Shaddup. There's half a row of Apple softwared toward the back of every CompUSA.
Re:Mach is the "guts" of Mac OS X.
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
Actually NeXTstep is the 'guts' of MacOS X, since Apple spent itself nearly into bankrupcy trying to invent a 'next gen MacOS' before being acquired by NeXT, who just gutted it all and wrote a new 'candyshop' to sit on top and released it as 'version 10.'
Re:FreeBSD is free'er, MacOS X better for users
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
Yes, BSD provides more freedom, but that statement only applies to the initial recipient of the code. No guarantees of freedom exist for anyone else.
By that same criterion, no freedom exists for ANYBODY using the GPL'd code.
But now IHBT.
Re:It's my choice
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
and had the additional advantage of riding the back of a wave of MS hatred.
Linux is for people who hate Microsoft. BSD is for people who love UNIX.
Re:Why FreeBSD when there's NetBSD?
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
I would second your opinion. I have a complete mirror now (which needs constant updating, of course) of the NetBSD pkgsrc collection source files. I have machines with four or five different kinds of processors in them (68k, Sparc, Sparc64, i386, PPC, MIPS). I prefer having the capability to run a single freenix on ALL of them, with a single unified/etc structure. I can cross-build packages for all archs anywhere I like.
With FreeBSD there are a few ports to archs other than Intel, but they are side efforts. NetBSD has cross-platform development as a primary goal.
And with Linux, well, since it's just a kernel it builds (not that cleanly, but the kludges are all stuck in that big tarball somewhere, or can be patched in), but then you have to shop all over to find some odd variant someone has 'rolled up' for your processor architecture.
Well, if that's your criterion, you might as well put Hershey's Syrup on your sandwiches and be done with it.
Re:FreeBSD makes sense
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
The first time I installed NetBSD was back when I had a laptop with no CD drive and was well-used to installing Slackware over an NFS server onto machines with only a boot floppy.
I had tried installing Slack, and SuSE, and even Red Hat 4.3 on the laptop, but at that point in history, the PCMCIA drivers was still a horrible kludge that you bolted on the side of the Linux kernal at boottime. It was a hideous mess.
With NetBSD, my PCMCIA ethernet card was recognized right 'out of the box' on the stock install kernel, which fit nicely with the install userland on a single floppy diskette.
Really, I've used Linux in certain settings since that time, but I've never really liked it.
Re:Where is the Netcraft confirms troll
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
It's confirmed that the BSD Trolls are dying. (or they've gotten fucking lives, or noticed girls, or something, anyway.)
'Skippy' isn't peanut butter at all. It's just sugar paste and trans-fat oils and assorted glop, plus some of the offal the peanut processors have left after skimming out the good parts of the peanut (the peanut oil, etc.) to sell at higher prices.
The process of making 'real' peanut butter involves grinding peanuts into a fine paste and possibly adding salt. The only ingredients listed on the jar should be 'peanuts and salt.' There are often several brands and types of real peanut butter available at stores these days. Skippy is NOT one of them.
Re:Linux And The BSDs
on
Why FreeBSD
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Linux only scales well on said 'large SMP systems' where there has been a tremendous amount of hand-holding by the vendors of said hardware.
I'm having good experiences running NetBSD on a quad CPU server here, but you didn't mention NetBSD...
And I know that isn't necessarily a 'large SMP system.'
Frankly, who *cares* what proprietary vendors are able to twist Linux into doing on their specific hardware? They could do the same thing with any OS they focused on.
Also the GNU added to Linux is spotty and arbitrary, depending on what any of a few hundred 'distro producers' decide to include, and from what sources.
The BSD OSes, on the other hand, have a userland archived and tracked from a single CVS source tree.
Well, then they should strip off all the candy-colored bloat and just run Darwin.
Your characterization is actually improved, thank you, because it clearly delineates MacOS X as a needless parasite for the kind of work they're doing.
