Some would term the Opium Trade with China a form of economic warfare. How would Americans feel if the central American cocaine cartels sponsored militias defending crack dealers in L.A.?
One can argue about 'scientific credibility' any time people wander far out of their area of expertise and into psuedo-religion. Which is what Lovelock has done.
It's fine to play Sim Earth and look at the pretty colors. It's even fine to explore Wicca and becoum one with Mother Earth. It's not acceptable to claim to still be a scientist.
This latest project of his just earns him less credibility that before. There's no rule that someone appointed to the Royal Society can't 'slide off the edge' into irrationality after the appointment. And there's nothing to keep such an appointment from being based in politics. Well, politics/religion/environmentalism, all mashed together, anyway.
Microsoft bought a company, zombified their product, and piled a new userland layer on top of it. They crippled what was a full Userland that included inetd 'services' for telnet, ftp, etc. I don't need to go to a charade site (interix.com) to determine this.
I guess the broken junk product that Microsoft has turned it into might be what you describe. All the worse for OpenBSD to be associated with something like that. It doesn't matter from my point of view.
But we won't let Microsoft engage in revisionist history. 'Interop Systems' didn't exist before Microsoft bought Softway Systems. Makes one wonder what kind of crooked deal they are engaged in now with the new twist to things. And I notice from (yes) going to the 'Interix.com' website that they'll sell you the 'open source' for $30. It looks like Interix.com and this 'Interop' company is a parasite that Microsoft planted the spores of on the dead body of Softway Systems after buying and killing it.
You were clearly right in your original point. Except you keep ranting on about how much BETTER the new kludge is than the 'ancient' junk. That part I can't buy. When has Microsoft EVER bought out a codebase and actually improved it?
You're real good at dishing out insults, btw. Lends a heck of a lot of credence to your arguement. Are you insecure about something in your personal life to lash out like this?
The economies of scale of the present marketplace, i.e. with ATA133 drives inexpensive and on a fast bus, keep the barrier to entry for medium-grade video and multimedia production fairly low.
If the market shifts, so that crappy external drives and 'media players' and 'Web Console' hardware becomes the norm, the volume market for equipment capable of medium-grade multimedia production will shrink, and that sort of equipment will become more unreachable by 'regular folks' and content producers without deep pocket corporate backers. If you want to live in a world where people's 'workstations' are set-top consoles similar to a locked-down X-Box, it's your option to promote that kind of a world. But it's not how the rest of us want things to progress.
As to your comment about 'what you can afford,' as technology evolves, it becomes cheaper and more accessable. The only people/organizations interested in keeping it expensive and inaccessable are people who some of us strongly oppose.
I guess if all you are interested in being is a 'consumer' what you posit is 'okay.'
Interix is, or was, a software product produced by Softway Systems, a company which under NDA produced it as a POSIX subsystem to run on the NT kernel.
I don't know where you dug up the mythology about this 'Interop Systems' or the notion that 'Interix' was ever the name of a company.
I have a licensed copy of Interix from Softway systems. I purchased a second copy of the software product called 'Interix' branded by Microsoft, which they sold under the Microsoft brand after Microsoft purchased Softway Systems. The Microsoft branded Interix was cripped compared to the Softway Systems release, missing useful binaries like the vi editor.
Since purchasing Softway Systems, Microsoft has screwed with and crippled the software product formerly known as Interix. It's been twisted and morphed. I'm not sure if it has the inetd functions that Softway's Interix had, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't. The Softway release of Interix also includes binaries for NT Alpha. I am not aware of any other port of a POSIX subsystem for NT Alpha out there, but I am CERTAIN that Microsoft has no offering of that sort.
I don't care that you apparently have never used the product before Microsoft purchased it. It seems like you have fully digested a revisionist history of Interix and Softway Systems, which makes you a Microsoft lackey.
I'm not sure if you're making up nonsense, or just parroting Microsoft's revised history. Either way you're either a duped or a willing astroturfer for Microsoft on this topic.
I hope I haven't been trolled here, but it doesn't matter that much.
I have a nice little SCSI hard drive in an external enclosure. It's the exact size to fit nicely beneath a 'compact Mac' (i.e. a Plus or SE). Stackable components are not a new idea, they've been a part of the 'Mac' since nearly the beginning.
Disk drives "fast"? Hardly. Do people who aren't involved in, say, HDTV production or running a heavily-trafficked database-driven web site need disk drives that are significantly faster than the full-duplex 800 Mbps of the FireWire bus?
