1. Partially right, mostly wrong.
The core of it is open-source. Some of the programs are also open source, and due to the core of it being open source (Darwin) it allows for a lot of cross-over from Linux to OSX. You're right in that the proprietary nature of it is unappealing though.
2. Wrong. Very Wrong.
Not standard hardware. Up until the switch to Intel, Macs ran on PowerPC. One of the many key differences was that their cpus have 3 levels of cache, and are well known to outprocess their x86 counterparts. PowerPC hardware is the one true virtue of Mac, and is the "betamax" of computer architecture.
Even with the switch to Intel, the core design behind it is better than standard x86(_86). Though I'm not a big fan of the Intel switch, I still admit that the hardware is more stable, and better built.
3. Again Wrong.
Windows plus the software to do ANYTHING on it, plus the inevitable service that will be run on it is by far the most expensive solution out there. OSX is number 2 to this, but thats simply because they charge for some of their software. The OSX version I got with my iBook, I got most all the applications I would use with it for free. The OSX plus the packages with it still cheaper than WinXP Pro, which comes with NOTHING.
The service charges for a mac a generally far less, since you send it in, and get it repaired by the same company or a certified repair shop through the company. Sometimes its more expensive (ok, most times) but none the less, it will break down less.
4. Are you high?
Windows Update is not secure (as this article points out), and the methodology.. seriously, did you even think before posting this? their "methodology" is to release first, test later. Lets all flashback to the neato "feature" that MS added with XP SP1, where if you ran a defrag after upgrading from XP to XPSP1, you would damage data on your hard drive. After 6 months, there was a patch to fix it. MS -NEVER- made mention of this, even though there were several big complaints about its existance.
MS has the slowest (emphasis on S L O W E S T) security responses out there. Safari's recent security breach was fixed in a day.. that same breach with IE on its native OS took MONTHS!
Years behind?!?!
5. Ugh.
Since we've clearly pointed out that you have no idea what you are talking about, I shouldn't even bother with this one either. So, in lieu of that I'll ask you to re-read point #2.
6. Huh?
Where are you getting this?
Just so you know I'm a die-hard linux user, I run several Linux only networks. I'm not a fan of OSX, at all. However, Apple hardware is superior, and I would run exclusively off of it if I could. Even with my general dislike of OSX, I know several who use it. The college I went to had several mac labs. The cost of maintaining and equipping these labs were generally cheaper in the long run, which is why they went with them. I've also managed several IT offices, and have done the math on what it cost us to operate. Even with a competant setup, the long term cost of a Windows network is high.
I'm also not a fan of Steve Jobs. I think he's an egomaniac, and counter productive at times with his "computers are art" mentality.
Brought to you by the people who created such great products as Windows ME, and Windows Vista; we have the most expensive computer you've ever spilled liquid on!
Seriously.. by the time this really hits the commercial market (I would say 2 years), the linux version will be better.
I see a good amount of comments about CCP's PR or lack thereof. I can't help but remember the good PR that games like EverQuest incorporated. Like when asked about why Bard animations were incorrect, the response was "they are meant to be fruity." Or when monsters would get suddenly teleported to their original spawn point for no reason, "its a feature, not a bug."
In fact, before Verant's subsequent downfall (or buyout.. whatever) they went on an outright stance against players. The Conquest banning for waking the Sleeper was absurd, since the real reason they were banned was not for exploits, but because the devs introduced content they didn't finish. They claimed that Conquest exploited terrain to achieve victory.. much in the same way that NPCs would "exploit" similar terrain issues to train groups in dungeons.. however, this "feature" was listed as a bug, and subsequently many people got banned. After some time, some were allowed to play, but only after THEY apologized. I don't believe Sony or Verant ever acknowledged any misconduct or over reaction to that event.
I could go on about numerous companies (generally tied into Sony now that I think of it) that have made such stances against players.
To CCP's credit they admitted this wrong doing. They made it very public, and despite their lack of disciplinary action they have tightened their reigns a bit. The problem is that these are developers. Developers are not easy to replace.. its not like a few CSRs abusing mod/guide powers. In all actuality, working from the existing model of MMORPG PR, the appropriate action would have been to ban all the players who benefitted from dev misconduct, then nerf all the new high end items to distract people.
At this point, CCP is a huge target as a company and accusations sorrounding BoB/CCP will be easy pickins. Its not too far fetched that a rival alliance will resort to politics like this, in a game BASED on politics. Why this even gets slashdotted/dug/red/whatever is a bit silly at this point.
