Uh I dont think you quite grasped what Miguel was saying. Miguel wasn't saying BSD is dead. Far from it. In fact, I have heard Miguel saying he really likes FreeBSD in #gnome/irc.gnome.org.
What he *was* saying (for the clue impaired) was that FreeBSD has almost no market share. Linux has an order of magnitude more market share than FreeBSD, especially in the desktop, but even almost that much in the server space. BTW, when you try to support your arguments try not to link to FUD opinion pieces on zdnet. It really shows a lack of class.
I actually read that round table. Let me sum it up for you. Craig Mundie isn't debating anything. He's written about 3 comments, none of them addressing any criticisims of shared source or MS. The rest of the debate is essentially this BSD zealot called " Glass" who keeps antagonizing Bruce Perens with Troll after Troll of and anti-GPL spew. You'd think this is exactly what Microsoft PR wanted out of this. Fractiousness.
And who knows, maybe Windows XP will fail to catch on with consumers. Microsoft has certainly done their best to make it unpalatable to consumers.
One can only hope. I dont think we should count on this. What would be better is if AOL decides to adopt mozilla to keep open standards alive against the.NET insurgence. It would also be nice if companies like Dell and Compaq sold blank computers for me to put linux on. Talk about restrictive OEM licenses! I cant buy a dell machine with linux with paying the MS tax... I do think that things will be changing for the better soon. I just hope it isn't too late. Like the Lawn Mower Man sucking himself into the phone lines and the internet, so goes Microsoft into the.NET future. Beware. Be very aware.
I think that's because MS appeals to people who dont particularly care for computers as long as they can do a few simple thing slike email, web, messaging, and writing documents. To them Apple and Windows provide this same functionality, but apple provides something more. Fashion.
These people are usually more creative and individualist than the like-minded person that decides to go with windows. They are integrating their macintosh into the style of everything else in their lives. Their clothes, their posters on the wall, their furnature. Technical reasons for a computer purchase dont matter as long as the basic functionality is satisfied. At least I imagine that this is what the apple marketing folks discuss in their strategy sessions:)
slashdot: Down with microsoft!! They suck, they are abusers of the weak and exploiters of the dumb! Freedom is so very important, therefore MS sucks. nanojath: Slashdot sucks!! All they do is bash microsoft! When microsoft isn't being bashed anymore that must mean slashdot doesn't exist!! Yeah, because slashdot only stands for anti-microsoft and pro-communism!!
Do I sense a hint of hippocracy? I think it's been said before -- Slashdot is not a monolithic community. It is a community with wide ranging opinions and viewpoints. From the tireless BSD advocate to the angered MS supporter. As far as I can tell it's always been this way. And as far as CmdrTaco bashing MS with his front page post? I dont see it. He is rightly concerned over a change in MS licensing policy, as we all should be. MS would take away our freedom to increase their power over us. Obviously, to many many people this is wrong, and immoral. But I guess to you it's "bashing", which implies a lack of reason, and I just dont see that.
Where "X" is your cdrom drive. This will set the filesystem readahead to maximum, so when it does spin up and starts reading it will read for longer.. Dunno though. You seem to have a retarded cdrom drive either way. You might also want to try this:
hdparm -E 20
This command will set your cd drive to transfer at 20x. You could also try 30x or 35x. See what works.
This announcement has absolutely NOTHING to do with the GPL, and everything to do with divide-and-conquer. In order to get.NET on Linux, there is no need to write any kernel modules, modify any GPL code, or link to any GPL libraries. They fed you shit and you enjoyed every bite of it.
Er, I dont think he was thinking that MS would try to pull kernel module stunts with.NET. I think he was just trolling with a Doomsday SCenerio. Obviously, MS porting Windows to *BSD let alone any other more controversial OSen is next to zero. And yes, MS is feeding us shit to divide our community. They play us off one another and the GPL is an important part of that. So to say that's not what was going on here is kind of wrong. They used this as a marketing wedge to further their goals, even though it is orthagonal to the purpose of getting.NET out to Apple. Remember, it's a Process not a Company - Halloween II.
