Gentoo user here, just to side-step any Ubuntu fanboy responses.
Why are two competing display server stacks considered a problem in this case?
Over the years we've had countless situations like this The various desktop environments, package management systems, initialisation systems, boot loaders, audio stacks, etc. etc.
Often seen as the benefit of open-source software. The ability for multiple software components to exist that fulfil the same function. May the best man win.
Innovation and progress comes from each project trying to out-do it's rivals.
Often these competing solutions have a single distro or company behind them, driving development forward.
Why is Ubuntu's new display server, competing against X.org and Wayland any different?
Ballmer fired. New CEO coming in a few months time. Share-holders are demanding sweeping changes across the board. MS's Skype division "Look at us, we're doing stuff. We're still relevant. Please don't axe us."
When they push Windows-only "secure boot" on laptops? When they push Windows-only "secure boot" on servers? When they push Windows-only "secure boot" on desktop machines?
When, exactly, will this obviously evil and anti-competitive move be of relevance to you?
It's not sufficient, because it doesn't solve the problem.
The problem is that MS's implementation of secure boot allows them to control what can and cannot boot on a device. It is entirely at their discretion.
As you can see, locking out other OSs is already in place for the Surface tablet, which is unable to boot any other system (even with the boot-loader shims done by RedHat, Ubuntu and the Linux foundation.)
But the local computer shop or data recovery firm sure cares, as secure boot eliminates their ability to bypass windows to recover data direct from storage.
Joe Shmoe will care that the latest virus to infest his system leaves his data corrupted and secure boot prevents any remedial actions.
"Look at Windows 8. Don't like the unterface? tough, there's nothing you can do about it. Now look at Unity. Don't like the interface? Well try these others, there's plenty to choose from."
Playing devil's Advocate here, as personally I agree with this (and don't let the proprietary nVidia driver anywhere near my system). But just for kicks, how does the recent case of Oracle trying (and failing) to claim copyright on the Java APIs affect this.
If you cannot copyright an API, then you cannot apply a copyright license either.
What if nVidia challenged this with exactly the same arguments that Google used with Dalvik.
Only speaking for Linux here, But googling for generic issues often throws up heaps of out-of-date or otherwise unhelpful hits For a set of systems that move so fast (eg. 6 monthly release cycles for Ubuntu and Fedora), you need to get more taylored results
Including "Quantal", "Wheezy" or "Spherical" in your search terms is likely to pull up far more relevant results
How will this affect bootstrapping the GCC on bare systems?
Been a while since I've delved into LFS or the like, but I'd think GCC being C++ based would seriously complicate things as it's now got more dependencies.
So, we have: - Dell (project Sputnik. Partners with Canonical to sell Linux PCs) - Valve (Steam for Linux) - Blizzard (only blasted Windows 8, not announced their contingency plan yet) - Mozilla (Windows 8 revives the IE browser lockin)
and now Acer how can you not take the "think twice" line as a threat of defection
Will the Windows 8 Style UI be available on my Windows Phone Series 7, or will I have to wait for the Windows Phone Series 8 to get the new Windows 8 Style UI.
Also, will any sea-shells, woodchucks or pickled peppers be included?
Slashdot Mirror
Gentoo user here, just to side-step any Ubuntu fanboy responses.
Why are two competing display server stacks considered a problem in this case?
Over the years we've had countless situations like this
The various desktop environments, package management systems, initialisation systems, boot loaders, audio stacks, etc. etc.
Often seen as the benefit of open-source software.
The ability for multiple software components to exist that fulfil the same function. May the best man win.
Innovation and progress comes from each project trying to out-do it's rivals.
Often these competing solutions have a single distro or company behind them, driving development forward.
Why is Ubuntu's new display server, competing against X.org and Wayland any different?
Torvald's comments to Nvidia were to do with Optimus (their GPU switching stuff), not their closed graphics driver
Ballmer fired.
New CEO coming in a few months time.
Share-holders are demanding sweeping changes across the board.
