For example, having to type the path (or at the very least a./) to run a program that's in the current directory you're in if it's not specified in the path.
This is a feature!:-)
There's less chance of unknowingly running a "trojan horse" program if you have to specify the absolute path to an executable file.
Hobbiests started coding on them because they were open and a bit of fun but they were NEVER ahead of their time and they were NEVER real computers.
Sorry QuantumG, but this is unfounded bullsh*t.
Back in 1985 the A1000 had a multitasking OS, 12-bit graphics, and 4 channel sound. During the same time period, the IBM AT was getting by with MS-DOS, 4-bit graphics, and a speaker that went "beep". The 1985 Mac was still monochrome only.
I don't really know enough about X to comment, but I see that hasn't stopped anyone else, so here goes...
I've done almost all of my X programming with either Tcl/Tk or TeleUSE, and haven't really dug into X itself. There's a reason for this -- X is huge. I'd have to erase 15% of my brain to find room to store all that information.
Maybe they should think about cleaning up the API a bit, and deprecating all of the less useless stuff. It's starting to look like the Windows API.
Hopefully this will go to court, and we will find out how the GPL stands up. If it does stand up, that's great; we now have a precedent. If it doesn't, then it's better to find out now, and see what can be done about fixing the problems.
You could refute the CTT, though, if you found just one counterexample:-)
Yes, that is what I was trying to say -- thank you for the correction.
The interesting thing is although the CTT is probably true, we can never be sure, unless someone shows it to be false, in which case we now know that know less than we previously thought that we knew (something like that...).
I was trying to point out to the previous poster that taking an undergraduate course in automata theory doesn't qualify one to run the universe.:-)
I've thought about why geeks are typically irreligious. I think it has to do with the fact that geeks are rarely social creatures, and church is a very social atmosphere.
Good observation. I'm a Christian, but I have to force myself to go to church. All these people around, and none of them want to talk about Linux, compilers, or automata theory.:-(
Another thing is education. The more a person knows, the more they tend to rely on their own understanding of the world, and dismiss things they don't understand and/or can't explain. This leads to pride, which just makes the situation worse. That's why there are so many flamewars on/.; everyone thinks they are right. Except for me; I know that I'm right! =)
I would so like to be in the mind of a christian for a day just to see what it's like.
It isn't about thinking, so being in the mind of a Christian for a day wouldn't be that informative.
I'm all for education and learning (I spend a lot of time on it myself), but the human mind can only evaluate and process information gained from the physical world -- what we can see, hear, and feel. You will never be able to understand God with your mind, no matter how hard to try. The human mind, although a wonderful thing, is limited, and if you rely only on your intellect, then you will always have more questions than answers.
TedC at VISI dot com
Well, that's if for me -- I've done my part contributing to this 1300+ post wad on Rob's hard drive.:-)
You are a Christian, but you do not adhere to a set of ideals?
I do adhere to a set of ideals, it's just that I'm not very good at it sometimes, so I don't like to emphasis that aspect of it. Even though I skip church, drink beer (in moderation (usually)), and cuss out idiots on the freeway, I still have the same right standing before God as Billy Graham and the Pope. Pretty cool, eh?:-)
A myth is something, such as crazy religious ideas, believed by idiots with no proof whatsoever. I think the words you are looking for are "scientifically proven theory".
You're confusing "myth" with "faith". I think the definition you're looking for is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen".:-)
So tell me, then, what makes you a Christian, and what would I have to do to become one [snip]
If you really want to know the answer to your question, start reading the book of Acts. It reads like a story, and isn't dry or boring at all. Here's a link to an online version.
TedC
PS. I'm not sure why the closing anchor tag on my url isn't being parsed correctly; it must be a bug. Anyway, it makes it easier to hit the link.:-)
I'm not very religious, but I am a Christian. There's a big difference between these two concepts. The former indicates an adherence to a set of ideals, whatever they may be -- there many to chose from. The later is something that I am, not something that I do.
Reading the previous 50 or so responses, I would say that at least half of them are negative. Caldera released some code, and all some people can do is whine about the license, complain that they should have done it months ago, or make up some feeble-minded theory on how having a better installer is going to ruin Linux. Talk about FUD -- I should have worn hip boots and bought a shovel...
As much as I hate Microsoft and would like to see it destroyed, I don't think the government should be involved.
They pobably won't have to be involved.
Any ordinary fad in the computer industry would have subsided by now, but Linux isn't an ordinary fad -- it just keeps rolling along. Last year everyone went wild when Oracle, Informix, Sybase, and IBM announced ports of their relational database systems to Linux. This was big news, and it got a lot of coverage in the mainstream computer press. This is when all the PHBs started hearing about Linux.
