[geeks] Can't decide on an OS

[Jonathan Patschke]

On Thu, 26 Sep 2013, Mouse wrote:

>> The short answer is that there isn't one, and it's getting time that
>> competent "someones" get together and make the next usable workstation
>> OS.
>
> Part of the problem there is that it's difficult to get anything even
> vaguely like agreement on what constitutes "usable".

I think that if your basic premise that the computer should support
content creators first and content consumers second, you have a pretty
good direction.  NeXTstep did this.  IRIX did this.  Various incarnations
of the Macintosh System Software and OS X did this.  Even the early
releases of Windows NT got this right for certain classes of technical/CAD
users.

>> but it's going to take some hell of an angel investor to get graphics
>> support where it needs to be for workstation use, though.
>
> Only because users keep moving the goalposts.  Any even vaguely modern
> peecee can, without using any hardware graphics assist at all, blow the
> graphics doors off machines that, when they were new, were greeted with
> ecstatic delight at the zippy graphics performance they offered.

That's sort of the nature of end-users.  They want more.  I'd like to be
able to run OpenCL jobs on a fast graphics processor in a BSD box, but
even respectable 2D and OpenGL-accelerated compositing would be nice.

However, these are unfortunately Hard Problems to solve.

> Furthermore, even that angel investor isn't going to help much until a
> significant fraction of users actually start telling manufacturers "no,
> I won't buy that, because the hardware is undocumented".

It's my understanding that AMD and nVidia both document their graphics
cards at the register level these days.  The documentation is not
particularly friendly, and it requires subject-matter expertise to digest,
but, the docs are there.

> Now, it's only a very few fringe weirdos like me who do that.  Most
> people, even the more stringent openness advocates I know, buy -
> cheerfully or grudgingly, it doesn't matter to the makers, as long as
> they buy - undocumented graphics hardware; as long as that continues,
> real change is unlikely.

I feel for the hardware manufacturers.  The patent system in the US is so
hostile towards anyone who actually builds something (as opposed to
someone who just files patent paperwork and sells the rights to
attorneys), and every published specification is an open invitation for a
patent troll to file suit.  With the US courts seeming to know no bounds,
it almost doesn't matter where the tech is developed if it's sold here.

I think if that got fixed, we'd see better documentation, as there'd be
literally no reason for for companies to hide that from end users.

> So am I, so am I...to the point where I'm trying to think of something I
> could do for a living that would let me never touch computers again.

I'm seriously considering getting into machining.  There's opportunity for
computing there (Postscript->G-Code conversion, wheee!), but making
something besides compiler error messages appeals to me.

-- 
Jonathan Patschke | "No matter how much the government controls...any
Elgin, TX         %  problem will be blamed on whatever small zone of
USA               |  freedom that remains."         --Sheldon Richman