Yes, and the extra type of rods she is talking about is _between_ the red and blue kind.. so all it does is allow greater differentiation of already seen colours, i.e. absolutely nothing to do with UV at all. So 2-3% of the female population can see a crazy amount of shades of colour.
The blue cells _can_ detect into the UV range, in both men and women, however normally this is blocked by the natural lens.
I already know all of the above that you've mentioned. In the context I was using it 'load the os' meant load executable code, whatever that may be. Fact remains kernel devs would prefer something that simply points to where code can begin to be executed, as opposed to the EFI route of doing a whole host of functions that the kernel _should_ be doing, and in the process possibly have a bunch of unfixable bugs.
EFI provides far too much functionality, it is too abstracted away from what the hardware does. The simpler it is, the less chance there is of it being bugged and having it 'just work' the way it was intended.
If you need an example of another clusterfuck with good intentions, just have a look at acpi and how it turned out providing nice high-level functionality for power management (hint: we are still heavily fighting implementation bugs with it now from board to board).
The bios has its share of issues, I never said it didn't. However EFI is a step in the wrong direction, it is a step towards a more complicated boot process. What you want is an even simpler one, as a bonus with a simpler boot process not surprisingly it tends to boot faster.
Don't get me wrong, the bios has more than its fair share of issues. But these issues can be resolved by removing all of the functionality presently just bypassed by modern kernels. It is that crap which gives you the longer boot times.
EFI is a step in the wrong direction, it is a step towards more complicated boot process. It should be as simple as possible while getting the job done, because the more complex you make it, the more bugs creep their ugly heads.
All of the things you mentioned above are _positive_ things, in that you would have to be crazy to use the bios for anything other than loading the os and getting the hell out.
So you would be okay with Microsoft preventing other vendors from being able to run software on Windows that competes with other software that Microsoft makes?
yes
In fact, I'd welcome it, all the more reason for people to go to an alternative os.
If having a tiny, cheap five or eight port gigabit switch attached to your adsl modem is an issue.. you either have bigger problems or you really don't value having gigabit speed.
Linux already runs on x86, and if google played their cards right code quality wise (bit endianness etc) It should all be just a recompile away more or less. (with new peripheral drivers of course... as with any new peripherals on a new device)
Use a linux distro that comes on a dvd instead of a cd and install kde/gnome/xfce/whatever else you like and choose your desktop manager then? (kde would likely suit it well)
I don't understand the fascination of using 600mb cd images as the primary os on a machine with hundreds of gigs of storage.
With every piece of software I could ever need installed (and as I'd imagine most slashdotters do I dabble a lot) the total install size came to about 8 gig. 95% of that software came from the install dvd.
having both QT and GTK installed works wonders also, solves the people who refuse to install something from the other because they don't want to install however many mb of libraries, when it is really a once-off.
Gnomes obsession with removing features and simply telling users 'no, you will like it _this_ way' has been documented for quite some time. It's the downside of trying to pander to user experience people all the time.
Microsoft has to keep their customers on the upgrade treadmill, even if they're still getting paid for selling the old version, because they have to keep their platform a moving target.
They've advanced from that, they are now getting $15 a pop from almost every android phone sold. So they don't even have to make anything anymore and they can still make profits just from leeching on others work.
Continuing with your line of reasoning.. why not set the ultimate example and simply kill on sight?
People consider an eye for an eye barbarous, and yet an arm for a pinky seems completely acceptable to them.
The aim of the penal system should not be to make examples of people, it should be to enable people to return to being functional useful members of society.
Context-free understanding of what code does is _useful_ something that c++ completely blows out of the water once you start abusing its more advanced features.
Can c be coded badly? of course, can you sit down and figure out what a code snipped is doing? yes. Can you do the same of ill coded c++, quite possibly no, this is a serious flaw.
Even horrible c code can be understood if you just sit there looking at it for a bit. That in c++ it is possible for that to not be the case is a horrible failing.
Because context-free grammar is a bad thing and having undecidable grammar is such a lovely feature where you can have no idea what a specific piece of code does (sarcasm).
es, and that's exactly how it's supposed to work, assuming no prior art.
Are you _really_ suggesting apple should have the right to all things touch screen and square with rounded edges?
Nothing you ever come up with is completely original. It all builds from your prior experience with other things. This is how people learn and progress.
