Slashdot Mirror
Domain: over-yonder.net
Stories and comments across the archive that link to over-yonder.net.
Comments · 21
-
Re: Good!
Try one of the BSDs - here's some rationale
-
Re:Groklaw has a pretty good article.
Your priorities are wrong. Yes, fvwm makes you edit a config file. Which means you can easily clone a config, put it into version control, etc. And yes, it may take several hours until you like it. But I spend that several hours 20 years ago and then another few hours when fvwm2 came out. The only thing I changed in the meantime is to move to 3x3 virtual desktops instead of 3x2 and a bit of tuning for edge-scroll and auto-raise when I change mice. (Multi-monitor? Only if your GUI is so broken it does not have a fast pager. The FVWM pager is better than multiple physical monitors could ever be. Change desktops with a flick of the wrist. And it already was so 20 years ago.) That effort is quite acceptable for having a stable, fast GUI exactly to my wishes for 20 years now. And cloning it (several laptops) takes about 1 minute.
Here is some more on why config files are actually a good idea: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/winstupid/1
-
Re:Linux vs. FreeBSD
FreeBSD for Linux Users. It's the clearest explanation I've ever found.
-
Re:Kontact is cool.
I don't know that I've seen that done, aside from Dolphin, and Dolphin and Konqueror share a KPart. Unless I'm missing something, Dolphin is all about providing a different UI.
That's correct (in KDE4 at least). It's possible to uninstall Dolphin, and then Konqueror will be unable to browse local directories.
TRWTF is what Dolphin (the application) is actually *for*. The UI is *more* cluttered than Konqueror despite providing *less* features. It's like they heard of the trade-off between features and ease-of-use[0] but didn't realise that one of those is supposed to be improved, rather than both get worse. I suspect I may not be the target market for this application
[0] Not that I really believe in this trade-off, for reasons more-or-less described by this guy: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/userfriendly/userfriendly1.php
-
Re:Sadly I've given up
Aparently my link didn't work.
-
Re:Useless
Ever upgraded kernels? With the binary drivers, that's always a blast.
Indeed.BSDBox
Most annoying. It sometimes takes me a whole ten seconds to type all that out, with a further two minutes for the kernel to install, the port to rebuild and the machine to reboot (this stage is optional and only required if the kernel is being updated because of a vulnerability or you are running an X session that won't let go of the nvidia kernel module). Yeah, ease of use, CLI, Joe Sixpack, yada yada.
General purpose computers are complicated. It's what makes them so powerful. Hiding this fact is deluding the user, restraining flexibility and limiting the ability to learn, not to mention being diametrically opposite to the Unix philosophy (Linux Is Not UniX, yes, I know).
Matt Fuller (who is not me, I hasten to add) dissects the arguments here. For my own part, whenever I hear of such-and-such being made "easier," I wonder just what is being compromised to get there. Sure, make things easier if you must, but leave my CLI alone. I do not want to spend twenty minutes clicking pretty boxes in GUIs to do what takes me thirty seconds as su root, which is one reason I chose BSD. -
Re:What's the real difference
Here are two comparisons and a (shameless plug) novice user's perspective.
-
Re:"Streaming Penguin"
No matter how much better Linux gets than Windows, as long as there's less support for it, there are good reasons for not using it.
The tide is slowly turning. Why don't you be part of the revolution?
What I don't understand is how Windows-knowledgable people, aka, "computer knowledgable" people are so afraid of Linux. It's an irrational fear; it doesn't make logical sense to be afraid of a computer operating system. What it does make sense to be though, is afraid of change, and afraid of sticking your foot into something you don't know or understand. The funny thing is though, all the Windows experts running around claiming Linux is harder, slower, whatever silly conjecture they care to spurt, none of them (a) regularly use Linux, or (b) knew how to use Windows in the first place.
Believe it or not, Windows users of Slashdot, you didn't actually know how to use Windows when you first started using it. Like anything else, there was a learning curve, and like anything else, you had to put in some time to get to know the system so you could use it to its full potential. It's the same for Linux and Linux distributions; you have to put time in to learn a new and different system.
This link has probably been bandied around Slashdot before, but it's relevant here: Why Windows Causes Stupidity
The title is a little inflammatory, but if you actually read the article (instead of just skimming over it, ignoring it, and returning here to flame me), you'll understand where the author is coming from. -
Re:Ill informed post
I hate to admit it, but I think that many people have misinterpreted what Gentoo really is and for whom it is geared. Let's be candid: it's really not about excessive CFLAGS.
Take a good read of this article; it outlines some of the fundamental differences in philosophy between BSD and Linux. In some respects, Gentoo's portage system attempts to reconcile the differences between BSD's ports tree and the absence thereof in Linux as well as the concept of perpetual updates through make buildworld. (I know a guy who's maintained the same install of Gentoo on his laptop for over four years who has kept it up-to-date by using portage without a re-install. Talk about impressive for a Linux distribution.) Yes, it is true that Gentoo does not have a native pkg_add that FreeBSD does to install ports, but what Gentoo offers is as close to that as one can get in Linux; and it is one hell of an improvement on the base concept, might I say. In many respects, if you want to criticize Gentoo over having to compile things to keep it up-to-date, then BSD ought to be brought up for discussion.
