OFFTOPIC. I have been away for awhile... but this thread reminded me of value of/. Somehow, the reply filters and short posts, even if flame, convey more information than even Wikipedia can.
While I love this announcement, its not the dual boot part. Dual booting sucks... remember when you had to restart DOS to another config all the time? This is worse. Pain when you realize... sheesh, the app I want to run now is on the other OS. I believe this to be transitional to the Apple XP Shell which makes XP look like a Mac, including Cocoa/Carbon or whatever that stuff is.
I vote that Apple will do a GUI for Windows, but continue with OSX as well for the Unix enthusiasts. There is risk in any approach, so if they can afford to run 3 versions of apps (osx-ppc, osx-intel and windows-osxshell) then they have it all. Lots of testing of apps, but their shim on Windows lowers total testing effort by 80%. Sheer speculation. This dual-boot was a real surprise... how long does that "don't support" line really hold up without a further transition down the road?
I find that when companies start out, with their original founders that know their stuff, things are ok. Later, the originals leave/die/forced out, and bean counters take hold. Then, I don't trust them. Some companies later "find their roots", and maybe can trust them again.
I find that it is fun to get a new distro going on hardware or VM, but too pita to run on a regular basis. Easier to run OSS on Windows like Perl, PHP, LAMP, Python, MySQL, etc. etc.
C'mon, admit it. Nobody ever thought that they were illegally using FAT's technology when Linux (and other stuff) used FAT. Whether FAT is good or not is totally irrelevent, as is whether MS should patent it. Nobody checked... period. You should remove it to conform to the GPL... period.
Hmmm... maybe. Those are flaws in the game code, not the Xbox hardware. So, still can't do anything without opening the case. However, point taken, it would be another layer of security to check the game code. Here is a question; are there devices out in the wild that ARE more secure than the Xbox?
Remember, security is layers and each layer protects against certain hackers. Sniffing and understanding communication between chipsets is way beyond the average hacker. And, to date, I cannot place a disc in my XBox and turn it into something else without opening the case... so in my opinion, it is still secure.
I agree with the opinions here that the average gamer maybe won't be able to spare the cycles EVENTUALLY; i.e. first games for these advanced machine won't need all the power. So early games may be able to spare it. For me, I am such a lousy gamer that a) my classic Galaxian that I will buy yet again will have 2.8 CPU's to spare and b) I am so slow at current games that again, I will have a CPU to spare. However, these games have the freedom to not have to cooperate with other tasks on the system. So some sort of sharing will have to be either built into the game or hidden from it by the "OS".
Will be a neat thing, though. Ask MS to sign a Folding "game" for enthusiasts... post my Folding scores to Live, etc. Maybe I could "help" the folding? Monitor it, guide it, make some decisions? Doubtful, but cool!
This is a strange one. One train of thought is that IBM could not generate the G5 that Apple wanted; whether it be performance, power consumption, volume of chips... whatever. But that seems odd. Perhaps IBM wants to concentrate on their cell stuff... but what about RS6000's? They still need PowerPC. So that seems wrong. However, what does anyone know about closed door sessions that Jobs sits in?
I used to like conspiracies, but now I don't believe that successful ones happen that often. However with this one, I wonder if there is some other advantage that Jobs is thinking of. My bet is that the Apple "Intel Inside" boxes will be very Apple-specific just as the current ones are; Apple ROM's, and copyrighted stuff. So cross-platform OS will not happen (Windows won't run on Apple hw, and OSX will not run on PC's). So I am grudgingly wondering if cross platform applications is what he has in mind. Here is more of a stretch... MS is involved, and will provide and support some apps on either Windows or OSX, and gets a clip from OSX to "make up" for the "loss" of a Windows sale. And therefore MS provides a Win32 subsystem for OSX.
Sheesh... there I go, in JFK-land.
Interesting read. The mamoth x86 code base is not just MS's legacy... its ours.
Imagine the future where you buy an x86 "plug-in" to your Cell-based computer to run older apps; all newer.Net or Java apps get JIT'ed the first time you run them, then are fine. And you do this on your XBox.
I would prefer a WinCE boot USB key and/or CD. Would be a more familiar UI and better support (from MS). Kinda like AMD's 50x15 stuff, but use regular PC or an XBox.
Long term solutions are hard... and this is looong terrrrm. What I see in IT sometimes is short-to-medium term solutions, that are better than bandaids, that need tweaks and patches, and maintenance, and THOSE are what pay the bills. I see the same thing here with the casks. For humans, now, the casks stored NEAR THE ORIGINAL SITE are the "best" solution... sure, they need maintenance and perhaps enhancements... but that is the idea. Plus, keep them in our backyard because dammit, that is where we wanted the reactor so we are going to keep the long term costs visible which forces us to keep it safe.
... industry that lone inventors survive. As much as we would like to think sw dev is different, it is not... controlled by large corporations like anything else.
I see posts saying Windows is $200... for new PC's (new mobo's actually), you get OEM Windows which is priced far lower than retail... somewhere around $100CDN, I believe. And I think Ballmer would cut the Windows price to fit a $200 computer.
Slashdot Mirror
OFFTOPIC. I have been away for awhile ... but this thread reminded me of value of /. Somehow, the reply filters and short posts, even if flame, convey more information than even Wikipedia can.
While I love this announcement, its not the dual boot part. Dual booting sucks ... remember when you had to restart DOS to another config all the time? This is worse. Pain when you realize ... sheesh, the app I want to run now is on the other OS. I believe this to be transitional to the Apple XP Shell which makes XP look like a Mac, including Cocoa/Carbon or whatever that stuff is.
