Re:standardized locations, etc.
on
Is RPM Doomed?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
>Also, the registry is a fucking stupid idea. (despite the >fact that GNOME and KDE are mindlessly cloning it). >The registry causes more problems than anything else >I've seen on a Windows system. The MacOS did things >right -- let all your centralized databases just be > caches for data that can be rebuilt from files around >your system.
Umm. KDE works exactly the way you describe MacOS as working. All of the KDE config file are just that, files. However, to aid performance, etc, they are built into a sort of binary "registry/database" by a program called kbuildsycoca. If it becomes fubar'd then you just rebuild it.
>Is it really that wrong to ask a software development >company to pay money for all the bleeding edge tools >that make their work so much easier? More revenues >and profit for software companies leads to: >More jobs for engineers >More new companies being started to share (and >make smaller) that profit (microeconomic fact actually, >despite the position of Microsoft)
No, it's not wrong to ask the software development companies to pay for the tools that make their lives easier (most do). But, it does cost a lot of money because those tools aren't cheap. (Go look at rational's products for example, or lsf.) But this also has an impact. It raises the bar to entry into the market, thereby reducing the number of companies that can afford the productivity tools necessary for them to compete effectivly in the market place. It also increases their cost of doing business, and this reduces their margins. It might make more revenues for software companies selling these tools, yes. However, I don't see how that results in more jobs for engineers. If I'm a project manager for clearcase at rational, and I'm making lots of money off of that product, why would I throw more people at if? It doesn't make business sense. I want to have as few people working on it as I have to in order to maximize my return. Anyone working in the industry knows that there is a point of dimishing return for any project, where by adding more people to the project just increases the chance of killing it. So, I'd argue you'd have less jobs in this space.
I would argue that b/c the barrier to entry would be higher if there was no free software, there would be fewer new companies started to share in the the profits because it would require a larger captial investment for a startup to compete against a large wealthy and heavily entrenched company that is already in the market. Which investor is going to give you, a startup, enough venture capital to take on Microsoft, or someone as large, as a competitor? In fact, if you mention that Microsoft is going to be your largest direct competitor I'd argue that the vc's will be very hesitant to give you any captial at all. My best friend has a master in economics and when I asked him about that he said that "No responsible VC will give you the funding to take on Microsoft." Having fewer, richer companies will create many microsoft type companies.
Anyway, we already know that most software developers don't work on consumer type products. Most work on internal customised software anyway.
Hey dufus, I'm talking about the kid who get's cloned. As someone who has had more than his fair share of health problems I know what it's like to live w/ poor health as a result of someone's poor choices. THAT'S what I'm talking about, physical screw ups, for the kid who's a result of this "experiment." Maybe you should *read* posts before you reply.
Worse is growing up and finding out that you are an experiment, and that all your health problems and screw ups are a result of you being a guinea pig.
Personally I point new linux users at the latest mandrake (8.2) running KDE. ymmv. KDE is more similar to windows and a little more "integrated" than the other DE's or WM's, and I find that new users figure it out very quickly. GNOME, in my opinion is better if you know more about linux, it has a high coolness factor some say. Strange thing is that while KDE might be the better DE IMHO, gnome/gtk apps are better and typically more mature since KDE has been a moving target and gnome has been relatively stable for longer.
Ok, he complains that KDE is slow, but also admits that on this little box he's running w/ antialiasing and mosfets liquid theme, both of which are cpu hogs. As I understand it XFT currently has to parse all of the fonts every time it opens a window (don't know about redraws). Liquid, cludges transparency and other nifty effects, these take cpu resources. If you are on a small machine, and want to use KDE turn off all of the eye candy. The wizard that runs the first time you log in tells you this and gives you a sliding bar to choose between more eye candy, less speed or more speed, less eye candy.
