| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Linux gets heart transplant with 2.6.0 | |
|
||
| Time: 10:30 EST/15:30 GMT | News Source: CNET | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Top programmers on Wednesday released a major update to Linux, version 2.6.0, a change that's expected to help carry the open-source operating system into new markets. The new version of the core, or kernel, of Linux has several changes that make Linux better suited to powerful computers with numerous processors, a market dominated today by servers running versions of the Unix operating system on which Linux is based. This version will be the first major change since 2.4.0 was released in January 2001. From its lowly roots as a student project Linus Torvalds began 12 years ago, the software has matured to become a major competitor to Microsoft and a key part of most computing companies' plans. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 234 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:54:06 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1295 (216.84.210.100) at 12/18/2003 12:28:10 PM |
|
"software has matured to become a major competitor to Microsoft"
Not exactly... Its become a major competitor to Unix not Windows. It is a competitor to Windows yes, but its killing unix. Ever wonder why IBM got behind Linux (reference: new "Linux is the Future" commercial). IBM realized that they were screwed if they didn't embrace the OS that was going to kill them. |
| #2 By 61 (65.32.171.138) at 12/18/2003 1:08:58 PM |
|
Well, Bill did write software in the early days of the company (BASIC for the Altair, for one).
Also, why should Bill write the OS when he can hire more talented programmers to write a better OS than he could. |
| #3 By 2332 (216.41.45.78) at 12/18/2003 1:55:06 PM |
|
#1 - Bill bought his OS, Linus build his.
Actually, Linus borrow code from an existing unix variant called Minix, and more or less copied everything about it when he created Linux. Aside from the fact that Linus borrowed his code and Bill bought his code, I'm not sure I see the difference. Windows NT, on the other hand, was completely original. While it took design ideas from many other OS's, (Mostly VMS). it is far more original than Linux ever was. Granted, Gates didn't write any large portion of code for it, but he was certainly involved in the architecture. At any rate, Gates is a brilliant programmer. This post was edited by RMD on Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 13:56. |
| #4 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/18/2003 2:04:09 PM |
|
Linux versions are so boring, they offer no new innovations or any real features that people would care about.
Just not worth upgrading to. |
| #5 By 7797 (63.76.44.252) at 12/18/2003 3:28:30 PM |
|
The sodablue Hall of Shame:
" Linux versions are so boring, they offer no new innovations or any real features that people would care about. Just not worth upgrading to." "Granted, my main issue with Linux is it's old technology and not very fun to work with." "It's funny, but actually Linux is too bloated to be used for embedded devices." "Linux which is motivated entirely from hatred of Microsoft products" "OSS development is cheaper... partly true, but since it's unreliable and slower you position yourself with a competitive disadvantage." "The large problem is really that most open source zealots do not have any understanding of the computer world." "The US should start investigating on whether Linux exists because of illegal dumping by foreign companies." "most GPL code is of dubius quality" "I don't have a problem with Linux but I do have a problem with the community's general lack of respect for other peoples work." |
| #6 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at 12/18/2003 5:54:58 PM |
|
Actually Microsoft and IBM where design partners in the NT project, then split ways, thus making NT and OS/2, which in the beginning where very similar. If it hadn’t been for IBM there is a good chance Microsoft would have simply tried to “fix” the DOS platform, and we all know where that path ended (WinME).
IBM and MS were partners on OS/2, not NT. Among other things, MS contributed the GUI and file system for OS/2. The OS was sold under both the MS and IBM brands, and the original plan was that OS/2 was the future of application development on the PC. MS not only wanted to go beyond the constraints of DOS and 16-bit Windows soon after their release, they also wanted to go beyond hardware constraints on the time. When the 386 was released, MS wanted to create a 32-bit OS that required the 386 because of architectual advantages it offered over the 286. IBM, however, didn't adopt the 386, and wanted to keep the OS compatable with the 286. Differences in design philosopphy such as these, and MS' need to take Windows forward due to its established and increasing popularity were likely contributory to the split. During this time, MS hired Dave Cutler and some of his fellow engineers, and they started work on NT. A largely platform inspecific, 32-bit OS that would carry Windows, DOS, and OS/2 compatability forward through the use of pluggable subsystems, while offering a cleaner, more maintainable architecture underneath. It was also Microsoft's bid to enter Unix-dominated markets without using Unix. |
| #7 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 12/18/2003 6:36:02 PM |
| Anyone want to bet that 2.6.1 (which will fix the problems raised by parker) is out before SP2 for XP? |
| #8 By 7797 (64.244.109.161) at 12/18/2003 8:09:03 PM |
|
sodablue:
