Quick, name one technology MS has invented.
Quick, name one technology MS has invented.
Go to your windows app instead. You won't be missed. And try that approach using your windows app and see how well support treats you then.
He pulled in work for his employer. If the thousands of out of work American software engineers did they wouldn't be out of work. Since they can't, his H1B was warranted, as was its extension, and the US government failed in this case. Provided the story is correctly retold, of course.
Your friendly browser read Slashdot with you!
He did what none of the thousands of out of work American software engineers *did* do, or they wouldn't have been out of work. An H1B is not granted on potential alone, but on actual ability to accomplish.
I'm certain they mean better personal freedom. The US is a country with "free speech zones", where mixed race marriages get nixed by judges, where there are "no fly" lists which ban infants from entering airplanes, and where a person who appears to be from, say, the Middle East will be eyed with suspicion just for walking around.
It's not pleasant being an obvious foreigner living in the US, despite all the lip service paid to "personal liberty" and "human rights", which incidentally the US usually don't even ratify, much less even try to give the appearance of living up to the spirit of.
And being "backwards compatible" would mean that I can run the drivers and software written for Debian in 2001 now without recompile, can I do that?
Yes. Just install it using the Debian installer and it will run just fine.
That Linux runs "decade old shit" means that hardware is supported in Linux for decades. That means that if you buy hardware today which works with Linux, it will not break with the next version. Or the one after that. Or the one in a decade. That's what it means that "decade old shit" works in Linux. THAT is backwards compatibility.
And finally, as for why you have to have a stable ABI? Because if you will go to the big three, Walmart, Staples, and Best Buy, you will see that the vast majority of those selling to the big three won't actually play your GPL games.
And since when do those companies write hardware drivers? They don't, they never did, and they never will, is when.
All that's required for a "works with Linux" sticker is that the hardware manufacturer checks if the chips they use (you do realize hardly any of them actually design the chips in the hardware?) work with Linux. If they do, they can slap a tux on the box, and the hardware will work right now, and in the future, even when it is "decade old shit". The hardware manufacturers choose not to do this. That's not the Linux developers fault, and it has precisely nothing to do with the ABI.
Your argument is a non-argument. At least learn what the hell you're on about if you're gonna provide advice to your betters.
PS. Deus Ex runs fine in Debian as well.
So now you're suddenly admitting that Linux drivers ARE backwards compatible, and that is suddenly not important; or it's even a drawback.
A couple of comments ago you were whining about how you couldn't recommend a network card even if you know it works with Linux, because it might break in a few updates. This despite that that has yet to happen - and in fact, only *can* happen if your wet dream, stable ABI's, come through.
If you could at least keep your arguments consistent you might make a teeny bit of sense. As it is you sound like a closed source shrill only arguing for arguments sake.
You still haven't explained why the hardware manufacturers who use chips supported by the kernel drivers can't slap tuxes on their boxes, but somehow need a magical stable ABI to be able to do so. Except by alluding to how you want Linux to walk down the driver hell of Windows, which is not going to happen - an unstable ABI is a feature, not a bug.
Now I see where you're coming from. You're assuming the way to go is OEM provided hardware drivers.
Compare the stability of your average Windows install with OEM drivers to the stability of your average Linux system and you'll see why this assumption is flawed. Hardware vendors are really lousy at writing software, as a general rule.
And your facts are wrong; if the network card works with the current incarnation of Linux, it will work with the next one as well. This is one of the strengths of the Linux approach, with the driver being in the kernel and not updated at the whim of the manufacturer.
You're arguing that the only way forward is to throw away the stability and strength of Linux. To abandon the approach which has made Linux stable, secure and solid, and invite the mess of hardware drivers which has made Windows a mess.
Contrast this with what the hardware vendors can do today, right now. They can look at the chips in their hardware, and see if there are drivers in Linux for them. If there are, they can slap the tux on their box, and have another market for their hardware. If there isn't, they have a choice to release the specs or not. Either case is better than a hardware vendor provided driver. Yes, no support at all is better than a driver the kind of which Windows gets. No-one wants a "Linux 32/64" folder with a broken, outdated driver. What we, and joe sixpack, actually want is a penguin on the boxes which have drivers in the kernel.
You're right. The situation won't change. The ABI won't become stable, because that will make Linux unstable. That's not "militant", there is no shooting programmers or bombing software houses, it's just common sense, and the reason Linux will steadily gain user base.
I'm curious; how is a stable ABI going to change a single thing? Right now the manufacturer can look what chip they put in their hardware, look at the kernel drivers, and slap a penguin on the box if the chip has a driver. If there is a stable ABI the manufacturer can
ASCII a stupid question, you get an EBCDIC answer.