Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OpenBSD 5.1 Released

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by soupbowl View Post
    I'd like to know what wifi cards you have, I have 6 wifi cards and none of them work correctly in linux. 1 actually works but the wifi range is about 60% lower then it is in windows. 2 of them used to work, until a regression hit the drivers and they have not been update in a longtime. Also saying Linux has superior hardware support to windows is a joke. Out of the box without internet it might, but overall it does not. excluding third party support make no sense.
    I have Atheros based card and it's working great (but I use router for most of the time). Btw. I thought we were talking about wifi situation in BSD compared to Linux? So, BSD and Windows are in the same camp, right? That's somehow imaginable, because BSD is using proprietary friendly license. Linux has superior hardware support to Windows, because Linux drivers belongs to Linux and not to third party members. Windows without third party drivers simply doesn't exist. I explained before I mean Windows without third party drivers.

    As for the great article showing linux graphics stack beating out windows, I enjoy seeing all the games tested are old OpenGL titles, No on cares to play those games anymore
    and windows 7 has terrible support for openGL. Since DX is superior in every way, john carmack agrees.
    You are terribly mistaken. OpenGL is still very important, because it is used on Linux, OS X and Play Station. This is a huge market. After Valve going to Linux its graphic stack will become even better.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      Not stability problems in your posts about Linux as well.
      I didn't say BSD or Solaris has better performance. You think Linux is perfect?
      Some things are not fully compatible, like stability and performance.


      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      How this shows OOM is bad while hack in Solaris is good?
      So tell me which hack was that?


      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      Solaris was one of the most bloated Unix ever. It failed, because Sun started to base on marketing and "features" rather than user needs.
      True. Linux is next.


      Originally posted by kraftman View Post

      You didn't answer me.
      "Mode 2 (which is new in 2.6) is certainly an improvement over modes 0 and 1 available in the older versions of the Linux kernel. However, mode 2 doesn't mean that memory will never be overcommitted. It just uses a different heuristic for guessing how much memory is safe to allow to be allocated."


      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      Wrong vs Right ; BSD vs Linux ; killed vs living and growing rapidly.
      growing rapidly = getting bloated

      Comment


      • #43
        This shows, that FreeBSD is more stable than Linux (distributions).
        Because there are much more Linux servers than FreeBSD, but FreeBSD has good ranks.

        NetBSD is used by NASA: http://www.netbsd.org/gallery/resear...l#tcp_sat_nasa

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by kraftman View Post
          I have Atheros based card and it's working great (but I use router for most of the time). Btw. I thought we were talking about wifi situation in BSD compared to Linux? So, BSD and Windows are in the same camp, right? That's somehow imaginable, because BSD is using proprietary friendly license. Linux has superior hardware support to Windows, because Linux drivers belongs to Linux and not to third party members. Windows without third party drivers simply doesn't exist. I explained before I mean Windows without third party drivers.
          I also have Atheros based card and it works great without installing third party drivers on Windows. Also why would somebody use Windows without third party drivers.
          Windows at least has more stable driver ABI, so drivers can easly be installed.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by LightBit View Post
            I didn't say BSD or Solaris has better performance. You think Linux is perfect?
            Some things are not fully compatible, like stability and performance.
            You were saying Linux is not as reliable and that's what I was talking about here. The stability and performance is tunable and that's a good thing.

            So tell me which hack was that?
            The one that caused an application to be killed. I don't know what they did. Maybe it's the hack from your article?

            True. Linux is next.
            Not true. Linux is less bloated than Windows, BSD, Solaris. I'm not talking about kernel size, but about things like ability to run unmodified kernel in embedded systems.

            "Mode 2 (which is new in 2.6) is certainly an improvement over modes 0 and 1 available in the older versions of the Linux kernel. However, mode 2 doesn't mean that memory will never be overcommitted. It just uses a different heuristic for guessing how much memory is safe to allow to be allocated."
            And this quote is from Solaris devs? This is from the Linux kernel documentation:

            http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Docum...mit-accounting


            Don't overcommit. The total address space commit for the system is not permitted to exceed swap + a configurable percentage (default is 50) of physical RAM.
            growing rapidly = getting bloated
            Just a size of a package and number lines of code. You're running just a few percent of entire Linux.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by LightBit View Post
              This shows, that FreeBSD is more stable than Linux (distributions).
              Because there are much more Linux servers than FreeBSD, but FreeBSD has good ranks.

              NetBSD is used by NASA: http://www.netbsd.org/gallery/resear...l#tcp_sat_nasa
              That's funny, because it shows exactly opposite. The three the most reliable servers are running on Linux. Most of the 10 most reliable servers are Linux ones. Most of the servers in the first link are also running Linux. Your data is probably outdated (1999), because NASA is running Linux. However, they may also run other OS's. Linux is also used in CERN, Submarines and Army in general:

              http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7789
              http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6978
              http://jaboutboul.blogspot.com/2008/...-frontier.html

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                I also have Atheros based card and it works great without installing third party drivers on Windows. Also why would somebody use Windows without third party drivers.
                Windows at least has more stable driver ABI, so drivers can easly be installed.
                I have XP and I had to install drivers manually. That's true, but depending on third party members isn't a comfortable situation. Windows has very high market share, so they're doing what MS wants, but in the future it can change.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  You were saying Linux is not as reliable and that's what I was talking about here. The stability and performance is tunable and that's a good thing.
                  It defaults to 100% performance and it's not fully tunable.


                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  The one that caused an application to be killed. I don't know what they did. Maybe it's the hack from your article?
                  Nobody knows that, maybe perl did something stupid?


                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  Not true. Linux is less bloated than Windows, BSD, Solaris. I'm not talking about kernel size, but about things like ability to run unmodified kernel in embedded systems.
                  OpenBSD and NetBSD can both run on embedded systems without being recompiled with most of things disabled like Linux which also needs different userland.


                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  And this quote is from Solaris devs? This is from the Linux kernel documentation:

                  http://www.mjmwired.net/kernel/Docum...mit-accounting
                  Another source: http://opsmonkey.blogspot.com/2007/0...vercommit.html
                  It probably doesn't overcommit all memory, but it can overcommit avilable memory.


                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  Just a size of a package and number lines of code. You're running just a few percent of entire Linux.
                  That's bloat. On Arch Linux kernel is 16MB uncompressed + 37.7MB compressed modules. OpenBSD kernel 8.6MB uncompressed and it doesn' have modules. Not to mention userland.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    I have XP and I had to install drivers manually. That's true, but depending on third party members isn't a comfortable situation. Windows has very high market share, so they're doing what MS wants, but in the future it can change.
                    With Linux 2.5 there would be no way to get it work.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      That's funny, because it shows exactly opposite. The three the most reliable servers are running on Linux. Most of the 10 most reliable servers are Linux ones. Most of the servers in the first link are also running Linux. Your data is probably outdated (1999), because NASA is running Linux. However, they may also run other OS's. Linux is also used in CERN, Submarines and Army in general:

                      http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7789
                      http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6978
                      http://jaboutboul.blogspot.com/2008/...-frontier.html
                      Reliability of servers also depend on network connection and other stuffs. More FreeBSD servers are on high ranks than Linux servers percentually. There are many Linux servers much below 40 rank.

                      NASA also runs IRIX, it doesn't mean they don't run NetBSD. If you look popularity of os and where it is being used, you come to conclusion that Windows is the most reliable os on world.
                      You won't read news which says "Windows is being used by nuclear power plant controllers", because it is obvious.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X