Of all of them, OEOne must be the most original, and the one that has had the most obvious work done on it. Admittedly, it's not what I personally would want to use as my desktop, but it's the one most likely to appeal to those who find Windows too complicated. Unfortunately I fear this may cause its potential user base to be too small, given Linuxs (still) predominantly technical bias.
Hmm. Off the top of my head, the Amiga 1000s operating system (including GUI) fitted onto a 880k floppy. Also note that the number of colours used really has very little to do with anything apart from video memory usage. Or do you really think that it's much slower for instance to draw a grey rectangle than a white one?
Here's an interesting thread on ex Amiga hardware guy Dave Haynie's views on the new Amiga stuff. Of course, everyone knows that the x86 instruction set's shite, but he says performance wise it's the only way to go (and wait for Itanium for a clean architecture).
Umm. Sorry, but there's nothing illegal about reimplenting an API, and you don't need any priviledged information to do it. I've got the Addison Wesley coding references right here.
The colour scheme on pre 2.0 machines was based on a user interface study from NASA which found those colours were easiest on the eye (unfortunately they looked crap).
Also, while the Amigas custom chip arrangement meant that the CPU was usually freer to do more processing, the A500 was 7.14 Mhz to the STs 8 Mhz due to the memory addressing scheme (I think).
Take a look at the Pegasos. It's a far better design than the AmigaOne (being built by the ex-phase5 guys; bplan) and it's release really is imminent. Runs Linux too of course...
To be honest, I hardly think that the NHS is comparible with what the rest of the EU has in terms of state provided health care. Years of underfunding has screwed up Britains publicly funded services, and it will be a long time before we catch up with the rest of Europe.
In England, baseball is not played or watched at all. School kids play a game called rounders which seems similar to baseball. I haven't heard of any other EU states having any interest in baseball either.
AFAIK cricket is played pretty much exclusively by ex British Empire countries and not followed by anyone else in Europe. I don't think cricket is as important to England as baseball is to the USA though - football is pretty much the universal sport.
Imagine that I made up a game that was similar to another game already in existance but only played by me and my mates. Then imagine that we held a little league and called it the Global League. Wouldn't that be daft?
Origins of Football, Rugby and American football
on
World Cup Final
·
· Score: 1
"Soccer" comes from asSOCiation Football. IIRC, when the rules were originally standardised for this kind of game (at Canmbridge Uni), the majority agreed with the rules of modern football. This game was called Football. A few (from Rugby scholl and elsewhere) prefered a more physical game where you were allowed to hack (kick the legs of another player) and handle the ball. To diferentiate this kind of game from Football this was called Rugby Football, and later Association Football was retrofitted to normal Football to help people distinguish between the two.
At the time many public school types added "er" to the names of things. Rugby became rugger and association football, soccer.
For some reason, the Rugby version of football became more popular in the USA and the rules remained similar until, in the first few decades of the last century, large amounts of fatalities caused the US president to ask the American Rugby football players to change the rules (ball can be passed forwards etc).
I think theis sums it up but I may have some minor facts wrong.
Please read -- I admire the USA in many ways. There are many parts of its constitution which stand as guiding principles for other countries around the globe. Indeed, the US has fared so well because it understands the importance of the liberal values of democracy and transparency in its affairs, and long may that last. The chief tenant of transparency and the openness of the state and other controlling powers is, as the founding fathers knew, manifested by the right to free speach. By circumventing (whether through commercial monopolies or government) the abilty to send information from one person to another (a pre-internet analogue - talking), recent proposals are surely in breach of its constitution.
As most will agree nowadays, economic progess is best achieved by letting Adam Smith have his way. As all good economics students know, commercial enterprises change and adapt. They always have done and they always will - Shakespeare didn't have Intellectual Property but prospered never the less. How can it be that I can say whatever I like with my voice, but I cannot necessarily transmit data with a modem - surely the medium is unimportant? Most people would call that censorship.
"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
Please vote against/use your powers to prevent XYZ.
your name/NickWKG -- Hopefully, this post will become a good piece of source material with which to lobby your political representative. Please improve and add to this argument (and repost it). I believe that the constitutional angle will strike more of a chord than any technical argument.
