But I would say that OSX has engineered users to it. Of course it doesn't get in the way. Because there isn't anything that can be done that hasn't been anticipated.
That's the nature of the "GUI". At least, in the Apple/Microsoft sense.
Of course, that's exactely what a great number of casual users want -- Email, web browsing, and maybe a letter. Maybe play some music or the latest game.
All of these are very constrained activities. If you add an activity, you add a program. Almost no "reuse" of tools goes on. Things are very concrete.
Very usable and pretty. It doesn't work as a model for a general purpose computer, which is what I want, but does work for a great many people.
So I agree that this option can be supported, as long as I don't have to bother with it. The beauty of Linux, revealed.
Optimally, it would be nice to run MythTV with no Window Manager at all.
But... the application itself works fine, but when it invokes mplayer... focus won't change.
So, we try "twm". Very lightweight. With the appropriate init file, everything is good -- except there are problems focusing WITHIN windows created by qt (that is, the application setup windows).
Gnome is far too heavy, as is KDE. Generally, you really want the GUI to *be* MythTV. I use "mwm". Gets out of the way, and generally stays there.
I used to work as a contractor. The clients I contracted to insisted that I have indemnification insurance, for 5 years after the work had been completed, and signed off on.
That's right -- 5 years. The premiums for this is quite a killer. I typically bill $150 to $300/hour ($75 if I get to work at home, and I don't need indemnification -- and for that you only get a 60 day warantee).
The insurance company has never had to pay out on these policies (for me), but it had to be covered. Of course, you (customer) DON'T get this if you go to "Geek Squad" to get your computer installed or repaired. But, then again, you never paid for it.
Yes, I am willing to be the "single responsible vendor". But you really have to pay for it. What this translates to is a computer equivalent to your typical $600 home system costing $20,000. And, I would insist on qualifying the entire software stack. You want a change? Got to go through change management, testing and rollout.
And that is for a general system (no medical, aircraft, etc.). Other systems that require external certification, I generally WON'T touch (unless you are willing to pay standard medical malpractice premiums, for a time equivalent to the rated life of the equipment, or the treated patients, or my expected lifetime. Call it 30 to 40 years).
If you are NOT willing to pay for this, then stop whinging about it. If you ARE willing, go see SUN or IBM (or others). They will be delighted to do business with you. Generally, not on PC or Apple junk, and it WILL cost you, but they WILL take responsibility.
First, troff is available NOW, on as many platforms as you want. Its available on Microsoft Windows, and is a standard part of Unix, and is on Linux. No development needed.
Same for TeX and LaTeX.
But, these are not WYSIWYG formats. They are document formats. The "open document" format is a word processor format for WYSIWYG style software. Not tied to a particular vendor.
PDF is a display format, not tied to a particular display device, but is also only a "de-facto" standard.
The reason that the "standard old-school" document formats are not WYSIWYG is that the designers had somewhat different and more universal goals. They are oriented toward document production; not towards casual letter writing.
WYSIWYG seems to have won -- most casual users prefer a simple, hands-on, concrete program.
So what we need is an independent interchange format that will allow document access without being dependent on a single vendor.
If that is not done, innovation suffers. Windows NT used to be available on several platforms -- Alpha, PowerPC, MIPS and Intel. It is now only available on Intel. There are really only two choices for platform if you need MS Word(tm): Windows Intel, and Apple. Sun, IBM Power, HPUX, IRIX etc. need not apply. Even other Intel based platforms can't join in (Linux, BSD, Solaris, etc.).
All OS innovation must then come from Microsoft and Apple. Effectively a government mandated monoply, based on choice of MS.DOC format.
I don't care WHAT format is chosen, as long as an un-natural monopoly is not created.
As to the costs -- there are ALWAYS costs. There are costs associated with using the "du jour".DOC format as well. Every citizen is obliged to purchase a copy of MS Word(tm). If 1 million people will make use of this government service, this would be a "hidden" 200,000,000 dollar tax (give or take).
And what does disabilities have to do with an open document format?
What does the "maturity" of FOSS have to do with an open document format?
But lets take your points in turn...