$1 seems quite reasonable, if you make wise choices in the songs you purchase, and get them on an unencumbered format. You've now got recordings you can listen to for a lifetime and beyond. I have recordings going back decades, including a large number of 78-rpm recordings over 75 years old. I'm glad somebody paid full dollar for them back then.
Now, if you buy trendy pop (or trendy angst bullshit, for that matter)that you'll probably only enjoy for four months or a year, and you buy it 'encumbered' on a system like Apple's online sales effort, you might not be making a wise investment at $1 per song.
$1 per song for a lifetime of enjoyment can be a really good deal. A particularly good deal when compared to 'subscription' methods where you lose all access if you don't pay up each month.
Do you really think Windows is worth what Microsoft wants for it?
Isn't that a decision for each Microsoft customer to make? I take it from the tone of your comment that you're not one of said customers.
The previous sentence, BTW, demonstrates that Microsoft is not within a monpolistic market. (and the fact that I'm entering this on a Dell machine with NO Microsoft software on it reinforces that)
I called Microsoft for support because I had purchased Windows NT 3.51 on floppy diskettes and wanted the CDROM version (the store I bought it at only stocked the floppy diskette version). The friendly rep at Microsoft took down my credit card number and shipped out the CD for a media charge of a few dollars. I did the same thing (bought a floppy disk version) of Visual C 1.0.
I understand that Microsoft is a somewhat bigger operation these days.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, we can at least recommend that if at all possible, don't position yourself with your head right up next to your Wireless router's antenna.
Like you would if you were jabbering on a small portable cell phone.
I feel inner pain when I think of some 'Dee Jay' slapping his grubby hands onto a turntable.
Jebus Cripes. Hands off, dude.
A lot of the music I enjoy these days is from the '78-rpm-era' Usenet newsgroup. Basically MP3 conversions of old 78RPM recordings.
I'm not that caught up in wether my music is 'CD Quality.' The quality of the actual MUSIC that was recorded is more important.
Shaddup. There's half a row of Apple softwared toward the back of every CompUSA.
Actually NeXTstep is the 'guts' of MacOS X, since Apple spent itself nearly into bankrupcy trying to invent a 'next gen MacOS' before being acquired by NeXT, who just gutted it all and wrote a new 'candyshop' to sit on top and released it as 'version 10.'
I run NetBSD on a Macintosh SE/30.
Because I can.
(I run Minix on a 286 laptop)
Yes, BSD provides more freedom, but that statement only applies to the initial recipient of the code. No guarantees of freedom exist for anyone else.
By that same criterion, no freedom exists for ANYBODY using the GPL'd code.
But now IHBT.
and had the additional advantage of riding the back of a wave of MS hatred.
Linux is for people who hate Microsoft. BSD is for people who love UNIX.
I would second your opinion. I have a complete mirror now (which needs constant updating, of course) of the NetBSD pkgsrc collection source files. I have machines with four or five different kinds of processors in them (68k, Sparc, Sparc64, i386, PPC, MIPS). I prefer having the capability to run a single freenix on ALL of them, with a single unified /etc structure. I can cross-build packages for all archs anywhere I like.
With FreeBSD there are a few ports to archs other than Intel, but they are side efforts. NetBSD has cross-platform development as a primary goal.
And with Linux, well, since it's just a kernel it builds (not that cleanly, but the kludges are all stuck in that big tarball somewhere, or can be patched in), but then you have to shop all over to find some odd variant someone has 'rolled up' for your processor architecture.
Well, if that's your criterion, you might as well put Hershey's Syrup on your sandwiches and be done with it.
The first time I installed NetBSD was back when I had a laptop with no CD drive and was well-used to installing Slackware over an NFS server onto machines with only a boot floppy.
I had tried installing Slack, and SuSE, and even Red Hat 4.3 on the laptop, but at that point in history, the PCMCIA drivers was still a horrible kludge that you bolted on the side of the Linux kernal at boottime. It was a hideous mess.
