Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Oh joy! (Score 2) 122

I'll bite. Free software is cool and everything, most of my stuff is running on it. But do you really want all the different car safety stuff to be open? Didn't they ditch a Jeep by remote last year? My car (1999 Grand Marquis LS) is not open to that kind of hacking. Sure, it doesn't have anything fancy like bluetooth or remote software update, but the software that runs the car is pretty safe from malware. I'd like my next car to be like that...

I love open software, but since so many eyeballs can look at the code, do I really want that in my car? (because the many eyeballs stuff)

Comment Applesoft BASIC (Score 1) 633

On my dad's Apple ][+ clone (upgraded to a ][e for LOGO and PASCAL). Then MS BASIC v2.0 on my very first own computer, a breadbox C64. Afterwards, 6809 assembler in CEGEP, some PERL couple years ago, I don't really code anymore, but I'd like as hell to be able to read those old 5.25 floppies. That I can do for the C64 (still have one, and x1541 can transfer to PC, but Without buying extra hardware I'm kinda fscked for Apple disks.)

Comment Re:Humans can part a trailer just fine (Score 1) 273


"So can one with a human driver. They do it every day all over the world with excellent results. Nothing wrong with letting the computer do it but let's not pretend humans can't handle the task."

While working at a Coke bottling plant as a student job, one of their drivers would backup his truck (2 45-footers on it) in one move. in 1988 I'm pretty sure he didn't have any electronic assistance, and yet everytime he would dock perfectly, maybe an inch or so between the dock and the second trailer.

Comment Re:This could get interesting (Score 1) 267

Actually, they do (or did, future will tell us).

Apple ][ series (6502) to MAC (68k) compatibility was achieved via an add-on card on some models. 68k to PPC was via an emulation layer. MacOS classic to OS X was done with emulation (my gigabit G4 Powermac did that pretty well actually, and if memory serves it was called CLASSIC, or do it with fat binaries.

Starting with 10.4.11 there were universal binaries that could run on either PPC or x86, or Rosetta could handle them via emulation (up to 10.5.8 IIRC). So they can pull off another architecture change and retain compatibility until vendors come up with updated software.

Kinda fascinating that a Visicalc file could be transfered from a 5.25 floppy from late '70s early 80s all the way to the latest MAC, while Windows running on X64 can't even handle a 16-bit installer without external support...

IMHO what Intel needs to do is ditch anything before P6 in their architecture. What ran on a 66Mhz 486 or 233 Pentium can be done easily with emulation on newer machines.

Slashdot Top Deals

One good suit is worth a thousand resumes.