It was light, fast, stable, and pretty enough. Using wmaker right now because XFCE4 has a few drawbacks. While I might look at KDE 3.5 just to see, i still might cobble together all the 1.0 code and try to run it on my fbsd 5.4/athlon system. It oughta fly balls!
I have a Cyrix 150 in the basement. Runs NetBSD in text-only mode. 16MB ram, a pair of 2.1GB hdds, some sort of S3/Virge video card- No need for GUIs or anything. Coding, newsgroups, irc, writing a novel... all that stuff. It's quiet, doesn't put out a lot of heat. Building BitchX from source took about an hour and a half, but it's not like the machine was unuseable during that time.
Days like today, when it's 97F outside, and probably 110F in my bedroom, i seriously consider putting the Athlon in the basement and bringing the Cyrix upstairs. About 90% of the things *I* use a computer for can be satisfied by that little machine.
While i unfortunately feel as if i've 'outgrown' such games (at the age of 30)....
I'm glad to see that people are still playing them and that they're still alive. My friends and I put in a lot of hours to D'n'D and similar, creating and playing our worlds and characters. And this was back in the late 1980s/early 1990s when video games still rawked!
Oddly, i feel the same way about a lot of video games as i do about tabeltop games.... Strange predicament- I feel "too old" to get interested in them, but rationally I can't figure out why my age would matter at all.
Yay! Now we're one step closer to AMD destroying Intel. I'm tired of seeing these Dell commercials advertising P4's like they're some Godly device brought to us for beastly processing.
Agreed that Pentium 4's are unimpressive, but Intel doesn't just make processors.
Seems to me like all the games that were first out of the gate for the PS2 and XBOX were designed to wow with graphics. Great visuals, but weak and one-dimensional gaming.
Problem is, it seems to have shifted the whole mentality of game developers. Games seem to look good first, but play good second. On a whim i put away some of my PS2 titles and dug out the old PS1 stalwarts. The original Driver was still a kick in the ass. Breath of Fire III was amazing. FF7 was good, Grandia was good. For kicks i fired up my old K6-II and played older versions of Sim City (2K and 3K), Stronghold, Age of Empires, C&C were all so much more fun. It wasn't nostalgia either.
Paper Mario seemed like a great game too. The graphics were nice and clean, but not overly extravagant. But it was still a great game build up from many simple concepts. Just like the old days.
I hope that the hardware *does* stagnate, and maybe devs will stop writing 500 lines of code to control breast jiggle in the next Dead On Arrival and instead brainstorm some ingenuity into the games instead.
It doesn't have to wow me with graphics. Wow me with fun!
I agree with a lot of your post, and see the same. And i see all the other fanboys trumpeting that just don't seem to 'get it', like you mention.
Ever take a look at the BSDs? Userland apps are often similar to linux, but the core system is unlike what you describe above. It's all made by same team, and it all works together. Free, Net, or Open, your needs might indicate which is the best for your situation, but why not try them out and see?
Oh, and give Dragonfly another year before trying it, but try not to get caught up in the hype.
But how do AV researchers dissect such malware, especially when virus writers have devoted so much time to avoiding detection and perfecting their craft with self-decrypting viruses, polymorphic shellcode, and obfuscated loops.
I have a theory that probably 90% of the worms we see are written by the AV companies themselves.
Either that, or they're REALLY DAMN GOOD at getting hold of some fledgling outbreak, no matter how obscure, and reverse engineering it and learning all its minute details. Sometimes they claim to do this within a couple of hours of its first known incident.
I dunno.. maybe i'm a conspiratorist... I still say that Norton Internet Security is the most effective piece of malware out there.
If your going to switch processors (ppc to intel) then you want to use up the old stock, switch to dual processor only and use them up twice as fast:)
This is what everyone keep saying, but aren't chips intended for SMP designed a little differently than ones intended for single?
Of course, we have yet to see any OS (aside from high-end UNIX/mainframe implementations) yet that can fully take advantage of a dual proc system, much less a 64-bit dual proc system.....
It's not like telling a programmer how to communicate with the underlying hardware is going to tell them how it (the PCB/silicon) was designed, so why make this information secret?
Granted things like video cards and ethernet cards and stuff are significantly more complicated than say, guitar stombox effects and amplifiers, but electronics are electronics. It is not entirely impossible to look at the part itself and map out all the traces on the board (gets harder on multilayer boards, but it's still not impossible). Parts are parts, in the case of resistors, capacitors, diodes and stuff, and they're all marked and/or measurable. Lots of circuits have common subcomponents that are 'universal'- no different than linked lists or binary trees are to programming. Maybe you'll see a proprietary IC, but its manufacturer might have the specs available- I haven't seen an IC data sheet yet that doesn't have an internal schematic of the IC. You might be able to buy them from that manufacturer directly, or build the equivalent from other ICs and parts.
Far as I can tell though, most ICs are pretty standard and available.
