This is given by Chris Cox who is on Adobe's Photoshop (the unamed app that he works on) team who writes optimizations for both the PC and PPC versions and generally knows his sh*t. Generally, he also benchmarks compilers and tests out new HW from AMD/Intel/Apple way before it hits the streets.
Carmack's a fine programmer and designer but don't assume he's at the top of the field in everything he has a hand in.
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/unix/history.htm l
..it's 1999. That jives with my personal experiences using FreeBSD 3.4 since late 1999.
And next time read a bit more carefully. I never said it was forked 6 months ago. I don't know how you got that into your head. Then again, you are posting as AC.
you would know that it's because it takes a good length of time to get something as large as an OS ready. They wanted a nice stable, proven code-base to work from and so they picked a certain snapshot of FreeBSD and used it. That way you don't have to work out the nightmare of continuing to upgrade and merge old code with new code (which I get to do at work, wheeee). When Apple decided to go with OS X, FreeBSD 4.0 was likely in alpha stability.
OSX did not pop out overnight (or even in the last 6 months). You've seen how 'fast' Mozilla has come along, no?
This is so youy can use GPL'ed software in a private environment w/o the concern that you must make the source available to anyone who comes knocking. So supercorp. is allowed to take Linux or any other GPL product and custumoize with all sorts of cool proprietary knick knacks containing all their cool IP and code and not have to worry about being forced to legally distribute the achanges because a disgruntled employee blabs on slashdot. This remains true as long as supercorp never distributes the product to the public.
You only have to make the source available to the person you send the binaries. There is no (ridiculous) requirement that you must open the source to everyone.
However, you can't forbid that person from redistributing the source afterwards which generally makes the point moot.
The opinion is widespread because people associate the MB chipset with the proc. And AMD 3rd party chipsets were (and still continue to be even today) notorious for shoddy hardware and drivers.
My brothers K5 was a flaky machine. My friend's K6-2 decided to just die. He always had sound card compatibility problems. Many IRC friends had sound issues with the early K7s. Video cards were always iffy ("Use the latest drivers! Upgrade every week!").
Notice that I left out any mention of the Motherboard chipset manufacturer. Most people, even techies, don't make the proper distinction.
A friend who works for AMD has a nice 1Ghz Athlon system. In Win2k it will occasionally hiccup for about a second or so. The problem? The VIA drivers suck. It's like building a great house but letting someone do a crappy job on your driveway and lawn.
Now, of course, some people haven't had any problems or researched the issues ultra-carefully before diving into the Kx fray but those people are few. I'm happy to say that a friend and I put together a nice Athlon rig for colocation and it's been doing just fine. However, this is an issue that has plagued AMD's public perception from the K5 days and that's why there is this reputation, deserved or not. I myself tread very carfeully when dealing with MB purchases.
If it takes you a few seconds to obscure something it seems like a reasonable amount of protection for effort. Likewise if you can plant a few fake trails for minimal effort.
There's no reason for Eidos to kill off either Thief 3 or Deus Ex 2. Both of their predecessors made significant money (too late for Looking Glass, unfortunately), which, of course, Daikatana failed miserably at.
Personally, although DOOM was a great game in its time, I never thought much of any of the original id crew or the game design. The concept is extremely simple-minded (and conitnues to be) and it did well because of (Carmack's) execution.
Btw: is it just me or can nobody among these early posters spell Thief correctly?
Perhaps they are refering to the applications software that seems to be the meat of the product. I tried finding out more about it but stopped after I saw the big honking !!!! BLINK !!! tags on the store page.
... I can get multi-gigahertz performance in something the size of a wallet that costs less than $50. In other words, when computers are truly ubiquitous. When they are so cheap and numerous that I truly don't care.
Until then the mainstream will be (easily) modifiable computers. People still need customized solutions for at least a few more years and it's still cheaper to do so rather than have one prepackaged system. Remember that $500 isn't chump change. PC gaming in particular, which is a huge factor in popular computing, doesn't invite closed systems since we haven't plateaued. You can't equate PC and consoles for at least the next couple generations.
It's going to happen, yes, but not for several years at the minimum.
Which is the problem they are fixing. From what I recall of the original article and the way German lawyers work, Adobe didn't have any knowledge that this was occurring before the fact. The German lawyers went after KIllustrator on their own (on behalf of Adobe). Adobe is just now officially responding to the incident and they are acting reasonably and in a good PR way.
*sigh*... instead of highlighting the real interesting issue they focuussed into the glitzy geek angle to this story. What should have been the big issue in this story is that ALL cell phones made after sometime later this year must have GPS tracking support. As stated, this is so 911 can more easily track calls and save lives. However, these intrusions can easily get out of control without proper limitations.