He makes other comments that make me wonder how clued in he is too, like not knowing what gdm is, being surprised that gdm logs him into kde when kde is in his defaults file, etc. I think this "review" should be taken as a relatively new linux users foray into another desktop, not as a comparison betwwen gnome and kde. Besides, any sane user of linux on an old machine would not use either. Personally I think xfce is very fast on old hardware, and looks nice too.
Are there any other Canadians here (particularly those who live in Ottawa), who want to help me draft a formal response to this and go to the hearing to present our objections? Come on guys, I know it has nothing to do with hockey, but we have to start getting more pro-active in Canada or else this country is going to go in the shitter.
The US helped the afgani's fight the soviets, but
after that they stopped. The alliance was the
official gov't until the taliban over threw them
courtesy of Pakistan.
Anyway, it was one point, that doesn't negate the
other points that I made earlier.
So, what was the US's "own interests" in helping
the Afgan's fight the soviets? I seem to recall them
asking for the help of the US?
Amen! The problem w/ the world today is all the bleeding hearts.
They all say, we shouldn't war with X because Y number of
innocent people will die. So what should we do then? Just leave
them alone? Do they not understand that the "terrorists"
/ militants / bad guys in these countries are more than
willing to hide behind the innocent men/women/children
and grow stronger so that when the time is right they can
come and kill our innocent men/women/children? Do they
not realise that these people are more than willing to sacrifice
their innocents for their cause?
Cruniform says "What does letting them starve achieve?"
Hey, buddy, it's not our problem, they were starving before we
got there! At least now there is more aid coming their way,
and from where? We do not want to kill innocents, or let them die
and I agree that it's bad, but these people are the resonsibility
of their governments, who instead of helping them like they
should be, they are putting money into their military to
further their fanatical idealisms. (case in point, iraq)
It is not our fault these people are suffering. It is a conscious
choice on the part of their government. Period.
Cruniform also says: "SO they're worth less than our
North American lives?" Hell yes. We protect OUR innocents
ahead of theirs! You repeat that brain dead rhetoric when
the terrorists are on our soil w/ a bomb or gun in YOUR face.
Which, btw is exactly what will happen if we leave these
countries alone. Like another poster said, Hell doesn't stay
confined to one area, it spreads.
The ONLY reason the world isn't plunged back into
the dark ages over and over again is b/c of countries
like the US taking a stand to hold it at bay. And don't
fucking tell me to pull the flag out of my ass, I'm not
an American.
I don't particualrly agree w/ all of the US's foreign policy
or actions, but consider where we would be if the US
wasn't here or didn't care about the rest of the world.
Anyone who thinks it would be utopia is fuckin smoking
crack. All you bleeding hearts wake up and actually
take a good look at the world. There are people out
there who would gladly kill you and your pregant wife/
mother/sister and throw the baby in a fire or roast it
like a chicken, just b/c of some fuckin religion or
irrational hatred. Grow up people.
Holzmann's probably just there b/c he's the chair.
And yes, I know seldin can't code, but hell, better
than taking a class with Chali. (who can't code,
AND is a prick). No, Seldin is a math prof, and
it does show. His, crypto class was great! (but
I did hear that his coding classes weren't so great).
At least he's fair and amicable in person.
(i.e. completely the opposite if chali).
Cool, this is the university I graduated from and I can bet that
I know who's responsible for this. Jonathan Seldin,
the euopean god of lamba calculus, who was also my
cryptology professor; and a damn good prof too, if I might add.
That's correct. More correctly should we say: "They believe that they will go on to become *like* god one day," being that his purpose for mankind is for them to become like him one day. It sounds very blasphemous from a modern western christian point of view. However, it makes perfect sense if you understand the mormon mindset and cosmology.
>You say you believe that God is bound by the same laws of physics that we are. I don't know of any religion that would agree.
OK. Here's one: Mormonism. While many mormons may not agree, there are many that would. As for the official doctrines of the church they do not say one way or another, but do invite the possiblity in various ways.
