XP ownes Vista roll call!....

[baseline bum]

IN - too many of the high end stuff just doesn't work properly

OpenBSD owns all

Seriously the BSD family is very similar with different scopes to them. Quick and dirty differences (nuances are much more complicated).

OpenBSD - Security and hardware support - Best security record in the industry
NetBSD - Emphasis on running on many different hardware platforms
FreeBSD - Empahsis on network operations/heavy duty servers

We've started using OpenBSD for all out IT backbone infrastructure a few years back and never looked back. It requires an investment in knowledge but then it just blows everything else away.

P.S. ST is running on OpenBSD

Can I assume that NetBSD has the most mature AMD64 support? FreeBSD says their AMD64 branch is too young to be rock-solid. I'm not going to use OpenBSD as a main OS when it doesn't offer hardware accelerated graphics.

It's unbelievable how little support there is on the AMD64 platform (especially from 3rd party software, like Flash), considering it has been the standard not only at AMD, but on Intel chips too in the past year.

I wonder if NetBSD's ports tree is easy to use to build 32-bit applications. For instance, 32-bit mplayer kills 64-bit. All my videos look like using the 64-bit codecs.

[Slomo]

I'll freely admit to have a very limited knowledge of Xwin under OpenBSD because as I said we use it mainly for our backbone infrastructure and servers, where a GUI is really not needed.

You understand that the setuid thing is a security thing? In a secure system root shouldn't be used at all. We are all lazy and do it on our machines, but on a commercial system we really don't.

The man pages are very good. It's the openBSD philosophy where the do entation is as much part of the OS as the code is, so until a fuction's man page is complete the function itself is not considered fuilly operational.

And running X on OpenBSD might not be the best thing, but build any type of secure network and I'll bet you than we can do it better with OpenBSD than with anything else.

I do not know how it is with NetBSD and the AMD 64(in theory they are the ones that spend most time on the portability of their OS to different platforms). OpenBSD works really nice on those, but if graphic support is what you're after then OpenBSD is probbly not your best choice.

Most of the problems with hardware support comes from the unwillingness of the manufacturers to share the drivers code under a free public licence. AMD for a while cooperated with OpenBSD very well, but now with the new Vista guidelines problems are coming back.

[Bigzax]

windows 98 rules!

[Al Gore]

windows 98 rules!

98 Plus with that heavy metal intro!

[Inbred]

IN - too many of the high end stuff just doesn't work properly

OpenBSD owns all

Seriously the BSD family is very similar with different scopes to them. Quick and dirty differences (nuances are much more complicated).

OpenBSD - Security and hardware support - Best security record in the industry
NetBSD - Emphasis on running on many different hardware platforms
FreeBSD - Empahsis on network operations/heavy duty servers

We've started using OpenBSD for all out IT backbone infrastructure a few years back and never looked back. It requires an investment in knowledge but then it just blows everything else away.

P.S. ST is running on OpenBSD

Can someone translate this into English for me?

[DarkReign]

98 Plus with that heavy metal intro!

Didnt you invent the internet on Windows 3.1?

[DarkReign]

Can someone translate this into English for me?

Yes.....

Theyre both IT guys (thats Information Technology). Networking your computer and your moms is done with a simple router or a crossover cable.

Networking 300+ computers to one server that updates in real-time as the 300+ employees work on stuff is entirely another.

Stability. Security. Support.

So, Slomo and BB kick knowledge about stuff only people in the industry would know. It would be like 2 doctors coming into a thread and kicking their knowledge in its native Latin classifications and only the lawyers could follow.

[baseline bum]

I'll freely admit to have a very limited knowledge of Xwin under OpenBSD because as I said we use it mainly for our backbone infrastructure and servers, where a GUI is really not needed.

You understand that the setuid thing is a security thing? In a secure system root shouldn't be used at all. We are all lazy and do it on our machines, but on a commercial system we really don't.

The man pages are very good. It's the openBSD philosophy where the do entation is as much part of the OS as the code is, so until a fuction's man page is complete the function itself is not considered fuilly operational.

And running X on OpenBSD might not be the best thing, but build any type of secure network and I'll bet you than we can do it better with OpenBSD than with anything else.

I do not know how it is with NetBSD and the AMD 64(in theory they are the ones that spend most time on the portability of their OS to different platforms). OpenBSD works really nice on those, but if graphic support is what you're after then OpenBSD is probbly not your best choice.

