Desktop Linux

[Peter Flass]

I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying that
Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead. Anyone have any thoughts on
this? I use desktop Linux on my "work" machines-I'm "planning" to move
entirely to Linux, but I've got some stuff on XP that it's just easier to
keep using, for example Photoshop rather than learning to use Gimp to the
same level. And of course this iPad is basically grafted onto my hand. I
suppose I'll stop using XP when the computer dies.

--
Pete

[Dan Espen]

My desktop would like to say "the reports of my death are
greatly exaggerated".

Of course my cell phone, Kindle, and TV would agree.

--
Dan Espen

[Joe Pfeiffer]

I've been reading both that this year will be the year of the desktop on
Linux, and that the Linux desktop is dead, ever since I switched over in
1998. If you don't have a pressing need for a Windows- or OSX-only
application, Linux works great on the desktop (and I recognize not
wanting to incur the not-insignificant costs of moving from an
application you know to one you don't, like the Gimp, can count as a
"pressing need"!). I use the XFCE desktop, which gives a good
traditional working environment.

[Ibmekon]

This it ?

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2489986/linux/is-linux-dead-on-the-desktop.html

Carl Goldsworthy

[Michael Black]

I used to have Linux on the desktop, but then I got a scanner, so I moved
the computer to under the desk.

It works just as well, and unlike when I first put Linux on that desktop
in 2001, I'm not using floppy disks much, so any difficulty accessing the
floppy disk drive is not really an issue anymore.

Michael

[Dan Espen]

Probably, about a month old. Here is the conclusion:

Linux has a stranglehold on the workstation market, for developers,
and on tablets and phones. It's time the enterprise decided Linux on a
business laptop is finally, totally dead

Workstation? Is that a desktop where you actually need to do work?

Enterprises use decisions by committee.
Hope they aren't listening to this troll.

--
Dan Espen

[Stan Barr]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:40:06 +0000 (UTC), Peter Flass
<peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying that
> Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead. Anyone have any thoughts on
> this?

I've been reading things like that since about 1995 :-)
Linux just keeps on going...

(I've been running Linux snce 1993, and Mac from before that.
I did have a WinXP box for about a year, purely to convert .doc files.
Hated it! When the disk controller failed it went for scrap...)

I don't *want* Linux to become too popular on the desktop, if it did I
wouldn't be able to say "I know nothing about it, take your broken
computer to someone else."

--
Stan Barr pla...@bluesomatic.org

[Peter Flass]

Yes. Linux has clearly won the mobile space. They're talking specifically
about desktop systems (and laptops that aren't chromebooks, etc.) Thanks.

>
> Carl Goldsworthy


--
Pete

[Stan Barr]

Correction: By "it" I meant Windows! Brain fade again...

--
Stan Barr pla...@bluesomatic.org

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> writes:
> Probably, about a month old. Here is the conclusion:
>
> Linux has a stranglehold on the workstation market, for developers,
> and on tablets and phones. It's time the enterprise decided Linux on a
> business laptop is finally, totally dead
>
> Workstation? Is that a desktop where you actually need to do work?

latest workstation tech

Haswell-E processor
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2600325/intel-turns-its-attention-to-desktop-performance-unveils-8-core-haswell-e-processor.html
Intel Core i7-5960X, -5930K And -5820K CPU Review: Haswell-E Rises
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-5960x-haswell-e-cpu,3918.html

and

Mac, Chromebook gains soften PC industry decline
http://www.computerworld.com/article/2599990/windows-pcs/mac-chromebook-gains-soften-pc-industry-decline.html

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

[Quadibloc]

On Friday, August 29, 2014 8:47:22 AM UTC-6, MLCWA wrote:

> Workstation? Is that a desktop where you actually need to do work?

That's a desktop used for things like computational fluid dynamics, or other stuff in the "impress your friends" category - hey, a computer _can_ be used for other things besides surfing the web and sending E-mail.

