There are dip switches on my US Robotics Courier V.everything external modem. Because it's a traditional modem, and you can set switches to control exactly how it behaves.
True, but many Linux vendors don't ship an 'official' kernel and instead fork it with add-ons that Linus hasn't gotten around to including yet.
I can testify to my direct experience with this.
I used to try to run Red Hat (back in the 5.1 era) and always jokingly said I "ran RedHat for about the first fifteen minutes after an install" because I'd rip out their modular scheme and plug in a monolithic kernel tuned to the hardware I had.
One of the things I discovered quickly was that the RedHat Kernel Source had default settings radically different from a stock kernel that you can download from places like kernel.org. For the brief period of time I ran SuSE it was even worse. There seemed to be modifications to the config script (when you ran 'make menuconfig' that just plain refused to let you make certain changes.
My experience is that the "distributors" crowbar the kernel source in ways I don't approve of.
Is Microsoft the only support vehicle for NT, though? There are dozens of other ways to purchase support for NT, all the way down to hiring a MSCE or two.
Just as there are numerous support vehicles for Linux support.
Linux is not POSIX-compliant. It's POSIX-kindasorta.
One of the vendors has to submit for compliance testing for Linux to be POSIX-branded. And judging from the way the GCC team thumbs their noses at the ANSI C Standards process, there isn't much interest in compliance testing on the part of Free Software advocates. An organization like RedHat could get it, of course, if they wanted to commit the resources.
To say nothing for all those used bubblegum cards that the kids carry on about all the time. Even the new ones that have those PokeyMon characters oh them. Though they're all a major rip-off these days. No damn gum in the package at all!
Don't just say "Because that's immoral" or "Because I said so". Those are just saying "Go for more and stretch the limits"
Not every parent prints their moral code on a sheet of rubber. Not every child lives in a chaotic world where they get their way if they scream enough.
Actually, from what I heard regarding the Falwell/Teletubbies controversey, it was the gay community who first noticed the triangle and started making a big deal about it. Falwell's people just noticed it after it had been taken up by the gay community.
Not that I am taking sides on the issue.
Re:I cant really see who this chip is targeted at
on
700 MHz Athlon
·
· Score: 1
I can see where this chip is targeted:
At the resellers. It's the perfect upgrade to tout to those repeat customers who come in at every major CPU upgrade to buy yet another motherboard. Some people will buy whatever has the big numbers on it.
Unfortunatley that's not a sustainable market, nor will that sort of person be fooled more than a few times. So AMD is likely in deep trouble now with this.
The local shops here are already selling Athlons and motherboards, though I can't say I've heard how well they are selling. I bought my Pentium III a month ago so am not interested. And I regret ever buying a K6-2.
Maybe you can get the FSF to join up with Ralph Nader and Red Hat to produce the SMB Athlon motherboard you're cherishing. Call the chipset the Stallman.
Don't forget to keep pounding your chest in fury. In pounding sessions, wring your hands.
heh
Re:ATHLON! ATHLON! LIKE TRIATHLON! YOU REDNECK!
on
700 MHz Athlon
·
· Score: 1
I think it's all a whole lot of fun.
Especially seeing people go off on it like you have.
This site is slowly filling up with an elite of moderating spooks-n-spirits. Fill the chamber with odd hierarchies and mysterious things can happen. Our own little secret police, merits and demerits. What fun! Not always worthy of our attention, ov course.
I'd like to be able to set my "maximum threshold" to 1 or 2, to be certain. Filter out the people who start out at three or above, and hope for the twos whose pithy words the elite particularly fancy get moderated out of my face in a timely fashion.
Take a guess what commonly worshipped software development beast is at fault for the problems you and others here have described:
The Hacker.
The Hacker is someone who spurns top level design, and just wants to "write code."
The Hacker doesn't want to hear from a usability engineer, he wants to "release often" and have random people all over the 'net find his bugs.
