That's a bug, not a feature. Keep your politics out of my PC, and let me get on with what I want to do. I prefer "Free" software licences, "free as in freedom" (BSD, MIT, Mozilla, CDDL), not "free as in Follow My Rules" (GPL).
For instance, a few reasons why I prefer Linux over *BSD or Solaris:
- better package management
Really? Ports is one the best package management systems I've ever used. I hated the linux version of "dll hell" I always ended up with on Debian (yet never on Windows!)
- better hw support
Again, I've always had better hardware support on Free/PC-BSD. Most linux distribution have an irrational aversion to binary drivers/blobs, or legally can't because of GPL issues. The BSDs don't suffer from that, and I've always had an easier time with drivers for that reason.
- Much larger community
You'll be wanting Windows, then;-)
- Better availability of qualified Linux sysadmins
I've never needed so much help as when I was on linux. BSD always seemed more consistent, and therefore intuitive once I got started.
I wish I had the mod points to vote you down. You're spouting the same false bullshit people have been saying for years. The only thing you left out was the standard "BSOD" jab.
Windows NT was build to be secure, and actually had a better permissions system than unix. Windows Live OneCare is being discontinued, and is being re-released (for free) to Windows Vista and Win7 as Security Essentials.
You can't stop users running shitty software (like toolbars and desktop buddies), and MS already does everything practical to stop users running every damn thing that gets emailed to them.
Your whinge is stupid and outdated. I may as well complain Macs are insecure because they don't have protected memory and use co-operative multitasking.
It's the 21st century, and I'm embarrassed by the ignorance displayed by my fellow humans, sometimes. That was a well-phrased putdown, you just offered!
XP had a far inferior UI than 2k and no security features (like the NX bit) when it came out. It was significantly slower, and even after 3 service packs never matched 2k in that area. After some tweaking you could make the interface look superficially like 2k, but it would still be less responsive and didn't quite work right (like when you'd minimise something, and alt-tab to go to something else that already maximised but XP would restore what you minimised instead!)
XP is crap, it was always crap, and it always will be. I was stoked a couple of years ago when I was finally able to leave XP and move to Vista.
My spare room (where I'm currently sitting) has three computers networked so my friends and I can play Starcraft. There is a Vista machine, an XP machine and a 2k machine, and even though the 2k machine is a Celeron 600 it still outperforms the 1Gig PIII running XP with the same amount of RAM.
2k was a work of art. XP is McDonalds (lowest common denominator rubbish).
I'm impressed, I've never seen anybody else that could remember those old poke commands to change the screen black (though I used to make the border hot pink with 4;-)
Netscape died because they decided to rewrite their codebase from scratch. From the ashes we received the Mozilla Suite.
The Mozilla Suite was abandoned for a complete rewrite, but it took until v3 before Firefox was able to match the speed of the old Mozilla Suite (now Seamonkey). Firefox still hasn't matched Seamonkey's stability.
Now you're saying Firefox needs another rewrite? Christ almighty. What is going on?
Dude, if I had the mod-points, I would have modded you down, but not for any of the reasons you stated in your post.
I don't hope to see such underrated gems as was "Logan's run", "Demon seed", "2001: A space odyssey" etc.
How can you possibly think 2001 is underrated? It's been used as the benchmark for SciFi for decades. It's one of the most overhyped movies of all time. And Demon Seed? If you're talking about that boring-as-batshit movie where a computer gives birth to a baby, then it's impossible to underrate it, it was that bad. (I do agree that Logan's Run was underrated, though.)
There is good SciFi around, but you won't find it if you only look for big name movies by people like Spielberg. Mainstream SciFi is made for a mainstream audience. Of course it's going to have a lowest-common-denominator approach. Let the majority have it's Idol and Big Brother. Those that want more can find it. (Unfortunately on eMule and Torrents more often than not, as there's no decent distribution model for the long tail in movies.)