Funny, it works for me. I've got the SO6 early access version 3 too if you are interested in trying that. BTW: I think I'm getting layed off so I don't think I'll be finishing that NLUG page any time soon:(
Sure it's fine for a small or medium business, but for enterprise businesses that usually have a server room on it's own subnet. Yes 100mb switches are cheap, if you are only buying a few. When you have to upgrade the infrastructure in a whole campus of 2000+ lan drops in over 5 buildings each with 5 floors, and then the hubs, routers, cabling, etc all has to be upgraded. That's expensive. No one is going to upgrade that just to run sunrays.
I was told those numbers, assuming we are talking about the networking requirements, by sun themselves when they presented sunrays to the large enterprise in which I work. (where I help make infrastructure and purchasing decisions).
Yes, but there are technical issues as well as cost issues with a thin client solution like this.
1) You need 100 mb switched networking
2) The server needs to be on the same subnet as the clients. (in the supported configuration) This is a problem for large enterprises.
3) They are not good for video streaming or multimedia. i.e. a CAD user would probably not want to use one.
I personally don't like thin clients that much because you have no local computing resources to take advantage of. I think that linux on a pc is better b/c you have local resources that can be taken advantage of, and during the evening you can make them part of a compile cluster using something like LSF. Of course, this assumes your user base consists of software and hardware designers.
Hi, how do I get vmware to compile and run on any linux kernel greater than 2.4.6? It always fails to compile the kernel modules.
Thanks.
How many distro's now ship KDE as default?
on
KDE 2.2.1 Up
·
· Score: 1
Just curious, does anyone know which distro's still ship GNOME as the default desktop? I know of RH and progeny, but are there any others? (This is not a flame, I'm just curious as to the growth of KDE in general mindshare).
Slashdot Mirror
>Also, the registry is a fucking stupid idea. (despite the
>fact that GNOME and KDE are mindlessly cloning it).
>The registry causes more problems than anything else
>I've seen on a Windows system. The MacOS did things
>right -- let all your centralized databases just be
> caches for data that can be rebuilt from files around
>your system.
Umm. KDE works exactly the way you describe MacOS as working. All of the KDE config file are just that, files. However, to aid performance, etc, they are built into a sort of binary "registry/database" by a program called kbuildsycoca. If it becomes fubar'd then you just rebuild it.
I second that! This is the most clued-in politician I have EVER heard!
>Is it really that wrong to ask a software development
>company to pay money for all the bleeding edge tools
>that make their work so much easier? More revenues
>and profit for software companies leads to:
>More jobs for engineers
>More new companies being started to share (and
>make smaller) that profit (microeconomic fact actually,
>despite the position of Microsoft)
No, it's not wrong to ask the software development companies to pay for the tools that make their lives easier (most do). But, it does cost a lot of money because those tools aren't cheap. (Go look at rational's products for example, or lsf.) But this also has an impact. It raises the bar to entry into the market, thereby reducing the number of companies that can afford the productivity tools necessary for them to compete effectivly in the market place. It also increases their cost of doing business, and this reduces their margins. It might make more revenues for software companies selling these tools, yes. However, I don't see how that results in more jobs for engineers. If I'm a project manager for clearcase at rational, and I'm making lots of money off of that product, why would I throw more people at if? It doesn't make business sense. I want to have as few people working on it as I have to in order to maximize my return. Anyone working in the industry knows that there is a point of dimishing return for any project, where by adding more people to the project just increases the chance of killing it. So, I'd argue you'd have less jobs in this space.
I would argue that b/c the barrier to entry would be higher if there was no free software, there would be fewer new companies started to share in the the profits because it would require a larger captial investment for a startup to compete against a large wealthy and heavily entrenched company that is already in the market. Which investor is going to give you, a startup, enough venture capital to take on Microsoft, or someone as large, as a competitor? In fact, if you mention that Microsoft is going to be your largest direct competitor I'd argue that the vc's will be very hesitant to give you any captial at all. My best friend has a master in economics and when I asked him about that he said that "No responsible VC will give you the funding to take on Microsoft." Having fewer, richer companies will create many microsoft type companies.
