Don't forget to read the man page on hdiutils when you discover that you can't burn ISO9660 cds through the GUI without buying shareware. It Just Works!
(once you install Fink...)
I agree completely. OS X is a fine product with many positive qualities for the consumer or graphic design/media professional, but it can't replace Linux. Terminal.app, iTerm, and Aqua are unbearably slow. To maintain backwards compatablility the GUI code interacts with the filesystem in ways that can't sync with CLI operations. This disconnect remains even if one uses UFS.
Even the selling point most often touted beyond the cliched "it just works" line -- that OS X is a joy to look at -- fell flat on me after a while. Most of the widgets have wonderful aesthetics (except the scrollbar trough), but I don't think it looks any better than an average GNOME installation.
X's lack of change is more likely due to the fact that it IS so modular; changing X in significant ways would break a ton of stuff in so many ways that the changes are likely impossible. This is where too much modularity is a problem.
This makes no sense to me on an intuitive level. Modularity is what makes most of what can be found on Sourceforge or Freshmeat run on *BSD, Linux, Darwin, Solaris, etc... I don't see how a monolithic structure would facilitate easy alteration of X11's capabilities.
And if X is so hot, why doesn't Apple run their GUI under X? Clearly they saw the limitations of it and decided to do something else.
Uhh, for the same reason Microsoft doesn't run Windows on top of X11? Apple didn't write their GUI on top of X11 so they could maintain a hammer lock on their platform. They had to craft an environment that would allow developers to easily migrate their OS 8/9 wares to the new display system. Apple's design philosophy doesn't harmonize too well with the notion of a display server that can run multiple toolkits (read: inconsitancy) either. As it stands you can run X apps on Aqua's xserver as it is and Apple still gets to keep it's closed OS and its slick development environment for native OS X applications. If it were simply a matter of X11 limitations they would have come up with something that isn't so sluggish by comparison.
Something isn't right with your claim. The XRandr extention was written explicitly to allow changing the display resolution on the fly without an X restart. Until XRandr, XFree86 has only allowed dynamically changing the viewport resolution. The lack of XRandr-ability has been a common complaint about X11 for years.
IIRC, powerstrip is the windows tool you need to take care of this. Whether it will work or not depends on the graphics card you're using. Matrox and (I think) NVidia cards will allow you to tweak the display signals enough to get the resolution you want.
This presumes the 20E21 is, like other old GDM-foo monitors, a fixed frequency beast. These things were built to run at only one or two resolution/refresh rates. If you run *nix at all the task might be easier because -- after reading the Video Timing HOWTO (can't recall the exact name here) you can get in there and tweak modelines to your heart's content. You may find that 800x600 will only be available in a smaller section of the whole screen
Back when I built my first homebrewed PC around a K6 and a motherboard found in a trashcan I stumbled upon an old Sun workstation at a thrift store. $80 later I had what seemed like little more than a fascinating pile of junk in the corner of my apartment. Some web sleuthing turned up information on 13W3 connectors, trinitron tubes and composite sync circuits. I had found a 19" GDM-1962. A trip to Radio Shack, a soldering iron, and a bit of pluck got the thing up and running on a "regular pc". I was in heaven. Up until then I had been using a cheap 15" shadow mask monitor. Those Trinitron tubes have a warmth and color saturation that can't be imitated. It's the kind of thing that can make one understand an audiophile's penchant for a particular old tube amp.
I've still got it in my closet. It still has the chip I soldered into it to convert the sync. I've still got the big ol' ugly cable I wired up to convert HD15 to 13W3. I've still got the modelines somewhere needed to drive it's unusual resolution -- even the tricked out ones that will give you a VGA resolution in a tiny square! For some reason I've yet to part with the thing even though I've still got even better Trinitrons in storage as well. It's crying out to be turned into some kind of "eMac" like conversation piece. With the bezel removed it still looks good. There's a distinct charm to the aluminum frame the tube is mounted in. Someday soon I'll have a dedicated xscreensaver/ogg box illuminating my apartment like an electronic aquarium.
Bertrand Russell's wife once had to leave the man very explicit instructions on how to make tea. I'm not talking about some colorful Martha Stewart-esque tip about how to save time or make it perfect. I'm talking about directions on how to boil water. Seriously, that level of detail.
Saying "Blow me." would be not only infantile and not professional it would be completely inappropriate and pointless.
That's what Flower said. Why are you brining it up as if he thinks otherwise? His point was quite clear in the matter.
As far as the possible offence the phrase, "Before you waste any more of my time or yours..." could cause I don't think it's any more blunt than, "I don't personally care what the/. thinks is acceptable", or, "Grow Up".
Either you really misread Flower's post or something even stranger is going on here.