So you think apple and windows shouldn't have ever existed too? because xerox should have patented their display system and kept it locked down to extremely expensive business systems for 20 years?
People don't like your idea because it stifles progress by decades.
Xbox 360 starts at $175
Wii starts at $150
PS3 starts at $250 which is only a bit more, but you get a blu-ray player out of it too.
Not here they aren't, just checked the latest prices here for the lowest end models and they were the following (all prices in AUD, USD in brackets after it)
Xbox 360 4gb flash model - $345 (362)
Wii - $198 (208)
Ps3 160gb model - $348 (365)
On a side note, the ps3 when it launched here hit $1000
TV. What "capabilities" are you looking for now?
The ability to play hd movies, yes the xbox360 and ps3 can play _some_ formats, but it is hard to argue that the pc can't play more.
Some kind of ergonomics, out of the people you know how many have their xbox/ps3 set up at a desk with a monitor/keyboard and mouse? Unless you think using the internet with an xbox/ps3 controller is easier and more efficient form of input than mouse/keyboard. Also even if they did, you are at the behest of microsoft/sony as to when you can get browser updates and features and the like. Not to mention the fact they seriously lack power in comparison, I've seen farmville bring some quad core machines to their knees before, you really think an xbox or ps3 could handle it, let alone a _wii_?
Normal people who want a decent computer for $200 buy a used one on craiglist
People will usually take new over second hand.. they ask their resident computer guy what their best options are for that kind of money, because they have no idea what the hardware specs etc really mean and trust their expertise. Said computer guy asks a few questions on what the machine is going to be used for, then discusses the trade-offs of going different routes if they are asking for something that is overly pushing it budget wise. Parts are then ordered and machine made.
Computer guy installs the os and enables the functionality they want, in such a way that it is literally a point-click away. Spends two minutes showing them the simple ways of accessing the required functionality, and then all is well.
But Windows would be simpler and easier,
After putting family (over the age of 60) who had never touched a computer before on to linux on an old p3 machine, they find it a dream. A couple of years later they acquired a brand new windows laptop and asked me to put linux on it, told them to wait a bit and see how they like the installed os first (it functioned to their needs and less work for me) after a year they still preferred using a p3 733 instead of a core 2 duo laptop just because they disliked the windows interface and found linux easier.
And in so far as support, the only support calls I've had have been in regard to the windows machine. The linux machine might take an extra half hour to set up, but the lower incidence of support required gets that time back over time.
Windows only makes sense if you don't know what you're doing with linux, and I think the article is rather obviously targeted to those who are capable of getting theirs and others needs from linux.
The dirt cheap ones wind up seriously costing you in operating costs and tend not to live as long, a 5000 black page toner cartridge for the one you listed was seen for $75 cheapest, $150 on average, mine is $40 for 6000.
Didn't think postscript printers had hit the cheap and disposable category yet, mine are business workstation types.
The bugger even emails you when the toner is low, goes 30 pages per minute on a4, 15 on a3, has more than a half gig of ram.. etc etc.
ppd's are postscript printer description files. They are near human-readable and only tell what the limits of the printer are. They are used with native postscript printers.
Native postscript printers have a craptonne (compared to non) of processing power and memory, and do most of the work themselves, hell I can plug in a usb stick with pdfs on it into mine and get it to print without a pc at all. Catch is of course you are generally looking at a few thousand for such printers.
Do you REALLY think he is smarter than the entire kernel teams for OSX, Windows, OS/2, Solaris, BSD, etc? I repeat, arrogant much?
The projects have different needs and priorities, and different needs tend to yield *gasp* different methods of solution.
Your argument is akin to "hey, you are doing things differently, you therefore suck". I can only imagine what that kind of effect that attitude would have if it were to be adopted in science where any differing hypothesis from the first must be ridiculed because it isn't the same as other peoples, regardless of merit.
I'll repeat this until it sinks in, i'll even highlight it, Do you know what the definition of insanity is? It is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome and that is EXACTLY what you and the community have been doing for damned near a decade now. What were your numbers 3 years ago? why they were at 1%. What will your numbers be 3 years from now? I bet my last dollar they'll be 1%. It don't take Kojak to solve this case, and it isn't some conspiracy by Gates and the Illuminati, nor is it payoffs to the OEMs that ended over a decade ago.