I'm an EU citizen, but this post is aimed at the US because the EU has a nasty habit of following whatever the USA does, so whatever happens in the states happens here too:(
As long as there's information carriers (people) involved, data will always be free. How many MS employees will know MSs private key? How many of them will leak it? Can it be obtained through reverse engineering? (Answer: YES)
If MS has worked out a regime to change their private key if it becomes public, what is the mechanism through which the key is changed? This info and the new key WILL be leaked/reverse engineered.
Even sadder, if I remember correctly, Commodores management had AA (AGA) as early as 1990 but looked at how far the competitors were behind and decided to delay it for a couple of years. They were close to finishing AAA when Commodore layed off all of it's engineers.
This is a false protectionist arguement that has been well argued by Bastiat.
Bastiat's famous tongue-in-cheek petition to the French Parliament on behalf of the French candlemakers requested passage of a law requiring the closure of all the windows in France, thereby blocking out the sunlight. In turn, production would be stimulated and jobs created in the candle and related industries. The competition from the sun was unfair.
Microsoft is the candlemaker, and Free (as in speech) software is the sun.
HAM just like any other mode only flickered in interlace mode - all HAM did was changed the way the CLUT was used (IIRC there were base colours in the CLUT and modifier values, so sometimes if you had two different non base colours horizontally adjacent to each other there would have be some bluring between them).
"Wouldn't it be great if the Mozilla browser engine were an Active control that could be embedded as in applications?"
That's a question that myself and other had asked on the Mozilla groups soon after the Mozilla project began. And further:
"Wouldn't it be great if the Mozilla control used the same API as the Internet Explorer control?"
The aim of this project is to be both of these things.
All that.NET is the Common Language Routine and SOAP. SOAP is easy enough, and the main advantage that the CLR has over the JVM is the fact that Microsoft will support more than one CLR compiler, unlike Sun which forces everyone to use Java.
If people really want to compete with.NET they would be better off writing non-Java compilers for the JVM (compile to bytecode).
That said, should the UN*Xs be following MS in this respect. UNIX has a firm tradition of using compiled languages (C was created to facilitate the development of the OS), while Microsoft (remember MS started off writing interpreters) has always preferred interpreted BASIC. What do you think VB.NET is, if not an evolution of this theme?
"Gentoo Linux is a fast and modern, completely free x86-based Linux distribution with a clean and flexible design. Unlike other distros, Gentoo Linux has an advanced package management system called Portage. Portage is a true ports system in the tradition of BSD ports, but is Python-based and sports a number of advanced features including dependencies, fine-grained package management, "fake" (OpenBSD-style) installs, safe unmerging, system profiles, virtual packages, config file management, and more."
So where is this "shared source" then?
on
Mundie Responds
·
· Score: 1
Just done a search on Microsofts MSDN and I can't find it...
You raise some good points, but if a GPLed OS was to take over the OS market things wouldn't be all doom and gloom...
Imagine 2 closed source OSs; OS-Ernie and OS-Bert. Both, for the sake of argument are pretty comparable feature wise. If, in a pure market place, OS-Bert introduces an amazing new feature, then the OS should gain market share at the expense of OS-Ernie. OS-Bert must now compete by improving it's feature set accordingly or shrink and die. This process is called competition and benefits the consumer.
The argument is that because Linux is not a commercial company, and may become the dominant OS because it's free/open source, noone will be able to compete and innovation will die.
This is an appealing argument but ultimately flawed. Linux and other open source projects will continue to improve (providing there are enough coders working on them) through internal competition based on the technical merit of contributers new code.
Lets take the previous scenario and fast forward it a little to when Linux is the dominant OS. This time Ernie and Bert are 2 kernel hackers, and both are working on, say, process management. If Ernie submits a better solution to a technical problem than Bert does, his code will be adopted into the OS.
Open source mearly competes internally. The consumer will benefit more because the market will choose purely as a result of technical merit, and not because of marketing. After all, once a closed source OS acheives market dominance what reason does it really have to innovate. It has already won. Compare Windows with BeOS.
Slashdot Mirror
"all efforts to stop content swapping/theft - possibly even including Palladium - are in the long term futile"
My money's on Yggdrasil. Oh, hang on...
Of all of them, OEOne must be the most original, and the one that has had the most obvious work done on it. Admittedly, it's not what I personally would want to use as my desktop, but it's the one most likely to appeal to those who find Windows too complicated. Unfortunately I fear this may cause its potential user base to be too small, given Linuxs (still) predominantly technical bias.
