i wonder if that mark russinovich fellow realizes that kde and gnome (the more windows-like desktop environments, in my opinion) are as popular as they are because a whole load of people have used windows before a *nix flavor. it's not like they're embedded into the operating system - it's all optional. there are numbers upon numbers of window managers which look and behave nothing like windows. i'm amused that he even says stuff like this, seeing as how windows is just the most original piece of software engineering there is. (core parts of internet explorer, the defragmenter, the tcp stack not being written by microsoft. oh, and how about that cute "whoami" command that appeared recently, the unix-like file permissions and task manager that appeared in nt, and netbios' striking resemblance to NIS and NFS?)
i've been a *nix system administrator and network administrator at my little university for almost two years now. i got a CCNA in high school after studying for it my junior and senior year. did it help? kind of. such concepts as OSI model (yes, i know of the group who says "wow, you said OSI model, you must be leet") do actually come in handy for troubleshooting networks from the bottom up.
the cisco/novell-specific part of the curriculum has thus far been pretty much a complete waste for me, except maybe operating zebra on my ipv6 router (i'm trying to persuade the school to adopt it), since it closely resembles cisco's own IOS.
while at linuxworld new york 2004, i saw a redhat certified guy come up to the gentoo booth and ask them some silly stuff. he said that he was a network administrator at buffalo university(!), and yeah, he seemed like one of those people who could do stuff on the exam, but not much aside from that. i think certs are a lot more useful if they teach concepts which can be applied to everyday network/system/whathaveyou administration instead of vendor-specific stuff. but then again, one ca nargue the vendor-specific stuff is what makes this system go round.
uh.. devfs isn't the issue here. i know it's a long way up, but if you read the article and some of the comments, the sound system is in discussion mr. anonymous coward. devfs is also an intermediary until udev is done.
it's kind of funny because in "dying" operating systems like freebsd, there's kernel-level mixing of "dead" oss/dev/dsp-style channels.. and it's quite good. not to mention that in newer versions of these "dying" operating systems, devfs manages these things in such a way that you no longer even need to tell a program which dspX.X device to use. with all these newfangled things like alsa being developed, why don't people just concentrate on improving what was already there?
Slashdot Mirror
similar functionality has been provided by the japanese program winny (http://www.uguu.org/winny/) and the newer share (http://www.uguu.org/share/) for some time (with encryption, too)
first microsoft gives us bullcrap statistics about how "windows outpeforms linux" and now this? does anyone else find it comical?
i thought it was a continent
i wonder if that mark russinovich fellow realizes that kde and gnome (the more windows-like desktop environments, in my opinion) are as popular as they are because a whole load of people have used windows before a *nix flavor. it's not like they're embedded into the operating system - it's all optional. there are numbers upon numbers of window managers which look and behave nothing like windows. i'm amused that he even says stuff like this, seeing as how windows is just the most original piece of software engineering there is. (core parts of internet explorer, the defragmenter, the tcp stack not being written by microsoft. oh, and how about that cute "whoami" command that appeared recently, the unix-like file permissions and task manager that appeared in nt, and netbios' striking resemblance to NIS and NFS?)
i've been a *nix system administrator and network administrator at my little university for almost two years now. i got a CCNA in high school after studying for it my junior and senior year. did it help? kind of. such concepts as OSI model (yes, i know of the group who says "wow, you said OSI model, you must be leet") do actually come in handy for troubleshooting networks from the bottom up. the cisco/novell-specific part of the curriculum has thus far been pretty much a complete waste for me, except maybe operating zebra on my ipv6 router (i'm trying to persuade the school to adopt it), since it closely resembles cisco's own IOS. while at linuxworld new york 2004, i saw a redhat certified guy come up to the gentoo booth and ask them some silly stuff. he said that he was a network administrator at buffalo university(!), and yeah, he seemed like one of those people who could do stuff on the exam, but not much aside from that. i think certs are a lot more useful if they teach concepts which can be applied to everyday network/system/whathaveyou administration instead of vendor-specific stuff. but then again, one ca nargue the vendor-specific stuff is what makes this system go round.
uh.. devfs isn't the issue here. i know it's a long way up, but if you read the article and some of the comments, the sound system is in discussion mr. anonymous coward. devfs is also an intermediary until udev is done.
it's kind of funny because in "dying" operating systems like freebsd, there's kernel-level mixing of "dead" oss /dev/dsp-style channels.. and it's quite good. not to mention that in newer versions of these "dying" operating systems, devfs manages these things in such a way that you no longer even need to tell a program which dspX.X device to use. with all these newfangled things like alsa being developed, why don't people just concentrate on improving what was already there?