With NetBSD, my PCMCIA ethernet card was recognized right 'out of the box' on the stock install kernel, which fit nicely with the install userland on a single floppy diskette.
Really, I've used Linux in certain settings since that time, but I've never really liked it.
It's confirmed that the BSD Trolls are dying. (or they've gotten fucking lives, or noticed girls, or something, anyway.)
Linux is what FreeBSD should have been, and cite the huge number of supercomputers using Linux
Possibly so, if this was some sort of a hot-rod competition.
It's not.
'Skippy' isn't peanut butter at all. It's just sugar paste and trans-fat oils and assorted glop, plus some of the offal the peanut processors have left after skimming out the good parts of the peanut (the peanut oil, etc.) to sell at higher prices.
The process of making 'real' peanut butter involves grinding peanuts into a fine paste and possibly adding salt. The only ingredients listed on the jar should be 'peanuts and salt.' There are often several brands and types of real peanut butter available at stores these days. Skippy is NOT one of them.
Linux only scales well on said 'large SMP systems' where there has been a tremendous amount of hand-holding by the vendors of said hardware.
I'm having good experiences running NetBSD on a quad CPU server here, but you didn't mention NetBSD...
And I know that isn't necessarily a 'large SMP system.'
Frankly, who *cares* what proprietary vendors are able to twist Linux into doing on their specific hardware? They could do the same thing with any OS they focused on.
Also the GNU added to Linux is spotty and arbitrary, depending on what any of a few hundred 'distro producers' decide to include, and from what sources.
The BSD OSes, on the other hand, have a userland archived and tracked from a single CVS source tree.
Well, then they should strip off all the candy-colored bloat and just run Darwin.
Your characterization is actually improved, thank you, because it clearly delineates MacOS X as a needless parasite for the kind of work they're doing.
$1 seems quite reasonable, if you make wise choices in the songs you purchase, and get them on an unencumbered format. You've now got recordings you can listen to for a lifetime and beyond. I have recordings going back decades, including a large number of 78-rpm recordings over 75 years old. I'm glad somebody paid full dollar for them back then.
Now, if you buy trendy pop (or trendy angst bullshit, for that matter)that you'll probably only enjoy for four months or a year, and you buy it 'encumbered' on a system like Apple's online sales effort, you might not be making a wise investment at $1 per song.
$1 per song for a lifetime of enjoyment can be a really good deal. A particularly good deal when compared to 'subscription' methods where you lose all access if you don't pay up each month.
Do you really think Windows is worth what Microsoft wants for it?
Isn't that a decision for each Microsoft customer to make? I take it from the tone of your comment that you're not one of said customers.
The previous sentence, BTW, demonstrates that Microsoft is not within a monpolistic market. (and the fact that I'm entering this on a Dell machine with NO Microsoft software on it reinforces that)
I can download isos of Darwin without visiting warez sites.
What you claim is like saying that somebody running Windows 3.1 is just running MS-DOS.
I called Microsoft for support because I had purchased Windows NT 3.51 on floppy diskettes and wanted the CDROM version (the store I bought it at only stocked the floppy diskette version). The friendly rep at Microsoft took down my credit card number and shipped out the CD for a media charge of a few dollars. I did the same thing (bought a floppy disk version) of Visual C 1.0.
I understand that Microsoft is a somewhat bigger operation these days.
Your links pick-and-choose Microsoft infractions over the 20+ year history of a company central to the "IT Ecology" for much of that time.
Give Google a little more time.
Headhunters will always tell you the grass is greener over on that 'other side' they'll make money moving you to.
It's a newsworthy novelty, like if one of the cars was 'Powered by OS/2' or something.
Really, more of a NASCAR sort of thing, like the big logos all over the place.
Then they should be running Darwin, and dispense with all the eyecandy and bloat, which inherently translates 'instability' in the real world.