news/2011-q2-ps: A few wording changes, etc.

1 files changed, 26 insertions, 57 deletions

diff --git a/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn b/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
index 5433f307..d5463851 100644
--- a/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
+++ b/news/2011-q2-ps.mdwn
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ else="
 
 After our last *[[Quarter of the Hurd, Q2 of 2011|2011-q2]]* has been picked
 up by a bunch of news sites, blogs, and so on, discussions have been
-running all over the net.
+running all over the net -- with (very) varying degrees of informedness.
 
 > {{$news/2011-q2#lwn}}, {{$news/2011-q2#phoronix-1}},
 > {{$news/2011-q2#phoronix-2}}, {{$news/2011-q2#golem}},
@@ -85,42 +85,44 @@ the more common misunderstandings.
     which are part of the underlying GNU Mach microkernel.)
 
   * **The Hurd has SMP, but needs support for new chipsets**:
-    Both Mach (the microkernel used by the Hurd),
+    Both GNU Mach (the microkernel used by the Hurd),
     and the Hurd servers themselves come with SMP support.
-    However, Mach [[misses drivers for modern SMP chipsets|faq/smp]];
-    and there are also some SMP-related bugs in the implementation --
+    However, GNU Mach [[misses drivers for modern SMP chipsets|faq/smp]], and
+    there are also some SMP-related bugs in the implementation,
     so further work is needed
-    for the Hurd to take advantage of modern multicore processors.
+    for the Hurd to take advantage of multicore processors.
 
   * **Installation can still be challenging**:
     Please [[take notice|http://xkcd.com/293/]] of the
     [README file](http://people.debian.org/~sthibault/hurd-i386/installer/cdimage/YES_REALLY_README.txt) --
     just like with any software in development,
     there are some known pitfalls to avoid.
-    (Or better yet, help to fix :-) )
+    (Or better yet, help to fix.)  :-)
     Alternatively, you can simply use the the
-    [preinstalled image](http://people.debian.org/~sthibault/hurd-i386/debian-hurd.img.tar.gz) in qemu.
+    [preinstalled
+    image](http://people.debian.org/~sthibault/hurd-i386/debian-hurd.img.tar.gz)
+    in QEMU/KVM/VirtualBox/...
 
   * **GNU Hurd is not the same as GNU/Hurd**:
     The GNU project set out in 1983 to create a complete free operating system.
     When a distribution such as Debian combines their GNU-based userland
-    with the GNU kernel (named `GNU Hurd`),
+    with the GNU kernel (named [[*GNU Hurd*|hurd/what_is_the_gnu_hurd]]),
     the result is more or less a full GNU system.
     However, such third-party distributions are distinct
     from what an official complete GNU system release would be;
-    and thus we often call them `GNU/Hurd`
-    (similar to `GNU/Linux` or `GNU/kFreeBSD`) for clarity.
+    and thus we often call them *GNU/Hurd* for clarity, similar to *GNU/Linux*
+    or *GNU/kFreeBSD*.
 
   * **Performance**:
     The benchmarks conducted by Phoronix (as reported by
     {{$2011-q2#phoronix-3}}) (Phoronix/Michael: thanks for doing these!)
-    attested very good performance to the Hurd.
-    Keep in mind though that these benchmarks were almost completely CPU-bound;
+    attest very good performance to the Hurd.
+    Keep in mind though that these benchmarks were almost completely CPU-bound,
     so they essentially just confirm that we don't do anything stupid
-    regarding CPU initialisations. (Cache setup etc.)
+    regarding CPU initialization (cache setup, etc.).
     The results would be different for benchmarks
     that actually exercise the operating system functionality more.
-    The fact that the tests were performed in a virtualised environment,
+    The fact that the tests were performed in a virtualized environment,
     might also have helped the results,
     for example by mitigating the effects of our unoptimized I/O paths --
     which are currently the major bottleneck in most situations.
@@ -129,57 +131,24 @@ the more common misunderstandings.
     [[doesn't necessarily hamper performance|ipc#performance]]
     quite as much as often believed.
     We are glad to see such solid benchmarks
-    help dispel some of the myths around the Hurd :-)
+    help dispel some of the myths around the Hurd and other microkernel-based
+    systems.
 
   * **Given the available manpower, the progress is very good**:
     Over the past decade,
-    there were seldom more than *half a dozen developers* at any given time
+    there were seldom more than [[*half a dozen developers* at any given
+    time|faq/how_many_developers]]
     hacking on the Hurd, in their spare time --
-    not hundreds of paid developers like Linux has.
-    Considering this, the progress made is quite encouraging;
+    not hundreds of paid developers like Linux has nowadays.
+    Considering this, the progress made is quite encouraging
     with the system being [[pretty usable|hurd/status]] for many day-to-day tasks now.
     It is generally understood that the ambitious architecture of the Hurd
-    required a lot of effort to get it working at all --
+    requires a lot of effort to get it working at all,
     but the recent progress shows that once the foundations are in place,
     the Hurd design indeed allows the developers to be very productive.
     To see the progress over the last few years, you can have a look at our 
-    [[news_archive|news]]. If you’ve grown interested, you can find 
-    various ways to contribute on the [[contributing]] page. We’d be happy 
-    to see you join in because every single hand makes a big difference in the Hurd!
+    [[news archive|news]].  If you're interested, you can find various ways of
+    [[contributing]].  We'd be happy to see you join in, because for the Hurd,
+    every single helping hand makes a big difference!
 
 """]]
-
-<!--
-
-IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-08-24:
-
-    < ArneBab> hurd related: I now think you were right, antrik: the hurd
-      rumors don't belong into the news (tschwinge)
-    < antrik> ArneBab: you mean the postscriptum as a whole, or just the wild
-      rumours part?...
-    < ArneBab> the whole PS
-    < ArneBab> it should rather go into a blog post
-    < ArneBab> (in the wiki)
-    < antrik> hm... I don't think I agree
-    < ArneBab> why?
-    < antrik> apparently there is a number of people following the news now,
-      and apparently many of them misread some statements... it makes sense to
-      use the same channel for clarifying them I'd say
-    < ArneBab> hm, ok
-    < ArneBab> how would you select the part to include?
-    < antrik> roughly speaking, I'd include everything that actually relates to
-      the previous news that were misunderstood
-    < antrik> and drop all unrelated speculations that popped up
-    < antrik> BTW, it *might* be useful perhaps to actually update the original
-      news posting with the clarifications?...
-    < ArneBab> we can't do that without breaking some peoples RSS feeds
-    < antrik> note that there is another aspect to consider: the fact that
-      several news sites picked it up is indeed genuine news by itself...
-    < ArneBab> that's right, yes
-    < antrik> will it really break anything? from what I heard so far it just
-      means they will see the posting as new again, which would actually make
-      sense in this case...
-    < antrik> but I don't insist if you think it's too risky :-)
-    < antrik> just an idea
-
--->