If Loki Software can port somethign as complicated as a 3d first person shooting game from DirectX/win32 to Linux/SDL/GL with only around 10 people on their staff, then I think Palm could port their Palm"OS" to linux pretty damned easily.
They'd have to make some design decisions like whether to use the Frame buffer or X (I'd reccomend X), but the basic State machine that PalmOS is, appears very simple. The point about porting over the underlying infrastructure like the Database (I'd call it a binary file which stored basic structures ala struct{}) is probably not a very good one. That will be simple to port as well.
So the ultimate hurdle which you have so elegantly laid out is "Will it make us more money." You seem confident that it wont.
My vision is like this: Palm makes their linux app. They license it for $30-$50 per device. To display the Palm brand prominently on your device you have to pay a marketing fee to Palm to use their brand and logo and some kind of catch phrase like "Palm Inside". They get to decide which devices can run Palm OS to insure compatability.
A standard New-Age Palm would contain a.13micron 200-300Mhz arm cpu, color LCD (400x600(could be less when cost is a factor)), and 32 MB of ram and 32MB of flash. PalmApp would take up no more than 2-5MB of ram, and possibly 10MB of flash with a buttload of contacts, messages etc.
Because this New-Age Palm runs on top of linux, Palm's licensees will be able to bundle more sophisticated games than can be written for current PalmOS. Developers would ideally glom onto the platform and develop new "Killer" apps that will boost sales and pump up Palm's revenues.
Question: How does Palm transition to this new business model?
My idea is that they continue to sell their Old-Age Palm devices as long as they sell. They do not enter the New-Age Palm market because they do not want disrupt the market. They can continue to sell Old-Age Palm handhelds like they do now as long as people are willing to buy them. Companies like Sony and Nokia and Sharp (Dare I say compaq?! no...) would then use the Palm layer on top of linux to be able to Value Add and customize their users experience, *While still maintaining* the current Palm experience as the Main experience for users.
I think this is a win win for Palm, increases Market penetration by an order of magnitude. Gets the Marketing forces of Sony, Nokia, Sharp VERY MUCH behind the new palm platform.
See now? Am I so crazy?
I dont think so. Maybe my ideas are too revolutionary for the Old Stodgy Guard at Palm (After all they came from 3com, *gasp*). I dont know. If you want to deconstruct my Vision so be it. Show me the proof of your talents!!:)
No. He said that would be the most common approach because many many people/businesses have invested alot of effort and resources in developing Apache-specific content. Look at slashdot. It is apache specific and would take an equal amount of porting effort to bring it up on IIS as it would TUX.
"teg" is not saying that the only way is to use apache for dynamic. He's saying that will be a common way for the time being.
But the catch is TUX is a fully functional web server capable of dynamic content on its own. It can run CGI's and custom userspace modules.
Obviously it doesn't have all the features of apache, but in time those will be ported to the TUX architecture.
Dont confuse khttpd with TUX. khttpd is a static only web server and TUX is a fully dynamic web server that can complete the SpecWEB99 benchmark test on its own. That test contains 60% static content and 40% dynamic content, accurately refelcting the average content spectrum of today's web serving load.
Hrm, well, Mr Businessman stud, show me your accomplishments. 98% of business school graduates couldn't sell themselves out of a paper bag.
I glanced over your message and its pomposity was striking. Why bother fighting me? I am irrelevant.
I come up with a back-of-the-napkin idea that I thought was pretty cool, and you go ahead and deconstruct it into utter meaninglessness.
I've said it earlier and I'll say it again. The idea of having a palm application running on top of a linux handheld would be very cool. I would want one. Porting "PalmOS" to linux would be almost trivial. You could rewrite it from scratch in a few weeks/month. PalmOS is a very very simple application, there is nothing complex at all about it.
And I think it bears repeating. The amount of money saved per device is irrelevant if your goal is to sell 2x as many devices, however remote that may possibly be. I'm not passing myself off as Palm upper management, although you so arrogantly presume to have that kind of expertise.
Heh you got any more edifying knowledge for my poor poor self? I think your intensity is rather strange given the setting. Why are you so defensive about tearing down my simple ideas? Do they threaten you? Do you work for the Great Satan of Software?