The government involvement you mention concerns anti-trust/monopoly busting. The shit with SCO involves protecting the copyright of GPL'd software. Honestly now, just what the fuck are you talking about?
I'd rather phrase that intro without resorting to Proper-Noun-isms that might degrade the critical, academic nature of my thesis, but I think it's quite true. The open development model is an analog of the principals that informed modern-era democratic government and free market economies. (It's strange that some/.'ers bother to self-label -- however ironically -- their public image as that of "hippie communists".)
Both of those apple pie "Isms" involve taking a monolithic entity and breaking it down into smaller parts that work autonomously on smaller problems. The emphasis in on segregation of function, atomicity, and individual volition. Centralized fiat is deemphasized. Pragmatism trumps idealism. Think ants and their anthills vs spiders and their webs. Somewhere in this vague rant there should be a reference to the 18th Century, the Clockwork Universe, and the Scientific Method, but I'm too drunk, tired, and pressed for time so I hope someone else here will pick up the ball on this one.
Long story short: Yeah, IBM and Rehat should go ballistic with GPL-Capitalism PR. It only makes sense.
...which would match the force exerted on the backside of the turbine blades by the helium that has crept right through thinking the blade is no different than the walls of the container. This stuff might flow up the walls of a test tube, but that doesn't mean it's going to levitate if you cap the tube with a rubber stopper.
That's some very interesting commentary that makes a lot of sense. Perhaps we should conclude that nothing is immune from the corruption that comes with fashionablility, or that "Academy" is just as succeptable to fads as any other clique. Mass appeal usually necessitates a certain amount of watering down. If Derrida has written something that will be worth reading 300 years from now then perhaps, for the moment, it disseminates itself by unconciously hitching itself to politics in the minds of careerists. There's a joke in there somewhere about loosing a watch in once place but looking for it in another because "the light's better"...
Maybe Stanley Fish already said it all: "Academics like to eat shit, and in a pinch they don't care who's shit they eat."
Can you really claim that Postmodernism had a clear programmatic aim such as the one you describe? I don't doubt that there were noble political ideals informing some it's creative thinkers -- however quietly those ideals may have been tucked beneath the apparatus they errected -- but now that everything is said and done can't we just admit that it was mostly bullshit?
Have you ever seen The Princess Bride? Remember the scene where the Prince is about to toast and drink with Wallace Shawn's character Vizzini the "intellectual" leader of the "bad guys". The scene's set up spawns a monologue for Vizzini wherein he thinks aloud about who's going to be a victim of "Iocaine" poison. His rationalizations about which goblet to pick begin with an attempt to read The Prince and spin off into absurdity without ever completely loosing a thread of "smart sounding" logic. The humor of the scene stems from Vizzini's solipsitic outsmarting of himself.
I think most of the publication that came from this literary/cultural movement should be perceived as we are supposed to perceive Vizzini. The character died because he was so enamoured with his own ability to "talk smart" that he lost sight of the original problem.
I remember reading the article/. is pointing out here a long time ago (this may be a dupe). The points made about the self-containment of the Humanities' academic community are worth as much as Sokal's example. A mutual admiration society whos members compete for the captain's chair in the Flying Wedge of avant garde literary criticism is bound to go a little nuts.
So there is no equivilent hardware on the x86 side.
Yes there is.
Well, maybe a quad something or other would come close.
Of course it would. A dual or single might do it too!
Everyone who buys x86 does so because they think clock speed is performance.
No they don't.
They see the G5 at 2GHz and think its slower than a 3GHz pentium.
Whoever said that?
This includes %99 of slashdot posters who will go on and on with rationalizations to try and "prove" that they don't think so-- they will even post benchmarks like spec (Which just measures clock rate) to try to prove it.
I guess I'm in that 1% that thinks you're flat out wrong about everything and see no need to explain why.
But at the end of the day, they are not educated in computer engineering, they don't know what they are talking about, and they will tell you BS.
The day hasn't ended and my friends who work at Apple think I'm educated in "Computer Engineering" because it seems like I know what I'm talking about
and I never tell them "BS".
Like the guys used to do in the 70s who tricked out their cars but never really knew the physics behind them, so they put in things that salespeople sold them that didn't really enhance performance-- but they told their friends they did because tehy [sic] wanted to seem cool. They told their friends about it in excruciating detail.
Oh yeah, those guys. Ya know, I used to hang with them all the time, but then I bought my first Mac and everything changed. It's like we can't even relate anymore!
That is what its like having the performance argument with an x86 fan. By definition they are ignorant, and arguing with an idiot only makes an idiot of yourself.
Oh, Dude. Totally! It, like totally make a guy look totally ignorant -- like this guy.
