Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Sucks but... (Score 1) 271

by rev0lt (#47810711) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

Smaller companies often have old desktops running as their "servers", no raid (or using the crappy bios fakeraid), no backups, no redundancy etc.

Smaller companies often have no servers and have everything online, or have a in-house NAS and a bunch of desktops. This isn't the nineties anymore. Some corner shops may still have a couple of desktops doubling as servers (yah, I've seen it), but it is not that common.

Lots of cheaper servers are also based on desktop boards, and lots of budget hosting companies use such systems.

Just because they are in a rackmount case, it doesn't make them "servers". And most providers describe in detail the hardware, and will give you explicit option for an entry-level server solution - you get what you choose to pay for. If you're dumb enough to get an i7 "server" with 32GB of RAM for database work, its your problem, not theirs.
Most desktop gear isn't even designed for a 24/7 operation, let alone having to support the cpu running at full capacity and indefinite amount of time. Desktop gear is not designed, both from a thermal and electrical perspective, for this kind of operation.

Comment: Re:The other way round (Score 0) 271

by rev0lt (#47810565) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

I like to use ECC even on the desktop, and yes there are ways to do it. At a cost.

Just because you use entry-level server gear/workstation gear for desktop work, it doesn't make it desktop :) And the cost isn't that big of a difference - a small entry-level xeon workstation/server isn't that much more expensive than the desktop gear. The problem is, most "regular" consumers aren't even aware of this, because the corner shop and the shopping mall sells computers that look like a christmas tree, not workstations.

Comment: Re:Sucks but... (Score 3, Funny) 271

by rev0lt (#47804501) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

And you think with the low margins the manufacturers have these days, they can do without that share?

Unfortunely, yes. No major motherboard manufacturer even cares about niche market. And the IC manufacturers, they don't really care, either.

Also people using desktop Linux are typically in the higher income levels and can not only pay for quality

Higher income buyers are buying trendy Apple, Andoid tablets and Microsoft laptops, not linux workstations.

they can recognize it, unlike the sheep

No, they just don't care about that. But you do get the smugness of the illusion that the manufacturer uses fairy dust instead of building it like everyone else.

Wolves are always a minority.

Now, you're just assuming stuff. I'd say wolves are quite the majority of animals in wolfpacks, and the major ingredient in wolf stoo.

What you are also completely forgetting is that a lot of these will actually run as servers. You know, because Linux does well as server

Who is using COTS desktop boards on servers? Traditionally, Intel desktop cpu lines do not support ECC memory. And you talk like there is no option for servers besides Linux.

You know, because Linux does well as server, quite unlike Windows

I assume you speak from experience. I'd blame it on the sysadmin, not the operating system.

But you would not know or understand that.

Get out of the basement sometimes. Try to vent out at least some of that frustration of yours.

Comment: Re:What a bunch of Wuss (Score 1) 579

by rev0lt (#47702481) Attached to: Munich Reverses Course, May Ditch Linux For Microsoft

In the early days all of Germany's neighbors were weak in comparison, they'd all been through WW1 also.

I don't really see where you got that idea. The british empire had what was probably the most well-oiled war machine at the time - and Germany gave them a run for their money.

No one really wanted to get into a war and were slow to react.

If you mean "leaders were well aware of the consequences of war in your own backyard because it had happened a decade and a half before", yeah. No redneck reasoning here. And when the Americans realized this, they bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They've witnessed the horrors of the invasion of China and what is now Korea a couple of years before. (Hint: google "nanking massacre" - it makes the german seem inefficient by comparison).

If Germany had just grabbed their "lebensraum" and stopped they probably could have kept it.

You seem to forget that WWII was also fought in Africa. And Asia. Germany was fighting every major country on Earth at the time (with the exception of Japan), and had taken control of France and Netherlands, both with colonies in Africa.

Comment: Re:What a bunch of Wuss (Score 1) 579

by rev0lt (#47702411) Attached to: Munich Reverses Course, May Ditch Linux For Microsoft
Even after the USA entered, if Germany had invested into expanding their submarine fleet as it was proposed internally (and, at the time, they had the biggest submarine fleet in the world), it would not have been difficult to cut the US supply lines to the allies by taking control of the Atlantic. Again, bad decisions.

Comment: Re:Over paid (Score 1) 442

by rev0lt (#47609931) Attached to: Big Bang Actors To Earn $1M Per Episode

I just thing it's not worth millions of dollars a year.

No professional career is worth millions of dollars a year, even if you're running into burning buildings or doing the other crap you mention. Btw, writing is way easier than acting, at least for me. It has to do with talent. But - BUT - if someone builds a business model around your specific skill/trick/whatever that generates millions in revenue, aren't you entitled to a cut? That's how professional sports work. Acting careers. Writing careers. Inspiring spokesman. Religious leaders. Politicians. Bankers. Whatever, all those people making millions a year. They're just taking a cut of the profit their work generates. If you don't like it, that's your problem.

Comment: Re:I know you're trying to be funny, but... (Score 1) 739

by rev0lt (#47562811) Attached to: Linus Torvalds: "GCC 4.9.0 Seems To Be Terminally Broken"

https://lkml.org/lkml/1998/9/3... [lkml.org] I don't know what else to tell you. They really do suck. Trap-gates are faster and safer. Call-gates are... prettier, more elegant.

Have a look at Linux 2.0 implementation. You'lll see an interrupt handler copying registers to the stack, and *then* invoking the call gate. So basically, doubling the work. And no, interrupts are not safer, as they don't provide stack isolation. This is done *manually* in the Linux implementation.

