On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:35:22 +0800, Dean Michael C. Berris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: .. > I don't see how manipulexible another OS is if you're not manipulating > the actual OS... You're downloading *something else* off the net and > making it run on your OS.
Yes that's true, I failed to differentiate that. But let's face it-- the OS is/should be infrastructure. While MS does dumb-ass things like put what should rightly be in userspace, in kernel-space, it doesn't change the fact that to them, the OS is infrastructure. Infrastructure is defined differently by different people. MS seems to think that JPEG decoding and Zlib compression should be in the kernel. It's not relevant. Simply think of the OS as something that enables you to do something. .. > Like what? You have the compilers, you have the API's, you have the > libraries, the computer, the keyboard, the chair. If there's nothing > between the keyboard and the chair, then there must be something wrong. Yeah right. I am frankly surprised that there are people on this list who question my qualifications. But to address your point-- it's true, we can always reinvent the wheel. AND YES MISTER ZAK, I DID READ UP THE LITERATURE ON FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS. But-- whether you implement the code yourself, or "lazily download something off sourceforge," for THIS particular application, there is no OSS solution. Trust me-- I HAVE LOOKED. I also considered writing the code myself, seeing as I wrote a complete DSP suite back in college (back when there was no libfftw).. Actually you could say I'm a "if I can do it with Linux, I will do it with Linux even if it's harder" kind of person. I'm not a "D/L something and if it don't compile whine" kind of person. .. > When you say OS, you mean the kernel right? I don't see how being a PSOS > OS will allow your OS to be "manipulexible" if you don't even have > enough resources to "manipulex" it. You don't even have the source code > to it! I consider "manipulexable" equivalent to "making it do what I want." So call me stupid/lazy/a suit/whatever, but there's Cygwin and Activestate Perl and other things. "But you're just turning Windoze into *ix!" you cry. Yes, maybe, but with working fingerprint recognition software... .. > There is open source development even on the Other OS. What I think is > muddled a bit here is the differentiation between the OS (kernel), and > the evironment (other applications that interface with the kernel). There's no point making that distinction from a functional perspective. From a technical perspective, yes, but in the world I live in, no. Maybe when you've worked as long as I have (and the fun of coding for work has all been drained out of you...) you will come to see my point, which is: I don't care what's kernel and what's userspace. I care about how this agglomeration will do my job. .. > Is Microsoft opening up the sources to Windows(R) ? Hmmm... I thought so > too. ;) I didn't mean that. I meant the culture of sharing solutions, which IMHO is more valuable than having the source code of the kernel. C'mon, when was the last time you dug into the Linux kernel? (aside from editing a few .h files so that some weird hardware is supported or something..) Besides-- even if MS opened the source of Windoze (N.B. WindowsCE *has* been released under a "look but don't touch" source license)-- who would want to look in there? .. > Example: GDI bug. Allows jpeg images to ruin your computer -- and this > is part of the KERNEL!!! Another: ActiveX controls that can crash the > system. Please. > > If that's not inferior, I don't know what is. At least, that's In My Not > So Humble Opinion. I would consider that to be Sloppy Programming, and Bad Design. But... what about the fork bomb bug which still exists in all/most modern Linux distributions due to sloppy ulimit? (yes mister Zak, your debian unstable doesn't count, before you swarm all over me correcting my errors) Note-- I'm not defending MS. I love free software. Currently I'm hacking on "astro-info" (astro-info.sourceforge.net -- see! I'm a lazy sourceforge downloader!!) I'm adding more objects to the deepsky catalog, and I'm planning to add a serial mouse reader so that a (hacked) mouse can be used as DSC's (digital setting circles) for a telescope. Free software is great. And having source code is great. And being able to hack is great. But-- if a job needs doing, and free software can't do it, I won't hesitate to use proprietary software. -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List plug@lists.q-linux.com (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
