Slashdot Mirror
Vista Vs. Gutsy Gibbon
ricegf writes in with the account of one Rupert Goodwins writing in ZDNet UK. Goodwins has 7 computers running various versions of Windows and Linux, and explains why he chooses to do most of his work on the Gibbon. "So here's the funny thing. I've used Windows since 1.0. I've lived through the bad times of Windows/386 and ME, and the good times of NT 3.51 and 2K. I know XP if not backwards, then with a degree of familiarity that only middle-aged co-dependents can afford each other... Then how come I'm so much more at home with Ubuntu than Vista? It boils down to one abiding impression: Ubuntu goes out of its way to get out of your way... Vista goes out of its way to be Vista and enforce the Vista way."
How many of these articles are we going to get?
(I'll leave it up to you as to whether I'm just fed up with them, or am pondering the success of Linux)
My laptop came with Vista and installed Ubuntu right after purchase. I use Ubuntu much more than my legally purchased windows copy, probably about 10:1 in favor of linux because vista pops up dialog boxes for way too much stuff. For instance, every boot creates about 10 dialog boxes that need to be confirmed. My cpu monitoring app, norton antivirus, etc... all have to be given permission to run, it really pisses me off. I haven't found a way to give permanent permission to those apps without turning UAE off, which strips out some very necessary protection. FU Microsoft.
Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
You see what you want to see. You want to like Ubuntu (or insert some Linuzzzzz distro here), so this is a good start. We all do. I like Windows (and I damn sure see all it's imperfections). I have used Ubuntu, and it feels very rough to me. But once again: I see what I want to see, and I have no incentive to search some other OS, because in Windows I feel like home. I have a OSX machine at home as well for testing purposes. The system is good but it feels OSX alien to me. Everybody should use the system they like and stop preaching and advocating. use trhe TOOL you like, not the bible you read.
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
like "First Post"
But this insight came out instead.
To the end-user, Windows has "security through obstruction", which annoys and gets disabled. To that same end-user, Linux has "security through obscurity", which stays out of the way.
Yes, I know, open source, all the flaws are right there for everyone to see, not obscured at all. That's not what the end-user sees. The end-user just knows that it's more secure because that's what their geek friend told them; they never see why, they never care why and they never need bother with it. This is a good thing. What doesn't annoy them enough that they go out of their way to disable... I'm sure you see where I'm going with this.
Let's review what we've learned so far this year:
Linux - driver issues. Vista - driver issues.
Linux - learning curve. Vista - learning curve.
Linux - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience. Vista - secure until you work around the security in the name of convenience.
Linux - annoying until you learn it. Vista - annoying until you learn it AND disable the security features.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Some time ago I accidentally fried my motherboard, so, time to get a new computer. My dad's job was throwing out an "old" machine. The new machine was a bit worse than my original one. It didn't have DDR2 memory, it used a Radeon 9200 rather than my nVidia card, the CPU was an old Pentium 4 rather than my faster AMD chip, and the integrated soundcard I had never heard of.
Anyway, I connect my HD which had Ubuntu Edgy installed on it, boot up. X complains about the video card so I change "nvidia" to "ati" in xorg.conf, type: startx, and 2 minutes latter I am reading my mail in thunderbird.
But you know, I'm sure Vista would perfectly well manage me changing ALL hardware except the HD, running on a P4 with 384MB SDRAM, and be up and running without even a reboot. Oh, and does Aero support virtual desktops yet?
Seriously, given the price and system requirements, Vista is a joke.
I don't want to be a defeatist, but...
In my opinion, it doesn't really matter whether ubuntu is better, because Microsoft already has >90% of the market. Be realistic: 2008 will not be the year of the Linux Desktop. Neither will 2009. Or 2010. When a company has that much marketshare and actively tries to keep others from entering the playing field, it's not really going to happen. Most people just want to sit at the computer and do their work. I use the Vista on my laptop only about 3% of the time; otherwise I'm using Kubuntu. When I'm on the bus and the person asks me about compiz, I happily tell them about Linux. But the momentum of Microsoft Windows is so large that Linux will not become a widely-used desktop OS.
I did a complete reformat of my system for Gutsy. Installed from the CD, and ended up with the black screen of death on restart.
