Four/five years ago I installed Linux on a *huge* 730MB hard drive(yeah, nifty, eh?;). Well, that's a lie. I got to the "fdisk" part of the install, and promptly lost 230M that I never got back:)
A year or two ago, I installed Caldera 1.3. Then I installed Caldera 2.2. Then I installed RedHat version 5.2, then Mandrake 6.2, then Red Hat 6.2, and now Debian. In each case, I had the distribution installed for a minimum of a month or two.
So, while I'm no guru, I have used a reasonable number of Linux distributions(and I'm not counting the dozens of "mini-distributions" that I've tried out and tweaked[plug: ramf, available at ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/system/recovery , is my current favorite]).
Anyways, you can add all the automation to package management you want, but it all comes down the the package maintainers. Generally, when you're using Debian packages made by Debian maintainers, a certain quality can be expected. Packages will be dependant on what they need - and they will suggest packages that allow for full functionality. You can be reasonably sure that you'll get a man page for most commands, even if it's a simple "please refer to online documentation available at: http://www.foobar.com/foo/bar.html".
So, while I'm glad that other distributions are adopting 'apt', and the ability to automatically install packages and automatically update ones available, it will all come down to maintainer commitment. Commitment to quality, commitment of time. Red Hat, Mandrake, and friends usually don't update packages after a distribution has released. Sure, if there's a security bug found, they'll release an update, but that's pretty much it. I was never able to go to Red Hat's site and download the latest set of GNOME packages for my Red Hat 6.2 install.
However, when you run the Debian 'testing' or 'unstable' distributions(neither are as bad as their names suggest), when a new app is released, it'll generally be packaged and available through regular Debian mirrors within a few weeks. The Debian 'stable' distribution is targetted at a different audience, and is updated much less frequently.
Ok, so, enough of this. My point is that unless these distribution makers are willing to invest considerable time and money in keeping their packages up-to-date and well done, then 'apt' is probably just overkill.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I think Microsoft might be able to actually pull it off, though.
Whether you're talking about Sun or Apple or what have you, they all tried to take on everything at once. Hardware, software, connectivity.
Microsoft, however, has done things in a very methodical... hell, a very *scary* way. They really are like the Borg in some respects. One step at a time, relentless. Anyways, MS captured the software market only a wee bit at a time. They're not even there yet. All they've got is a iron grip on desktop software, and a good foot in the door on medium-sized servers. But they keep expanding. Windows CE on one end, NT+IA64 on the other.
I don't know where it started, but they keep getting a bigger piece of the pie. Then they start on their neighbor's pie. One step at a time.
Damnit, they're fucking scary.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
You touch on a very important point here, despite your flippancy;)
Right now, Microsoft doesn't own the hardware. They've got the software, lock, stock, and barrel, but they don't control the hardware.
Despite the anti-trust case, and how badly it seems to be going for them, the release of the X-Box is probably the first of many moves to start controlling hardware. Exactly how long do you think it will be before MS releases a keyboard and mouse for the X-Box? How long before they make a "special" release of Windows that runs on the X-Box?
The X-Box is basically a PC. Get right down to it, it has an x86 processor, an IDE hard drive, an IDE DVD player, and a video card that is supported by/supports DirectX.
Three or four generations of X-Boxes later(assuming they're wildly successful, which they probably will be), I can imagine that most MS software will require a special, MS-approved platform to run on. What platform will that be, you ask? Well, probably something that had, as an ancestor, the X-Box.
Will it be very different? Probably not. I bet it'll still have a keyboard, it'll still have a mouse, it'll basically be a repackaged PC - but "approved".
Now, there are good economic reasons for this. If Microsoft only needs to support the four or five different versions of the X-Box, then their life will be that much easier. There's won't be as many worries about hardware conflicts, there won't be as many worries about crappy third-party drivers(which are a massive source of Windows instability). This is probably their way out of any accusations about monopolies; a standard PC can actually be a good thing if used correctly, if it's not exploited through high pricing and exclusive developers' rights.
I won't guess any further than what I've already said - but I *do* think that much of that will come to pass, in one form or another.
Will I go down fighting? Damn right. Our family motto reflects largely on our attitudes.
Will this be good for the population at large? Maybe. If the X-Box variants are cheap and work, then the concept of "access everywhere" might actually happen. Not half-assed attempts at non-standard "web terminals" around today. But if Microsoft gets a lock and exercises that power to milk its customers for all they'll stand(and MS has done this before - don't doubt it), then we'll just be, yet again, largely locked into the "MS way".
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I'm sure a dozen other people have said this, but here I go, just to throw in my two cents;)
I'm not quite quasimodo-ugly either;) I'm slightly overweight(rather slightly - just a bit of pudge), have an odd nose, etc., etc..
Anyways, I hear where you're coming from. When I was better looking, it was the same thing. All these hot women wanted to be my "friends":)
But you know what I found out? When I actually swallowed my pride and made a move - it WORKED!:) Without fail. Every time. We're talking some pretty friggin hot women here. A few turned in to real relationships, most fizzled after about a month. But the fact is, these women who days before had only been interested in "friendship", actually wern't.
And come on, be honest. If a woman you knew very well asked you a question that made you really uncomfortable, would you answer honestly? Or safely? Thought so.
Now, I had a buddy who went right to the extreme - made passes on almost anything with breasts. Now, I'd watch him get either kicked in the groin or slapped about 5 or 6 times every night we went out to shoot some pool at the local bar. But you also know what? I never saw him go home alone.
So, the point? You'll never know unless you try. Most women I know get really uncomfortable when you *ask* them things. Instead of asking by speaking, as by acting. You'd be surprised;)
Eventually, you'll get so good at it that it's really too easy. Generally, that's when people "get to know each other" before they get into anything serious. They know they can go out and have fun without any difficulty at all - so they take the time and look for something more meaningful. Just remember, a nice, warm, caring, tender guy who makes no move more risky than "hey, do you like me?" obviously doesn't want a relationship enough.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Just hoping to clear a bit up on that Ontarian nuclear power plant that failed the tests.