boring? no innovation? features no once cares about? HMMMMMMMM It's The Superman Kernel http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20031218142551627 "In addition to just supporting new hardware features, internal limits have been also increased when possible. For example, the number of unique users and groups on a Linux system has been bumped from 65,000 to over 4 billion. (16-bit to 32-bit), making Linux more practical on large file and authentication servers. Similarly, The number of PIDs (Process IDs) before wraparound has been bumped up from 32,000 to 1 billion, improving application starting performance on very busy or very long-lived systems. Although the maximum number of open files has not been increased, Linux with the 2.6 kernel will no longer require you to set what the limit is in advance; this number will self-scale. And finally, Linux 2.6 will include improved 64-bit support on block devices that support it, even on 32-bit platforms such as i386. This allows for filesystems up to 16TB on common hardware." parker: slower memory performance? "NUMA (or "Non-Uniform Memory Access") is a step beyond SMP in the multi-processing world and is a major leap forward for efficiency on systems that have many processors. Current multiprocessing systems were designed with many of the same limitations as their uniprocessor counterparts, especially as only a single pool of memory is expected to serve all processors. On a many-processor system, there is a major performance bottleneck due to the extremely high contention rate between the multiple cpus onto the single memory bus. NUMA servers get around that difficulty by introducing the concept that, for a specific processor, some memory is closer than others." Oh yeah so boring and slow.. Microsoft thinks so too: http://www.itworld.com/Comp/2444/031216msunit/ "To a certain extent, Microsoft's decision to form a division focused on the OS core was driven by its main rival, Linux, said Rob Enderle, principal analyst at Enderle Group, a consulting firm specializing on emerging technologies, in San Jose, California. "'They have been studying Linux extensively. Part of their study has been on how Linux has been able to maintain a high level of consistency in the kernel while groups around it maintain maximum flexibility,' Enderle said." Yeah no one in their right mind would use linux right? http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,61657,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_5 This post was edited by tgnb on Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 20:19. |
| #9 By 7797 (64.244.109.161) at 12/18/2003 10:20:17 PM |
|
"Let's quote a site whose sole purpose is to rave about open source and slam SCO (but mostly slam SCO)."
Wrong. Very Wrong. I can tell you haven't spent more than 2 seconds reading the mountains of facts and legal paperwork and analysis over there. "Let's quote an analyst" Yeah why not. People here drule over things when "analysts" rave about windows. "Let's quote an article that says Austin is CONSIDERING using Linux" Yeah why not? Them considering it alone shows that they are taking Linux very serious. |
| #10 By 135 (208.186.90.91) at 12/19/2003 12:14:49 AM |
|
Boring. It's just an evolution over Linux 2.5. Nothing revolutionary or exciting about it!
What's the point of upgrading? It offers absolutely nothing compelling. [BTW, if you're too dense to understand... I'm parodying the buggers who claim XP or Longhorn isn't worth upgrading to] |
| #11 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 12/19/2003 1:13:58 AM |
|
#29 "http://www.redhat.com/about/presscenter/2003/press_q2fy2004_table.html"
Total Subscription revenue is up 78% on last year, net income is up 119% on the last 6 months (where they were losing money last year). Did you read the columns backwards? cynic! |
| #12 By 12071 (203.217.24.43) at 12/19/2003 3:07:25 AM |
|
#31 Take a look at those figures:
August 31st 2002 ($1,951) i.e. a LOSS of almost $2 million August 31st 2003 $3,337 i.e. a PROFIT of over $3 million How is that not making money? Like I said, you are either reading the information wrong assuming the columns are in the order of earliest year (left most column) to latest year (right most column).... which they are not... look again. Or you assume that all those figures are losses (which I doubt you would assume). RedHat have made approximately $1.8 million in the last quarter, and in the quarter before that they turned a almost $2 million LOSS into a $1.5 million PROFIT. |
| #13 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 12/19/2003 5:58:42 PM |
|
Keep in mind that for Redhat to become profitable, they had to move away from the GPL and adopt a proprietary subscription/support model.
You cannot obtain Redhat Enterprise Linux without paying for a yearly subscription. Good news for Redhat. Bad news for the GPL. |
| #14 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 12/19/2003 7:39:44 PM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
| #15 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 12/19/2003 8:44:29 PM |
| This comment has been removed due to a violation of the Active Network Terms of Use. |
| #16 By 5444 (216.167.135.250) at 12/21/2003 4:16:09 PM |
|
Sodablue, I am kinda disappointed that you don't know the development cycle for Linux.
Of course it is just a stepping stone from 2.5. 2.5 or any odd number build in the .x slot is a development non stable build that leads to the stable release of the even number list. IOW no build of 2.5 is considered stable enough for production use. it is there if you want to test it. or to look at it from a ms point of view (not quite true in the case of longhorn as entire systems are being rebuilt) but it 2.5.0 would be earearly early alpha stages. as it gets closer with rc levels. like that past 3 monts) we would bein the later stages of the build. when it went from 2.5.x to 2.6 it became a stable build (stable being a relative term here). el |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 234 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:54:06 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
