Google around - there needs to be some minor patching to be done to the philes to get them to work under Windows XP. I'm sure that you'll even be able to find the patched versions.
No, Windows NT was developed initially for the N10 (Intel i860), hence the moniker 'NT.' (which later got adopted by marketroids to mean 'New Technology'... and by *nix-lovers as 'Nice Try'). You are correct though about VMS influences in NT. *cough* Cutler *cough*
Really? Hmmm, my Linux/PPC install says otherwise. Nice troll. It doesn't take a MENSA genius to figure out that you a) never even looked at the linux kernel source code, b) have no clue how it works c) don't even know "which" PC specific cruft you're talking about (PC-specific, or x86-specific? These are different things)
The "concept" may be 10 years old, but if you seriously think today's sources bear anything but the slightest semblance at say.... 0.01, then please pass around whatever it is you're smoking.
Heck... even the **printf functions have been rewritten, jeez. The VM has long been rewritten. Drivers drivers? Yup. Module support? Didn't exist in 0.01 days. I could go on for pages describing the sheer volume of changes - and I won't even mention the fact that Linux isn't tied to the IBM PC AT anymore. Please actually LOOK at the linux source code before spouting off. The stuff that is > 10 years old is minimal and/or completely insignificant. They don't increment version numbers for nothing.
Out of sheer curiousity, go grab some random binaries of off an SLS disk and try running then on your latest Linux install. Oh, you can't. Likely cause your kernel wasn't compiled ith supporting the obsolete a.out format, eh? You don't need to be an amature OS developer (I am) to figure out that you're wrong.
Gah, I loved your post but I disagree with GRUB being somehow better than OpenBoot/OpenFirmware. The drive enumeration is completely braindead, doesn't match up with anything in Linux (heck, doesn't even match up with the enumeration in Hurd, and Grub is the Hurd bootloader, dammit). Also, GRUB is just a bootloader - thats it. Sure, if you use the Multiboot format it can pass some information like memory size to the kernel, but OF/OB is a system monitor that manages all the hardware at start-up. The naming isn't ridiculous - its descriptive of WHAT the device is and WHERE the device is (including the bus its on). Also OF/OB provide an architecture-independent language (a variation of Forth) for writing PCI-card onboard ROMs, as well as an easy interface for USING these device from within OF/OB (the device tree). Technically, a SCSI controller from UltraSparc would be able to be booted from by a Mac's OpenFirmware.
Nice troll. I call BS. Ever try installing Solaris x86 on a PC? Good luck! The only configuration I found laying around that worked with *that* turd was an ol' Pentium Pro i440-based mobo. Solaris x86 - the only PC operating system these days that brings back the joys of hunting for crappy, unsupported or just plain non-existant drivers for your: a) Network card. Wow. Just... wow. And this wasn't something arcane either. b) Video... well.. "driver" heh. If the Xserver doesn't support it, have fun running CDE in 640x480. c) Sound driver. d) Chipset driver... for those that actually WANT to use their ATA-133 drive as an ATA-133 drive.
People complain that Linux is "hard to install," complaining about Slackware and Debian installers. They must have never dealt with the Solaris installer. Its amazing how a corp can put ALL this work into tweaking their kernel to the extreme... and the f*&#-up something absolutely simple as an... installer.
After the pain I've been through... the ONLY machine I will ever want to deal with Solaris on... is a Sun machine. At least there they don't have an excuse for having skeleton hardware support.
If Physics researchers and IT departments are now classified as "dorm geeks", you're right on the spot. Personally, I've noticed that when institutions want Big Iron, they usually go for a pSeries... you know, the AIX-wielding beast with 12GB (or so) of RAM and 4-way Power5 SMP. Sun has its place as a developer workstation, I agree. But SCO? What kind of a douche would buy into that? What exactly do you get with SCO that I can't get from Sun or IBM?