When I read that line about the "System Idle Process", I thought he was trying to be funny.
When I hit Ctrl-Alt-Delete, I see that the System Idle Process is hogging all the resources and chewing up 95 percent of the processor's cycles. Doing what? Doing nothing?
- John C. Dvorak, PC mag, 29th Sept, 2003
If Vista were actually doing more for the user than XP, then people wouldn't be quite so upset.
Absolute rubbish.
Why did nobody get upset about XP? XP is a bloated, slow, buggy version of Windows 2000. XP offers me nothing over Windows 2000 except an ugly FisherPrice interface, and on the same hardware is an order of magnitude slower. Even my graphics hardware can't perform as good as it did under Windows 2000 after 7 years of driver updates.
People don't like Vista because other people don't don't like Vista. It's cool not to like Vista.
But, most of what makes Vista slow are either bugs (file copy bug, poor algorithm used by SuperFetch that actually slows down real-world usage, etc.) or things the user doesn't want, like DRM
FUD.
Can somebody please explain what DRM is supposed to be slowing down my computer? And why is it that a screenshot of a video playing in Media Player Classic comes out blank under XP, but is fine under Vista?
I've been using Vista for a year and a half now, and I swear XP has more disruptive DRM than any I've encountered in Vista. I can still rip CDs and DVDs under Vista just fine.
Your a troll, or a simpleton parroting other trolls.
I know I'm not representative of the general population, but I *love* the fade in.
It gives that slight feel of stability. When things just *pop* in front of you, it feels on edge, flaky. I thought the fade in that was introduced in Win2k was one of the best UI additions ever. I always hated the slide-out style Start Menu.
"Many companies refuse to use GPL code because of its viral nature."
This would explain why BSD is so much more popular than Linux then.
Yes, it does explain why BSD is more popular than Linux.
The open and genuinely free nature of the BSD licences is why BSD is the basis for OSX (much more popular than Linux), and why BSD code is used in the memory management subsystems of Windows (hugely more popular than Linux), and formerly in the networking subsystems of Windows.
Just because the Linux crowd is more vocal, doesn't mean it's more popular. Linux is used in a lot of places, but so is BSD, just moreso.
Even Firefox uses BSD code in its memory management, for Christ's sake. As a standalone OS, BSD is more popular (counting OSX), and as code use goes, BSD is vastly more popular.
I'd argue there's far more standards and compatability in Gnome and Ubuntu than for Windows.
Standards do you no good if nothing works. Windows works, Linux doesn't, but it's standards compliant!
And honestly I have never, ever had trouble with drivers on any machine, on any distro -- including random ones like DSL, Puppy, or other ones I just want to use for experiments.
You are the exception, really. I have never seen anyone install Linux without some level of messing around. I'm guessing you probably do some messing around, but because it's stuff you know, you don't even think about or remember it.
Compare this to Windows, where I've never gotten an install to work the first time.
Again, you're the exception. Windows does automatically detect devices and update drivers, and Windows still has better driver support than Linux.
One thing I didn't realise about drivers is that just because Linux has a driver, that doesn't mean it'll do what you think it does. For example, I installed a printer on my Debian box (this was about 2002) and was horrified at the quality of the print. The printer was a 600x600 dpi printer (supported on Windows, of course), but the Linux driver allowed a maximum of 300x300 dpi! A quarter of the resolution!
Ubuntu doesn't have a solid base of home users because there are too many supporters like you fooling yourself about the quality and usability of the software. I tried Ubuntu and was disgusted by the experience. Nothing worked, and when I tried to get help I was fobbed off by people like you.
I won't be recommending Ubuntu to anyone, if they don't want Windows, they can try a Mac.
Slashdot Mirror
GPL licensed.
That's a bug, not a feature. Keep your politics out of my PC, and let me get on with what I want to do. I prefer "Free" software licences, "free as in freedom" (BSD, MIT, Mozilla, CDDL), not "free as in Follow My Rules" (GPL).