You might also be a bit concerned to know that many (test system) cars already have on board tracking devices that track what type of driver you are, how often you drive, average length of a trip, mileage, miles/km per hour that you drive. It's only a matter of time and legislation before everything is in place so you can't break traffic laws.
You might try *reading the article link*. Slashdot editors and submitter comments are *NOT* to be trusted.
You would see that the primary reason is that they say they are offering T-10 pagers but are, in fact, not. Also this apparently has been ongoing since before February. Additionally the company is ignoring opt-out requests.
Lack of Kreativity (a popular view of OSS). Why not just Klone a produkt *and* it's produkt name when you can just sprinkle Ks everywhere. It's less work, and everyone knows programmers have a hard time picking deskriptive names.
Same reason Javascript and Java have similar names: to steal existing Mindshare.
I love acronym abuse and polution! I would have thought intelligent people could avoid such unexcusably stupid decisions.
Re:Then by the same logic....
on
USENIX Reports
·
· Score: 2
That is a correct extension of that logic although many of those versions of Linux are customized for the task at hand, not because of strong beliefs.
The/. crew is a necessary evil. Unfortunately, like usual in real-life, less than good quality became dominant.
Re:anti-bsd posts up 75% on slashdot!!!!!
on
USENIX Reports
·
· Score: 2
Nothing in my post implies that there are no reasonable users.
Re:anti-bsd posts up 75% on slashdot!!!!!
on
USENIX Reports
·
· Score: 2
While I tend to agree with you, and am myself a freebsd user and openbsd follower, remember that BSD users are still rabid and intolerant. In fact most power *users* of any following are.
It's part of the reason that there are 3 *BSDs.
And while someone in #freebsdhelp on efnet is just as likely to be running mirc on win2k (using a freebsd NAT box) as they are BitchX in an xterm, the universal sentiment is that 'Linsux' really sux, hence the preponderance of @linuxsucks.com et al dns tags.
What Linux *does* have is a high fad/hip/cool factor which leads to lots of bandwagoning... and banbwagoneers tend to be rabid (vapid) ignorant users (zealots).
Slashdot Mirror
I would direct you to this REPLY to Carmack's post (which is always overlooked for some (obvious) reason)
8 01 20
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12564&cid=1
This is given by Chris Cox who is on Adobe's Photoshop (the unamed app that he works on) team who writes optimizations for both the PC and PPC versions and generally knows his sh*t. Generally, he also benchmarks compilers and tests out new HW from AMD/Intel/Apple way before it hits the streets.
Carmack's a fine programmer and designer but don't assume he's at the top of the field in everything he has a hand in.
According to this URL:
m l
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/unix/history.ht
..it's 1999. That jives with my personal experiences using FreeBSD 3.4 since late 1999.
And next time read a bit more carefully. I never said it was forked 6 months ago. I don't know how you got that into your head. Then again, you are posting as AC.
you would know that it's because it takes a good length of time to get something as large as an OS ready. They wanted a nice stable, proven code-base to work from and so they picked a certain snapshot of FreeBSD and used it. That way you don't have to work out the nightmare of continuing to upgrade and merge old code with new code (which I get to do at work, wheeee). When Apple decided to go with OS X, FreeBSD 4.0 was likely in alpha stability.
OSX did not pop out overnight (or even in the last 6 months). You've seen how 'fast' Mozilla has come along, no?
Ditto for Delphi and C++ Builder. There you get to use "real" languages as well.
This is so youy can use GPL'ed software in a private environment w/o the concern that you must make the source available to anyone who comes knocking. So supercorp. is allowed to take Linux or any other GPL product and custumoize with all sorts of cool proprietary knick knacks containing all their cool IP and code and not have to worry about being forced to legally distribute the achanges because a disgruntled employee blabs on slashdot. This remains true as long as supercorp never distributes the product to the public.
Again, only must be available to you if you obtain the binary. Not just because you have a PS2 (unless it runs a Linux as shipped).
I did note that. Read the last sentence.
To clarify an important point:
You only have to make the source available to the person you send the binaries. There is no (ridiculous) requirement that you must open the source to everyone.
However, you can't forbid that person from redistributing the source afterwards which generally makes the point moot.
The opinion is widespread because people associate the MB chipset with the proc. And AMD 3rd party chipsets were (and still continue to be even today) notorious for shoddy hardware and drivers.
My brothers K5 was a flaky machine. My friend's K6-2 decided to just die. He always had sound card compatibility problems. Many IRC friends had sound issues with the early K7s. Video cards were always iffy ("Use the latest drivers! Upgrade every week!").
Notice that I left out any mention of the Motherboard chipset manufacturer. Most people, even techies, don't make the proper distinction.
