[News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows - Linux ; AZ Nomad writes: > On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 16:03:13 +0200, Hadron wrote: > > >>Linonut writes: > >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom: >>> >>>> Hadron wrote: >>>> >>>> [utter ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 40 of 40

Thread: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

  1. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    AZ Nomad writes:

    > On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 16:03:13 +0200, Hadron wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Linonut writes:

    >
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> [utter bull****]
    >>>>
    >>>> BTW: I run 64bit linux since nearly 2 years. I have not switched back to
    >>>> 32bit, as 64bit is *faster* than 32bit, often by quite some margin

    >
    >>This is not my experience. Not when one takes into account the problems
    >>that occur - e.g need to use ia32 libs, skype falling over, delay in
    >>backports for the amd64 libraries in some cases.

    >
    > Bull****. Everything with very very few exceptions compiles as 64
    > bits. Some stuff like firefox plugins but that's it.


    So why "bull****"? I use it. I know.

    >
    >>If someone proved to me it was faster by a wide margin, I would say
    >>"great". As it is I don't notice any speed increase. I *do* however
    >>notice a difference now I have moved from Ubuntu to Debian.

    >
    > People have proved it to you but you aren't interested in facts.
    >


    Where? Really.


    >>It's called helping to improve things - not what passes for "advocacy"
    >>here.

    >
    > Go blow it out your ass. You're little more than a microsoft shill.
    >
    > I'm surprised you even tolerate 32 bits. You should stick with windows
    > 9x.


    Thanks for that. You were convincing.

    --
    Esta cita es patrocinador ol*mpico de Almendralejo 2008.

  2. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    [H]omer wrote:

    > So remind me again, exactly /why/ is the proprietary development model
    > so much "better" than FOSS?


    Because it *overhelmingly* produces superior products.



  3. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Hadron wrote:

    > Ian Hilliard writes:
    >
    >>>

    >>

    http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.p...8045f6e281780c
    >>>

    >>
    >> Many OSS developers believe that by not making it easy to use the CSS
    >> drivers this will force the producers of these drivers to change their

    >
    > Yes. The kind that were a hindrance to Linux adoption for years. The
    > Mark Kents of this world.
    >
    >> ways. I personally believe that the producers of these drivers won't
    >> change their ways until there is an economic imperative. The opening of
    >> the ATI hardware spec may just be the necessary catalyst.

    >
    > They are not going to give their code away. And why should they?
    >
    >>
    >> Ian

    >


    Maybe they should give their hardware spec away, as ATI have done. The FOSS
    developers will do the rest.

    Ian

  4. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    It was on, or about, Sun, 23 Sep 2007 16:46:26 +0100, that as I was
    halfway through a large jam doughnut, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Sunday 23 September 2007 16:09 : \____
    >
    >> William Poaster wrote:
    >>
    >>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o'
    >>>> wisdom:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> [utter bull****]
    >>>>>
    >>>>> BTW: I run 64bit linux since nearly 2 years. I have not switched
    >>>>> back to 32bit, as 64bit is *faster* than 32bit, often by quite some
    >>>>> margin
    >>>>
    >>>> Indeed, I have the same experience (only a few months, though). I'd
    >>>> be quite happy to convert to 64-bit on all my machines.
    >>>>
    >>>> The only downside is that I'd like to increase my RAM.
    >>>>
    >>>> By the way, check out Hadron's recent post at alt.linux.debian.
    >>>
    >>> So it's trolling that group now? It figures, I suppose.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Certainly. After all, in the ubuntu group people have now smelled the
    >> stench from Hadron.

    >
    > They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.


    For H wouldn't it be:-
    Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?


    --
    Hadron - comp.os.linux.advocacy
    Message-ID:
    Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 16:30:46
    "Of course I troll sometimes. I never denied it."

  5. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    ____/ William Poaster on Sunday 23 September 2007 23:40 : \____

    > It was on, or about, Sun, 23 Sep 2007 16:46:26 +0100, that as I was
    > halfway through a large jam doughnut, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Sunday 23 September 2007 16:09 : \____
    >>
    >>> William Poaster wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Linonut wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o'
    >>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> [utter bull****]
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> BTW: I run 64bit linux since nearly 2 years. I have not switched
    >>>>>> back to 32bit, as 64bit is *faster* than 32bit, often by quite some
    >>>>>> margin
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Indeed, I have the same experience (only a few months, though). I'd
    >>>>> be quite happy to convert to 64-bit on all my machines.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The only downside is that I'd like to increase my RAM.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> By the way, check out Hadron's recent post at alt.linux.debian.
    >>>>
    >>>> So it's trolling that group now? It figures, I suppose.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Certainly. After all, in the ubuntu group people have now smelled the
    >>> stench from Hadron.

