You want to know how to get Linux some share? As a retailer I'll be happy to let you know, it is really easy...1.-GET RID OF THE DAMNED TERMINAL!
Like the cmd on Windows 7, where you have to fix your sleepmode by typing: powercfg/h on ?
It ain't 1979 anymore and disco is fricking dead, let go of the fucking blinking cursor, alright?
Like Windows that still uses a fscking hourglass? (now fancy round one)
2.-FIX YOUR DAMNED DRIVER MODEL! It is 2011 and the constant driver borkage is getting old, okay?
You mean those fancy pants modular modules, which Vista later copied and worked so well without BSOD'ing? Ah those... Or do you mean Gallium3D GPU driver model that rivals all competition?
As for TFA? Its a hobby OS, made by guys that KNOW its a Hobby OS
That must be why so many important institutes and companies rely on it for running the fscking economy, right?
Because of the productivity factor in certain use cases like programming, administration, video and music entertainment, web browsing infotainment and the pure geekyness of it.
It's about to use the Gallium3D driver architecture, for which there is a nVidia driver (which kinda sucks if you intent to play anything more demanding than Quake3 on it) and AMD actually has active driver development on it, which is about 25-125% performance of the blob (depending on various tests, but Doom3 runs fine, so I guess it's not a desaster).
Are you so stupid you believe there are "types" of DNA?
You should have read my sig, but because you're appearantly too stupid, I'll make an exception for you, below: From the fscking dictionary:
type a number of things or persons sharing a particular characteristic, or set of characteristics, that causes them to be regarded as a group, more or less precisely defined or designated; class; category: a criminal of the most vicious type.
So yes, I actually believe is have the type of DNA that made me a type (race in biology) of homo sapien.
To further proof that this term is actually used without dictionary-whoring: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_profiling It appears that almost everyone has a different DNA type. Sorted by various gene, this can be grouped based on lenght, skin pigment, lenght, type of hair and shape of eye sockets and lip size. Total shocker, isn't it? I know...
Evolution is logic; that which dies, dies. That which survives can replicate.
Today, we let everyone replicate. If we could, we would let seemingly uncontrollable child cancer genomes replicate if we had the cure for it.
Imagine that there is some kind of natural disaster and everyone had child cancer?! "Oops, sorry sir but the power to the child cancer pill factory is torn appart due to some flood".
You do realise that being the fittest (read: more succesful) in our current society, means being a total asshole with shitloads of money to pay for every single need?
There have been some tests that show that the happiest (non-suicidal people) are the people who arent stupid (120).
So that leaves us with a 110 IQ, rich asshole to mate with everyone.
That would explain why female humans prefer male humans (when not on the pill) with totaly different DNA, based on smell.
It's obvious that mating with different DNA creates much more different combinations and thus a bigger possibility for survival.
It's something that we're totaly screwing up right now, by trying to treat all possible diseases and letting all crap DNA survive, weakening our chanses of survival. It's like not willing to sacrivise one baby for a thousand.
For example anti-biotics; it's subscribed to everything and everyone right now, meaning that if deadly stuff mutates to be able to resist the two common anti-biotics then we're absolutely screwed.
There's nothing to peer review, because the 'paper' doesn't publish a new theory. All it says is that resulting forces require a statistical 'average' of a couple of forces and that statistical analysis resulst doesn't match with what the entropic force theory calculations predict, but does match with Newton gravity.
That doesn't disprove entropic gravity, but merely sais that the current formula's not correct.
Google has no choice but to do it. If they don't, the low speed dataplan connections keep exististing and that's bad for the webserver services ecosystem. I mean; how do you rent HD movies, if no-one has the bandwith and everyone has a datalimit?
I guess Google saw that action was needed in order to make future service investments and this is their testing ground and forcing competition to step up. Furthermore Google would love competition, just like they released the Chrome browser, hoping that all other popular browser would feel the need to have blazingly fast browsers as well; more faster browsers allround, more ads to display per minute.
The question about "what was before the big bang" is akin to the question "is there a god". Both cannot be solved. Looking beyond the big bang would require you to look back before the time when there was no time and, well, how do you look behind the beginning?
Which is why I said that I couldn't find the propper words words.
That's also the problem I have with "religious science". A scientific theory offers a way to test it. Religious science doesn't do that.