Anyway, we already know that most software developers don't work on consumer type products. Most work on internal customised software anyway.
Hey dufus, I'm talking about the kid who get's cloned. As someone who has had more than his fair share of health problems I know what it's like to live w/ poor health as a result of someone's poor choices. THAT'S what I'm talking about, physical screw ups, for the kid who's a result of this "experiment." Maybe you should *read* posts before you reply.
Worse is growing up and finding out that you are an experiment, and that all your health problems and screw ups are a result of you being a guinea pig.
Bero,
There were rumours floating around a while ago that RH was going to make KDE the new default desktop. Do you know if that is true?
Well, VNC over something like a cable connection sucks, unless you have a fairly fast connection and you are using tightvnc at both ends.
If you are using windows then timbuktu is very
nice, and fast too.
Over dialup, don't even bother.
Personally I point new linux users at the latest mandrake (8.2) running KDE. ymmv. KDE is more similar to windows and a little more "integrated" than the other DE's or WM's, and I find that new users figure it out very quickly. GNOME, in my opinion is better if you know more about linux, it has a high coolness factor some say. Strange thing is that while KDE might be the better DE IMHO, gnome/gtk apps are better and typically more mature since KDE has been a moving target and gnome has been relatively stable for longer.
Ok, he complains that KDE is slow, but also admits that on this little box he's running w/ antialiasing and mosfets liquid theme, both of
which are cpu hogs. As I understand it XFT currently has to parse all of the fonts every time it opens a window (don't know about redraws).
Liquid, cludges transparency and other nifty effects, these take cpu resources. If you are on a small machine, and want to use KDE turn off all
of the eye candy. The wizard that runs the first time you log in tells you this and gives you a sliding bar to choose between more eye candy, less speed or more speed, less eye candy.
He makes other comments that make me wonder how clued in he is too, like not knowing what gdm is,
being surprised that gdm logs him into kde when kde is in his defaults file, etc. I think this
"review" should be taken as a relatively new linux users foray into another desktop, not as
a comparison betwwen gnome and kde. Besides, any
sane user of linux on an old machine would not use either. Personally I think xfce is very fast on old hardware, and looks nice too.
Because it breaks binary compatability in the move from qt2 to qt3. In addition qt3 brings some enhancements such as data aware widgets, etc.
Hi,
Are there any other Canadians here (particularly those
who live in Ottawa), who want to help me draft a formal
response to this and go to the hearing to present our
objections? Come on guys, I know it has nothing to do
with hockey, but we have to start getting more pro-active
in Canada or else this country is going to go in the shitter.
The Pakistani's put the Taliban in power IIRC.
The US helped the afgani's fight the soviets, but
after that they stopped. The alliance was the
official gov't until the taliban over threw them
courtesy of Pakistan.
Anyway, it was one point, that doesn't negate the
other points that I made earlier.
So, what was the US's "own interests" in helping
the Afgan's fight the soviets? I seem to recall them
asking for the help of the US?
Amen! The problem w/ the world today is all the bleeding hearts.
They all say, we shouldn't war with X because Y number of
innocent people will die. So what should we do then? Just leave
them alone? Do they not understand that the "terrorists"
/ militants / bad guys in these countries are more than
willing to hide behind the innocent men/women/children
and grow stronger so that when the time is right they can
come and kill our innocent men/women/children? Do they
not realise that these people are more than willing to sacrifice
their innocents for their cause?
Cruniform says "What does letting them starve achieve?"
Hey, buddy, it's not our problem, they were starving before we
got there! At least now there is more aid coming their way,
and from where? We do not want to kill innocents, or let them die
and I agree that it's bad, but these people are the resonsibility
of their governments, who instead of helping them like they
should be, they are putting money into their military to
further their fanatical idealisms. (case in point, iraq)
It is not our fault these people are suffering. It is a conscious
choice on the part of their government. Period.
