Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Unknown? (Score 1) 63

by NotBorg (#46159309) Attached to: Who's Writing Linux These Days?

There are a number of developers for whom we were unable to determine a corporate affiliation; those are grouped under “unknown” in the table below. With few exceptions, all of the people in this category have contributed ten or fewer changes to the kernel over the past three years, yet the large number of these developers causes their total contribution to be quite high.

The category “none,” instead, represents developers who are known to be doing this work on their own, with no financial contribution happening from any company.

"Unknown" means they don't know if the author's work is sponsored.

Comment: Re:Good! (Score 1) 340

by NotBorg (#45812207) Attached to: X.Org Server 1.15 Brings DRI3, Lacks XWayland Support
I grew up on DOS and can probably still fit more TSRs between 0xA0000–0xFFFFF than most. I grew out of it because, despite being very familiar with it, it just wasn't that great. I've been through many transitions over the years and the one to systemd was one of the most enjoyable. I have more control and I don't have to figure it out for every distribution like I do with those god awful shell scripts that need pages of distribution specific "boiler plating" in a vain attempt to make them robust.

Comment: Re:Mac has superior model (Score 1) 829

by NotBorg (#45763779) Attached to: Microsoft's Ticking Time Bomb Is Windows XP
I'm running a modern, full featured, OS on my decade old hardware. What's even more remarkable is that I have binaries from 2004 (coming up on a decade) that run just fine too. If I looked around I'm sure I could find older binaries that still work despite being built so long ago. I am considering switching to a lighter weight desktop environment, however. I won't trouble you by using the L word, but it seems to work fine for me without all that loud ticking.

Comment: Re:Everyone wants something for free (Score 1) 100

by NotBorg (#45558159) Attached to: Open Source In the Datacenter: It Was Never About Innovation
Most open source is NOT free (as in monetary cost). It's almost good enough so you modify it (at the cost of development time). The expense of maintaining that modification encourages sending your modifications back upstream. The difference is that it's cheaper to pay your own developers to do it than it is to ask some proprietary vendor to modify their stuff for you. Cheaper wins.

Comment: Re:Mozilla did great but the battle is elsewhere (Score 1) 153

by NotBorg (#45381623) Attached to: Ninth Anniversary of Firefox 1.0 Release

We dodged that bullet but now we're heading to a world where facebook.com plus a small few other sites are the internet.

If that were true, there would be no point in search. Yes there are a few that are very popular, but their relative popularity doesn't come at the expense of the very long tail.

Comment: cough*cough*moronic*woodland creature*cough*cough (Score 1) 274

by NotBorg (#45323055) Attached to: Linux 3.12 Released, Linus Proposes Bug Fix-Only 4.0
I think for this to work he has to say something like "We won't move on and merge new features until X bugs have been fixed." In other words if you want the merge window to reopen for features, fix some bugs. X has to be high enough that a good many developers have to work at it. Kinda like making sure you hit your target heart-rate before getting off the treadmill.

A LISP programmer knows the value of everything, but the cost of nothing. -- Alan Perlis

Working...