John Savard

[Rob Doyle]

On 8/29/2014 10:53 AM, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
> Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> writes:
>> Probably, about a month old. Here is the conclusion:
>>
>> Linux has a stranglehold on the workstation market, for developers,
>> and on tablets and phones. It's time the enterprise decided Linux on a
>> business laptop is finally, totally dead
>>
>> Workstation? Is that a desktop where you actually need to do work?

> Mac, Chromebook gains soften PC industry decline
> http://www.computerworld.com/article/2599990/windows-pcs/mac-chromebook-gains-soften-pc-industry-decline.html

Chrome OS is based on linux. I'd still count it as linux.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrome_OS

Certainly microsoft is having to react to the Chromebook.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/08/13/microsoft-targets-googles-chromebook-for-the-upcom.aspx

Rob.

[greymaus]

Slow news day.

Linux never really penetrated the corporate market, where stupid
people make decisions.

I like the iPad, but its not .. really.. the same. Useful for newspaper
headlines in the morning, things beyond that is crippled apps.

Maus..

[Shmuel Metz]

In <alpine.LNX.2.02....@darkstar.example.org>, on
08/29/2014

at 10:46 AM, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> said:

>It works just as well, and unlike when I first put Linux on that
>desktop in 2001, I'm not using floppy disks much,

CD burner? DVD burner? USB ports?

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spam...@library.lspace.org

[Shmuel Metz]

In
<438497238431007703.0689...@news.eternal-september.org>,
on 08/29/2014

at 12:40 PM, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> said:

>I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying
>that Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead.

Yes. The article was worth every cent you paid for it.

>Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I've been reading that people are moving from desktops[1] to mobile
devices; I find that more plausible, but I wouldn't put any money on
desktop Linux going away any time soon.

[1] And towers.

[Michael Black]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:

> In <alpine.LNX.2.02....@darkstar.example.org>, on
> 08/29/2014
> at 10:46 AM, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> said:
>
>> It works just as well, and unlike when I first put Linux on that
>> desktop in 2001, I'm not using floppy disks much,
>
> CD burner? DVD burner? USB ports?
>

The DVD drive is higher up, so it's within arm reach.

This one has USB ports on the front, but yes, those are kind of low, I
have to fumble to get to them.

But, I just have a USB cable plugged in, and leave that on the desktop, so
I have something handy for when I need a USB port.

Michael

[greymaus]

Chrome OS is a PITA


--
Maus

[JimP]

Computerworld... I haven't read their crap in decades. Too much of a
Microsoft mouth piece.

JimP.

[Jon Elson]

I've been using Linux as the OS on all my desktop systems since before
2000. There was a short time between VMS and Linux where I used
Windows 95 and NT for main desktop functions, just a couple years.
I have one program that I still use that requires Windows, I now
run it under XP via VMware on Linux host systems.

I have no intentions of switching to anything else in the forseeable
future.

I do use a laptop mostly when traveling.

Jon

[Jon Elson]

Peter Flass wrote:

> I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying that
> Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead.

OK, I have a source of some interesting data. It is not at all
authoritative, as it is contaminated heavily by search engines.
But, here's a list of browser or other OS Identification info
in the logs from my web store:

Linux 2362
Windows 7637
Apple 4565

total page requests 112xxx, 93K of them are Baiduspider bot requests.

So, many requests don't identify the OS, but for those that do,
it seems to show that Linux is WAY more popular than many sources
indicate. Some of my products are tied in with a Linux-based
open source software package, so that might tilt the results
just a little.

Jon

[Peter Flass]

Probably more than a little. I check a couple of "stats" sites monthly
(can't recall the names) and Linux is (IIRC) consistently less than a
couple of percent.

I can't really understand why people and companies haven't rushed to dump
the dreck put out by that monopolistic, money-grubbing band of pirates long
ago.


--
Pete

[Quadibloc]

On Friday, August 29, 2014 6:40:06 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:

> I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying that
> Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead. Anyone have any thoughts on
> this?

Linux has, apparently, never started life on the desktop - so how could it have
"died"? Only a very few people used it at the beginning, and sadly that hasn't
improved much. If anything, Microsoft's stumble with Windows 8 gave it a chance
recently.

