But you can develop on Linux with a portable toolkit and cross-compile to Windows. That means you get the users from both platforms and thaty our dev environment is much more stable.
It's not running Windows CE. It offers a Windows CE layer so that some DirectX titles can port to Dreamcast. But only one game so far has announced that they'll be using that layer, and no major company will be developing on the Dreamcast.
As far as things like the Playstation 2, current users are comparing those shots with the performance we're seeing with today's graphics cards. By the end of the year,.18 micron 3d accelerators combined with hardware support for transforms and lightings will give us a 6-10-fold increase in polygon count and will put PCs on par with the PS2's level by Christmas time.
Remember that when the Playstation came out games were written under DOS, which could not take advantage of a machine's platform-specific hardware; vendors didn't write the graphics driver... they just had to memcopy to $A000, for instance.
The Playstation 2 has a nice API and should be a nice machine, but it won't be released until late in 2000. Comparing the PS2 to the machines of today reeks of ZDnet journalism.
The TNT processor has more transistors than the P2 does, and the upcoming NV-10 will have more than the Merced. But 3d chipsets are a very competetive market so the profit margins are much lower... that's why we're seeing all this consolidation.
That has aboslutely nothing to do with Direct3D but rather the card itself. Actually, Matrox G400 is the king of Direct3D right now. Nvidia has some nice OpenGL drivers...
This is the version that was shipped to the trade mags that wrote their reviews on it.
Saying that "this beta isn't tested for DR-DOS" makes little sense. This is a BETA PRODUCT; this is exactly what a Beta is for! To test things and fix bugs that pop up just before the release!
Actually, the main reason that our craters are far less numerous is that we have an atmosphere. The vast majority of bits and pieces burn up into things little larger than pebbles.
That said, there still is that nice crater in the Yucatan... The one they think killed the dinosaurs.
He means official in the sense of having it mandated by law instead of being their primary language. The United States, for example, doesn't have an official language... but everyone knows that we all (or should) speak English.
That's because you're running netscape. www.microsoft.com serves all IE page requests and then, if it's not doing *anything else*, serves non-IE page requests.
Keep in mind that Caldera split into two separate companies. The DR-DOS company ("Caldera Thin Clients") is different from the Linux division ("Caldera Systems"). They may never see any of it, or... maybe they will.
Yes, actually. Their president used to be the president of Novell, and when he switched (possibly formed, I'm not sure) Caldera, he bought DR-DOS from them specifically so that he could sue Microsoft over it.
It was probably a good move; they are expected to win this case.
No, it is their fault. They *allowed* the buddy video drivers to run in supervisor mode/at the lowest level, bypassing all of the protections of running it in user mode. So when a driver crashes, the machine dies... So sorry. Press the reset button and buy the upgrade.
A real microkernel cannot do this. Odd how people run around claiming that NT is a microkernel? Well, it's not. It's a layered kernel -- but that doesn't have the same buzzword compliancy!
Assume if you will that 3 different companies started making Windows. Assume Microsoft is, for example, split into 3 groups with the same intellectual property that all have access to the same source code.
Now assume that one of those companies wanted to make their OS not compatible with the others. Do you think everyone will flock to the new incompatability? Would it be advertised as "New! Can't run old programs or any existing programs, but we'll sell you some new ones!"?
No. People wouldn't buy it, and the company would suffer-- they know this already. Instead, companies would have to compete by finding ways to increase stability, efficiency, and *standards* support without breaking legacy code. That effect is the desired one. Competing products tend to converge until they are difficult to tell apart, not diverge.
Don't believe the "support nightmare" FUD-- for it is just that. In the end, any small (And I do mean small-- the Windows children could not be vastly different from each other or else they wouldn't sell) extra cost would be worth the immesuarable value of the freedom we attain and the value of the better code bases.
The three (or more, but at least three) seperate-but-equal groups with the same IP solution should be the solution that the government goes for. Another solution -- say, splitting off the apps from the OS -- would only cause the two monopolies to collude with each other and continue their practises.
This IS the system. We protect corporations with intellectual property and copyrights. For that protection, we expect companies to play by certain rules. Breaking those rules has consequences.
There is no such thing anymore as a true free market in a successful capitalist country. We have a command/control economy, just like every other successful "free" nation in the world.
Having a monopoly in and on of itself is not illegal. Trying to be more profitable is not illegal. But trying to increase those profits by temporarily taking a loss in order to kill out all of your competetion IS illegal. 'Accidental' monopolies are fine and just, but taking actions to actively secure that monopoly by killing out all of your competitors is not just... and should never be just. I daresay that without GNU/Linux/FreeBSD/BeOS etc the country as a whole would truly be in a great deal of trouble-- for even if the government takes great action against Microsoft, what other platforms are out there to run programs? And who would want to run one of them?
And no, MacOS doesn't count. It can't run on our machines.
Bullocks. MS stole the idea of COM from industry-standard CORBA, but couldn't bare to adapt to an accepted standard that wasn't explicity controlled by them.
Slashdot Mirror
But you can develop on Linux with a portable toolkit and cross-compile to Windows. That means you get the users from both platforms and thaty our dev environment is much more stable.
It's not running Windows CE. It offers a Windows CE layer so that some DirectX titles can port to Dreamcast. But only one game so far has announced that they'll be using that layer, and no major company will be developing on the Dreamcast.
.18 micron 3d accelerators combined with hardware support for transforms and lightings will give us a 6-10-fold increase in polygon count and will put PCs on par with the PS2's level by Christmas time.
