I do believe that Free/Open SW is largely better than Closed.
However, what I meant was that the accountability factor and sometimes the openness can harm you if you depend intensely on certain Open SW packages that may have critical bugs. For example, my customer will not purchase my $30 million software package if it contains critical bugs. They routinely browse bug reports and security bulletins for bugs in the packages we use. If they find one we must fix it before shipping.
I say this from experience -- Apache is hard to learn in 1 night to fix a security bug!
I would wager you've never used Java. I say that not as an insult, but because you simply have yet to realize that a change made back in 1996 made the average piece of Java code run as fast as the average piece of C/C++ code.
---
Five composite benchmarks listed below show that modern Java has acceptable performance, being nearly equal to (and in many cases faster than) C/C++ across a number of benchmarks.
1. Numerical Kernels
Benchmarking Java against C and Fortran for Scientific Applications
Mark Bull, Lorna Smith, Lindsay Pottage, Robin Freeman,
EPCC, University of Edinburgh (2001).
The authors test some real numerical codes (FFT, Matrix factorization, SOR, fluid solver, N-body) on several architectures and compilers. On Intel they found that the Java performance was very reasonable compared to C (e.g, 20% slower), and that Java was faster than at least one C compiler (KAI compiler on Linux).
The authors conclude, "On Intel Pentium hardware, especially with Linux, the performance gap is small enough to be of little or no concern to programmers."
2.
More numerical methods: SciMark2 scores
R. F. Boisvert, J. Moriera, M. Phillipsen, R. Pozo,
Java and Numerical Computing,
Computing in Science & Engineering, 3(2):18-24, Mar.-Apr., 2001.
SciMark includes a number of numerical codes. On a PIII/500, MFlops (higher is better):
ibm jdk 1.3.0 84.5
linux2.2 gcc (2.9x) -O6 87.1
3.
Still more numerical methods
From the book Object-Oriented Implementations of Numerical Methods by Didier Besset (MorganKaufmann, 2001):
Operation Units C Smalltalk Java
Polynomial 10th degree msec. 1.1 27.7 9.0
Neville Interpolation (20 points) msec. 0.9 11.0 0.8
LUP matrix inversion (100 x 100) sec. 3.9 22.9 1.0
4. Microbenchmarks (cache effects considered)
Several years ago these benchmarks showed java performance at the time to be somewhere in the middle of C compiler performance - faster than the worst C compilers, slower than the best. These are "microbenchmarks", but they do have the advantage that they were run across a number of different problem sizes and thus the results are not reflecting a lucky cache interaction (see more details on this issue in the next section).
These benchmarks were updated with a more recent java(1.4) and gcc(3.2), using full optimization (gcc -O3 -mcpu=pentiumpro -fexpensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns2...). This time java is faster than C the majority of the tests, by a factor of more than 2 in some cases...... suggesting that java performance is catching up to or even pulling ahead of gcc at least.
These test were mostly integer (except for an FFT).
5.
Microbenchmarks (cache effects not considered)
In January 2004 OSNews.com posted an article, Nine Language Performance Round-up: Benchmarking Math & File I-O. These
Is that sometimes bugs in say a 2.0.5 version of software that's standardized during a Linux distro's "point oh" release just start seriously affecting your company's performance. Then you try to upgrade but find a dependency on another new package as well. Some of us cannot install whatever we want on the machines. I have to spend a week or two research and prepping and thinking of every possible reason and counter-complaint about why we need the updates that I get exhausted pretty easily.
Linux is by far the best UNIX-like system out there and I love it for that. But depending on other developers who work for free and fix all critical bugs in a timely matter is, for me, like putting a $30 million dollar project into the hands of what could be a 20 year old kid, albeit a damn good coder of a kid, but someone else nonetheless.
With Microsoft at least there's a bit of accountability or someone my company can blame when our project fails.
Some guy on an HP forum asks how to get Java code to run in his Web browser on Linux Itanium. Shock and awe follows as he's told you can't run an applet on his multi-thousand dollar 64-bit workstation.
He does contradict himself a lot. I'm not a huge GWB hater, but the other day in a press conference he stumbled through a speech asking Americans to conserve fuel. But back in 2001 someone asked and the administration vehemently stated that by no means should Americans cut back on their energy consumption; it's the American way, etc.
