Your assumption being that the headless/non X capable machine is administered from a machine running X. Another assumption is that the administrator using the assumed-to-be-existing computer running KDE *shudder* actually wants to use Konqueror as opposed to a terminal emulator and screen. For anyone who can remember 5 keyboard combos there are reasons to prefer a terminal emulator and screen. How about if you need to be logged into and working on several remote machines....screen or Konqueror?
The keyboard is not just a receptacle for toast crumbs and suspicious looking hairs (though it's good for that too).
There's very much a place for console applications. If you ssh into a machine that has no graphics capability you'll have an awful lot of trouble running Krusader on it;-) There are lots of great applications which use curses/ncurses to offer interfaces and facilities analogous to gui apps and there are also plenty of apparently low end machines out there on which running X and a desktop is too expensive, i.e. start x and watch everything else hang, but when run without X the same machines are perfectly suited to their tasks and have years of useful life ahead of them.
I also have an amd64 PC with 2 GB RAM, nvidia GPU etc. MC is installed and gets used regularly on that as well. That says a lot for the capabilities of MC but also some not so favourable things about GTK file managers....
Anyway I'm pleased to see there are people interested in reviving development of MC.
It's easy to do this without bloat. The people whining about bloat haven't got their brains engaged. The files on the install disk are compressed. Just let the installer offer a choice of either/both browsers. The cost in space on the DVD is what...5 -10 MB absolute max. Vista only comes on DVD and doesn't even use 3 GB of what's available, there is plenty of DVD capacity going to waste.
Cost to the end user: 0 financially and 0 in HDD space if desired.
Cost to Microsoft/OEMs: close to 0. The Mozilla installer needs to be integrated into the Vista installer so there's an afternoon's work for someone to do that, add an extra menu box and check it works.
The issue of media players might be more difficult because so many OEMs have their own deals with 3rd party vendors for multimedia players/media centre applications. They might object to a competing player being bundled.
yeah but who gives a fuck? It's hardly a unique name, Hughes is only slightly less common than Smith or Robinson or Jones. And what makes you think I use my own network for BitTorrent? Having lived in rural areas for a long time it's been gratifying to find so many public and unprotected networks on moving into an urban sprawl. And you forget that not all 'illegal' music arrives via the internet, there are also public lending libraries and the collections of friends and relatives. So find me and sue me, and when you've lost you can kiss my hairy arse.
At my IP address it's a true 100%, no need for statisticians or surveys. Thank you to the director, the camera man, the other nominess *blubber* *squeal* and most of all to me...oh yeah and all you other leechers too. What strikes me as odd is that the illegal music sounds better than legal music and Works Everywhere!((TM)) Did anyone tell the RIAA yet? Maybe they didn't realise that selling a substandard product at a premium price alienates customers while empowering and enabling alternative providers.
The default software choices are not really that different, both distributions use Gnome by default so you get the Gnome desktop and OpenOffice and all the usual stuff. Ubuntu will offer some extras like Cheese (webcam app) and their Restricted Hardware tool and some extra apps like F-Spot and Tomboy, Tracker meta search tool and of course Compiz. A much more significant difference may be that many people take advantage of the Debian netinstall mini CDs and don't even begin to install a full pre-configured desktop environment but instead install a base system followed by only those components they actually want, hence the eclecticism of their choices. It's also possible to use a regular Debian install CD or DVD and choose the expert or expert-gui installs and make a similar set of choices during the install. This is an option that Ubuntu dropped several versions ago.
Ubuntu and relatives use relatime by default. Installing *buntu from the desktop CD will always result in relatime being used. The Ubuntu server CD intaller is more like the Debian installer which by default specifies atime but offers the user the option to change to noatime, relatime and so on.
Tell us again how to configure it to prevent police officers breaking into your home/business/hotel room and installing software and/or hardware keyloggers. Thanks.
It's not good English if it's the wrong word to use. Words, in prose, are supposed to convey commonly accepted meaning. Either the author is being disingenuous or is using the word slated without knowing its meaning. How complicated is that to understand? Or perhaps that should that be "How confabulated is that to undermine?"