Not for me it isn't. Well, the CPU fan is more important than the PS fan, but it sure isn't quieter. Even without putting any special attention towards the PS I would rank it the 3rd priority in the battle against PC noise. The CPU fan is first. The hard drives are second.
To offer something constructive to balance out my flat out disagreement with your assertion, I would like to recommend Antec's "TruePower" line of power supplies for those seeking to reduce the noise of any homebrew system who have nothing left to tweak. They won't do anything for you if you're overclocking an Athlon with one of those "Tornado" fans, but if you've already got a Zalman and a Seagate then a "TruePower" might be up your alley. I don't run a hardware review site, but I have hands on experience comparing Antec's line to Vantec (i.e. Vanity-Tech -- the name is a crass joke on the customer) and other stock power supplies, after going through a heavy "tweak" phase that included building a BP6-550 into a dorm-fridge. The Antec wins hands down if you want something quiet and solid.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, there's a new game in there somewhere! It's just like "Rock Paper Scissors", except I think the iBook always loses. Wanna play?
Don't forget to read the man page on hdiutils when you discover that you can't burn ISO9660 cds through the GUI without buying shareware. It Just Works!
(once you install Fink...)
Even the selling point most often touted beyond the cliched "it just works" line -- that OS X is a joy to look at -- fell flat on me after a while. Most of the widgets have wonderful aesthetics (except the scrollbar trough), but I don't think it looks any better than an average GNOME installation.
Maybe that's why you're so persistent in sustaining this debate?
That's the advantage of using Linux it can protect itself from bad drivers.
How does it do that?
I'm sure most of us feel that was about Internet pornography as well.
This makes no sense to me on an intuitive level. Modularity is what makes most of what can be found on Sourceforge or Freshmeat run on *BSD, Linux, Darwin, Solaris, etc... I don't see how a monolithic structure would facilitate easy alteration of X11's capabilities.
And if X is so hot, why doesn't Apple run their GUI under X? Clearly they saw the limitations of it and decided to do something else.
Uhh, for the same reason Microsoft doesn't run Windows on top of X11? Apple didn't write their GUI on top of X11 so they could maintain a hammer lock on their platform. They had to craft an environment that would allow developers to easily migrate their OS 8/9 wares to the new display system. Apple's design philosophy doesn't harmonize too well with the notion of a display server that can run multiple toolkits (read: inconsitancy) either. As it stands you can run X apps on Aqua's xserver as it is and Apple still gets to keep it's closed OS and its slick development environment for native OS X applications. If it were simply a matter of X11 limitations they would have come up with something that isn't so sluggish by comparison.
Something isn't right with your claim. The XRandr extention was written explicitly to allow changing the display resolution on the fly without an X restart. Until XRandr, XFree86 has only allowed dynamically changing the viewport resolution. The lack of XRandr-ability has been a common complaint about X11 for years.
This presumes the 20E21 is, like other old GDM-foo monitors, a fixed frequency beast. These things were built to run at only one or two resolution/refresh rates. If you run *nix at all the task might be easier because -- after reading the Video Timing HOWTO (can't recall the exact name here) you can get in there and tweak modelines to your heart's content. You may find that 800x600 will only be available in a smaller section of the whole screen
I've still got it in my closet. It still has the chip I soldered into it to convert the sync. I've still got the big ol' ugly cable I wired up to convert HD15 to 13W3. I've still got the modelines somewhere needed to drive it's unusual resolution -- even the tricked out ones that will give you a VGA resolution in a tiny square! For some reason I've yet to part with the thing even though I've still got even better Trinitrons in storage as well. It's crying out to be turned into some kind of "eMac" like conversation piece. With the bezel removed it still looks good. There's a distinct charm to the aluminum frame the tube is mounted in. Someday soon I'll have a dedicated xscreensaver/ogg box illuminating my apartment like an electronic aquarium.
Bertrand Russell's wife once had to leave the man very explicit instructions on how to make tea. I'm not talking about some colorful Martha Stewart-esque tip about how to save time or make it perfect. I'm talking about directions on how to boil water. Seriously, that level of detail.
I thought BSD was monolithic like Linux.
That's what Flower said. Why are you brining it up as if he thinks otherwise? His point was quite clear in the matter.
As far as the possible offence the phrase, "Before you waste any more of my time or yours..." could cause I don't think it's any more blunt than, "I don't personally care what the /. thinks is acceptable", or, "Grow Up".
Either you really misread Flower's post or something even stranger is going on here.
This is the first time I've encountered a nick like yours without chuckling at it. Well, I'm still chuckling, but I'm chuckling with you.
The government involvement you mention concerns anti-trust/monopoly busting. The shit with SCO involves protecting the copyright of GPL'd software. Honestly now, just what the fuck are you talking about?
