherboard that's ATX form factor.
There's no way in hell a lot of us are going to wander down proprietary lane and buy hardware from a company that is virulently and aggressively single-sourced.
Nobody has been 'tempted away from Linux' except the same old Macintosh nancies who briefly flirted with dumping MacOS because of the disaster it was growing into prior to Apple buying NeXTStep and rebranding it as their 'new' OS.
Re:Please, mod parent down (was Re:Dear Don, does
on
Ask Donald Becker
·
· Score: 1
That's kind of like the old 'stone soup' story, except what if everybody shows up with more rocks and nobody brings any food?
The upper management of Apple bought NeXT and used it's OS, because they finally gave up on the inhouse effort at all their 'next generation' OSes. It has a Unix core, and they freshened it up by borrowing some FreeBSD code.
MacOS V. 10 isn't a 'win' for FreeBSD any more than it's a 'win' for any OS.
The fact they got there first is no reason for the rest of mankind to pay a levy or do without.
'The fact that they got there first' shows that they were spurred to work hard at developing the device, because of the rewards offered.
No, people do not work long hard hours for free, for social recognition. A few people can sit in their endowed chairs spending the grant money doled out to them (i.e. Stallman) but most people work for a living.
If it has 'value' (you used the p-word which I suspect you were trained to react to in a certain way) then that value should be transferrable. If Gershwin wanted his heirs to benefit from his work, that's his perogative.
Not all 'successful' people think that way, of course: Bill Gates intends for his children to have to work for their wealth, hence the Gates Foundation has a goal of seeing to it that his wealth is all given away by the time he's dead.
I'd have stuck with BeOS if it would have been closer to unix. Something seemed terribly broken to me logging into a machine that has a shell prompt and automatically being root.
Actually, some people thought the single user model was one of the virtues of BeOS. It had a lot of Unix-y goodness, but it didn't drag in a multi-user Time Sharing enviroment. Time Sharing environments are fine for servers and multi-user machines, but they're a real waste on a single user desktop machine.
I remember how angry I was when I was in tech school (in 1983) and the Computer-I elective was based around the 6800 processor. I, at the time, was a big advocate of the Z80 chip.
However, it's really an arbitrary point what processor is used in an introductory course. Only the true zealot lets the platform that basic concepts are taught on become a sticking point. I was wrong back then to rant, and the people here are wrong (generally) to rant as well. Do you obsess over what kind of wood the tables in the library are made out of?? (walnut! this is an expensive school, the tables should NOT be made out of maple!)
You slipped smoothly from 'It's sad to see them teach students how to use a product, instead of how to use the language.' to 'you should use this..' very smoothly there.
Furthermore, GCC may be a better tool than Visual Studio, but it's not an Integrated Development Enviroment. So you're comparing apples and oranges.
Please, oh please, don't say 'let them use vi.'
I like vi. I like it a lot. I like that it's on every Unix box I use and I can run it on a little shell screen from anywhere. I'm realistic enough, though, to know it's not what an intro student is going to warm up to.
"no one can do to Disney as Disney did to the Brothers Grimm."
Actually, the Brothers Grimm didn't create all those stories, either. They went around and collected from the oral tradition. So it's not theirs either.
The Intellectual Property (yeah, I know, dirty word that) in the Taiwanese 'high tech' industries is NOT particularly native to that island. Taiwan is NOT the Asian equivalent of, say, Germany. If it weren't advantageous for multinationals to produce certain types of goods in Taiwan the plants would be rolled out in some other country.
It is against the law for the vagrants to sleep on your sofa and defecate in your sink. You should call the police and have them arrested for trespassing.
It might be a good idea to start locking the door when you will be away, but it isn't necessary for you to lock the door to press charges against these people. Please do so, vigorously.
Whatever. There's practically a growth industry around shutting that stuff off.
My point is that people harping about the Paperclip end up coming off like they've not used a Microsoft product in, say, about five years. Not that that's a bad thing, but your criticism starts to sound irrelevant to the unwashed, like you don't have a clue. (which isn't how to convince people)
Of course, you are probably too young to remember the days of key disks (back in the days of 360K DSDD 5.25" floppies) and how big a pain in the butt they were then.
I'm not too young, and the way I remember it, the big pain was how easily a floppy diskette is to damage.
CDs are a LOT harder to damage. They are much, much more convenient than diskettes were.
This is an arguement about the P-word (yes I know, the high seas and all that...) and as always people insist on cloaking it in different terms, because they have honest, legitimate reasons to need to make copies of the CD.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, I can core out an old Macintosh and put the parts in a new case. Coolness.
Right.
FOAD, dude.
You just don't get it. Shiney things that are proprietary are BAD.
Of course, since it's somebody with the name 'OddWeapon' who made the correction, it has about as much credibility as any other uncooraborated fact posted in a comment on this site...
Okay, bruiser. So tell me where I buy a fucking PPC motherboard that's ATX form factor.
There's no way in hell a lot of us are going to wander down proprietary lane and buy hardware from a company that is virulently and aggressively single-sourced.
We did that before.
