Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... I'd like many things, mostly moving it closer to Plan9. - Move closer to Plan 9: per-process filesystem views and easy way to implement filesystem interfaces in userland. Directory unions are also a good idea, too many programs end up implementing search paths. - Hierachical administration. There is no reason why root should be able to sandbox untrusted code by creating users/groups, chroot, etc., while a user can't do it. I'd like to see a set-theoretic approach to permissions: - Sandboxing means giving something a subset of my permission set. - A group, as now used in unix, is a subset of each of the members. - A union of several users is also interesting - it's a limited superuser (root is the union of all). Plan 9 something like this, IIRC. - Files that are also directories. There are so many things that can be neatly expressed with them. Reiserfs 4 is going to have them. - Perhaps reach pipes where you can create named sub-pipes would be a good idea (i.e. give meaning to fchdir() to a pipe). Or perhaps it's a bad idea. I haven't decided yet. - A clean terminal protocol. No ioctls please. No ptys, just a pair of pipes. And a portable extensible protocol on top of it. And uncurses ;-). I have a lot of ideas here but I need more time to flesh them out... That's more or less all I think of now. -- Beni Cherniavsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: I can only read email on week-ends... = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hurd [was Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings [OT] ]
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Dovix wrote: Numbering is really not an issue. See, it can always start at 3.0 as the first stable version. That practice worked quite well with NT ;) By that time Linux may still be at 2.8, and if for some reason Linus will decide to go for the magic Number 3.0, Hurd can launch as Hurd 2005 ... Maybe I did not express myself correctly, but I was only using the numbering as an indication for stability and maturity. Hurd does not have a stable release yet, and when it does it will be much less mature than the current Linux (or even perhaps a Linux kernel version some time back). And judging by the time the Hurd is progressing in comparison to the time Linux does, one can assume a similar situation will always prevail. btw, did anybody ACTUALLY try The Hurd? There's even (or was) a Debian iso for it. Check: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/87 It's the best I can find now. Regards, Shlomi Fish --- Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Secondly, the development of Hurd took too much time to believe it can ever amount to anything. Linux (the kernel) is already at 2.6.x and is widely deployed and has a lot of features, and is taking the world by storm. Hurd is not even at 1.0, and its development began before Linus Torvalds startedworking on Linux. Will it ever be ready for prime-time? Just my 20 agoroth. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Meir Kriheli wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 19 December 2003 21:10, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years.-6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) andLinux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli 1. Hope that the SCO mess will be over by then. Me too. 2. G++ compile speed for C++ code on par with GCC (those kde cvs compiles are way too long). First of all, I'm not sure the speed of C++ compilation can ever approach the speed of ANSI C compilation, because C++ is a more complex language. But you are right that the speed of g++ is lacking and probably can be improved. 3. freedesktop.org will be more dominant in DE/WMs development process. 4. Keith Packard work will be merged in the main xfree86 tree (and he'll be back on team). I second that. 5. e17 will be released :-P 6. Standart compliance everywhere and across OSes (web browsers/sites, file formats etc). I second that as well. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
I second you indeed. behdad On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Meir Kriheli wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 19 December 2003 21:10, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years.-6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) andLinux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli 1. Hope that the SCO mess will be over by then. Me too. 2. G++ compile speed for C++ code on par with GCC (those kde cvs compiles are way too long). First of all, I'm not sure the speed of C++ compilation can ever approach the speed of ANSI C compilation, because C++ is a more complex language. But you are right that the speed of g++ is lacking and probably can be improved. 3. freedesktop.org will be more dominant in DE/WMs development process. 4. Keith Packard work will be merged in the main xfree86 tree (and he'll be back on team). I second that. 5. e17 will be released :-P 6. Standart compliance everywhere and across OSes (web browsers/sites, file formats etc). I second that as well. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hurd [was Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings [OT] ]