So yeah, newsflash, politicians don't always keep their promises. "Flip-flopping" is more common than many think, and Kerry isn't the only one who does it:)
1.) No one I know uses Microsoft aside from Windows/Office on their projects anymore.
2.) In the technology areas, Open Source and Free Software have taken over and are the ones doing most of the innovating now.
3.) Microsoft will most likely be delegated to a "secretary" computer company, providing email/wordprocessing/scheduling software to companies and not much else.
4.) IBM may actually have "died" and come back thanks to its embracing of Linux, etc. whereas Microsoft will probably go the way IBM did but may actually die unless they start buying out a ton of Open Source developers (which they are trying to do).
5.) Microsoft is hedging its bets on the Web, but Google will win that battle, as we've seen with their prompt acquisition of talent including many ex-Microsofters.
2.) The last thing you should do when you get home is hop onto your personal computer, but that's what many of us do. We want to do email/IM/blog but it's the last thing we should be doing.
3.) Find hobbies that have nothing to do with technology. Ride bikes, run, lift weights, camp, geocache, buy a gun, get a significant other if you don't have one, or if you do spend more time with them.
4.) Most of all just stay well-rounded. In all aspects of your life. Keep a balance (no I'm not religious but yes this is similar to some Ancient Eastern philosophies/religions).
As if BMW's Microsoft-powered iDrive wasn't bad enough, now drivers can copy viruses inadvertantly onto their cars from their home computers using their car key!
(Fact: 2005 BMW 7 series vehicle, MSRP of $70,000+, has more known bugs/defects already than a 1990 Lexus luxury sedan)
Spending $500-1000 to put a computer in your car will cost $500-1000.
But insurance will not appraise your vehicle at its fair market value + $500-1000, so if someone smashes and grabs your penguin box, it's gone for good.
I realize you're trolling but the only thing an unbiased engineer could claim with regards to the two OSes is that FreeBSD has perhaps slightly better security.
Performance wise they're similar and many even feel Linux has a slight edge (especially recent colonels).
Sure, it's getting better, but every day it seems 1,000 new sites are added that only work in such-and-such browser with such-and-such plugins/spyware installed.
I miss the simple days of information with the occasional colored background or image.
As I think more about this decision, I wonder why not simply split the development between bug fixes and feature providers.
For example, Linux kernel 2.7 is released.
We run regression test on it for a week or two.
At that point, we document all known bugs and hand them and the entire 2.7 codebase off to our bug fixing team.
Then we identify improvements to current capabilities as well as new features we want to add, document all of it clearly, and hand that off to the feature team along with their own copy of the 2.7 baseline.
Then we have our bug guys working the 2.7_bugfix baseline and our features guys adding valuable new code to the 2.7_features baseline.
Prior to the next release, we merge all the changes together, spend a week sorting out any dependecy problems and interface problems, then we ship.
And repeat.
Sounds feasible to me. I just don't like the feeling I get when thinking that there's such a short development window.
The Linux kernel is already pretty darn stable, especially when compared to other operating systems. Let's keep the new features coming!
But as I browse the submitters of actual code, it seems that it's no longer the every-man's operating system.
More and more often we're seeing Red Hat and IBM employees tinkering with the code.
Does this mean a lack of quality? No, certainly not. A professional developer is usually very well versed in what he or she's working on.
But I propose that we watch what is being worked on and that our priorities are appropriate.
Perhaps an IBM or similar company has a new feature that they want, or worse, need, in the Linux kernel, and as such they spend all their time working on that.
The reality might be however that an improved VM is needed but all the Red Hat guys are busy working on some scheduling code that really isn't as crucial.
As far as I know, Linus himself still verifies all submissions and deems which baselines they appear in, but I hope that since he's also a professional and getting paid by Corporate if our priorities are straight.
Hopefully RM Stallman and friends are always heads-up, but I'm aware that often some serious fights take place on the Linux kernel mailing list regarding these types of issues.
Let's keep Linux progressing in the areas it needs to mature!
But as far as I know DVD-R and CD-R blank media labeled for "music" use have a piracy tax applied to them.
Many consumers are tricked by this because they don't know much and think blank media labeled for "data" will not support mp3s, etc. which is not true.
But that sounds a lot like the world of Open Source and Free Software.
Though granted, we who develop Open Source apps often have to keep a unified user interface that's familiar to Windows and Mac users.
We also work hard to have a Linux friendly version of all the popular Windows-only applications so that Windows fans can't say "well yeah but Linux doesn't have ____, or ______".