Of course, I was able to get out of it. That's not really the point. The point is I had to do a bunch of command line hackery just to see the login screen for the first time.
...But I'll take XP on the desktop over Ubuntu (or Linux) any day. Ubuntu 7.10 is a pain to install, setup and use compared to XP. Few things I need "just work" in Linux.
Before you suggest it, I'm a hardcore geek from way back. Waaaay back. But these days I simply don't have time to spend all day and night just getting an OS to work. I have a wife and kids now, not to mention actual work to accomplish.
There aren't enough hours in a day/night leftover for ploughing through howtos, or trawling usergroups, for the info necessary just to, say, get 7.10 or Mandriva 2008 to connect to the LAN.
On the server, *nix rules, but on the desktop it has a very long way to go before it can compete with XP on an even footing. Vista? Dunno. You couldn't pay me enough to use it.
Yes, I know, I'm going to be modded troll or flamebait or accused of being an MS apologist or fanboy by some raw-nerved *nix zealot. How dare I say such things? Gasp! Shame on me.
You do realize that in a few years, you'll have to be running Vista to use the tools of our generation? So why put off til tomorrow...
In a few years time, even Photoshop will be on the web.
Most of the rest of us will be running Macs or Linux boxes, unless you're a store that needs cash registers. Or webbing in via a PS3 or 360 (or successors thereof).
Windows computers are the mainframes of the consumer computing space. They'll be around for a long time but it'll not be because people want to use them.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
When I'm using Windows, (any version) I really miss having a real terminal (cmd.exe just doesn't do it for me) and apt-get (there is nothing like having all of the software I need available at any time from one central place)
"It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
They absolutely can be compared like they were cars.
Vista is like a short bed gasoline pickup truck. You can perform most day to day tasks with it, but it gets horrible gas mileage and can't handle edge cases (4 passengers, seven foot long cargo) very well at all.
A distro like Ubuntu is more like a VW Golf TDI that can transform into a panel van or 18 wheeler when necessary. It's obviously superior in every way, but people complain about stupid stuff like gas stations that don't sell diesel and how hard it is to get through a 10' tunnel when you're in 18-wheeler mode.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
Darn Firefox plugins, I missed a classic bit of irony
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
...at least Vista _boots_ after installation. I have had nothing but trouble from attempting to run Ubuntu--from difficulty getting the Nvidia drivers for my 6800 working to GRUB mysteriously being screwed up between sessions, to not my system not even booting if I do something as radical as try to boot my system with an external hard drive plugged in. Add all the problems with it not mounting things like said external drive or the secondary internal drive as anything but read-only, and a ton of other issues, and so far I've probably spent more time trying to get the damn thing working than actually using it. When I did the recent upgrade to 7.10, it didn't even boot after installation. It wiped my XP entry out of menu.lst and botched the rest of the file. No backup file or anything of the sort. If Microsoft released an OS that didn't even boot directly after installation they would never hear the end of it. I used Vista for several months and had plenty of troubles with it, like Explorer forgetting over half the directory settings it was supposed to retain or never getting it to detect my XP desktop over my home network (Ubuntu on the other hand just plain doesn't work with files over a network, try playing music or videos shared from another computer, so while it technically works who cares?) But at least Vista generally _worked_, Ubuntu must be synonymous with 'broken'.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you _____ fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a _____ (a _____ w/_____ gigs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my ancient _____ running _____, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this _____, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that. In addition, during this file transfer, _____ will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even _____ is straining to keep up as I type this. I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various _____'s, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a _____ that has run faster than its _____ counterpart, despite the _____'s same chip architecture. My _____ with _____ megs of ram runs faster than this _____ mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that _____ is a superior operating system. _____ lovers, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use _____ over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
~ In Trust, We Trust ~
In my experience there's really no reason to run Norton antivirus, unless you enjoy giving your operating system the equivalent of 300 pound cell mate named Bubba. Between Avast!, AVG, Clamwin, Panda, and any other free antivirus software out there, there's got to be something to replace Norton.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
they are Different Things They are both operating systems. They are very much the same thing, we should compare them so we can choose between 2 competing products and decide which would suit our needs.
as if somehow Window is the "baseline" for this benchmark I know you don't agree with that and neither do I, but like it or not Microsoft operating systems are number 1 based on the number of installs and that's why a comparison is prudent.
