Or at least used to be; the official line was that it works, but should not be considered production quality like the Unix counterpart. So it wouldn't be a fair test yet.
--
Is this the kind of dweeb Pournelle relies on?
on
2 Scoops of Quickies
·
· Score: 1
He says Dell et all standardize on M$ because that's commodities rule, yet doesn't comprehend that just about everything *except* the OS is interchangeable - disk drives, monitors, sound cards, even the bloody processor to an extent. ONLY M$ has a lock on their particular piece of the pie.
He says Linux sucks because you have to recompile to use a different sound card. Duh. No you don't, if you compile all of them, which is what M$ does. Is he so lame as to think that M$ has a single solitary sound driver which can deal with every sound card out there? I don't expect him to know about modules, and changing drivers without rebooting, but this is really pathetic.
If this is what Pournelle thinks of as intelligent reasons for M$ success and Linux failure, then there is nothing to fear for free source fans. These nuts have blinders on AND have their head buried somewhere dark. You must know your enemy to defeat him, and obviously M$ supporters don't.
Like that idiotic PC Week interview where the moron says Linux could have kept the copyright to Linux and been a millionaire by now. Duh!
Hah! I have a track bike (no derailleurs, no brakes, no freewheel). Not only do I snub road bikes, but I snub most track bikes, because mine has inch pitch gears. So there. I love the looks of you modern day wonders when I say I ride a 7 in the back.
IIRC and if it's what I read about a month or so ago. Not meant for standard encryption duties, only to tie a registered product to a specific processor. Scares the piss out of me -- what if you upgrade your processor? What about dual processor systems? What about just buying a new box and moving all your software over?
--
Maybe you need to read between the lines
on
Slackware.com
·
· Score: 1
Of course it's commercial. Who said it wasn't? The comment about Shockingly enough, its Slackware.com is humor. Needs an apostrophe, but it' humor.
while they -king of all hypocrites- shipped the same desktop they were fighting in the US (moral!) in central Europe.
I believe it turned out to be a European distributor who was adding KDE to Red Hat.
You accuse Red Hat of vaporware, yet I see no facts in your own arguments, own innuendo and rumour. How about some solid facts to back up your FUD? Otherwise you just look ugly yourself.
You may think of it as a techo news site, but it's really whatever Rob wants it to be. How many other non-techno news articles have you complained about? All of them? I bet not.
The point being that you can build a GUI on top of a command line, but you can't build a command line on top of a GUI. You can build features on top of reliability, but you can't build reliability on top of features.
I use a GUI a lot, but when push comes to shove, it's the command line that gets the work done.
They keep a lot of employees because the stock price keeps on going up. They keep investors happy for the same reason; M$ stock is a legal pyramid scheme. Once it stops climbing for a quarter or two, a few investors will bail, the stock price will stumble around for a short while until everyone else realizes it ain't gonna recover, and then it's gonna dive like you've never seen. And then employees will abandon in droves, and M$ will have no attraction left for anybody.
VB makes it easier to create and use simple Automation objects. It does this by hiding the details. But once you move to more complex Automation problems, you may find those details aren't as irrelevant as they first seemed; you may want to see and control them. If you're clever enough, you can usually hack your way around VB limitations, but in Delphi you can usually solve the problems without arcane hacks.
xkeycaps man page implies that modifier keys are just that - modifiers. They can't do anything by themselves, they can only modify other keys' actions. Now you could redefine them as non modifiers...
This new computer of mine has one of these Lose95 104 key keyboards.
How do I get X to recognize them? I don't see anything obvious in keysymdefs.h.
FVWM's 'Key' function doesn't have any modifiers for these keys. Will I have to modify the sources? Probably trivial to add 'W' for instance, but I'd just as soon not if I don't have to.
How about regular programs from then on? I suppose Xkeycaps would help, although I tried it. I don't know how to reference them, since X doesn't appear to recognize them.
Certainly the general areas of the brain are platform independent. I suspect it's like voice; similar in general, differing in details. But when you concentrate on remembering something, or moving a specific body part, etc, the same areas of the brain get increased blood flow.
When you want to telephone a company, or send them snail mail, you look them up in the phone book or some other directory, or on your warranty card, or owners' manual, or write it down from the billboard or TV ad.
There are only a limited number of phone numbers, which map to many different names. If a company named HAN had 1-800-call-han, I doubt IBM would so them for using the same telephone keys (426) as IBM.
The only thing that makes www.nbc.com valuable is that it gets you to IBM. Now if some clown puts up a site at www.nbc.tv, either he pretends to be NBC (and gets sued for fraud) or he puts up something non-NBC, in which case no one is fooled.
