Yeah, I guess it is pretty naive. I'm just tired of new versions of software running slower and slower on my older hardware. (Web browsers especially. And operating systems.)
Not all markets show that tolerance. Video game markets, for example. A lot of them have those "set in stone" release dates, and the games don't come out very well. (Of course, my gaming taste is stuck in the '90s where it belongs, so don't take my word for it.)
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Lazy programmers aren't writing efficient code, they're just relying on Moore's Law to push them through. Of course, I don't think the average consumers understand much about efficiency, seeing as eyecandy is so popular, even a selling point.
You know what else I've noticed? Every time a poster says "Mod me troll, but..." or "I expect to get modded down for this, but..." they always get modded +5 in[sightful|formative|teresting].
This is quite an interesting phenomenon to me. It seems like with the whole "cloud" business, we're going back to a client-server computing approach; the servers and clients are just a shit-ton more powerful than anything 20-30 years ago.
The general public has no clue linux actually exists.
Whoa, hold on there! I'm sure if they own an Android or webOS device, they'll have heard of Linux at some point, no matter how small the reference may be.
Depends on the target audience. If your goal as a distro admin is to gain more users, then you want to think about what people see when they use your product. Look at what Ubuntu did with Unity; that's about all the proof needed. Sure, an end user can remove Unity and install GNOME 2 or XFCE or whatever, but the point is that a distro is simply a set of choices that some admin has made. They have to be good choices if the distro wants to survive.
It does, but perhaps not for the reasons everyone imagines. Linux is great for breathing new life into older systems. For casual users, it can also be quite useful as long as it's set up correctly. Power users are power users; they'll figure out stuff.
Is it ready for the masses? I still don't think so.
Slashdot Mirror
I think most web services work this way. IANAL, but I'm sure a signature is required for an actual copyright transfer.
Yeah, I guess it is pretty naive. I'm just tired of new versions of software running slower and slower on my older hardware. (Web browsers especially. And operating systems.)
Not all markets show that tolerance. Video game markets, for example. A lot of them have those "set in stone" release dates, and the games don't come out very well. (Of course, my gaming taste is stuck in the '90s where it belongs, so don't take my word for it.)
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Lazy programmers aren't writing efficient code, they're just relying on Moore's Law to push them through. Of course, I don't think the average consumers understand much about efficiency, seeing as eyecandy is so popular, even a selling point.
"Security" = trying hard to make sure consumers can't jailbreak their own devices.
http://xkcd.com/449/
A very relevant area where this problem can be readily seen is computer data formats.
Except for Ron Paul, of course.
The "i" of this decade is the "e" of the '90s.
Society is people , not mindless robots.
And if it was mindfull robots, that means the machines have won and we wouldn't be discussing this right now.
You know what else I've noticed? Every time a poster says "Mod me troll, but..." or "I expect to get modded down for this, but..." they always get modded +5 in[sightful|formative|teresting].
Fine, but you're not saying how heavily you're read-writing on those disks.
I thought it was software patents that were the problem, not copyright. Or am I missing something?
Ayn Rand's not building the railroad. Dagny Taggart is.
How do you explain this, then?
This sounds exactly like that sketch from The Onion Movie. "I ain't askin' for no god-damn handout, I want a muthafuckin' job, bitch!"
This is quite an interesting phenomenon to me. It seems like with the whole "cloud" business, we're going back to a client-server computing approach; the servers and clients are just a shit-ton more powerful than anything 20-30 years ago.
LXDE is amazing as well. It's really light and efficient. It's my personal favorite out of all the traditional-look-and-feel desktop environments.
The general public has no clue linux actually exists.
Whoa, hold on there! I'm sure if they own an Android or webOS device, they'll have heard of Linux at some point, no matter how small the reference may be.
Depends on the target audience. If your goal as a distro admin is to gain more users, then you want to think about what people see when they use your product. Look at what Ubuntu did with Unity; that's about all the proof needed. Sure, an end user can remove Unity and install GNOME 2 or XFCE or whatever, but the point is that a distro is simply a set of choices that some admin has made. They have to be good choices if the distro wants to survive.
It does, but perhaps not for the reasons everyone imagines. Linux is great for breathing new life into older systems. For casual users, it can also be quite useful as long as it's set up correctly. Power users are power users; they'll figure out stuff.
Is it ready for the masses? I still don't think so.
What about MATE? I thought that was a maintenance fork.
will it offer any benefit over just using GNOME 2?
I think a little part of my soul just died.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/recommended-cameras.htm Scroll down a bit for the section for Casual Photography.