Yes, when pointing out someone abusing the English language for the purpose of shamelessly exaggerating their position, in a laughably bad attempt to deceive people and simultaneously claiming the moral high ground, I'm being exactly like Phil the Greek.
And you're a pompous cunt.
If over 9000 people were entered on a list or somehow scheduled to attend then it's a good use of the word. As about 25 people actually attended it looks like the word "slated" was used in a meaningless and unthinking way so I stand by my comment. A better wording for the article might have been "Over 9,000 people were never likely to attend, except in the fantasies of the organisers and of the lame hack who wrote this article. In fact very few people showed up and we carefully cropped the photos to avoid showing you a street with 25 activists generating no interest or reaction from the 3 people passing by". If you think "slated" was used even approximately correctly, or that using entirely the wrong word is good English then you're an idiot as well as a failed pedant.
"Over 9,000 people were slated to attend"
Slated to attend? That's not even English, it's barely bad journalese. It seems to be a way to avoid saying "25 people attended, with 2 crappy banners, and nobody cares. We'd better make up some shit so we don't look totally ineffectual".
Ken Starks is a tedious and shameless self-promotion artist. He won't ever reveal the real names of the teacher or the student because they don't exist. He's a serial troll. The choice of Helios as a moniker is partially apt because he is at the very least *ego*centric, though certainly not effulgent.
Free software would benefit greatly if "Helios" and Roy Schestowitz beat each other into dumb oblivion or if/. and lxer and similar just stopped taking any notice of these arseholes. They're embarrassing.
That's all very reasonable but fails to state the other side of the equation, which is that you, and everybody else, *can* have and use that huge bandwidth all the time but the price is going to be massively higher than at present. ISPs work on contention ratios like banks work on debt ratios. When the ISPs find that the contention ratio is unworkable because a proportion of its customers render the model broken then the easiest course of action for them is to change the model. The most likely outcome is that we will simply pay for what we use, like we do with electricity, gas, fuel etc. This is how it works in Australia afaik. The "unlimited" model which started in the US and was adopted in Europe has probably reached the end of its workable life. I know that here in the UK the best ISPs do not offer these unsustainable "unlimited" plans. When you finally get sick of Virgin/Tiscali/Tesco/BT etc shaping your bandwidth into oblivion you migrate to a small ISP and pay for a 30GB peak time 300GB off peak monthly plan and then go to the broadband/ISP forums and announce how much better your new ISP is.....funny that....
Re:Almost everything he complains about is wrong
on
What Needs Fixing In Linux
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Agree very much with your comments. Really the article should have been entitled "Clueless journo thinks success=approval by crappy prorpietary vendors" or "Clueless journo thinks becoming Windows XP is the be all and end all of free software development" or "Clueless journo used some distro, ignored 99% of tools and capabilities and then sounded off like an asshole after a big dinner". You can always spot a doofus when he/she starts saying "integrated" in a completely meaningless way. The only valid points he has is that there is a mess of audio APIs, the rest is really junk. Why on earth would anyone want to pay for some commercial remote back up service like the ones he mentions? What exactly is supposed to be broken or wrong with cron, rsync and ssh? If you need a gui for that stuff it's also available (kde kio slaves and kcron come to mind). If the Linux kernel and the Linux/GNU/Busybox operating systems were as broken as this journalist's understanding then we would indeed have a problem.
Recovery in this context clearly doesn't mean format & re-install. It's nice that you have your own definitions for words/phrases/concepts and are able to be oblivious to normal usage and context, but it makes a rational exchange rather difficult.