Cruniform also says: "SO they're worth less than our
North American lives?" Hell yes. We protect OUR innocents
ahead of theirs! You repeat that brain dead rhetoric when
the terrorists are on our soil w/ a bomb or gun in YOUR face.
Which, btw is exactly what will happen if we leave these
countries alone. Like another poster said, Hell doesn't stay
confined to one area, it spreads.
The ONLY reason the world isn't plunged back into
the dark ages over and over again is b/c of countries
like the US taking a stand to hold it at bay. And don't
fucking tell me to pull the flag out of my ass, I'm not
an American.
I don't particualrly agree w/ all of the US's foreign policy
or actions, but consider where we would be if the US
wasn't here or didn't care about the rest of the world.
Anyone who thinks it would be utopia is fuckin smoking
crack. All you bleeding hearts wake up and actually
take a good look at the world. There are people out
there who would gladly kill you and your pregant wife/
mother/sister and throw the baby in a fire or roast it
like a chicken, just b/c of some fuckin religion or
irrational hatred. Grow up people.
Specifically, can you get a *TiVo* in Canada?
Holzmann's probably just there b/c he's the chair.
And yes, I know seldin can't code, but hell, better
than taking a class with Chali. (who can't code,
AND is a prick). No, Seldin is a math prof, and
it does show. His, crypto class was great! (but
I did hear that his coding classes weren't so great).
At least he's fair and amicable in person.
(i.e. completely the opposite if chali).
Cool, this is the university I graduated from and I can bet that
I know who's responsible for this. Jonathan Seldin,
the euopean god of lamba calculus, who was also my
cryptology professor; and a damn good prof too, if I might add.
That's correct. More correctly should we say: "They believe that they will go on to become *like* god one day," being that his purpose for mankind is for them to become like him one day. It sounds very blasphemous from a modern western christian point of view. However, it makes perfect sense if you understand the mormon mindset and cosmology.
>You say you believe that God is bound by the same laws of physics that we are. I don't know of any religion that would agree.
OK. Here's one: Mormonism. While many mormons may not agree, there are many that would. As for the official doctrines of the church they do not say one way or another, but do invite the possiblity in various ways.
Hey Mike!
:(
Funny, it works for me. I've got the SO6 early access version 3 too if you are interested in trying that. BTW: I think I'm getting layed off so I don't think I'll be finishing that NLUG page any time soon
Sheldon.
Sure it's fine for a small or medium business, but for enterprise businesses that usually have a server room on it's own subnet. Yes 100mb switches are cheap, if you are only buying a few. When you have to upgrade the infrastructure in a whole campus of 2000+ lan drops in over 5 buildings each with 5 floors, and then the hubs, routers, cabling, etc all has to be upgraded. That's expensive. No one is going to upgrade that just to run sunrays.
Sure, they are very cool, and yes I believe they do support vpn's but the above restrictions still hold (in the supported configuration).
I was told those numbers, assuming we are talking about the networking requirements, by sun themselves when they presented sunrays to the large enterprise in which I work. (where I help make infrastructure and purchasing decisions).
Yes, but there are technical issues as well as cost issues with a thin client solution like this.
1) You need 100 mb switched networking
2) The server needs to be on the same subnet as the clients. (in the supported configuration) This is a problem for large enterprises.
3) They are not good for video streaming or multimedia. i.e. a CAD user would probably not want to use one.
I personally don't like thin clients that much because you have no local computing resources to take advantage of. I think that linux on a pc is better b/c you have local resources that can be taken advantage of, and during the evening you can make them part of a compile cluster using something like LSF. Of course, this assumes your user base consists of software and hardware designers.
Hi, how do I get vmware to compile and run on any linux kernel greater than 2.4.6? It always fails to compile the kernel modules.
Thanks.
Just curious, does anyone know which distro's still ship GNOME as the default desktop? I know of RH and progeny, but are there any others? (This is not a flame, I'm just curious as to the growth of KDE in general mindshare).
Sheldon.