I worked for Ontario Hydro at the time, doing network rollouts in their head office(Toronto, Canada). So while I wasn't part of the Y2K team in question, I did know a few of the guys, and I was in "that circle."
Anyways, and I wish I could remember now, that failed test had relatively little to do with the reactor itself. I think it might have been some of their accountng systems(they're all Novell/MS crap) or somesuch. I know this doesn't really sound good, but all I remember is, "Oh, was that it? Hahaha, I'm not worried:)"
Sorry!:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
You missed my point. That thing about Windows ME was just to disprove the "usability is inversely proportional to security point".
Using that very simple and easy-to-implement security scheme I mentioned, you increased security several times over what it was before - with almost no loss in useability. By what that poster said, the 400-500% gain in security would have meant a serious loss in useability - obviously not so.
Now, since I'm in the mood for a little fight:
Points 4 and 5 have nothing to do with security. They had to do with good computing in general - always have a backup. I will ignore them.
1. You're right, you could do all those things. But it's all of a sudden a HELLUVA lot harder than a regular Windows ME install. And there's no guarantee you'll be able to decrypt the drive before you die. It could take that long. But only a minor speed loss is incurred(with the proper algorithms).
2. The ACLs and such you mention are for multi-user systems. Windows ME is not a multi-user system. Sure, you can have different backgrounds and preferences for different users, but that does not a multi-user system make. Since Windows ME is a single-user system, no ACLs are required.
3. See point 1 above.
4. Ignored.
5. Ignored.
6. Good idea about the "duress" password. Point taken.
7. We're talking about security vs. useability here. I am saying that with a certain value of security, you don't lose that same value in useability. The TEMPEST protection measures, though, shouldn't hamper useability of the operating system - although the size of such a computer might be a hindrance.
8. You can write a 2 line VB program that will grind my computer to a halt; I can write a 4-5 hundred line Intel assembly program which will completely preclude those particular VB instructions from ever being run.
9. It's still very usable. Games, word processing, office apps.
10. You're wrong there. Money buys a lot of things - including respect. Some of my employers pay Microsoft to have a team of engineers on standby, 24 hours a day, with access to Windows source. And Microsoft *HAS* given source to other companies.
Now, I'm not going to lambast you for purposefully taking my argument as something it wasn't. Before you say anything else, consider for a moment the point I was trying to make, and then refute the point itself - not my example.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Security and ease-of-use are mutually exclusive, and are usually inversely proportional.
I disagree. In many cases, yes, security can limit useability. For instance, the most secure system is one that has been broken down to its individual molecules and scattered out into space on a hundred million different probes. Of course, at that point, it's not very useful.
But let's look at it this way. We'll consider a default Window ME install to be very useable, but rather insecure. Now, add a small filesystem layer that encrypts and decrypts everything to and from the hard drive. Replace the usual login password with something that checks an individual's physical traits(such as DNA or maybe fingerprints). Make sure that it's checked as soon as possible. I'd replace the BIOS with whatever checks for the DNA/fingerprint. We'll also assume this workstation isn't physically connected to any other.
All of a sudden, you have an incredibly secure system, with the same useability(maybe a little slowdown for encryption/decryption, but there are fast, secure algorithms availble). So no I've already refuted the "inversely proportional" part.
Now, I've yet to see a security implementation that doesn't hamper useability in some form, but to say that it's impossible is downright moronic. Just because you can't think of a way to do it doesn't mean it's not possible.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Well, I hate to argue this, because it all depends on one's definition of UNIX.
"A layer buried deep under Aqua"
Hahahaha!:) How long does it take someone to get a shell, after it's been installed? Two seconds? Three? Doesn't seem terribly buried to me. XFree86 has already been ported. GCC already works. What more do you want.
"can be made to compile"
That makes it sound like you've got to absolutely FORCE things to compile, with endless tweaking and modifications. Frankly, by the time OSX is released, there will be relatively little pain in porting over apps(at least those apps that took any amount of portability into concern).
I'm sorry, but you must not know what you're talking about. There is a huge, massive, big-ass UNIX layer under Aqua. Just because you can't figure out how to get to it doesn't mean it's "not even UNIX like" nor "deep under".
Sorry.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Re:Linux has been running on Alpha for quite a whi
on
Is SMT In Your Future?
·
· Score: 2
I imagine there would be a similar problem to what Intel is facing right now with the P4. I don't claim to be a compiler technology guru, but I imagine the EV8 will only be very fast when code was compiled specifically for it(then again, which other processors isn't this true for?:).
There is also going to be some needed kernel support too. Since the threads need to be distinguishable to the EV8, the kernel will have to name them(looks like two bits would do it, and it makes sens to me. But maybe they'll use just one, or use three or four for some headroom).
Actually, you're right, I was speaking specifically of this hypothetical EV8; but only because I imagine it'll be a while before it comes out. In that time, I hope Linux becomes mainstream enough that some nice high-quality(read: nice graphics[not necessarily 3D; Diablo was great) games will be ported/written to it/for it. That way, with a nicely updated GCC and an EV8-aware Linux kernel, those games would just scream:)
I havn't played a real game in about a year now - it's all old hat. There's just not a whole lot more you can do with today's processors. I hope the EV8 inspires someone:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
The first thing I'd like to say is that you obviously need a fair bit of smacking around. Just because a chip won't do well on benchmarks don't mean dick. You're right - on benchmarks, this chip won't do too great. So, you can be happy with your P4 which shows great on the benchmarks, and gets 40fps on the next-gen games; I'll be happy on my badly-benchmarking EV8 which gets 120fps.