    >>
    >> They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.

    >
    > For H wouldn't it be:-
    > Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    > Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?


    H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^lkdH^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^dsmH^H^ H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^
    --
    ~~ Best of wishesH^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^ Carrier error.
    Please retransmith [sicH^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hadron^H^H^H^H^H^H^Ca n't have
    Hardon]

  6. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    After takin' a swig o' grog, William Poaster belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    >> They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.

    >
    > For H wouldn't it be:-
    > Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    > Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?


    Damn Small Hadron.

    --
    Tux rox!

  7. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Ian Hilliard writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Ian Hilliard writes:
    >>
    >>>>
    >>>

    > http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.p...8045f6e281780c
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Many OSS developers believe that by not making it easy to use the CSS
    >>> drivers this will force the producers of these drivers to change their

    >>
    >> Yes. The kind that were a hindrance to Linux adoption for years. The
    >> Mark Kents of this world.
    >>
    >>> ways. I personally believe that the producers of these drivers won't
    >>> change their ways until there is an economic imperative. The opening of
    >>> the ATI hardware spec may just be the necessary catalyst.

    >>
    >> They are not going to give their code away. And why should they?
    >>
    >>>
    >>> Ian

    >>

    >
    > Maybe they should give their hardware spec away, as ATI have done. The FOSS
    > developers will do the rest.
    >
    > Ian


    You are, I assume, a professional developer?

    Why would NVidia give away their API? The API hints at the HW.

    The rest, for you, should be easy to deduce,

    --
    Ci sono cose che non riusciamo a comprendere, ma che in ogni caso
    esistono.
    -- Worf, "Echi mentali" (TNG)

  8. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Linonut writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, William Poaster belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>> They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.

    >>
    >> For H wouldn't it be:-
    >> Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    >> Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?

    >
    > Damn Small Hadron.


    Hilarious. Really.

    --
    Ci sono cose che non riusciamo a comprendere, ma che in ogni caso
    esistono.
    -- Worf, "Echi mentali" (TNG)

  9. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Linonut espoused:
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, William Poaster belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>> They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.

    >>
    >> For H wouldn't it be:-
    >> Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    >> Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?

    >
    > Damn Small Hadron.
    >


    Ahh, fantastic.

    Anyway, I anyone has time, it would probably be useful to have a bot
    searching the other linux groups for our trolls, so that we can issue
    warnings to the groups as and when they appear. Anyone got some spare
    time?

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  10. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    ____/ Linonut on Monday 24 September 2007 02:32 : \____

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, William Poaster belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >>> They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.

    >>
    >> For H wouldn't it be:-
    >> Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    >> Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?

    >
    > Damn Small Hadron.


    ....Said Gary Stewart to his practitioner.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Windows: slippery when dry. You have been warned.
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Load average (/proc/loadavg): 1.61 2.24 2.45 3/160 29680
    http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative

  11. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Hadron wrote:

    > Ian Hilliard writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Ian Hilliard writes:
    >>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>

    >>

    http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.p...8045f6e281780c
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Many OSS developers believe that by not making it easy to use the CSS
    >>>> drivers this will force the producers of these drivers to change their
    >>>
    >>> Yes. The kind that were a hindrance to Linux adoption for years. The
    >>> Mark Kents of this world.
    >>>
    >>>> ways. I personally believe that the producers of these drivers won't
    >>>> change their ways until there is an economic imperative. The opening of
    >>>> the ATI hardware spec may just be the necessary catalyst.
    >>>
    >>> They are not going to give their code away. And why should they?
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Ian
    >>>

    >>
    >> Maybe they should give their hardware spec away, as ATI have done. The
    >> FOSS developers will do the rest.
    >>
    >> Ian

    >
    > You are, I assume, a professional developer?
    >
    > Why would NVidia give away their API? The API hints at the HW.
    >
    > The rest, for you, should be easy to deduce,
    >


    I'm a project manager for software development. I suspect I know exactly
    what work is required to develop the drivers given the hardware spec.

    It is wrong to say that the API will give away all the internal workings.
    The API's only speak to the interface to the hardware. The underlying
    hardware can be deduced, but no better than they can now by analysing the
    interface to the graphic processor with a data analyser.

    What giving away the API will do is show what errors were made in design and
    what work-arounds needed to be made. As with opening the source, opening
    the hardware API's keeps the developers honest.