Hmm. Off the top of my head, the Amiga 1000s operating system (including GUI) fitted onto a 880k floppy. Also note that the number of colours used really has very little to do with anything apart from video memory usage. Or do you really think that it's much slower for instance to draw a grey rectangle than a white one?
Here's an interesting thread on ex Amiga hardware guy Dave Haynie's views on the new Amiga stuff. Of course, everyone knows that the x86 instruction set's shite, but he says performance wise it's the only way to go (and wait for Itanium for a clean architecture).
While Linux has run on PPC chips for a long time, it is difficult to come upon a G4 chip without paying the "Apple Tax" for the hardware
Perhaps I could point you in the direction of the Pegasos , a PPC board aimed at Linux and alternative computer users.
Umm. Sorry, but there's nothing illegal about reimplenting an API, and you don't need any priviledged information to do it. I've got the Addison Wesley coding references right here.
The colour scheme on pre 2.0 machines was based on a user interface study from NASA which found those colours were easiest on the eye (unfortunately they looked crap).
Also, while the Amigas custom chip arrangement meant that the CPU was usually freer to do more processing, the A500 was 7.14 Mhz to the STs 8 Mhz due to the memory addressing scheme (I think).
Of course, the Amiga rocked and still does.
Take a look at the Pegasos. It's a far better design than the AmigaOne (being built by the ex-phase5 guys; bplan) and it's release really is imminent. Runs Linux too of course...
To be honest, I hardly think that the NHS is comparible with what the rest of the EU has in terms of state provided health care. Years of underfunding has screwed up Britains publicly funded services, and it will be a long time before we catch up with the rest of Europe.
In England, baseball is not played or watched at all. School kids play a game called rounders which seems similar to baseball. I haven't heard of any other EU states having any interest in baseball either.
AFAIK cricket is played pretty much exclusively by ex British Empire countries and not followed by anyone else in Europe. I don't think cricket is as important to England as baseball is to the USA though - football is pretty much the universal sport.
Imagine that I made up a game that was similar to another game already in existance but only played by me and my mates. Then imagine that we held a little league and called it the Global League. Wouldn't that be daft?
"Soccer" comes from asSOCiation Football. IIRC, when the rules were originally standardised for this kind of game (at Canmbridge Uni), the majority agreed with the rules of modern football. This game was called Football. A few (from Rugby scholl and elsewhere) prefered a more physical game where you were allowed to hack (kick the legs of another player) and handle the ball. To diferentiate this kind of game from Football this was called Rugby Football, and later Association Football was retrofitted to normal Football to help people distinguish between the two.
At the time many public school types added "er" to the names of things. Rugby became rugger and association football, soccer.
For some reason, the Rugby version of football became more popular in the USA and the rules remained similar until, in the first few decades of the last century, large amounts of fatalities caused the US president to ask the American Rugby football players to change the rules (ball can be passed forwards etc).
I think theis sums it up but I may have some minor facts wrong.
Nick
Football obviously. How often does your foot touch the ball in niche American football?
Please read
:(
--
I admire the USA in many ways. There are many parts of its constitution which stand as guiding principles for other countries around the globe. Indeed, the US has fared so well because it understands the importance of the liberal values of democracy and transparency in its affairs, and long may that last. The chief tenant of transparency and the openness of the state and other controlling powers is, as the founding fathers knew, manifested by the right to free speach. By circumventing (whether through commercial monopolies or government) the abilty to send information from one person to another (a pre-internet analogue - talking), recent proposals are surely in breach of its constitution.
As most will agree nowadays, economic progess is best achieved by letting Adam Smith have his way. As all good economics students know, commercial enterprises change and adapt. They always have done and they always will - Shakespeare didn't have Intellectual Property but prospered never the less. How can it be that I can say whatever I like with my voice, but I cannot necessarily transmit data with a modem - surely the medium is unimportant? Most people would call that censorship.
"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
Please vote against/use your powers to prevent XYZ.
your name/NickWKG
--
Hopefully, this post will become a good piece of source material with which to lobby your political representative. Please improve and add to this argument (and repost it). I believe that the constitutional angle will strike more of a chord than any technical argument.