Still, it is nice that Gentoo can be updated without having to perform a complete re-installation of the operating system. I hate to say it, but performing "s/old release/new release/g" on
.
What about customization? Sure, some BSD packages may have makefile-based booleans, but in no way are the centrally documented or are they centrally documented. FreeBSD KNOBS comes close, but it still is not exhaustive. There is no real comparison with USE flags. If BSD had it so well, I wonder why people are trying to port portage to BSD. (I love BSD, mind you, so I am not being unreasonably harsh on it.)
What about fundamental design? It is meant to be flexible and dynamic. Ever notice how many directories are suffixed with ".d" in
And when it comes to configuration changes, Debian has debconf, which allows some packages to preserve changes across updates through configuration file regeneration. While this is nice for preseeding, this is not helpful when there are major updates or when you've made hand-made modifications. Yes, dpkg will bring about a diff of the two files, but does dpkg's integrated configuration diff mechanism really hold its own against Gentoo's dispatch-conf? If you've used dispatch-conf, the answer is no.
Yes, it is true that there are some quality assurance failings with packages in Portage, but let's put that aside for a moment. When it comes to making packages for Gentoo, it certainly beats making them for Debian. Yes, Debian has its nice policy manual, but it is not always up to date or the easiest thing to read. Gentoo's documentation let's a first-time package builder build a package in very little time; whereas Debian or Redhat's syste
-
Re:DesktopBSD
First result for "BSD vs Linux" on Google:
http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4lin ux/bsd4linux1.php -
"User-friendly" technology makes people dumb
-
Re:BSD v LinuxCould someone point me to (or post) a lowdown on the potential benefits of BSD has over linux (or vice versa) that doesn't include wild speculation and unfounded cynicism?
This page has a good description of the differences between (Free)BSD and Linux: http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4li
n ux/bsd4linux1.php. If you see those differences as benefits (I do), then give a BSD a try. If the differences just differences (i.e., they're not benefits) to you, then stick with whatever you've got now. -
Re:BSD v Linux
-
Re:BSD vs. Linux
It is a good link, just need to fix the space inserted by Slash.
http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4lin ux/bsd4linux1.php
-
Various differencesSo what's the difference between SVR4 and Linux? At a glance they may look the same because they're both in the Unix family, but they're actually quite different.
GNU/Linux has a wider variety of software natively written for it
the Linux kernel includes support for more hardware than SVR4
Linux is more popular as a desktop operating system than SVR4.
Another important factor to consider for many users is price, although there are inexpensive and free versions of UNIX.
Linux issues and bugs generally are often fixed extremely fast.
For a more in-depth technical reference, see this good article on the fundamental difference between BSD and UNIX (although BSD is not technically SVR4 it's still a good read). -
Re:Long awaited uh?
Take a look here if you'd like a more detailed reason as to why someone might want to use BSD over Linux.
-
Re:"Hard" Systems
First of all, no one is forcing anything on anyone. The question was asked which system is best for a newbie, and I responded that a harder system is best for those wishing to learn about the system. I'm currently using one of those "hard" systems. It's FreeBSD. It does not limit me. I get EVERYTHING the newbie Linux distros offers, except hand holding. Same software. Same functionality.
Some people want a system that's easy to use without learning how. If I step up to a kiosk system, that's certainly what I want. But such a system will make learning more difficult. By design. I found a really good essay on usability versus learnability. It's called Why Windows Causes Stupidity. Ignore the inflammatory title and read it. -
Re:got a copy when
Most computer users prefer the latter as well.
If they care about it, and are savvy enough, they'll prefer the one that's the easiest to use for the experienced user, regardless of the requisite learning curve.
There's a good essay on this I found. You should find it interesting as well. -
I wanted to read this but...
...the rant says "Forbidden You don't have permission to access
s hare/smarty') in/ share/smarty') in
Could someone please be kind enough to post a mirror? -
I wanted to read this but...
...the rant says "Forbidden You don't have permission to access
s hare/smarty') in/ share/smarty') in
Could someone please be kind enough to post a mirror? -
Re:mmm...tasty.
Aw yeah. That'll be one sweet calculator. If I combine this and my fashionable pocket protectors, I'll be the perfect chick repellant.
Actually, I found back in high school that Casios actually bring in the chicks. Not that they wanted anything to do with me -- they just wanted to play Blackjack on my CFX-9800.
They all forgot about me quickly after I ported it to the TI-81/82.
Meanwhile, the guys with HP's were writing music, playing Minesweeper, and proclaiming FIFO as their god. And 2 out of 3 of them got decent looking chicks.
No, after 5½ years, I'm not bitter....no, really....