Anyways, now, to answer your valid concern:)
From an adoption standpoint(ie: how well your CPU will sell), putting 8 or more CPUs in one die isn't a great thing. How many operating systems do you know run well on 8 or more processors? However, almost every OS today uses multiple threads/processes which will benefit from this architecture.
Of course, we're talking about an Alpha here, which basically runs Unix(and the various flavours thereof). When Linux gets ported to this processor, I imagine it'll perform stellarly. That's why I want Linux to succeed, actually:) If games start getting written for Linux, natively, then I'll be able to run nice 3D games on kick-ass non-x86 hardware:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Yes, the project is commercial - but so are many Linux ventures (Loki, Red Hat - need I go on).
Now, Loki obviously doesn't(and in some cases, can't) release source code in a Free manner, Red Hat surely does. Your company will not be doing so. Don't compare yourselves to them.
The full version for Linux will be freely available for download, so I don't see the project's commercialisation as being a major factor here.
I don't expect you do release your source code under a GPL-like license, but I would expect you to at least understand why a lot of people want it. A *lot* of open-source type programmers use commercial software that often costs thousands of dollars - they arn't out for a free lunch, obviously. They want things to be Free(notice the capital "f", which I'm using to refer to free as in freely modifyable, redistributable, etc., etc.). In this case, your project's commercialism *IS* a problem. Since you won't be Freely distributing your source code, that goes against the ethics of many people. Just because you're giving something away without charging for it doesn't mean that's good enough.
I'm sure that there will be people that will want to see otherwise, but commercialism != evil corporate domination.
Personally, I don't equate commercialism with evil corporate domination, and I apologize for those here that do. However, I've grown up in corporate North America. I see it all around me. I've been burned so bad and so often that I never want it to happen again. And it does. Again and again. I'll never use your desktop if I can avoid it, because you have the control. If you end up being sucessful enough to cause me harm, then you very well could. I don't want to be in that position ever again(even though I know I can't avoid it), and if I can use a Free alternative, I will.
Using the GPL would have caused major problems for the project that would have meant handing over many of our rights over to the Free Software Foundation.
Since your problem is with giving rights over to the Free Software Foundation, why don't you take the GPL and modify it accordingly? Use a GPL-like license, which will allow the "people" to take it, modify it, redistribute it, all Freely.
Now, if your problem is with THAT, then leave the FSF out of it. It has no bearing on your comments otherwise.
Now, you talk about evil plots and the like. Come on! Please. Like I said before, I've grown up in this world, and I don't like it. I can lose my house because someone in the bank had a bad day. With a few button presses, I can lose all my credit. They have POWER; unadulterated, unshakeable power. Too many commercial entities these days are nearly beyond control. Any sort of control. They're so close it's not funny. Right now the only things govenments have that corporations don't is armies. How long will it be before that changes? What will happen then? The government will *finally* move to do something to protect its people(using military might, if necessary), and find that there's nothing even IT can do.
But this isn't evil. It's just the way it is. It's the status quo. Your company isn't evil.
But remember this: just because you don't set out to screw people, doesn't mean that people don't get screwed.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Of course, nobody NEEDS a second graphics card. Hell, nobody NEEDS a first graphics card.
It won't let you eat, it won't let you breathe, it won't let you go to the can. No computers are NEEDED. What we NEED is food. Maybe shelter.
But you know what I *WANT*? I'd like one of those little 9" black and white monitors you sometimes see working with a cash register. Probably real cheap, too!:) If I could find one of those, I'd buy one right away. Then I could hook up my second video card. Then I could have all the goodness of a real console visible at all times.
Can you say log monitoring? System health? Nethack?:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
The point is that to retain memory, DRAM requires not only power but a properly operating controller to supply the refresh cycles.
Laptops run off batteries, and their memory seems okay.
My Pilot runs okay off AAA-type batteries. Memory has been running quite well, thank you:)
This fellow wasn't talking about slapping some RAM sticks to a breadboard and running current through the wires. Of course you would need a memory controller. Duh.:) The problems you raised were solved many years ago. If they hadn't been, nobody would be using volatile memory(like SDRAM) at all - it'd be too unreliable.
I almost think you're just looking to spread some FUD.
"Mission Critical" data, whatever that may be, would be existing at tiny charges on the very tiny capacitors,
You say this like it's a bad thing! It's relied on every day. Hell, mission-critical data on its way to be written to disk is nothing but A CLUMP ELECTRONS MOVING ALONG A WIRE, in a lot of cases, those wires many times smaller than a human hair.
Don't make a mountain out of a molehill. This isn't a bad idea, and just because they'll have to put a DRAM controller on the card doesn't make it one.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Or better: how Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Ultima Ascension, Red Alert 2, and Diablo 2 run.
If you can't afford any better a processor than a $50-60 Cyrix, then you're probably not going to be able to afford spending much on other system components. Like a reasonably fast hard drive. Or more than 32M of RAM. Or any non-integrated graphics subprocessor.
So, for the audience this is targetted at(low-cost/power computer purchasers), it makes almost no sense to spend any time or transistors on a good FPU. All those games/benchmarks you mentioned are FPU-intensive. Now, the Cyrix will get its ass kicked in them. But if you can't tell the difference between a $60 Cyrix and a $200 PIII in the applications this chip was designed for(and, more importantly, bought for), what the hell does it matter how well it runs Unreal Tournament?:)
Thanks:) Needed a good rant today.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Hehehe:) I'd like to see you run the latest Windows or even an older Red Hat on a 486 with little memory. Unless you're going to restrict her to web-based browsing and out-of-date productivity software, you're going to be killing that little computer.