    Ian

  12. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Ian Hilliard writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Ian Hilliard writes:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Ian Hilliard writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>

    > http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.p...8045f6e281780c
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Many OSS developers believe that by not making it easy to use the CSS
    >>>>> drivers this will force the producers of these drivers to change their
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes. The kind that were a hindrance to Linux adoption for years. The
    >>>> Mark Kents of this world.
    >>>>
    >>>>> ways. I personally believe that the producers of these drivers won't
    >>>>> change their ways until there is an economic imperative. The opening of
    >>>>> the ATI hardware spec may just be the necessary catalyst.
    >>>>
    >>>> They are not going to give their code away. And why should they?
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Ian
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Maybe they should give their hardware spec away, as ATI have done. The
    >>> FOSS developers will do the rest.
    >>>
    >>> Ian

    >>
    >> You are, I assume, a professional developer?
    >>
    >> Why would NVidia give away their API? The API hints at the HW.
    >>
    >> The rest, for you, should be easy to deduce,
    >>

    >
    > I'm a project manager for software development. I suspect I know exactly
    > what work is required to develop the drivers given the hardware spec.


    It would be some spec. The internal state machines in modern video cards
    are colossally complex - as are critical timing paths, parallel
    pipelines and multi texture units.

    >
    > It is wrong to say that the API will give away all the internal
    > workings.


    Not really. It would make reverse engineering it a LOT easier.

    > The API's only speak to the interface to the hardware. The underlying
    > hardware can be deduced, but no better than they can now by analysing the
    > interface to the graphic processor with a data analyser.


    Don't be silly Are you really telling me that analysing with a data
    analyser is as easy as, say, reading a line of code saying
    "setCurrentFrameBuffer" complete with a document explaining the 64
    different bit patters you can pass to it depending on video mode?

    Of course it isn't. Working with a data analyser would take eons to
    determine what different calls do - the results depend on too much
    current state data. This is not trivial VGA anymore.

    Jesus, Wine still doesn't work properly.

    >
    > What giving away the API will do is show what errors were made in design and
    > what work-arounds needed to be made. As with opening the source, opening
    > the hardware API's keeps the developers honest.


    Sorry. It would give away a LOT. The question is, do they mind that?

    The best drivers by far for the NVidia card at the moment are the NVidia
    proprietary ones. Rather than admonishing them, people should support
    them.

    >
    > Ian


    --
    Não menospreze as idéias dos outros, a menos que você tenha uma melhor.
    -- Richard A. Moran

  13. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 17:43:05 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    > > "Valued customers" bug Neat Receipts over Vista support
    > >
    > > ,----[ Quote ]
    > >| There, people wonder why it's just so difficult for firms to develop 64-bit
    > >| drivers. Microsoft might be a better company to ask - but we suspect it's a
    > >| huge sea change and we are just the flots and the jets being carried along on
    > >| the top of an irresistible wave.
    > > `----
    > >
    > > http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=42548
    > >
    > > Even some Microsoft products do not support 64-bit PCs. Of course, open source
    > > drivers don't have this issue.

    >
    > I think the issue here is that, for a variety of reasons, Linux drivers are
    > typically written in C, and not optimized to the Nth degree for performance
    > like their Windows counterparts are.


    BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

    >
    > I'd dare say, most "performance" oriented drivers (video, sound, etc..) are
    > written largely in assembly language to eek out every ounce of performance
    > the hardware can give. This makes them less portable, and developers have
    > much less experience writing 64-bit assembly. C drivers, unless you're
    > really stupid, largely just need a recompile.



  14. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Hadron wrote:

    > Linonut writes:
    >
    > > After takin' a swig o' grog, William Poaster belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    > >
    > >>> They have a release named after him -- Warty Warthog.
    > >>
    > >> For H wouldn't it be:-
    > >> Hoaxer Hardon? Hoodwinking Hardon? Hocus-Pokus Hardon? Hoser Hardon?
    > >> Horse-trader Hardon? Humgug Hardon?

    > >
    > > Damn Small Hadron.

    >
    > Hilarious. Really.


    You are in deed.

    >











  15. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Hadron wrote:

    > Linonut writes:
    >=20
    > > After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter K=C3=B6hlmann belched out this bit o=

    ' wisdom:
    > >
    > >> Hadron wrote:
    > >>
    > >> [utter bull****]
    > >>
    > >> BTW: I run 64bit linux since nearly 2 years. I have not switched back =

    to
    > >> 32bit, as 64bit is *faster* than 32bit, often by quite some margin

    >=20
    > This is not my experience. Not when one takes into account the problems
    > that occur - e.g need to use ia32 libs, skype falling over, delay in
    > backports for the amd64 libraries in some cases.
    >=20
    > If someone proved to me it was faster by a wide margin,


    Poor child, deluding yourself into believing you're significant enough
    for anyone to have to prove something to your standards.

