Uhm, I've written plenty of single threaded apps that can give the appearance of being multithreaded.
Congratulations?
All it has to do is use non-blocking calls and make regular UI updates to make sure the user isn't aware of the single-threaded nature.
A non-blocking call implies multi-threaded design, genius.
It takes effort
AKA, Hack.
and in many cases is far easier than writing proper thread safe multithreaded applications
Absolutely not.
almost every toolkit out there there is only one thread that handles ALL UI in an application.
Actually, almost every toolkit out there, there is a single thread that handles EVERYTHING, including UI, unless other threads are explicitly spawned. Which is why I pointed out the fact that Firefox doesn't freeze during async operations, because it's multithreaded.
You know that Google Chrome window you see, with all those tabs in it, and all the processes controlling them. Guess what, the GUI you see runs in a single thread, fed by a bunch of backend processes with some re-parented windows.
Way to be condescending without actually disputing anything I said.
It amazes me how people post on slashdot as if they know everything about programming when they really don't have a clue.
Firefox is already multi-threaded. Single process, multi-threaded. Any one thread can crash the entire process. One process cannot crash another process, at least not directly.
Note that if it were just a performance thing, they could have gone multithreaded instead. This would probably get even better performance.
Firefox is already multithreaded (if it weren't the UI would freeze during downloading, rendering, etc).
It amazes me how many people here on slashdot don't understand the differences and distinctions of multi-process vs. multi-threaded.
Re:Hooray fileinfo is standard!
on
PHP 5.3 Released
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It's funny how people cling to languages for arbitrary and sometimes downright illogical reasons. It's like each language is cool or acceptable in various online social circles. In fact, they can be broken down into their equivalent high school archetype:
PHP - The Slackers
.NET - The Jocks
C - The Goths/Hardcore
Ruby - The Hipsters
Haskell - The Nerds
Java - The drifters
In seriousness, I'm with the OP. I wish the ridiculous language evangelism would stop. In the end, people are just being short sighted and limiting the tools at their disposal.
I imagine it will be a vary hard case to make since really all they are trying to do is fix their broken OS.
How is releasing anti-virus software fixing their "broken OS?" Are you implying that a non-broken OS is completely immune to viruses and malware or are you just spewing typical anti-Microsoft vitriol?
There is zero recognition that Linux has already been satisfying its core audience
I recognize this entirely. But very few Linux users seem satisfied. They do, however, feel entitled to the IP of companies who have invested untold millions in R&D, chastising anyone who would dare release a blob. Which, as I pointed out, they should be grateful for considering what little, if any, return they're getting.
I've finally realized that to these folks "the desktop" means "access to wallets" in the same way that TV, radio, and the printed page once did.
Wrong again. After 10 years of using Linux, I've learned that the GPL means "whats yours is mine and what's mine is mine," in a corporate context at least. You want some company to GPL their code. Then, in order for said company to use GPL'd code, they'd have to change their entire business model, for a far less profitable one, the process alone costing millions. The irony, of course, is that the community claims that open sourcing code allows the community to do the porting itself. Which of course is bullshit. They get the open source code, and then cry and complain that the company isn't putting forth an effort to port it *FOR* them. Best example to date being Chrome.
I think he's one of those born-again Capitalists who always "get to the bottom line" and find it heretical to have any goals that are not the shortest path to establishing or growing mass-market consumer sales volume.
Wrong once again. I'm not the one talking down to a company who invested time and money to release a driver for my platform of choice, because they released a binary only and care to protect their IP. I'm not the one advocating the "you're either with us or against us" mentality. The point I'm making, is that some companies want to make money. Some want to protect their IP. YOU are flawed in thinking there is something wrong with that.
>Because it's Java it can't use hardware acceleration?
If they really are bound to java, they're at google's mercy for hardware accelerated bindings.
Windows CE supports drivers much the way desktop windows does, so there is flexibility and familiarity there. I used to own an HTC Fuze running Windows Mobile 6.5, which had an ATI chip and drivers for hardware acceleration. It is already being done.