1 - Having an open document format will allow specialized readers and tools to be developed that support disabled persons
2 - FOSS has a LONGER history and is MORE mature than "closed source".
Still -- its meaningless. Microsoft should simply provide an export filter for the open format, and be done with it. Or provide a filter for (TeX, troff, LaTeX) or another REVISABLE format. About the only thing that can be done is an export to PDF (or can it?). At least I have a reasonable chance of reading the gov. document in that format.
I bought a motherboard, and it stated in the instructions that Windows XP was needed for USB 2.0 support.
So, I installed Windows XP. But, the optical drives (that were just used) never showed up.
So I installed Windows 98SE. Optical drivers showed up! Until I installed the motherboard specific drivers. Then, they disappeared. And Windows 98 SE doesn't support my USB 120GB hard drive, or flash. If I turn on "DMA", the optical drives disappear under Windows 98 SE as well.
I put in a TV tuner card. It came with drivers and a PVR application. None of which work -- best as I can figure, it didn't decompress all the files correctly. So I don't know if this works with Windows (98 -or- XP). And I can't find drivers for Windows 98 for my CIMR-100 remote.
-AND- Windows 98 SE crashes on exit. Every time.
I put Linux on. Fedora Core 2 (yes, its obsolete, but I happen to have it on DVD).
USB 2.0 - check USB hard drive - check USB flash - check TV Tuner - (needed installation of XAWTV) - check PVR - MythTV - check CIMR-100 - check DMA to hard drive - check All optical drives available - check No crash on exit - check
And this is with random "craptastic" hardware. I was attempting building a PVR with the cheapest hardware possible (motherboard, tuner, video). No thought to "compatibility" with a particular OS. Purely price/performance for the task at hand.
First, port 25 *is* the mail submission port. Next, authentication *can* be done using this port.
I do have a "constant" connection at home. With cable modem. Its up pretty much 24/7. My DNS provider can't tell client which port to use for incoming mail though. It is assumed to be port 25. Of course I don't relay that email.
Why would I bother with SSL? In this application (receiving internet mail), its almost completely useless (specifically, I can't control relaying that may already have happened).
I tried, and dropped Bell Sympatico DSL, because they blocked INCOMING port 25 as well. There are services that will take port 25 submitted mail and relay it. At an additional cost per month.
And, I accept mail from ANYBODY. I just don't relay it. (more specifically, I relay internal mail, but not external mail). Authentication doesn't have anything to do with this.
You sure have a strange way of defining "mainstream".
I would think that, from you comment, you believe "mainstream" to mean "home user".
What is mainstream? You car? TV? Bank server? Internet email server? Internet web server?
And where does Solaris, AIX and HPUX fit?
As to being an "alternative to Windows"; why would you think that? Do you WANT a linux-based Operating Environment to be an alternative to Windows? And why?
Computer communications were in use, but (and it a BIG but), most were point to point.
A modem calls a modem, and transmits data. There were even "networks" moving data from computer to computer. Basically, you peered up and transferred traffic.
All "routes" were static. Up-stream cooperation was needed to introduce a new "route".
The ideas that (1) the routing could be made dynamic, (2) the routing could be pushed to the edge and (3) that protocol could be separated from physical transport were the innovative things.
It still boggles my mind. Simple ideas; and revolutionary.
This just wasn't the way of thinking through most of the 60s.
If you think that you would have come up the underlying ideas -- more power to you.
Ratboy (and I *was* there, and am still impressed).
Deposit and out of pocket expenses relating to an unplanned move.
Also, defamation of character.
And legal fees, of course.
Get a lawyer. Some people deserve to be bitch-slapped. And (by the way) that IS the carrot. Opening the letter is a FEDERAL offense; if she wants to pursue that route.
IBM 370 KIM-1 Printing terminals LED readouts PONG Rabbit-ear TV (3 channels) Really long phone cords, so you could talk around the house. Polyester leisure suits Carburators 3 to 2 prong plug cheats
There is no way to learn, modify, or tinker with their driver.
And, they seem to like it that way!
