Your well reasoned view is a far cry from "fuck industry." I do realize that companies need to be socially responsible, but comments such as "fuck industry" really show a lack of knowledge about the events of the past. Things are the way they are for a reason. Of course industry can become more humane and responsible, but outright being hostile to it "fuck industry" is ignoring stuff that the situations elsewhere in the world have taught us.
libc isn't the entire API. Stuff like the format of the virtual file systems (/proc and/devfs) also matters. My point is that forks shouldn't be allowed to happen unless they are forced to follow a standard. This can easily be done by Linus not allowing forks to use the "Linux" trademark without standards compliance. Without being forced like this, it is all too easy (because programmers are lazy, I know I am!) for companies to make proprietory interfaces (say through another library like ALSA does) just to make their job easier.
Forking is a nice thing to allow the kernel to do, but I'd be very careful about doing it on a whim. If it can be avoided, that would be the best thing. This all harks back to the whole KDE/GNOME mess. The problem with that isn't duplicated work, but duplicated APIs. Its also the same reason why OpenGL still isn't as popular as D3D, comptibility. It is critical that different implementations remain source (and preferably binary) compatibile with each other. I'd hope that somebody would have the sense to create a Linux Standards Committie (oh, wait...) that would decided changes to the API standards. Without such a body, you get the whole UNIX fragmentation mess all over again. The problem stems from the fact that people are willing to change things that they own. Because Linux owns the kernel right now, IBM can't change the API. However, if they create their own fork, then they'll go changing APIs that, with some work, they could avoid changing. Like it or not, programmers are human, and they are inherently irresponsible. You can't just say "fork it, it'll work out" because frankly, it won't.
"Fuck Industry!!!" Shame on you! You don't know where it's been!
Seriously, though, I'd be careful about saying stuff like that. Industry is the whole reason fucks like you can sit on their computers and whine about it. Industry is the backbone of this country (and most of the developed world) and without it, you guys wouldn't have homes, much less computers. THere are dozens of countries out there that are having major growing pains trying to build industries own. They have to deal with pollution, worker-abuse, monetary drains, etc. And you know what? It's worth it. Because eventually, industry will allow countries like that to not only gain wealth and feed its citizens, but will allow them to become more environmentally responsible and more socially free. (Surprise surprise! Got to have money before you can worry about the environment!)
Not really. He has a point. It really would be nice if the moderation system was extended to lower troll postings. First, you could implmenent a snooper for links that would check against a database of common "goat" links (seems that trolls just seem to reuse the same ones) which would set a warning flag on the post. Second, you could seperate the real trolls from the "doesn't say good things about Linux" "trolls". Very often, an unpopular opinion is moderated down. While this is inevitable, it would be helpful to create a distinction between tech-related posts, and totally unrelated "troll" posts. Right now, I often browse at -1, because so much good stuff gets moderated down. Also, AC's often have something important to say, and unfortunatly, their valid posts and some troll posts both end up at rating 0. It would also be helpful if you could filter comments by rating catagory instead of value. For example, allow "offtopic" or "flame-bait" but dissallow "troll" (which would be reserved for goat links.) There are just tons of things you could do to improve the troll situation around here.
I'm surprised that nobody knew this. This compatibility is absolutely not possible. Dreamcast games are not written for WindowsCE (except for some early ones) but for the close-to-the-metal SegaOS (guess why!). That means serveral things:
A) Lots of SH4 ASM
B) No Win32
C) Direct coding to the PowerVR, no DirectX used.
The whole situation is made more complicated by the fact that the PVR chipset has to have code written specially for it. That means that although DirectX does work with it, it works suboptimally. That also means that most games ditch D3D and use their own routines to access the graphics card. Hence, these games would not work on an XBox.
I never said it wasn't offensive of morally bankrupt, I just said it wasn't the part of the government to regulate it.
Re:Do this on other platforms
on
2.2 vs 2.4
·
· Score: 2
Or... you could eat lunch.... just a thought;)
Re:Small niggle with the article
on
2.2 vs 2.4
·
· Score: 2
Dude, I've got a 20GB Maxtor, and HDTach reports (average) sustained rates in the mid 20's (over the entire drive.) That means for at least a quarter of the drive, it is saturating my UDMA/33 bus.
Umm, the kernel code has nothing whatsoever to do with the system code. If you've ever looked at Win32, you'll know that it is nowhere near as simple as POSIX (with one Xception.) The fact that the userspace is convultated is due to crappy design of the userspace, not crappy code in the kernel. (The kernel code is a bit convultated, but most people say it is quite elegant. But IANAKE)
I doubt it. Microsoft is obsessive about documentation. The DirectX docs, for example, are around 800 pages just for the API. Anything and everything about that API is in those pages. I have a hard time believing that the same level of documentation doesn't exist for the source itself.