Now, personally, I'm likely to buy one of these chips. Why? Because I like things that don't make a lot of noise. I have three computers in the room I sleep in, and it's getting difficult. If I can replace my routing box with something that's completely fanless(even w/o a harddrive - root partition loaded into ramdisk from CD, lots of memory), then I'm likely to buy it. Right now I'm running a P100, and it's got a fan that's a fair bit louder than what I'd like. Not to mention the fact that the harddrive is always spinning because of logfiles and such.
Anyways, you get the point. While this may never be more than a niche processor(certain low-power/low-noise usages, ie: webpads, PDAs, notebooks, extremely inexpensive PCs), that doesn't mean it can't be a success. If they don't spend three or four billion dollars making a new plant to manufacture these things, then they could make a fair bit of profit off it, too.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I'd like to add that I've had the same problem. Most of the documentation is either way too easy, or rather difficult. In the first case, it's often pages and pages of "hit the key with an upwards-pointing arrow to go up", whereas with the former it's "use to so that you can accomplish ".
Just wanted to say I know how you feel:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Hey, what's up?:) I'm not a teenager, but I am a Linux user, and a rather dedicated one. I've come to the realization over the past year or so that, indeed, MS Office is actually a good software packager. Well, relatively speaking, of course;) I find it fast, relatively lean, feature-complete, and more-or-less stable. I was wondering if you yourself have a particular software favorite that doesn't run under Linux?
Thanks for your time,
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
This probably doesn't matter to most people, but The GIMP is open source.
If over the course of your life you've grown frustrated and irritated with companies' lack of support and care, then you might come to appreciate open source for its own sake.
While a proffesional graphics designed should use whatever tool best does the job, someone who only uses Photoshop casually might decide to use The GIMP even if it lacks a feature or two, just because it's open source.
I don't know much about GIMP's technical superiority(if any) over Photoshop, but I use it because a) it runs on my machine, and b) it's open source.
That's enough for me(but I don't make my money off it, either:).
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
This is just a personal thing. I'm no purchaser, and I have no power anywhere. So, by helping me, you'll get relatively little return on your investment.
I am, however, an Average Joe(tm), so if what I want is what everyone wants, you could make a big return on your investment:)
First, I'd like to congratulate you on the work you've done so far. I don't know a lot about the in-depth stuff, but I like what I've been seeing. Good job.:)
What I'd like is to run Linux on my Palm Pilot. The Palm is remarkable. An example in successful adaptation. The UI is perfectly suited to the device, the speed is great(considering it's running on what, 16MHz?), and the hardware is cool.
I think this is something that Linux is perfectly suited for. Look at TrollTech's QT/Embedded. Amazing piece of software. What I'd like IBM to do is build the hardware, make some basic software, and sell a few million units. Use a standard UI tookit(like QT/E, or GTK+ nothing specifically "designed" for a palmtop; I'd like to, one day, be able to run the same apps on my palmtop as I run on my desktop today).
Now, this is just the end-goal that I'm talking about. But all the infrastructure work that would have to be done, if done right, would be great.
So, to sum up:
I'd like a Linux handheld, about the size of a PalmPilot, with similar cost($~200).
Software to run on it. I'd suggest QT/E, because I can read the code;) But in all honesty, QT/e looks to be a good way to go. Develop some games, some productivity apps, use QT/Windows and QT/X for the synchronization software, and you're all set.
The reason I'm suggesting this, as opposed to the other things I'd really like to see come out of IBM, is that I think it's feasable(sp?). I honestly think that within two years, IBM could release a handheld computer that I'd buy.
Thank you for your time, and sorry if I'm a bit incoherent. Working off a hangover:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Thanks again:) I found and downloaded the demo:) Which, I might add, was for Windows only. Had to borrow a friend's computer:)
For me, it's difficult to use, but I see what you guys talk about when you say that it's easy - the brain mirrors what each hand knows. I am, unfortunately, very right-centric; in a lot of things. I use my right hand on more than half the keyboard, so it'll take some getting used to, but I'm going to give it a try.
Thanks again, and you've sold me:)
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I'd also like to point out that under most operating systems the keys can be easily remapped; while you wouldn't be able to see which key was what on the board itself(unless you used stickers), you'd still be able to have whichever layout you'd like...
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Thank you for your reply:) I looked as closely as I could; but I couldn't see properly enough. I'll save it and use The Gimp to scale it up; I'll also visit your homepage.
But I'm still interested to know if *you* could use it on a day-to-day, fulltime basis. I'll take your work on the fact that it's functionally a full-sized keyboard(and I'll be able to tell for myself, shortly), but the company seems to be targeting handhelds and the like. I'm looking for a one-handed desktop keyboard replacement, and I'm not interested in five-buttoned chording keyboards;) So, could you use it fulltime? I'm not too worried about performance; that's a secondary factor for me. I'm mostly worried about space(which your keyboard is obviously good with), functionality(which seems to be full), and that nebulous "feel" which allows one to use it for long durations(which I'm not sure about):)
Thanks again,
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Hey, that keyboard looks cool; and useful. Of the three featured there, that's the one I'm interested in.
I've been looking for an alternative keyboard for a while(for full-time use), and I've considered Kenesis keyboard, but they don't tickle my fancy.
I'd like to know, in all honesty, if you could use this on a day-to-day, fulltime basis. Little things; does it have Home, End, PgUp, PgDown, arrow keys? Full punctuation keys?
Thanks in advance,
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Watch your tone. We're having a good discussion here. Of course, I'm assuming that you're posting anonymously because you don't like cookies - not because you're a troll.
The poster didn't answer the question that had been asked very well. They talked about XML as a good thing, but they didn't talk about the bad things(which you must know about when trying to make an informed decision). I was just trying to clear the issue up a bit. The bad things about XML being that you've got to write a good DTD, and good XSLs, etc., etc..