Drawing a parallel, American car companies spend far more money on marketing than R&D. Japanese car companies are the opposite. Look how that turned out.
That being said, Windows CE is rock solid, has a familiar API, and if extremely mature. There is no reason to believe that this isn't a solid engineering decision, albeit a not-so-popular decision here on slashdot.
You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all. It's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops. Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop (which it never will be, because of flawed ideologies), be thankful for any corporate *desktop* support you get.
In an attempt to allow actual discussion, let me take care of all the typical, canned, tired replies to this story so that we can just get them out of the way:
Lame chair throwing reference!
Liberal use of M$
....Bloat....Resources....vim....gdb
Uninformed opinion due to the fact that I've never used Visual Studio
Depending on how effective the facial recognition is (and subsequent skeleton mapping) it should be able to ignore others, and even recognize them if they are also playing.
The summary may be technically accurate, but the point is off. IE6 is dying, quickly. If you happen to develop for it in a corporate context, it really isn't that bad because you are targeting IE6, and *only* IE6. What really hurts is developing for modern browsers, and then having to retrofit IE6, which we can safely say is a thing of the past.
They set back operating systems on the majority of the world's PCs by half a decade.
Disgruntled slashdotters are so cuuuute!
Microsoft is on top of their game right now. You do your own platform no favors by ignoring Microsoft's innovations and deluding yourself into thinking your platform is superior. Desktop Linux is failing because of people like you, who fail to see its shortcomings. It's quite the paradox.
If I were a betting man I'd put my money on getting more involved in the consumer electronics department, infringing more on Apple's territory than google's.
This is an operating system still 6 months away from release. By the time it's released, all Intel/AMD CPU's being sold will have vt extensions. Most being sold today have vt extensions. It's not designed for old hardware. Very few people are being alienated, certainly not enough to warrant compromising security with an all-software solution. Which brings me back to my original point: Slashdotter's should be the last to fault them for this.
Slashdot Mirror
Poor linux users, under-represented minority that we are :)
You get what you pay for.
Uhm, I've written plenty of single threaded apps that can give the appearance of being multithreaded.
Congratulations?
All it has to do is use non-blocking calls and make regular UI updates to make sure the user isn't aware of the single-threaded nature.
A non-blocking call implies multi-threaded design, genius.
It takes effort
AKA, Hack.
and in many cases is far easier than writing proper thread safe multithreaded applications
Absolutely not.
almost every toolkit out there there is only one thread that handles ALL UI in an application.
Actually, almost every toolkit out there, there is a single thread that handles EVERYTHING, including UI, unless other threads are explicitly spawned. Which is why I pointed out the fact that Firefox doesn't freeze during async operations, because it's multithreaded.
You know that Google Chrome window you see, with all those tabs in it, and all the processes controlling them. Guess what, the GUI you see runs in a single thread, fed by a bunch of backend processes with some re-parented windows.
Way to be condescending without actually disputing anything I said.
It amazes me how people post on slashdot as if they know everything about programming when they really don't have a clue.
Irony.
Firefox is already multi-threaded. Single process, multi-threaded. Any one thread can crash the entire process. One process cannot crash another process, at least not directly.
Note that if it were just a performance thing, they could have gone multithreaded instead. This would probably get even better performance.
Firefox is already multithreaded (if it weren't the UI would freeze during downloading, rendering, etc).
It amazes me how many people here on slashdot don't understand the differences and distinctions of multi-process vs. multi-threaded.
In seriousness, I'm with the OP. I wish the ridiculous language evangelism would stop. In the end, people are just being short sighted and limiting the tools at their disposal.
Wasn't TCP designed for just this? Guaranteed transmission?
Regardless of UAC or not, that model of software distribution is totally unworkable.
UAC is no less effective than sudo. Why are linux advocates unable to draw this parallel?
I imagine it will be a vary hard case to make since really all they are trying to do is fix their broken OS.
How is releasing anti-virus software fixing their "broken OS?" Are you implying that a non-broken OS is completely immune to viruses and malware or are you just spewing typical anti-Microsoft vitriol?
Oh ok... Thought so.
