"Only Unix had any pretentions to real portability and it was a bit player in the pre-MS-DOS age."
I believe VAX was portable too (maybe not?). But my point being here that whereas Unix was a step forward, DOS was a step backwards because it did not build upon this foundation set. Plus, once Windows came out, we then had a GUI dependent on one architecture, whereis X/Motif (which Windows was heavily based upon) worked on multiple architectures. Clearly, a step in the reverse direction. The development of an abstraction of using the computer, id est, a 2D GUI environment, should have been a step forward had it not been dependent on the x86. And then, of course, we have the facts (going on with the step-backwards thing) that Windows (up until XP) wasn't a multitasking environment and wasn't really a pure 32-bit operating system ("Windows is a 32-bit GUI for a 16-bit extension to a 8-bit operating system developed for a 4-bit processor by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition", etc, its funny). My final issue of stepping-backwards is that the Windows platform STILL doesn't support anything but the x86 platform! (Don't know if Windows NT is the exception but that's really just a MS version of Unix, pretty much, look-and-feel-wise [not that there's anything wrong with that!])
But your point about the status of the British government is very interesting, and, unfortunately, all to true, I imagine.
Unix, of course, but other OSes, like VAX, worked on multiple platforms, such as the DEC PDP's, IBM computers, Alpha workstations, et cetera, instead of just x86's. Mostly just Unix though, ^_^, of considerable mention, nonetheless.
Yeah, well Bush isn't really that smart at all, there's little to comment on that. But, hey, he's a pretty good orator (until he mispronounces something, which is hilarious) and that's all that really matters. He's just a figurehead, and really doesn't have much to do with the way the country is run and anyone whom says otherwise is giving him much too much credit. Still, even with his lack of intellect, I think we're much better off with his people than with Gore's (but I'm pretty much a Republican, so I'm kind of bias ^_^), which would've had us sit back on our heels and do nothing productive at all (just like the 8-year span of Clinton's years). And I'll probally vote for his people this upcoming election, but we'll see.
And all these jokes are funny. Come on. Laugh already, it's good for one.
Not trolling, I'm reading this in a very noninflamatory, nonchalant way, so, sorry if it comes off as a bit aggressive.
My point about setting back the industry 20 years is in reference to the "mainstream computing". I only mean that "John Q. Public" has himself been set back. He has come to accept the MS tax and to use a slow buggy OS that he can't fix. Unix made headway into universities and such before Windows and Apple was there too. The average user would most-likely now be using a *nix or MacOS instead. Games would have developed to use mostly just OpenGL. Applications would be forced to be multi-platform and Java would have developed earlier and faster out of necessity. The *nixes of today, being the primary OS, would have developed even faster. Imagine what could happen if open-source was the mainstream! I mean, look at the internet, a project developed bazaar-style in open-source (well, free software actually) style. It would be amazing what we could accomplish if every one and his brother learned to use *nix instead of learning to deal with MS. And that's what would have happened: people, the average joe's, would have instead of learned *nix in order to survive in the ever-changing world.
This average joe does pretty much only "use a computer to run their applications", however the MS market impairs ones ability to do this. In order to run these apps they need the MS version of Windows and the MS version of these apps (thanks to OpenOffice.org and such at least we find a modicum of interoperability with third parties developing using the MS standards). These "standards" that some tout as virtutous are really more akin to something that has developed to force most people to use MS's apps, NOT in order to solve any sort of problem.
XP is not a technically advanced operating system; the kernel doesn't even support 64-bit-processors (and if it does, why the heck is MS working on Longhorn?). The kernel is bloated and sluggish and it lacks support for a ton of components (heck, I couldn't even get my legal copy of it to install without first doing a bunch of other stuff -- should a "technically advanced operating system" be that difficult to install on modern hardware [ATI Radeon 9700 Pro conflicted, etc]). The kernel is buggy and insecure. The file permissions system is a blatant copy of previous operating systems (and its about time they introduced it). I'm not trolling here, this is fact. And the biggest problem with these truths is that the intelligent user can't do anything about it!
But these are just my (bias) views. Feel free to tell me otherwise.
Illegal or not, the point is that these actions a KBE do not make. Gates doesn't deserve positive acknowledgement and rewards for his tricky ways. In the least, I find it insulting that someone who set back the computer world by at least 20 years is getting rewarded! Up until DOS and later, Windows, OS'es worked on multiple platforms and actually WORKED, period! MS has set back the PC market decades and it has come to a point now when the average joe has learned to accept an OS he has no control over, that crashes constantly, that is plagued with holes and flaws and, to top it all off, costs and arm and a leg. Surely, Gates doesn't deserve this honour for "services to the global enterprise" when he has actually harmed it.