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I apologize, and you're right:) The poster didn't mention that a good DTD would need to be written(a lot of work, I might add), and I didn't mention that a good set of XSLs would need to be written:)
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Slashdot Mirror
Just a bit of background:
;). Well, that's a lie. I got to the "fdisk" part of the install, and promptly lost 230M that I never got back :)
Four/five years ago I installed Linux on a *huge* 730MB hard drive(yeah, nifty, eh?
A year or two ago, I installed Caldera 1.3. Then I installed Caldera 2.2. Then I installed RedHat version 5.2, then Mandrake 6.2, then Red Hat 6.2, and now Debian. In each case, I had the distribution installed for a minimum of a month or two.
So, while I'm no guru, I have used a reasonable number of Linux distributions(and I'm not counting the dozens of "mini-distributions" that I've tried out and tweaked[plug: ramf, available at ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/system/recovery , is my current favorite]).
Anyways, you can add all the automation to package management you want, but it all comes down the the package maintainers. Generally, when you're using Debian packages made by Debian maintainers, a certain quality can be expected. Packages will be dependant on what they need - and they will suggest packages that allow for full functionality. You can be reasonably sure that you'll get a man page for most commands, even if it's a simple "please refer to online documentation available at: http://www.foobar.com/foo/bar.html".
So, while I'm glad that other distributions are adopting 'apt', and the ability to automatically install packages and automatically update ones available, it will all come down to maintainer commitment. Commitment to quality, commitment of time. Red Hat, Mandrake, and friends usually don't update packages after a distribution has released. Sure, if there's a security bug found, they'll release an update, but that's pretty much it. I was never able to go to Red Hat's site and download the latest set of GNOME packages for my Red Hat 6.2 install.
However, when you run the Debian 'testing' or 'unstable' distributions(neither are as bad as their names suggest), when a new app is released, it'll generally be packaged and available through regular Debian mirrors within a few weeks. The Debian 'stable' distribution is targetted at a different audience, and is updated much less frequently.
Ok, so, enough of this. My point is that unless these distribution makers are willing to invest considerable time and money in keeping their packages up-to-date and well done, then 'apt' is probably just overkill.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I think Microsoft might be able to actually pull it off, though.
... hell, a very *scary* way. They really are like the Borg in some respects. One step at a time, relentless. Anyways, MS captured the software market only a wee bit at a time. They're not even there yet. All they've got is a iron grip on desktop software, and a good foot in the door on medium-sized servers. But they keep expanding. Windows CE on one end, NT+IA64 on the other.
Whether you're talking about Sun or Apple or what have you, they all tried to take on everything at once. Hardware, software, connectivity.
Microsoft, however, has done things in a very methodical
I don't know where it started, but they keep getting a bigger piece of the pie. Then they start on their neighbor's pie. One step at a time.
Damnit, they're fucking scary.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
You touch on a very important point here, despite your flippancy ;)
Right now, Microsoft doesn't own the hardware. They've got the software, lock, stock, and barrel, but they don't control the hardware.
Despite the anti-trust case, and how badly it seems to be going for them, the release of the X-Box is probably the first of many moves to start controlling hardware. Exactly how long do you think it will be before MS releases a keyboard and mouse for the X-Box? How long before they make a "special" release of Windows that runs on the X-Box?
The X-Box is basically a PC. Get right down to it, it has an x86 processor, an IDE hard drive, an IDE DVD player, and a video card that is supported by/supports DirectX.
Three or four generations of X-Boxes later(assuming they're wildly successful, which they probably will be), I can imagine that most MS software will require a special, MS-approved platform to run on. What platform will that be, you ask? Well, probably something that had, as an ancestor, the X-Box.
Will it be very different? Probably not. I bet it'll still have a keyboard, it'll still have a mouse, it'll basically be a repackaged PC - but "approved".
Now, there are good economic reasons for this. If Microsoft only needs to support the four or five different versions of the X-Box, then their life will be that much easier. There's won't be as many worries about hardware conflicts, there won't be as many worries about crappy third-party drivers(which are a massive source of Windows instability). This is probably their way out of any accusations about monopolies; a standard PC can actually be a good thing if used correctly, if it's not exploited through high pricing and exclusive developers' rights.
I won't guess any further than what I've already said - but I *do* think that much of that will come to pass, in one form or another.
Will I go down fighting? Damn right. Our family motto reflects largely on our attitudes.
Will this be good for the population at large? Maybe. If the X-Box variants are cheap and work, then the concept of "access everywhere" might actually happen. Not half-assed attempts at non-standard "web terminals" around today. But if Microsoft gets a lock and exercises that power to milk its customers for all they'll stand(and MS has done this before - don't doubt it), then we'll just be, yet again, largely locked into the "MS way".
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I'm sure a dozen other people have said this, but here I go, just to throw in my two cents ;)
;) I'm slightly overweight(rather slightly - just a bit of pudge), have an odd nose, etc., etc..
:)
:) Without fail. Every time. We're talking some pretty friggin hot women here. A few turned in to real relationships, most fizzled after about a month. But the fact is, these women who days before had only been interested in "friendship", actually wern't.
;)
I'm not quite quasimodo-ugly either
Anyways, I hear where you're coming from. When I was better looking, it was the same thing. All these hot women wanted to be my "friends"
But you know what I found out? When I actually swallowed my pride and made a move - it WORKED!
And come on, be honest. If a woman you knew very well asked you a question that made you really uncomfortable, would you answer honestly? Or safely? Thought so.
Now, I had a buddy who went right to the extreme - made passes on almost anything with breasts. Now, I'd watch him get either kicked in the groin or slapped about 5 or 6 times every night we went out to shoot some pool at the local bar. But you also know what? I never saw him go home alone.
So, the point? You'll never know unless you try. Most women I know get really uncomfortable when you *ask* them things. Instead of asking by speaking, as by acting. You'd be surprised
Eventually, you'll get so good at it that it's really too easy. Generally, that's when people "get to know each other" before they get into anything serious. They know they can go out and have fun without any difficulty at all - so they take the time and look for something more meaningful. Just remember, a nice, warm, caring, tender guy who makes no move more risky than "hey, do you like me?" obviously doesn't want a relationship enough.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Just hoping to clear a bit up on that Ontarian nuclear power plant that failed the tests.