Now almost a year later, we have Intel, HP, and SGI working on getting a 64-bit version of Linux running on the Merced processor. It wouldn't suprise me to see IBM eventually throw in the towel on their Monterey project and use Linux instead. Meanwhile, back at Redmond, MS is still struggling to bring their next 32-bit version of Windows to market.
That's on the commercial side of things. Upcoming products from Corel, Amiga, and Loki will probably go a long way toward erroding Window's share of the home market as well.
So even if the government does find MS guilty, it really won't matter. By the time they decide what to do about it, MS will just be a shadow of it's former self. Last year this would have seemed an overly optimistic view by a/. poster, but now even the mainstream media is beinging to entertain the possibility.
Unless they've changed their mind again, the new Amiga will be using X.
You are correct, according to their recent technology brief Amiga is using X, and AFAIK they haven't changed their mind. This makes a lot of sense, and follows along with their plan to integrate existing technologies instead of reinventing everything.
I suspect that the only Amiga specific additions will be a Workbench window manager and desktop environment, and probably a new gui toolkit as well. It will be interesting to see if they base their stuff on Qt/KDE or GTK+/Gnome, or if they do something new. There has to be something new and different in order to interest people enough to buy, and it's probably a safe bet that they're going to concentrate on the visible elements, and leave the "below the surface" stuff alone.
The faster the code it produces, the better it is.
I know this won't go over real big on a forum dominated by Linux users, but VC++ generates some really fast code. It's not just simple trimming CPU cycle stuff either; they (MS programmers) seem to be doing a pretty good job of recognizing patterns in code and replacing it with faster algorithms when it's "safe".
TedC
"There ain't no such thing as the fastest code" Michael Abrash
I have found STL to be one of the most useful features of C++.
I agree completely.
I've always had a certain amount of ambivalence toward C++. On one hard, it addresses some of the short comings of C; but on the other hand, it has gotten so complex that it rivals Ada in this respect. Probably it's best feature is that it lets one pick and chose the features and paradigm that one wants to use, unlike some languages (which I will not name here, lest I be flamed to a crisp by some language x zealot) which forces one into a certain paradigm.
But I really like generic programming in general, and STL in particular. It's unfortuanate that so few people have experimented with this type of programming.
but this could be a _very_ bad thing if misinterpreted- e.g. bye bye samba- it was good knowin ya.
I can see MS "disabling" NT servers remotely if they find they are on a network with Samba. I guess the bright side of this, for NT admins anyway, is that MS will have to improve the remote admin capabilities of NT in order to do this. Or maybe Steve Balmer will just drive over in a car and pull the plug.:-)
They still are the only machines round that can do 2D scrolling smoothly.
Smooth 2D scrolling is possible with a VGA; see 'Zen of Graphics Programming' by Michael Abrash for details. You're right, though; the original Amiga was quite impressive in 1985.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a feature! :-)
There's less chance of unknowingly running a "trojan horse" program if you have to specify the absolute path to an executable file.
TedC
Sorry QuantumG, but this is unfounded bullsh*t.
Back in 1985 the A1000 had a multitasking OS, 12-bit graphics, and 4 channel sound. During the same time period, the IBM AT was getting by with MS-DOS, 4-bit graphics, and a speaker that went "beep". The 1985 Mac was still monochrome only.
TedC
TedC
I've done almost all of my X programming with either Tcl/Tk or TeleUSE, and haven't really dug into X itself. There's a reason for this -- X is huge. I'd have to erase 15% of my brain to find room to store all that information.
Maybe they should think about cleaning up the API a bit, and deprecating all of the less useless stuff. It's starting to look like the Windows API.
TedC
TedC
Yes, that is what I was trying to say -- thank you for the correction.
The interesting thing is although the CTT is probably true, we can never be sure, unless someone shows it to be false, in which case we now know that know less than we previously thought that we knew (something like that...).
I was trying to point out to the previous poster that taking an undergraduate course in automata theory doesn't qualify one to run the universe. :-)
TedC
TedC
Good observation. I'm a Christian, but I have to force myself to go to church. All these people around, and none of them want to talk about Linux, compilers, or automata theory. :-(
Another thing is education. The more a person knows, the more they tend to rely on their own understanding of the world, and dismiss things they don't understand and/or can't explain. This leads to pride, which just makes the situation worse. That's why there are so many flamewars on /.; everyone thinks they are right. Except for me; I know that I'm right! =)
Okay, chill, that was a joke...
TedC
It isn't about thinking, so being in the mind of a Christian for a day wouldn't be that informative.