Some examples of what I'm talking about include Evolution (a Microsoft Outlook clone) and Open Office (a clone of the entire MS Office suite).
However, we are making in-roads in areas like CSS support for Web browsers. Recently, Konqueror and another Open browser became the first to pass the CSS smiley test.
Aside from SUN, who have lost most of their relevance anyway, all the other hardware companies enjoy "giving away" free software products and charging for hardware and extended tier support. Many companies even pay their own guys to add features and stability via code submission to various Open Source apps. I'm thinking Red Hat, HP, Intel, etc.
It's also applicable to those one-man companies and consultants out there. I know one guy who often gives a quote for Windows and quote for a Linux system based on requirements given to them. So someone wants a dedicated server, and Joe Geek gives them a quote for $2,500 in hardware + $1,800 in software for the Windows system, then a quote of $2,500 for hardware and $0 for software for the Linux system.
They just need to keep hiring away our best Open Source talent.
I know they did recently -- article here focusing on their "theft" of Daniel Robbins, the former chief architect of Gentoo Linux.
They claim to be wanting to learn more about Open Source when they try and justify hiring guys who are just getting by financially but are huge braintrusts of the Linux movement. Basically they offer these guys 6 figure salaries to work behind closed doors in Redmond and never release anything of value to OSS ever again.
Many of them being family guys, they cannot turn these offers down due to finances. Kids are expensive, wives are expensive, SUVs are pricy, gas is pricy, taxes, computer hardware, and on and on.
I don't blame them but I think it's a dirty trick by Microsoft. I love OSS and use it at home at work and on project I create. We need to keep our talent.
Slashdot Mirror
I do believe that Free/Open SW is largely better than Closed.
However, what I meant was that the accountability factor and sometimes the openness can harm you if you depend intensely on certain Open SW packages that may have critical bugs. For example, my customer will not purchase my $30 million software package if it contains critical bugs. They routinely browse bug reports and security bulletins for bugs in the packages we use. If they find one we must fix it before shipping.
I say this from experience -- Apache is hard to learn in 1 night to fix a security bug!
I would wager you've never used Java. I say that not as an insult, but because you simply have yet to realize that a change made back in 1996 made the average piece of Java code run as fast as the average piece of C/C++ code.
... suggesting that java performance is catching up to or even pulling ahead of gcc at least.
---
Five composite benchmarks listed below show that modern Java has acceptable performance, being nearly equal to (and in many cases faster than) C/C++ across a number of benchmarks.
1. Numerical Kernels
Benchmarking Java against C and Fortran for Scientific Applications
Mark Bull, Lorna Smith, Lindsay Pottage, Robin Freeman,
EPCC, University of Edinburgh (2001).
The authors test some real numerical codes (FFT, Matrix factorization, SOR, fluid solver, N-body) on several architectures and compilers. On Intel they found that the Java performance was very reasonable compared to C (e.g, 20% slower), and that Java was faster than at least one C compiler (KAI compiler on Linux).
The authors conclude, "On Intel Pentium hardware, especially with Linux, the performance gap is small enough to be of little or no concern to programmers."
2.
More numerical methods: SciMark2 scores
R. F. Boisvert, J. Moriera, M. Phillipsen, R. Pozo,
Java and Numerical Computing,
Computing in Science & Engineering, 3(2):18-24, Mar.-Apr., 2001.
SciMark includes a number of numerical codes. On a PIII/500, MFlops (higher is better):
ibm jdk 1.3.0 84.5
linux2.2 gcc (2.9x) -O6 87.1
3.
Still more numerical methods
From the book Object-Oriented Implementations of Numerical Methods by Didier Besset (MorganKaufmann, 2001):
Operation Units C Smalltalk Java
Polynomial 10th degree msec. 1.1 27.7 9.0
Neville Interpolation (20 points) msec. 0.9 11.0 0.8
LUP matrix inversion (100 x 100) sec. 3.9 22.9 1.0
4. Microbenchmarks (cache effects considered)
Several years ago these benchmarks showed java performance at the time to be somewhere in the middle of C compiler performance - faster than the worst C compilers, slower than the best. These are "microbenchmarks", but they do have the advantage that they were run across a number of different problem sizes and thus the results are not reflecting a lucky cache interaction (see more details on this issue in the next section).