So who exactly gets hurt by these fake names? Good gosh, you type in the wrong one, you figure it out pretty darned quickly, or it's farud, and they get their ass sued. No one going to whitehouse.com is going to mistake it for whitehouse.gov Well, maybe with this president, who knows?:-)
Typical govt bureaucracy, looking for a solution to a non-problem.
Unix vendors sell proprietary Unices and boxen because it differentiates them from the competition. But the OS is a loss center; it only runs on their hardware, and only exists because they wouldn't want to use a competitor's Unix.
Now along comes a Unix that no competitor owns and which has developers working on it at no cost to the proprietary vendors. The smart ones (which includes Sun first of all) will shift to Linux to keep costs down, to take advantage of the free development staff. They will add their unique contributions into the Linux tree, to hope that it becomes part of the Linux "standard" and their competitors have to adopt or perish. The proprietary Unices will only survive for high end boxes with special needs, ie, 1024 node SMP etc which they want to keep a lock on. But eventually the high end will shrink to such a small base that it too will be ported to Linux.
Just imagine, what with no W2K tax, and Linux efficiency and performance, the savvy buyers will buy the Linux cut rate server at half the price and laugh all the way to the bank. Then as word gets out...
Can youimagien PC Week or one of those rags comparing a cut rate Linux server against a dual PII W2K octsing twice as much? I drool in anticipation.
Got a friend who suggested (seriously) back in the summer of 1998 that from now on, we should all buy 4 times as much food when we go shopping.
Let's see, that comes out to a 6 year stockpile. Have to be all canned or dehydrated of course. Even then, not sure I'd trust that shelf lifetime. And if things get so bad that you really need 5 years food supply, you'd better have a hell of a lot of ammo to keep the hungry hordes away.
M$ is famous for making royalties disappear; I understand that's what they did to Spyglass when they reduced the price of Exploder to 0 (Spyglass got a percentage of sales, not a per unit royalty). So maybe IBM should release as much of the OS/2 source as possible; at least enough that OS/2 users could migrate the desktop parts they want on top of Linux. Then M$ would get no royalties.
Well, it's an idea. I don't know how the royalties are calculated. It would be lots of fun if it did happen:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Or at least used to be; the official line was that it works, but should not be considered production quality like the Unix counterpart. So it wouldn't be a fair test yet.
--
He says Dell et all standardize on M$ because that's commodities rule, yet doesn't comprehend that just about everything *except* the OS is interchangeable - disk drives, monitors, sound cards, even the bloody processor to an extent. ONLY M$ has a lock on their particular piece of the pie.
He says Linux sucks because you have to recompile to use a different sound card. Duh. No you don't, if you compile all of them, which is what M$ does. Is he so lame as to think that M$ has a single solitary sound driver which can deal with every sound card out there? I don't expect him to know about modules, and changing drivers without rebooting, but this is really pathetic.
If this is what Pournelle thinks of as intelligent reasons for M$ success and Linux failure, then there is nothing to fear for free source fans. These nuts have blinders on AND have their head buried somewhere dark. You must know your enemy to defeat him, and obviously M$ supporters don't.
Like that idiotic PC Week interview where the moron says Linux could have kept the copyright to Linux and been a millionaire by now. Duh!
--
Mountain bikes: I have no idea, I snub them.
Hah! I have a track bike (no derailleurs, no brakes, no freewheel). Not only do I snub road bikes, but I snub most track bikes, because mine has inch pitch gears. So there. I love the looks of you modern day wonders when I say I ride a 7 in the back.
--
Bought it from VAResearch without Windows. Why waste a trip? But it would be fun, in a sad sort of way.... :-)
--
IIRC and if it's what I read about a month or so ago. Not meant for standard encryption duties, only to tie a registered product to a specific processor. Scares the piss out of me -- what if you upgrade your processor? What about dual processor systems? What about just buying a new box and moving all your software over?
--
Of course it's commercial. Who said it wasn't? The comment about Shockingly enough, its Slackware.com is humor. Needs an apostrophe, but it' humor.
--
while they -king of all hypocrites- shipped the same desktop they were fighting in the US (moral!) in central Europe.
I believe it turned out to be a European distributor who was adding KDE to Red Hat.
You accuse Red Hat of vaporware, yet I see no facts in your own arguments, own innuendo and rumour. How about some solid facts to back up your FUD? Otherwise you just look ugly yourself.
--
Got ear wax in your eyes or something? Brain fogged by anti-sengan hostility?
--
You may think of it as a techo news site, but it's really whatever Rob wants it to be. How many other non-techno news articles have you complained about? All of them? I bet not.