There's a lot more to it than launching applications. Even then it's unsatisfactory in many ways. It's extremely inconvenient to have to run an application as admin and have all the output non-executable and non-writable for other users...one more crappy task to fix all the permissions after every run. Anyway there are many applications which simply don't work with run as. The previous poster who linked to Super SU was nearer the mark. Windows user model works fine for users with no local admin rights working under a domain controller, i.e. in the office with IT dept running everything. For home/individual users it really stinks. The existence of botnets of tens or hundreds of thousands of compromised Windows PCs should negate the need to even mention or discuss this but it seems that simple, sane authorisation models have been thoroughly subverted for so long that the absolute worst model is considered normal and acceptable. What's really incredible to me is that if you look at unix user/super user model or the Ubuntu/OS X style sudo model they are both easy and *convenient* for the end user as well as the administrator and have no real drawback; I can't quite work out why MS dedicated the last 10 years to screwing it up so badly. It is a horrible experience for their users to suffer unwanted malicious software on their systems and it could all have been easily avoided. It shouldn't be normal to run a system so badly configured and implemented that it requires 3rd party add ons simply to appear secure. It shouldn't be anything other than extraordinarily unusual to have one's personal and financial details exposed to criminals etc. Run as is not the answer because there are too many situations where it simply doesn't work or is so inconvenient that it becomes impractical.
Personally speaking, Windows is only for games while everything else gets done on a sensible OS. Windows by default has no immunity and no powers of recovery. It has AIDS.
Actually there isn't money to be made this way because all those unhappy customers demanding refunds will be expensive. The idea that you can clean an infected Windows PC by installing product A or B or C is mistaken. The whole idea that security is a boxed product or is available by clicking an.exe/.msi installer is bogus. Assuming that the malware on these infected computers is even known to the AV companies (and that's no longer a reasonable assumption in most cases) then the only way to actually remove it effectively is by running the AV tools from read only media, i.e. a live CD. Well designed malware will simply disallow the installation/use/updating of common AV software. The malware authors are streets ahead of the "security" vendors. The AV products installed on a clean machine can't even prevent many of these problems let alone cure them. Most Windows users would be better advised to save their pennies and re-install from original media, always be patched and up to date (applications as well as OS), run as unprivileged user with strong passwords on all accounts and browse only with Firefox + privoxy + noscript + adblock. That isn't perfect but it's zero financial cost and way more effective than anything Symantec, McAfee etc can offer. Unfortunately running Windows with an unprivileged account is as convenient as toothache.
Slashdot Mirror
Your assumption being that the headless/non X capable machine is administered from a machine running X. Another assumption is that the administrator using the assumed-to-be-existing computer running KDE *shudder* actually wants to use Konqueror as opposed to a terminal emulator and screen. For anyone who can remember 5 keyboard combos there are reasons to prefer a terminal emulator and screen. How about if you need to be logged into and working on several remote machines....screen or Konqueror? The keyboard is not just a receptacle for toast crumbs and suspicious looking hairs (though it's good for that too).
There's very much a place for console applications. If you ssh into a machine that has no graphics capability you'll have an awful lot of trouble running Krusader on it ;-) There are lots of great applications which use curses/ncurses to offer interfaces and facilities analogous to gui apps and there are also plenty of apparently low end machines out there on which running X and a desktop is too expensive, i.e. start x and watch everything else hang, but when run without X the same machines are perfectly suited to their tasks and have years of useful life ahead of them.
I also have an amd64 PC with 2 GB RAM, nvidia GPU etc. MC is installed and gets used regularly on that as well. That says a lot for the capabilities of MC but also some not so favourable things about GTK file managers....
Anyway I'm pleased to see there are people interested in reviving development of MC.
It's easy to do this without bloat. The people whining about bloat haven't got their brains engaged. The files on the install disk are compressed. Just let the installer offer a choice of either/both browsers. The cost in space on the DVD is what...5 -10 MB absolute max. Vista only comes on DVD and doesn't even use 3 GB of what's available, there is plenty of DVD capacity going to waste. Cost to the end user: 0 financially and 0 in HDD space if desired. Cost to Microsoft/OEMs: close to 0. The Mozilla installer needs to be integrated into the Vista installer so there's an afternoon's work for someone to do that, add an extra menu box and check it works. The issue of media players might be more difficult because so many OEMs have their own deals with 3rd party vendors for multimedia players/media centre applications. They might object to a competing player being bundled.
yeah but who gives a fuck? It's hardly a unique name, Hughes is only slightly less common than Smith or Robinson or Jones. And what makes you think I use my own network for BitTorrent? Having lived in rural areas for a long time it's been gratifying to find so many public and unprotected networks on moving into an urban sprawl. And you forget that not all 'illegal' music arrives via the internet, there are also public lending libraries and the collections of friends and relatives. So find me and sue me, and when you've lost you can kiss my hairy arse.