My point still stands -- and I do own some nVidia hardware (and nVidia shares, and Microsoft shares, *and* ATI shares). Put the closed source driver in, and it just isn't Linux. It may be YOUR operating system, or a commercial operating system, or something else.
But if I can't tinker with it, I wouldn't call it Linux anymore (or GNU/Linux, etc.). That's what the "taint" flag is all about. A clear sign that the kernel has left the open source arena, and a hint that much less support is available.
Now, you claim I am "black and white" over this issue. And I am. Doesn't mean I put down nVidia (or any other closed-source vendor -- except Microsoft and Apple -- for different (and personal) reasons). In fact, I support you! I love Microsoft Windows users! (that market has supported me for a long time).
Just don't fall into the trap of thinking that nVidia somehow supports "open source". They don't. Nor does ATI.
I don't use Microsoft Internet Explorer. Never have. (even though I Microsoft does have Internet Explorer 5 available for Solaris and HPUX -- which is what I would need).
So I guess I am seeing "bad rendering" on pages. I am unclear on what I should be looking for, though.
Currently, I use Mozilla 1.7.7 (desktop), lynx (server), and EudoraWeb (palm) as web browsers. What are the web-sites that make "IE" a must-have or must-use application?
You are maybe the thousandth poster with this comment; but I still don't know what I am missing...
Most "Voice Modems" have this ability. Direct handset sound to the computer, via the modem.
You would then need a "sound card driver" for the modem. I think Windows (tm) probably supports that. Linux -- not so sure (I have worked with these devices, and have sent and received audio to the handset, but not through a sound driver, just direct serial port access).
It is possible; how much is it worth to you? (I could write the appropriate shim to make it work, if it doesn't exist).
On the other hand, modems that support this tend not to be cheap -- typically $200+ for a full-feature voice modem (but the voice modem can also be used as an answering machine, a call director, a fax machine &etc.). So the SIP handset would be less expensive overall.
The idea of splitting up into separate "programs" (processes) is that each is isolated by hardware from others. So an error (bug) will disturb one but not others.
The OS itself (and, I believe that MAC OS X core does this as well) shares code pages anyway. The incremental cost of a new "program" is then the data used, and the scheduling (which is typically insignificant).
The ONLY thing is that it becomes difficult to share material (documents) BETWEEN the processes (because of the isolation).
In a system that shares the single application instance, I imagine that you spend a lot more time saving important material.
But really, the resource sharing is done by the kernel anyway, so that isn't a valid argument. (and, as an aside, it is possible to determine if an application is running and being serviced by an X server, and the open instance can be vectored to the running instance. It is also possible to find a machine on the local net that is already running your application, and vector the execution to that machine, which is something I used to do to reduce application start-up times, and something that the original commenter may have done as well).
I agree that MAC OS X GUI isn't too shabby. The transparent terminals are a feature to die for. The other features? Pretty much ho-hum, in my opinion.
"Personally I don't see supporting Binary Drivers as the death of Linux, but that's just me."
It IS the death of Linux. Of course "big buisiness as well as the non technical users (and) my folks" don't get it.
Linux is an Open Source kernel. Meant for experimentation. It grew because Minix wasn't free. And there were hassles with BSD at the time. It only makes sense if it STAYS free.
Then, investigations into other processors, architectures, etc. can take place. By introducing the CONCEPT of a "binary driver", a lot of that (if not all) is cut off.
In that case, you may as well go with "Microsoft Windows XP (r)".
And why SHOULD your mom or dad use Linux? Personally, I don't care. If they want to, go ahead. Linux is not marketed at them (or anyone else). Some companies may package it, and market that result (and, if they decide to include binary drivers, that's THEIR decision, and the consumers).
But Linux? No way. PS. That's also why it is very, very important that Linus control the trademark. I would HATE to find a binary-only driver in the Linux source.
So, consider that you would not be moving your folks to Linux. You may consider moving them to Ubuntu, or something else. And there IS a difference.
I had an AMD Duron 750 processor. Running Linux (tm), although it does have a license for Microsoft Windows Me (tm).
I wanted to make this box into a "media computer", so I purchased an nVidia 5200 card with TV-out, and a DVD burner. Put them into the computer. In the process (somehow), the clip holding the processor fan pressed into the fan, preventing it from working.