I will be sarcastic and just agree with you. The PC definitely should be a dumbed down box like the television set. Special 'content creation' hardware should be needed to author 'content.' Keep the barrier to entry high enough and then advertisers will subsidize the whole process. The content creators can form an organzation. Let's call it the RIAA, that sounds good....
And the IBM PC Convertible, IBM's first Laptop machine, used a 'stacked' design for peripherals. There was a connector on the back of the main CPU unit, and there was a family of peripheral components you plugged and clamped on the end. There was a serial/parallel, a video, and a printer perhipheral. Each component had the male buss connector on one side and the female buss connector on the opposite side.
As you added components on the end made, it made the PC Convertible, already a heavy monster of a machine, longer and longer. All three peripherals would add almost a foot in length to the machine.
The flamebait approach, however, would be to say that some don't understand the UNIX culture's license, and they reinvent it poorly. (the UNIX license as it evolved could be termed 'the BSD license.' Or 'the GPL.' And that discussion would BE the flamefest.)
No, SFU is Interix, which they purchased when they acquired Softway Systems. And at Softway, it was earlier called OpenNT. A plug-in POSIX subsystem that talks directly to the NT Kernel layer. In parallel with the Win32 Subsystem, the OS/2 1.0 subsystem, and the MS-DOS subsystem.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with OpenBSD, or NetBSD, or FreeBSD.
Agreed. There are whole sections of the GNU toolchain built as Windows NT Console apps. A lot of useful stuff was ported back in the Windows NT 3 days when a lot of UNIX shops started migrating over. I am glad I have those binaries, because these days everyone wants to haul in big kludges to provide 'Unix' type commands on NT. A lot of useful work can be accomplished on, for instance, a Windows NT 3.51 box without using the GUI as anything but a place-holder for your terminal windows.
When I ran a BBS it was written in Pascal. Borland Turbo Pascal 3.0, to be exact. It was the WWIV BBS, which was ONLY distributed as Pascal source code. No binaries were distributed, it was an open source (lower case, not the Trademark(tm) version) project.
Speaking as someone who has tried to grow things from seed, it's important to remember (these people likely understand this) that posession of seeds by no means insures the preservation of a plant species. Roses, for example, are seldom grown from the seed. Many plants are propagated by grafting, and having the seeds is no guarantee the species is 'preserved' in this way. It's very difficult to grow some species by seed.
IBM had no competitor for their processor, and no one purchased enough of them to make it worth IBM's time to improve it as much as Intel and AMD have improved their processors.
Correct, because Motorola decided they wanted OUT of the processor MHz/MIPS/fanboy horse race and withdrew from the PowerPC Consortium.
It's instructive to study why Motorola bailed out.
Also, IBM is quite active in evolving the POWER architecture. Not so keen on futzing with a POWER pee-cee variant. Again, something instructive to study. Could it be that IBM and Motorola have little interest in a market where their logos are stickers on the modded cases of fanboys?
What we all need to do (what *I* certainly need to do) is go through and start categorizing and ranking the redundancy. I know that the data I have saved that is the oldest is still okay (things that were 'passed along' on QIC tapes before I got my first CD Writer, and were recently moved to DVD+R while retaining the original CDs). I am not sure sure about all the middle layers of stuff. But there is a LOT of duplication and a LOT of unimportant redundant things.
It all bears a LOT of organizing. We can all use more of that.
Thank god I never got into 'usenet binaries' the way one of my more extreme friends did back in the day. He has what is now doubtless a whole closet full of worthless cakeboxes of crap.
However, Intel has recently obtained another largish customer,
And who was that? The 'customer' who didn't command enough volume to get what they wanted from IBM's OEM processor business, so they 'hooked their wagon' with Intel?
Slashdot Mirror
Some would term the Opium Trade with China a form of economic warfare. How would Americans feel if the central American cocaine cartels sponsored militias defending crack dealers in L.A.?
I'm sure the Easter Island civilization would feel the same way.
Uh, yeah. And civilization as a whole didn't collapse, did it?
One can argue about 'scientific credibility' any time people wander far out of their area of expertise and into psuedo-religion. Which is what Lovelock has done.
It's fine to play Sim Earth and look at the pretty colors. It's even fine to explore Wicca and becoum one with Mother Earth. It's not acceptable to claim to still be a scientist.