:)"
:)
I worked for Ontario Hydro at the time, doing network rollouts in their head office(Toronto, Canada). So while I wasn't part of the Y2K team in question, I did know a few of the guys, and I was in "that circle."
Anyways, and I wish I could remember now, that failed test had relatively little to do with the reactor itself. I think it might have been some of their accountng systems(they're all Novell/MS crap) or somesuch. I know this doesn't really sound good, but all I remember is, "Oh, was that it? Hahaha, I'm not worried
Sorry!
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
You missed my point. That thing about Windows ME was just to disprove the "usability is inversely proportional to security point".
Using that very simple and easy-to-implement security scheme I mentioned, you increased security several times over what it was before - with almost no loss in useability. By what that poster said, the 400-500% gain in security would have meant a serious loss in useability - obviously not so.
Now, since I'm in the mood for a little fight:
Points 4 and 5 have nothing to do with security. They had to do with good computing in general - always have a backup. I will ignore them.
1. You're right, you could do all those things. But it's all of a sudden a HELLUVA lot harder than a regular Windows ME install. And there's no guarantee you'll be able to decrypt the drive before you die. It could take that long. But only a minor speed loss is incurred(with the proper algorithms).
2. The ACLs and such you mention are for multi-user systems. Windows ME is not a multi-user system. Sure, you can have different backgrounds and preferences for different users, but that does not a multi-user system make. Since Windows ME is a single-user system, no ACLs are required.
3. See point 1 above.
4. Ignored.
5. Ignored.
6. Good idea about the "duress" password. Point taken.
7. We're talking about security vs. useability here. I am saying that with a certain value of security, you don't lose that same value in useability. The TEMPEST protection measures, though, shouldn't hamper useability of the operating system - although the size of such a computer might be a hindrance.
8. You can write a 2 line VB program that will grind my computer to a halt; I can write a 4-5 hundred line Intel assembly program which will completely preclude those particular VB instructions from ever being run.
9. It's still very usable. Games, word processing, office apps.
10. You're wrong there. Money buys a lot of things - including respect. Some of my employers pay Microsoft to have a team of engineers on standby, 24 hours a day, with access to Windows source. And Microsoft *HAS* given source to other companies.
Now, I'm not going to lambast you for purposefully taking my argument as something it wasn't. Before you say anything else, consider for a moment the point I was trying to make, and then refute the point itself - not my example.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Security and ease-of-use are mutually exclusive, and are usually inversely proportional.
I disagree. In many cases, yes, security can limit useability. For instance, the most secure system is one that has been broken down to its individual molecules and scattered out into space on a hundred million different probes. Of course, at that point, it's not very useful.
But let's look at it this way. We'll consider a default Window ME install to be very useable, but rather insecure. Now, add a small filesystem layer that encrypts and decrypts everything to and from the hard drive. Replace the usual login password with something that checks an individual's physical traits(such as DNA or maybe fingerprints). Make sure that it's checked as soon as possible. I'd replace the BIOS with whatever checks for the DNA/fingerprint. We'll also assume this workstation isn't physically connected to any other.
All of a sudden, you have an incredibly secure system, with the same useability(maybe a little slowdown for encryption/decryption, but there are fast, secure algorithms availble). So no I've already refuted the "inversely proportional" part.
Now, I've yet to see a security implementation that doesn't hamper useability in some form, but to say that it's impossible is downright moronic. Just because you can't think of a way to do it doesn't mean it's not possible.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Well, I hate to argue this, because it all depends on one's definition of UNIX.
:) How long does it take someone to get a shell, after it's been installed? Two seconds? Three? Doesn't seem terribly buried to me. XFree86 has already been ported. GCC already works. What more do you want.
"A layer buried deep under Aqua"
Hahahaha!
"can be made to compile"
That makes it sound like you've got to absolutely FORCE things to compile, with endless tweaking and modifications. Frankly, by the time OSX is released, there will be relatively little pain in porting over apps(at least those apps that took any amount of portability into concern).
I'm sorry, but you must not know what you're talking about. There is a huge, massive, big-ass UNIX layer under Aqua. Just because you can't figure out how to get to it doesn't mean it's "not even UNIX like" nor "deep under".
Sorry.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I imagine there would be a similar problem to what Intel is facing right now with the P4. I don't claim to be a compiler technology guru, but I imagine the EV8 will only be very fast when code was compiled specifically for it(then again, which other processors isn't this true for? :).
:)
:)
There is also going to be some needed kernel support too. Since the threads need to be distinguishable to the EV8, the kernel will have to name them(looks like two bits would do it, and it makes sens to me. But maybe they'll use just one, or use three or four for some headroom).
Actually, you're right, I was speaking specifically of this hypothetical EV8; but only because I imagine it'll be a while before it comes out. In that time, I hope Linux becomes mainstream enough that some nice high-quality(read: nice graphics[not necessarily 3D; Diablo was great) games will be ported/written to it/for it. That way, with a nicely updated GCC and an EV8-aware Linux kernel, those games would just scream
I havn't played a real game in about a year now - it's all old hat. There's just not a whole lot more you can do with today's processors. I hope the EV8 inspires someone
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
The first thing I'd like to say is that you obviously need a fair bit of smacking around. Just because a chip won't do well on benchmarks don't mean dick. You're right - on benchmarks, this chip won't do too great. So, you can be happy with your P4 which shows great on the benchmarks, and gets 40fps on the next-gen games; I'll be happy on my badly-benchmarking EV8 which gets 120fps.