The software industry is permeated by hot dog coders who, umm, basically are just coders. It's a real problem, and is worse in the Free Software community than in the Commercial Software business. "Open Source," also known as "fix it yourself," while viewed by some people as the central philosopy of Free Software development, is also merely the least wobbly leg it leans on. So we end up with Byzantine software, designed by nobody, and added to by everybody, that works well at the things coders have felt a need for, but has a User Interface reknown throughout the rest of the world as cryptic. Emacs is probably the supreme example of this design philosophy.
Please don't bring up "Peer review" to argue against my point. The classic notion of "Peer Review" that has increasingly been distorted by "Open Source" advocates, has to do with a body of peers with credentials. Not the guy with the loudest mouth on Usenet.
In today's market, if something lasts twice as long as the warranty period, the engineer spent too much money on materials and/or tooling costs on the component/product. In an over-engineered world such as the one we live in, the warranty period should be viewed as the useful-life rating of a product.
Many successful companies, of course, still sell items with very long or even in some cases "lifetime" warranties. AT Cross Pens serve as an example of this.
Actually, you're about three generations too late in heaping praise if you only refer to the C version of WWIV.
I started running a BBS using the Turbo Pascal version of WWIV before they "closed the source" by releasing the C version.
The earier Pascal versions of WWIV were released ONLY AS SOURCE CODE and it was up to the sysop to compile it and get it up and running. I remember what fun I had modifying and adapting it to do what *I* wanted it to do on my system.
[I remember how busy my board was back then, too, with an 8088 processor, 640K of RAM (over half of which was used as a disk cache, the Pascal version ran fine in 256K of RAM), a 5 MB Hard drive, and a 1200 baud modem.]
With the first C-Language version, it became necessary to "Send In Money" to receive the source code.
then again, the first thing taught in a windows class isn't how to edit the registry.
Since clueless hackers editing the registry is one of the leading common causes of Windows instability (you know who you are-- you immediately go in with your little tools and your "great skill" in "taming the beast" and start "ripping things out."), it seems to me like teaching people to Not Edit The Registry should be one of the first things taught in an Intro-To-Windows class.
Then again, I shudder to think anybody would get much of any worth taking such a class from a Microsoft Hater. That would be like having a Mac Hater teach an intro to the Macintosh course.
Word for Windows 2.0 fits on a single floppy diskette. The file winword.exe can be carried around on a single HD floppy diskette from machine to machine. It means lots of the bloat features don't exist (dictionary, thesaurus, etc.) but the VBA runs. It gives you a potent portable editor/programming environment that will run on almost any Windows~1 machine.
I remember what a feature-pig the next version of Word for Windows seemed like when it came out (the next version, Word for Windows 6, was the "come into sync with the Macintosh version" release. Had all kinds of bad design elements as a result, like forcing the user to switch the default system printer in order to print to a particular printer)
As Lenin can be paraphrased as saying: "The tides of time can not be turned back. The end of capitalism is inevitable. The future belongs to us."
I am not stating this to say that any of the Free Software community is communistic, necessarily. My intent is not to red-bait. My intent is to point out that many people have tried to invoke manifest destiny as an epitath on something they disagree with. Many of them later eat their words.
Better start keeping paper copies on rice paper. And make sure you're using soy-based ink.
Was there a wide public outcry to go into space in the 60's? It seems to me (I was there, were you?) that there was a lot of enthusiasm that it was happening, but people weren't getting voted in and out of office because of it.
What the space program and NASA did allow government to do, and one of the reasons it was so popular with the military, was have an at-any-cost R&D setup. If you don't think the space program and NASA were a diversionary way to fund advanced weapons technology research (even to the point of dupeing scientists and technical people who otherwse would NEVER work on weapons of mass destruction) then you're reading way too many SciFi novels with warm-fuzzy critters in them.
The "challange" of going to the moon wouldn't have carried as much weight in government as it did if there weren't important 'challanges' like dropping megatons on Moscow behind it all.
Slashdot Mirror
It's what happens when "talk over a beer in the corner tavern" translates directly into written text without going through an editor.
Hey, didn't you know that this was the techno version of the Drudge Report? (the Drudge Window System running the Techno-Geek Window Manager??)
It will get 'credentials' for a few weeks from the mainstream, then will be considered crackpot by almost everybody.
As well it should.