For instance, a few reasons why I prefer Linux over *BSD or Solaris:
- better package management
Really? Ports is one the best package management systems I've ever used. I hated the linux version of "dll hell" I always ended up with on Debian (yet never on Windows!)
- better hw support
Again, I've always had better hardware support on Free/PC-BSD. Most linux distribution have an irrational aversion to binary drivers/blobs, or legally can't because of GPL issues. The BSDs don't suffer from that, and I've always had an easier time with drivers for that reason.
- Much larger community
You'll be wanting Windows, then ;-)
- Better availability of qualified Linux sysadmins
I've never needed so much help as when I was on linux. BSD always seemed more consistent, and therefore intuitive once I got started.
Diff'rent strokes, I guess.
wat
There is no cost for anti-virus (except maybe in the corporate world). You mac people are just used to paying for what others get for free.
I wish I had the mod points to vote you down. You're spouting the same false bullshit people have been saying for years. The only thing you left out was the standard "BSOD" jab.
Windows NT was build to be secure, and actually had a better permissions system than unix. Windows Live OneCare is being discontinued, and is being re-released (for free) to Windows Vista and Win7 as Security Essentials.
You can't stop users running shitty software (like toolbars and desktop buddies), and MS already does everything practical to stop users running every damn thing that gets emailed to them.
Your whinge is stupid and outdated. I may as well complain Macs are insecure because they don't have protected memory and use co-operative multitasking.
*Ahem*
My leg does not smell like another dog.
I wish I had mod-point to mod you up.
It's the 21st century, and I'm embarrassed by the ignorance displayed by my fellow humans, sometimes. That was a well-phrased putdown, you just offered!
Dude, harsh.
XP had a far inferior UI than 2k and no security features (like the NX bit) when it came out. It was significantly slower, and even after 3 service packs never matched 2k in that area. After some tweaking you could make the interface look superficially like 2k, but it would still be less responsive and didn't quite work right (like when you'd minimise something, and alt-tab to go to something else that already maximised but XP would restore what you minimised instead!)
XP is crap, it was always crap, and it always will be. I was stoked a couple of years ago when I was finally able to leave XP and move to Vista.
My spare room (where I'm currently sitting) has three computers networked so my friends and I can play Starcraft. There is a Vista machine, an XP machine and a 2k machine, and even though the 2k machine is a Celeron 600 it still outperforms the 1Gig PIII running XP with the same amount of RAM.
2k was a work of art. XP is McDonalds (lowest common denominator rubbish).
I loved my old C64.
;-)
I'm impressed, I've never seen anybody else that could remember those old poke commands to change the screen black (though I used to make the border hot pink with 4
Seriously?
Netscape died because they decided to rewrite their codebase from scratch. From the ashes we received the Mozilla Suite.
The Mozilla Suite was abandoned for a complete rewrite, but it took until v3 before Firefox was able to match the speed of the old Mozilla Suite (now Seamonkey). Firefox still hasn't matched Seamonkey's stability.
Now you're saying Firefox needs another rewrite? Christ almighty. What is going on?
Can somebody please explain how a hacked Photoshop install not working is somehow Windows DRM?
I mean, seriously, for fucks sake, they admit they "clobbered" a Photoshop DLL, and Photoshop stopped working, so they blame "Draconian Windows DRM"?.
There's something seriously wrong with this picture. This is pretty fucken weak, even for Slashdot.
How can you possibly think 2001 is underrated? It's been used as the benchmark for SciFi for decades. It's one of the most overhyped movies of all time. And Demon Seed? If you're talking about that boring-as-batshit movie where a computer gives birth to a baby, then it's impossible to underrate it, it was that bad. (I do agree that Logan's Run was underrated, though.)
