...and they did it better, than any other implementation I have seen so far.
With "better" I mean: faster, better integrated into the OS and with much better (visual) quality.
Anti-aliasing in RISC OS did not just blur the edges to make the characters look better, it really enhanced the readability of fonts.
> Anyways, why are they going so far out? If I were NASA, I think I'd concentrate on Mars. It's
> close, and if we work on it, it could be habitable by people!
So why not concentrate on the moon? It's even more close than mars.
Or the earth? Hey, the earth is already habitable!
Well, NASA does *science* and if they don't send out a probe to pluto in the next few years they'll miss a oportunity since pluto will be a) frozen and b) large part's will be "in the dark" for two centuries.
> When considered rationally, it's obvious that funding support for ISS is much more important
> than research about the atmosphere of Pluto.
First: We don't want to go there to examine the atmosphere, we want to research Pluto's surface. Wich won't work when the atmosphere is frozen and covers pluto.
Second: We haven't been there yet, so we don't know what we might gain by the Pluto-Kuiper express.
> Rather than focusing on theoretical work, it is time for scientists to submit to their natural
> social role of technology providers.
Well, let's go back a few thousand years and imagine King Willy or Queen Sally saying to their scientist: "Stop playing with numbers and looking to the stars and invent something so that our ships can navigate at high seas."
Or think about all those great scientist of the past (Galileo, Newton, Heisenberg, Einstein to name just a few) or *any* Mathematician - nobody of those tried to work as "technology provider".
Here's another example were *much* effort was wasted by a very popular program: The Gold-making. For centuries many, many people spend their whole live while searching for a simple way to turn some cheap material into gold. Only modern science has showed, that this just can't work.
Because Linux' ext2fs doesn't do synchronous metadata updates (like FreeBSD's FFS) as default (ext2fs is incredible slow if it does this.)
Wich is fatal in case of crashes - there's a great chance you will lose mail if a crash happens after mail was received and bevor update drained the buffers.
To make the benchmark more fair (i.e. with same functionality on both OS) Byte should mount the filesystems with the spool and mail directories with synchronous metadata updates and repeat the test.
We might see bigger differences in the other benchmarks as well...
BTW: Many western countries still do manual counting (with clear rules). And it works: You usually know who has won the election 2 hours after voting has closed and have the precise numbers by the next day.
Try out XFree86 4.0.2, it's a free implemantation of X.Org's X11 Release 6.4 and has just been released. (It has been mentioned on Slashdot, you know!)
(SCNR - But *please* don't call XFree86 4.* "X4".
X4 is something different.)
Re:Damm, now we have "of course it runs Linux.."
on
Dreamcast Runs Linux
·
· Score: 4
Not true, NetBSD had a single user shell on the dreamcast in October.
You should have informed yourself before you started ranting: This has nothing to do with pride.
They just have found a faster, cleaner, more flexible (in short: better) solution than OpenSSH.
You can read more about it in the mailinglist archives, e.g. here:
"It was originally written for an embedded realtime OS, but also works on Solaris and NetBSD. It has independent reader/writer threads, for MUCH better performance than other Secure Shell implementations, has better Kerberos support, and is just written in a much cleaner way.
It is already being used inside at least one very popular commercial product."
> Basically, the response was: there's way too much bad blood between us,
I have some doubts you/really/ have talked to the core of NetBSD or FreeBSD since I don't believe any [Net|Free]BSD-developer/core-member would have said such thing.
BTW: This text (written more than *seven* years ago to end the discussion about merging) sums it up, how it *really* was and still is:
NetBSD-FreeBSD-merge
> This is a sad state of affairs, and hurts BSD a lot.
Could you tell us why? Where? When?
> This brings us to the most important point, BSD is far superior to Linux because BSd is already on
> version 4.2
Actually:
The latest release of BSD was 4.4
The latest release of FreeBSD is 4.2
The latest release of NetBSD is 1.4.2, 1.5 will be out in a few days (weeks?)
The latest release of OpenBSD is 2.7, 2.8 is on its way
The latest release of BSD/OS (BSDi Internet Server) is 4.1
Yes, I prefer NetBSD to Solaris on my sun4c and sun4m systems. It's smaller, faster and much, much better structured => much more easy to maintain (and I think more secure).
On sun4u I would probably go for Solaris... (but I don't have one (yet))...
Apple didn't supported the PREP or later CHRP efforts made by IBM, Motorola and other hardware companies around the PowerPC and instead prefered to stay on its little Mac-island with Apple-crap.
Imagine that: You might have been able to buy your PowerPC based PC (with working OpenFirmware!) from your local dealer at low-low prices and install your favourite OS as you do with IA32 PCs today...
>Yes. They invented multi-processing.
I thought Al Gore did...
*shudder*
DEC sold multiprocessor machines (e.g. the PDP11/50, made 1972). loooong before Intel made CPUs with a usable memory model (e.g. something beyond that crappy 80286).
Slashdot Mirror
> Furthermore, it should only be applied to text above a certain type size.
This is completely *WRONG*.
A well implemented anti-aliasing does enhance the readability of small fonts.
...and they did it better, than any other implementation I have seen so far.
With "better" I mean: faster, better integrated into the OS and with much better (visual) quality.
Anti-aliasing in RISC OS did not just blur the edges to make the characters look better, it really enhanced the readability of fonts.
> Anyways, why are they going so far out? If I were NASA, I think I'd concentrate on Mars. It's
> close, and if we work on it, it could be habitable by people!
So why not concentrate on the moon? It's even more close than mars.
Or the earth? Hey, the earth is already habitable!