Another approach is for Hurd to implement interfaces, which will allow it to use Linux drivers (this approach is almost as heretical as developing a layer for allowing Linux to use NDIS-compatible drivers). On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote: On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Dovix wrote: Numbering is really not an issue. See, it can always start at 3.0 as the first stable version. That practice worked quite well with NT ;) By that time Linux may still be at 2.8, and if for some reasonLinus will decide to go for the magic Number 3.0, Hurd can launch as Hurd 2005 ... Maybe I did not express myself correctly, but I was only using the numbering as an indication for stability and maturity. Hurd does not have a stable release yet, and when it does it will be much less mature than the current Linux (or even perhaps a Linux kernel version some time back). And judging by the time the Hurd is progressing in comparison to the time Linux does, one can assume a similar situation will always prevail. btw, did anybody ACTUALLY try The Hurd? There's even (or was) a Debian iso for it. Check: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/87 It's the best I can find now. Regards, Shlomi Fish --- Omer My opinions, as expressed in this E-mail message, are mine alone. They do not represent the official policy of any organization with which I may be affiliated in any way. WARNING TO SPAMMERS: at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hurd [was Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings [OT] ]
I was joking of course, about version numbers. That's why I added the [OT]. Funny, but it is a common knowledge that M$ apps become usable after their third version, and starting NT from 3.x didn't change that paradigm. I have the feeling that The Hurd will be fine WHEN and IF it is finally released as a stable OS, regardless of numbering. Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Dovix wrote: Numbering is really not an issue. See, it can always start at 3.0 as the first stable version. That practice worked quite well with NT ;) By that time Linux may still be at 2.8, and if for some reason Linus will decide to go for the magic Number 3.0, Hurd can launch as Hurd 2005 ... Maybe I did not express myself correctly, but I was only using the numbering as an indication for stability and maturity. Hurd does not have a stable release yet, and when it does it will be much less mature than the current Linux (or even perhaps a Linux kernel version some time back). And judging by the time the Hurd is progressing in comparison to the time Linux does, one can assume a similar situation will always prevail. btw, did anybody ACTUALLY try The Hurd? There's even (or was) a Debian iso for it. Check: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/87 It's the best I can find now. Regards, Shlomi Fish - Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
21 2003, 07:20,Behdad Esfahbod: On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: linux? what linux? in 5 years i would like to use the hurd! :) What does the hypothetical hurd has promised you to do that you like to use it? Is it the name that is better than linux? IMHO forget about hurd. It's simply dead. Who's gonna write all these drivers again? The best is that they need porting every driver from linux to so called hurd which may be simply an implementation of linux's internal interface... as hirds... I do believe that the hurd can offer a much better user experience then linux, for the home user as well as the hobist (don't know about buisness servers). the more extensible nature of the hurd's architecture and the much better designed API (well it was designed, which is usually better then evolved which is what the Linux API did) will probably make integration of system components much better then it is in Linux. The current status in Linux is a disaster. installation of a new hardware piece is ten times more difficult then in any other competing OS, even taking into account all the neat scripts that people write in order to circumvent the shortcomings of the kernel. (yes, I know 2.6 is much better then how it used to be, but its still not good enough). Unfortunatly as other people have mentioned - the HURD is seriously lacking in developers, especially driver writers. Linux is to blame for most of that. and at this stage HURD developers had best put all their efforts into porting Linux drivers to HURD as this is the fastest route to getting more people to install HURD, get more testing done and get more developers in the project. In 5 years I hope to be using HURD on my primary computer, but I really hope it won't take 5 years. Oh, and in 5 years I'd also like to see the current XFree86 scrapped in favor of a better performing, better looking, easier to configure alternative. Fresco would be neat, but I'd settle for Keith Richard's work or getting everything to run on XDirectFB. -- Oded ::.. You are only young once, but you can stay immature indefinitely. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Oded Arbel wrote: 21 2003, 07:20, ?? ??? ?? Behdad Esfahbod: On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: linux? what linux? in 5 years i would like to use the hurd! :) What does the hypothetical hurd has promised you to do that you like to use it?Is it the name that is better than linux? IMHO forget about hurd.It's simply dead. Who's gonna write all these drivers again?The best is that they need porting every driver from linux to so called hurd which may be simply an implementation of linux's internal interface... as hirds... I do believe that the hurd can offer a much better user experience then linux, for the home user as well as the hobist (don't know about buisness servers). the more extensible nature of the hurd's architecture and the much better designed API (well it was designed, which is usually better then evolved which is what the Linux API did) will probably make integration of system components much better then it is in Linux. The current status in Linux is a disaster. installation of a new hardware piece is ten times more difficult then in any other competing OS, even taking into account all the neat scripts that people write in order to circumvent the shortcomings of the kernel. (yes, I know 2.6 is much better then how it used to be, but its still not good enough). I have to disagree on this one. So far, installing hardware on Linux was very straightforward, and many times kudzu or harddrake did the job for me. Plus, since Mandrake 7.2 I never had to re-compile the kernel, except UML kernels for kernel development. (and once, when it turned out I did not really need it). Most other operating systems are either Windows, where backwards compatibility is kept, (even if it's sub-optimal) and where hardware vendors make sure to produce their own working drivers, or operating systems that run on other architectures besides i386, where dealing with hardware is much simpler because of less diversity and more a-priori knowledge. (including for Linux that runs there). Is the situation considerably better in x86-based BSD systems? And what are you referring by shortcomings of the kernel? What is wrong with the kernel, exactly? Unfortunatly as other people have mentioned - the HURD is seriously lacking in developers, especially driver writers. Linux is to blame for most of that. KImageShop is seriously lacking in developers, and the GIMP is to blame for most of that. Can you blame people for wanting to contribute to a fully functional, full-fledged working system that to something that does not work yet, and has not for countless years? And besides, I think that even with the few developers it has, the Hurd should have been able to produce something working by now. So, I'm inclined to think there's something fishy about its development or codebase. and at this stage HURD developers had best put all their efforts into porting Linux drivers to HURD as this is the fastest route to getting more people to install HURD, get more testing done and get more developers in the project. Agreed. In 5 years I hope to be using HURD on my primary computer, but I really hope it won't take 5 years. The Linux kernel works for me, and for what I have to do with my computer. It also works for a great deal of many other people who enjoy using the GNU/Linux operating system. So, I'm not eagerly waiting for the Hurd. If it ever matures and become more usable than Linux, I may switch to it. But for the time being, I'll take Linux anyday. Oh, and in 5 years I'd also like to see the current XFree86 scrapped in favor of a better performing, better looking, easier to configure alternative. Fresco would be neat, but I'd settle for Keith Richard's work or getting everything to run on XDirectFB. X does has its deficincies, yes. But it also something that is there, and works. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
21 2003, 14:52,Shlomi Fish: since Mandrake 7.2 I never had to re-compile the kernel, except UML kernels for kernel development HURD offers something very interesting in this areana: you won't need UML with HURD because each user can run her own drivers/filesystems/etc or even a full kernel on a running system w/o affecting other users. Is the situation considerably better in x86-based BSD systems? Not AFAIK. marginly better I might say. And what are you referring by shortcomings of the kernel? What is wrong with the kernel, exactly? There are tons of problems, one that comes to mind now (because I just ran into it today) is that if a process is blocked on IO, inside the kernel, nothing you can do in user space can free it. you can't interrupt it or even kill -9 it. if you can't fix the problem at the root, you might as well reboot. Unfortunatly as other people have mentioned - the HURD is seriously lacking in developers, especially driver writers. Linux is to blame for most of that. KImageShop is seriously lacking in developers, and the GIMP is to blame for most of that. Can you blame people for wanting to contribute to a fully functional, full-fledged working system that to something that does not work yet, and has not for countless years? No. never meant to say anything bad about the people working on Linux, but you have to agree that if Linux had not existed, HURD would have had many more developers, may be even to the point that it would have been usable about now. BTW - as Debian GNU/Hurd have been mentioned here, here are the installation instruction if anybody wants to try it out. http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/hurd-install -- Oded ::.. You are caught in a maze of twisty little Sendmail rules, all obscure. -- Sendmail: Theory and Practice / Avolio Vixie To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