A worthwhile review would be one that covers the top 3-4 operating systems and outlines strengths and weaknesses of each, but I think most people on
Look over their, it's a grammar nazi
The main problem with ubuntu is the interface. It doesn't come with ratpoison installed by default. Then, you have to dig around in config files to get it working. And, frankly the bash shell and vim editor are horribly bloated compared to lightweight counterparts, like sh and vi.
It's a GUI problem, so I'll just stick to Vista... oh. Never mind.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
At work, I got a shiny new machine. Since we need to certify some of our products with Windows Vista, we designated it the Vista certification machine. So far, so good.
We use the MKS Toolkit software suite to simplify several tasks while developing on Windows. Everything seemed to work fine, until I had to use patch to apply a diff to some sources. As soon as I typed
patch -p0 foo.diff
at the command prompt I got a pop-up window from Vista asking permission to run the executable. If I answered "yes, go ahead" instead of running the program in the same command prompt window it popped it up in another command prompt which promptly disappeared. And, apparently, did absolutely nothing to the files that were supposed to be patched. Experimentation shows that even
patch --help
pops up the dialog and fails, so it isn't a permissions problem on the files to patch. So I say to myself, "Myself, we're a revision or two back on MKS Toolkit, and this is not the Vista-certified version - let's try another patch.exe." So I go get the GnuWin32 version of patch.exe. I put it first on the PATH, and try again. Another pop-up. I answer yes, and not only does patch run in a window that disappears, but it GPFs as well.
At this point, I'm pissed. But suddenly the penny drops. I rename the MKS toolkit patch.exe to ptch.exe and type
ptch --help
which produces a nice help message. Trying on the original diff causes the required files to be patched correctly.
Apparently the Windows Vista User Access Control considers patch.exe to be a forbidden executable name. I investigated further and the only way to disable this functionality appears to be to completely turn off UAC, which I did immediately.
But there you have it - Windows Vista's vaunted security is about as logical and effective as banning water bottles in carry-on luggage.
By just reading the title I can tell you right now that there is no way you could compare Vista to Gutsy Gibbon. Why?
Microsoft Windows Vista is an operating system with a Desktop environment and a few extremely basic applications such as a drawing application, web browser and calculator program. Maybe a few other basic programs that I am missing.
Canonical Ubuntu - Gutsy Gibbon is an operating system with the option of two Desktop environments and over 10,000 applications. I think there are around 45,000 deb files but all of those aren't programs. These applications include a web browser, graphics 3D and sound manipulation programs, games, photo and music management, office suite (out of the box), the list could go on.
With that in mind any comparison would be useless..
Measure by security? You can't because Ubuntu has vastly more applications that could have potential holes. I saw a chart that showed Vista with less security problems but look at the information above, it's obvious that Ubuntu has (possibly) more security holes its software is 100's times bigger then Microsoft's offering.
There are other things that you could possibly compare with but you have to keep in mind the above information and you'll realise that Windows and Ubuntu are quite different even if they are both operating systems. They are both produced, run and distributed in different ways. This means there is a lot of mis-understanding about Linux and distributions in general.
In any case I hope people who dislike previous versions of Ubuntu try it out again, especially if you downloaded breezy badger or older. If you like a windows look then download a version of Kbuntu. I started using Ubuntu when Breezy came out and not much worked on my laptop, but I am currently running an older version of Ubuntu (Feisty) and my laptop works out of the box. I can't wait to try out Gutsy.
If you love using software give it ago. ^_^
The government can't save you.
Dual Screen.
Yeah, yeah... I know there are dual screen solutions for Linux, but none of them work correctly! Either my cursor will become garbled up, or the system will simply crash on reboot. Just an all around pain. Automatic, simple multiple display support would do wonders for Linux, IMHO.
Uh, because if the Linux share of the computing world is going to grow, its got to be at the expense of Windows. There ain't anywhere else for it to come from.
No, its saying that the distro has to provide a reason to choose it over Windows. Now price is one, of course, but often not enough, given the fact that most software that consumers are aware of is written for Windows. So people have to know that what they are doing in Windows can be done in Linux, either with the same software (through Wine or otherwise) or through alternatives which are functionally adequate, and ideally superior in some way (again, price is often one way, but often not enough.)