Wow. That was hilarious. Seriously, though, when you reply like that you make the parent seem more serious and actually seem to make more sense than you. That being said, the parent doesn't understand the idea behind this project at all (which is understandable in our society). See, that's how you do it!
Yes, however GC games have been scientifically proven (here at WPI at least) to be more fun than XBOX games. And, besides, XBOX is made by M$, so clearly GC *must* be better. By the way, as I'm typing this I'm speaking these words out loud in a humorous fashion to induce hilarity and not really worry about making any sort of point.
Actually, and the site mentions it, the DMCA allows Reverse Engineering for the purpose of software operability, i.e., as long as they don't steal/use the SDK and build all the stuff from the ground up its perfectly legal (in the USA at least; not sure about international copyright laws and stuff).
Interesting that the DMCA actually has a section that protects us. Hmm.
Unless I read this completely incorrectly, in which case, someone, please right me! (pun intended)
"Give me a break. If you have enough room to install a program, you have enough room for its configuration file, even in xml."
This is assuming that one doesn't have *just* enough room for the program, but its true, the xml probally wouldn't be THAT much bigger.
"Great, but you're not going to notice the speed difference of using a parser to load the file."
This is really my issue because not every machine running Linux (such as, say, a 100mhz computer or running it on a pda or something even smaller!) is going to be able to parse that xml as quickly as the traditional.config files. And even if that point doesn't stand, there's still the issue of backwards compatibility. Programs would have to (ie, should) support both.config and xml files, and if they have to do that, they might as well just support.config and screw the xml. Plus writing xml files by hand is harder than writing.config files, which, in comparision to xml, have little markup (if any) and are incredibly straightforward.
That being said, the idea to use xml is a good idea and at least people are willing to think about new solutions to old issues (but I still like the.config's ^_^).
Are there not man pages for a reason? Really, configuring each program is not that hard. If you used XML it'd introduce a new level of complexity not needed, making bloated.config files that just take up more room. Plus, then all those programs would need to implement libxml and such. And I bet parsing XML is a bit slower (at least) then just parsing these easy.config files.
And, they wouldn't want to segregate all of us that use 'vi' to make these.config files (or at least modify them). No, XML is not a good idea here. Even standardization sucks because it forces all us programmers to try to follow some stupid rules in order to get our programs to work instead of designing it in our own working way. Sounds alot like MS actually!
Absolutely correct. That's why the Bible sells, just like these senseless (and fun!) games. Unfortunately, unlike these games (such as Postal 2) which are clearly based on real life, urinating on people to put out the fire they are engulfed within, the Bible has some ridiculous ideas, like a "god" figure, sort of along the lines of a DM understood by most as the supreme being.
That being said, I hope they DO port the Bible over to Linux so we can play some really fun violent fantasy games! Yay!
Personally, something I thought was interesting was that in Neo's painfully-obvious messianic self-sacrifice he didn't destroy the computers, didn't accomplish anything, per se (except terminating Smith, of course), and merely prolongs the eventuality of the computers destroying Zion, et cetera. The machines are computers after all, and a promise/suggestion to do something incredibly foolish, like NOT destroying Zion and equalizing their system, is not even a possibility; the machines will still destroy Zion and kill those humans eventually, this just prolongs the wait before said event. I see this as a direct correlation to other messianic sacrifices which accomplish nothing but leading man to believe in nothing. Of course, this mostly is just me using a concept to my advantage, towards my personal bias. Pfff!
Oh yes, and the movie sucked ass too. My friends and I are planning on compliing a good movie, comprised of the important parts of the last two (meaning most of the third will be cut out) and adding in some stuff that adds a bit of subtlety to the movie (I mean, seriously, every one freaking knew Neo represented a Jesus character; is it REALLY necessary to flood the screen with all the cross imagery! The audience has a modicum of understanding, I would hope, and doesn't need this blatant symbolism pushed down their throats!)
A 3D desktop is pretty neat to look at (for a while before migranes set in) but, as many have mentioned, incredible overkill and immensely inefficient. But, then again, I say the same about 2D GUI's too! If one can't do it on the command line, it can't be done! Hear, hear for 1D interfaces!
That being said, I'm definitely setting up a 3D desktop eventually just to show off and be more of a geek.
Slashdot Mirror
"Only Unix had any pretentions to real portability and it was a bit player in the pre-MS-DOS age."