On Sun, 21 Dec 2003, Oded Arbel wrote: 21 2003, 14:52, ?? ??? ?? Shlomi Fish: since Mandrake 7.2 I never had to re-compile the kernel, except UML kernels for kernel development HURD offers something very interesting in this areana: you won't need UML with HURD because each user can run her own drivers/filesystems/etc or even a full kernel on a running system w/o affecting other users. Yes, so I've heard. Is the situation considerably better in x86-based BSD systems? Not AFAIK. marginly better I mightsay. Hmmm... so it's not as much a problem of Linux as it is the problem of the wacky i386 architecture. And since Linux has to run there, I guess the users or developers have to deal with it as well. Plus, I remember a great deal of hardware and device drivers problems I encountered in Windows as well. If you don't like it buy a nice PowerMac/UltraSparc/Iris/Alpha/whatever and run Linux there. And what are you referring by shortcomings of the kernel? What is wrong with the kernel, exactly? There are tons of problems, one that comes to mind now (because I just ran into it today) is that if a process is blocked on IO, inside the kernel, nothing you can do in user space can free it. you can't interrupt it or even kill -9 it. if you can't fix the problem at the root, you might as well reboot. Well, that can be resolved with some amount of revamping (at least I think so). No need to throw away all the good work that has been done on Linux so far. The question of course is whether resolving all these problems in Linux will take more time than adding all the missing functionality to the Hurd. And I believe this is not true. Unfortunatly as other people have mentioned - the HURD is seriously lacking in developers, especially driver writers. Linux is to blame for most of that. KImageShop is seriously lacking in developers, and the GIMP is to blame for most of that. Can you blame people for wanting to contribute to a fully functional, full-fledged working system that to something that does not work yet, and has not for countless years? No. never meant to say anything bad about the people working on Linux, but you have to agree that if Linux had not existed, HURD would have had many more developers, may be even to the point that it would have been usable about now. And in the meantime everyone would have used a BSD clone... ;-) I sure as hell don't regret that Linus Torvalds started Linux even if it meant less developers being involved in the Hurd. One bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. People have been working on the Hurd for several good years before Linux started. A great deal of people have continued to work on it during the time Linux has matured and widely deployed. And yet a working product have been failed to be produced. I'm not a great believer in the concentration of effort/let's have just one alternative belief. The existence of KDE does not necessarily makes GNOME progress any slower. (and vice versa). And so, I'm not sure the rise of Linux has slowed down the Hurd considerably. Like people here said, maybe it can even contribute some drivers code for them to use. And we must always remember Brooks' Law: the more developers a project has, there are more interactions between the developers, and so its initial progress is slower. According to ESR's The Cathedral and the Bazaar, the Bazaar model overrides this tendency, but I'm not sure if completely or if the development of the Hurd is fully Bazaar like, or ever can be. Regards, Shlomi Fish BTW - as Debian GNU/Hurd have been mentioned here, here are the installation instruction if anybody wants to try it out. http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/hurd-install That is a useful link. Thanks! Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
21 2003, 19:41,Shlomi Fish: Is the situation considerably better in x86-based BSD systems? Not AFAIK. marginly better I mightsay. Hmmm... so it's not as much a problem of Linux as it is the problem of the wacky i386 architecture. And since Linux has to run there, I think that it can be done better, as 2.6 proves - or tries to at least: I have no real experience with that as I haven't been running 2.6 long enough, but the architecture looks so much better. And I think you can do even better then that. No. never meant to say anything bad about the people working on Linux, but you have to agree that if Linux had not existed, HURD would have had many more developers, may be even to the point that it would have been usable about now. And in the meantime everyone would have used a BSD clone... ;-) I feel your pain.. I'm not a great believer in the concentration of effort/let's have just one alternative belief. The existence of KDE does not necessarily makes GNOME progress any slower. (and vice versa). And so, I'm not sure the rise of Linux has slowed down the Hurd considerably. point taken. -- Oded ::.. I've never been canoeing before, but I imagine there must be just a few simple heuristics you have to remember... Yes, don't fall out, and don't hit rocks. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