:)
:) If games start getting written for Linux, natively, then I'll be able to run nice 3D games on kick-ass non-x86 hardware :)
Anyways, now, to answer your valid concern
From an adoption standpoint(ie: how well your CPU will sell), putting 8 or more CPUs in one die isn't a great thing. How many operating systems do you know run well on 8 or more processors? However, almost every OS today uses multiple threads/processes which will benefit from this architecture.
Of course, we're talking about an Alpha here, which basically runs Unix(and the various flavours thereof). When Linux gets ported to this processor, I imagine it'll perform stellarly. That's why I want Linux to succeed, actually
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Yes, the project is commercial - but so are many Linux ventures (Loki, Red Hat - need I go on).
Now, Loki obviously doesn't(and in some cases, can't) release source code in a Free manner, Red Hat surely does. Your company will not be doing so. Don't compare yourselves to them.
The full version for Linux will be freely available for download, so I don't see the project's commercialisation as being a major factor here.
I don't expect you do release your source code under a GPL-like license, but I would expect you to at least understand why a lot of people want it. A *lot* of open-source type programmers use commercial software that often costs thousands of dollars - they arn't out for a free lunch, obviously. They want things to be Free(notice the capital "f", which I'm using to refer to free as in freely modifyable, redistributable, etc., etc.). In this case, your project's commercialism *IS* a problem. Since you won't be Freely distributing your source code, that goes against the ethics of many people. Just because you're giving something away without charging for it doesn't mean that's good enough.
I'm sure that there will be people that will want to see otherwise, but commercialism != evil corporate domination.
Personally, I don't equate commercialism with evil corporate domination, and I apologize for those here that do. However, I've grown up in corporate North America. I see it all around me. I've been burned so bad and so often that I never want it to happen again. And it does. Again and again. I'll never use your desktop if I can avoid it, because you have the control. If you end up being sucessful enough to cause me harm, then you very well could. I don't want to be in that position ever again(even though I know I can't avoid it), and if I can use a Free alternative, I will.
Using the GPL would have caused major problems for the project that would have meant handing over many of our rights over to the Free Software Foundation.
Since your problem is with giving rights over to the Free Software Foundation, why don't you take the GPL and modify it accordingly? Use a GPL-like license, which will allow the "people" to take it, modify it, redistribute it, all Freely.
Now, if your problem is with THAT, then leave the FSF out of it. It has no bearing on your comments otherwise.
Now, you talk about evil plots and the like. Come on! Please. Like I said before, I've grown up in this world, and I don't like it. I can lose my house because someone in the bank had a bad day. With a few button presses, I can lose all my credit. They have POWER; unadulterated, unshakeable power. Too many commercial entities these days are nearly beyond control. Any sort of control. They're so close it's not funny. Right now the only things govenments have that corporations don't is armies. How long will it be before that changes? What will happen then? The government will *finally* move to do something to protect its people(using military might, if necessary), and find that there's nothing even IT can do.
But this isn't evil. It's just the way it is. It's the status quo. Your company isn't evil.
But remember this: just because you don't set out to screw people, doesn't mean that people don't get screwed.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Of course, nobody NEEDS a second graphics card. Hell, nobody NEEDS a first graphics card.
:) If I could find one of those, I'd buy one right away. Then I could hook up my second video card. Then I could have all the goodness of a real console visible at all times.
:)
It won't let you eat, it won't let you breathe, it won't let you go to the can. No computers are NEEDED. What we NEED is food. Maybe shelter.
But you know what I *WANT*? I'd like one of those little 9" black and white monitors you sometimes see working with a cash register. Probably real cheap, too!
Can you say log monitoring? System health? Nethack?
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
You raise an implementation issue.
:)
:) The problems you raised were solved many years ago. If they hadn't been, nobody would be using volatile memory(like SDRAM) at all - it'd be too unreliable.
The point is that to retain memory, DRAM requires not only power but a properly operating controller to supply the refresh cycles.
Laptops run off batteries, and their memory seems okay.
My Pilot runs okay off AAA-type batteries. Memory has been running quite well, thank you
This fellow wasn't talking about slapping some RAM sticks to a breadboard and running current through the wires. Of course you would need a memory controller. Duh.
I almost think you're just looking to spread some FUD.
"Mission Critical" data, whatever that may be, would be existing at tiny charges on the very tiny capacitors,
You say this like it's a bad thing! It's relied on every day. Hell, mission-critical data on its way to be written to disk is nothing but A CLUMP ELECTRONS MOVING ALONG A WIRE, in a lot of cases, those wires many times smaller than a human hair.
Don't make a mountain out of a molehill. This isn't a bad idea, and just because they'll have to put a DRAM controller on the card doesn't make it one.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Or better: how Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Ultima Ascension, Red Alert 2, and Diablo 2 run.
:)
:) Needed a good rant today.
If you can't afford any better a processor than a $50-60 Cyrix, then you're probably not going to be able to afford spending much on other system components. Like a reasonably fast hard drive. Or more than 32M of RAM. Or any non-integrated graphics subprocessor.
So, for the audience this is targetted at(low-cost/power computer purchasers), it makes almost no sense to spend any time or transistors on a good FPU. All those games/benchmarks you mentioned are FPU-intensive. Now, the Cyrix will get its ass kicked in them. But if you can't tell the difference between a $60 Cyrix and a $200 PIII in the applications this chip was designed for(and, more importantly, bought for), what the hell does it matter how well it runs Unreal Tournament?
Thanks
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Hehehe :) I'd like to see you run the latest Windows or even an older Red Hat on a 486 with little memory. Unless you're going to restrict her to web-based browsing and out-of-date productivity software, you're going to be killing that little computer.