Microsoft Australia's Chief Security Adviser Peter Watson calls UAC a great idea and 'strategically a direction that all operating systems and all technologies should be heading down.' He also believes Microsoft is charting new territory with UAC.
He also believes in unicorns, woodland faeries, and window's firewall.
Ah, sexual favors... This whole time I've relied on half-assed written reports of stories of mild interest. Though I'm still puzzled as to why my article on the guy who got drunk and wrestled a shark was denied... thats media gold.
The Ubuntu package manager takes care of finding the program you want, getting it and installing it.
Lets not forget "configures" in there as well.
Also, Ubuntu has 2 interfaces for its package manager, and it doesn't have programs in it that can't be uninstalled (see: corrupted Norton A/V, spyware). Frankly a comparison between the two is a strain on my better judgement. I think out of the thousands of people who read slashdot, maybe 4 of them ever "added" a program through Windows add/remove programs (and I don't include Windows Components). A more appropriate comparison would have been how programs are competantly removed by a program manager.. in which case it would be fairly even... but then again I haven't confirmed/denied that Vista has the same problem XP had with corrupted/malicious programs refusing to be removed from add/remove programs.
Remastersys Made for Mint, works with all Ubuntu-like systems.
sudo remastersys backup = Backup your system.
sudo remastersys dist = Make a distributable copy of your installed system.
Apparently "remastersys" wasn't included in this review.
1 command, with like 2 options.. can backup a system to a liveCD/DVD in a relatively short period of time.
I wonder how long it will be before people find out where the cameras are and start posing naked in front of them.
Re:Why do this?
on
AMD's New DRM
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
AMD, Dell and HP have plenty of beneficial reasons for supporting DRM. They may not produce content, but they sure as hell sell stuff for content producers. For example.. AMD chooses to support DRM, thus it makes it easier for Dell to adopt them and get a bigger bonus support from Philips and/or Sony for their hardware or software bundles.
Thats almost too basic, but thats the principle here. AMD's move will make it easier for volume distributors to adopt them, as DRM slowly but surely becomes a part of our lives. AMD will more than likely have huge support from content producers such as Sony, and BMG. With that support comes money and advertising.
Generally.. if someone plans on buying something, they are going to buy it regardless of how it sounded online. Granted there are a few times where someone will hear something they downloaded, and say, "Hey I need to get that," but rarely will someone download material like this as an attempt to "try it out" before buying it.
A good example is that guy (you know him... we all do) that will download a movie 5 times to find a good quality version of it, and eventually give up and buy the DVD in the end. That same guy will get a DVD quality download of another movie, and never spend a cent (save the $1 for the DVD media to burn it on) on that movie.
Its not freeloading.. its human nature.
I'm sure the 5 people who honestly download copyrighted content on the internet to "try it before buying it" will enjoy this service.. but I doubt anyone will pay for it. Especially since they are downloading free content from the internet to begin with.
People get paid for this.
MythBusters has already tested this, and the frequency that cellphones use does (believe it or not) interfere with navigation systems on the plane.
To be perfectly honest, how this even got posted to/. is beyond me.
...the most feared words in IT Support, when on the topic of security and viruses, "but I have Norton!"
Can't tell you how many times I hear that from customers/clients who bring me PCs riddled with common and some not so common viruses that virtually any other AV software would have stopped at the door. Not to mention that removing norton is nothing short of an exercise in futility.
Which I guess brings the biggest question of all... how is Symantec (creators of Norton) able to comment on security, when its own security software is a known security issue?
I for one would like an Apple PPC with linux pre-installed. In fact I have an iMac (G3 600Mhz) at home I run Ubuntu 6.10 PPC on for my daughter, and it runs better than the OS9 it had on it.
In several comparisons that I've done (and read) Linux generally performs as well, if not better in some cases, on PowerPC hardware than Mac does. However, that has changed to some extent with the switch to intel. Though there are several articles floating around the web stating that when linux is configured to run on the Mactel iBooks, the performance is still marginally ahead for linux.
Personally, if I could get my hands on a Power6 PC, and slap linux on it, I'd be all but done with x86.
I'm personally surprised that IBM isn't doing this in lieu of the Apple switch to Intel.
Basically.. if I could get an intel iMac with Linux preloaded, I'd save up for it and buy it. Right now, I find MacOS X to be about as useful as a second butthole. (And yes.. I've used OS X, a bunch.)
Debian developers throw a fit because of unfair compensation.
Debian users get to wait until developers remember who they are developing for.
Debian Enterprise goes down the toilet because its gone from long release cycles, to long release cycles and an unstable development team.
I've been a huge fan of debian since my first days of using Linux, but this is just petty, and childish.
