They count systems sold with linux preinstalled. Since time and time again it has been shown that the number of users capable of installing an operating system is insignificant thus users just use whatever comes with the computer.
Individual designers are great and all but when it come to the dollar signs they don't mean squat. They probably constitute less than 5% of those who PAY for their $600 a copy photoshop. Small shops buy a single copy and illegally install it on all their pc's (sad but still reality).
Big studios on the other hand and big graphics HAVE been moving to linux. Disney, pretty much the entire movie and animation industry. On every mention of apps there are literally dozens of posts just on slashdot wishing the apps were available for linux.
With that being the case I'm sure if Adobe and others put out feelers (something which is hardly unknown for corporations that waste more money on these feelers than the less than 50k it'd cost to port the app) they'd find there is growing interest and the potential to sieze the linux graphics market like they did with Mac and windows.
Graphics benches favoring linux on mac have been around for ages, it's simple you render on MacOS it's blows windows away, you render on linux on pc it blows macOS away, you render on Linux on mac it blows both away.
Nope, this doesn't even count that, it only counts systems that come preinstalled with linux. If you buy or download a linux distro and setup a dual boot that doesn't get counted.
Considering the number of desktop users even capable of installing an operating system is far far fewer than 3% I'd say that's not a very significant number to consider anyway;)
You must be crazy, in case you haven't noticed in operating systems linux is hardly catching up, open source development in practice is generally about 5x as fast and yet significantly more stable with fewer bugs and tighter security.
Open source simply hasn't significantly concentrated on this particular area yet, that doesn't mean that it never will and that when it does it won't blow commercial development away like it has in every other popular area of development.
How exactly do you figure that not choice? The owner of the pc chooses the operating system. If all pc's come preloaded with one operating system then there is no choice. But if a corporation chooses to put linux on IT'S desktops then the choice was made.
Or do you honestly believe the secretary should choose the OS on the desktop? lol
At home it's your pc or pcs and you choose the operating system on the pcs you own. If you have 4 pcs, like I do, that counts as 4 desktops. Because my computer illiterate wife didn't choose the OS on the desktops I let her use does that mean there was no choice? Of course not, their my desktops and I chose what to run on my computers.
Yes but that doesn't stop someone from dropping out of the project and looking over this code and writting a COMPLETE documentation of the api based upon it which the remaining developers could then use.
a minimal linux install can fit on a floppy disk. The craziest ideas of a general purpose minimal linux install are under 50mb. The redhat/fedora minimal install are 300-400MB, you decide how minimal it is;)
If it's like fedora 1 you need all the iso's. minimal install STILL requires like 30mbs off of disc 3. There is plenty of room for everything and then some on disc1 but due to poor structuring and layout of the cd's.
Those aren't just his reasons, those are the reasons the open source movement came into existance to begin with. The reasons individuals have for following may differ but the reason for the movement itself does not.
Demonstrating that a computer is just a calculator is not exactly teaching programming either.
Teaching that kid BASIC as his first language not only hides from him an understanding of what various types of loop translate to on the system and why one is more efficient to the other, it also impairs him to learn any other programming language henceforth since about the only one basic easily translates to is pascal.
Unless you count vb, I'd almost more readily call html a programming language. But really that was just an analogy to demonstrate the concept.
The relation is the same, you have output beneath that can be written in efficient and inefficient manners but produce the same apparent result. The only way to know those is to understand that code. And then you have a high level program to generate that output, some are grossely inefficient, or are grossely inefficient when applied in various ways. Without understanding html you'd never know that each time you move an image a pixel your frontpage or publisher program leaves legacy crud.
Just as someone who doesn't know asm isn't going to know that a for and while loop in their high level language end up being different output and that it DOES make a difference which they use when either will work (dated example I know, sue me).
I'd disagree, because of one simple thing. I feel it's never good to learn an abstracted layer before learning what it's abstracting.
To use something that doesn't send chills down so many people's spines. html. There are so many people using netscape composer, and frontpage, etc etc. Would you really recommend someone use an html editor without learning html first? Of course not, you can't use one properly or even know if the one your using is any good if you can't see the code output... which is far more important than the visual output.
I agree 100% and think minimalism is a wonderful experience to have in there. Whether or not I'd think it's the place to start for your first language is another matter.
Your post makes no sense unless you were confused by my mistype, I meant to say "the x86 core ISN'T going to get you far if what your wanting to do is talk to the kernel". Parts of the kernel ARE in assembler, and the bootloader is largely in ASM.
So in truth, the kernel is the car. Asm can be the road, it can be the engine, it can be the passengers, it can be the wind resistance, it can be virtually any component. But nonetheless, if your writting an application sitting on top of the kernel you are going to need to speak to the kernel's api at some point (or the api of a layer sitting on top of it), just as if your writting a windows application in asm or c, or vb, you need to be speaking to the win32 api.