Windows is the baseline. If people buy computers without actively choosing an OS, its what they are most likely to end up with. It is what most people who might switch to Linux, given an adequate reason, are using now. The facts make it the baseline.
And, ideally, that's what the comparisons show: that the Linux way is better, for which it must first be at least as good and must be usable.
We don't; OTOH, one of the barriers to transition is fear of the difficulty of switching. So demonstrating that things are similar enough that this fear is overblown is a way of overcoming that.
Well, if it doesn't have a windows feature, then people choosing to leave Windows for it will be losing something. So that's a valid reason for it to be rated down. And sometimes missing a bug can result in missing a feature that matters to users, like compatibility with particular software. Though that's, I would assume, less frequently a problem.
Two different cars are different things just as much as two different OS's are; like different cars, different OS's are different tools which can be applied to the same task. Comparing them side-by-side as it relates to that task is not a bad idea, but a good one.
I noticed a recurring lament in the comments attached to TFA: Businesses usually have one or a few business-specific and business-critical applications that are Windows-only and that don't run adequately under Wine. Rupert's suggestion was to run Windows under virtualization - i.e. polluting every seat at the shop with microsoft code and licenses.
Why not do what my company does: Run the can't-do-without-'em Windows apps on a central Windows server and access them remotely via rdesktop?
Then you have only as many licenses as you actually need and you can migrate as many desktops and laptops as you please to Linux.
(And since it uses Microsoft's own version of remote desktopping they'll have a hard time breaking it without breaking themselves. B-) )
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
More generally, poor programmers try to make programs so simple that only simple things are possible.
Good programmers, and I'll point at Apple IPhoto chaps just because I saw one lately, make the things people actually want to do easy. In tis case it was having three sliders, labeled "lighten shadows", "darken highlights" and "brightness". Doing those adjustments is downright hard, but the good developers found that is what real live humans wanted to do, and did the work to make it easy.
Linux programmers, go thou and do likewise!
--dave
davecb@spamcop.net
Ubuntu is great, better than Vista in most aspects, when the drivers and lacking hardware support don't get in your way. :-/
Unfortunately, this seem to be a more common occurence than even in Vista, from my experiences anyway.
But this is not really a blame on just Ubuntu, but on hardware support from manufacturers. Not that it matter who it is to blame for the end user.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Ubuntu goes out of its way to get out of your way... Vista goes out of its way to be Vista and enforce the Vista way.
This really speaks to the core values and differences between the closed source and open source philosophies as outlined by Richard Stallman (yes, Richard Stallman is different from most of the rest of us and some people just cannot get past the beard and the long hair, but he has some worthwhile things to say if you can get past the charisma issue, -4 reaction adjustment at least if we were playing D&D) among others. The closed source philosophy is really about their way of doings, the experience that they want you to have, and their control of every aspect of that experience whereas the open source philosophy is all about freedom to choose your own experience, the experience that you want to have, and your choice about every aspect of that experience. If you want to take the defaults that is alright OR if you think that something that is not available and should be then you can take the source code and make it happen...it is all good AND other people cannot subsequently take that away from you (the GPL requirement of sharing changes and additions).
Yup, it is. It's the most popular desktop OS on the planet. Other than some killer apps (which I admit is a big 'other') and certain hardware, most Linux distros will exceed the baseline of Windows by some margin in a number of areas. It's good to compare and see where Windows is winning or losing. It's certainly not about seeing how far Linux has managed to copy the features of Windows. That's what Wine is for.
You may want to give Gutsy Gibbon a try. It has a new GUI-based screen configuration utility that handles dual screens. http://www.ubuntu.com/files/GutsyImages/Screen-and-Graphic-Preferences.jpg This is a feature that I've been waiting for :-) Yes, mucking around with xorg.Conf isn't too hard, but this makes life easier for new comers.
Gutsy Gibbon isn't "there" yet as far as being a perfectly consumer-friendly desktop system. It's fairly close -- I'm using it right now, in fact -- but it still has a ways to go. Yes, Compiz is nice. It also has a habit of causing MPlayer to go haywire. Things always seem kind of sluggish. Sure, my machine is a bit old, but even XP wasn't quite as sluggish. It's not unbearable though. Close. But not there yet.