So then... releasing their specs or not, it makes no difference on whether or not someone could figure out how their card works and/or clone it.
Yes I realize this takes a lot of work and man-hours to do, but surely this happens in industry of all sorts all the time.
In the "All The World Is A Windows Machine" mentality of Microsoft, what OSes are they talking about running?
Certainly not OSX/x86- we know Apple wouldn't allow that.
Certainly not any *nix- lest they intentionally break and cripple it as some sort of "self-justification tool"
Other Windows Oses? I.E., XP on top of Longhorn? Win98 on top of LongHorn? If Longhorn is properly done, they won't need this for "compatibility", especially in light that XP already does this.
(seriousness over)
Or maybe it is to run the up and coming, resource-hungry SymantecOS that underlies the Norton Internet Security Suite.
Sure, i'll agree that even at this very state of affairs there are lots of offerings from Apple, that you could buy right now, that are excellent machines in their own right.
Problem is, i've been hearing this 1:4 thing (and all the rest) since about 1994. Lots have changed on both sides, but the argument hasn't. Numbers are numbers, facts are facts, but there is a lot of freakin' hype too.
And of course you and i will surely BOTH agree that clock speed is only a piece of the pie. To many other things affect total system performance. And then system performance means different things for different people.
I'll agree that Apple is making the smart move. Now, if we can only shut up those "OMGWTFBBQ I CAN FINALLY HAVE OSX ON MY X86" Mandrake kids in their mother's basement.;)
Slashdot Mirror
HTF can you expect anything different?
Mod article +5 Duh.
Seriously... I do.
It was light, fast, stable, and pretty enough. Using wmaker right now because XFCE4 has a few drawbacks. While I might look at KDE 3.5 just to see, i still might cobble together all the 1.0 code and try to run it on my fbsd 5.4/athlon system. It oughta fly balls!
Ya beat me to it.
I got more haha out of that than the AYBABTU
Why would IBM want to do this? It would make business sense to kill OS/2 dead and start sales on its replacement.
Whatever ideology it is we delude ourselves with what IBM has morphed itself into these days, they are first and foremost a business
And besides, is OS/2 really that great? Some things deserve to die. I'm not saying OS/2 *does* (i've never actually used it myself).
Is it wonderful or is it crap? This is something that needs to be considered as well.
I have a Cyrix 150 in the basement. Runs NetBSD in text-only mode. 16MB ram, a pair of 2.1GB hdds, some sort of S3/Virge video card- No need for GUIs or anything. Coding, newsgroups, irc, writing a novel... all that stuff. It's quiet, doesn't put out a lot of heat. Building BitchX from source took about an hour and a half, but it's not like the machine was unuseable during that time.
Days like today, when it's 97F outside, and probably 110F in my bedroom, i seriously consider putting the Athlon in the basement and bringing the Cyrix upstairs. About 90% of the things *I* use a computer for can be satisfied by that little machine.
While i unfortunately feel as if i've 'outgrown' such games (at the age of 30)....
I'm glad to see that people are still playing them and that they're still alive. My friends and I put in a lot of hours to D'n'D and similar, creating and playing our worlds and characters. And this was back in the late 1980s/early 1990s when video games still rawked!
Oddly, i feel the same way about a lot of video games as i do about tabeltop games.... Strange predicament- I feel "too old" to get interested in them, but rationally I can't figure out why my age would matter at all.
-hopeless....
Yay! Now we're one step closer to AMD destroying Intel. I'm tired of seeing these Dell commercials advertising P4's like they're some Godly device brought to us for beastly processing.
Agreed that Pentium 4's are unimpressive, but Intel doesn't just make processors.
Seems to me like all the games that were first out of the gate for the PS2 and XBOX were designed to wow with graphics. Great visuals, but weak and one-dimensional gaming.
Problem is, it seems to have shifted the whole mentality of game developers. Games seem to look good first, but play good second. On a whim i put away some of my PS2 titles and dug out the old PS1 stalwarts. The original Driver was still a kick in the ass. Breath of Fire III was amazing. FF7 was good, Grandia was good. For kicks i fired up my old K6-II and played older versions of Sim City (2K and 3K), Stronghold, Age of Empires, C&C were all so much more fun. It wasn't nostalgia either.
Paper Mario seemed like a great game too. The graphics were nice and clean, but not overly extravagant. But it was still a great game build up from many simple concepts. Just like the old days.
I hope that the hardware *does* stagnate, and maybe devs will stop writing 500 lines of code to control breast jiggle in the next Dead On Arrival and instead brainstorm some ingenuity into the games instead.
It doesn't have to wow me with graphics. Wow me with fun!
</rant>
Welcome to the Republican America.
I agree with a lot of your post, and see the same. And i see all the other fanboys trumpeting that just don't seem to 'get it', like you mention.