These benchmarks were updated with a more recent java(1.4) and gcc(3.2), using full optimization (gcc -O3 -mcpu=pentiumpro -fexpensive-optimizations -fschedule-insns2...). This time java is faster than C the majority of the tests, by a factor of more than 2 in some cases...
These test were mostly integer (except for an FFT).
5.
Microbenchmarks (cache effects not considered)
In January 2004 OSNews.com posted an article, Nine Language Performance Round-up: Benchmarking Math & File I-O. These
Is that sometimes bugs in say a 2.0.5 version of software that's standardized during a Linux distro's "point oh" release just start seriously affecting your company's performance. Then you try to upgrade but find a dependency on another new package as well. Some of us cannot install whatever we want on the machines. I have to spend a week or two research and prepping and thinking of every possible reason and counter-complaint about why we need the updates that I get exhausted pretty easily.
Linux is by far the best UNIX-like system out there and I love it for that. But depending on other developers who work for free and fix all critical bugs in a timely matter is, for me, like putting a $30 million dollar project into the hands of what could be a 20 year old kid, albeit a damn good coder of a kid, but someone else nonetheless.
With Microsoft at least there's a bit of accountability or someone my company can blame when our project fails.
Some guy on an HP forum asks how to get Java code to run in his Web browser on Linux Itanium. Shock and awe follows as he's told you can't run an applet on his multi-thousand dollar 64-bit workstation.
Link
That's the J2SE not the JRE.
You cannot run Java apps on Itanium.
We spent $849,000 on an Itanium cluster and have recently found ourselves SOL since it's a dying architecture.
You can't even run Java on them.
He does contradict himself a lot. I'm not a huge GWB hater, but the other day in a press conference he stumbled through a speech asking Americans to conserve fuel. But back in 2001 someone asked and the administration vehemently stated that by no means should Americans cut back on their energy consumption; it's the American way, etc.
:)
So yeah, newsflash, politicians don't always keep their promises. "Flip-flopping" is more common than many think, and Kerry isn't the only one who does it
1.) No one I know uses Microsoft aside from Windows/Office on their projects anymore.
2.) In the technology areas, Open Source and Free Software have taken over and are the ones doing most of the innovating now.
3.) Microsoft will most likely be delegated to a "secretary" computer company, providing email/wordprocessing/scheduling software to companies and not much else.
4.) IBM may actually have "died" and come back thanks to its embracing of Linux, etc. whereas Microsoft will probably go the way IBM did but may actually die unless they start buying out a ton of Open Source developers (which they are trying to do).
5.) Microsoft is hedging its bets on the Web, but Google will win that battle, as we've seen with their prompt acquisition of talent including many ex-Microsofters.
1.) Leave work at work.
2.) The last thing you should do when you get home is hop onto your personal computer, but that's what many of us do. We want to do email/IM/blog but it's the last thing we should be doing.
3.) Find hobbies that have nothing to do with technology. Ride bikes, run, lift weights, camp, geocache, buy a gun, get a significant other if you don't have one, or if you do spend more time with them.
4.) Most of all just stay well-rounded. In all aspects of your life. Keep a balance (no I'm not religious but yes this is similar to some Ancient Eastern philosophies/religions).
As if BMW's Microsoft-powered iDrive wasn't bad enough, now drivers can copy viruses inadvertantly onto their cars from their home computers using their car key!
(Fact: 2005 BMW 7 series vehicle, MSRP of $70,000+, has more known bugs/defects already than a 1990 Lexus luxury sedan)
Spending $500-1000 to put a computer in your car will cost $500-1000.
But insurance will not appraise your vehicle at its fair market value + $500-1000, so if someone smashes and grabs your penguin box, it's gone for good.
I realize you're trolling but the only thing an unbiased engineer could claim with regards to the two OSes is that FreeBSD has perhaps slightly better security.
Performance wise they're similar and many even feel Linux has a slight edge (especially recent colonels).
STFU already!
I would love to have OS X running on my Intel hardware.
Think of how many Intel boxes we all have.
Imagine tweaking existing Beowulf software for OS X!
Imagine how fast those Photoshop scripts would run with all that CPU power!
First we get announcement of a change to a decent chipset, now multi-function mice, what next, TCP/IP support?! (-;
Sure, it's getting better, but every day it seems 1,000 new sites are added that only work in such-and-such browser with such-and-such plugins/spyware installed.
I miss the simple days of information with the occasional colored background or image.