Asm is no different than any other language, knowing the language is great and all, but it's worthless without learning the proper api's you'll need to actually write a program that does something. That's a major flaw in most programming tutorials. They'll teach C or another language and not mention a single word about the api's one needs to know to actually write a program that does more than calculate pie.
I started out learning to code in asm on my c64 and I'd have to say it was a very rewarding experience.
Anyone who disagrees with this probably doesn't have much experience coding in assembler to begin with. Asm really is fairly easy, the trick is that most who teach asm actually spend too much time on those computer concepts and not enough time on actual real coding. It's wonderful understanding how the machine works, and necessary to write good assembler but you should start with the 2 pages of understanding that is needed to "get" asm at all.
Then teach language basics and THEN teach about the machine using actual programs (text editor, other simple things) and explaining the reason they are coded the way they are in small chunks. Instead of handing a chart of bios calls and a tutorial on basic assembler, introduce bios calls in actual function in a program, most of them are simple enough that when shown in use they are quite clear and anyone can understand.
After all assembler, pretty much any assembler, is composed of VERY simple pieces, it's understanding how those pieces can be fit together to form a simple construct and how those simple constructs form together to create a simple function and how those simple functions form together to create a simple yet powerful program that teaches someone programming. Learning to program this way keeps things easy, but still yields a wealth of knowledge about the system.
It also means that when you write code for the rest of your life you'll have an understanding of what this and that form of loop do in C (insert language here) and why this one is going to be faster since simply looking at the C (insert language here) concepts doesn't show any benefit to one over the other.
It is in the same fashion that win32 asm is different from linux asm. The core is the same but knowing the core of x86 assembler is going to get you far if what you are wanting to do is talk to the kernel.
I wasn't aware privacy was a problem that needed a solution. I was under the impression it was lack of privacy in numerous areas that needs to be fixed.
I think a better answer would be to remove all public databases altogether. A database which can be used to verify that a domain is held is great, or that your new domain "is out there". But that certainly doesn't require anything more than a single record giving a random ID that came from a webpage with a "generate" button that autogenerates a unique 128bit ID number without being given any information whatsoever.
Slashdot Mirror
They count systems sold with linux preinstalled. Since time and time again it has been shown that the number of users capable of installing an operating system is insignificant thus users just use whatever comes with the computer.
Actually I find it quite broad. The way it is phrased it includes EVERY version of MacOS including OS X.
Individual designers are great and all but when it come to the dollar signs they don't mean squat. They probably constitute less than 5% of those who PAY for their $600 a copy photoshop. Small shops buy a single copy and illegally install it on all their pc's (sad but still reality).
Big studios on the other hand and big graphics HAVE been moving to linux. Disney, pretty much the entire movie and animation industry. On every mention of apps there are literally dozens of posts just on slashdot wishing the apps were available for linux.
With that being the case I'm sure if Adobe and others put out feelers (something which is hardly unknown for corporations that waste more money on these feelers than the less than 50k it'd cost to port the app) they'd find there is growing interest and the potential to sieze the linux graphics market like they did with Mac and windows.
Graphics benches favoring linux on mac have been around for ages, it's simple you render on MacOS it's blows windows away, you render on linux on pc it blows macOS away, you render on Linux on mac it blows both away.
Nope, this doesn't even count that, it only counts systems that come preinstalled with linux. If you buy or download a linux distro and setup a dual boot that doesn't get counted.
Considering the number of desktop users even capable of installing an operating system is far far fewer than 3% I'd say that's not a very significant number to consider anyway ;)
You must be crazy, in case you haven't noticed in operating systems linux is hardly catching up, open source development in practice is generally about 5x as fast and yet significantly more stable with fewer bugs and tighter security.
Open source simply hasn't significantly concentrated on this particular area yet, that doesn't mean that it never will and that when it does it won't blow commercial development away like it has in every other popular area of development.
Troll. Linux is about free software, as in freedom not the price tag. We want to see sourcecode, we don't care if we have to pay for the app.
For that matter I've even purchased software that wasn't open source for linux.
How exactly do you figure that not choice? The owner of the pc chooses the operating system. If all pc's come preloaded with one operating system then there is no choice. But if a corporation chooses to put linux on IT'S desktops then the choice was made.
Or do you honestly believe the secretary should choose the OS on the desktop? lol
At home it's your pc or pcs and you choose the operating system on the pcs you own. If you have 4 pcs, like I do, that counts as 4 desktops. Because my computer illiterate wife didn't choose the OS on the desktops I let her use does that mean there was no choice? Of course not, their my desktops and I chose what to run on my computers.
No kidding, it's called open source, it's a proven method.
Yes but that doesn't stop someone from dropping out of the project and looking over this code and writting a COMPLETE documentation of the api based upon it which the remaining developers could then use.
a minimal linux install can fit on a floppy disk. The craziest ideas of a general purpose minimal linux install are under 50mb. The redhat/fedora minimal install are 300-400MB, you decide how minimal it is ;)
My system is 100% optimized for my athlonXP, yours can be too, just pick up a copy of gentoo and do a stage1 install.