Naturally there is some minimum spec for these cables. However, when monster claims "Advanced Design and Technology Give You Absolutely Brilliant Picture", I tend to call bull. The picture won't be any different using any other in-spec HDMI cable. If the cable used isn't in-spec, then I will hear/see digital artficats, or see/hear absolutely nothing.
And no, my memory doesn't have have gold contacts, because the motherboard connector doesn't have gold contacts. Need I remind you what happens when two dissimilar metals contact?
Why is a "Monster cable" better than something I duct-taped together for transmitting digital signals? Is the uber-secret alloy in the cable gently massaging the individual bits to produce never-before-seen/heard clarity in sound/video? Rofl!
Reminds me of a fool I know who spent a fortune on moster fibre-optic cables and then kept ensuring me how the difference was "obvious" when compared to random cheap cables. Heh.
Okay, so/he/ is "a moron"... but the PHB who takes the bait after seeing a mission statement 'come up with' using one of those buzzword-generators isn't? Pah!
Not sure I comprehend. If your advisor wants to look at them... doesn't she likely have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed?
If she wants to edit them (i.e. put her name on/your/ work), she should at least put forth the extra effort of duplicating everything into PowerPoint. Heck, just take a screenshot, or something (PrtScrn button, Ctrl-V to paste). Anyways, the available presentation packages for LaTeX are pretty nifty...
They wisened up in the other sense too... my UMAX dual 604e PowerMac uses buffered EDO/FPM 5-Volt DIMMs. Most computer hardware of that age used 3.3v DIMMs, with the exception of some intel server mobos and Sun (maybe HP/SGI too?) workstations. Now Apple uses standard DDR memory. I'd rather they stuck with SCSI drives like they did in the past, but IDE is significantly cheaper and more ubiquitous.
Rofl 7200 RPM. My 10k RPM UltraSCSI Cheetah doesn't just get uncomfortably warm to the touch... it will BURN you. Air cooling doesn't really help here either. Maybe I should go for a heatsink+fan.
"enough support"? No, its a full blown X Server based of XFree86. Heck, the even provided a window manager that makes the window decorations fit in with the rest of OS X. As the other poster said, gimme a break - they designed their own windowing system AND they provided an X11 server that fits in well into their environment. What more do you want? The API is different so porting an application from X11 to Aqua acutally takes effort? Boo hoo. What, pray tell me, did you expect? Did you know that porting a win32 app to Xlib, GTK, QT, Aqua, Carbon OR ncurses actually takes effort? LOL!
Yeah... for me its so far cell + wallet + pda, but even then it looks absolutely ridiculous with my Khakis. Good thing Apple's new $99 toy is small enough to go someplace OTHER than my pant pockets. I figure if I have to wear a lanyard to work... might as well wear an mp3 player as well *g*.
Too bad the basic gumstix (with the case) costs > $100 and has only serial as the connectors. No USB or audio connectors + tiny amount of flash. It would be a fun project, but the end result would cost more and have significantly less capacity than the $99 ipod.
Yeah, I perfectly understand your point. In fact, most people probably consider DOS to be an OS. However, in my view, it doesn't pass the test as it is really nothing more than a program loader (just like SYSLINUX, or the GRand Unified Bootloader [GRUB], or OpenFirmware, or PC BIOS). Its a pretty weak resource allocator/manager. Unless you're in command.com, the "OS" never actually has full control over the machine, neverminding the ability to multitask. In my opinion, if DOS is an OS, then so is GRUB, SYSLINUX, BIOS, the OpenFirmare prompt (any ROM monitor really).
I like your post and you make good points, but please.. for the love of God... don't call DOS a "plain text OS." If DOS is an OS, then so is SYSLINUX. (http://syslinux.zytor.com/) (http://syslinux.zytor.com/comboot.php)
Slashdot Mirror
Considering Mosaic was originally developed for some random UNIX + X11, I severely doubt it would have ever been ported to DOS, of all things.
Bungie made the leap and dropped Mac support? You mean like when they were bought by Microsoft?
Of *course* they dropped support for a rival platform. This has nothing to do with technical limitations.