I believe VAX was portable too (maybe not?). But my point being here that whereas Unix was a step forward, DOS was a step backwards because it did not build upon this foundation set. Plus, once Windows came out, we then had a GUI dependent on one architecture, whereis X/Motif (which Windows was heavily based upon) worked on multiple architectures. Clearly, a step in the reverse direction. The development of an abstraction of using the computer, id est, a 2D GUI environment, should have been a step forward had it not been dependent on the x86. And then, of course, we have the facts (going on with the step-backwards thing) that Windows (up until XP) wasn't a multitasking environment and wasn't really a pure 32-bit operating system ("Windows is a 32-bit GUI for a 16-bit extension to a 8-bit operating system developed for a 4-bit processor by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition", etc, its funny). My final issue of stepping-backwards is that the Windows platform STILL doesn't support anything but the x86 platform! (Don't know if Windows NT is the exception but that's really just a MS version of Unix, pretty much, look-and-feel-wise [not that there's anything wrong with that!])
But your point about the status of the British government is very interesting, and, unfortunately, all to true, I imagine.
Unix, of course, but other OSes, like VAX, worked on multiple platforms, such as the DEC PDP's, IBM computers, Alpha workstations, et cetera, instead of just x86's. Mostly just Unix though, ^_^, of considerable mention, nonetheless.
Yeah, well Bush isn't really that smart at all, there's little to comment on that. But, hey, he's a pretty good orator (until he mispronounces something, which is hilarious) and that's all that really matters. He's just a figurehead, and really doesn't have much to do with the way the country is run and anyone whom says otherwise is giving him much too much credit. Still, even with his lack of intellect, I think we're much better off with his people than with Gore's (but I'm pretty much a Republican, so I'm kind of bias ^_^), which would've had us sit back on our heels and do nothing productive at all (just like the 8-year span of Clinton's years). And I'll probally vote for his people this upcoming election, but we'll see.
And all these jokes are funny. Come on. Laugh already, it's good for one.
Not trolling, I'm reading this in a very noninflamatory, nonchalant way, so, sorry if it comes off as a bit aggressive.
My point about setting back the industry 20 years is in reference to the "mainstream computing". I only mean that "John Q. Public" has himself been set back. He has come to accept the MS tax and to use a slow buggy OS that he can't fix. Unix made headway into universities and such before Windows and Apple was there too. The average user would most-likely now be using a *nix or MacOS instead. Games would have developed to use mostly just OpenGL. Applications would be forced to be multi-platform and Java would have developed earlier and faster out of necessity. The *nixes of today, being the primary OS, would have developed even faster. Imagine what could happen if open-source was the mainstream! I mean, look at the internet, a project developed bazaar-style in open-source (well, free software actually) style. It would be amazing what we could accomplish if every one and his brother learned to use *nix instead of learning to deal with MS. And that's what would have happened: people, the average joe's, would have instead of learned *nix in order to survive in the ever-changing world.
This average joe does pretty much only "use a computer to run their applications", however the MS market impairs ones ability to do this. In order to run these apps they need the MS version of Windows and the MS version of these apps (thanks to OpenOffice.org and such at least we find a modicum of interoperability with third parties developing using the MS standards). These "standards" that some tout as virtutous are really more akin to something that has developed to force most people to use MS's apps, NOT in order to solve any sort of problem.
XP is not a technically advanced operating system; the kernel doesn't even support 64-bit-processors (and if it does, why the heck is MS working on Longhorn?). The kernel is bloated and sluggish and it lacks support for a ton of components (heck, I couldn't even get my legal copy of it to install without first doing a bunch of other stuff -- should a "technically advanced operating system" be that difficult to install on modern hardware [ATI Radeon 9700 Pro conflicted, etc]). The kernel is buggy and insecure. The file permissions system is a blatant copy of previous operating systems (and its about time they introduced it). I'm not trolling here, this is fact. And the biggest problem with these truths is that the intelligent user can't do anything about it!
But these are just my (bias) views. Feel free to tell me otherwise.
Illegal or not, the point is that these actions a KBE do not make. Gates doesn't deserve positive acknowledgement and rewards for his tricky ways. In the least, I find it insulting that someone who set back the computer world by at least 20 years is getting rewarded! Up until DOS and later, Windows, OS'es worked on multiple platforms and actually WORKED, period! MS has set back the PC market decades and it has come to a point now when the average joe has learned to accept an OS he has no control over, that crashes constantly, that is plagued with holes and flaws and, to top it all off, costs and arm and a leg. Surely, Gates doesn't deserve this honour for "services to the global enterprise" when he has actually harmed it.