If the API is any indication, I can only imagine what the implementation is like. Actually, I was looking at the bootloader code for Win95 the other day. Some guy had dissasembled it, and he kept refering to the code's author as "some crazy mother f*cker." Take a look here. A couple of the comments are hilarious (as is the code!)
Not that I encourage this, but there is a very elegant way to do this with SysV IPC. Just create a "server" using the library and have it respond to messeges.
I think the main reason child porn is illegal is not the actual porn itself, but the fact that making it is a form of child abuse. I abhor racists, bigots, and child abusers as much as the next guy, but I think that it is dangerous territory to start limiting freedom of speech in cases where it is not directly harmful. For example, keeping people from saying things that might insult a race or a gender is just too damn close to keeping people from insulting an institution (such as the government.) Keeping people from publishing stuff that might incite other people to do something illegal (such as this case) is dangerous because it can easily be extended to keeping people from publishing anti-government material. Freedom of speech is taking a huge beating lately, and it worries me. The problem is that right now, its limitations are being applied to obvious things. However, such types of laws have a way of spreading out their scope, and if the current track continues, I think we could end up with the very real danger of censorship.
PS> I think a Bush comment is quite relevent here;) This whole child-porn thing relates to a broader group of cases in which publishing material insulting to a particular group is illegal. The problem with that model is that the conservatives get to control what is considered offensive, and eventually, such laws lead to government instilled morality. That's why Bush's ideas of "bringing morality to the country through the whitehouse" bother me so much. It is not the governments job to protect the sensibilities of the public, it is their job to protect their bodies (and implicitly their mental health.) The government should stay out of your wallet as much as possible, but moreover, it should stay out of your soul; it should leave morality and values to the parents (who, BTW, are a big failiure in this generation) whose job it is to instill them.
PRICE FOR ONLINE ORDERS ONLY
- Nvidia Riva TNT2 vanta 16MB sdram
PCI - Retail Box
Nvidia Riva TNT2 vanta 16MB sdram PCI
$ 48
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Partially correct. There is a PCI version, it is just a little more expensive. Still, $48 is chump change considering how much better having good OpenGl compatibility feels.
Thanks to the wonders of OSS, you could probably just reuse XAA and the existing drivers! As I remember, the acceleration API is quite general. And all those people making two redundant desktop environments might be more useful creating a replacement for X. Of course, given the fact that the OSS community has infinate programms (according to popular logic) manpower shouldn't even be an issue.
A) I'm not a newbie. All my xinitrc's for the last several years have included a script to renice X to -20.
B) Yes it IS particularly bloated. While BeOS and QNX get away with full featured DEs for less than a meg, X at a minimum has a around 10-15 megs of binaries. Given the fact that QNX's Photon (in conjunction with QNET) does even more than X (full network transparency, window manager, FontFusion AA font renderer, OpenGL integration, etc, X compatibility) and takes up at most a few megs (with all the features, the most bloated being X compatibility) X has to be classified as criminally bloated.
C) Why doesn't anybody use xlib then? xlib reminds me a lot of GDI (which makes sense, the GDI is influenced by X), and given the fact that Win32 is overall one of the crappiest API's I've ever had the pain to program, that's not saying much.
Yo, why was this modd'ed down? X11 is a crufty piece of junk! And even if the moderator doesn't agree with that statement, there is evidence supporting it, and the rest of the post is quite insightful. (namely the bits related to using SDL and keeping network transparency.) Where are my mod-points when I need them?
Except make it not slow, bloated, and hard to program! You compatibility freaks should really realize when you just have to give it up and move on with new (and hopefully better) technology!
How long before this is in GNOME as well? Methinks personally that it will be there sooner or later. The "competition" between the desktop environments has until now shown that a Very Good Idea is soon to be adopted by all the players. (So s/"competition"/innovation/ here!)
>>>>>>>
However, they also have a case of "not invented here" syndrome, so most likely, GNOME EVAS will not be compatible with KDE EVAS, will not be compatible with E EVAS.
How exactly can OpenGL do stuff like this? I know that OpenGL is now added to Xfree 4 hardware-accelerated whenever possible, and otherwise software-wise, so I understand people will start to use the OpenGL API just because they know it is always as fast as possible. But I thought OpenGL was about 3D? (OpenGL is still a bare terrain for me.)