I was installing Windows Me (tm), because the graphics card and the DVD burner both come with some Windows (tm) applications.
With no fan, the processor lived for 5 minutes, and died.
I replaced the power supply, mainboard, processor and re-built the machine. The replacement mainboard came with a software CD; and indicated that USB 2.0 would ONLY work with Windows XP. So I bought a copy of Windows XP.
And installed that. Now, the Memorex DVD burner is identified by the BIOS, and was USED to install Windows XP, but doesn't show up (even if I put a CD into it). I have NO clue how to solve this -- there aren't any additional drivers or anything, and Ubuntu sees the drive just fine.
"Crappy application installs" -- I wish the OS itself would install properly.
Now, I am going to try Windows 98SE or Me (tm). Maybe "Nero 6" and "DVD Shrink", etc. will work on that platform.
Or not; I am not holding my breath. I will also try swapping the DVD-ROM and DVD-RW units.
But this stuff isn't simple on Windows. At least not for me. It strikes me that when Windows XP works, it works the way a naive user expects, but that the low level bits are not inspectable.
If you want a "Linux" that works the way you have specified, try Ubuntu. It just works. No "root", no choice between "KDE and Gnome", you don't see packages to install. And I am sure that Ubuntu isn't alone (Knoppix is also in the same category).
The problem IS the software. The email program should NOT execute ANYTHING, without having the user go through a contortion. The email program should NOT make use of complex system internals -- until material has been isolated. The email program should NOT "magically" fill in images from URLs. The email program should not call on proxies that elevate priviledge.
&etc.
The issue is the same whether or not Windows, Linux, or another OS is concerned.
Note that a lot of Unix mailers probably fail these tests.
But, it is Microsofts influence (make it convenient, easy and inherently not secure) that drives a lot of this crap.
Good for the end users, for some value of "good", and, I guess, seemed like a good idea at the time, because it provided home users with a better "OOB" (out-of-box) experience. It is still WRONG.
In the "Linux" community, you can find mailers and software that run the gamut from the Windows-inspired "do it all" approach, to the Unix (mail) approach of "do NOTHING except mail".
Ratboy.
Re:...the same features we delivered seven years a
on
Windows 95 Turns 10
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Why python? That problem would be a simple sh script.
But... processes don't have version numbers. We assume that you mean the files containing the executables. We assume that you are running linux, and the gnu utilities.
Of course, you are going to want to restart the commands, so "ps -c" would not be appropriate, but I will leave that to you.
Also, to run this on a remote machine, add "ssh user@remote" to the front of the command.
30 lines? 2 lines, followed by a diff, and uniq, followed by 2 lines of scp. I am not sure what a "service" is (vs. a process) in your context. I don't think that you meant "process".
But its really only 10ish lines of sh script (I would say "service", list the running "services", and use rpm to extract the versions, and scp the rpm to the partner machine, install it, and restart the service. Since the rpm doesn't back-date without forcing, ALL running services could be so updated. Of course, installing the "service" restarts the service anyway).
Note that doing so, and re-encoding the video effectively reduces the quality to that which you could extract easily otherwise (DVD quality, or less).
Tapping the uncompressed hi-def video signal gives you a WALLOP of data, which cannot be practically stored now, or in the (immediate, 5 year term) future. And, re-encoding THAT stream is very difficult.
Basically, the plan is to protect the encoded 36Mbit stream. Of course, any crypto is time-limited. Figure a 5 to 10 year term.
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting.
But I would say that OSX has engineered users to it. Of course it doesn't get in the way. Because there isn't anything that can be done that hasn't been anticipated.
That's the nature of the "GUI". At least, in the Apple/Microsoft sense.
Of course, that's exactely what a great number of casual users want -- Email, web browsing, and maybe a letter. Maybe play some music or the latest game.
All of these are very constrained activities. If you add an activity, you add a program. Almost no "reuse" of tools goes on. Things are very concrete.
Very usable and pretty. It doesn't work as a model for a general purpose computer, which is what I want, but does work for a great many people.