Slashdot Mirror
Reading the post, I noticed a contradiction... "no crapware" and "it comes with Windows Vista Basic Home"
1. Partially right, mostly wrong. The core of it is open-source. Some of the programs are also open source, and due to the core of it being open source (Darwin) it allows for a lot of cross-over from Linux to OSX. You're right in that the proprietary nature of it is unappealing though. 2. Wrong. Very Wrong. Not standard hardware. Up until the switch to Intel, Macs ran on PowerPC. One of the many key differences was that their cpus have 3 levels of cache, and are well known to outprocess their x86 counterparts. PowerPC hardware is the one true virtue of Mac, and is the "betamax" of computer architecture. Even with the switch to Intel, the core design behind it is better than standard x86(_86). Though I'm not a big fan of the Intel switch, I still admit that the hardware is more stable, and better built. 3. Again Wrong. Windows plus the software to do ANYTHING on it, plus the inevitable service that will be run on it is by far the most expensive solution out there. OSX is number 2 to this, but thats simply because they charge for some of their software. The OSX version I got with my iBook, I got most all the applications I would use with it for free. The OSX plus the packages with it still cheaper than WinXP Pro, which comes with NOTHING. The service charges for a mac a generally far less, since you send it in, and get it repaired by the same company or a certified repair shop through the company. Sometimes its more expensive (ok, most times) but none the less, it will break down less. 4. Are you high? Windows Update is not secure (as this article points out), and the methodology.. seriously, did you even think before posting this? their "methodology" is to release first, test later. Lets all flashback to the neato "feature" that MS added with XP SP1, where if you ran a defrag after upgrading from XP to XPSP1, you would damage data on your hard drive. After 6 months, there was a patch to fix it. MS -NEVER- made mention of this, even though there were several big complaints about its existance. MS has the slowest (emphasis on S L O W E S T) security responses out there. Safari's recent security breach was fixed in a day.. that same breach with IE on its native OS took MONTHS! Years behind?!?! 5. Ugh. Since we've clearly pointed out that you have no idea what you are talking about, I shouldn't even bother with this one either. So, in lieu of that I'll ask you to re-read point #2. 6. Huh? Where are you getting this? Just so you know I'm a die-hard linux user, I run several Linux only networks. I'm not a fan of OSX, at all. However, Apple hardware is superior, and I would run exclusively off of it if I could. Even with my general dislike of OSX, I know several who use it. The college I went to had several mac labs. The cost of maintaining and equipping these labs were generally cheaper in the long run, which is why they went with them. I've also managed several IT offices, and have done the math on what it cost us to operate. Even with a competant setup, the long term cost of a Windows network is high. I'm also not a fan of Steve Jobs. I think he's an egomaniac, and counter productive at times with his "computers are art" mentality.
Brought to you by the people who created such great products as Windows ME, and Windows Vista; we have the most expensive computer you've ever spilled liquid on! Seriously.. by the time this really hits the commercial market (I would say 2 years), the linux version will be better.
I see a good amount of comments about CCP's PR or lack thereof. I can't help but remember the good PR that games like EverQuest incorporated. Like when asked about why Bard animations were incorrect, the response was "they are meant to be fruity." Or when monsters would get suddenly teleported to their original spawn point for no reason, "its a feature, not a bug." In fact, before Verant's subsequent downfall (or buyout.. whatever) they went on an outright stance against players. The Conquest banning for waking the Sleeper was absurd, since the real reason they were banned was not for exploits, but because the devs introduced content they didn't finish. They claimed that Conquest exploited terrain to achieve victory.. much in the same way that NPCs would "exploit" similar terrain issues to train groups in dungeons.. however, this "feature" was listed as a bug, and subsequently many people got banned. After some time, some were allowed to play, but only after THEY apologized. I don't believe Sony or Verant ever acknowledged any misconduct or over reaction to that event. I could go on about numerous companies (generally tied into Sony now that I think of it) that have made such stances against players. To CCP's credit they admitted this wrong doing. They made it very public, and despite their lack of disciplinary action they have tightened their reigns a bit. The problem is that these are developers. Developers are not easy to replace.. its not like a few CSRs abusing mod/guide powers. In all actuality, working from the existing model of MMORPG PR, the appropriate action would have been to ban all the players who benefitted from dev misconduct, then nerf all the new high end items to distract people. At this point, CCP is a huge target as a company and accusations sorrounding BoB/CCP will be easy pickins. Its not too far fetched that a rival alliance will resort to politics like this, in a game BASED on politics. Why this even gets slashdotted/dug/red/whatever is a bit silly at this point.