There are dip switches on my US Robotics Courier V.everything external modem. Because it's a traditional modem, and you can set switches to control exactly how it behaves.
It's not any kind of a Cybertool unless it has a wire-wrap bit on it.
True, but many Linux vendors don't ship an 'official' kernel and instead fork it with add-ons that Linus hasn't gotten around to including yet.
I can testify to my direct experience with this.
I used to try to run Red Hat (back in the 5.1 era) and always jokingly said I "ran RedHat for about the first fifteen minutes after an install" because I'd rip out their modular scheme and plug in a monolithic kernel tuned to the hardware I had.
One of the things I discovered quickly was that the RedHat Kernel Source had default settings radically different from a stock kernel that you can download from places like kernel.org. For the brief period of time I ran SuSE it was even worse. There seemed to be modifications to the config script (when you ran 'make menuconfig' that just plain refused to let you make certain changes.
My experience is that the "distributors" crowbar the kernel source in ways I don't approve of.
Is Microsoft the only support vehicle for NT, though? There are dozens of other ways to purchase support for NT, all the way down to hiring a MSCE or two.
Just as there are numerous support vehicles for Linux support.
Linux is not POSIX-compliant. It's POSIX-kindasorta.
One of the vendors has to submit for compliance testing for Linux to be POSIX-branded. And judging from the way the GCC team thumbs their noses at the ANSI C Standards process, there isn't much interest in compliance testing on the part of Free Software advocates. An organization like RedHat could get it, of course, if they wanted to commit the resources.
Even the slashdot effect, and severe mail overloads to the FUD writers is helpful.
That's called "mob rule" and it usually doesn't impress anybody.
To say nothing for all those used bubblegum cards that the kids carry on about all the time. Even the new ones that have those PokeyMon characters oh them. Though they're all a major rip-off these days. No damn gum in the package at all!
Don't just say "Because that's immoral" or "Because I said so". Those are just saying "Go for more and stretch the limits"
Not every parent prints their moral code on a sheet of rubber. Not every child lives in a chaotic world where they get their way if they scream enough.
Actually, from what I heard regarding the Falwell/Teletubbies controversey, it was the gay community who first noticed the triangle and started making a big deal about it. Falwell's people just noticed it after it had been taken up by the gay community.
Not that I am taking sides on the issue.
I can see where this chip is targeted:
At the resellers. It's the perfect upgrade to tout to those repeat customers who come in at every major CPU upgrade to buy yet another motherboard. Some people will buy whatever has the big numbers on it.
Unfortunatley that's not a sustainable market, nor will that sort of person be fooled more than a few times. So AMD is likely in deep trouble now with this.
The local shops here are already selling Athlons and motherboards, though I can't say I've heard how well they are selling. I bought my Pentium III a month ago so am not interested. And I regret ever buying a K6-2.
Maybe you can get the FSF to join up with Ralph Nader and Red Hat to produce the SMB Athlon motherboard you're cherishing. Call the chipset the Stallman.
Don't forget to keep pounding your chest in fury. In pounding sessions, wring your hands.
heh
I think it's all a whole lot of fun.
Especially seeing people go off on it like you have.
You're right. Commonly misspelled trademarks are a marketing manager's worst nightmare.
I guess they should have thought of that before picking Athlon as the brand name.
This site is slowly filling up with an elite of moderating spooks-n-spirits. Fill the chamber with odd hierarchies and mysterious things can happen. Our own little secret police, merits and demerits. What fun! Not always worthy of our attention, ov course.
I'd like to be able to set my "maximum threshold" to 1 or 2, to be certain. Filter out the people who start out at three or above, and hope for the twos whose pithy words the elite particularly fancy get moderated out of my face in a timely fashion.
Take a guess what commonly worshipped software development beast is at fault for the problems you and others here have described:
The Hacker.
The Hacker is someone who spurns top level design, and just wants to "write code."
The Hacker doesn't want to hear from a usability engineer, he wants to "release often" and have random people all over the 'net find his bugs.