As far as things like the Playstation 2, current users are comparing those shots with the performance we're seeing with today's graphics cards. By the end of the year,
Remember that when the Playstation came out games were written under DOS, which could not take advantage of a machine's platform-specific hardware; vendors didn't write the graphics driver... they just had to memcopy to $A000, for instance.
The Playstation 2 has a nice API and should be a nice machine, but it won't be released until late in 2000. Comparing the PS2 to the machines of today reeks of ZDnet journalism.
The TNT processor has more transistors than the P2 does, and the upcoming NV-10 will have more than the Merced. But 3d chipsets are a very competetive market so the profit margins are much lower... that's why we're seeing all this consolidation.
That has aboslutely nothing to do with Direct3D but rather the card itself. Actually, Matrox G400 is the king of Direct3D right now. Nvidia has some nice OpenGL drivers...
Depends on who is doing it. in this case we'll start with the "cute" ones.
This is the version that was shipped to the trade mags that wrote their reviews on it.
Saying that "this beta isn't tested for DR-DOS" makes little sense. This is a BETA PRODUCT; this is exactly what a Beta is for! To test things and fix bugs that pop up just before the release!
Actually, the main reason that our craters are far less numerous is that we have an atmosphere. The vast majority of bits and pieces burn up into things little larger than pebbles.
That said, there still is that nice crater in the Yucatan... The one they think killed the dinosaurs.
Explain this to me, since the state of California has a higher population than France?
He means official in the sense of having it mandated by law instead of being their primary language. The United States, for example, doesn't have an official language... but everyone knows that we all (or should) speak English.
And apparently Toshiba put theirs on a 14.4 ;)
That's because you're running netscape. www.microsoft.com serves all IE page requests and then, if it's not doing *anything else*, serves non-IE page requests.
Keep in mind that Caldera split into two separate companies. The DR-DOS company ("Caldera Thin Clients") is different from the Linux division ("Caldera Systems"). They may never see any of it, or... maybe they will.
Yes, actually. Their president used to be the president of Novell, and when he switched (possibly formed, I'm not sure) Caldera, he bought DR-DOS from them specifically so that he could sue Microsoft over it.
It was probably a good move; they are expected to win this case.
They're focusing more on thin clients and embedded applications.
Not really an exaggeration, but yes, definitely a typo!
I meant "mixed command/free market" system. Sorry for the confusion.
No, it is their fault. They *allowed* the buddy video drivers to run in supervisor mode/at the lowest level, bypassing all of the protections of running it in user mode. So when a driver crashes, the machine dies... So sorry. Press the reset button and buy the upgrade.
A real microkernel cannot do this. Odd how people run around claiming that NT is a microkernel? Well, it's not. It's a layered kernel -- but that doesn't have the same buzzword compliancy!
Assume if you will that 3 different companies started making Windows. Assume Microsoft is, for example, split into 3 groups with the same intellectual property that all have access to the same source code.
Now assume that one of those companies wanted to make their OS not compatible with the others. Do you think everyone will flock to the new incompatability? Would it be advertised as "New! Can't run old programs or any existing programs, but we'll sell you some new ones!"?
No. People wouldn't buy it, and the company would suffer-- they know this already. Instead, companies would have to compete by finding ways to increase stability, efficiency, and *standards* support without breaking legacy code. That effect is the desired one. Competing products tend to converge until they are difficult to tell apart, not diverge.
Don't believe the "support nightmare" FUD-- for it is just that. In the end, any small (And I do mean small-- the Windows children could not be vastly different from each other or else they wouldn't sell) extra cost would be worth the immesuarable value of the freedom we attain and the value of the better code bases.
The three (or more, but at least three) seperate-but-equal groups with the same IP solution should be the solution that the government goes for. Another solution -- say, splitting off the apps from the OS -- would only cause the two monopolies to collude with each other and continue their practises.
This IS the system. We protect corporations with intellectual property and copyrights. For that protection, we expect companies to play by certain rules. Breaking those rules has consequences.
There is no such thing anymore as a true free market in a successful capitalist country. We have a command/control economy, just like every other successful "free" nation in the world.
Having a monopoly in and on of itself is not illegal. Trying to be more profitable is not illegal. But trying to increase those profits by temporarily taking a loss in order to kill out all of your competetion IS illegal. 'Accidental' monopolies are fine and just, but taking actions to actively secure that monopoly by killing out all of your competitors is not just... and should never be just. I daresay that without GNU/Linux/FreeBSD/BeOS etc the country as a whole would truly be in a great deal of trouble-- for even if the government takes great action against Microsoft, what other platforms are out there to run programs? And who would want to run one of them?
And no, MacOS doesn't count. It can't run on our machines.
Windows 95 did. It uses the BSD TCP/IP stack.
Burlington installed 6,000 (I believe that was the number) Linux systems. They use Linux for everything now.
MS's stock doubling = Bill Gates' fortune doubling.
The three necessary comments have yet to be made, so I just thought I'd have to say them.
1) Can it run Linux?
2) How many MP3s can we get on it?
And 3) Does it have a RAID driver yet?
Hmm. We consume lots of resources and leak all over the place, so just maybe!
Actually no. Where I work (software company) almost everyone is quite thin...
:-)
except for that other division. they're a bunch of lazy oafs. but our team is thin
Bullocks. MS stole the idea of COM from industry-standard CORBA, but couldn't bare to adapt to an accepted standard that wasn't explicity controlled by them.