At my IP address it's a true 100%, no need for statisticians or surveys. Thank you to the director, the camera man, the other nominess *blubber* *squeal* and most of all to me...oh yeah and all you other leechers too. What strikes me as odd is that the illegal music sounds better than legal music and Works Everywhere!((TM)) Did anyone tell the RIAA yet? Maybe they didn't realise that selling a substandard product at a premium price alienates customers while empowering and enabling alternative providers.
The default software choices are not really that different, both distributions use Gnome by default so you get the Gnome desktop and OpenOffice and all the usual stuff. Ubuntu will offer some extras like Cheese (webcam app) and their Restricted Hardware tool and some extra apps like F-Spot and Tomboy, Tracker meta search tool and of course Compiz. A much more significant difference may be that many people take advantage of the Debian netinstall mini CDs and don't even begin to install a full pre-configured desktop environment but instead install a base system followed by only those components they actually want, hence the eclecticism of their choices. It's also possible to use a regular Debian install CD or DVD and choose the expert or expert-gui installs and make a similar set of choices during the install. This is an option that Ubuntu dropped several versions ago.
Ubuntu and relatives use relatime by default. Installing *buntu from the desktop CD will always result in relatime being used. The Ubuntu server CD intaller is more like the Debian installer which by default specifies atime but offers the user the option to change to noatime, relatime and so on.
Tell us again how to configure it to prevent police officers breaking into your home/business/hotel room and installing software and/or hardware keyloggers. Thanks.
And you're a dumb cunt. What's your day job, Israeli foreign affairs minister? Or just regular US fuckwit college fodder?
The more I think about it the more it looks like A Microsoft version of the virtual desktop.
Wow, if I buy an Apple I can burn CDs with a wireless adapter! I'm bending over now...
It's not good English if it's the wrong word to use. Words, in prose, are supposed to convey commonly accepted meaning. Either the author is being disingenuous or is using the word slated without knowing its meaning. How complicated is that to understand? Or perhaps that should that be "How confabulated is that to undermine?"
Yes, when pointing out someone abusing the English language for the purpose of shamelessly exaggerating their position, in a laughably bad attempt to deceive people and simultaneously claiming the moral high ground, I'm being exactly like Phil the Greek. And you're a pompous cunt.
If over 9000 people were entered on a list or somehow scheduled to attend then it's a good use of the word. As about 25 people actually attended it looks like the word "slated" was used in a meaningless and unthinking way so I stand by my comment. A better wording for the article might have been "Over 9,000 people were never likely to attend, except in the fantasies of the organisers and of the lame hack who wrote this article. In fact very few people showed up and we carefully cropped the photos to avoid showing you a street with 25 activists generating no interest or reaction from the 3 people passing by". If you think "slated" was used even approximately correctly, or that using entirely the wrong word is good English then you're an idiot as well as a failed pedant.
"Over 9,000 people were slated to attend" Slated to attend? That's not even English, it's barely bad journalese. It seems to be a way to avoid saying "25 people attended, with 2 crappy banners, and nobody cares. We'd better make up some shit so we don't look totally ineffectual".
Ken Starks is a tedious and shameless self-promotion artist. He won't ever reveal the real names of the teacher or the student because they don't exist. He's a serial troll. The choice of Helios as a moniker is partially apt because he is at the very least *ego*centric, though certainly not effulgent. Free software would benefit greatly if "Helios" and Roy Schestowitz beat each other into dumb oblivion or if /. and lxer and similar just stopped taking any notice of these arseholes. They're embarrassing.
didunt am possabul git noh moor dumma.
Maybe he was calling his dog?