The software industry is permeated by hot dog coders who, umm, basically are just coders. It's a real problem, and is worse in the Free Software community than in the Commercial Software business. "Open Source," also known as "fix it yourself," while viewed by some people as the central philosopy of Free Software development, is also merely the least wobbly leg it leans on. So we end up with Byzantine software, designed by nobody, and added to by everybody, that works well at the things coders have felt a need for, but has a User Interface reknown throughout the rest of the world as cryptic. Emacs is probably the supreme example of this design philosophy.
Please don't bring up "Peer review" to argue against my point. The classic notion of "Peer Review" that has increasingly been distorted by "Open Source" advocates, has to do with a body of peers with credentials. Not the guy with the loudest mouth on Usenet.
In today's market, if something lasts twice as long as the warranty period, the engineer spent too much money on materials and/or tooling costs on the component/product. In an over-engineered world such as the one we live in, the warranty period should be viewed as the useful-life rating of a product.
Many successful companies, of course, still sell items with very long or even in some cases "lifetime" warranties. AT Cross Pens serve as an example of this.
Actually, you're about three generations too late in heaping praise if you only refer to the C version of
WWIV.
I started running a BBS using the Turbo Pascal version of WWIV before they "closed the source" by releasing the C version.
The earier Pascal versions of WWIV were released ONLY AS SOURCE CODE and it was up to the sysop to compile it and get it up and running. I remember what fun I had modifying and adapting it to do what *I* wanted it to do on my system.
[I remember how busy my board was back then, too, with an 8088 processor, 640K of RAM (over half of which was used as a disk cache, the Pascal version ran fine in 256K of RAM), a 5 MB Hard drive, and a 1200 baud modem.]
With the first C-Language version, it became necessary to "Send In Money" to receive the source code.
That wouldn't be "Hacking" though and we all know well enough to assume a worshipful pose when contemplating the idea of "writing code."
Flow charts must come at the last stage in development. Ask any "Real Hacker(tm)"
then again, the first thing taught in a windows class isn't how to edit the registry.
Since clueless hackers editing the registry is one of the leading common causes of Windows instability (you know who you are-- you immediately go in with your little tools and your "great skill" in "taming the beast" and start "ripping things out."), it seems to me like teaching people to Not Edit The Registry should be one of the first things taught in an Intro-To-Windows class.
Then again, I shudder to think anybody would get much of any worth taking such a class from a Microsoft Hater. That would be like having a Mac Hater teach an intro to the Macintosh course.
Word for Windows 2.0 fits on a single floppy diskette. The file winword.exe can be carried around on a single HD floppy diskette from machine to machine. It means lots of the bloat features don't exist (dictionary, thesaurus, etc.) but the VBA runs. It gives you a potent portable editor/programming environment that will run on almost any Windows~1 machine.
I remember what a feature-pig the next version of Word for Windows seemed like when it came out (the next version, Word for Windows 6, was the "come into sync with the Macintosh version" release. Had all kinds of bad design elements as a result, like forcing the user to switch the default system printer in order to print to a particular printer)
As Lenin can be paraphrased as saying: "The tides of time can not be turned back. The end of capitalism is inevitable. The future belongs to us."
I am not stating this to say that any of the Free Software community is communistic, necessarily. My intent is not to red-bait. My intent is to point out that many people have tried to invoke manifest destiny as an epitath on something they disagree with. Many of them later eat their words.
Better start keeping paper copies on rice paper. And make sure you're using soy-based ink.
And then, as the Chinese have been known to say (with a slightly different wording):
"Let a thousand code-forks bloom!"
Was there a wide public outcry to go into space in the 60's? It seems to me (I was there, were you?) that there was a lot of enthusiasm that it was happening, but people weren't getting voted in and out of office because of it.
What the space program and NASA did allow government to do, and one of the reasons it was so popular with the military, was have an at-any-cost R&D setup. If you don't think the space program and NASA were a diversionary way to fund advanced weapons technology research (even to the point of dupeing scientists and technical people who otherwse would NEVER work on weapons of mass destruction) then you're reading way too many SciFi novels with warm-fuzzy critters in them.
The "challange" of going to the moon wouldn't have carried as much weight in government as it did if there weren't important 'challanges' like dropping megatons on Moscow behind it all.