The hope that someday it might become a major desktop platform, however,
doesn't seem to me to be any more dead at the moment than it ever was. More and
more of the necessary elements for that to happen are present each year.

Someday, all those Microsoft patents hanging over Linux like the sword of
Damocles will expire, and then corporate entities will feel free to avoid
Microsoft server pricing and go for Linux openly.

John Savard

[Stephen Wolstenholme]

On Sun, 31 Aug 2014 06:13:54 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>On Friday, August 29, 2014 6:40:06 AM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying that
>> Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead. Anyone have any thoughts on
>> this?
>
>Linux has, apparently, never started life on the desktop - so how could it have
>"died"? Only a very few people used it at the beginning, and sadly that hasn't
>improved much. If anything, Microsoft's stumble with Windows 8 gave it a chance
>recently.
>

I don't care who produces my desktop environment as long as I like it
and so do thousands of others. At the moment I have not seen one
better than Windows 7.

I had to use a Unix desktop variant at work but it was not as good as
those produced by either Microsoft or Apple. It was also very
difficult to get common software applications to run on it so I gave
up trying.

I still get the occasional email from people requesting Linux versions
but they back down as soon as I ask who is paying the bill.

Steve

--
Neural Network Software http://www.npsnn.com
EasyNN-plus More than just a neural network http://www.easynn.com
SwingNN Prediction software http://www.swingnn.com
JustNN Just a neural network http://www.justnn.com

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

Jon Elson <el...@pico-systems.com> writes:
> I've been using Linux as the OS on all my desktop systems since before
> 2000. There was a short time between VMS and Linux where I used
> Windows 95 and NT for main desktop functions, just a couple years. I
> have one program that I still use that requires Windows, I now run it
> under XP via VMware on Linux host systems.

i've had linux machine (and cdroms) going back to sometime slackware
cdrom around 1993
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux

but had nt3.5 & nt4 development releases on main machines
... and then switched off before nt5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

i do have xp virtual machine that I've used once a year for taxes
(although it keeps trying to tell me to upgrade).

part of the issue going on now for desktop is open-source, native linux
drivers for high-performance graphics cards ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_graphics_device_driver

and followup
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2014j.html#70 Desktop Linux

Intel unleashed octo-core speed demon for the power-crazed crowd
Haswell-E processors designed for gamers and workstation crowds
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/08/29/intel_unleashed_octocore_speed_demon_for_the_powercrazed_crowd/
Intel's Haswell-E Desktop CPU Debuts With Eight Cores, DDR4 Memory
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/14/08/29/1833254/intels-haswell-e-desktop-cpu-debuts-with-eight-cores-ddr4-memory?sbsrc=md
Intel's Core i7-5960X processor reviewed Haswell Extreme cranks up the
core count
http://techreport.com/review/26977/intel-core-i7-5960x-processor-reviewed

[Rob Doyle]

It's not for me either...

It's a pretty good solution for a school, however. The hardware is
inexpensive and the web-apps require almost no IT support.

... it's all about $$$$

Rob.

[Quadibloc]

On Sunday, August 31, 2014 12:36:06 PM UTC-6, Rob Doyle wrote:
> On 8/30/2014 1:55 AM, greymaus wrote:

> > Chrome OS is a PITA

> It's not for me either...

I remember an ad for a locked-down laptop for Grandma that ran on a customized version of Linux - perfect for getting on the Internet in perfect safety, but little else.

I wouldn't want to spend my money on such a thing for my own use, and a Chromebook doesn't sound any better. I want a computer that can do everything a computer can do - to draw pictures, to do calculations, heck, even to do computational fluid dynamics if I felt like it.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Sunday, August 31, 2014 2:16:06 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> I remember an ad for a locked-down laptop for Grandma that ran on a customized version of Linux

The "Wow! Computer for Seniors" by firstStreet - a version of the Telikin - was what I saw.