Just because apple produces their OS for x86 systems doesn't mean taht dell now gets a license to put Macos on their X86 boxes.
So if apple did make an X86 Macos they wouldn't end up competing with Dell anymore than they do now.
Your point about dual booting your Mac x86 box is fallacious. Apple would prevent windows booting on their x86 boxes. Furthermore, being on x86, apple's emulator for windows would run VERY fast and have a potential for native windows speed.
Apple only goes to x86 because it reduces costs, gets them out the poorly performing ppc market (Motorolla's cpus are really shitty compared to intels, frequency being a big part). I think you totally misread the apple on x86 hypothetical. You assumed all the wrong things.
Re:5 years since the release of Quake means...
on
Five Years of Quake
·
· Score: 1
Fps is an average taken over a length of time. Of course if you stare at a wall like Raymond (Dustin Hoffman) your monitor is gonna limit your time resolution. Try one the "crusher" type demos for quake1 to see your minimum time resolution (an oft-neglected metric).
If you know anything about business, business decisions aren't made solely on cost benefit analysis. The best businessmen work from intuition and a keen, personalized intimacy with the details of their situation.
Aside from that, cost-benefit is important, and the strategic implications of the move to linux are based on long-term profitability; the thrust being that more marketshare ubiquitous use can only happen when the price is low enough relative to the commodity hardware in question.
Of course I am not the CEO of palm and am not intimately familiar with the details of their operations, so a cost benefit analysis from _me_ would be utterly worthless. Likewise with yourself, but I wont stop you from trying.
I was suggesting for palm to make PalmOS an application on top of linux.
Compaq is hopelessly tied to Microsoft, and you cant buy one of their devices without paying the microsoft tax. sorry.
... But, I guess you're right. Palm could hold onto its market for some time to come. Wince is a threat, certainly, and.NET will try to make it "the standard"... but we shall see.
You act as if palm is in a zero-sum game.
I was giving strategic advice to palm on how to explode their revenue and sell millions more than they otherwise would, and keep growing.
Maybe I just have a better strategic vision than the beurocrats at palm. (hell, they came from 3com, what do you expect)
So why not put linux where it isn't seen. Nobody has to know that linux is running your embedded device, or your web-station, or set top box. The windows of the non-pc future does not look like windows (except for obvious branding). There wont be the win32 look and feel because it will function differently. I guess my thesis is that operating systems of the future will branch out into areas that are not so demanding of the user (like the pc is). These new areas will eventually crowd out pc in terms of market share, revenue, and development resources. Why would you want a proprietary operating system on a $50-$100 hardware device? It doesn't make sense. If the future doesn't contain a *majority* of $50-100 devices that run commodity/Free operating systems I will be very surprised.
Palm is fighting a losing battle. And needs to get rid of the PalmOS and make the PalmAPI that runs on linux, windriver, qnx, whatever, and sell it CHEAP. And DONT get rid of your hardware business. A yopi with linux running a PalmAPI Shell? Jesus christ that sounds attractive. I fucking want one. I'll fscking pay $25 extra for that palm software too. Fucking bring it on baby! It's certainly better than the $70 MS tax on ipaq, is more functional (PalmAPI interoperating with other linux apps), and has more developer interest.
Is linux a long shot? Fuck I dont know. You seem skeptical without much analytical thought, kind of gut reaction. At least I argue my case. You give predictions and opinions based on a few seconds of thought. Skepticism aint bad, but it's a two-way street, and require analitical thinking to flesh out a possible scenerio framework backed up by meaningful figures. I'm not asking for a dissertation, just something that more approaches the skeptic's ideal.
(btw, when I said Ms be broken up in earlier post, I meant, if linux isn't able to stop MS, I personally dont know what is, and in 5 years MS will become so powerful that they need to be broken up. But as I've stated here, I think linux is capable of thwarting MS. But regardless, I am waiting for the deliberations to end in the appeal to give further weight to my reasoning, one way or the other.)
Heh, gee, where've you been in the last 5 years? You think it's gonna suddenly taper off because Ballmer and Mundie are on top of it?