For a real challenge, try to do what the Russians do and build your kitchen into the Mac Mini!
As I think more about this decision, I wonder why not simply split the development between bug fixes and feature providers.
For example, Linux kernel 2.7 is released.
We run regression test on it for a week or two.
At that point, we document all known bugs and hand them and the entire 2.7 codebase off to our bug fixing team.
Then we identify improvements to current capabilities as well as new features we want to add, document all of it clearly, and hand that off to the feature team along with their own copy of the 2.7 baseline.
Then we have our bug guys working the 2.7_bugfix baseline and our features guys adding valuable new code to the 2.7_features baseline.
Prior to the next release, we merge all the changes together, spend a week sorting out any dependecy problems and interface problems, then we ship.
And repeat.
Sounds feasible to me. I just don't like the feeling I get when thinking that there's such a short development window.
The Linux kernel is already pretty darn stable, especially when compared to other operating systems. Let's keep the new features coming!
You can already do that fairly easily.
Just pick what modules you want to use for whatever system.
Then utilize make --menuconfig and build as appropriate.
More information available via Google search.
Linux has made amazing progress.
But as I browse the submitters of actual code, it seems that it's no longer the every-man's operating system.
More and more often we're seeing Red Hat and IBM employees tinkering with the code.
Does this mean a lack of quality? No, certainly not. A professional developer is usually very well versed in what he or she's working on.
But I propose that we watch what is being worked on and that our priorities are appropriate.
Perhaps an IBM or similar company has a new feature that they want, or worse, need, in the Linux kernel, and as such they spend all their time working on that.
The reality might be however that an improved VM is needed but all the Red Hat guys are busy working on some scheduling code that really isn't as crucial.
As far as I know, Linus himself still verifies all submissions and deems which baselines they appear in, but I hope that since he's also a professional and getting paid by Corporate if our priorities are straight.
Hopefully RM Stallman and friends are always heads-up, but I'm aware that often some serious fights take place on the Linux kernel mailing list regarding these types of issues.
Let's keep Linux progressing in the areas it needs to mature!
But as far as I know DVD-R and CD-R blank media labeled for "music" use have a piracy tax applied to them.
Many consumers are tricked by this because they don't know much and think blank media labeled for "data" will not support mp3s, etc. which is not true.
But that sounds a lot like the world of Open Source and Free Software.
Though granted, we who develop Open Source apps often have to keep a unified user interface that's familiar to Windows and Mac users.
We also work hard to have a Linux friendly version of all the popular Windows-only applications so that Windows fans can't say "well yeah but Linux doesn't have ____, or ______".
Some examples of what I'm talking about include Evolution (a Microsoft Outlook clone) and Open Office (a clone of the entire MS Office suite).
However, we are making in-roads in areas like CSS support for Web browsers. Recently, Konqueror and another Open browser became the first to pass the CSS smiley test.
Aside from SUN, who have lost most of their relevance anyway, all the other hardware companies enjoy "giving away" free software products and charging for hardware and extended tier support. Many companies even pay their own guys to add features and stability via code submission to various Open Source apps. I'm thinking Red Hat, HP, Intel, etc.
It's also applicable to those one-man companies and consultants out there. I know one guy who often gives a quote for Windows and quote for a Linux system based on requirements given to them. So someone wants a dedicated server, and Joe Geek gives them a quote for $2,500 in hardware + $1,800 in software for the Windows system, then a quote of $2,500 for hardware and $0 for software for the Linux system.
Guess which one the client usually goes with.
The coders and engineers working for finance (Wall St. especially) are some of the best in the world and the best salaries in the world.
They obv. know what they're doing and have chosen Lunix.
They just need to keep hiring away our best Open Source talent.
I know they did recently -- article here focusing on their "theft" of Daniel Robbins, the former chief architect of Gentoo Linux.
They claim to be wanting to learn more about Open Source when they try and justify hiring guys who are just getting by financially but are huge braintrusts of the Linux movement. Basically they offer these guys 6 figure salaries to work behind closed doors in Redmond and never release anything of value to OSS ever again.
Many of them being family guys, they cannot turn these offers down due to finances. Kids are expensive, wives are expensive, SUVs are pricy, gas is pricy, taxes, computer hardware, and on and on.
I don't blame them but I think it's a dirty trick by Microsoft. I love OSS and use it at home at work and on project I create. We need to keep our talent.
Shame on you MS.