>>>
OpenGL doesn't really do 3D, it draws triangles in 3D space. All you have to do is fix your viewpoint directly above the scene, and make sure that everything you render is the same distance from the observer. For example, to blit a pixmap to part of a window, you create a texture out of the pixmap, and draw it on whatever part of the desktop you want. You get the hardware scaling effects by making the quad (quadralateral) you are using bigger or smaller, and OpenGL will not only resize the pic, but if you have filtering enabled, will smooth it out. You can do anti-aliasing creating a texture with the text and the correct alpha values, and alpha blending (again, accelerated by OpenGL) the texture onto the screen. OpenGL is actually quite nifty for 2D when used in this way. I wrote a little demo game once using GL. It was a 2D side scroller, but using OpenGL you can add stuff like rotation, scaling, light effects, cool fire effects, etc, that are usually hard (and slow) to do without GL.
So why are normal X extentions not hardware accellerated?
>>>>>
For most cards, the 2D path (used by X) doesn't mesh well with the 3D (OpenGL) path.
That's what X is supposed to do: work with your video card, right? I mean, why can't this be done through Xrender or whatever deals with antialias etc.?
>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose it could by done through X render, but I think that the XRender guys saw it fit to write their own driver API, maybe for good reasons (or maybe not;)
OS X uses OpenGL, but not to accelerate Quartz. What it does is allow GL in Quartz views. Quartz itself, is software rendered PDF. (Now if they *did* hardware render it, I'd have an excuse to buy a G4...)
actually rather good for pixely 2D stuff).
>>>
Actually, for most implementations, the OpenGL 2D path sucks monkey balls. It is only good when you treat the desktop as a 3D space with a fixed viewpoint. That means instead of using blits and stuff, you texture map windows onto quads and draw them. Of course, I don't know how Raster pulled it off, since OpenGL currently doesn't support hardware rendering to a pixmap, but hey, he's a smart guy.
give a ray of hope to those of us with slower cards
>>>>>>>
I don't think that any cards from the P120 era even *have* OpenGL HW acceleration, much less a good implementation of it. So no, I suggest you splurge and spend the $35 (on pricewatch) that a NVIDIA RivaTNT2 M64 costs. You'll be happier, trust me.
Slashdot Mirror
Your well reasoned view is a far cry from "fuck industry." I do realize that companies need to be socially responsible, but comments such as "fuck industry" really show a lack of knowledge about the events of the past. Things are the way they are for a reason. Of course industry can become more humane and responsible, but outright being hostile to it "fuck industry" is ignoring stuff that the situations elsewhere in the world have taught us.
libc isn't the entire API. Stuff like the format of the virtual file systems (/proc and /devfs) also matters. My point is that forks shouldn't be allowed to happen unless they are forced to follow a standard. This can easily be done by Linus not allowing forks to use the "Linux" trademark without standards compliance. Without being forced like this, it is all too easy (because programmers are lazy, I know I am!) for companies to make proprietory interfaces (say through another library like ALSA does) just to make their job easier.
Forking is a nice thing to allow the kernel to do, but I'd be very careful about doing it on a whim. If it can be avoided, that would be the best thing. This all harks back to the whole KDE/GNOME mess. The problem with that isn't duplicated work, but duplicated APIs. Its also the same reason why OpenGL still isn't as popular as D3D, comptibility. It is critical that different implementations remain source (and preferably binary) compatibile with each other. I'd hope that somebody would have the sense to create a Linux Standards Committie (oh, wait...) that would decided changes to the API standards. Without such a body, you get the whole UNIX fragmentation mess all over again. The problem stems from the fact that people are willing to change things that they own. Because Linux owns the kernel right now, IBM can't change the API. However, if they create their own fork, then they'll go changing APIs that, with some work, they could avoid changing. Like it or not, programmers are human, and they are inherently irresponsible. You can't just say "fork it, it'll work out" because frankly, it won't.
"Fuck Industry!!!" Shame on you! You don't know where it's been!
Seriously, though, I'd be careful about saying stuff like that. Industry is the whole reason fucks like you can sit on their computers and whine about it. Industry is the backbone of this country (and most of the developed world) and without it, you guys wouldn't have homes, much less computers. THere are dozens of countries out there that are having major growing pains trying to build industries own. They have to deal with pollution, worker-abuse, monetary drains, etc. And you know what? It's worth it. Because eventually, industry will allow countries like that to not only gain wealth and feed its citizens, but will allow them to become more environmentally responsible and more socially free. (Surprise surprise! Got to have money before you can worry about the environment!)