Anyway, I guess we can disagree. Not much point in debating it. We'll just have to see. Either way it will be interesting. Microsoft could be rendered neutered by linux, or by the Justice Department. Either outcome is Good, imo.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell yeah I am, Bitch. :)
Uh I dont think you quite grasped what Miguel was saying. Miguel wasn't saying BSD is dead. Far from it. In fact, I have heard Miguel saying he really likes FreeBSD in #gnome/irc.gnome.org.
What he *was* saying (for the clue impaired) was that FreeBSD has almost no market share. Linux has an order of magnitude more market share than FreeBSD, especially in the desktop, but even almost that much in the server space. BTW, when you try to support your arguments try not to link to FUD opinion pieces on zdnet. It really shows a lack of class.
Encore encore!! Very touching. Made me think of my beginnings as a linux zealot in late 1996. Ahh those were the days :)
I actually read that round table. Let me sum it up for you. Craig Mundie isn't debating anything. He's written about 3 comments, none of them addressing any criticisims of shared source or MS. The rest of the debate is essentially this BSD zealot called " Glass" who keeps antagonizing Bruce Perens with Troll after Troll of and anti-GPL spew. You'd think this is exactly what Microsoft PR wanted out of this. Fractiousness.
- And who knows, maybe Windows XP will fail to catch on with consumers. Microsoft has certainly done their best to make it unpalatable to consumers.
One can only hope. I dont think we should count on this. What would be better is if AOL decides to adopt mozilla to keep open standards alive against theI think that's because MS appeals to people who dont particularly care for computers as long as they can do a few simple thing slike email, web, messaging, and writing documents. To them Apple and Windows provide this same functionality, but apple provides something more. Fashion.
:)
These people are usually more creative and individualist than the like-minded person that decides to go with windows. They are integrating their macintosh into the style of everything else in their lives. Their clothes, their posters on the wall, their furnature. Technical reasons for a computer purchase dont matter as long as the basic functionality is satisfied. At least I imagine that this is what the apple marketing folks discuss in their strategy sessions
- slashdot: Down with microsoft!! They suck, they are abusers of the weak and exploiters of the dumb! Freedom is so very important, therefore MS sucks.
Do I sense a hint of hippocracy? I think it's been said before -- Slashdot is not a monolithic community. It is a community with wide ranging opinions and viewpoints. From the tireless BSD advocate to the angered MS supporter. As far as I can tell it's always been this way. And as far as CmdrTaco bashing MS with his front page post? I dont see it. He is rightly concerned over a change in MS licensing policy, as we all should be. MS would take away our freedom to increase their power over us. Obviously, to many many people this is wrong, and immoral. But I guess to you it's "bashing", which implies a lack of reason, and I just dont see that.nanojath: Slashdot sucks!! All they do is bash microsoft! When microsoft isn't being bashed anymore that must mean slashdot doesn't exist!! Yeah, because slashdot only stands for anti-microsoft and pro-communism!!
I do X configuration by hand all the time. And I always compile my own kernels.
You seem lazy. All these things are fun.
Where "X" is your cdrom drive. This will set the filesystem readahead to maximum, so when it does spin up and starts reading it will read for longer.. Dunno though. You seem to have a retarded cdrom drive either way. You might also want to try this:
This command will set your cd drive to transfer at 20x. You could also try 30x or 35x. See what works.
This announcement has absolutely NOTHING to do with the GPL, and everything to do with divide-and-conquer. In order to get
Er, I dont think he was thinking that MS would try to pull kernel module stunts with
If Loki Software can port somethign as complicated as a 3d first person shooting game from DirectX/win32 to Linux/SDL/GL with only around 10 people on their staff, then I think Palm could port their Palm"OS" to linux pretty damned easily.
.13micron 200-300Mhz arm cpu, color LCD (400x600(could be less when cost is a factor)), and 32 MB of ram and 32MB of flash. PalmApp would take up no more than 2-5MB of ram, and possibly 10MB of flash with a buttload of contacts, messages etc.