Ipod? Works pretty well. Basic copying of files works nicely (albeit with a few GTKpod kinks here and there). Mounting and un-mounting usually work automatically without any extra prodding after plugging it in. Usually. Smart playlists are dodgy in GTKpod. Giving Amarok a try, so we'll see. But still... Not. Quite. There. Yet.
Program installation? Well, Synaptic/apt-get are great. You got the right repositories in there, and you know what you're looking for -- works like a charm. Can't see my mom learning how to add repositories and public key signatures. Close. But not quite there yet.
On the other hand, it's leaps and bounds ahead of where Linux-on-the-desktop used to be the last time I went down that path (SuSe 7.something? Mandrake something-dot-something?? Few years ago, anyways...). So progress is definitely being made. It all depends on your personal threshold.
For me, Ubuntu has proven to be quite - QUITE - sufficient. I'll probably be sticking with it for everything except ArcGIS. For all the "moms" of the world, though... I just don't think it's quite there yet. Give it a few more years and it might just make it.
Then we just need a good way of marketing it...
"Cut word lines. Cut music lines. Smash the control images. Smash the control machine." - William S. Burroughs
I believe this behavior is done for two reasons. One: so it can edit pictures non-destructively (as in none of your original data is destroyed, very important to those of us who might use the same picture multiple times and edit it differently for different occasions). Two: to avoid the issue of loss of data through compression. Almost any slashdotter can tell you of the ability of jpeg to destroy pictures after repeated compression.
Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
As for the CLI (command line interfaces) objections - registry or CLI, they are both hard for new users. But now we get to the bit that really puts things in context:
The above poster appears to have not grasped the idea that sometimes it's better to communicate by writing than to point at pictures. A mixed interface is very useful - GUI only is very limiting as in the imaginary example of a word processor with only an on screen keyboard and mouse pointer to click on it as the input device. The GUI is limited to the items the designer put in with a lot of effort - a decent command line shell can pipe things from one command to the next for a lot of flexability. How much space is used in all directories with names starting with "f"? Where's the document that mentions Mr Whatsit and Mr Whosit by name? Trivial questions to answer from the command line but a lot of effort to make GUIs to cover even a small number of possible cases. Even Xorg.conf has so many options in it that the GUI to modify more than the usual bits done by current GUIs would be even more unweildy than powerstrip on windows has to be to cover so many options. Then we get to the experience of many long term windows and early mac users - they grey menu option that you should be able to get to but the GUI designer missed something so you cannot use it in certain conditions where you should. GUIs are quick and easy ways for the user to select stuff but have to work by limiting options a bit more than if the application can parse text.
It's a different system that does things differently - and using a command line shell and text editor is part of that just as "C:" the registry hive and even the find tool is part of MS Windows.
What hardware in particular?
I'd like to encourage anyone and everyone who has a piece of hardware not supported by Linux to report it to the LinuxDriverProject.
MS has a different philosophy, and so has to go in larger steps. They need to market their software, they need to convince users to shell out money for it, they need to convince oems to pre-install it, and negotiate the pricing structure. All this leads to larger more substantial releases. Completely reworked GUI's, privilege schemes, filesystems etc. I'm sorry going from KDE 3.5.7 to 3.5.8 doesn't strike me as a major upgrade. Similarly with the kernel changes. I upgraded my Kubuntu from 7.4 to 7.10 and didn't notice a difference.
Now I didn't spend time reading up of a bunch of forums for some of the more obscure features, I honestly don't care if I can turn my multiple desktops into a spinning Rubix cube, I only use the one desktop anyways, I can't stand having more than 4 things open at once, and can't be bothered to remember which desktop I opened what in.
Anyways, MS has to make major changes to convince people to upgrade, or at least make people think they got their moneys worth. Unfortunately, major changes screw over the end users that have spend 5 years learning keyboard shortcuts, or what have you. Stability issues will crop up and might take a year or so to get worked out.
Hey - It's Ubuntu 7.10, not 7.1 for a reason. "7" indicates the year of release, and 10 indicates the month. Ubuntu 7.1 would be whichever Feisty Alpha they released in January.