    Fact: It is faster by a wide margin whether you believe it, don't
    believe it, or crap cucumbers.







  16. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    DFS wrote:

    > [H]omer wrote:
    >
    > > So remind me again, exactly /why/ is the proprietary development model
    > > so much "better" than FOSS?

    >
    > Because it *overhelmingly* produces superior products.


    If you're a virus writer, spyware author, or spammer.

    >
    >



  17. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    > ____/ Linonut on Monday 24 September 2007 02:32 : \____


    >> Damn Small Hadron.

    >
    > ...Said Gary Stewart to his practitioner.


    His brain, certainly.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | "OOXML is a superb standard"
    | - GNU/Linux traitor, Miguel de Icaza.
    `----

    Fedora release 7 (Moonshine) on sky, running kernel 2.6.22.1-41.fc7
    19:42:25 up 46 days, 18:37, 2 users, load average: 0.62, 0.68, 0.61

  18. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch

    wrote
    on Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:00:18 -0500
    <1eirmr0npa07a.dlg@funkenbusch.com>:
    > On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 17:43:05 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> "Valued customers" bug Neat Receipts over Vista support
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>| There, people wonder why it's just so difficult for firms
    >>| to develop 64-bit drivers. Microsoft might be a better
    >>| company to ask - but we suspect it's a huge sea change
    >>| and we are just the flots and the jets being carried along on
    >>| the top of an irresistible wave.
    >> `----
    >>
    >> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=42548
    >>
    >> Even some Microsoft products do not support 64-bit PCs.
    >> Of course, open source drivers don't have this issue.

    >
    > I think the issue here is that, for a variety of reasons,
    > Linux drivers are typically written in C, and not optimized
    > to the Nth degree for performance like their Windows
    > counterparts are.


    Someone's not up on modern pipelining. Even in the
    early 90's there were a large number of difficulties in
    optimizing assembly code because of such things as pipeline
    stalls. Also, Windows has to contend with anything from a
    Pentium D to a Xeon to an Opteron, with different timings
    for each variant. Support of multiple forks of assembly
    stretches credulity to the breaking point.

    >
    > I'd dare say, most "performance" oriented drivers (video,
    > sound, etc..) are written largely in assembly language to
    > eek


    That's 'eke', in case you're even remotely curious about
    how to correctly spell things.

    > out every ounce of performance the hardware can give.
    > This makes them less portable, and developers have
    > much less experience writing 64-bit assembly. C drivers,
    > unless you're really stupid, largely just need a recompile.


    Assuming they're written properly. Gnu C/C++ has assembly
    builtins, which can be a pain -- I'm not happy with QEMU
    on my laptop, for example.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #1123133:
    void f(FILE * fptr, char *p) { fgets(p, sizeof(p), fptr); }

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  19. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Hadron wrote:

    > The best drivers by far for the NVidia card at the moment are the NVidia
    > proprietary ones. Rather than admonishing them, people should support
    > them.


    The best drivers for x86 are the nVidia drivers. There are however a lot of
    other platforms which use a lot less power or perform a lot better, where
    it would be nice to have a good 3D driver.

    The current driver model is too closely tied to a particular hardware
    platform. This is the biggest problem that I see. The slow rate at which
    CSS software is patched and/or updated is another serious problem.

    Ian

  20. Re: [News] Customers Stung by 64-bit Microsoft Windows

    Ian Hilliard espoused:
    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> The best drivers by far for the NVidia card at the moment are the NVidia
    >> proprietary ones. Rather than admonishing them, people should support
    >> them.

    >
    > The best drivers for x86 are the nVidia drivers. There are however a lot of
    > other platforms which use a lot less power or perform a lot better, where
    > it would be nice to have a good 3D driver.
    >
    > The current driver model is too closely tied to a particular hardware
    > platform. This is the biggest problem that I see. The slow rate at which
    > CSS software is patched and/or updated is another serious problem.
    >


    You can't get nVidia drivers for linux on PPC which support 3D in any
    meaningful way. The open-source drivers do a very good job of doing 2D
    support for X, which is fantastic, and makes PPC Macs usable for
    everything except things like Nexuiz and so on.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2