There is good SciFi around, but you won't find it if you only look for big name movies by people like Spielberg. Mainstream SciFi is made for a mainstream audience. Of course it's going to have a lowest-common-denominator approach. Let the majority have it's Idol and Big Brother. Those that want more can find it. (Unfortunately on eMule and Torrents more often than not, as there's no decent distribution model for the long tail in movies.)
Seriously, he said that:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1334678,00.asp
Getting off-topic, but what gives me the shits is the way a complete download of Firefox is 7MB, but an "update" will be 9MB.
How the fuck does that work?
And yet here we are, 9 years after Active Directory was released in Windows 2000, and even with Microsoft's help the OSS community can't catch up.
How does that work? 9 years. Seriously, I know I must sound like a troll, but considering other OSS achievements why is this so hard?
Just like IE 6 was complete and there was nothing left to improve other than a few bug fixes?
Seriously?
Are you really saying Microsoft went down because they didn't count on the internet over a decade ago?
Are you mental?
I'm getting really annoyed at the Mac commercials that constantly slam PC's.
I get the opposite reaction. I find Apple's ads cute, fun, and surprisingly truthful
This is how your country ended up with Bush for eight years.
Absolute rubbish.
Why did nobody get upset about XP? XP is a bloated, slow, buggy version of Windows 2000. XP offers me nothing over Windows 2000 except an ugly FisherPrice interface, and on the same hardware is an order of magnitude slower. Even my graphics hardware can't perform as good as it did under Windows 2000 after 7 years of driver updates.
People don't like Vista because other people don't don't like Vista. It's cool not to like Vista.
FUD.
Can somebody please explain what DRM is supposed to be slowing down my computer? And why is it that a screenshot of a video playing in Media Player Classic comes out blank under XP, but is fine under Vista?
I've been using Vista for a year and a half now, and I swear XP has more disruptive DRM than any I've encountered in Vista. I can still rip CDs and DVDs under Vista just fine.
Your a troll, or a simpleton parroting other trolls.
Nauru? It could be our "Cosmic Solution".
Germans take everything seriously.
Seriously.
I know I'm not representative of the general population, but I *love* the fade in.
It gives that slight feel of stability. When things just *pop* in front of you, it feels on edge, flaky. I thought the fade in that was introduced in Win2k was one of the best UI additions ever. I always hated the slide-out style Start Menu.
If I could kiss you, I would.
Yes, it does explain why BSD is more popular than Linux.
The open and genuinely free nature of the BSD licences is why BSD is the basis for OSX (much more popular than Linux), and why BSD code is used in the memory management subsystems of Windows (hugely more popular than Linux), and formerly in the networking subsystems of Windows.
Just because the Linux crowd is more vocal, doesn't mean it's more popular. Linux is used in a lot of places, but so is BSD, just moreso.
Even Firefox uses BSD code in its memory management, for Christ's sake. As a standalone OS, BSD is more popular (counting OSX), and as code use goes, BSD is vastly more popular.
Standards do you no good if nothing works. Windows works, Linux doesn't, but it's standards compliant!
You are the exception, really. I have never seen anyone install Linux without some level of messing around. I'm guessing you probably do some messing around, but because it's stuff you know, you don't even think about or remember it.
Again, you're the exception. Windows does automatically detect devices and update drivers, and Windows still has better driver support than Linux.
One thing I didn't realise about drivers is that just because Linux has a driver, that doesn't mean it'll do what you think it does. For example, I installed a printer on my Debian box (this was about 2002) and was horrified at the quality of the print. The printer was a 600x600 dpi printer (supported on Windows, of course), but the Linux driver allowed a maximum of 300x300 dpi! A quarter of the resolution!
Ubuntu doesn't have a solid base of home users because there are too many supporters like you fooling yourself about the quality and usability of the software. I tried Ubuntu and was disgusted by the experience. Nothing worked, and when I tried to get help I was fobbed off by people like you.
I won't be recommending Ubuntu to anyone, if they don't want Windows, they can try a Mac.