--
The point being that you can build a GUI on top of a command line, but you can't build a command line on top of a GUI. You can build features on top of reliability, but you can't build reliability on top of features.
I use a GUI a lot, but when push comes to shove, it's the command line that gets the work done.
--
They keep a lot of employees because the stock price keeps on going up. They keep investors happy for the same reason; M$ stock is a legal pyramid scheme. Once it stops climbing for a quarter or two, a few investors will bail, the stock price will stumble around for a short while until everyone else realizes it ain't gonna recover, and then it's gonna dive like you've never seen. And then employees will abandon in droves, and M$ will have no attraction left for anybody.
--
VB makes it easier to create and use simple Automation objects. It does this by hiding the details. But once you move to more complex Automation problems, you may find those details aren't as irrelevant as they first seemed; you may want to see and control them. If you're clever enough, you can usually hack your way around VB limitations, but in Delphi you can usually solve the problems without arcane hacks.
--
I think they have the wrong show.
--
xkeycaps man page implies that modifier keys are just that - modifiers. They can't do anything by themselves, they can only modify other keys' actions. Now you could redefine them as non modifiers...
--
--
Certainly the general areas of the brain are platform independent. I suspect it's like voice; similar in general, differing in details. But when you concentrate on remembering something, or moving a specific body part, etc, the same areas of the brain get increased blood flow.
--
When you want to telephone a company, or send them snail mail, you look them up in the phone book or some other directory, or on your warranty card, or owners' manual, or write it down from the billboard or TV ad.
:-)
There are only a limited number of phone numbers, which map to many different names. If a company named HAN had 1-800-call-han, I doubt IBM would so them for using the same telephone keys (426) as IBM.
The only thing that makes www.nbc.com valuable is that it gets you to IBM. Now if some clown puts up a site at www.nbc.tv, either he pretends to be NBC (and gets sued for fraud) or he puts up something non-NBC, in which case no one is fooled.
So who exactly gets hurt by these fake names? Good gosh, you type in the wrong one, you figure it out pretty darned quickly, or it's farud, and they get their ass sued. No one going to whitehouse.com is going to mistake it for whitehouse.gov Well, maybe with this president, who knows?
Typical govt bureaucracy, looking for a solution to a non-problem.
--
I wasn't sure what I was reading for a second there. Maybe I've sniffed too many rubber tires...
--
Unix vendors sell proprietary Unices and boxen because it differentiates them from the competition. But the OS is a loss center; it only runs on their hardware, and only exists because they wouldn't want to use a competitor's Unix.
Now along comes a Unix that no competitor owns and which has developers working on it at no cost to the proprietary vendors. The smart ones (which includes Sun first of all) will shift to Linux to keep costs down, to take advantage of the free development staff. They will add their unique contributions into the Linux tree, to hope that it becomes part of the Linux "standard" and their competitors have to adopt or perish. The proprietary Unices will only survive for high end boxes with special needs, ie, 1024 node SMP etc which they want to keep a lock on. But eventually the high end will shrink to such a small base that it too will be ported to Linux.
--
M$ is paranoid. And because they react so harshly, rightly so :-)
Them what lives by the paranoia shall die by the paranoia.
--
Just imagine, what with no W2K tax, and Linux efficiency and performance, the savvy buyers will buy the Linux cut rate server at half the price and laugh all the way to the bank. Then as word gets out...
Can youimagien PC Week or one of those rags comparing a cut rate Linux server against a dual PII W2K octsing twice as much? I drool in anticipation.
--
Got a friend who suggested (seriously) back in the summer of 1998 that from now on, we should all buy 4 times as much food when we go shopping.
Let's see, that comes out to a 6 year stockpile. Have to be all canned or dehydrated of course. Even then, not sure I'd trust that shelf lifetime. And if things get so bad that you really need 5 years food supply, you'd better have a hell of a lot of ammo to keep the hungry hordes away.
Cor blimey there's a lot of fools out there.
--
So not having been to college equates to making crackers into heroes, and both equate to being a fool?
Your elitism is showing. Feeling insecure because you're wasting time in college?
--
In fact, it was the only web server software which increased in percentage: Everything else decreased.
Not quite; thttpd increased by 0.01.
--
M$ is famous for making royalties disappear; I understand that's what they did to Spyglass when they reduced the price of Exploder to 0 (Spyglass got a percentage of sales, not a per unit royalty). So maybe IBM should release as much of the OS/2 source as possible; at least enough that OS/2 users could migrate the desktop parts they want on top of Linux. Then M$ would get no royalties.
:-)
Well, it's an idea. I don't know how the royalties are calculated. It would be lots of fun if it did happen
--