A friend who works for AMD has a nice 1Ghz Athlon system. In Win2k it will occasionally hiccup for about a second or so. The problem? The VIA drivers suck. It's like building a great house but letting someone do a crappy job on your driveway and lawn.
Now, of course, some people haven't had any problems or researched the issues ultra-carefully before diving into the Kx fray but those people are few. I'm happy to say that a friend and I put together a nice Athlon rig for colocation and it's been doing just fine. However, this is an issue that has plagued AMD's public perception from the K5 days and that's why there is this reputation, deserved or not. I myself tread very carfeully when dealing with MB purchases.
If it takes you a few seconds to obscure something it seems like a reasonable amount of protection for effort. Likewise if you can plant a few fake trails for minimal effort.
So what you've said is that they've stayed true to the intent of the test whilst straying from the letter of the test.
Seems to me that they've managed what was intended which is far mroe important than nitpicking on what they should have called it.
Just reading about the login procedure makes me shudder and cringe.
There's no reason for Eidos to kill off either Thief 3 or Deus Ex 2. Both of their predecessors made significant money (too late for Looking Glass, unfortunately), which, of course, Daikatana failed miserably at.
Personally, although DOOM was a great game in its time, I never thought much of any of the original id crew or the game design. The concept is extremely simple-minded (and conitnues to be) and it did well because of (Carmack's) execution.
Btw: is it just me or can nobody among these early posters spell Thief correctly?
Then don't call it "news" and don't let the "editors" sit in on panels as "journalists" at conferences.
Right... and this *really* helped BeOS.
Perhaps they are refering to the applications software that seems to be the meat of the product. I tried finding out more about it but stopped after I saw the big honking !!!! BLINK !!! tags on the store page.
... I can get multi-gigahertz performance in something the size of a wallet that costs less than $50. In other words, when computers are truly ubiquitous. When they are so cheap and numerous that I truly don't care.
Until then the mainstream will be (easily) modifiable computers. People still need customized solutions for at least a few more years and it's still cheaper to do so rather than have one prepackaged system. Remember that $500 isn't chump change. PC gaming in particular, which is a huge factor in popular computing, doesn't invite closed systems since we haven't plateaued. You can't equate PC and consoles for at least the next couple generations.
It's going to happen, yes, but not for several years at the minimum.
Which is the problem they are fixing. From what I recall of the original article and the way German lawyers work, Adobe didn't have any knowledge that this was occurring before the fact. The German lawyers went after KIllustrator on their own (on behalf of Adobe). Adobe is just now officially responding to the incident and they are acting reasonably and in a good PR way.
*sigh*... instead of highlighting the real interesting issue they focuussed into the glitzy geek angle to this story. What should have been the big issue in this story is that ALL cell phones made after sometime later this year must have GPS tracking support. As stated, this is so 911 can more easily track calls and save lives. However, these intrusions can easily get out of control without proper limitations.
You might also be a bit concerned to know that many (test system) cars already have on board tracking devices that track what type of driver you are, how often you drive, average length of a trip, mileage, miles/km per hour that you drive. It's only a matter of time and legislation before everything is in place so you can't break traffic laws.
You might try *reading the article link*. Slashdot editors and submitter comments are *NOT* to be trusted.
You would see that the primary reason is that they say they are offering T-10 pagers but are, in fact, not. Also this apparently has been ongoing since before February. Additionally the company is ignoring opt-out requests.
Lack of Kreativity (a popular view of OSS). Why not just Klone a produkt *and* it's produkt name when you can just sprinkle Ks everywhere. It's less work, and everyone knows programmers have a hard time picking deskriptive names.
Embedding scripting language into programs... you mean like SWIG?
http://www.swig.org/
Same reason Javascript and Java have similar names: to steal existing Mindshare.
I love acronym abuse and polution! I would have thought intelligent people could avoid such unexcusably stupid decisions.
That is a correct extension of that logic although many of those versions of Linux are customized for the task at hand, not because of strong beliefs.
/. crew is a necessary evil. Unfortunately, like usual in real-life, less than good quality became dominant.
The
Nothing in my post implies that there are no reasonable users.
While I tend to agree with you, and am myself a freebsd user and openbsd follower, remember that BSD users are still rabid and intolerant. In fact most power *users* of any following are.
It's part of the reason that there are 3 *BSDs.
And while someone in #freebsdhelp on efnet is just as likely to be running mirc on win2k (using a freebsd NAT box) as they are BitchX in an xterm, the universal sentiment is that 'Linsux' really sux, hence the preponderance of @linuxsucks.com et al dns tags.
What Linux *does* have is a high fad/hip/cool factor which leads to lots of bandwagoning... and banbwagoneers tend to be rabid (vapid) ignorant users (zealots).