Of course it does. If you dive into string stuff, it is testable with multiple universes in which gravity seems to play a role (notice that gravity isn't a force in information theory, also considdering that the world is flat, but a holographic 3D representation). Now what did we just bolted onto the ISS? Isn't that a gravity device to test this multi-universe theory?
Of course you can't test God/Allah/Zues, but what you can do is put up testable theories that don't counteract/seem to support the idea of the existence of a creator.
Let's throw some: Multiple universes (11 dimensional theory), which are flat but reprisent holographicaly (information theory) and exchange information (gravity is large chucks of mass growing towards each other while filling up space fabric, but represent like pulling and bending static space fabric), which exchanges 'souls'.
The creator created the Earth in 7 days (time is relative, Einstein). The entire universe is flat, so above earth there is heaven (another universe) and below is hell (11 dimensional string stuff: universes are stacked and attached to a membrane).
So far all testable. The earth (read = our universe) is a testing ground for humans, considdering Adam and Eve sucked, so what better way to test it than having this corral of all possible branches (Lisi, theory of everything) and we're definately confined (either read momentum or location, Quantum physics).
This is all very plausable and testable (except Adam, Eve, creator and heaven and hell universe).
Oh and in case that you think this is complete bullshit, then at least considder the fact that science originated in the religious Islamic middle east, when we were still stuck in the dark ages. Did you know that before Darwin, Islamic scientists already had a theory of evolution?
First of all the Big Bang was supposed to create its own logic (shape) and time. So no matter how logical your reasoning for the absence of a creator is; it's only valid within our universe. 'Outside', 'before' or 'behind' (can't find the propper words) there might as well be a two headed bunny rabit who sneezed the universe into existense. There might as well be a creator and you would have nothing scientifically valid against the existence of a creator. Furthermore the creator might be everywhere and always has been because the creator is not confined to space, time and logic.
Heaven and hell might as well be different universes.
Now there is this smart neurological researcher called Dick Swaab who sais that he has found that due to evolution, the human brain got a piece of religious brain function. But that doesn't mean that if there is a creator who can create an entire universe, might not also planned the Big Bang all the way into humans with religious brains. It also doesn't mean that there is no creator. For example; if humand were to obtain a piece of brain that deals with Newton laws, does that mean that laws of Newton are invalid, just because it has evolved into your brain? I personaly don't think so.
I'd say let them create a theory for non religious scientist to scientifacly disprove, or confirm. That way, we can at least figure out what is NOT the case.
Everybody's different, but the only thing that works for me is: 1. Boss tells me "x must be done in time before y, so your deadline is at z."; 2. My boss leaving me the fsck alone; 3. I'm doing whatever I want to be doing, which gives me a great feeling of voluntarily chosing to do it out of myself; 4. Shit get's done on time; 5. Me happy, Boss happy; 6. If not delivered I'm fscked, which results in healthy motivation.
Is that so hard? Why must I be dominated and baby-sitted ? In fact, who the hell thought that it was a good idea to have all these stupid management techniques around in the first place? I'm not too stupid to realise what I'm hired for...
You say that is if IT asked for SOX, HIPAA, PCI, etc along with all of the script-kiddies (and professional hacker networks) that are actively looking for vulnerabilities. IT engineers a network that meets compliance regulations because they *have* to, not because they thought it might be a fun thing to do. After a few SaaS providers are hacked, it will be interesting to see what kind of responsibility the customer has for the hack even if they made sure that the provider had all of the right certifications.
No network, no hacking the network. You're a solution in search for a problem.
Unless your kids are hosting their own email server, your household budget *does* include an email administrator, you're just paying it to your ISP (or through trading off some privacy and pageviews to an ad-supported email provider)
Given the fact that you're already doing that, why the hell go and find an extra admin, added to the payroll? Let the cloud companies take care of it and just call your ISP if your internet connection is down, because... you know... That's what they're for. Do you also have a phone operator, just in case you're getting phone phreaked? Lol..
Easy to use is not the point. If you create a car that steers for you but you still lack that airco then you're still not going to sell anything.