Most of the problems with hardware support comes from the unwillingness of the manufacturers to share the drivers code under a free public licence. AMD for a while cooperated with OpenBSD very well, but now with the new Vista guidelines problems are coming back.

Yeah, I get OpenBSD wants no process running as root, but I'm looking at desktop use. Setuid X is a lot better idea than creating my character devices with lower permissions. An unpriveledged X process isn't going to work very well with Beryl.

There's no reason to expect companies like ATI and nVidia to share their HALs when they've got millions invested in their hardware. I hate the GPL, and how most Linux distros are crippled out of box because of it. Could you imagine where computing would be if Berkeley GPLed their networking code?

Still, AMD has released the source to a lot of the drivers for older ATI hardware to the XOrg foundation (I think everything up to r300), and I know Intel has open-sourced their graphics drivers.

[baseline bum]

windows 98 rules!

98 was the worst Microsoft OS ever created, except for Win95, 3.1, 3.11, DOS, ME, and Vista.

[Slomo]

Yeah, I get OpenBSD wants no process running as root, but I'm looking at desktop use. Setuid X is a lot better idea than creating my character devices with lower permissions. An unpriveledged X process isn't going to work very well with Beryl.

I understand why you want to do it, but no way! Theo is quite adament about this sort of stuff. You should have seen the faces of the people when I booted up my XP notebook in the middle of a conference where most of the european developers, Theo and some of the US guys were present. The debate was quite fun afterwards (I had the upper hand since I had a car in the hotel parking lot with a trunk full of Slovenian beer and the bar was closed ).

There's no reason to expect companies like ATI and nVidia to share their HALs when they've got millions invested in their hardware. I hate the GPL, and how most Linux distros are crippled out of box because of it. Could you imagine where computing would be if Berkeley GPLed their networking code?

Still, AMD has released the source to a lot of the drivers for older ATI hardware to the XOrg foundation (I think everything up to r300), and I know Intel has open-sourced their graphics drivers.

Well I've heard that many hardware manufacturers would be willing to share their codes in order to sell more hardware on more platforms, but the recent contracts with Microsoft makes it almost impossible since Microsoft would not certify their hardware and it scares MS user away (their biggest market by far).

Yeah thank god for the few smart people from Berkeley.

[velik_m]

I switched from win98 to winXP this year, and so far i have no complaints. I'm in no hurry to get Vista.

[baseline bum]

I understand why you want to do it, but no way! Theo is quite adament about this sort of stuff. You should have seen the faces of the people when I booted up my XP notebook in the middle of a conference where most of the european developers, Theo and some of the US guys were present. The debate was quite fun afterwards (I had the upper hand since I had a car in the hotel parking lot with a trunk full of Slovenian beer and the bar was closed ).

Well I've heard that many hardware manufacturers would be willing to share their codes in order to sell more hardware on more platforms, but the recent contracts with Microsoft makes it almost impossible since Microsoft would not certify their hardware and it scares MS user away (their biggest market by far).

Yeah thank god for the few smart people from Berkeley.

Seriously, you know Theo? Can you get him to autograph my Vista disc?

[Cry Havoc]

Can someone translate this into English for me?

If you can't understand it, BSD doesn't concern you in the slightest.

[Cry Havoc]

in.


vista sucks. mac wanna-be.

LOL

Um. Okay.

[nkdlunch]

98 was the worst Microsoft OS ever created, except for Win95, 3.1, 3.11, DOS, ME, and Vista.

you have not heard of Windows NT?

that was the most pathetic piece of in history

[Slomo]

Seriously, you know Theo? Can you get him to autograph my Vista disc?

I do.

He'll be over here again end of November (Venice OBSD conf). I don't know if I'd dare ask him to sign a Vista disk

[Beno Udrih]

Whoa you guys just said a bunch of things I don't understand.

[Beno Udrih]

But of course you nerds aren't going to like vista. I haven't had any problems with my laptop. But at the same time I'm not using it for some of the things you guys use it.

[spurster]

We have Vista on a desktop with 1GB memory and no fiddling, and it's ok.

We also have Vista on a laptop now expanded to 2GB and the Aero interface and several services and startup programs disabled. It is reasonably usable now.

For unclear reasons, Vista will be a dog on some systems.

[Banjo Boy]

Yeah, I get OpenBSD wants no process running as root, but I'm looking at desktop use. Setuid X is a lot better idea than creating my character devices with lower permissions. An unpriveledged X process isn't going to work very well with Beryl.