If it's like fedora 1 you need all the iso's. minimal install STILL requires like 30mbs off of disc 3. There is plenty of room for everything and then some on disc1 but due to poor structuring and layout of the cd's.
The xbox is the least of the hardware that microsoft currently manufactures.
Microsoft doesn't make phones... YET. If they got a lock on the market they'd so be in there.
Those aren't just his reasons, those are the reasons the open source movement came into existance to begin with. The reasons individuals have for following may differ but the reason for the movement itself does not.
A simple view page source yields that the site was not handcoded at all.
Demonstrating that a computer is just a calculator is not exactly teaching programming either.
Teaching that kid BASIC as his first language not only hides from him an understanding of what various types of loop translate to on the system and why one is more efficient to the other, it also impairs him to learn any other programming language henceforth since about the only one basic easily translates to is pascal.
Unless you count vb, I'd almost more readily call html a programming language. But really that was just an analogy to demonstrate the concept.
The relation is the same, you have output beneath that can be written in efficient and inefficient manners but produce the same apparent result. The only way to know those is to understand that code. And then you have a high level program to generate that output, some are grossely inefficient, or are grossely inefficient when applied in various ways. Without understanding html you'd never know that each time you move an image a pixel your frontpage or publisher program leaves legacy crud.
Just as someone who doesn't know asm isn't going to know that a for and while loop in their high level language end up being different output and that it DOES make a difference which they use when either will work (dated example I know, sue me).
I'd disagree, because of one simple thing. I feel it's never good to learn an abstracted layer before learning what it's abstracting.
To use something that doesn't send chills down so many people's spines. html. There are so many people using netscape composer, and frontpage, etc etc. Would you really recommend someone use an html editor without learning html first? Of course not, you can't use one properly or even know if the one your using is any good if you can't see the code output... which is far more important than the visual output.
I agree 100% and think minimalism is a wonderful experience to have in there. Whether or not I'd think it's the place to start for your first language is another matter.
Your post makes no sense unless you were confused by my mistype, I meant to say "the x86 core ISN'T going to get you far if what your wanting to do is talk to the kernel". Parts of the kernel ARE in assembler, and the bootloader is largely in ASM.
So in truth, the kernel is the car. Asm can be the road, it can be the engine, it can be the passengers, it can be the wind resistance, it can be virtually any component. But nonetheless, if your writting an application sitting on top of the kernel you are going to need to speak to the kernel's api at some point (or the api of a layer sitting on top of it), just as if your writting a windows application in asm or c, or vb, you need to be speaking to the win32 api.
Asm is no different than any other language, knowing the language is great and all, but it's worthless without learning the proper api's you'll need to actually write a program that does something. That's a major flaw in most programming tutorials. They'll teach C or another language and not mention a single word about the api's one needs to know to actually write a program that does more than calculate pie.
I started out learning to code in asm on my c64 and I'd have to say it was a very rewarding experience.
Anyone who disagrees with this probably doesn't have much experience coding in assembler to begin with. Asm really is fairly easy, the trick is that most who teach asm actually spend too much time on those computer concepts and not enough time on actual real coding. It's wonderful understanding how the machine works, and necessary to write good assembler but you should start with the 2 pages of understanding that is needed to "get" asm at all.
Then teach language basics and THEN teach about the machine using actual programs (text editor, other simple things) and explaining the reason they are coded the way they are in small chunks. Instead of handing a chart of bios calls and a tutorial on basic assembler, introduce bios calls in actual function in a program, most of them are simple enough that when shown in use they are quite clear and anyone can understand.
After all assembler, pretty much any assembler, is composed of VERY simple pieces, it's understanding how those pieces can be fit together to form a simple construct and how those simple constructs form together to create a simple function and how those simple functions form together to create a simple yet powerful program that teaches someone programming. Learning to program this way keeps things easy, but still yields a wealth of knowledge about the system.
It also means that when you write code for the rest of your life you'll have an understanding of what this and that form of loop do in C (insert language here) and why this one is going to be faster since simply looking at the C (insert language here) concepts doesn't show any benefit to one over the other.
It is in the same fashion that win32 asm is different from linux asm. The core is the same but knowing the core of x86 assembler is going to get you far if what you are wanting to do is talk to the kernel.
I wasn't aware privacy was a problem that needed a solution. I was under the impression it was lack of privacy in numerous areas that needs to be fixed.
I think a better answer would be to remove all public databases altogether. A database which can be used to verify that a domain is held is great, or that your new domain "is out there". But that certainly doesn't require anything more than a single record giving a random ID that came from a webpage with a "generate" button that autogenerates a unique 128bit ID number without being given any information whatsoever.
If nothing else it'd be a great way to wrack up whoever is running the system's phone bills with calls to every number in every phone book in norway.