Think of the following possible situation: A couple of enthousiastic and talented people make a game today, with the awesomeness factor in which the original Doom was once released onto the internet. You can bet your ass that I'll be installing Haiku as dual boot, just to play that game. I'll be dual booting. Then Haiku gets a super awesome HTMLv5 browser. Might as well browse the web then when I've already booted Haiku. I might as well use Google Docs instead of rebooting to Word... While I'm serving the web and doing some work, I might as well fire up that media player.
What freaking reason would I have to reboot to Windows? Video editing? Like more than 5% of all people do that... Photoshop? Like more than 5% of all people do that.
While I'm at it I might as well download that file as PDF because anyone can read that. I'll send it with Gmail. Might as well set up that email program now.
Instant messaging? VoIP? Hello, it's 2011 and everybody has WatsApp on their phone...
App development is too easy with Haiku. If only people would make apps that people would realy want, like some cool games and a much better digital office bundle it would kill Windows just as fast as people would switched from the PS2 to the Xbox360.
The reason no OS on the planet has ever beaten Windows (including that iCrap), is because it offered nothing better than Windows that people realy, realy wanted to run. Yes it was technologically better as in a car with the best engine on the world, but without airco, without good brakes, slippy tires and a leaking roof.
It's not that hard to beat Windows, but you must offer apps that people want so badly that they'll dump Windows apps for it.
Please explain to me how you got rid of the human error factor.
The thing is: if it's accesable then it's accesable. Yes you can make a computer secure by letting it being able to do nothing, but then it's useless. If you let people acces it through the internet, someone else can too. The problem is that computers are digital. No matter what authentification system is in place, the system is binary. Everybody can copy that code and use it themselves, provided that they are smarter than the creator.
Slashdot Mirror
You want to know how to get Linux some share? As a retailer I'll be happy to let you know, it is really easy...1.-GET RID OF THE DAMNED TERMINAL!
Like the cmd on Windows 7, where you have to fix your sleepmode by typing: /h on
powercfg
?
It ain't 1979 anymore and disco is fricking dead, let go of the fucking blinking cursor, alright?
Like Windows that still uses a fscking hourglass? (now fancy round one)
2.-FIX YOUR DAMNED DRIVER MODEL! It is 2011 and the constant driver borkage is getting old, okay?
You mean those fancy pants modular modules, which Vista later copied and worked so well without BSOD'ing? Ah those... Or do you mean Gallium3D GPU driver model that rivals all competition?
As for TFA? Its a hobby OS, made by guys that KNOW its a Hobby OS
That must be why so many important institutes and companies rely on it for running the fscking economy, right?
For all things 'work' considdered; absolutely. For silly things like gaming I still dual boot, but not out of love...
Because of the productivity factor in certain use cases like programming, administration, video and music entertainment, web browsing infotainment and the pure geekyness of it.
It's about to use the Gallium3D driver architecture, for which there is a nVidia driver (which kinda sucks if you intent to play anything more demanding than Quake3 on it) and AMD actually has active driver development on it, which is about 25-125% performance of the blob (depending on various tests, but Doom3 runs fine, so I guess it's not a desaster).
BTW Android just had a Gallium3D tree merged...
Nice to know that they changed it from this: http://www.mozilla.org/ports/beos/
And since it works on Chrome (webkit), it should also work on Webpositive.
Are you so stupid you believe there are "types" of DNA?
You should have read my sig, but because you're appearantly too stupid, I'll make an exception for you, below:
From the fscking dictionary:
type
a number of things or persons sharing a particular characteristic, or set of characteristics, that causes them to be regarded as a group, more or less precisely defined or designated; class; category: a criminal of the most vicious type.
Now, you may not know it, but DNA can carry various sequences of characteristics we call genes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene
So yes, I actually believe is have the type of DNA that made me a type (race in biology) of homo sapien.
To further proof that this term is actually used without dictionary-whoring:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_profiling
It appears that almost everyone has a different DNA type. Sorted by various gene, this can be grouped based on lenght, skin pigment, lenght, type of hair and shape of eye sockets and lip size. Total shocker, isn't it? I know...
You're so stupid that you asociate Jews with a type of DNA?
Evolution is logic; that which dies, dies. That which survives can replicate.
Today, we let everyone replicate. If we could, we would let seemingly uncontrollable child cancer genomes replicate if we had the cure for it.
Imagine that there is some kind of natural disaster and everyone had child cancer?! "Oops, sorry sir but the power to the child cancer pill factory is torn appart due to some flood".