Wow. That was hilarious. Seriously, though, when you reply like that you make the parent seem more serious and actually seem to make more sense than you. That being said, the parent doesn't understand the idea behind this project at all (which is understandable in our society). See, that's how you do it!
Yes, however GC games have been scientifically proven (here at WPI at least) to be more fun than XBOX games. And, besides, XBOX is made by M$, so clearly GC *must* be better. By the way, as I'm typing this I'm speaking these words out loud in a humorous fashion to induce hilarity and not really worry about making any sort of point.
Actually, and the site mentions it, the DMCA allows Reverse Engineering for the purpose of software operability, i.e., as long as they don't steal/use the SDK and build all the stuff from the ground up its perfectly legal (in the USA at least; not sure about international copyright laws and stuff). Interesting that the DMCA actually has a section that protects us. Hmm. Unless I read this completely incorrectly, in which case, someone, please right me! (pun intended)
"Give me a break. If you have enough room to install a program, you have enough room for its configuration file, even in xml."
.config files. And even if that point doesn't stand, there's still the issue of backwards compatibility. Programs would have to (ie, should) support both .config and xml files, and if they have to do that, they might as well just support .config and screw the xml. Plus writing xml files by hand is harder than writing .config files, which, in comparision to xml, have little markup (if any) and are incredibly straightforward.
.config's ^_^).
This is assuming that one doesn't have *just* enough room for the program, but its true, the xml probally wouldn't be THAT much bigger.
"Great, but you're not going to notice the speed difference of using a parser to load the file."
This is really my issue because not every machine running Linux (such as, say, a 100mhz computer or running it on a pda or something even smaller!) is going to be able to parse that xml as quickly as the traditional
That being said, the idea to use xml is a good idea and at least people are willing to think about new solutions to old issues (but I still like the
Are there not man pages for a reason? Really, configuring each program is not that hard. If you used XML it'd introduce a new level of complexity not needed, making bloated .config files that just take up more room. Plus, then all those programs would need to implement libxml and such. And I bet parsing XML is a bit slower (at least) then just parsing these easy .config files.
.config files (or at least modify them). No, XML is not a good idea here. Even standardization sucks because it forces all us programmers to try to follow some stupid rules in order to get our programs to work instead of designing it in our own working way. Sounds alot like MS actually!
And, they wouldn't want to segregate all of us that use 'vi' to make these
...ahem, 10%. I think. Eh, 86% of all statostics are made up on the spot.
Absolutely correct. That's why the Bible sells, just like these senseless (and fun!) games. Unfortunately, unlike these games (such as Postal 2) which are clearly based on real life, urinating on people to put out the fire they are engulfed within, the Bible has some ridiculous ideas, like a "god" figure, sort of along the lines of a DM understood by most as the supreme being.
That being said, I hope they DO port the Bible over to Linux so we can play some really fun violent fantasy games! Yay!
Oh yes, and least I forget, Postal 2 sucks...
Well, IMO...
Personally, something I thought was interesting was that in Neo's painfully-obvious messianic self-sacrifice he didn't destroy the computers, didn't accomplish anything, per se (except terminating Smith, of course), and merely prolongs the eventuality of the computers destroying Zion, et cetera. The machines are computers after all, and a promise/suggestion to do something incredibly foolish, like NOT destroying Zion and equalizing their system, is not even a possibility; the machines will still destroy Zion and kill those humans eventually, this just prolongs the wait before said event. I see this as a direct correlation to other messianic sacrifices which accomplish nothing but leading man to believe in nothing. Of course, this mostly is just me using a concept to my advantage, towards my personal bias. Pfff!
Oh yes, and the movie sucked ass too. My friends and I are planning on compliing a good movie, comprised of the important parts of the last two (meaning most of the third will be cut out) and adding in some stuff that adds a bit of subtlety to the movie (I mean, seriously, every one freaking knew Neo represented a Jesus character; is it REALLY necessary to flood the screen with all the cross imagery! The audience has a modicum of understanding, I would hope, and doesn't need this blatant symbolism pushed down their throats!)
A 3D desktop is pretty neat to look at (for a while before migranes set in) but, as many have mentioned, incredible overkill and immensely inefficient. But, then again, I say the same about 2D GUI's too! If one can't do it on the command line, it can't be done! Hear, hear for 1D interfaces! That being said, I'm definitely setting up a 3D desktop eventually just to show off and be more of a geek.