Google around - there needs to be some minor patching to be done to the philes to get them to work under Windows XP. I'm sure that you'll even be able to find the patched versions.
No, Windows NT was developed initially for the N10 (Intel i860), hence the moniker 'NT.' (which later got adopted by marketroids to mean 'New Technology'... and by *nix-lovers as 'Nice Try'). You are correct though about VMS influences in NT. *cough* Cutler *cough*
Examples, dipshit?
Really? Hmmm, my Linux/PPC install says otherwise. Nice troll. It doesn't take a MENSA genius to figure out that you a) never even looked at the linux kernel source code, b) have no clue how it works c) don't even know "which" PC specific cruft you're talking about (PC-specific, or x86-specific? These are different things)
The "concept" may be 10 years old, but if you seriously think today's sources bear anything but the slightest semblance at say.... 0.01, then please pass around whatever it is you're smoking.
Heck... even the **printf functions have been rewritten, jeez. The VM has long been rewritten. Drivers drivers? Yup. Module support? Didn't exist in 0.01 days. I could go on for pages describing the sheer volume of changes - and I won't even mention the fact that Linux isn't tied to the IBM PC AT anymore. Please actually LOOK at the linux source code before spouting off. The stuff that is > 10 years old is minimal and/or completely insignificant. They don't increment version numbers for nothing.
Out of sheer curiousity, go grab some random binaries of off an SLS disk and try running then on your latest Linux install. Oh, you can't. Likely cause your kernel wasn't compiled ith supporting the obsolete a.out format, eh? You don't need to be an amature OS developer (I am) to figure out that you're wrong.
Gah, I loved your post but I disagree with GRUB being somehow better than OpenBoot/OpenFirmware. The drive enumeration is completely braindead, doesn't match up with anything in Linux (heck, doesn't even match up with the enumeration in Hurd, and Grub is the Hurd bootloader, dammit). Also, GRUB is just a bootloader - thats it. Sure, if you use the Multiboot format it can pass some information like memory size to the kernel, but OF/OB is a system monitor that manages all the hardware at start-up. The naming isn't ridiculous - its descriptive of WHAT the device is and WHERE the device is (including the bus its on). Also OF/OB provide an architecture-independent language (a variation of Forth) for writing PCI-card onboard ROMs, as well as an easy interface for USING these device from within OF/OB (the device tree). Technically, a SCSI controller from UltraSparc would be able to be booted from by a Mac's OpenFirmware.
Nice troll. I call BS. Ever try installing Solaris x86 on a PC? Good luck! The only configuration I found laying around that worked with *that* turd was an ol' Pentium Pro i440-based mobo. Solaris x86 - the only PC operating system these days that brings back the joys of hunting for crappy, unsupported or just plain non-existant drivers for your:
a) Network card. Wow. Just... wow. And this wasn't something arcane either.
b) Video... well.. "driver" heh. If the Xserver doesn't support it, have fun running CDE in 640x480.
c) Sound driver.
d) Chipset driver... for those that actually WANT to use their ATA-133 drive as an ATA-133 drive.
People complain that Linux is "hard to install," complaining about Slackware and Debian installers. They must have never dealt with the Solaris installer. Its amazing how a corp can put ALL this work into tweaking their kernel to the extreme... and the f*&#-up something absolutely simple as an... installer.
After the pain I've been through... the ONLY machine I will ever want to deal with Solaris on... is a Sun machine. At least there they don't have an excuse for having skeleton hardware support.
If Physics researchers and IT departments are now classified as "dorm geeks", you're right on the spot. Personally, I've noticed that when institutions want Big Iron, they usually go for a pSeries... you know, the AIX-wielding beast with 12GB (or so) of RAM and 4-way Power5 SMP. Sun has its place as a developer workstation, I agree. But SCO? What kind of a douche would buy into that? What exactly do you get with SCO that I can't get from Sun or IBM?