So I agree that this option can be supported, as long as I don't have to bother with it. The beauty of Linux, revealed.
Ratboy.
Optimally, it would be nice to run MythTV with no Window Manager at all.
But... the application itself works fine, but when it invokes mplayer... focus won't change.
So, we try "twm". Very lightweight. With the appropriate init file, everything is good -- except there are problems focusing WITHIN windows created by qt (that is, the application setup windows).
Gnome is far too heavy, as is KDE. Generally, you really want the GUI to *be* MythTV. I use "mwm". Gets out of the way, and generally stays there.
Ratboy.
I used to work as a contractor. The clients I contracted to insisted that I have indemnification insurance, for 5 years after the work had been completed, and signed off on.
/hour ($75 if I get to work at home, and I don't need indemnification -- and for that you only get a 60 day warantee).
That's right -- 5 years. The premiums for this is quite a killer. I typically bill $150 to $300
The insurance company has never had to pay out on these policies (for me), but it had to be covered. Of course, you (customer) DON'T get this if you go to "Geek Squad" to get your computer installed or repaired. But, then again, you never paid for it.
Yes, I am willing to be the "single responsible vendor". But you really have to pay for it. What this translates to is a computer equivalent to your typical $600 home system costing $20,000. And, I would insist on qualifying the entire software stack. You want a change? Got to go through change management, testing and rollout.
And that is for a general system (no medical, aircraft, etc.). Other systems that require external certification, I generally WON'T touch (unless you are willing to pay standard medical malpractice premiums, for a time equivalent to the rated life of the equipment, or the treated patients, or my expected lifetime. Call it 30 to 40 years).
If you are NOT willing to pay for this, then stop whinging about it.
If you ARE willing, go see SUN or IBM (or others). They will be delighted to do business with you. Generally, not on PC or Apple junk, and it WILL cost you, but they WILL take responsibility.
Ratboy.
First, troff is available NOW, on as many platforms as you want. Its available on Microsoft Windows, and is a standard part of Unix, and is on Linux. No development needed.
.DOC format.
.DOC format as well. Every citizen is obliged to purchase a copy of MS Word(tm). If 1 million people will make use of this government service, this would be a "hidden" 200,000,000 dollar tax (give or take).
Same for TeX and LaTeX.
But, these are not WYSIWYG formats. They are document formats. The "open document" format is a word processor format for WYSIWYG style software. Not tied to a particular vendor.
PDF is a display format, not tied to a particular display device, but is also only a "de-facto" standard.
The reason that the "standard old-school" document formats are not WYSIWYG is that the designers had somewhat different and more universal goals. They are oriented toward document production; not towards casual letter writing.
WYSIWYG seems to have won -- most casual users prefer a simple, hands-on, concrete program.
So what we need is an independent interchange format that will allow document access without being dependent on a single vendor.
If that is not done, innovation suffers. Windows NT used to be available on several platforms -- Alpha, PowerPC, MIPS and Intel. It is now only available on Intel. There are really only two choices for platform if you need MS Word(tm): Windows Intel, and Apple. Sun, IBM Power, HPUX, IRIX etc. need not apply. Even other Intel based platforms can't join in (Linux, BSD, Solaris, etc.).
All OS innovation must then come from Microsoft and Apple. Effectively a government mandated monoply, based on choice of MS
I don't care WHAT format is chosen, as long as an un-natural monopoly is not created.
As to the costs -- there are ALWAYS costs. There are costs associated with using the "du jour"
Ratboy.
And what does disabilities have to do with an open document format?
What does the "maturity" of FOSS have to do with an open document format?
But lets take your points in turn...
1 - Having an open document format will allow specialized readers and tools to be developed that support disabled persons
2 - FOSS has a LONGER history and is MORE mature than "closed source".
Still -- its meaningless. Microsoft should simply provide an export filter for the open format, and be done with it. Or provide a filter for (TeX, troff, LaTeX) or another REVISABLE format. About the only thing that can be done is an export to PDF (or can it?). At least I have a reasonable chance of reading the gov. document in that format.
Ratboy.
I bought a motherboard, and it stated in the instructions that Windows XP was needed for USB 2.0 support.