Simple mathematical transforms, however, can be stored. EG, if you have set the three sliders to "25," "10" and "15," those numbers can be stored (say, 0.5KB of metadata) instead of the resulting file, and then reapplied every time you want to see the changed version. Photoshop calls them filter layers. Much easier on the hard drive and RAM -- but taking that approach means you have to manually export the resulting file to send it to a friend; not necessarily the best approach for consumer software.
with the 500 GB SATA HDD on sale for $150 tell me why I should care.
I picked up an HP laptop recently (one of the "Verve special edition" laptops), and it came preinstalled with Vista. Unlike some other craptastic laptops I've tried out (and in particular, one Acer laptop I tried out and returned after a week due to unsupported wireless in Linux and bad keyboard), this thing actually ran Vista almost decently. Still too long of a wait to boot -- XP boot times seem far faster to me -- but it was usable.
Problem is, the laptop didn't come with any sort of optical media for Vista. HP puts a partition on the hard drive that is there to allow the user to recover and restore, and they provide software in Vista to burn 2 restore DVDs "just in case." I burned the restore discs and hoped for the best... But as it turns out, Vista's flavor of NTFS doesn't resize properly in GParted (either refuses to resize, or resizes and then becomes unbootable without volume repair). Without genuine Vista discs, I was unable to do any repairs after an abortive attempt to resize the Vista partition, soooo...
I turned the laptop over to the tender mercies of the Ubuntu 7.10 installer off of the Gutsy DVD. Amazingly, sound and networking worked with nary a hiccup, suspend and resume work the way they should, and even the media keys across the top of the keyboard do what you'd expect them to. About the only thing I'm missing support for right now is the SD card reader. (Chipset seems to be unsupported, will have to research.) There's a built-in webcam and stereo microphones in the lid, and I'm going to experiment with them to see if I can get them to work, but it's not a major priority for me.
I would have preferred to keep Vista around -- not because I really like Vista (as I work with XP daily at the office, and Vista really doesn't work the way I think Windows "ought" to), but because theoretically there might be some games or the random app that might not work right / be available under Linux. But this morning, as I started throwing more and more packages on the laptop, I started to realize that maybe this is a blessing in disguise. By Vista not wanting to share and play nicely, I've been forced to decide between Vista and Ubuntu. It wasn't even much of a choice.
Still, it would've been nice to keep Vista around in a small partition, just as a security blanket. But if I can get WoW working under Wine (and reports say that it should actually run pretty well, providing my graphics adapter can keep up), it'd be tough to say just what I'd really need Vista for.
When you have 20+ systems to backup it gets to be a big problem. Like I said, if there was some way for iPhoto to clean up the photo cache when you don't want all those revisions it would be a welcome improvement, but iPhoto does not seem to have such capability.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
This is what Picasa does, btw.
Yeah, but the simple enough idea of smart layers feature hasn't appeared until CS3. I mean, for a program that has been under development as long as photoshop, no less a program intended for professionals, I would think this would have been around for a little while longer. The idea of a virtual layer that applies a series of filters to the parent layer, in a specific order, seems simple enough--and of course it would save gobs of memory on huge images, but would probably require lots more processor, depending on the usage.
Same thing for "save selection", and adjustment layers that would be better served without a layer mask. Is it really necessary to create a full color channel the same size of the full image, so that you can load a selection area? Sure, you can take your selection and save it as a vector path, and that works fine and dandy sometimes. Doesn't work well with flowing hair in my experience, unless you get the just right feather radius. I mean, a MacPro with 16GB of memory looks pretty attractive for the things I want to do sometimes, and yet it might not be enough for doing big images right, and in an easily modifiable way. The next step is to do the mac and keep a swap drive on some kind of beefy fibre channel array, or super computer/datacenter/cluster-worthy NAS.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
Intriguing. My experience has been that Apple marketing convinces the end user that they have provided all they need. I see this attitude from several of my classmates, who can't seem to understand that changes in program requirements set forth by the professor require them to change their code. "What? You're making me change my program? But I already wrote it!" The rest of us quietly make the changes and move on with our lives.