John Savard

[greymaus]

Agreed. I got one a while ago, when they were new. Same thing as the
IPod, its not Your computer, you just have permission to use some
aspects of it... I gave it to my sister, whose laptop was clogged
with M$ crud, viruses, etc. SHe couldn't configure it to print labels
for her (small) business. Then there is the constant hints to use the
Cloud.



--
Maus
.
.
...

[greymaus]

Agreed.
Reading now about the Novena... interesting.

[Ahem A Rivet's Shot]

On 1 Sep 2014 08:55:04 GMT

greymaus <grey...@mail.com> wrote:

> Agreed.
> Reading now about the Novena... interesting.

Not at those prices.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, September 1, 2014 2:55:04 AM UTC-6, greymaus wrote:

> Reading now about the Novena... interesting.

I wouldn't know where to buy a _keyboard_ for it. But the idea of a laptop computer with an integrated FPGA is interesting.

John Savard

[greymaus]

On 2014-09-01, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2014 08:55:04 GMT
> greymaus <grey...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> Agreed.
>> Reading now about the Novena... interesting.
>
> Not at those prices.
>

BIOS seems to be opensource, as does the system

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, September 1, 2014 4:54:58 AM UTC-6, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2014 08:55:04 GMT
> greymaus <grey...@mail.com> wrote:

> > Agreed.
> > Reading now about the Novena... interesting.

> Not at those prices.

It's certainly true, as the page says, it's something "not for the faint of heart", and paying a premium for a totally open-source laptop, particularly when it's running on a chip which presumably is less powerful than current offerings from Intel, doesn't appeal to me personally.

But it does offer a built-in FPGA, so it *does* do things you can't do on commercially-available computers, until you get into supercomputer territory. If it only offered more raw number-crunching power...

John Savard

[Christian Brunschen]

In article <40170fb8-4a3d-411e...@googlegroups.com>,

Well, if you want a computer with an FPGA, you could investigate a
"Parallella Computer" from Adapteva,
<http://www.adapteva.com/parallella/>, which has ZYNQ 70x0 chip which
includes a dual-core ARM processor and an FPGA combined, as well as a
16- or 64-core "Epiphany" co-processor which seems to offer some
interesting performance.

>John Savard

// Christian

[Jorgen Grahn]

On Sun, 2014-08-31, Quadibloc wrote:
...

> Someday, all those Microsoft patents hanging over Linux like the sword of
> Damocles will expire, and then corporate entities will feel free to avoid
> Microsoft server pricing and go for Linux openly.

I don't think I ever heard about that, unless you mean that SCO thing,
and didn't that operation die years ago?

No doubt MS are sitting on a lot of weird patents. But for them to
actively threaten to use it (and make sure those corporate entities
hear about it) would be really bad PR -- like threatening to set off a
bomb.

Not that I know how people who buy IT things and services think.
Perhaps they live in an irrational fear of Microsoft; that would
explain a lot.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

[Michael Black]

The patents make things a bit harder. Some Linux distributions won't
fuss, while others will not include things like MP3 decoders (or maybe
encoders?). Same with video codecs. They exist, but some distributions
won't include them.

But the point is, time is passing. I thought some or all of the MP3
patents had lapsed, they came before much practical use for them. Haven't
.gif's come out of patent? Or maybe it's jpg's? Everyone has worked
around such problems, but once the patents expire, it just makes things
that much easier. And some of the more important patents must be running
out sometime soon.

Michael

[Joe Pfeiffer]

Not desktop, but here's a three year old article about Microsoft's
demands regarding Android licensing:

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2011/10/microsoft-collects-license-fees-on-50-of-android-devices-tells-google-to-wake-up/

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, September 1, 2014 4:56:54 PM UTC-6, Jorgen Grahn wrote:

> I don't think I ever heard about that, unless you mean that SCO thing,
> and didn't that operation die years ago?

That SCO thing was about copyrights to Unix itself.