Yeah...
And thank you Slashcode for leaving out some of my post:
Not stupid (above 100 IQ), but also not too brilliant to figure out everything sucks (above 120 IQ), resulting in 110 IQ.
You do realise that being the fittest (read: more succesful) in our current society, means being a total asshole with shitloads of money to pay for every single need?
There have been some tests that show that the happiest (non-suicidal people) are the people who arent stupid (120).
So that leaves us with a 110 IQ, rich asshole to mate with everyone.
That doesn't sound so nice to me.
That would explain why female humans prefer male humans (when not on the pill) with totaly different DNA, based on smell.
It's obvious that mating with different DNA creates much more different combinations and thus a bigger possibility for survival.
It's something that we're totaly screwing up right now, by trying to treat all possible diseases and letting all crap DNA survive, weakening our chanses of survival. It's like not willing to sacrivise one baby for a thousand.
For example anti-biotics; it's subscribed to everything and everyone right now, meaning that if deadly stuff mutates to be able to resist the two common anti-biotics then we're absolutely screwed.
Devolution if you will...
There's nothing to peer review, because the 'paper' doesn't publish a new theory. All it says is that resulting forces require a statistical 'average' of a couple of forces and that statistical analysis resulst doesn't match with what the entropic force theory calculations predict, but does match with Newton gravity.
That doesn't disprove entropic gravity, but merely sais that the current formula's not correct.
I beg your pardon, since when is fsck spelled like fuck? This is /., you know...
Google has no choice but to do it. If they don't, the low speed dataplan connections keep exististing and that's bad for the webserver services ecosystem. I mean; how do you rent HD movies, if no-one has the bandwith and everyone has a datalimit?
I guess Google saw that action was needed in order to make future service investments and this is their testing ground and forcing competition to step up. Furthermore Google would love competition, just like they released the Chrome browser, hoping that all other popular browser would feel the need to have blazingly fast browsers as well; more faster browsers allround, more ads to display per minute.
The question about "what was before the big bang" is akin to the question "is there a god". Both cannot be solved. Looking beyond the big bang would require you to look back before the time when there was no time and, well, how do you look behind the beginning?
Which is why I said that I couldn't find the propper words words.
That's also the problem I have with "religious science". A scientific theory offers a way to test it. Religious science doesn't do that.
Of course it does. If you dive into string stuff, it is testable with multiple universes in which gravity seems to play a role (notice that gravity isn't a force in information theory, also considdering that the world is flat, but a holographic 3D representation). Now what did we just bolted onto the ISS? Isn't that a gravity device to test this multi-universe theory?
Of course you can't test God/Allah/Zues, but what you can do is put up testable theories that don't counteract/seem to support the idea of the existence of a creator.
Let's throw some:
Multiple universes (11 dimensional theory), which are flat but reprisent holographicaly (information theory) and exchange information (gravity is large chucks of mass growing towards each other while filling up space fabric, but represent like pulling and bending static space fabric), which exchanges 'souls'.
The creator created the Earth in 7 days (time is relative, Einstein). The entire universe is flat, so above earth there is heaven (another universe) and below is hell (11 dimensional string stuff: universes are stacked and attached to a membrane).
So far all testable. The earth (read = our universe) is a testing ground for humans, considdering Adam and Eve sucked, so what better way to test it than having this corral of all possible branches (Lisi, theory of everything) and we're definately confined (either read momentum or location, Quantum physics).
This is all very plausable and testable (except Adam, Eve, creator and heaven and hell universe).
Oh and in case that you think this is complete bullshit, then at least considder the fact that science originated in the religious Islamic middle east, when we were still stuck in the dark ages. Did you know that before Darwin, Islamic scientists already had a theory of evolution?
Well there is room for that.
First of all the Big Bang was supposed to create its own logic (shape) and time. So no matter how logical your reasoning for the absence of a creator is; it's only valid within our universe. 'Outside', 'before' or 'behind' (can't find the propper words) there might as well be a two headed bunny rabit who sneezed the universe into existense. There might as well be a creator and you would have nothing scientifically valid against the existence of a creator. Furthermore the creator might be everywhere and always has been because the creator is not confined to space, time and logic.
Heaven and hell might as well be different universes.
