NetBSD's pkgsrc project (which works on FreeBSD and Linux) solves this by having stable branches much like Debian, but once per quarter. So you can keep a stable package tree with security fixes, but still compile from source with your custom configuration. There are other problems like very hackish upgrading, but at least that part was done right.
That's what PC-BSD is for. All of the FreeBSD 6 foundation you love, but with Ubuntu-like usability layered on top with minimal fuss. I have not tried it myself, but all reviews I've read are highly positive. And it's not just an Ubuntu clone either, with some innovation in integrating a new packaging system into the OS.
The Linux install is not subsidized with hundreds of badvertisement and spyware programs. You get a fixed, enhanced, tested Ubuntu 7.10 without any malware. To many people that's worth a lot more than Vista. Personally? I'd get the cheap Vista license and then replace the install with Ubuntu anyway, and then perform a ritual sacrifice to help a copy of Vista leave this world.
What, and watch as people realise the average user can survive with OpenOffice.org for a flat price of nothing? They can't have that. They can't stand competition at all. Even a 50% drop in annual Office purchases would be a bombshell to Microsoft.
With SystemV shared memory (shmem) it's trivial, and that's a decades-old feature of Real Unixes. What, doesn't OSX support it?
Even so, of course Photoshop should be rewritten for the new framework. After all, when a proprietary technology corporation decides to screw over their third-party developers and customers, isn't it the American Way to bear all the costs and keep paying them money?
Quite the opposite - at least with C you have absolute 100% control of the code you're running until you reach actual system calls, and then the kernel might allow you to make modules to extend those too. Since the very best the JVM can do is make C-like code, doing it yourself will make it faster.
The cost is having to do all of the intelligent JVM-like optimization manually, which means you'll spend years micro-optimizing C code instead of macro-optimizing Java code or moving on to new features or another project entirely. And the micro-optimized C code will be nearly unreadable because high-level constructs have to be resolved into their implementation details because the compiler can't do it for you. For a large application you'll probably end up with a garbage collector in the C code anyway, and chances are it won't be anywhere near as optimized as Java 6's.
For all its faults, Windows has supported the standard IPP (Internet Printing Protocol) for a long time. I've never needed to use Samba as a printer sharer, although it can still be convenient for network discovery. Sure, Windows' IPP still has catches like only allowing raw printing, but hey, that's the kind of shit you come to expect.
Kind of interesting that now it's the US technology industry that really leads the world in privacy violation and propaganda (because really, what is advertising if not propaganda?) Russia has really fallen behind in controlling people's lives for power and profit.
Sure they do, they specify it in the EULA. What do you expect from proprietary software? When will you people learn? You seriously think closed source is for keeping secrets? It's for keeping control.
Bwah? Linux has had it for yonks in PaX, grsecurity, etc. which are just a patch away. Many security-minded distributions patch it into their kernel stream and the user doesn't have to worry about it. That's no worse than how Vista has it.
You don't really get it. You should note that this feature has been available in Linux and some BSDs for many years, and they've solved every problem to the point they run it by default, even for development.
That's pretty optimistic. We're talking about a software industry where it takes many companies years just to update their compiler version, saying nothing of their entire operating platform, not even considering migrating to a completely different platform (Linux, MacOSX, whatever) which Microsoft deliberately stays incompatible with. So an optimistic estimation for Linux to replace Windows, if it's the only way to survive at all, would take a good 5 years or so.
In the meantime you'd have a bunch of half-assed ports using winelibs and Mono and similar rubbish, which makes the situation even worse than a Windows-dominant one. Some companies would bomb entirely, although that's just good old natural selection. And unlike the current legacy software which is being replaced, some of the half-assed solutions may stay 'good enough' to never be replaced at all, much like how the Windows platform is dominated now. Windows Vista still has the kernel hook to cmd.exe for chrissakes. Is this an industry that could survive a bomb?
The alternative is to fix the patent system, impose anti-monopoly restrictions on Microsoft, and other regulatory changes to allow competition to take over naturally, and let the market adapt on its own. This is the sort of evolution that led to such strong competition in the PC hardware industry, without any bombs and without long gaps of horrible inefficiency and regression.
How does that help? Solve a resource waste problem with more resource waste? Perhaps I'm missing your point.
Besides, the whole premise is broken. So some USA industries manage countless millions of foreign slaves in China, India, etc for a cheap workforce, but that's perfectly good capitalism? Using legal communication channels for data mining and advertising, same as every single noteworthy company in the world does, becomes demonised as soon as somebody labels it as mass spamming and fishing based on an unknown portion of the market? And that's a reasonable motivation to mass-ban one of the largest nations (economically, politically, population, landmass) in the world?