Why do you think I give a shit about market share?
Dell the current number 3 OEM, even though they only offer Linux on a token amount of frankly outdated hardware, has to run their own repo [theinquirer.net] at considerable out of pocket expense.
If you read that article the video chipsets specific driver wasn't in mainline so dell were shipping their own drivers with the 8.04 ubuntu install it was shipping with, when updated to 9.04 of course these drivers weren't in mainline and so no automatic support, and thusly the creation of the external repo. The only lesson learned here is dell are silly for not getting their driver in mainline.
But instead they'll just do as I have done in my shop, which is refuse to sell or support your OS
Again, why should I (or anyone else for that matter) care about that?
You seem very emotionally invested in how evil and horrible linus is, combined with an obsession for market share, distribution and support methods which are inefficient and of no real concern to the development process (and a severe hindrance to it if your recommendations were to be followed)
Nice try. We're talking people who build computers from parts. They do more than browse the web.
So.. you're saying someone who is building a $200 pc, intends to use it as a high-end gaming/cad/other-niche-use machine?
I cannot think of a low-end use that would be ill suited for linux. as I mentioned before I wanted names of specific items that would be troublesome.. because something tells me heavy autocad users aren't going to be trying to run it on a $200 machine.
if you've got an HDTV... maybe you can afford more than $200 for a computer.
Just because you have the money, doesn't mean you _need_ to waste it.
In any case, if you just want to browse the web, send email, and use a TV as a monitor... I'd by a console.
To buy something more expensive and less capable? No thankyou.
Of course, but did you read what you posted to elsewhere in this discussion? This link in particular. You try to make it come off as a thing _against_ the development style of linux, when if you actually read it it simply provides great insight into the evolution of successful software over time.
read it it is a RELIGIOUS TEXT with the writer going on about how basically they wouldn't be able to Goatse the kernel anymore! Well boo hoo, you can't Goatse the kernel if you actually had to support anything, my heart bleeds.
All I'm hearing is "I don't have anything solid against this so I'm going to call it like a religion and compare it to a man with a messed up anus." A bit childish don't you think? If you want to attack it come up with technical points against it.
And if you think he is right and I'm bullshit, riddle me this? if that approach would work WHY HASN'T IT BEEN DONE?
erm... it has been, or you wouldn't be bitching about it would you? lol
Look at the facts...Windows, BSD, Solaris, OSX, OS/2....what do they have in common? A Stable ABI.
What else do they also have in common? Crappy out of the box (and in the case of solaris, os x and os/2 just in general) support for hardware, nowhere near as much code re-use between similar drivers, the deprecation of fully functioning hardware because a vendor now says you need a new device even though the old still runs and suits your functions perfectly, ridiculously long release cycles. The list goes on.
The RMS camp says 'ZOMG If you had a stable ABI you'd lose the 4 freedoms ZOMG!"
The rms camp don't even come into this, this is 'we will not fuck over what is best for the kernel in the long run just to temporarily pander to some companies that don't want to play the game and make it better for all'. It is out of pragmatism and what will result in the technically best kernel.
And as you found out letting the kernel devs do it can easily end up with fucked and abandoned hardware
Still rocking those MFM hard disks I see? I'm sure since you're running late 70's hard drives that using a kernel a year or so old to still get support of them shouldn't be too much of an issue. I can forgive getting rid of support for 30+ year old devices that realistically are impossible to get, and that can simply use an older version to get support.
But don't take my word for it, mark this post and come back in a year and watch it come true! linux will gain NO SHARE in the next 12 months, they will gain NO SHARE in the next 24 months, they will gain NO SHARE in the next 36, in short Linux is a dead end in its current incarnation.
Linux is a kernel, and last I checked, Android/media centres(i.e. wdtv)/routers/servers etc etc are flourishing. But more to the point, from a kernel development perspective why should they care about those who don't use it?
The sole aim of linux is to be a useful, quality kernel. Who defines quality? Those using it. I think you will find it _very_ hard to argue that linux does not serve a whole range of people far better than any other kernel presently in existence. It scales from your mobile phone to top 500 machines. On any architecture that is powerful enough to run it (even some microcontrollers). With better in-built hardware support than any other os presently.