21 2003, 19:42,Gilad Ben-Yossef: On Sunday 21 December 2003 18:37, Oded Arbel wrote: HURD offers something very interesting in this areana: you won't need UML with HURD because each user can run her own drivers/filesystems/etc or even a full kernel on a running system w/o affecting other users. Which is exactly what UML does. The fact the in HURD it will be your_kernel talking to the microkernel and on Linux it's UML talking to the host kernel is moot It is if you want to run a full OS, but the HURD allows you to run just a filesystem (and pretend its root - a-la chroot), or just a specific driver or any combinartion of hirds that you feel like using, and most times you don't even need super-user premission to do that. Is the situation considerably better in x86-based BSD systems? Not AFAIK. marginly better I might say. Technically, that's wrong. Darwin for example is a BSD system running on top of the Mach microkernel, the same one that HURD used in the begining of the project. And the situation with Darwin is marginly better then in Linux regarding most of the problems Ive mentioned. HURD has a bit different approach then Darwin to how the kernel works with the rest of the system, and I think the situation there is much better (again, not taking into account amount, quality and availability of hardware drivers as this is clearly not a fair comparison). There are tons of problems, one that comes to mind now (because I just ran into it today) is that if a process is blocked on IO, inside the kernel, nothing you can do in user space can free it. you can't interrupt it or even kill -9 it. if you can't fix the problem at the root, you might as well reboot. But have you ever asked yourself why this is so? snip But now consider what happens if you are doing IO. I mean real IO here - talking to some hardware or such. As the kernel, you started handling the request and sent some instructions to the hardware, like wrote some stuff to a region of memory the card reads via DMA for example. Yes, but mostly the problems are with simple stuff like PIPEs, network sockets and such, and I think that the kernel should make allowences for those, or atleast for the KILL signal. And after this too long a speech, maybe all you need is to add soft to the NFS volume mount options? :- because it doesn't help any- it blocks as well, especially if portmap isn't running.. besides, why soft isn't the default ? we know that the abstraction doesn't work so why try to enforce it ? -- Oded ::.. No program done by an undergrad will work after she graduates. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hurd [was Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings [OT] ]
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 02:17:29AM -0800, Dovix wrote: I was joking of course, about version numbers. That's why I added the [OT]. Funny, but it is a common knowledge that M$ apps become usable after I would say barely usable, not usable. Taking win 3.11 as an example ;-) Actually when they put out windows at first as a competition for os2 (which they also wrote for IBM while they also wrote windows behind their back) their target was to first put the os out on the market and then make it stable. I don't think they got around to the stable part yet. their third version, and starting NT from 3.x didn't change that paradigm. I have the feeling that The Hurd will be fine WHEN and IF it is finally released as a stable OS, regardless of numbering. Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Dovix wrote: Numbering is really not an issue. See, it can always start at 3.0 as the first stable version. That practice worked quite well with NT ;) By that time Linux may still be at 2.8, and if for some reason Linus will decide to go for the magic Number 3.0, Hurd can launch as Hurd 2005 ... Maybe I did not express myself correctly, but I was only using the numbering as an indication for stability and maturity. Hurd does not have a stable release yet, and when it does it will be much less mature than the current Linux (or even perhaps a Linux kernel version some time back). And judging by the time the Hurd is progressing in comparison to the time Linux does, one can assume a similar situation will always prevail. btw, did anybody ACTUALLY try The Hurd? There's even (or was) a Debian iso for it. Check: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/87 It's the best I can find now. Regards, Shlomi Fish - Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years.-6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... In five years I hope to see the Linux operating system as the predominant operating system on computers, surpassing Windows by a long shot. I think Linux is a much superior OS than Windows is, with a better development model and I would like to see it deployed more commonly on the desktop as well. As for improvements to it: 1. Better Hebrew support especially in not-so-WYSIWYG technologies like DocBook. 2. Better office suites that can rival Microsoft Office and similar commercial offerings. 3. Better support for emerging web standards like SVG, MathML, etc. in web-browsers. 4. A good full-fledged open source vector graphics editing program. 5. A complete sound editing program to rival CoolEdit. (just the things off the top of my head - there may be others I don't recall). As for the kernel - I'm not sure if I'm aware of any standing issues with it, at least as far as I'm concerned. It just works and it is useful as it is. What I would like to see is open source Nvidia drivers. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: linux? what linux? in 5 years i would like to use the hurd! :) The hurd? (LOL secretely). Well, first of all because it's a true micro-kernel OS, it may always be slower than Linux or other monolithic kernel equivalents. Secondly, the development of Hurd took too much time to believe it can ever amount to anything. Linux (the kernel) is already at 2.6.x and is widely deployed and has a lot of features, and is taking the world by storm. Hurd is not even at 1.0, and its development began before Linus Torvalds started working on Linux. Will it ever be ready for prime-time? Note that there are some things that Hurd can do and Linux can't but for the everyday user, there aren't just enough advantages to prefer it. Just my 20 agoroth. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings [OT]