In summary, what the hell is wrong with people? This whole thread is just one big brainfuck. Not referring to your post in particular, though it did remind me to rant.
...and replace it with an economic crisis. The whole crux of the problem with closed source software is that it is dependent on a single vendor. How do you think it's an improvement to destroy that vendor and eliminate any hope of maintenance and support?
The other problems are all rooted in culture and government. The US is what it is because it's been ruled by corporate interests and a corrupt government. It's not something that can ever be fixed, but it can be cleaned up with a series of good administrations. Australia will follow, as it always does.
Really, the whole planet is screwed, different nations just have their different problems. Corruption is universal though, no matter how much propaganda the US might spread. Just remember that being honest is the exception, not the rule, for a species like the human which is based instinctively on self preservation and gratification.
It's called a network effect. Linux improves, and gets more users, some of whom are developers, who improve Linux. It just keeps growing with every cycle.
Proprietary operating systems can't compete because they're closed. The best an innovative user/developer can do is fire off feedback asking for a feature, and it'll be implemented wrong anyway, and then released 3 years later in the next major version.
Even more impressive is that this is the *stable* kernel branch that's growing so fast. The -mm experimental branch has gone right off the hook, to the point Andrew is complaining the development doesn't scale any more with only him at the helm.
For those who want a more conservative choice for servers, there's always something like FreeBSD. It's nice to have choice and interoperability. FreeBSD is more compatible with Linux than Windows XP is compatible with Windows Vista. If you don't believe me, consider that at least FreeBSD and Linux have a lot of standards (APIs, file formats, layouts, etc) in common.
Slashdot Mirror
NetBSD's pkgsrc project (which works on FreeBSD and Linux) solves this by having stable branches much like Debian, but once per quarter. So you can keep a stable package tree with security fixes, but still compile from source with your custom configuration. There are other problems like very hackish upgrading, but at least that part was done right.
That's what PC-BSD is for. All of the FreeBSD 6 foundation you love, but with Ubuntu-like usability layered on top with minimal fuss. I have not tried it myself, but all reviews I've read are highly positive. And it's not just an Ubuntu clone either, with some innovation in integrating a new packaging system into the OS.
Great idea, because it's not like we have checksum verification in the driver-neutral layer to handle that. Oh wait.
Of course, then you can just break the driver-neutral layer and even regular network quality faults will no longer be compensated.
The Linux install is not subsidized with hundreds of badvertisement and spyware programs. You get a fixed, enhanced, tested Ubuntu 7.10 without any malware. To many people that's worth a lot more than Vista. Personally? I'd get the cheap Vista license and then replace the install with Ubuntu anyway, and then perform a ritual sacrifice to help a copy of Vista leave this world.
Imagine a world where a small asteroid fragment or comet strikes Microsoft HQ tomorrow afternoon. Maybe if we all imagine hard enough it'll happen.
What, and watch as people realise the average user can survive with OpenOffice.org for a flat price of nothing? They can't have that. They can't stand competition at all. Even a 50% drop in annual Office purchases would be a bombshell to Microsoft.
You saw it here first folks, a new anonymous literary masterpiece born right here on the dot.
With SystemV shared memory (shmem) it's trivial, and that's a decades-old feature of Real Unixes. What, doesn't OSX support it?
Even so, of course Photoshop should be rewritten for the new framework. After all, when a proprietary technology corporation decides to screw over their third-party developers and customers, isn't it the American Way to bear all the costs and keep paying them money?
That's what I said, here:
"The cost is having to do all of the intelligent JVM-like optimization manually, which means you'll spend years micro-optimizing C code"
Quite the opposite - at least with C you have absolute 100% control of the code you're running until you reach actual system calls, and then the kernel might allow you to make modules to extend those too. Since the very best the JVM can do is make C-like code, doing it yourself will make it faster.
The cost is having to do all of the intelligent JVM-like optimization manually, which means you'll spend years micro-optimizing C code instead of macro-optimizing Java code or moving on to new features or another project entirely. And the micro-optimized C code will be nearly unreadable because high-level constructs have to be resolved into their implementation details because the compiler can't do it for you. For a large application you'll probably end up with a garbage collector in the C code anyway, and chances are it won't be anywhere near as optimized as Java 6's.
For all its faults, Windows has supported the standard IPP (Internet Printing Protocol) for a long time. I've never needed to use Samba as a printer sharer, although it can still be convenient for network discovery. Sure, Windows' IPP still has catches like only allowing raw printing, but hey, that's the kind of shit you come to expect.