The masses simply won't deal with the fiddly driver breaking CLI heavy bullshit, like it or lump it. Give the people what they want, give the reatilers a product that is easy to support, watch your numbers rise. Don't? I hope you enjoy where you are at, because you sure as hell ain't going anywhere.
The masses already use linux. Whether it be on their phone, their router, or their pc. But again more importantly, so long as I can use it for the needs I (or those I choose to support) have, why should I give a shit what other people use?
And I just wound up 'fixing' a windows xp home theatre pc using linux.
The machines tv tuner card drivers had severe problems, and both the on-board video and tv tuner card did not have windows 7 drivers.
Linux was installed, everything appeared perfectly and as a bonus it now functions as a mythtv backend allowing new functionality the owner is really pleased with.
What use is windows when perfectly good hardware can be deprecated by the vendors at their whim (the motherboard was made late 2006, driver support discontinued 2008)
In regards to wireless, what chipsets are you purchasing that aren't supported? last I checked between the ath5k, ath9k, rt2x00 drivers the overwhelming majority of common hardware has been handled elegantly. I can just plug in a nintendo wifi usb stick and bam wireless is there, same with my pci ar2431 board. No bullshit, plug and play.
Circa 2005-2007 I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you linux wifi support was more than questionable. These days actually being hard-pressed to find hardware that doesn't "just work" out of the box is a testament to how much it has improved.
Not this hardware abi driver interface bullshit again, you bring it up all the time.. and it is addressed all the time. ( I think this is the third of fourth time I've replied to you on this topic on/. alone, usually long write-ups but don't have the time today)
While this is old, it is something you may find interesting. In short, you don't want a fixed abi, what you want, are stable drivers.
Slashdot Mirror
No, but do natural lenses absorb UV?
Yes, and the extra type of rods she is talking about is _between_ the red and blue kind.. so all it does is allow greater differentiation of already seen colours, i.e. absolutely nothing to do with UV at all. So 2-3% of the female population can see a crazy amount of shades of colour.
The blue cells _can_ detect into the UV range, in both men and women, however normally this is blocked by the natural lens.
I already know all of the above that you've mentioned. In the context I was using it 'load the os' meant load executable code, whatever that may be. Fact remains kernel devs would prefer something that simply points to where code can begin to be executed, as opposed to the EFI route of doing a whole host of functions that the kernel _should_ be doing, and in the process possibly have a bunch of unfixable bugs.
EFI provides far too much functionality, it is too abstracted away from what the hardware does. The simpler it is, the less chance there is of it being bugged and having it 'just work' the way it was intended.
If you need an example of another clusterfuck with good intentions, just have a look at acpi and how it turned out providing nice high-level functionality for power management (hint: we are still heavily fighting implementation bugs with it now from board to board).
The bios has its share of issues, I never said it didn't. However EFI is a step in the wrong direction, it is a step towards a more complicated boot process. What you want is an even simpler one, as a bonus with a simpler boot process not surprisingly it tends to boot faster.
Don't get me wrong, the bios has more than its fair share of issues. But these issues can be resolved by removing all of the functionality presently just bypassed by modern kernels. It is that crap which gives you the longer boot times.
EFI is a step in the wrong direction, it is a step towards more complicated boot process. It should be as simple as possible while getting the job done, because the more complex you make it, the more bugs creep their ugly heads.
All of the things you mentioned above are _positive_ things, in that you would have to be crazy to use the bios for anything other than loading the os and getting the hell out.
An interesting read if anyone cares for it.
All that is being done by making the boot process more complex is letting people add more bugs to firmware, do not want.
So you would be okay with Microsoft preventing other vendors from being able to run software on Windows that competes with other software that Microsoft makes?
yes
In fact, I'd welcome it, all the more reason for people to go to an alternative os.
If having a tiny, cheap five or eight port gigabit switch attached to your adsl modem is an issue.. you either have bigger problems or you really don't value having gigabit speed.
Linux already runs on x86, and if google played their cards right code quality wise (bit endianness etc) It should all be just a recompile away more or less. (with new peripheral drivers of course... as with any new peripherals on a new device)
Use a linux distro that comes on a dvd instead of a cd and install kde/gnome/xfce/whatever else you like and choose your desktop manager then? (kde would likely suit it well)
I don't understand the fascination of using 600mb cd images as the primary os on a machine with hundreds of gigs of storage.