Microsoft holds patents on things like the FAT file system, and naturally they've arranged things so that to use a USB memory stick on a Windows computer, it has to be "formatted" too, with a Microsoft patented file system, so that Linux computers either infringe a Microsoft patent, or format USB sticks in an incompatible fashion.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, September 1, 2014 12:41:34 PM UTC-6, Christian Brunschen wrote:

> Well, if you want a computer with an FPGA, you could investigate a
> "Parallella Computer" from Adapteva,
> <http://www.adapteva.com/parallella/>, which has ZYNQ 70x0 chip which
> includes a dual-core ARM processor and an FPGA combined, as well as a
> 16- or 64-core "Epiphany" co-processor which seems to offer some
> interesting performance.

I thought I heard about that co-processor before, and it was single-precision only instead of double-precision. On that page, I didn't see the FPGA mentioned.

That is a *very* interesting little board.

John Savard

[Christian Brunschen]

In article <8fc8ee6d-aa7a-492c...@googlegroups.com>,

It is - though alas I can't really think of anything I would do with
it, so I can't really justify buying one more gadget "just because"!

But yes, the $149 "desktop" system sems to be quite a reasonable
combination of performance and expandability and price - powerful
enough for a small standalone Linux computer, with a fair amount of
GPIO, that 16-core Epiphany coprocessor for some crunching of numbers,
and that FPGA as well (28k logic gates, apparently guestimated as
equivalent to 430k ASIC gates, according to
http://www.xilinx.com/publications/prod_mktg/zynq7000/Zynq-7000-combined-product-table.pdf)
for which Xilinx's gratis "ISE WebPACK" design software (available for
Windows and Linux,
<http://www.xilinx.com/products/design-tools/ise-design-suite/ise-webpack.htm>)
is supposedly well sufficient (per
<http://www.parallella.org/2014/05/13/fpga-bitstreams-headless-configuration-and-expansion/>)
..

Available to buy from Adapteva <http://shop.adapteva.com/> in the US,
also from Amazon <http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0091UD6TM/>, and outside
the US from RS Components, for instance in the UK
<http://uk.rs-online.com/web/c/semiconductors/semiconductor-development-kits/processor-microcontroller-development-kits/?searchTerm=parallella>
.

Hmmm ... tempting!

>John Savard

// Christian

[Scott Lurndal]

Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> writes:
>On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
>
>> In <alpine.LNX.2.02....@darkstar.example.org>, on
>> 08/29/2014
>> at 10:46 AM, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> said:
>>
>>> It works just as well, and unlike when I first put Linux on that
>>> desktop in 2001, I'm not using floppy disks much,
>>
>> CD burner? DVD burner? USB ports?
>>
>The DVD drive is higher up, so it's within arm reach.
>
>This one has USB ports on the front, but yes, those are kind of low, I
>have to fumble to get to them.
>
>But, I just have a USB cable plugged in, and leave that on the desktop, so
>I have something handy for when I need a USB port.

My new LED (ASUS) monitors have a built-in USB3.0 hub. Just need to run a cable
from the host to the monitor, then can plug 4 devices into the monitor. With
a dual-head setup, that's 8 USB 3.0 ports available on the (physical) desktop.

[Charlton Wilbur]

>>>>> "RD" == Rob Doyle <radi...@gmail.com> writes:

RD> Chrome OS is based on linux. I'd still count it as linux.

Well, fuck, then, if we're going to consider sales numbers, it looks
like Linux on the desktop was completely blown away by BSD in the
pocket.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwi...@chromatico.net

[Charlton Wilbur]

>>>>> "DE" == Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> writes:

>> http://www.computerworld.com/article/2489986/linux/is-linux-dead-on-the-desktop.html

DE> Probably, about a month old. Here is the conclusion:

DE> Linux has a stranglehold on the workstation market, for
DE> developers, and on tablets and phones. It's time the enterprise
DE> decided Linux on a business laptop is finally, totally dead

Linux on the desktop for the masses has been dead for years.

You have to buy a machine capable of running Windows in order to run
Linux, and the vast majority of those come with Windows not for free but
included in the price and difficult to get refunded. So you have to do
MORE work to get Linux than you would do to get Windows, and you have to
know enough to do the work first, which makes Linux for the masses a
non-starter.