Now there is this smart neurological researcher called Dick Swaab who sais that he has found that due to evolution, the human brain got a piece of religious brain function. But that doesn't mean that if there is a creator who can create an entire universe, might not also planned the Big Bang all the way into humans with religious brains. It also doesn't mean that there is no creator. For example; if humand were to obtain a piece of brain that deals with Newton laws, does that mean that laws of Newton are invalid, just because it has evolved into your brain? I personaly don't think so.
I'd say let them create a theory for non religious scientist to scientifacly disprove, or confirm. That way, we can at least figure out what is NOT the case.
Everybody's different, but the only thing that works for me is:
1. Boss tells me "x must be done in time before y, so your deadline is at z.";
2. My boss leaving me the fsck alone;
3. I'm doing whatever I want to be doing, which gives me a great feeling of voluntarily chosing to do it out of myself;
4. Shit get's done on time;
5. Me happy, Boss happy;
6. If not delivered I'm fscked, which results in healthy motivation.
Is that so hard? Why must I be dominated and baby-sitted ? In fact, who the hell thought that it was a good idea to have all these stupid management techniques around in the first place? I'm not too stupid to realise what I'm hired for...
You say that is if IT asked for SOX, HIPAA, PCI, etc along with all of the script-kiddies (and professional hacker networks) that are actively looking for vulnerabilities. IT engineers a network that meets compliance regulations because they *have* to, not because they thought it might be a fun thing to do. After a few SaaS providers are hacked, it will be interesting to see what kind of responsibility the customer has for the hack even if they made sure that the provider had all of the right certifications.
No network, no hacking the network. You're a solution in search for a problem.
Unless your kids are hosting their own email server, your household budget *does* include an email administrator, you're just paying it to your ISP (or through trading off some privacy and pageviews to an ad-supported email provider)
Given the fact that you're already doing that, why the hell go and find an extra admin, added to the payroll? Let the cloud companies take care of it and just call your ISP if your internet connection is down, because... you know... That's what they're for. Do you also have a phone operator, just in case you're getting phone phreaked? Lol..
"Haiku Browser" is Firefox. Still no argument...
Outlook 2010 has a web interface for your email and agenda. Argument flies out of the windows, still...
Easy to use is not the point. If you create a car that steers for you but you still lack that airco then you're still not going to sell anything.
Think of the following possible situation:
A couple of enthousiastic and talented people make a game today, with the awesomeness factor in which the original Doom was once released onto the internet. You can bet your ass that I'll be installing Haiku as dual boot, just to play that game. I'll be dual booting.
Then Haiku gets a super awesome HTMLv5 browser. Might as well browse the web then when I've already booted Haiku. I might as well use Google Docs instead of rebooting to Word...
While I'm serving the web and doing some work, I might as well fire up that media player.
What freaking reason would I have to reboot to Windows? Video editing? Like more than 5% of all people do that... Photoshop? Like more than 5% of all people do that.
While I'm at it I might as well download that file as PDF because anyone can read that. I'll send it with Gmail. Might as well set up that email program now.
Instant messaging? VoIP? Hello, it's 2011 and everybody has WatsApp on their phone...
Everybody wants a sportscar like a Corvette Z06, or an Austin Martin.
The catch is that most people buy cheaper cars that aren't offering that same 'pollished' experience because they can't afford.
There goes your argument...
App development is too easy with Haiku. If only people would make apps that people would realy want, like some cool games and a much better digital office bundle it would kill Windows just as fast as people would switched from the PS2 to the Xbox360.
The reason no OS on the planet has ever beaten Windows (including that iCrap), is because it offered nothing better than Windows that people realy, realy wanted to run. Yes it was technologically better as in a car with the best engine on the world, but without airco, without good brakes, slippy tires and a leaking roof.
It's not that hard to beat Windows, but you must offer apps that people want so badly that they'll dump Windows apps for it.
Signed,
Linux user.
Please explain to me how you got rid of the human error factor.
The thing is: if it's accesable then it's accesable. Yes you can make a computer secure by letting it being able to do nothing, but then it's useless. If you let people acces it through the internet, someone else can too. The problem is that computers are digital. No matter what authentification system is in place, the system is binary. Everybody can copy that code and use it themselves, provided that they are smarter than the creator.