Naturally there is some minimum spec for these cables. However, when monster claims "Advanced Design and Technology Give You Absolutely Brilliant Picture", I tend to call bull. The picture won't be any different using any other in-spec HDMI cable. If the cable used isn't in-spec, then I will hear/see digital artficats, or see/hear absolutely nothing.
And no, my memory doesn't have have gold contacts, because the motherboard connector doesn't have gold contacts. Need I remind you what happens when two dissimilar metals contact?
Not nice enough to pass the W3C test suite though. Thankfully, thanks to Apple, we're past that.
Why is a "Monster cable" better than something I duct-taped together for transmitting digital signals? Is the uber-secret alloy in the cable gently massaging the individual bits to produce never-before-seen/heard clarity in sound/video? Rofl!
Reminds me of a fool I know who spent a fortune on moster fibre-optic cables and then kept ensuring me how the difference was "obvious" when compared to random cheap cables. Heh.
Okay, so /he/ is "a moron"... but the PHB who takes the bait after seeing a mission statement 'come up with' using one of those buzzword-generators isn't? Pah!
Not sure I comprehend. If your advisor wants to look at them... doesn't she likely have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed?
/your/ work), she should at least put forth the extra effort of duplicating everything into PowerPoint. Heck, just take a screenshot, or something (PrtScrn button, Ctrl-V to paste). Anyways, the available presentation packages for LaTeX are pretty nifty...
If she wants to edit them (i.e. put her name on
They wisened up in the other sense too... my UMAX dual 604e PowerMac uses buffered EDO/FPM 5-Volt DIMMs. Most computer hardware of that age used 3.3v DIMMs, with the exception of some intel server mobos and Sun (maybe HP/SGI too?) workstations. Now Apple uses standard DDR memory. I'd rather they stuck with SCSI drives like they did in the past, but IDE is significantly cheaper and more ubiquitous.
Rofl 7200 RPM. My 10k RPM UltraSCSI Cheetah doesn't just get uncomfortably warm to the touch... it will BURN you. Air cooling doesn't really help here either. Maybe I should go for a heatsink+fan.
"enough support"? No, its a full blown X Server based of XFree86. Heck, the even provided a window manager that makes the window decorations fit in with the rest of OS X. As the other poster said, gimme a break - they designed their own windowing system AND they provided an X11 server that fits in well into their environment. What more do you want? The API is different so porting an application from X11 to Aqua acutally takes effort? Boo hoo. What, pray tell me, did you expect? Did you know that porting a win32 app to Xlib, GTK, QT, Aqua, Carbon OR ncurses actually takes effort? LOL!
Yeah... for me its so far cell + wallet + pda, but even then it looks absolutely ridiculous with my Khakis. Good thing Apple's new $99 toy is small enough to go someplace OTHER than my pant pockets. I figure if I have to wear a lanyard to work... might as well wear an mp3 player as well *g*.
Too bad the basic gumstix (with the case) costs > $100 and has only serial as the connectors. No USB or audio connectors + tiny amount of flash. It would be a fun project, but the end result would cost more and have significantly less capacity than the $99 ipod.
Uh, it doesn't shuffle unless explicitely told to do so. RTFW(ebsite).
OTOH, Caribou is a f'awesome place.
Good book, but not about viruses. More so about how to write and inject shellcode and exploit vulnerabilties.
Yeah, I perfectly understand your point. In fact, most people probably consider DOS to be an OS. However, in my view, it doesn't pass the test as it is really nothing more than a program loader (just like SYSLINUX, or the GRand Unified Bootloader [GRUB], or OpenFirmware, or PC BIOS). Its a pretty weak resource allocator/manager. Unless you're in command.com, the "OS" never actually has full control over the machine, neverminding the ability to multitask. In my opinion, if DOS is an OS, then so is GRUB, SYSLINUX, BIOS, the OpenFirmare prompt (any ROM monitor really).
I like your post and you make good points, but please.. for the love of God... don't call DOS a "plain text OS." If DOS is an OS, then so is SYSLINUX. (http://syslinux.zytor.com/) (http://syslinux.zytor.com/comboot.php)