There's no reason to expect companies like ATI and nVidia to share their HALs when they've got millions invested in their hardware. I hate the GPL, and how most Linux distros are crippled out of box because of it. Could you imagine where computing would be if Berkeley GPLed their networking code?

Still, AMD has released the source to a lot of the drivers for older ATI hardware to the XOrg foundation (I think everything up to r300), and I know Intel has open-sourced their graphics drivers.

And Kori still thinks we don't need a Tech forum

[Steve Perry]

The reason I don't like Vista is...............It is set up so that your on line activity can be monitored since there is a built in back door code to access your HD .
There is a huge market in information. XP does not have the code built in. The NSA and other organizations have to rely on your online service provider to release your activity/download Logs. The only people who seem to really like Vista are the ones who always want something new or different.

Let's take a car for example. At one time everyone had to have A "Mustang 5.0 with the rag top down so your hair can blow" then they wanted SUVs then Hummers. When in fact all a car does is get you from point A to point C, after Microsoft unveils their next new operating system, the same folks who are on the Vista band wagon now, will say how much it sucks.
Life is really one big circle. I on the other hand prefer the Triangle life

[DarkReign]

The reason I don't like Vista is...............It is set up so that your on line activity can be monitored since there is a built in back door code to access your HD .
There is a huge market in information. XP does not have the code built in. The NSA and other organizations have to rely on your online service provider to release your activity/download Logs. The only people who seem to really like Vista are the ones who always want something new or different.

If Big Brother wants to bone you, they dont need software companies to bend you over.

Take off the tinfoil hat.

[Cry Havoc]

Let's take a car for example. At one time everyone had to have A "Mustang 5.0 with the rag top down so your hair can blow" then they wanted SUVs then Hummers. When in fact all a car does is get you from point A to point C

A couple of points:

A) There is nothing wrong with attempting to improve the way one functions. XP was a massively huge upgrade over ME and Win98. "Wanting something different" in this case was just wanting something that worked. Vista has a lot of promise, and if MS develops it well, will become a very good operating system. The support for Dx10 alone is important in a number of respects, and the fact that they are introducing more GPU-based applications means the potential for a more dynamic OS in the future. And, despite how much animosity there is against Microsoft these days, they have been improving their products. My dream OS is a fully integrated 3-D system that allows you to use your fingers and hands and gestures to navigate, rather than a mouse.

B) Yes. Cars get you from point A to point B. However, as many have said, "Life is about the journey, not a destination."

And
this just might be a little more enjoyable than your average commute. I would hesitate to say that EVERYONE wants SUVs nowadays.

Not to make this a car thread, by any means. But there is something very moving about a car, literally and figuratively. They are emotive, transportable works of art. To say they are all the same is to say that a 5 year old's scribble is the same as a Van Gogh, because they consist of roughly the same materials on the same kind of canvas.

[leemajors]

A couple of points:

A) There is nothing wrong with attempting to improve the way one functions. XP was a massively huge upgrade over ME and Win98. "Wanting something different" in this case was just wanting something that worked. Vista has a lot of promise, and if MS develops it well, will become a very good operating system. The support for Dx10 alone is important in a number of respects, and the fact that they are introducing more GPU-based applications means the potential for a more dynamic OS in the future. And, despite how much animosity there is against Microsoft these days, they have been improving their products. My dream OS is a fully integrated 3-D system that allows you to use your fingers and hands and gestures to navigate, rather than a mouse.

B) Yes. Cars get you from point A to point B. However, as many have said, "Life is about the journey, not a destination."

And
this just might be a little more enjoyable than your average commute. I would hesitate to say that EVERYONE wants SUVs nowadays.

Not to make this a car thread, by any means. But there is something very moving about a car, literally and figuratively. They are emotive, transportable works of art. To say they are all the same is to say that a 5 year old's scribble is the same as a Van Gogh, because they consist of roughly the same materials on the same kind of canvas.

i don't think they should have taken as long as they did to get it out the door. with as long as it took, they should have released a much more polished product instead of hawking widgets.

[Cry Havoc]

i don't think they should have taken as long as they did to get it out the door. with as long as it took, they should have released a much more polished product instead of hawking widgets.

When should it have been released? Windows XP was barely being cemented as the main OS two years ago. If you change OSes too quickly, you are doing a disservice to the consumers who bought XP.