He also believes in unicorns, woodland faeries, and window's firewall.
Ah, sexual favors... This whole time I've relied on half-assed written reports of stories of mild interest. Though I'm still puzzled as to why my article on the guy who got drunk and wrestled a shark was denied... thats media gold.
The Ubuntu package manager takes care of finding the program you want, getting it and installing it.
Lets not forget "configures" in there as well.
Also, Ubuntu has 2 interfaces for its package manager, and it doesn't have programs in it that can't be uninstalled (see: corrupted Norton A/V, spyware). Frankly a comparison between the two is a strain on my better judgement. I think out of the thousands of people who read slashdot, maybe 4 of them ever "added" a program through Windows add/remove programs (and I don't include Windows Components). A more appropriate comparison would have been how programs are competantly removed by a program manager.. in which case it would be fairly even... but then again I haven't confirmed/denied that Vista has the same problem XP had with corrupted/malicious programs refusing to be removed from add/remove programs.
Remastersys Made for Mint, works with all Ubuntu-like systems. sudo remastersys backup = Backup your system. sudo remastersys dist = Make a distributable copy of your installed system.
Apparently "remastersys" wasn't included in this review. 1 command, with like 2 options.. can backup a system to a liveCD/DVD in a relatively short period of time.
I wonder how long it will be before people find out where the cameras are and start posing naked in front of them.
AMD, Dell and HP have plenty of beneficial reasons for supporting DRM. They may not produce content, but they sure as hell sell stuff for content producers. For example.. AMD chooses to support DRM, thus it makes it easier for Dell to adopt them and get a bigger bonus support from Philips and/or Sony for their hardware or software bundles.
Thats almost too basic, but thats the principle here. AMD's move will make it easier for volume distributors to adopt them, as DRM slowly but surely becomes a part of our lives. AMD will more than likely have huge support from content producers such as Sony, and BMG. With that support comes money and advertising.
Generally.. if someone plans on buying something, they are going to buy it regardless of how it sounded online. Granted there are a few times where someone will hear something they downloaded, and say, "Hey I need to get that," but rarely will someone download material like this as an attempt to "try it out" before buying it. A good example is that guy (you know him... we all do) that will download a movie 5 times to find a good quality version of it, and eventually give up and buy the DVD in the end. That same guy will get a DVD quality download of another movie, and never spend a cent (save the $1 for the DVD media to burn it on) on that movie. Its not freeloading.. its human nature.
I'm sure the 5 people who honestly download copyrighted content on the internet to "try it before buying it" will enjoy this service.. but I doubt anyone will pay for it. Especially since they are downloading free content from the internet to begin with.
People get paid for this.
MythBusters has already tested this, and the frequency that cellphones use does (believe it or not) interfere with navigation systems on the plane. To be perfectly honest, how this even got posted to /. is beyond me.
Route for SkyPE.
...the most feared words in IT Support, when on the topic of security and viruses, "but I have Norton!" Can't tell you how many times I hear that from customers/clients who bring me PCs riddled with common and some not so common viruses that virtually any other AV software would have stopped at the door. Not to mention that removing norton is nothing short of an exercise in futility. Which I guess brings the biggest question of all... how is Symantec (creators of Norton) able to comment on security, when its own security software is a known security issue?
I for one would like an Apple PPC with linux pre-installed. In fact I have an iMac (G3 600Mhz) at home I run Ubuntu 6.10 PPC on for my daughter, and it runs better than the OS9 it had on it. In several comparisons that I've done (and read) Linux generally performs as well, if not better in some cases, on PowerPC hardware than Mac does. However, that has changed to some extent with the switch to intel. Though there are several articles floating around the web stating that when linux is configured to run on the Mactel iBooks, the performance is still marginally ahead for linux. Personally, if I could get my hands on a Power6 PC, and slap linux on it, I'd be all but done with x86. I'm personally surprised that IBM isn't doing this in lieu of the Apple switch to Intel. Basically.. if I could get an intel iMac with Linux preloaded, I'd save up for it and buy it. Right now, I find MacOS X to be about as useful as a second butthole. (And yes.. I've used OS X, a bunch.)
The humor is lost now. If there was any to begin with.
The seemingly more appropriate abbreviation would be ManNAd.
Debian developers throw a fit because of unfair compensation. Debian users get to wait until developers remember who they are developing for. Debian Enterprise goes down the toilet because its gone from long release cycles, to long release cycles and an unstable development team. I've been a huge fan of debian since my first days of using Linux, but this is just petty, and childish.