Not really. He has a point. It really would be nice if the moderation system was extended to lower troll postings. First, you could implmenent a snooper for links that would check against a database of common "goat" links (seems that trolls just seem to reuse the same ones) which would set a warning flag on the post. Second, you could seperate the real trolls from the "doesn't say good things about Linux" "trolls". Very often, an unpopular opinion is moderated down. While this is inevitable, it would be helpful to create a distinction between tech-related posts, and totally unrelated "troll" posts. Right now, I often browse at -1, because so much good stuff gets moderated down. Also, AC's often have something important to say, and unfortunatly, their valid posts and some troll posts both end up at rating 0. It would also be helpful if you could filter comments by rating catagory instead of value. For example, allow "offtopic" or "flame-bait" but dissallow "troll" (which would be reserved for goat links.) There are just tons of things you could do to improve the troll situation around here.
I'm surprised that nobody knew this. This compatibility is absolutely not possible. Dreamcast games are not written for WindowsCE (except for some early ones) but for the close-to-the-metal SegaOS (guess why!). That means serveral things:
A) Lots of SH4 ASM
B) No Win32
C) Direct coding to the PowerVR, no DirectX used.
The whole situation is made more complicated by the fact that the PVR chipset has to have code written specially for it. That means that although DirectX does work with it, it works suboptimally. That also means that most games ditch D3D and use their own routines to access the graphics card. Hence, these games would not work on an XBox.
I never said it wasn't offensive of morally bankrupt, I just said it wasn't the part of the government to regulate it.
Or... you could eat lunch.... just a thought ;)
Dude, I've got a 20GB Maxtor, and HDTach reports (average) sustained rates in the mid 20's (over the entire drive.) That means for at least a quarter of the drive, it is saturating my UDMA/33 bus.
Umm, the kernel code has nothing whatsoever to do with the system code. If you've ever looked at Win32, you'll know that it is nowhere near as simple as POSIX (with one Xception.) The fact that the userspace is convultated is due to crappy design of the userspace, not crappy code in the kernel. (The kernel code is a bit convultated, but most people say it is quite elegant. But IANAKE)
Even a 70 minute CD will store you without compression. 80 min is nearly 700 meg.
I doubt it. Microsoft is obsessive about documentation. The DirectX docs, for example, are around 800 pages just for the API. Anything and everything about that API is in those pages. I have a hard time believing that the same level of documentation doesn't exist for the source itself.
If the API is any indication, I can only imagine what the implementation is like. Actually, I was looking at the bootloader code for Win95 the other day. Some guy had dissasembled it, and he kept refering to the code's author as "some crazy mother f*cker." Take a look here. A couple of the comments are hilarious (as is the code!)
Not that I encourage this, but there is a very elegant way to do this with SysV IPC. Just create a "server" using the library and have it respond to messeges.
I think the main reason child porn is illegal is not the actual porn itself, but the fact that making it is a form of child abuse. I abhor racists, bigots, and child abusers as much as the next guy, but I think that it is dangerous territory to start limiting freedom of speech in cases where it is not directly harmful. For example, keeping people from saying things that might insult a race or a gender is just too damn close to keeping people from insulting an institution (such as the government.) Keeping people from publishing stuff that might incite other people to do something illegal (such as this case) is dangerous because it can easily be extended to keeping people from publishing anti-government material. Freedom of speech is taking a huge beating lately, and it worries me. The problem is that right now, its limitations are being applied to obvious things. However, such types of laws have a way of spreading out their scope, and if the current track continues, I think we could end up with the very real danger of censorship.
;) This whole child-porn thing relates to a broader group of cases in which publishing material insulting to a particular group is illegal. The problem with that model is that the conservatives get to control what is considered offensive, and eventually, such laws lead to government instilled morality. That's why Bush's ideas of "bringing morality to the country through the whitehouse" bother me so much. It is not the governments job to protect the sensibilities of the public, it is their job to protect their bodies (and implicitly their mental health.) The government should stay out of your wallet as much as possible, but moreover, it should stay out of your soul; it should leave morality and values to the parents (who, BTW, are a big failiure in this generation) whose job it is to instill them.
PS> I think a Bush comment is quite relevent here
Irreverent (in the context of the quote) means kinda offbeat, unusual, silly even. Mandrake's logos are definately silly. Maybe I shoulda said cutesy?
PRICE FOR ONLINE ORDERS ONLY
- Nvidia Riva TNT2 vanta 16MB sdram
PCI - Retail Box
Nvidia Riva TNT2 vanta 16MB sdram PCI
$ 48
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Partially correct. There is a PCI version, it is just a little more expensive. Still, $48 is chump change considering how much better having good OpenGl compatibility feels.