Ironically, Firefox is now the only major browser lacking process isolation. Zing!
I responded to the child of your post, if interested.
There is zero recognition that Linux has already been satisfying its core audience
I recognize this entirely. But very few Linux users seem satisfied. They do, however, feel entitled to the IP of companies who have invested untold millions in R&D, chastising anyone who would dare release a blob. Which, as I pointed out, they should be grateful for considering what little, if any, return they're getting.
I've finally realized that to these folks "the desktop" means "access to wallets" in the same way that TV, radio, and the printed page once did.
Wrong again. After 10 years of using Linux, I've learned that the GPL means "whats yours is mine and what's mine is mine," in a corporate context at least. You want some company to GPL their code. Then, in order for said company to use GPL'd code, they'd have to change their entire business model, for a far less profitable one, the process alone costing millions. The irony, of course, is that the community claims that open sourcing code allows the community to do the porting itself. Which of course is bullshit. They get the open source code, and then cry and complain that the company isn't putting forth an effort to port it *FOR* them. Best example to date being Chrome.
I think he's one of those born-again Capitalists who always "get to the bottom line" and find it heretical to have any goals that are not the shortest path to establishing or growing mass-market consumer sales volume.
Wrong once again. I'm not the one talking down to a company who invested time and money to release a driver for my platform of choice, because they released a binary only and care to protect their IP. I'm not the one advocating the "you're either with us or against us" mentality. The point I'm making, is that some companies want to make money. Some want to protect their IP. YOU are flawed in thinking there is something wrong with that.
>Because it's Java it can't use hardware acceleration? If they really are bound to java, they're at google's mercy for hardware accelerated bindings.
Windows CE supports drivers much the way desktop windows does, so there is flexibility and familiarity there. I used to own an HTC Fuze running Windows Mobile 6.5, which had an ATI chip and drivers for hardware acceleration. It is already being done.
Drawing a parallel, American car companies spend far more money on marketing than R&D. Japanese car companies are the opposite. Look how that turned out.
That being said, Windows CE is rock solid, has a familiar API, and if extremely mature. There is no reason to believe that this isn't a solid engineering decision, albeit a not-so-popular decision here on slashdot.
You linux folk should be grateful for the fact that they release a driver at all. It's not like they get any return for creating a driver that allows a handful of people to run a hardware accelerated compiz desktops. Until linux becomes a viable platform for the desktop (which it never will be, because of flawed ideologies), be thankful for any corporate *desktop* support you get.
Now... on to the real discussion!
Is the video not showing up for anyone else, or just me?
1. Kojima isn't directing the movie
Fixed that for you. And I wouldn't consider that a bad thing, if you actually want a game you can play.
Depending on how effective the facial recognition is (and subsequent skeleton mapping) it should be able to ignore others, and even recognize them if they are also playing.
The summary may be technically accurate, but the point is off. IE6 is dying, quickly. If you happen to develop for it in a corporate context, it really isn't that bad because you are targeting IE6, and *only* IE6. What really hurts is developing for modern browsers, and then having to retrofit IE6, which we can safely say is a thing of the past.
In order to complain that IE doesn't support more than 32 style tags in an HTML document.
What I can't believe is that he implies Linux is superior in terms of usability and user-experience.
They set back operating systems on the majority of the world's PCs by half a decade.
Disgruntled slashdotters are so cuuuute!
Microsoft is on top of their game right now. You do your own platform no favors by ignoring Microsoft's innovations and deluding yourself into thinking your platform is superior. Desktop Linux is failing because of people like you, who fail to see its shortcomings. It's quite the paradox.
If I were a betting man I'd put my money on getting more involved in the consumer electronics department, infringing more on Apple's territory than google's.
The higher the base, the smoother the degradation curve from 1...N digits.
This is an operating system still 6 months away from release. By the time it's released, all Intel/AMD CPU's being sold will have vt extensions. Most being sold today have vt extensions. It's not designed for old hardware. Very few people are being alienated, certainly not enough to warrant compromising security with an all-software solution. Which brings me back to my original point: Slashdotter's should be the last to fault them for this.