This latest project of his just earns him less credibility that before. There's no rule that someone appointed to the Royal Society can't 'slide off the edge' into irrationality after the appointment. And there's nothing to keep such an appointment from being based in politics. Well, politics/religion/environmentalism, all mashed together, anyway.
Microsoft bought a company, zombified their product, and piled a new userland layer on top of it. They crippled what was a full Userland that included inetd 'services' for telnet, ftp, etc. I don't need to go to a charade site (interix.com) to determine this.
I guess the broken junk product that Microsoft has turned it into might be what you describe. All the worse for OpenBSD to be associated with something like that. It doesn't matter from my point of view.
But we won't let Microsoft engage in revisionist history. 'Interop Systems' didn't exist before Microsoft bought Softway Systems. Makes one wonder what kind of crooked deal they are engaged in now with the new twist to things. And I notice from (yes) going to the 'Interix.com' website that they'll sell you the 'open source' for $30. It looks like Interix.com and this 'Interop' company is a parasite that Microsoft planted the spores of on the dead body
of Softway Systems after buying and killing it.
You were clearly right in your original point. Except you keep ranting on about how much BETTER the new kludge is than the 'ancient' junk. That part I can't buy. When has Microsoft EVER bought out a codebase and actually improved it?
You're real good at dishing out insults, btw. Lends a heck of a lot of credence to your arguement. Are you insecure about something in your personal life to lash out like this?
The economies of scale of the present marketplace, i.e. with ATA133 drives inexpensive and on a fast bus, keep the barrier to entry for medium-grade video and multimedia production fairly low.
If the market shifts, so that crappy external drives and 'media players' and 'Web Console' hardware becomes the norm, the volume market for equipment capable of medium-grade multimedia production will shrink, and that sort of equipment will become more unreachable by 'regular folks' and content producers without deep pocket corporate backers. If you want to live in a world where people's 'workstations' are set-top consoles similar to a locked-down X-Box, it's your option to promote that kind of a world. But it's not how the rest of us want things to progress.
As to your comment about 'what you can afford,' as technology evolves, it becomes cheaper and more accessable. The only people/organizations interested in keeping it expensive and inaccessable are people who some of us strongly oppose.
I guess if all you are interested in being is a 'consumer' what you posit is 'okay.'
Interix is, or was, a software product produced by Softway Systems, a company which under NDA produced it as a POSIX subsystem to run on the NT kernel.
I don't know where you dug up the mythology about this 'Interop Systems' or the notion that 'Interix' was ever the name of a company.
I have a licensed copy of Interix from Softway systems. I purchased a second copy of the software product called 'Interix' branded by Microsoft, which they sold under the Microsoft brand after Microsoft purchased Softway Systems. The Microsoft branded Interix was cripped compared to the Softway Systems release, missing useful binaries like the vi editor.
Since purchasing Softway Systems, Microsoft has screwed with and crippled the software product formerly known as Interix. It's been twisted and morphed. I'm not sure if it has the inetd functions that Softway's Interix had, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't. The Softway release of Interix also includes binaries for NT Alpha. I am not aware of any other port of a POSIX subsystem for NT Alpha out there, but I am CERTAIN that Microsoft has no offering of that sort.
I don't care that you apparently have never used the product before Microsoft purchased it. It seems like you have fully digested a revisionist history of Interix and Softway Systems, which makes you a Microsoft lackey.
I'm not sure if you're making up nonsense, or just parroting Microsoft's revised history. Either way you're either a duped or a willing astroturfer for Microsoft on this topic.
I hope I haven't been trolled here, but it doesn't matter that much.
It's 'Design' in much the same way that the cardboard prop computers at an office supply store, used in computer furniture displays, is 'Design.'
In other words, fake plastic stuff put together by 'designers' who seem to have little inkling about 'the stuff inside.'
Those of us who end up responsible for 'the insides' detest those creeps. It's a shame that schools are still producing even MORE of them.
I have a nice little SCSI hard drive in an external enclosure. It's the exact size to fit nicely beneath a 'compact Mac' (i.e. a Plus or SE). Stackable components are not a new idea, they've been a part of the 'Mac' since nearly the beginning.
Disk drives "fast"? Hardly. Do people who aren't involved in, say, HDTV production or running a heavily-trafficked database-driven web site need disk drives that are significantly faster than the full-duplex 800 Mbps of the FireWire bus?
I will be sarcastic and just agree with you. The PC definitely should be a dumbed down box like the television set. Special 'content creation' hardware should be needed to author 'content.' Keep the barrier to entry high enough and then advertisers will subsidize the whole process. The content creators can form an organzation. Let's call it the RIAA, that sounds good....