Or by using the 'interactive' option, -i. DragonFly goes so far as to improve it (-I) and make it a default alias for login shells.
Kind of interesting that now it's the US technology industry that really leads the world in privacy violation and propaganda (because really, what is advertising if not propaganda?) Russia has really fallen behind in controlling people's lives for power and profit.
Sure they do, they specify it in the EULA. What do you expect from proprietary software? When will you people learn? You seriously think closed source is for keeping secrets? It's for keeping control.
Bwah? Linux has had it for yonks in PaX, grsecurity, etc. which are just a patch away. Many security-minded distributions patch it into their kernel stream and the user doesn't have to worry about it. That's no worse than how Vista has it.
You don't really get it. You should note that this feature has been available in Linux and some BSDs for many years, and they've solved every problem to the point they run it by default, even for development.
And that's fantastic. And if you want to protect your particular code from this sort of use, you can use the Affero GPL.
That's pretty optimistic. We're talking about a software industry where it takes many companies years just to update their compiler version, saying nothing of their entire operating platform, not even considering migrating to a completely different platform (Linux, MacOSX, whatever) which Microsoft deliberately stays incompatible with. So an optimistic estimation for Linux to replace Windows, if it's the only way to survive at all, would take a good 5 years or so.
In the meantime you'd have a bunch of half-assed ports using winelibs and Mono and similar rubbish, which makes the situation even worse than a Windows-dominant one. Some companies would bomb entirely, although that's just good old natural selection. And unlike the current legacy software which is being replaced, some of the half-assed solutions may stay 'good enough' to never be replaced at all, much like how the Windows platform is dominated now. Windows Vista still has the kernel hook to cmd.exe for chrissakes. Is this an industry that could survive a bomb?
The alternative is to fix the patent system, impose anti-monopoly restrictions on Microsoft, and other regulatory changes to allow competition to take over naturally, and let the market adapt on its own. This is the sort of evolution that led to such strong competition in the PC hardware industry, without any bombs and without long gaps of horrible inefficiency and regression.
How does that help? Solve a resource waste problem with more resource waste? Perhaps I'm missing your point.
Besides, the whole premise is broken. So some USA industries manage countless millions of foreign slaves in China, India, etc for a cheap workforce, but that's perfectly good capitalism? Using legal communication channels for data mining and advertising, same as every single noteworthy company in the world does, becomes demonised as soon as somebody labels it as mass spamming and fishing based on an unknown portion of the market? And that's a reasonable motivation to mass-ban one of the largest nations (economically, politically, population, landmass) in the world?
In summary, what the hell is wrong with people? This whole thread is just one big brainfuck. Not referring to your post in particular, though it did remind me to rant.
...and replace it with an economic crisis. The whole crux of the problem with closed source software is that it is dependent on a single vendor. How do you think it's an improvement to destroy that vendor and eliminate any hope of maintenance and support?
The other problems are all rooted in culture and government. The US is what it is because it's been ruled by corporate interests and a corrupt government. It's not something that can ever be fixed, but it can be cleaned up with a series of good administrations. Australia will follow, as it always does.
Really, the whole planet is screwed, different nations just have their different problems. Corruption is universal though, no matter how much propaganda the US might spread. Just remember that being honest is the exception, not the rule, for a species like the human which is based instinctively on self preservation and gratification.
Why not solve the Microsoft problem the same way? What, you mean to say mass murder is only ok if it's in somebody else's country?
It's called a network effect. Linux improves, and gets more users, some of whom are developers, who improve Linux. It just keeps growing with every cycle.
Proprietary operating systems can't compete because they're closed. The best an innovative user/developer can do is fire off feedback asking for a feature, and it'll be implemented wrong anyway, and then released 3 years later in the next major version.
Even more impressive is that this is the *stable* kernel branch that's growing so fast. The -mm experimental branch has gone right off the hook, to the point Andrew is complaining the development doesn't scale any more with only him at the helm.
For those who want a more conservative choice for servers, there's always something like FreeBSD. It's nice to have choice and interoperability. FreeBSD is more compatible with Linux than Windows XP is compatible with Windows Vista. If you don't believe me, consider that at least FreeBSD and Linux have a lot of standards (APIs, file formats, layouts, etc) in common.
Hardware.. open.. follow standards and guidelines.. what universe is this again?
You know the funniest part? That OSTG makes money by hosting Windows Server 2003 advertisements which spread FUD about Linux.
Because if you compare US and Japanese innovation, it becomes even more humiliating for the US.