I'm an EU citizen, but this post is aimed at the US because the EU has a nasty habit of following whatever the USA does, so whatever happens in the states happens here too
Best to stop this shite at the source.
As long as there's information carriers (people) involved, data will always be free.
How many MS employees will know MSs private key? How many of them will leak it? Can it be obtained through reverse engineering? (Answer: YES)
If MS has worked out a regime to change their private key if it becomes public, what is the mechanism through which the key is changed? This info and the new key WILL be leaked/reverse engineered.
Remember: Information is FREE.
Did the chinese or vikings made maps of the world? They didn't.
Yes they did - http://www.isidore-of-seville.com/vinland/
Even sadder, if I remember correctly, Commodores management had AA (AGA) as early as 1990 but looked at how far the competitors were behind and decided to delay it for a couple of years. They were close to finishing AAA when Commodore layed off all of it's engineers.
This is a false protectionist arguement that has been well argued by Bastiat.
Bastiat's famous tongue-in-cheek petition to the French Parliament on behalf of the French candlemakers requested passage of a law requiring the closure of all the windows in France, thereby blocking out the sunlight. In turn, production would be stimulated and jobs created in the candle and related industries. The competition from the sun was unfair.
Microsoft is the candlemaker, and Free (as in speech) software is the sun.
HAM just like any other mode only flickered in interlace mode - all HAM did was changed the way the CLUT was used (IIRC there were base colours in the CLUT and modifier values, so sometimes if you had two different non base colours horizontally adjacent to each other there would have be some bluring between them).
take a look at:
http://www.iol.ie/~locka/mozilla/mozilla.htm
"Wouldn't it be great if the Mozilla browser engine were an Active control that could be embedded as in applications?"
That's a question that myself and other had asked on the Mozilla groups soon after the Mozilla project began. And further:
"Wouldn't it be great if the Mozilla control used the same API as the Internet Explorer control?"
The aim of this project is to be both of these things.
All that .NET is the Common Language Routine and SOAP. SOAP is easy enough, and the main advantage that the CLR has over the JVM is the fact that Microsoft will support more than one CLR compiler, unlike Sun which forces everyone to use Java.
.NET they would be better off writing non-Java compilers for the JVM (compile to bytecode).
If people really want to compete with
That said, should the UN*Xs be following MS in this respect. UNIX has a firm tradition of using compiled languages (C was created to facilitate the development of the OS), while Microsoft (remember MS started off writing interpreters) has always preferred interpreted BASIC. What do you think VB.NET is, if not an evolution of this theme?
from www.gentoo.org
"Gentoo Linux is a fast and modern, completely free x86-based Linux distribution with a clean and flexible design. Unlike other distros, Gentoo Linux has an advanced package management system called Portage. Portage is a true ports system in the tradition of BSD ports, but is Python-based and sports a number of advanced features including dependencies, fine-grained package management, "fake" (OpenBSD-style) installs, safe unmerging, system profiles, virtual packages, config file management, and more."
Just done a search on Microsofts MSDN and I can't find it...
You raise some good points, but if a GPLed OS was to take over the OS market things wouldn't be all doom and gloom...
Imagine 2 closed source OSs; OS-Ernie and OS-Bert. Both, for the sake of argument are pretty comparable feature wise. If, in a pure market place, OS-Bert introduces an amazing new feature, then the OS should gain market share at the expense of OS-Ernie. OS-Bert must now compete by improving it's feature set accordingly or shrink and die. This process is called competition and benefits the consumer.
The argument is that because Linux is not a commercial company, and may become the dominant OS because it's free/open source, noone will be able to compete and innovation will die.
This is an appealing argument but ultimately flawed. Linux and other open source projects will continue to improve (providing there are enough coders working on them) through internal competition based on the technical merit of contributers new code.
Lets take the previous scenario and fast forward it a little to when Linux is the dominant OS. This time Ernie and Bert are 2 kernel hackers, and both are working on, say, process management. If Ernie submits a better solution to a technical problem than Bert does, his code will be adopted into the OS.
Open source mearly competes internally. The consumer will benefit more because the market will choose purely as a result of technical merit, and not because of marketing. After all, once a closed source OS acheives market dominance what reason does it really have to innovate. It has already won. Compare Windows with BeOS.
NickWKG