Nobody has been 'tempted away from Linux' except the same old Macintosh nancies who briefly flirted with dumping MacOS because of the disaster it was growing into prior to Apple buying NeXTStep and rebranding it as their 'new' OS.
That's kind of like the old 'stone soup' story, except what if everybody shows up with more rocks and nobody brings any food?
The upper management of Apple bought NeXT and used it's OS, because they finally gave up on the inhouse effort at all their 'next generation' OSes. It has a Unix core, and they freshened it up by borrowing some FreeBSD code.
MacOS V. 10 isn't a 'win' for FreeBSD any more than it's a 'win' for any OS.
The fact they got there first is no reason for the rest of mankind to pay a levy or do without.
'The fact that they got there first' shows that they were spurred to work hard at developing the device, because of the rewards offered.
No, people do not work long hard hours for free, for social recognition. A few people can sit in their endowed chairs spending the grant money doled out to them (i.e. Stallman) but most people work for a living.
Actually, it's greedy people like Stallman who want to take from the public domain, and lock it all up in their utopian political schemes.
But, of course, that's an aside.
It isn't GNU's makefile system.
I think you're talking about the make program, which GNU cloned (something they do quite well), but which existed before GNU.
If it has 'value' (you used the p-word which I suspect you were trained to react to in a certain way) then that value should be transferrable. If Gershwin wanted his heirs to benefit from his work, that's his perogative.
Not all 'successful' people think that way, of course: Bill Gates intends for his children to have to work for their wealth, hence the Gates Foundation has a goal of seeing to it that his wealth is all given away by the time he's dead.
There's a port of Linux/PPC for the BeOS
You can also run NetBSD on the BeBox (and it's not yet-another-fork like most Linux distros,) but *ahem* maybe that was already assumed.
I'd have stuck with BeOS if it would have been closer to unix. Something seemed terribly broken to me logging into a machine that has a shell prompt and automatically being root.
Actually, some people thought the single user model was one of the virtues of BeOS. It had a lot of Unix-y goodness, but it didn't drag in a multi-user Time Sharing enviroment. Time Sharing environments are fine for servers and multi-user machines, but they're a real waste on a single user desktop machine.
Oh, please.
Contrarians are never gonna mind your suggestions...
I remember how angry I was when I was in tech school (in 1983) and the Computer-I elective was based around the 6800 processor. I, at the time, was a big advocate of the Z80 chip.
However, it's really an arbitrary point what processor is used in an introductory course. Only the true zealot lets the platform that basic concepts are taught on become a sticking point. I was wrong back then to rant, and the people here are wrong (generally) to rant as well. Do you obsess over what kind of wood the tables in the library are made out of?? (walnut! this is an expensive school, the tables should NOT be made out of maple!)
Wow.
You slipped smoothly from 'It's sad to see them teach students how to use a product, instead of how to use the language.' to 'you should use this..' very smoothly there.
Furthermore, GCC may be a better tool than Visual Studio, but it's not an Integrated Development Enviroment. So you're comparing apples and oranges.
Please, oh please, don't say 'let them use vi.'
I like vi. I like it a lot. I like that it's on every Unix box I use and I can run it on a little shell screen from anywhere. I'm realistic enough, though, to know it's not what an intro student is going to warm up to.
Nope:
Both the Grimm brothers and Disney are wrong.
"no one can do to Disney as Disney did to the Brothers Grimm."
Actually, the Brothers Grimm didn't create all those stories, either. They went around and collected from the oral tradition. So it's not theirs either.
The Intellectual Property (yeah, I know, dirty word that) in the Taiwanese 'high tech' industries is NOT particularly native to that island. Taiwan is NOT the Asian equivalent of, say, Germany. If it weren't advantageous for multinationals to produce certain types of goods in Taiwan the plants would be rolled out in some other country.
I guess I don't get it.
The creation of Linus Torvalds is quite a good thing, but 'gleaning pure joy'???
I'm not trying to belittle anything, but Linus is also a rather modest person in many ways.
There seems to now be a whole group of industries based on fixing the problems with the Gnu Hurd.
Dear Confused in Cleveland,
It is against the law for the vagrants to sleep on your sofa and defecate in your sink. You should call the police and have them arrested for trespassing.
It might be a good idea to start locking the door when you will be away, but it isn't necessary for you to lock the door to press charges against these people. Please do so, vigorously.
Whatever. There's practically a growth industry around shutting that stuff off.
My point is that people harping about the Paperclip end up coming off like they've not used a Microsoft product in, say, about five years. Not that that's a bad thing, but your criticism starts to sound irrelevant to the unwashed, like you don't have a clue. (which isn't how to convince people)
IBM tried a total redesign with the Microchannel BUS. EISA was an 'extension' of the old ISA bus, and not proprietary.
Just a little pedantry this morning....
I'm not too young, and the way I remember it, the big pain was how easily a floppy diskette is to damage.
CDs are a LOT harder to damage. They are much, much more convenient than diskettes were.
This is an arguement about the P-word (yes I know, the high seas and all that...) and as always people insist on cloaking it in different terms, because they have honest, legitimate reasons to need to make copies of the CD.