:)
They'd have to make some design decisions like whether to use the Frame buffer or X (I'd reccomend X), but the basic State machine that PalmOS is, appears very simple. The point about porting over the underlying infrastructure like the Database (I'd call it a binary file which stored basic structures ala struct{}) is probably not a very good one. That will be simple to port as well.
So the ultimate hurdle which you have so elegantly laid out is "Will it make us more money." You seem confident that it wont.
My vision is like this: Palm makes their linux app. They license it for $30-$50 per device. To display the Palm brand prominently on your device you have to pay a marketing fee to Palm to use their brand and logo and some kind of catch phrase like "Palm Inside". They get to decide which devices can run Palm OS to insure compatability.
A standard New-Age Palm would contain a
Because this New-Age Palm runs on top of linux, Palm's licensees will be able to bundle more sophisticated games than can be written for current PalmOS. Developers would ideally glom onto the platform and develop new "Killer" apps that will boost sales and pump up Palm's revenues.
Question: How does Palm transition to this new business model?
My idea is that they continue to sell their Old-Age Palm devices as long as they sell. They do not enter the New-Age Palm market because they do not want disrupt the market. They can continue to sell Old-Age Palm handhelds like they do now as long as people are willing to buy them. Companies like Sony and Nokia and Sharp (Dare I say compaq?! no...) would then use the Palm layer on top of linux to be able to Value Add and customize their users experience, *While still maintaining* the current Palm experience as the Main experience for users.
I think this is a win win for Palm, increases Market penetration by an order of magnitude. Gets the Marketing forces of Sony, Nokia, Sharp VERY MUCH behind the new palm platform.
See now? Am I so crazy?
I dont think so. Maybe my ideas are too revolutionary for the Old Stodgy Guard at Palm (After all they came from 3com, *gasp*). I dont know. If you want to deconstruct my Vision so be it. Show me the proof of your talents!!
No. He said that would be the most common approach because many many people/businesses have invested alot of effort and resources in developing Apache-specific content. Look at slashdot. It is apache specific and would take an equal amount of porting effort to bring it up on IIS as it would TUX.
"teg" is not saying that the only way is to use apache for dynamic. He's saying that will be a common way for the time being.
That's good news.
But the catch is TUX is a fully functional web server capable of dynamic content on its own. It can run CGI's and custom userspace modules.
Obviously it doesn't have all the features of apache, but in time those will be ported to the TUX architecture.
Dont confuse khttpd with TUX. khttpd is a static only web server and TUX is a fully dynamic web server that can complete the SpecWEB99 benchmark test on its own. That test contains 60% static content and 40% dynamic content, accurately refelcting the average content spectrum of today's web serving load.
Hahaha.
Hrm, well, Mr Businessman stud, show me your accomplishments. 98% of business school graduates couldn't sell themselves out of a paper bag.
I glanced over your message and its pomposity was striking. Why bother fighting me? I am irrelevant.
I come up with a back-of-the-napkin idea that I thought was pretty cool, and you go ahead and deconstruct it into utter meaninglessness.
I've said it earlier and I'll say it again. The idea of having a palm application running on top of a linux handheld would be very cool. I would want one. Porting "PalmOS" to linux would be almost trivial. You could rewrite it from scratch in a few weeks/month. PalmOS is a very very simple application, there is nothing complex at all about it.
And I think it bears repeating. The amount of money saved per device is irrelevant if your goal is to sell 2x as many devices, however remote that may possibly be. I'm not passing myself off as Palm upper management, although you so arrogantly presume to have that kind of expertise.
Heh you got any more edifying knowledge for my poor poor self? I think your intensity is rather strange given the setting. Why are you so defensive about tearing down my simple ideas? Do they threaten you? Do you work for the Great Satan of Software?
Psm works fine for me. Get the newest release of galeon, and mozilla 0.9.1, and make sure your mozilla comes with psm. That's all there's to it.
Just because apple produces their OS for x86 systems doesn't mean taht dell now gets a license to put Macos on their X86 boxes.
So if apple did make an X86 Macos they wouldn't end up competing with Dell anymore than they do now.
Your point about dual booting your Mac x86 box is fallacious. Apple would prevent windows booting on their x86 boxes. Furthermore, being on x86, apple's emulator for windows would run VERY fast and have a potential for native windows speed.