Well, NASA does *science* and if they don't send out a probe to pluto in the next few years they'll miss a oportunity since pluto will be a) frozen and b) large part's will be "in the dark" for two centuries.
Mars can wait, Pluto can't.
> When considered rationally, it's obvious that funding support for ISS is much more important
> than research about the atmosphere of Pluto.
First: We don't want to go there to examine the atmosphere, we want to research Pluto's surface. Wich won't work when the atmosphere is frozen and covers pluto.
Second: We haven't been there yet, so we don't know what we might gain by the Pluto-Kuiper express.
> Rather than focusing on theoretical work, it is time for scientists to submit to their natural
> social role of technology providers.
Well, let's go back a few thousand years and imagine King Willy or Queen Sally saying to their scientist: "Stop playing with numbers and looking to the stars and invent something so that our ships can navigate at high seas."
Or think about all those great scientist of the past (Galileo, Newton, Heisenberg, Einstein to name just a few) or *any* Mathematician - nobody of those tried to work as "technology provider".
Here's another example were *much* effort was wasted by a very popular program: The Gold-making. For centuries many, many people spend their whole live while searching for a simple way to turn some cheap material into gold. Only modern science has showed, that this just can't work.
> And, sorry, we *can't* kill ALL life on Earth.
Not yet, but we are working on it!
> Each switch to a smaller form factor (8 inch, 5 1/4 inch, 3.5 inch, etc) actually LOWERED the
> price/performance ratio
I bet you ment price/capacity ratio. The price/performance ratio skyrocked. Think about more RPMs-> lower rotational latency.
NetBSD does have drivers for IBM and 3com tokenring cards.
Both. It's a typo in the article *and* a shitload of RAM.
Because Linux' ext2fs doesn't do synchronous metadata updates (like FreeBSD's FFS) as default (ext2fs is incredible slow if it does this.)
Wich is fatal in case of crashes - there's a great chance you will lose mail if a crash happens after mail was received and bevor update drained the buffers.
To make the benchmark more fair (i.e. with same functionality on both OS) Byte should mount the filesystems with the spool and mail directories with synchronous metadata updates and repeat the test.
We might see bigger differences in the other benchmarks as well...
Intel did not buy ARM. Intel bought DEC's StrongARM division (and their ARM licenses). ARM is still independent from intel, see www.arm.com
BTW: Many western countries still do manual counting (with clear rules). And it works: You usually know who has won the election 2 hours after voting has closed and have the precise numbers by the next day.
(SCNR - But *please* don't call XFree86 4.* "X4". X4 is something different.)
Not true, NetBSD had a single user shell on the dreamcast in October.
They just have found a faster, cleaner, more flexible (in short: better) solution than OpenSSH.
You can read more about it in the mailinglist archives, e.g. here:
See http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/sparc/& lt;P> I have it running on these SPARCStations in my personal collection:
- SLC
- ELC
- IPX
- Classic X
- LX
- 4
and have it installed on someone else's SS10.I have some doubts you /really/ have talked to the core of NetBSD or FreeBSD since I don't believe any [Net|Free]BSD-developer/core-member would have said such thing.
BTW: This text (written more than *seven* years ago to end the discussion about merging) sums it up, how it *really* was and still is: NetBSD-FreeBSD-merge > This is a sad state of affairs, and hurts BSD a lot. Could you tell us why? Where? When?
> This brings us to the most important point, BSD is far superior to Linux because BSd is already on
> version 4.2
Actually:
The latest release of BSD was 4.4
The latest release of FreeBSD is 4.2
The latest release of NetBSD is 1.4.2, 1.5 will be out in a few days (weeks?)
The latest release of OpenBSD is 2.7, 2.8 is on its way
The latest release of BSD/OS (BSDi Internet Server) is 4.1
He said "BSD" not "FreeBSD".
NetBSD and OpenBSD run fine on sparcs.
Yes, I prefer NetBSD to Solaris on my sun4c and sun4m systems. It's smaller, faster and much, much better structured => much more easy to maintain (and I think more secure).
On sun4u I would probably go for Solaris... (but I don't have one (yet))...
No, "Rant-Man Stallman" is defintitly *NOT* the King of Open Source.
Have you read the mail discussion at all?
First mail from RMS to Jorrit:
"I don't support the Open Source Movement..."
Maybe this:
Apple didn't supported the PREP or later CHRP efforts made by IBM, Motorola and other hardware companies around the PowerPC and instead prefered to stay on its little Mac-island with Apple-crap.
Imagine that: You might have been able to buy your PowerPC based PC (with working OpenFirmware!) from your local dealer at low-low prices and install your favourite OS as you do with IA32 PCs today...
A satellite is orbiting something...
> Where only the elite or commiters are allowed to vote
Just like the US of A. Where only US-Americans are allowed to vote.
Or France, where only Frenchmen are allowed to vote.
Or [put in your favourite democracy here] where only [name the inhabitants of the country] are allowed to vote.
The FreeBSD core team steers the process of FreeBSD developement, so why should any outsider (i.e. non-developer) be allowed to vote?
Some notes:
RS6000 is a whole family of workstations/servers from IBM - not a processor architecture.
(RS6000 systems run on POWER, POWER2, PowerPC, and POWER3 cpus.)
HP's PA-RISC is missing, IBM's RT, Motorola 88k, NS32K, SH3/SH4, Intel i960 (not sure about that)...
I tried to be funny.
I failed. Sorry!
>Yes. They invented multi-processing.
I thought Al Gore did...
*shudder*
DEC sold multiprocessor machines (e.g. the PDP11/50, made 1972). loooong before Intel made CPUs with a usable memory model (e.g. something beyond that crappy 80286).