I vote that Apple will do a GUI for Windows, but continue with OSX as well for the Unix enthusiasts. There is risk in any approach, so if they can afford to run 3 versions of apps (osx-ppc, osx-intel and windows-osxshell) then they have it all. Lots of testing of apps, but their shim on Windows lowers total testing effort by 80%. Sheer speculation. This dual-boot was a real surprise ... how long does that "don't support" line really hold up without a further transition down the road?
Sheesh ...
I zip my code with the date as a version. Keep it simple.
I find that when companies start out, with their original founders that know their stuff, things are ok. Later, the originals leave/die/forced out, and bean counters take hold. Then, I don't trust them. Some companies later "find their roots", and maybe can trust them again.
... Nazis and off-world aliens that do not resemble any creature on Earth. Stick to those.
Totally agreed ... thanks! Lets face reality here ... NOTHING we do today is perfect either. Old triangle problem; pick any 2 sides.
Dumbo newbie question, but how does one disconnect from an SSH session running a bt without canning it first?
How come /. is not vulnerable to the /. effect? Text only? Super servers?
... like everything else. What global effort, or even national, is not?Are we surprised? Works good enough. Move along.
I find that it is fun to get a new distro going on hardware or VM, but too pita to run on a regular basis. Easier to run OSS on Windows like Perl, PHP, LAMP, Python, MySQL, etc. etc.
... for a hilarious thread! LOL! I am still smiling.
C'mon, admit it. Nobody ever thought that they were illegally using FAT's technology when Linux (and other stuff) used FAT. Whether FAT is good or not is totally irrelevent, as is whether MS should patent it. Nobody checked ... period. You should remove it to conform to the GPL ... period.
Hmmm ... maybe. Those are flaws in the game code, not the Xbox hardware. So, still can't do anything without opening the case. However, point taken, it would be another layer of security to check the game code. Here is a question; are there devices out in the wild that ARE more secure than the Xbox?
Remember, security is layers and each layer protects against certain hackers. Sniffing and understanding communication between chipsets is way beyond the average hacker. And, to date, I cannot place a disc in my XBox and turn it into something else without opening the case ... so in my opinion, it is still secure.
I agree with the opinions here that the average gamer maybe won't be able to spare the cycles EVENTUALLY; i.e. first games for these advanced machine won't need all the power. So early games may be able to spare it. For me, I am such a lousy gamer that a) my classic Galaxian that I will buy yet again will have 2.8 CPU's to spare and b) I am so slow at current games that again, I will have a CPU to spare. However, these games have the freedom to not have to cooperate with other tasks on the system. So some sort of sharing will have to be either built into the game or hidden from it by the "OS". Will be a neat thing, though. Ask MS to sign a Folding "game" for enthusiasts ... post my Folding scores to Live, etc. Maybe I could "help" the folding? Monitor it, guide it, make some decisions? Doubtful, but cool!
This is a strange one. One train of thought is that IBM could not generate the G5 that Apple wanted; whether it be performance, power consumption, volume of chips ... whatever. But that seems odd. Perhaps IBM wants to concentrate on their cell stuff ... but what about RS6000's? They still need PowerPC. So that seems wrong. However, what does anyone know about closed door sessions that Jobs sits in?
I used to like conspiracies, but now I don't believe that successful ones happen that often. However with this one, I wonder if there is some other advantage that Jobs is thinking of. My bet is that the Apple "Intel Inside" boxes will be very Apple-specific just as the current ones are; Apple ROM's, and copyrighted stuff. So cross-platform OS will not happen (Windows won't run on Apple hw, and OSX will not run on PC's). So I am grudgingly wondering if cross platform applications is what he has in mind. Here is more of a stretch ... MS is involved, and will provide and support some apps on either Windows or OSX, and gets a clip from OSX to "make up" for the "loss" of a Windows sale. And therefore MS provides a Win32 subsystem for OSX.
Sheesh ... there I go, in JFK-land.
Interesting read. The mamoth x86 code base is not just MS's legacy ... its ours.
Imagine the future where you buy an x86 "plug-in" to your Cell-based computer to run older apps; all newer .Net or Java apps get JIT'ed the first time you run them, then are fine. And you do this on your XBox.
Offtopic, but great.
I would prefer a WinCE boot USB key and/or CD. Would be a more familiar UI and better support (from MS). Kinda like AMD's 50x15 stuff, but use regular PC or an XBox.
Long term solutions are hard ... and this is looong terrrrm. What I see in IT sometimes is short-to-medium term solutions, that are better than bandaids, that need tweaks and patches, and maintenance, and THOSE are what pay the bills. I see the same thing here with the casks. For humans, now, the casks stored NEAR THE ORIGINAL SITE are the "best" solution ... sure, they need maintenance and perhaps enhancements ... but that is the idea. Plus, keep them in our backyard because dammit, that is where we wanted the reactor so we are going to keep the long term costs visible which forces us to keep it safe.
... industry that lone inventors survive. As much as we would like to think sw dev is different, it is not ... controlled by large corporations like anything else.
Perhaps switch everything from the Linux kernel to FreeBSD and avoid current SCO/future ? worries. And better integration with Apple.
I see posts saying Windows is $200 ... for new PC's (new mobo's actually), you get OEM Windows which is priced far lower than retail ... somewhere around $100CDN, I believe. And I think Ballmer would cut the Windows price to fit a $200 computer.