With every piece of software I could ever need installed (and as I'd imagine most slashdotters do I dabble a lot) the total install size came to about 8 gig. 95% of that software came from the install dvd.
having both QT and GTK installed works wonders also, solves the people who refuse to install something from the other because they don't want to install however many mb of libraries, when it is really a once-off.
Gnomes obsession with removing features and simply telling users 'no, you will like it _this_ way' has been documented for quite some time. It's the downside of trying to pander to user experience people all the time.
Microsoft has to keep their customers on the upgrade treadmill, even if they're still getting paid for selling the old version, because they have to keep their platform a moving target.
They've advanced from that, they are now getting $15 a pop from almost every android phone sold. So they don't even have to make anything anymore and they can still make profits just from leeching on others work.
Continuing with your line of reasoning.. why not set the ultimate example and simply kill on sight?
People consider an eye for an eye barbarous, and yet an arm for a pinky seems completely acceptable to them.
The aim of the penal system should not be to make examples of people, it should be to enable people to return to being functional useful members of society.
The trouble is that if you only have tiny steps available, then you have to figure out the original programmer's intention.
And figuring out programmers intention is easier when the languages grammar is more ambiguous... not.
Context-free understanding of what code does is _useful_ something that c++ completely blows out of the water once you start abusing its more advanced features.
Can c be coded badly? of course, can you sit down and figure out what a code snipped is doing? yes. Can you do the same of ill coded c++, quite possibly no, this is a serious flaw.
Well, undecidable grammar (example)r is certainly a lovely feature c++ has that c does not (sarcasm)
Even horrible c code can be understood if you just sit there looking at it for a bit. That in c++ it is possible for that to not be the case is a horrible failing.
Because context-free grammar is a bad thing and having undecidable grammar is such a lovely feature where you can have no idea what a specific piece of code does (sarcasm).
I had assumed you would have read at least a few of the replies etc.
c++ gives enough abstraction and odd feature combinations to allow people to make functional but a complete pain in the ass to maintain code.
While it can be more verbose, c is comparatively very straight forward, how easy code is to understand and maintain matters.
Um the "kernel" (by which I assume you mean Linux) is not written in C++. It should be, but it isn't.
There are reasons the kernel doesn't have any c++ in it (link is about git, but same deal for the kernel).
es, and that's exactly how it's supposed to work, assuming no prior art.
Are you _really_ suggesting apple should have the right to all things touch screen and square with rounded edges?
Nothing you ever come up with is completely original. It all builds from your prior experience with other things. This is how people learn and progress.
So you think apple and windows shouldn't have ever existed too? because xerox should have patented their display system and kept it locked down to extremely expensive business systems for 20 years?
People don't like your idea because it stifles progress by decades.
Xbox 360 starts at $175 Wii starts at $150 PS3 starts at $250 which is only a bit more, but you get a blu-ray player out of it too.
Not here they aren't, just checked the latest prices here for the lowest end models and they were the following (all prices in AUD, USD in brackets after it)
Xbox 360 4gb flash model - $345 (362)
Wii - $198 (208)
Ps3 160gb model - $348 (365)
On a side note, the ps3 when it launched here hit $1000
TV. What "capabilities" are you looking for now?
The ability to play hd movies, yes the xbox360 and ps3 can play _some_ formats, but it is hard to argue that the pc can't play more.
Some kind of ergonomics, out of the people you know how many have their xbox/ps3 set up at a desk with a monitor/keyboard and mouse? Unless you think using the internet with an xbox/ps3 controller is easier and more efficient form of input than mouse/keyboard. Also even if they did, you are at the behest of microsoft/sony as to when you can get browser updates and features and the like. Not to mention the fact they seriously lack power in comparison, I've seen farmville bring some quad core machines to their knees before, you really think an xbox or ps3 could handle it, let alone a _wii_?
Normal people who want a decent computer for $200 buy a used one on craiglist
People will usually take new over second hand .. they ask their resident computer guy what their best options are for that kind of money, because they have no idea what the hardware specs etc really mean and trust their expertise. Said computer guy asks a few questions on what the machine is going to be used for, then discusses the trade-offs of going different routes if they are asking for something that is overly pushing it budget wise. Parts are then ordered and machine made.