I'd rather phrase that intro without resorting to Proper-Noun-isms that might degrade the critical, academic nature of my thesis, but I think it's quite true. The open development model is an analog of the principals that informed modern-era democratic government and free market economies. (It's strange that some
Both of those apple pie "Isms" involve taking a monolithic entity and breaking it down into smaller parts that work autonomously on smaller problems. The emphasis in on segregation of function, atomicity, and individual volition. Centralized fiat is deemphasized. Pragmatism trumps idealism. Think ants and their anthills vs spiders and their webs. Somewhere in this vague rant there should be a reference to the 18th Century, the Clockwork Universe, and the Scientific Method, but I'm too drunk, tired, and pressed for time so I hope someone else here will pick up the ball on this one.
Long story short: Yeah, IBM and Rehat should go ballistic with GPL-Capitalism PR. It only makes sense.
...which would match the force exerted on the backside of the turbine blades by the helium that has crept right through thinking the blade is no different than the walls of the container. This stuff might flow up the walls of a test tube, but that doesn't mean it's going to levitate if you cap the tube with a rubber stopper.
That is the coolest metaphor I've ever read in a hardware discussion.
Why aren't network devices given nodes under /dev? Nodes are alocated for PPP and ISDN devices but there is no /dev/ethX. What gives here?
Maybe Stanley Fish already said it all: "Academics like to eat shit, and in a pinch they don't care who's shit they eat."
That statement makes very little sense.
IIRC, /. ran a story (long ago) pointing to a theory like that, or rather, the article claimed that c might have been a bit "slower" than it is today.
Fidel Castro on Communism: "We all knew this mumbo jumbo wouldn't fly."
Have you ever seen The Princess Bride? Remember the scene where the Prince is about to toast and drink with Wallace Shawn's character Vizzini the "intellectual" leader of the "bad guys". The scene's set up spawns a monologue for Vizzini wherein he thinks aloud about who's going to be a victim of "Iocaine" poison. His rationalizations about which goblet to pick begin with an attempt to read The Prince and spin off into absurdity without ever completely loosing a thread of "smart sounding" logic. The humor of the scene stems from Vizzini's solipsitic outsmarting of himself.
I think most of the publication that came from this literary/cultural movement should be perceived as we are supposed to perceive Vizzini. The character died because he was so enamoured with his own ability to "talk smart" that he lost sight of the original problem.
I remember reading the article /. is pointing out here a long time ago (this may be a dupe). The points made about the self-containment of the Humanities' academic community are worth as much as Sokal's example. A mutual admiration society whos members compete for the captain's chair in the Flying Wedge of avant garde literary criticism is bound to go a little nuts.
No they aren't.
So there is no equivilent hardware on the x86 side.
Yes there is.
Well, maybe a quad something or other would come close.
Of course it would. A dual or single might do it too!
Everyone who buys x86 does so because they think clock speed is performance.
No they don't.
They see the G5 at 2GHz and think its slower than a 3GHz pentium.
Whoever said that?
This includes %99 of slashdot posters who will go on and on with rationalizations to try and "prove" that they don't think so-- they will even post benchmarks like spec (Which just measures clock rate) to try to prove it.
I guess I'm in that 1% that thinks you're flat out wrong about everything and see no need to explain why.
But at the end of the day, they are not educated in computer engineering, they don't know what they are talking about, and they will tell you BS.
The day hasn't ended and my friends who work at Apple think I'm educated in "Computer Engineering" because it seems like I know what I'm talking about and I never tell them "BS".
Like the guys used to do in the 70s who tricked out their cars but never really knew the physics behind them, so they put in things that salespeople sold them that didn't really enhance performance-- but they told their friends they did because tehy [sic] wanted to seem cool. They told their friends about it in excruciating detail.
Oh yeah, those guys. Ya know, I used to hang with them all the time, but then I bought my first Mac and everything changed. It's like we can't even relate anymore!
That is what its like having the performance argument with an x86 fan. By definition they are ignorant, and arguing with an idiot only makes an idiot of yourself.
Oh, Dude. Totally! It, like totally make a guy look totally ignorant -- like this guy.
So don't do it, unless its for sport.
I won't. Never.
To offer something constructive to balance out my flat out disagreement with your assertion, I would like to recommend Antec's "TruePower" line of power supplies for those seeking to reduce the noise of any homebrew system who have nothing left to tweak. They won't do anything for you if you're overclocking an Athlon with one of those "Tornado" fans, but if you've already got a Zalman and a Seagate then a "TruePower" might be up your alley. I don't run a hardware review site, but I have hands on experience comparing Antec's line to Vantec (i.e. Vanity-Tech -- the name is a crass joke on the customer) and other stock power supplies, after going through a heavy "tweak" phase that included building a BP6-550 into a dorm-fridge. The Antec wins hands down if you want something quiet and solid.