Thanks to the wonders of OSS, you could probably just reuse XAA and the existing drivers! As I remember, the acceleration API is quite general. And all those people making two redundant desktop environments might be more useful creating a replacement for X. Of course, given the fact that the OSS community has infinate programms (according to popular logic) manpower shouldn't even be an issue.
A) I'm not a newbie. All my xinitrc's for the last several years have included a script to renice X to -20.
B) Yes it IS particularly bloated. While BeOS and QNX get away with full featured DEs for less than a meg, X at a minimum has a around 10-15 megs of binaries. Given the fact that QNX's Photon (in conjunction with QNET) does even more than X (full network transparency, window manager, FontFusion AA font renderer, OpenGL integration, etc, X compatibility) and takes up at most a few megs (with all the features, the most bloated being X compatibility) X has to be classified as criminally bloated.
C) Why doesn't anybody use xlib then? xlib reminds me a lot of GDI (which makes sense, the GDI is influenced by X), and given the fact that Win32 is overall one of the crappiest API's I've ever had the pain to program, that's not saying much.
Yo, why was this modd'ed down? X11 is a crufty piece of junk! And even if the moderator doesn't agree with that statement, there is evidence supporting it, and the rest of the post is quite insightful. (namely the bits related to using SDL and keeping network transparency.) Where are my mod-points when I need them?
Except make it not slow, bloated, and hard to program! You compatibility freaks should really realize when you just have to give it up and move on with new (and hopefully better) technology!
How long before this is in GNOME as well? Methinks personally that it will be there sooner or later. The "competition" between the desktop environments has until now shown that a Very Good Idea is soon to be adopted by all the players. (So s/"competition"/innovation/ here!)
;)
>>>>>>>
However, they also have a case of "not invented here" syndrome, so most likely, GNOME EVAS will not be compatible with KDE EVAS, will not be compatible with E EVAS.
How exactly can OpenGL do stuff like this? I know that OpenGL is now added to Xfree 4 hardware-accelerated whenever possible, and otherwise software-wise, so I understand people will start to use the OpenGL API just because they know it is always as fast as possible. But I thought OpenGL was about 3D? (OpenGL is still a bare terrain for me.)
>>>
OpenGL doesn't really do 3D, it draws triangles in 3D space. All you have to do is fix your viewpoint directly above the scene, and make sure that everything you render is the same distance from the observer. For example, to blit a pixmap to part of a window, you create a texture out of the pixmap, and draw it on whatever part of the desktop you want. You get the hardware scaling effects by making the quad (quadralateral) you are using bigger or smaller, and OpenGL will not only resize the pic, but if you have filtering enabled, will smooth it out. You can do anti-aliasing creating a texture with the text and the correct alpha values, and alpha blending (again, accelerated by OpenGL) the texture onto the screen. OpenGL is actually quite nifty for 2D when used in this way. I wrote a little demo game once using GL. It was a 2D side scroller, but using OpenGL you can add stuff like rotation, scaling, light effects, cool fire effects, etc, that are usually hard (and slow) to do without GL.
So why are normal X extentions not hardware accellerated?
>>>>>
For most cards, the 2D path (used by X) doesn't mesh well with the 3D (OpenGL) path.
That's what X is supposed to do: work with your video card, right? I mean, why can't this be done through Xrender or whatever deals with antialias etc.?
>>>>>>>>>>
I suppose it could by done through X render, but I think that the XRender guys saw it fit to write their own driver API, maybe for good reasons (or maybe not
OS X uses OpenGL, but not to accelerate Quartz. What it does is allow GL in Quartz views. Quartz itself, is software rendered PDF. (Now if they *did* hardware render it, I'd have an excuse to buy a G4...)
actually rather good for pixely 2D stuff).
>>>
Actually, for most implementations, the OpenGL 2D path sucks monkey balls. It is only good when you treat the desktop as a 3D space with a fixed viewpoint. That means instead of using blits and stuff, you texture map windows onto quads and draw them. Of course, I don't know how Raster pulled it off, since OpenGL currently doesn't support hardware rendering to a pixmap, but hey, he's a smart guy.
give a ray of hope to those of us with slower cards
>>>>>>>
I don't think that any cards from the P120 era even *have* OpenGL HW acceleration, much less a good implementation of it. So no, I suggest you splurge and spend the $35 (on pricewatch) that a NVIDIA RivaTNT2 M64 costs. You'll be happier, trust me.