Here's the thing though: we see a return on our investment, if you will. Meet the prof's specs, get a good grade, eventually get a degree and a good job. Apple and Windows developers tend to see a return on their investment: Please the end user, they buy the product, money in our pockets, move on with life.
what's the return for a Linux developer? "You flaming tightwad, why doesn't the software you spent the last two years of your life working on do XYZ? You should be more considerate of your end user!" It's of no relevance that the program already does A-R, and that even the big boys of the commercial world are just now getting L and Y working properly. How often have YOU voluntarily donated to the developers of the free software you use? What's the incentive to continue developing that software?
I guess the whole point is: We're working on it, just give us a little more time.
I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
I don't know where you shop but 500 GB hard drives are $100-$110. Anyway, disk storage isn't the (only) problem. Those bits have to be written and read to/from the hard drive (slow performance), stored in memory, sent over the network, sent over the Internet, sent to USB drives, stored on backups, etc. Unneeded / excessive bloat is never a good thing. Attitudes like yours are why computers that are 50 times "faster" than they were 10 years ago perform the same or slower. Have you used Vista?
Windows has a monopoly, Ubuntu doesn't. Ubuntu don't "own" the office suite they bundle, in fact you have the exact same rights to it as they do.
If MS lost it's monopoly, or bundled open-office, noone would have a problem.
ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
"She was already using Firefox / OpenOffice / Gaim so for her the differences were pretty nominal."
And that's the key. Switching operating systems is a big deal if it means switching your entire personal software collection at once, and that's what a lot of people try to do and fail. They switch, get culture shock, and retreat back to XP.
If you can figure out which applications you use and then convert yourself to a FOSS program, one by one, then by the time you have finished you can install Ubuntu Gutsy and the rest of your problems will be restricted to driver issues. I don't know why I didn't think of doing it like that earlier, it seems so obvious now.
If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
I'll tell you what I have contributed to open-source projects so far: very little. Why? Because, as a developer, I first have to make enough money to contribute that money to open-source projects, or enough money to have the time to contribute my time to them. In both cases, the problem is that I have only just begun to break even using my open-source tools, and so I have neither the time nor money to contribute much... yet.
I fully intend to contribute more to open-source, when I am in a position from which I can do so. Until then, about the best I can do is say, "Keep going! You are doing a Good Thing!"
... it is the final straw! I have read soooo many tales of a better computer experience with a linux OS that i've finally started on the path to having kubuntu installed with my new resolve to spend a definite amount of time using it. Yes, it was this story. Be proud! I was going to wait until my rage against Windows was incandescent, but why wait till then? I will still probably use Windows XP for years to come but no way am i going near Vista. So i better get my hands wet with linux, hey. It will also be better for my karma if i switch to linux and open source programs. I haven't purchased a piece of software for over 10 years now and no matter how much of a communist you are, you still get the feelings of guilt of not letting a simple legal fiction (ie proprietory software) get in the way of using all the wonderful programs that can be got from emule. These feeling come every now and then. About twice a year. If that!
why do you make the assumption he is in the US?
More generally, poor programmers try to make programs so simple that only simple things are possible.
In the Windows world, I often found programs nutered so they can sell the premium edition. It is so prevelant it has a name... Crippleware and Demoware
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoware
Pick up any recent HP computer and you will find many installed examples of this broken stuff littered all over it. When I first wanted to try Ubuntu, I downloaded the ISO on my wife's XP dell because it had the CD writer. Guess what, the CD writer program had ISO burning disabled, but they were kind enough to include a software package to offer to download the upgrade, no waiting for about $50. Grr. I never bothered to spend the $50 for a copy of Ubuntu. A search of friendlier software quickly turned up a real CD ISO burner.
Once Ubuntu was up and running, I found the simple task of burning a CD was simple, elegant, without bloat, and worked.
poor programmers try to make programs so simple that only simple things are possible
I find poor programmers try to make programs to extract the most cash possible.
1 Pay to be the default installation
2 Have reduced functionality of an essentual feature such as printing or burning
3 Have built in links to the upgrade fee processing site.
What they missed is The Internet and Google. Crippleware is deadware.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crippleware
The truth shall set you free!
I'd rather have a small violation of a non-legit codec then to have this ginormous company that was convicted of illegal monopolistic predatory practices telling me what I can and can't do with my computer.