Linux on the desktop for business users has been dead for years.

"Business users" need to use what everyone else is using, because the
cost of exporting and importing and the loss of formatting is just too
high, never mind the cost of retraining. Business users don't use
Windows; business users use Word and Excel and Project and SharePoint,
and the fact that those all run optimally on Windows and not at all on
Linux means Linux for business users is a non-starter.

This does not mean that Linux is not a viable desktop operating system.
In fact, it reached that point of usability somewhere around 2003, I
think -- around that time, if you knew what you were doing and either
were willing to put up with the pain of exchanging documents with
Windows users or worked in sufficiently obscure areas that everyone used
Linux, you could ditch Windows and Microsoft entirely.

But "linux on the desktop" meant the dream that the average computer
user would be aware that Linux was a viable alternative to Windows and
that some fraction of them would opt to use it. That never happened,
and becomes less and less likely as desktops fade into irrelevance and
a significant minority of users have started carrying around devices in
their pockets that run a BSD variant.

DE> Workstation? Is that a desktop where you actually need to do
DE> work?

It's an expensive computer that got bought because someone needed its
processing power and capabilities and not because it impressed the other
useless greyfaces in the meeting.

[Michael Black]

That would be handy, except I'm not likely to buy a new monitor. The one
I found on the sidewalk at least four years ago when the students moved
out is still working fine. And I have some backups also found in the
garbage.

Michael

[Quadibloc]

On Sunday, August 31, 2014 2:28:50 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> The "Wow! Computer for Seniors" by firstStreet - a version of the Telikin - was
> what I saw.

In addition to the Chromebook, there's a third alternative that was around for a while.

The drugstore chain in the U.S. sold a kind of netbook running Windows CE for
only $99. The computer was branded by Sylvania, and it was made for them by a
Chinese company called Menq. It came to my notice because some of their
production, presumably with a different operating system, found its way to
North Korea, which claimed that they made those computers themselves (along
with a staged photo in a factory for TV sets).

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Tuesday, September 2, 2014 11:11:24 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> The drugstore chain
CVS
> in the U.S.

Incidentally, what I'd like to see someday is a secure Internet computer that
you can also use as a real computer; maybe based on the Qubes OS, or on
something even more locked down with just two levels - Internet and real
computer.

Some laptops did already have a feature where you can boot into a limited
Internet appliance mode provided from ROM like the BIOS. But Microsoft wasn't
happy with the idea.

John Savard

[Quadibloc]

On Monday, September 1, 2014 6:43:02 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> I thought I heard about that co-processor before, and it was single-precision
> only instead of double-precision.

I checked, and it indeed has that limitation.

John Savard

[Andy Leighton]

On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 22:04:55 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 10:58:17 -0400
> Charlton Wilbur <cwi...@chromatico.net> wrote:
>>
>> You must have been conservative - I started playing with Linux in 1993,
>> and I remember 0.99pl11 being the first I tried. I ran it continuously
>
> Newcomer :) My first Linux kernel was 0.99p4 from SLS on about 50
> floppies (I recall thinking that if it was crud it wasn't a bad price to
> pay for blank floppies).

Yep, that was about when I started too. Spent an entire night installing
it on a Compaq 386sx25. It would have gone a lot quicker but some idiot
forget to activate the swap partition in the installation process.

--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

[Michael Black]

On Wed, 3 Sep 2014, Andy Leighton wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 22:04:55 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 10:58:17 -0400
>> Charlton Wilbur <cwi...@chromatico.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> You must have been conservative - I started playing with Linux in 1993,
>>> and I remember 0.99pl11 being the first I tried. I ran it continuously
>>
>> Newcomer :) My first Linux kernel was 0.99p4 from SLS on about 50
>> floppies (I recall thinking that if it was crud it wasn't a bad price to
>> pay for blank floppies).
>
> Yep, that was about when I started too. Spent an entire night installing
> it on a Compaq 386sx25. It would have gone a lot quicker but some idiot
> forget to activate the swap partition in the installation process.
>

I did that, but much later. Back then, you couldn't do that much without a
swap partition, now, but when I did it (not my first Linux install), it
was months before I realized I hadn't activated swap.