So, I installed Windows XP. But, the optical drives (that were just used) never showed up.
So I installed Windows 98SE. Optical drivers showed up! Until I installed the motherboard specific drivers. Then, they disappeared. And Windows 98 SE doesn't support my USB 120GB hard drive, or flash. If I turn on "DMA", the optical drives disappear under Windows 98 SE as well.
I put in a TV tuner card. It came with drivers and a PVR application. None of which work -- best as I can figure, it didn't decompress all the files correctly. So I don't know if this works with Windows (98 -or- XP). And I can't find drivers for Windows 98 for my CIMR-100 remote.
-AND- Windows 98 SE crashes on exit. Every time.
I put Linux on. Fedora Core 2 (yes, its obsolete, but I happen to have it on DVD).
USB 2.0 - check
USB hard drive - check
USB flash - check
TV Tuner - (needed installation of XAWTV) - check
PVR - MythTV - check
CIMR-100 - check
DMA to hard drive - check
All optical drives available - check
No crash on exit - check
And this is with random "craptastic" hardware. I was attempting building a PVR with the cheapest hardware possible (motherboard, tuner, video). No thought to "compatibility" with a particular OS. Purely price/performance for the task at hand.
Linux hardware support RULES.
Ratboy
First, port 25 *is* the mail submission port. Next, authentication *can* be done using this port.
I do have a "constant" connection at home. With cable modem. Its up pretty much 24/7. My DNS provider can't tell client which port to use for incoming mail though. It is assumed to be port 25. Of course I don't relay that email.
Why would I bother with SSL? In this application (receiving internet mail), its almost completely useless (specifically, I can't control relaying that may already have happened).
I tried, and dropped Bell Sympatico DSL, because they blocked INCOMING port 25 as well. There are services that will take port 25 submitted mail and relay it. At an additional cost per month.
And, I accept mail from ANYBODY. I just don't relay it. (more specifically, I relay internal mail, but not external mail). Authentication doesn't have anything to do with this.
Ratboy.
You sure have a strange way of defining "mainstream".
I would think that, from you comment, you believe "mainstream" to mean "home user".
What is mainstream? You car? TV? Bank server? Internet email server? Internet web server?
And where does Solaris, AIX and HPUX fit?
As to being an "alternative to Windows"; why would you think that? Do you WANT a linux-based Operating Environment to be an alternative to Windows? And why?
Ratboy
Computer communications were in use, but (and it a BIG but), most were point to point.
A modem calls a modem, and transmits data. There were even "networks" moving data from computer to computer. Basically, you peered up and transferred traffic.
All "routes" were static. Up-stream cooperation was needed to introduce a new "route".
The ideas that (1) the routing could be made dynamic, (2) the routing could be pushed to the edge and (3) that protocol could be separated from physical transport were the innovative things.
It still boggles my mind. Simple ideas; and revolutionary.
This just wasn't the way of thinking through most of the 60s.
If you think that you would have come up the underlying ideas -- more power to you.
Ratboy (and I *was* there, and am still impressed).
Deposit and out of pocket expenses relating to an unplanned move.
Also, defamation of character.
And legal fees, of course.
Get a lawyer. Some people deserve to be bitch-slapped. And (by the way) that IS the carrot. Opening the letter is a FEDERAL offense; if she wants to pursue that route.
Ratboy
IBM 370
KIM-1
Printing terminals
LED readouts
PONG
Rabbit-ear TV (3 channels)
Really long phone cords, so you could talk around the house.
Polyester leisure suits
Carburators
3 to 2 prong plug cheats
nVidia DOES NOT DO OPEN SOURCE!
There is no way to learn, modify, or tinker with their driver.
And, they seem to like it that way!
My point still stands -- and I do own some nVidia hardware (and nVidia shares, and Microsoft shares, *and* ATI shares). Put the closed source driver in, and it just isn't Linux. It may be YOUR operating system, or a commercial operating system, or something else.
But if I can't tinker with it, I wouldn't call it Linux anymore (or GNU/Linux, etc.). That's what the "taint" flag is all about. A clear sign that the kernel has left the open source arena, and a hint that much less support is available.