Computer guy installs the os and enables the functionality they want, in such a way that it is literally a point-click away. Spends two minutes showing them the simple ways of accessing the required functionality, and then all is well.
But Windows would be simpler and easier,
After putting family (over the age of 60) who had never touched a computer before on to linux on an old p3 machine, they find it a dream. A couple of years later they acquired a brand new windows laptop and asked me to put linux on it, told them to wait a bit and see how they like the installed os first (it functioned to their needs and less work for me) after a year they still preferred using a p3 733 instead of a core 2 duo laptop just because they disliked the windows interface and found linux easier.
And in so far as support, the only support calls I've had have been in regard to the windows machine. The linux machine might take an extra half hour to set up, but the lower incidence of support required gets that time back over time.
Windows only makes sense if you don't know what you're doing with linux, and I think the article is rather obviously targeted to those who are capable of getting theirs and others needs from linux.
The dirt cheap ones wind up seriously costing you in operating costs and tend not to live as long, a 5000 black page toner cartridge for the one you listed was seen for $75 cheapest, $150 on average, mine is $40 for 6000.
Didn't think postscript printers had hit the cheap and disposable category yet, mine are business workstation types.
The bugger even emails you when the toner is low, goes 30 pages per minute on a4, 15 on a3, has more than a half gig of ram.. etc etc.
ppd's are postscript printer description files. They are near human-readable and only tell what the limits of the printer are. They are used with native postscript printers.
Native postscript printers have a craptonne (compared to non) of processing power and memory, and do most of the work themselves, hell I can plug in a usb stick with pdfs on it into mine and get it to print without a pc at all. Catch is of course you are generally looking at a few thousand for such printers.
Do you REALLY think he is smarter than the entire kernel teams for OSX, Windows, OS/2, Solaris, BSD, etc? I repeat, arrogant much?
The projects have different needs and priorities, and different needs tend to yield *gasp* different methods of solution.
Your argument is akin to "hey, you are doing things differently, you therefore suck". I can only imagine what that kind of effect that attitude would have if it were to be adopted in science where any differing hypothesis from the first must be ridiculed because it isn't the same as other peoples, regardless of merit.
I'll repeat this until it sinks in, i'll even highlight it, Do you know what the definition of insanity is? It is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome and that is EXACTLY what you and the community have been doing for damned near a decade now. What were your numbers 3 years ago? why they were at 1%. What will your numbers be 3 years from now? I bet my last dollar they'll be 1%. It don't take Kojak to solve this case, and it isn't some conspiracy by Gates and the Illuminati, nor is it payoffs to the OEMs that ended over a decade ago.
Why do you think I give a shit about market share?
Dell the current number 3 OEM, even though they only offer Linux on a token amount of frankly outdated hardware, has to run their own repo [theinquirer.net] at considerable out of pocket expense.
If you read that article the video chipsets specific driver wasn't in mainline so dell were shipping their own drivers with the 8.04 ubuntu install it was shipping with, when updated to 9.04 of course these drivers weren't in mainline and so no automatic support, and thusly the creation of the external repo. The only lesson learned here is dell are silly for not getting their driver in mainline.
But instead they'll just do as I have done in my shop, which is refuse to sell or support your OS
Again, why should I (or anyone else for that matter) care about that?
You seem very emotionally invested in how evil and horrible linus is, combined with an obsession for market share, distribution and support methods which are inefficient and of no real concern to the development process (and a severe hindrance to it if your recommendations were to be followed)
Relax.. and grow up.
Nice try. We're talking people who build computers from parts. They do more than browse the web.
So.. you're saying someone who is building a $200 pc, intends to use it as a high-end gaming/cad/other-niche-use machine?
I cannot think of a low-end use that would be ill suited for linux. as I mentioned before I wanted names of specific items that would be troublesome.. because something tells me heavy autocad users aren't going to be trying to run it on a $200 machine.
if you've got an HDTV... maybe you can afford more than $200 for a computer.
Just because you have the money, doesn't mean you _need_ to waste it.
In any case, if you just want to browse the web, send email, and use a TV as a monitor... I'd by a console.
To buy something more expensive and less capable? No thankyou.
Did you even read what you posted to?