Michael

[Shmuel Metz]

In <slrnm09udk.1...@frailea.sa.invalid>, on 09/01/2014

at 10:56 PM, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se> said:

>No doubt MS are sitting on a lot of weird patents. But for them to
>actively threaten to use it (and make sure those corporate
>entities hear about it) would be really bad PR -- like threatening
>to set off a bomb.

They've done it before, and, like SCO, relied heavily on innuendo
rather than specifics. They don't need a legitimate case in order to
frighten people away.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spam...@library.lspace.org

[Rob Doyle]

On 9/4/2014 9:05 AM, David Hume wrote:
> Rob Doyle <radi...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>> It's not for me either...
>>
>> It's a pretty good solution for a school, however. The hardware is
>> inexpensive and the web-apps require almost no IT support.
>>
>> ... it's all about $$$$
>>
>
> Now you can get one with an NVIDIA Tegra processor.
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/review-acer-chromebook-13-changing-the-game-with-the-nvidia-tegra-7000033229/
>
> I can install linux on one of these things, right?
>
> $299.
>

Tegra is is ARM-based not X86-based ... Just saying.

I'm virtually certain you can run linux on the Tegra K1 series.

https://developer.nvidia.com/linux-tegra-rel-19

You would probably want to find a distribution that supported it.
Unless you want to build all of your applications...

Rob.

[Quadibloc]

On Wednesday, September 3, 2014 1:09:37 AM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:

> I checked, and it indeed has that limitation.

Incidentally, I came across a chip called the uM-FPU64 by Micromega. It sells
for only $20, and provides 64-bit floating point, with other features like
string operations, as a coprocessor to microcontrollers without that feature.
However, it runs at 40 MHz, which is rather slow by present-day standards.

This may be interesting for putting floating-point power in places that one
normally wouldn't expect to find it. But there may be better deals out there,
given the power of the ARM chips in smartphones these days.

John Savard

[Michael Black]

On Thu, 4 Sep 2014, Morten Reistad wrote:

> In article <8c0cc967-87ef-4cae...@googlegroups.com>,

> Go look at the raspberry pi. The model A can give you a fully functioning
> Linux for about $34, power supply and sd card included. With 700 Mhz
> (~900 if overclocking) of 32-bit arm, (arm6, but still) and hardware
> floating point.
>
And the advantage is that the IC and other parts is already soldered to
the board, so no fussing with a microscope on those surface mount parts.

Michael

[Rob Warnock]

David Hume <David...@hushmail.com> wrote:
+---------------
| I think I read that if you put a chrome-book into developer mode
| you can install another O.S.
+---------------

Or have both. "Crouton" lets you run a Linux in a
chroot-ed sandbox *under* Chromium [or ChromeOS]:

https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton
crouton: Chromium OS Universal Chroot Environment

crouton is a set of scripts that bundle up into an easy-to-use,
Chromium OS-centric chroot generator. Currently Ubuntu and Debian
are supported (using debootstrap behind the scenes)...
...
Who's this for?

Anyone who wants to run straight Linux on their Chromium OS device,
and doesn't care about physical security. You're also better off
having some knowledge of Linux tools and the command line in case
things go funny, but it's not strictly necessary.


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock <rp...@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403

[Charlton Wilbur]

>>>>> "AARS" == Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> writes:

>> You must have been conservative - I started playing with Linux in
>> 1993, and I remember 0.99pl11 being the first I tried. I ran it
>> continuously

AARS> Newcomer :)

Well, fuck, at least it's 20 years ago, so it's still folklore :)

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
cwi...@chromatico.net

[Rob Doyle]

I shelled out the $$$ for a Yggdrasil CD - I think version 0.99.5 - just
to try. I had been running BSD/386 and wanted to try this linux thingy.
This on a '386sx16.

That must have been common. I remember being dumbstruck 6 months later
when I ran out of memory the first time and discovered that swap had
never been enabled.