And the IBM PC Convertible, IBM's first Laptop machine, used a 'stacked' design for peripherals. There was a connector on the back of the main CPU unit, and there was a family of peripheral components you plugged and clamped on the end. There was a serial/parallel, a video, and a printer perhipheral. Each component had the male buss connector on one side and the female buss connector on the opposite side.
As you added components on the end made, it made the PC Convertible, already a heavy monster of a machine, longer and longer. All three peripherals would add almost a foot in length to the machine.
I have registered paid copies of Interix. I have no need or interest in downloading Microsoft's crippled version.
You've only used the freely downloadable version, eh?
The flamebait approach, however, would be to say that some don't understand the UNIX culture's license, and they reinvent it poorly. (the UNIX license as it evolved could be termed 'the BSD license.' Or 'the GPL.' And that discussion would BE the flamefest.)
Being on the GSA doesn't mean you sold anything, it just means you're on a list of vendors that it's easy for government agencies to buy from.
Correction: it means it is no longer impossible for government agencies to buy from them.
That isn't really accurate. The hotmail return address in most spam is just forged.
"Those who don't understand UNIX are doomed to reinvent it, poorly."
That's a rather shabby thing to say about Linus Torvalds, and it's not at all true.
No, SFU is Interix, which they purchased when they acquired Softway Systems. And at Softway, it was earlier called OpenNT. A plug-in POSIX subsystem that talks directly to the NT Kernel layer. In parallel with the Win32 Subsystem, the OS/2 1.0 subsystem, and the MS-DOS subsystem.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with OpenBSD, or NetBSD, or FreeBSD.
Agreed. There are whole sections of the GNU toolchain built as Windows NT Console apps. A lot of useful stuff was ported back in the Windows NT 3 days when a lot of UNIX shops started migrating over. I am glad I have those binaries, because these days everyone wants to haul in big kludges to provide 'Unix' type commands on NT. A lot of useful work can be accomplished on, for instance, a Windows NT 3.51 box without using the GUI as anything but a place-holder for your terminal windows.
And you know this, authoritatively?
The Hotmail service has changed considerably. Maybe the backend is still Solaris. But you didn't provide a cite.
The test was probably written by somebody real, but then filtered through a cage full of marketing weasels, who substuted in words like 'leverage.'
When I ran a BBS it was written in Pascal. Borland Turbo Pascal 3.0, to be exact. It was the WWIV BBS, which was ONLY distributed as Pascal source code. No binaries were distributed, it was an open source (lower case, not the Trademark(tm) version) project.
Speaking as someone who has tried to grow things from seed, it's important to remember (these people likely understand this) that posession of seeds by no means insures the preservation of a plant species. Roses, for example, are seldom grown from the seed. Many plants are propagated by grafting, and having the seeds is no guarantee the species is 'preserved' in this way. It's very difficult to grow some species by seed.
IBM had no competitor for their processor, and no one purchased enough of them to make it worth IBM's time to improve it as much as Intel and AMD have improved their processors.
Correct, because Motorola decided they wanted OUT of the processor MHz/MIPS/fanboy horse race and withdrew from the PowerPC Consortium.
It's instructive to study why Motorola bailed out.
Also, IBM is quite active in evolving the POWER architecture. Not so keen on futzing with a POWER pee-cee variant. Again, something instructive to study. Could it be that IBM and Motorola have little interest in a market where their logos are stickers on the modded cases of fanboys?
Well, there's always the possibility that your Intel/Dell conglomerate would buy all or a significant interest in AMD.
Really, to regular businessmen, it's all a business, not a holy war.
What we all need to do (what *I* certainly need to do) is go through and start categorizing and ranking the redundancy. I know that the data I have saved that is the oldest is still okay (things that were 'passed along' on QIC tapes before I got my first CD Writer, and were recently moved to DVD+R while retaining the original CDs). I am not sure sure about all the middle layers of stuff. But there is a LOT of duplication and a LOT of unimportant redundant things.
It all bears a LOT of organizing. We can all use more of that.
Thank god I never got into 'usenet binaries' the way one of my more extreme friends did back in the day. He has what is now doubtless a whole closet full of worthless cakeboxes of crap.
However, Intel has recently obtained another largish customer,
And who was that? The 'customer' who didn't command enough volume to get what they wanted from IBM's OEM processor business, so they 'hooked their wagon' with Intel?
Largish?