Have you read other of my postings ?
hey!... but was you yourself that complained vigorously in this thread
"" Can somebody explain to me why redhat, ubuntu, any commercial organisation can get
enthusiasts to help them find bugs and stabilise a product, only for them, once stable, to
sell it as a stable enterprise os.""
Do you think that is what is really happening ?... without "life long optimization", that is,
without a permanent tunning and seeing, what conflicts with what really, how can you tell that
the apps and libs that you "guess" are conflicting, are not running great as ever in RH
"commercial" or other offerings, and no need to issue patches and or warnings ?
"" The solution was to upgrade, upgrade the app but when I tried, that the old problem of
dependency hell ( now I know that has changed with yum . Ok mandrake had a slightly newer
version so I installed that. Great that worked - oh no some other app now has a different bug
so that means upgrade or down grade. dependency hell again.""
Isn't that because all possible combinations are impossible to track ?
But if a really optimization effort was made to be possible, because a revenue stream is been
generated, and the projects specially in desktop, and many more projects developers could be
supported and funded,... wouldn't this dependency hell me much more attenuated ?
I was in your side, because you and thousand more are in cold right now... i was in the cold
many times, and could be tomorrow again... but your arguments only give reasons for RH not get
involved in the mainstream desktop.
Your objections to my posts seem to be that; - what would be made "commercial" and installed
from those repositorys from online, would be much different from the *free*, and there would
be a permanent winter!?
How much worst could it be from what is now ?... wouldn't a real catch the bug and dependency,
generating much more involvement from the original projects, so that apps can be changed and
evolve to be vectorized and parallelized... help a lot ?
Source Code: awareness track marketing mobility, specially for that source code if 'exposed'
in a practical way... profits can generate a lot of improvements, dead RH, or Ubuntu or
Novell... no!... and how much different would it be from "box checking" a package manager that
install a binary, from the same thing that downloads the pre-formated source code or IL
representation, compiles it and installs it ????...........
The changed/optimized source code must be available anyway... its in the license. But yes, the
generated "profile file" and then aplayed compiler settings could not...
But do not *fear*, because there would be plenty of FAQs, wikis and howtos availables...
profile generators too, and that LLVM infrastructure *DOES LIFE LONG CHECK AND OPTIMIZATION*,
you would never be *LEFT BEHIND*, if savvy and willing to waste several days doing everything
possible to get the most optimization out of it... chances are that your installation could
even be better than the "commercial" installation !!!.......
The idea of *TAKING FROM THE HANDS* of final users, *INITIAL* debugging and dependency hell,
by installing from online, is only a *VERY GOOD SERVICE DESERVING A HONEST PROFIT*, because
there are plenty out there that have a *gross mania* that they know a lot about computers, but
the only thing they do is f..k up real good!!..
Otherwise why would a company waste resources, good engineers and high qualified technicians
time, to support a zoo ( i wont pay royalties) of the utmost imbecility and 'ubber' idiocy,
that is not only scary but is an horror movie that defies believe... getting itself under
because of it ?
...i know!... i once get a really angry boss, and not of a corner shop, complaining furiously
against my little company because why was that Windows(R) installs completely in the C:
partition !!??... we was right the technician "supposedly" could have installed it in D:, the
only think that was not accounted for is that that boss 'thing', with admin rights, would
render MSFT the service of changing what was inside of the windows folder from place, because
he felt that then would make much more sense and be much more aesthetic appealing!!!.... its
only an example!...
Why do you think that MSFT never got directly involved in this kind of direct support of
desktop end users ???.... it gots plenty of patsys!...
So what could be more simple, on the exploding need for bug squashing and dependency hell,
than to fund the original projects and projects developers for the task ?... yes... can only
be done if there is profit to justify it.
What is the difficulty of making *part* of that "optimization" using virtual machines that
mimic very closely the intended targets ?
Why would it be that pernicious of having several *different optimizations* if there gonna be
several different machine configurations, with different possible ISAs to support, and not
only in the CPU ?
3008 ?... stream computing is already possible now and not only for HPC jobs, Fusion chips
will be out in 2009, and the same for Intel Larabee, and Nvidia similar approaches...
watch the news...