Of course, but did you read what you posted to elsewhere in this discussion? This link in particular. You try to make it come off as a thing _against_ the development style of linux, when if you actually read it it simply provides great insight into the evolution of successful software over time.
read it it is a RELIGIOUS TEXT with the writer going on about how basically they wouldn't be able to Goatse the kernel anymore! Well boo hoo, you can't Goatse the kernel if you actually had to support anything, my heart bleeds.
All I'm hearing is "I don't have anything solid against this so I'm going to call it like a religion and compare it to a man with a messed up anus." A bit childish don't you think? If you want to attack it come up with technical points against it.
And if you think he is right and I'm bullshit, riddle me this? if that approach would work WHY HASN'T IT BEEN DONE?
erm... it has been, or you wouldn't be bitching about it would you? lol
Look at the facts...Windows, BSD, Solaris, OSX, OS/2....what do they have in common? A Stable ABI.
What else do they also have in common? Crappy out of the box (and in the case of solaris, os x and os/2 just in general) support for hardware, nowhere near as much code re-use between similar drivers, the deprecation of fully functioning hardware because a vendor now says you need a new device even though the old still runs and suits your functions perfectly, ridiculously long release cycles. The list goes on.
The RMS camp says 'ZOMG If you had a stable ABI you'd lose the 4 freedoms ZOMG!"
The rms camp don't even come into this, this is 'we will not fuck over what is best for the kernel in the long run just to temporarily pander to some companies that don't want to play the game and make it better for all'. It is out of pragmatism and what will result in the technically best kernel.
And as you found out letting the kernel devs do it can easily end up with fucked and abandoned hardware
Still rocking those MFM hard disks I see? I'm sure since you're running late 70's hard drives that using a kernel a year or so old to still get support of them shouldn't be too much of an issue. I can forgive getting rid of support for 30+ year old devices that realistically are impossible to get, and that can simply use an older version to get support.
But don't take my word for it, mark this post and come back in a year and watch it come true! linux will gain NO SHARE in the next 12 months, they will gain NO SHARE in the next 24 months, they will gain NO SHARE in the next 36, in short Linux is a dead end in its current incarnation.
Linux is a kernel, and last I checked, Android/media centres(i.e. wdtv)/routers/servers etc etc are flourishing. But more to the point, from a kernel development perspective why should they care about those who don't use it?
The sole aim of linux is to be a useful, quality kernel. Who defines quality? Those using it. I think you will find it _very_ hard to argue that linux does not serve a whole range of people far better than any other kernel presently in existence. It scales from your mobile phone to top 500 machines. On any architecture that is powerful enough to run it (even some microcontrollers). With better in-built hardware support than any other os presently.
The masses simply won't deal with the fiddly driver breaking CLI heavy bullshit, like it or lump it. Give the people what they want, give the reatilers a product that is easy to support, watch your numbers rise. Don't? I hope you enjoy where you are at, because you sure as hell ain't going anywhere.
The masses already use linux. Whether it be on their phone, their router, or their pc. But again more importantly, so long as I can use it for the needs I (or those I choose to support) have, why should I give a shit what other people use?
And I just wound up 'fixing' a windows xp home theatre pc using linux.
The machines tv tuner card drivers had severe problems, and both the on-board video and tv tuner card did not have windows 7 drivers.
Linux was installed, everything appeared perfectly and as a bonus it now functions as a mythtv backend allowing new functionality the owner is really pleased with.
What use is windows when perfectly good hardware can be deprecated by the vendors at their whim (the motherboard was made late 2006, driver support discontinued 2008)
In regards to wireless, what chipsets are you purchasing that aren't supported? last I checked between the ath5k, ath9k, rt2x00 drivers the overwhelming majority of common hardware has been handled elegantly. I can just plug in a nintendo wifi usb stick and bam wireless is there, same with my pci ar2431 board. No bullshit, plug and play.
Circa 2005-2007 I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you linux wifi support was more than questionable. These days actually being hard-pressed to find hardware that doesn't "just work" out of the box is a testament to how much it has improved.
Not this hardware abi driver interface bullshit again, you bring it up all the time.. and it is addressed all the time. ( I think this is the third of fourth time I've replied to you on this topic on /. alone, usually long write-ups but don't have the time today)
While this is old, it is something you may find interesting. In short, you don't want a fixed abi, what you want, are stable drivers.