Numbering is really not an issue. See, it can always start at 3.0 as the first stable version. That practice worked quite well with NT ;) By that time Linux may still be at 2.8, and if for some reason Linus will decide to go for the magic Number 3.0, Hurd can launch as Hurd 2005 ... btw, did anybody ACTUALLY try The Hurd? There's even (or was) a Debian iso for it. --- Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Secondly, the development of Hurd took too much time to believe it can ever amount to anything. Linux (the kernel) is already at 2.6.x and is widely deployed and has a lot of features, and is taking the world by storm. Hurd is not even at 1.0, and its development began before Linus Torvalds started working on Linux. Will it ever be ready for prime-time? Just my 20 agoroth. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- Shlomi Fish[EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/ Writing a BitKeeper replacement is probably easier at this point than getting its license changed. Matt Mackall on OFTC.net #offtopic. = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
Yea you just missing some zeros there, try 500 years;) Ely Levy System group Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: linux? what linux? in 5 years i would like to use the hurd! :) , 19 2003, 23:10,Muli Ben-Yehuda: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli -- diego, Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 19 December 2003 21:10, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli 1. Hope that the SCO mess will be over by then. 2. G++ compile speed for C++ code on par with GCC (those kde cvs compiles are way too long). 3. freedesktop.org will be more dominant in DE/WMs development process. 4. Keith Packard work will be merged in the main xfree86 tree (and he'll be back on team). 5. e17 will be released :-P 6. Standart compliance everywhere and across OSes (web browsers/sites, file formats etc). - Forwarded message from Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:04:38 -0800 From: Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i To: Linux Elitists [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind Google tells you a bit. Surkan has posted similar appeals to a number of LUGs. He's previously written for a number of MSFT rags, perhaps most notoriously I come not to praise Linux: http://linuxtoday.com/news/1998111802110PS Nov 18, 1998 As long as GNU/Linux remains a religion of freeware fanatics, Microsoft (and other NOS vendors) have nothing to worry about. See also: http://lists.gslug.org/pipermail/gslug-general/2003-November/86.html P.S. This report is a skunkworks project of mine, and really doesn't have anything to do with my day job. I just feel very strongly that Microsoft needs to listen better to what users need and want to try and change attitudes. http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/50/347546/2003-12-08/2003-12-14/0 I am a program manager in the Microsoft networking group, doing some research around network security needs. My goal is to help us identify the network security technologies Microsoft should be focusing on to help our customers over the next 5 years or so. - Forwarded message from Bill Kendrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Bill Kendrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 07:32:33 -0800 To: LUGOD [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mail-Followup-To: LUGOD [EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Id: lugod's free for all mailing list vox.lists.lugod.org Subject: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 I received an email last night from one Michael Surkan from Microsoft (based on the mail headers, it looks legit; not some prankster ;^) ) He wanted to know if it would be appropriate to post a note to our 'vox' list asking if folks here would be willing to talk about where they'd like to see MS go down the road... kind of a 5-year-plan, to paraphrase. Anyway, I told him 'go for it,' so he'll no doubt be posting soon. I wanted to give a head's-up to the list before people start arguing over whether it's a hoax or prank or not. The e-mail I got did, in fact, originate from *.microsoft.com. Also, a Google for his name found a quote from him at CBS News' website, and posts on LUG mailing list archives. I'm quite curious as to what they're up to, and how much MS would actually listen to us techie geeks. :^) -bill! [EMAIL PROTECTED] Got kids? Get Tux Paint! http://newbreedsoftware.com/bill/ http://newbreedsoftware.com/tuxpaint/ ___ vox mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox - End forwarded message - -- Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of Gestalt don't you understand? I could give you my word as a Spaniard? No good. I've known too many Spaniards. - Princess Bride ___ linux-elitists http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-elitists - End forwarded message - - -- Meir Kriheli MKsoft systems http://www.mksoft.co.il -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/5Px8RkS5DWK1mZkRAhQEAKC0qJNfOQ7K6ZYL/NFTHgzUUHNAOACfZnk1 vduvQ9hjHqMpsC4s8vxGBf4= =YKJY -END PGP SIGNATURE- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Diego Iastrubni wrote: linux? what linux? in 5 years i would like to use the hurd! :) What does the hypothetical hurd has promised you to do that you like to use it? Is it the name that is better than linux? IMHO forget about hurd. It's simply dead. Who's gonna write all these drivers again? The best is that they need porting every driver from linux to so called hurd which may be simply an implementation of linux's internal interface... as hirds... b , 19 2003, 23:10,Muli Ben-Yehuda: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