Now, you claim I am "black and white" over this issue. And I am. Doesn't mean I put down nVidia (or any other closed-source vendor -- except Microsoft and Apple -- for different (and personal) reasons). In fact, I support you! I love Microsoft Windows users! (that market has supported me for a long time).
Just don't fall into the trap of thinking that nVidia somehow supports "open source". They don't. Nor does ATI.
Ratboy
I don't use Microsoft Internet Explorer. Never have. (even though I Microsoft does have Internet Explorer 5 available for Solaris and HPUX -- which is what I would need).
So I guess I am seeing "bad rendering" on pages. I am unclear on what I should be looking for, though.
Currently, I use Mozilla 1.7.7 (desktop), lynx (server), and EudoraWeb (palm) as web browsers. What are the web-sites that make "IE" a must-have or must-use application?
You are maybe the thousandth poster with this comment; but I still don't know what I am missing...
Ratboy
Most "Voice Modems" have this ability. Direct handset sound to the computer, via the modem.
You would then need a "sound card driver" for the modem. I think Windows (tm) probably supports that. Linux -- not so sure (I have worked with these devices, and have sent and received audio to the handset, but not through a sound driver, just direct serial port access).
It is possible; how much is it worth to you? (I could write the appropriate shim to make it work, if it doesn't exist).
On the other hand, modems that support this tend not to be cheap -- typically $200+ for a full-feature voice modem (but the voice modem can also be used as an answering machine, a call director, a fax machine &etc.). So the SIP handset would be less expensive overall.
Ratboy.
"less memory and processor time"
The idea of splitting up into separate "programs" (processes) is that each is isolated by hardware from others. So an error (bug) will disturb one but not others.
The OS itself (and, I believe that MAC OS X core does this as well) shares code pages anyway. The incremental cost of a new "program" is then the data used, and the scheduling (which is typically insignificant).
The ONLY thing is that it becomes difficult to share material (documents) BETWEEN the processes (because of the isolation).
In a system that shares the single application instance, I imagine that you spend a lot more time saving important material.
But really, the resource sharing is done by the kernel anyway, so that isn't a valid argument. (and, as an aside, it is possible to determine if an application is running and being serviced by an X server, and the open instance can be vectored to the running instance. It is also possible to find a machine on the local net that is already running your application, and vector the execution to that machine, which is something I used to do to reduce application start-up times, and something that the original commenter may have done as well).
I agree that MAC OS X GUI isn't too shabby. The transparent terminals are a feature to die for. The other features? Pretty much ho-hum, in my opinion.
Ratboy.
XML is NOT a solution.
It is simply a "data wrapper".
TeX (LaTeX) is a solution for typeset material.
Ratboy.
VisiCalc uses text files -- the format is simple.
Basically, just a list of commands and data. Read them in, and plant into another spreadsheet.
The formulas will have to be converted, of course.
But, the format itself is trivial.
Ratboy.
"Personally I don't see supporting Binary Drivers as the death of Linux, but that's just me."
It IS the death of Linux. Of course "big buisiness as well as the non technical users (and) my folks" don't get it.
Linux is an Open Source kernel. Meant for experimentation. It grew because Minix wasn't free. And there were hassles with BSD at the time. It only makes sense if it STAYS free.
Then, investigations into other processors, architectures, etc. can take place. By introducing the CONCEPT of a "binary driver", a lot of that (if not all) is cut off.
In that case, you may as well go with "Microsoft Windows XP (r)".
And why SHOULD your mom or dad use Linux? Personally, I don't care. If they want to, go ahead. Linux is not marketed at them (or anyone else). Some companies may package it, and market that result (and, if they decide to include binary drivers, that's THEIR decision, and the consumers).
But Linux? No way. PS. That's also why it is very, very important that Linus control the trademark. I would HATE to find a binary-only driver in the Linux source.
So, consider that you would not be moving your folks to Linux. You may consider moving them to Ubuntu, or something else. And there IS a difference.
Ratboy
"It just is not as easy to use as Windows."
Ok. This is NOT proof of anything.
Just a story.