I'm all for education and learning (I spend a lot of time on it myself), but the human mind can only evaluate and process information gained from the physical world -- what we can see, hear, and feel. You will never be able to understand God with your mind, no matter how hard to try. The human mind, although a wonderful thing, is limited, and if you rely only on your intellect, then you will always have more questions than answers.
TedC at VISI dot com
Well, that's if for me -- I've done my part contributing to this 1300+ post wad on Rob's hard drive. :-)
I do adhere to a set of ideals, it's just that I'm not very good at it sometimes, so I don't like to emphasis that aspect of it. Even though I skip church, drink beer (in moderation (usually)), and cuss out idiots on the freeway, I still have the same right standing before God as Billy Graham and the Pope. Pretty cool, eh? :-)
TedC
You're confusing "myth" with "faith". I think the definition you're looking for is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen". :-)
TedC
If you really want to know the answer to your question, start reading the book of Acts. It reads like a story, and isn't dry or boring at all. Here's a link to an online version.
TedC
PS. I'm not sure why the closing anchor tag on my url isn't being parsed correctly; it must be a bug. Anyway, it makes it easier to hit the link. :-)
Reading my last post, I can't see anything that would qualify me as being ignorant.
Perhaps you use this word to describe anyone who doesn't happen to agree with you?
TedC
I'm not very religious, but I am a Christian. There's a big difference between these two concepts. The former indicates an adherence to a set of ideals, whatever they may be -- there many to chose from. The later is something that I am, not something that I do.
And I already have both a clue and a life. :-)
TedC
TedC
TedC
They pobably won't have to be involved.
Any ordinary fad in the computer industry would have subsided by now, but Linux isn't an ordinary fad -- it just keeps rolling along. Last year everyone went wild when Oracle, Informix, Sybase, and IBM announced ports of their relational database systems to Linux. This was big news, and it got a lot of coverage in the mainstream computer press. This is when all the PHBs started hearing about Linux.
Now almost a year later, we have Intel, HP, and SGI working on getting a 64-bit version of Linux running on the Merced processor. It wouldn't suprise me to see IBM eventually throw in the towel on their Monterey project and use Linux instead. Meanwhile, back at Redmond, MS is still struggling to bring their next 32-bit version of Windows to market.
That's on the commercial side of things. Upcoming products from Corel, Amiga, and Loki will probably go a long way toward erroding Window's share of the home market as well.
So even if the government does find MS guilty, it really won't matter. By the time they decide what to do about it, MS will just be a shadow of it's former self. Last year this would have seemed an overly optimistic view by a /. poster, but now even the mainstream media is beinging to entertain the possibility.
TedC
You are correct, according to their recent technology brief Amiga is using X, and AFAIK they haven't changed their mind. This makes a lot of sense, and follows along with their plan to integrate existing technologies instead of reinventing everything.
I suspect that the only Amiga specific additions will be a Workbench window manager and desktop environment, and probably a new gui toolkit as well. It will be interesting to see if they base their stuff on Qt/KDE or GTK+/Gnome, or if they do something new. There has to be something new and different in order to interest people enough to buy, and it's probably a safe bet that they're going to concentrate on the visible elements, and leave the "below the surface" stuff alone.
TedC
I used to work for him too.
TedC
I know this won't go over real big on a forum dominated by Linux users, but VC++ generates some really fast code. It's not just simple trimming CPU cycle stuff either; they (MS programmers) seem to be doing a pretty good job of recognizing patterns in code and replacing it with faster algorithms when it's "safe".
TedC
"There ain't no such thing as the fastest code"
Michael Abrash
I agree completely.
I've always had a certain amount of ambivalence toward C++. On one hard, it addresses some of the short comings of C; but on the other hand, it has gotten so complex that it rivals Ada in this respect. Probably it's best feature is that it lets one pick and chose the features and paradigm that one wants to use, unlike some languages (which I will not name here, lest I be flamed to a crisp by some language x zealot) which forces one into a certain paradigm.
But I really like generic programming in general, and STL in particular. It's unfortuanate that so few people have experimented with this type of programming.
TedC
I can see MS "disabling" NT servers remotely if they find they are on a network with Samba. I guess the bright side of this, for NT admins anyway, is that MS will have to improve the remote admin capabilities of NT in order to do this. Or maybe Steve Balmer will just drive over in a car and pull the plug. :-)
TedC
TedC
Smooth 2D scrolling is possible with a VGA; see 'Zen of Graphics Programming' by Michael Abrash for details. You're right, though; the original Amiga was quite impressive in 1985.
TedC
Of course these are just mockups; the final design will likely be quite different.
TedC