Now, personally, I'm likely to buy one of these chips. Why? Because I like things that don't make a lot of noise. I have three computers in the room I sleep in, and it's getting difficult. If I can replace my routing box with something that's completely fanless(even w/o a harddrive - root partition loaded into ramdisk from CD, lots of memory), then I'm likely to buy it. Right now I'm running a P100, and it's got a fan that's a fair bit louder than what I'd like. Not to mention the fact that the harddrive is always spinning because of logfiles and such.
Anyways, you get the point. While this may never be more than a niche processor(certain low-power/low-noise usages, ie: webpads, PDAs, notebooks, extremely inexpensive PCs), that doesn't mean it can't be a success. If they don't spend three or four billion dollars making a new plant to manufacture these things, then they could make a fair bit of profit off it, too.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I'd like to add that I've had the same problem. Most of the documentation is either way too easy, or rather difficult. In the first case, it's often pages and pages of "hit the key with an upwards-pointing arrow to go up", whereas with the former it's "use to so that you can accomplish ".
:)
Just wanted to say I know how you feel
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Hey, what's up? :) I'm not a teenager, but I am a Linux user, and a rather dedicated one. I've come to the realization over the past year or so that, indeed, MS Office is actually a good software packager. Well, relatively speaking, of course ;) I find it fast, relatively lean, feature-complete, and more-or-less stable. I was wondering if you yourself have a particular software favorite that doesn't run under Linux?
Thanks for your time,
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
This probably doesn't matter to most people, but The GIMP is open source.
:).
If over the course of your life you've grown frustrated and irritated with companies' lack of support and care, then you might come to appreciate open source for its own sake.
While a proffesional graphics designed should use whatever tool best does the job, someone who only uses Photoshop casually might decide to use The GIMP even if it lacks a feature or two, just because it's open source.
I don't know much about GIMP's technical superiority(if any) over Photoshop, but I use it because a) it runs on my machine, and b) it's open source.
That's enough for me(but I don't make my money off it, either
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
This is just a personal thing. I'm no purchaser, and I have no power anywhere. So, by helping me, you'll get relatively little return on your investment.
:)
:)
;) But in all honesty, QT/e looks to be a good way to go. Develop some games, some productivity apps, use QT/Windows and QT/X for the synchronization software, and you're all set.
:)
I am, however, an Average Joe(tm), so if what I want is what everyone wants, you could make a big return on your investment
First, I'd like to congratulate you on the work you've done so far. I don't know a lot about the in-depth stuff, but I like what I've been seeing. Good job.
What I'd like is to run Linux on my Palm Pilot. The Palm is remarkable. An example in successful adaptation. The UI is perfectly suited to the device, the speed is great(considering it's running on what, 16MHz?), and the hardware is cool.
I think this is something that Linux is perfectly suited for. Look at TrollTech's QT/Embedded. Amazing piece of software. What I'd like IBM to do is build the hardware, make some basic software, and sell a few million units. Use a standard UI tookit(like QT/E, or GTK+ nothing specifically "designed" for a palmtop; I'd like to, one day, be able to run the same apps on my palmtop as I run on my desktop today).
Now, this is just the end-goal that I'm talking about. But all the infrastructure work that would have to be done, if done right, would be great.
So, to sum up:
I'd like a Linux handheld, about the size of a PalmPilot, with similar cost($~200).
Software to run on it. I'd suggest QT/E, because I can read the code
The reason I'm suggesting this, as opposed to the other things I'd really like to see come out of IBM, is that I think it's feasable(sp?). I honestly think that within two years, IBM could release a handheld computer that I'd buy.
Thank you for your time, and sorry if I'm a bit incoherent. Working off a hangover
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Thanks again :) I found and downloaded the demo :) Which, I might add, was for Windows only. Had to borrow a friend's computer :)
:)
For me, it's difficult to use, but I see what you guys talk about when you say that it's easy - the brain mirrors what each hand knows. I am, unfortunately, very right-centric; in a lot of things. I use my right hand on more than half the keyboard, so it'll take some getting used to, but I'm going to give it a try.
Thanks again, and you've sold me
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I'd also like to point out that under most operating systems the keys can be easily remapped; while you wouldn't be able to see which key was what on the board itself(unless you used stickers), you'd still be able to have whichever layout you'd like...
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Thank you for your reply :) I looked as closely as I could; but I couldn't see properly enough. I'll save it and use The Gimp to scale it up; I'll also visit your homepage.
;) So, could you use it fulltime? I'm not too worried about performance; that's a secondary factor for me. I'm mostly worried about space(which your keyboard is obviously good with), functionality(which seems to be full), and that nebulous "feel" which allows one to use it for long durations(which I'm not sure about) :)
But I'm still interested to know if *you* could use it on a day-to-day, fulltime basis. I'll take your work on the fact that it's functionally a full-sized keyboard(and I'll be able to tell for myself, shortly), but the company seems to be targeting handhelds and the like. I'm looking for a one-handed desktop keyboard replacement, and I'm not interested in five-buttoned chording keyboards
Thanks again,
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Hey, that keyboard looks cool; and useful. Of the three featured there, that's the one I'm interested in.
I've been looking for an alternative keyboard for a while(for full-time use), and I've considered Kenesis keyboard, but they don't tickle my fancy.
I'd like to know, in all honesty, if you could use this on a day-to-day, fulltime basis. Little things; does it have Home, End, PgUp, PgDown, arrow keys? Full punctuation keys?
Thanks in advance,
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Watch your tone. We're having a good discussion here. Of course, I'm assuming that you're posting anonymously because you don't like cookies - not because you're a troll.
The poster didn't answer the question that had been asked very well. They talked about XML as a good thing, but they didn't talk about the bad things(which you must know about when trying to make an informed decision). I was just trying to clear the issue up a bit. The bad things about XML being that you've got to write a good DTD, and good XSLs, etc., etc..
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I apologize, and you're right :) The poster didn't mention that a good DTD would need to be written(a lot of work, I might add), and I didn't mention that a good set of XSLs would need to be written :)
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)