MS's Skype division "Look at us, we're doing stuff. We're still relevant. Please don't axe us."
Actual link to indiegogo page, which is missing from FTS
http://igg.me/at/ubuntuedge
The issues here is one of PR and perception by non-technical users
But it's not called "Locked boot", is it?
It's called "Secure boot"
and disabling "secure boot" is surely, by definition, insecure.
Asking new users to disable secure boot is not what distros want to do.
Seriously. Call the program
"screener-720p"
and when will it become relevant to you?
When they push Windows-only "secure boot" on laptops?
When they push Windows-only "secure boot" on servers?
When they push Windows-only "secure boot" on desktop machines?
When, exactly, will this obviously evil and anti-competitive move be of relevance to you?
It's not sufficient, because it doesn't solve the problem.
The problem is that MS's implementation of secure boot allows them to control what can and cannot boot on a device.
It is entirely at their discretion.
This is already in practice with the surface tablets
See Mathew Garrett's recent blog post
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/21189.html
As you can see, locking out other OSs is already in place for the Surface tablet, which is unable to boot any other system (even with the boot-loader shims done by RedHat, Ubuntu and the Linux foundation.)
A rather literal take on the first step.
Hopes are high for the 'extend' part, but swiftly dwindle at the thought being virtually extinguished
No point supporting i386 anyway
As far as I'm aware, GNU binutils won't work on anything less than a 486
I guess you could be affected if you're using some other toolchain, but realistically is pointless keeping support for 386
the ending's disappointing, though...
But the local computer shop or data recovery firm sure cares, as secure boot eliminates their ability to bypass windows to recover data direct from storage.
Joe Shmoe will care that the latest virus to infest his system leaves his data corrupted and secure boot prevents any remedial actions.
Actually, it's a perfect example.
"Look at Windows 8. Don't like the unterface? tough, there's nothing you can do about it.
Now look at Unity. Don't like the interface? Well try these others, there's plenty to choose from."
So that's why they called their UI Metro.
Always wondered about that
This ain't Windows, boy.
go back to your remote desktop, everything-has-to-interact-with-the-GUI-scripting, and other such nonsense...
Playing devil's Advocate here, as personally I agree with this (and don't let the proprietary nVidia driver anywhere near my system).
But just for kicks, how does the recent case of Oracle trying (and failing) to claim copyright on the Java APIs affect this.
If you cannot copyright an API, then you cannot apply a copyright license either.
What if nVidia challenged this with exactly the same arguments that Google used with Dalvik.
Only speaking for Linux here,
But googling for generic issues often throws up heaps of out-of-date or otherwise unhelpful hits
For a set of systems that move so fast (eg. 6 monthly release cycles for Ubuntu and Fedora), you need to get more taylored results
Including "Quantal", "Wheezy" or "Spherical" in your search terms is likely to pull up far more relevant results
How will this affect bootstrapping the GCC on bare systems?
Been a while since I've delved into LFS or the like, but I'd think GCC being C++ based would seriously complicate things as it's now got more dependencies.
So, we have:
- Dell (project Sputnik. Partners with Canonical to sell Linux PCs)
- Valve (Steam for Linux)
- Blizzard (only blasted Windows 8, not announced their contingency plan yet)
- Mozilla (Windows 8 revives the IE browser lockin)
and now Acer
how can you not take the "think twice" line as a threat of defection
Will the Windows 8 Style UI be available on my Windows Phone Series 7, or will I have to wait for the Windows Phone Series 8 to get the new Windows 8 Style UI.
Also, will any sea-shells, woodchucks or pickled peppers be included?
I'm sure lots more details are coming.
Valve are doing a big presentation on their Linux adventures next week at SIGGRAPH (6th - 9th Aug)
As if the UI is the worst thing about it...
Valve isn't lambasting windows 8, and porting all their games to Linux because of the UI
...who intentionally confuse the freedoms of the user with the freedoms of the proprietary software developer.
Never used it, but it's designed for exactly this
http://zorin-os.com/
FTFY