Download the ISO. Burn it to a CD. Boot the CD and wait for it to eject. Remove the CD and load a DVD. Enjoy. When done, eject the DVD and select "Exit". This entire operation leaves no trace or record on your hard drive.
http://geexbox.org/en/downloads.html
With Vista taking forever to boot up, the CD boot is faster. If all I want to do is watch a movie, the CD boot is the best choice. The codec and player are not compliant with the DVD consortium which is a good thing. Put in the DVD and watch the movie instead of the FBI warning and "Don't steal this film".
The truth shall set you free!
The important thing you missed is Excel. Excel is, by far and away, the most important reason so few comapnies move away from Microsoft. Yes, there are alternatives out there. Yes, for 90% of all Excel users, the alternatives are good enough. However, for the last 10% of users, the alternatives are simply not good enough. (Pivot tables, VBA, specific add-ins, mainly.)
And guess what? It's the 10% of users who use this stuff who have the final say.
Yes, the security of an OS no one uses is pretty good, since you can't hack something that's not running...
Seriously, though, a server running out-of-date software (your posted example) is eventually going to get borked regardless of operating system. Bad troll.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
Apple marketing may be good, but it doesn't have supernatural powers. It's not as if it is casting its spell over people so they accept music players that are just solid block of plastic, or email programs that don't have the ability to send or receive messages.
The truth is that a solid block of plastic does everything most people need a music player to do. It just falls short in satisfying their wants. And what they need in a computer does not even include a GUI; folks could get by with vi and LaTex. Who knows? Maybe once they got used to it they'd actually be better off. Having a GUI isn't about needs, it's about experience.
Marketing's great vice is definitely not minimizing their customers' needs. On the contrary, it strives in the customer's mind to promote whims to wants, and wants to needs. Apple marketing is no different than any other company's marketing. What they've done differently is to offer a different proposition to their customers. Instead of, "we'll do everything you want", it's "we'll do the things that matter most to you better." Naturally they don't dwell on the things that they don't do (yet -- that's a huge ingredient on the Apple upgrade treadmill). To be fair, other companies that have products that do more things don't exactly dwell on how poorly they do them.
It's all about which proposition you find more credible, which one is more possible to deliver upon.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I keep seeing this claim but never any real evidence to back it up. In fact the first link you give says "No stats are available on how much work is being done by developers on a payroll as opposed to community volunteers."
Yes the key developers on some high profile projects get paid by someone to work on thier projects. Linus gets paid by the "linux foundation" (which seems to be a trade organisation of firms with a vested interest in linux's sucess). The core devs of openoffice and java (which isn't fully opensource yet but is getting that way) are paid by sun. The commercial linux distros also put some paid development in the direction of projects that matter to them.
However I see no evidence that this is typical, all the smaller opensource projects I have been involved with them have been run by people who have a day job doing something else and propietry software for linux seems to be virtually nonexistant.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
It was an example of bad management of high profile websites that caused the breach, not bad security on the OS's behalf. The thing is, these servers were brute forced over sshd - and from what I know, it took the attackers nearly a week of brute forcing to get in, and Windows servers can be brute forced and attacked in very much the same way. What it needs is an attentive admin who keeps an eye on the servers, and keeps an eye on the logs, and should pick up unusual activity on the firewall or ports. So, it was bad administration that caused this, not an insecure OS.
Pivot tables. Seriously - you will never get a power user to switch from Excel without a good implementation of pivot tables. And again, power users dictate what tools to use (at least in this case). The last few times this has come up, more than one comment has read "what are those? I have never used them!". The obvious answer to that is "small wonder you can't understand why people stick with Excel".
Also, other power users of Excel may give a different answer to this question, which is why the contenders have such a difficult time getting a foothold. You really have to do very close to 100% of what Excel does at least as well in order to convince the power users to switch. And the perceived loss of giving up known features is larger than the perceived gain from new features, so in practice it's impossible to skip pivot tables and do something else exceedingly well. I have no idea what the alternatives do exceedingly well, my point is simply that that doesn't matter much.
I keep seeing these types of posts: "Vista doesn't really suck all that bad. If you have gobs of money to spend on hardware, and gobs of time to spend tweaking, then Vista almost works as well as XP or W2K."
To msft users, I guess these posts seem logical. But I always think: WTF? why are switching at all?
At least it puts him beyond Joe Sixbox.
Prov 9:8 Do not rebuke mockers or they will hate you; rebuke the wise and they will love you.