I had an AMD Duron 750 processor. Running Linux (tm), although it does have a license for Microsoft Windows Me (tm).
I wanted to make this box into a "media computer", so I purchased an nVidia 5200 card with TV-out, and a DVD burner. Put them into the computer. In the process (somehow), the clip holding the processor fan pressed into the fan, preventing it from working.
I was installing Windows Me (tm), because the graphics card and the DVD burner both come with some Windows (tm) applications.
With no fan, the processor lived for 5 minutes, and died.
I replaced the power supply, mainboard, processor and re-built the machine. The replacement mainboard came with a software CD; and indicated that USB 2.0 would ONLY work with Windows XP. So I bought a copy of Windows XP.
And installed that. Now, the Memorex DVD burner is identified by the BIOS, and was USED to install Windows XP, but doesn't show up (even if I put a CD into it). I have NO clue how to solve this -- there aren't any additional drivers or anything, and Ubuntu sees the drive just fine.
"Crappy application installs" -- I wish the OS itself would install properly.
Now, I am going to try Windows 98SE or Me (tm). Maybe "Nero 6" and "DVD Shrink", etc. will work on that platform.
Or not; I am not holding my breath. I will also try swapping the DVD-ROM and DVD-RW units.
But this stuff isn't simple on Windows. At least not for me. It strikes me that when Windows XP works, it works the way a naive user expects, but that the low level bits are not inspectable.
If you want a "Linux" that works the way you have specified, try Ubuntu. It just works. No "root", no choice between "KDE and Gnome", you don't see packages to install. And I am sure that Ubuntu isn't alone (Knoppix is also in the same category).
Ratboy (swearing at Windows XP)
Look up "hercules emulator" on google.
Ratboy
On the other hand, you really wouldn't know if you had an "infection", would you?
The problem IS the software. The email program should NOT execute ANYTHING, without having the user go through a contortion. The email program should NOT make use of complex system internals -- until material has been isolated. The email program should NOT "magically" fill in images from URLs. The email program should not call on proxies that elevate priviledge.
&etc.
The issue is the same whether or not Windows, Linux, or another OS is concerned.
Note that a lot of Unix mailers probably fail these tests.
But, it is Microsofts influence (make it convenient, easy and inherently not secure) that drives a lot of this crap.
Good for the end users, for some value of "good", and, I guess, seemed like a good idea at the time, because it provided home users with a better "OOB" (out-of-box) experience. It is still WRONG.
In the "Linux" community, you can find mailers and software that run the gamut from the Windows-inspired "do it all" approach, to the Unix (mail) approach of "do NOTHING except mail".
Ratboy.
Why python? That problem would be a simple sh script.
But... processes don't have version numbers. We assume that you mean the files containing the executables. We assume that you are running linux, and the gnu utilities.
ls -l -L --full-time $(which $(ps --noheader -c | cut -c 35-)) | cut -c 44-
Of course, you are going to want to restart the commands, so "ps -c" would not be appropriate, but I will leave that to you.
Also, to run this on a remote machine, add "ssh user@remote" to the front of the command.
30 lines? 2 lines, followed by a diff, and uniq, followed by 2 lines of scp. I am not sure what a "service" is (vs. a process) in your context. I don't think that you meant "process".
But its really only 10ish lines of sh script (I would say "service", list the running "services", and use rpm to extract the versions, and scp the rpm to the partner machine, install it, and restart the service. Since the rpm doesn't back-date without forcing, ALL running services could be so updated. Of course, installing the "service" restarts the service anyway).
Ratboy.
Of course you can record the visible video.
Note that doing so, and re-encoding the video effectively reduces the quality to that which you could extract easily otherwise (DVD quality, or less).
Tapping the uncompressed hi-def video signal gives you a WALLOP of data, which cannot be practically stored now, or in the (immediate, 5 year term) future. And, re-encoding THAT stream is very difficult.
Basically, the plan is to protect the encoded 36Mbit stream. Of course, any crypto is time-limited. Figure a 5 to 10 year term.
Ratboy
And you are correct. My bad. Typing without proofing isn't the best thing to do.
Thanks!
Ratboy