Small world :) Bill Kendrick mentioned below is the author of TuxPaint (among others) and was very cooperative in adding Hebrew support to his great app despite the challanges faced by the use of SDL libraries. Anyway, to the point, what I'd like to see more than anything else for Microsoft to do is joining industry and community standards, not fighting them. I think they might find out that doing so will not undermine their position but strenghten it and help in increasing the overall software business so they can peacfully co-exist with the other companies in the neighborhood. Since you asked specifically about the Linux kernel, I think that would be a much tougher question. Support for emerging technologies and standards, as well as growing up to large scale enterprise systems and down to embedded devices is a trivial expectation and will be happening anyway. I also doubt that going to the theoretical front would mean any difference to the end users considering what Linux was able to show so far (though I assume prof. Tenenbaum would still argue that a microkernel is better - lol) So what I would like to see along the way? - true suspend/resume capability - I am not sure how much of a kernel feature that migh be, but I would like to have it work in a similar way to my palm, i.e. zero delay hibernation and resume - regardless of the hardware being used (e.g. laptop or desktop) - for Windows to do so would not be possible (these days I have to reboot my w2k at work daily or it won't function correctly) but for Linux with hundreds of uptime days that might be a really desired feature. - Something crazy I was thinking about - allowing me to move from one place to another with only my 2.5 external hard disk - just plug it to the nearest computer and start working from where I stopped last time. I assume that would be similar to the first item but is a bit more complicated, since it involves resume + automatic hardware recognition and configuration of the new system. - Real time responsivness - I have to admit I didn't try 2.6 yet so I don't know how much it improves on that (though 2.4 with preemptive enabled does wonders) - but have you ever tried BeOS? I don't mind how hard the cpu works, but when I want attention I want it NOW, and when I need real smooth power (e.g. multimedia) this is really critical. - True plug and play - this technology is improving all the time, but I want it to work flawlessly - no longer plug and pray as it is today with either Linux or Windows. I want a system that is so much hardware aware - that even if I will take out a memory bank while it's working it would not freeze, crash or whatever - just recover from it, do damage control and go on. I think that's about it for now, if you can get some of these into the kernel five years from now I'll be very happy :) --- Muli Ben-Yehuda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli - Forwarded message from Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:04:38 -0800 From: Karsten M. Self [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i To: Linux Elitists [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind Google tells you a bit. Surkan has posted similar appeals to a number of LUGs. He's previously written for a number of MSFT rags, perhaps most notoriously I come not to praise Linux: http://linuxtoday.com/news/1998111802110PS Nov 18, 1998 As long as GNU/Linux remains a religion of freeware fanatics, Microsoft (and other NOS vendors) have nothing to worry about. See also: http://lists.gslug.org/pipermail/gslug-general/2003-November/86.html P.S. This report is a skunkworks project of mine, and really doesn't have anything to do with my day job. I just feel very strongly that Microsoft needs to listen better to what users need and want to try and change attitudes. http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/50/347546/2003-12-08/2003-12-14/0 I am a program manager in the Microsoft networking group, doing some research around network security needs. My goal is to help us identify the network security technologies Microsoft should be focusing on to help our customers over the next 5 years or so. -
Re: Fwd: [linux-elitists] Fwd: [vox] Microsoft interested in our feelings
linux? what linux? in 5 years i would like to use the hurd! :) , 19 2003, 23:10,Muli Ben-Yehuda: A Microsoft networking division manager has been contacting LUGs (including LUGoD) regarding what appear to be focus groups concerning where you'd like to see Microsoft in five years. -6' comes to mind [read more below for details] This being a slow friday evening, this strikes me as an excellent time to ask y'all where would you like to see Linux (the kernel) and Linux (the OS) be in five years. Go wild... Cheers, Muli -- diego, Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