Apple only goes to x86 because it reduces costs, gets them out the poorly performing ppc market (Motorolla's cpus are really shitty compared to intels, frequency being a big part). I think you totally misread the apple on x86 hypothetical. You assumed all the wrong things.
Fps is an average taken over a length of time. Of course if you stare at a wall like Raymond (Dustin Hoffman) your monitor is gonna limit your time resolution. Try one the "crusher" type demos for quake1 to see your minimum time resolution (an oft-neglected metric).
If you know anything about business, business decisions aren't made solely on cost benefit analysis. The best businessmen work from intuition and a keen, personalized intimacy with the details of their situation.
Aside from that, cost-benefit is important, and the strategic implications of the move to linux are based on long-term profitability; the thrust being that more marketshare ubiquitous use can only happen when the price is low enough relative to the commodity hardware in question.
Of course I am not the CEO of palm and am not intimately familiar with the details of their operations, so a cost benefit analysis from _me_ would be utterly worthless. Likewise with yourself, but I wont stop you from trying.
Developing software is fun!
Developing Free software is even more fun! (assuming one isn't getting berated by the likes of you)
sheesh.
Heh, I guess you completely musunderstood me.
.NET will try to make it "the standard"... but we shall see.
I was suggesting for palm to make PalmOS an application on top of linux.
Compaq is hopelessly tied to Microsoft, and you cant buy one of their devices without paying the microsoft tax. sorry.
... But, I guess you're right. Palm could hold onto its market for some time to come. Wince is a threat, certainly, and
You act as if palm is in a zero-sum game. I was giving strategic advice to palm on how to explode their revenue and sell millions more than they otherwise would, and keep growing. Maybe I just have a better strategic vision than the beurocrats at palm. (hell, they came from 3com, what do you expect)
So why not put linux where it isn't seen. Nobody has to know that linux is running your embedded device, or your web-station, or set top box. The windows of the non-pc future does not look like windows (except for obvious branding). There wont be the win32 look and feel because it will function differently. I guess my thesis is that operating systems of the future will branch out into areas that are not so demanding of the user (like the pc is). These new areas will eventually crowd out pc in terms of market share, revenue, and development resources. Why would you want a proprietary operating system on a $50-$100 hardware device? It doesn't make sense. If the future doesn't contain a *majority* of $50-100 devices that run commodity/Free operating systems I will be very surprised.
Palm is fighting a losing battle. And needs to get rid of the PalmOS and make the PalmAPI that runs on linux, windriver, qnx, whatever, and sell it CHEAP. And DONT get rid of your hardware business. A yopi with linux running a PalmAPI Shell? Jesus christ that sounds attractive. I fucking want one. I'll fscking pay $25 extra for that palm software too. Fucking bring it on baby! It's certainly better than the $70 MS tax on ipaq, is more functional (PalmAPI interoperating with other linux apps), and has more developer interest.
Is linux a long shot? Fuck I dont know. You seem skeptical without much analytical thought, kind of gut reaction. At least I argue my case. You give predictions and opinions based on a few seconds of thought. Skepticism aint bad, but it's a two-way street, and require analitical thinking to flesh out a possible scenerio framework backed up by meaningful figures. I'm not asking for a dissertation, just something that more approaches the skeptic's ideal.
(btw, when I said Ms be broken up in earlier post, I meant, if linux isn't able to stop MS, I personally dont know what is, and in 5 years MS will become so powerful that they need to be broken up. But as I've stated here, I think linux is capable of thwarting MS. But regardless, I am waiting for the deliberations to end in the appeal to give further weight to my reasoning, one way or the other.)
Heh, gee, where've you been in the last 5 years? You think it's gonna suddenly taper off because Ballmer and Mundie are on top of it?
Anyway, I guess we can disagree. Not much point in debating it. We'll just have to see. Either way it will be interesting. Microsoft could be rendered neutered by linux, or by the Justice Department. Either outcome is Good, imo.
lol
Heh, I wonder if you'll be so smug in 5-10 years when it actually is :)
anyway.