Rob.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2014-09-05, greenaum <gree...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 1 Sep 2014 22:56:54 GMT, Jorgen Grahn <grahn...@snipabacken.se>
> sprachen:
>
>> Not that I know how people who buy IT things and services think.
>> Perhaps they live in an irrational fear of Microsoft; that would
>> explain a lot.
>
> Or maybe a rational one.

"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they
aren't out to get you."

--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 06-Sep-14 07:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to
> get you."

Is it paranoia if they really are out to get you?

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[Patrick Scheible]

David Hume <David...@hushmail.com> writes:

> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> writes:
>
>
>> (I can't believe my DEC-20 emulator got lost in the lint at the bottom
>> of my pocket!)
>>
>
> What DEC-20 emulator? Is there a DEC-20 emulator?

KLH-10 with Mark Crispin's Panda distribution of TOPS-20.

-- Patrick

[jmfbahciv]

Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 06-Sep-14 07:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to
>> get you."
>
> Is it paranoia if they really are out to get you?

No. Wisdom fueled by self-prservation.

/BAH

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2014-09-06, Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:

> On 06-Sep-14 07:42, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to
>> get you."
>
> Is it paranoia if they really are out to get you?

No, just rational thinking.

I tried to join Paranoids Anonymous, but they wouldn't tell me
where they hold their meetings.

[Jon Elson]

Jon Elson wrote:


>
> OK, I have a source of some interesting data.
I'm doing a physics experiment at Argonne National Labs, just south
of Chicago, right now. For data acquisition and analysis, we have rooms
full of Linux systems. So many, I can't come close to counting them.
There are a couple machines running Windows, as they use National
Instruments LabView for some control tasks. But, REALLY heavy on
Linux here.

Jon

[Joe Pfeiffer]

I'm reminded of something someone who had had some business dealings
with Microsoft told me once: you can either try to fight them and get
squashed like a bug, or you can work with them and get squashed like a
bug.

[Whiskers]

On 2014-08-29, greymaus <grey...@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2014-08-29, Peter Flass <peter...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I just read an article in _Computerworld_ (sorry, no link) saying that
>> Linux on the Desktop was essentially dead. Anyone have any thoughts on
>> this? I use desktop Linux on my "work" machines-I'm "planning" to move
>> entirely to Linux, but I've got some stuff on XP that it's just easier to
>> keep using, for example Photoshop rather than learning to use Gimp to the
>> same level. And of course this iPad is basically grafted onto my hand. I
>> suppose I'll stop using XP when the computer dies.
>>
>
> Slow news day.
>
> Linux never really penetrated the corporate market, where stupid
> people make decisions.
>
> I like the iPad, but its not .. really.. the same. Useful for newspaper
> headlines in the morning, things beyond that is crippled apps.
>
> Maus..

When big corporations were starting to set up 'personal computers' for
their desk jockeys, in the early '80s, they were looking for something
that wouldn't increase the load on their mainframes (thus eliminating
thin clients and dumb terminals for general issue) and the people making
the decisions were familiar with the IBM brand. So it was really a 'no
brainer' to put in mass orders for IBM PCs and let the desk jockeys and
IT staff battle with the consequences. There wasn't anything else in
the market.

Apple machines were expensive and associated with 'creative types' so
the marketing dept might convince the accountants to let them have some,
but no-one else stood a chance.

Unix wouldn't run on the PCs of the day, and it wasn't cheap either.
Linux was a rumour, not 'useful'.

So IBM got the business, and gave it to Microsoft, whose grasp is very
tight. They also have a strong financial incentive to maintain their
grip; there is no such corporate entity related to GNU/Linux or FOSS, so
there is no competition - just a plethora of alternatives for those free
to think for themselves. That does seem to worry Microsoft though ...

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Walter Bushell]

In article <86lhpxr...@chai.my.domain>,

Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote:

> (I can't believe my DEC-20 emulator got lost in the lint at the bottom
> of my pocket!)
>

> -- Patrick

I could.

--
Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.