That's all very reasonable but fails to state the other side of the equation, which is that you, and everybody else, *can* have and use that huge bandwidth all the time but the price is going to be massively higher than at present. ISPs work on contention ratios like banks work on debt ratios. When the ISPs find that the contention ratio is unworkable because a proportion of its customers render the model broken then the easiest course of action for them is to change the model. The most likely outcome is that we will simply pay for what we use, like we do with electricity, gas, fuel etc. This is how it works in Australia afaik. The "unlimited" model which started in the US and was adopted in Europe has probably reached the end of its workable life. I know that here in the UK the best ISPs do not offer these unsustainable "unlimited" plans. When you finally get sick of Virgin/Tiscali/Tesco/BT etc shaping your bandwidth into oblivion you migrate to a small ISP and pay for a 30GB peak time 300GB off peak monthly plan and then go to the broadband/ISP forums and announce how much better your new ISP is.....funny that....
Agree very much with your comments. Really the article should have been entitled "Clueless journo thinks success=approval by crappy prorpietary vendors" or "Clueless journo thinks becoming Windows XP is the be all and end all of free software development" or "Clueless journo used some distro, ignored 99% of tools and capabilities and then sounded off like an asshole after a big dinner". You can always spot a doofus when he/she starts saying "integrated" in a completely meaningless way. The only valid points he has is that there is a mess of audio APIs, the rest is really junk. Why on earth would anyone want to pay for some commercial remote back up service like the ones he mentions? What exactly is supposed to be broken or wrong with cron, rsync and ssh? If you need a gui for that stuff it's also available (kde kio slaves and kcron come to mind). If the Linux kernel and the Linux/GNU/Busybox operating systems were as broken as this journalist's understanding then we would indeed have a problem.
journos quoting journos...how could it not be true?
Recovery in this context clearly doesn't mean format & re-install. It's nice that you have your own definitions for words/phrases/concepts and are able to be oblivious to normal usage and context, but it makes a rational exchange rather difficult.
re recovery: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Security/Microsoft-Says-Recovery-from-Malware-Becoming-Impossible/
There's a lot more to it than launching applications. Even then it's unsatisfactory in many ways. It's extremely inconvenient to have to run an application as admin and have all the output non-executable and non-writable for other users...one more crappy task to fix all the permissions after every run. Anyway there are many applications which simply don't work with run as. The previous poster who linked to Super SU was nearer the mark. Windows user model works fine for users with no local admin rights working under a domain controller, i.e. in the office with IT dept running everything. For home/individual users it really stinks. The existence of botnets of tens or hundreds of thousands of compromised Windows PCs should negate the need to even mention or discuss this but it seems that simple, sane authorisation models have been thoroughly subverted for so long that the absolute worst model is considered normal and acceptable. What's really incredible to me is that if you look at unix user/super user model or the Ubuntu/OS X style sudo model they are both easy and *convenient* for the end user as well as the administrator and have no real drawback; I can't quite work out why MS dedicated the last 10 years to screwing it up so badly. It is a horrible experience for their users to suffer unwanted malicious software on their systems and it could all have been easily avoided. It shouldn't be normal to run a system so badly configured and implemented that it requires 3rd party add ons simply to appear secure. It shouldn't be anything other than extraordinarily unusual to have one's personal and financial details exposed to criminals etc. Run as is not the answer because there are too many situations where it simply doesn't work or is so inconvenient that it becomes impractical. Personally speaking, Windows is only for games while everything else gets done on a sensible OS. Windows by default has no immunity and no powers of recovery. It has AIDS.
Actually there isn't money to be made this way because all those unhappy customers demanding refunds will be expensive. The idea that you can clean an infected Windows PC by installing product A or B or C is mistaken. The whole idea that security is a boxed product or is available by clicking an .exe/.msi installer is bogus. Assuming that the malware on these infected computers is even known to the AV companies (and that's no longer a reasonable assumption in most cases) then the only way to actually remove it effectively is by running the AV tools from read only media, i.e. a live CD. Well designed malware will simply disallow the installation/use/updating of common AV software. The malware authors are streets ahead of the "security" vendors. The AV products installed on a clean machine can't even prevent many of these problems let alone cure them. Most Windows users would be better advised to save their pennies and re-install from original media, always be patched and up to date (applications as well as OS), run as unprivileged user with strong passwords on all accounts and browse only with Firefox + privoxy + noscript + adblock. That isn't perfect but it's zero financial cost and way more effective than anything Symantec, McAfee etc can offer. Unfortunately running Windows with an unprivileged account is as convenient as toothache.