It's probably much a much narrower/null lead these days with massive caches, but back in 98, it was serious business.

I seriously doubt that. I was working extensively with x86 assembly in 98, and actually implemented call-gate systems in some of my pet projects. Granted, they were pet projects, not a mainstream piece of OSS, but I don't share that experience.

he various kernel mailing lists are abound with discussions on people wanting to try out call-gates, and finding out that *they suck*.

AFAIK, the implementation 2.0/2.2 still uses a call gate. Not directly, but inside the IV.

Also, SYSENTER wasn't switched to until we ran into the P4's massive pipeline stall on trap-gates, which the AMD K6 did *not* exhibit. It wasn't a fundamental problem with the trap-gate itself, but a quirk of the Netburst architecture.

It is a fundamental problem with the trap gate. The pipeline size and the agressive branch prediction mechanism only made it worse. Shorter pipelines don't suffer as much, as they are faster to clean and less prone to stupid execution stalls. Also, there was a huge amount of optimization done on silicon for this since 32 bit operating systems using interrupts became mainstream, and the same can't be said for the architecturally complex call-gate solution. SYSENTER simplifies a lot, but performs basically the same task as a call gate.

The fact that the unices/dos used entry 0x80 in the IDT, and NT used 0x2e, and 95 used 0x30, with call-gates to VxD code (eventually gotten rid of) doesn't mean the methodology of the trap was what was inherited

Actually, the fact that many other architectures do not provide any other user-defined global entry point besides the interrupt table has a huge weight in it; I don't see any problem with the metodology, if you're implementing a portable system. I see problems with a specific implementation of it on an operating system designed from the ground up for x86, and one of those problems is that whoever implemented it clearly had no clue about how it worked.

Comment: Re:Radicalization (Score 1) 868

by rev0lt (#47562595) Attached to: Gaza's Only Power Plant Knocked Offline

Jews, on the other hand, have thousands of years old connection to the land. There are historical artifacts, found all across Israel with Hebrew writings on them, and indeed most of Jewish history can be traced back to Greater Israel.

As many other tribes do, including many many muslim settlers. Jews didn't existed as a "nation" trying to form their own country since the beginning of the 30's. Problems between jewish settlements and muslim settlements go back many many centuries, as both shared the same piece of land. To suggest that jews are the ones with the legitimate right to it is to be narrow-minded. During the beginning of the XX century, they were actually a minority in the region. In fact, when jews all over Europe started returning to the "promised land", the influx was so big that the Brits passed laws limiting Jewish emigration.

The sad reality, is that we have a "neighbour" that is so extreme and hell bent on our extermination, that we have no choice but to continue defending ourselves.

That is a piss-poor excuse. I bet your neighbour doesn't have nuclear devices and the backing of the most well-equipped army in the World. But if that "us-or-them" attitude is what makes you sleep well at night - by all means. But regardless, both sides are to blame.

Comment: Re:"Proportional response" is nonsense (Score 1) 868

by rev0lt (#47562537) Attached to: Gaza's Only Power Plant Knocked Offline

That lie was exposed as such, when the Gazans voted — in free and internationally-observed elections [washingtonpost.com] — for Hamas [wikipedia.org].

Oddly enough, when American citizens are killed by the thousands as a response to direct actions of their freely elected democratic government, its called "terrorism", and it is a legitimate excuse to bomb the shit out of other countries. What you're saying is that anyone that suffered directly from decisions made by the US governments has the legitimate right of shooting down *any* american, just because it exercised its democratic duty. So, lets expand this concept - there has been some heavy international military interventions in the last decade, coordinated by more than a dozen democratic nations. It was their government's decision to take part on it. What you're defending is, that if you were on the other side of any of those interventions, you have the *right* to kill *anyone* from any of those countries, because they elected a government?
I actually hope you're an american.

Contrary to the haters' portrayal, IDF are not indiscriminate killers they don't need this sort of calculations to try their hardest to avoid killing innocent civilians. Shit still happens, unfortunately.

Its not the hater's portrayal when you have western media covering it, and even have Israel allies asking questions about this. Are you really convinced that Hamas has a super-duper propaganda machine that is bigger and more efficient than Israel's/US machine? Shit happens when you bomb one of the most densely populated areas in the world, and they don't care.

Comment: Re:Radicalization (Score 1) 868

by rev0lt (#47562389) Attached to: Gaza's Only Power Plant Knocked Offline

So I really do think that comparing casualty numbers here, when they're competently kept low by Israel and intentionally driven up by hamas, and yes they're deliberately trying to get their own killed for the press value, is a little disingenious. Unless you don't mind parrotting Hamas propaganda. Because that is what it is: Propaganda, very very bloodily so.

And what do they have left? I'd suggest you try to corner a common house pet like a cat or a dog, and see what happens. It is easy to take the moral high ground when you have food, water, sanitation and electricity. And a job, public transportation, schools, shelter. Parks for kids to play. Do you think everyone in Gaza is a terrorist? Do you think every arab is a terrorist?
Imagine yourself without most of what you take for granted, and that you look across your fence and your neighbour has everything you want and is laughing at you. It is hard not to get emotional on this, specially when you have an active propaganda machine telling you who the enemy is. And this machine exists in both sides.

Keep in mind, what is now the US and Australia was partially colonized by western criminals. Does this mean they are all criminals, and their children need to die? I don't think you believe what you wrote.

It is surely a great calamity for a human being to have no obsessions. - Robert Bly

Working...