Ever take a look at the BSDs? Userland apps are often similar to linux, but the core system is unlike what you describe above. It's all made by same team, and it all works together. Free, Net, or Open, your needs might indicate which is the best for your situation, but why not try them out and see?
Oh, and give Dragonfly another year before trying it, but try not to get caught up in the hype.
But how do AV researchers dissect such malware, especially when virus writers have devoted so much time to avoiding detection and perfecting their craft with self-decrypting viruses, polymorphic shellcode, and obfuscated loops.
I have a theory that probably 90% of the worms we see are written by the AV companies themselves.
Either that, or they're REALLY DAMN GOOD at getting hold of some fledgling outbreak, no matter how obscure, and reverse engineering it and learning all its minute details. Sometimes they claim to do this within a couple of hours of its first known incident.
I dunno.. maybe i'm a conspiratorist... I still say that Norton Internet Security is the most effective piece of malware out there.
But hey! What does it all matter when the operator can still insert UBBcode instead of HTML...
:oP
*duh*
[b]The powermacs are their professional towers. imacs and mac minis are aimed at non-power users.[/b]
And don't forget the eMacs, which are rather embarrassing on the performance scale...
If your going to switch processors (ppc to intel) then you want to use up the old stock, switch to dual processor only and use them up twice as fast :)
This is what everyone keep saying, but aren't chips intended for SMP designed a little differently than ones intended for single?
Of course, we have yet to see any OS (aside from high-end UNIX/mainframe implementations) yet that can fully take advantage of a dual proc system, much less a 64-bit dual proc system.....
Oh well.
That's excellent!
:-)
If it weren't such a horribly true comparison it would have made my day.
Thanks for sharing
Please Cue:
1) The comments about welfare-sucking Liberals that want someone else to do everything for them
2) The comments about the stupidity of Americans
3) The comments about irrelevant/flamebait articles
4) The "Just Use Linux/A MAC[sic]" mantra that is blind chestbeating/dickwaving moreso than some carefully considered solution.
And don't forget to mod this comment with one each of everything on the list!
It's not like telling a programmer how to communicate with the underlying hardware is going to tell them how it (the PCB/silicon) was designed, so why make this information secret?
Granted things like video cards and ethernet cards and stuff are significantly more complicated than say, guitar stombox effects and amplifiers, but electronics are electronics. It is not entirely impossible to look at the part itself and map out all the traces on the board (gets harder on multilayer boards, but it's still not impossible). Parts are parts, in the case of resistors, capacitors, diodes and stuff, and they're all marked and/or measurable. Lots of circuits have common subcomponents that are 'universal'- no different than linked lists or binary trees are to programming. Maybe you'll see a proprietary IC, but its manufacturer might have the specs available- I haven't seen an IC data sheet yet that doesn't have an internal schematic of the IC. You might be able to buy them from that manufacturer directly, or build the equivalent from other ICs and parts.
Far as I can tell though, most ICs are pretty standard and available.
So then... releasing their specs or not, it makes no difference on whether or not someone could figure out how their card works and/or clone it.
Yes I realize this takes a lot of work and man-hours to do, but surely this happens in industry of all sorts all the time.
In my experience, it is the Mac Zealots that have been the most effective in keeping me from owning a mac.
Maybe i'm different, maybe not.
In the "All The World Is A Windows Machine" mentality of Microsoft, what OSes are they talking about running?
Certainly not OSX/x86- we know Apple wouldn't allow that.
Certainly not any *nix- lest they intentionally break and cripple it as some sort of "self-justification tool"
Other Windows Oses? I.E., XP on top of Longhorn? Win98 on top of LongHorn? If Longhorn is properly done, they won't need this for "compatibility", especially in light that XP already does this.
(seriousness over)
Or maybe it is to run the up and coming, resource-hungry SymantecOS that underlies the Norton Internet Security Suite.
Debian has gone years without a new release, Apple disspells rumours of moving to Intel.....
oh wait...
All the benefits of a Mac, all the security of a pre-existing Windows application base. don't forget all the malware and virus compatibility.
:-D
If you're going to do it, do it right!
I know that it's a term, but it doesn't make much sense like that. Perhaps "Peer-produced Television"?
Sure, i'll agree that even at this very state of affairs there are lots of offerings from Apple, that you could buy right now, that are excellent machines in their own right.
;)
Problem is, i've been hearing this 1:4 thing (and all the rest) since about 1994. Lots have changed on both sides, but the argument hasn't. Numbers are numbers, facts are facts, but there is a lot of freakin' hype too.
And of course you and i will surely BOTH agree that clock speed is only a piece of the pie. To many other things affect total system performance. And then system performance means different things for different people.
I'll agree that Apple is making the smart move. Now, if we can only shut up those "OMGWTFBBQ I CAN FINALLY HAVE OSX ON MY X86" Mandrake kids in their mother's basement.
This subject is so popular, even Slashdot is Slashdotted. :eek:
Think Similar?