Plants use solar, but very few natural things use wind or tidal power. Nature has had a very long time to try and fill these energy niches, so it is a safe guess that they can't produce enough energy to sustain a large population at a reasonable standard of living.
The productive renewable path is solar - and this article suggests we have quite a way to go for mass production there - or relying on difficult to access energy sources like coal or uranium, maybe geothermal - which the biosphere has difficulty getting to.
If tidal power was really an option, I would expect to see more coastal trees taking advantage of it. If wind was an option, there would be plants using it to survive. Both these things probably exist, but neither in the numbers to suggests they represent a better deal than solar power.
>> they should probably scrap it and start over by porting KDE3 to Qt4.
I agree 100% that the KDE 4 lacks a horrible level of features for a release series, thus far. The 4.2 betas are more stable and usable for users than 4.0 and 4.1 combined (:P Literally if combining means combining bugs)
That said, since porting would involve re-reading and recoding the whole old codebase, and reimplementing would also involve re-reading and recoding the whole old codebase, I think that scrapping the _very nice_ desktop framework is a very poor suggestion.
Really the new Desktop model is better than the old. The current implementation sucks from lack of features - but it is a better start than a 3.x port. The underlying work are complete enough that a port is now simply beyond a waste of effort. KDE 4 is here to stay, and this is not a bad thing.
But none of the linux systems in common use run on anything other than GNU. GNU runs on everything (Mac, Windows, Linux, *BSD, GNU Hurd). Most importantly, the GNU project does actually include it's own kernel, which was written before Linux, and is fully capable of independent existence. That is why the GNU people claim it is more fundamental, and make a big deal about the GNU/Linux thing.
It goes left-right from most fundamental to the system to least, in the order of use. I suspect. A linux distro is built from the base of GNU tools (starting with gcc) and then moving to kernel, X, etc.
And I suspect you imply that you run Firefox out of OpenOffice. Possibly the syntax needs an update allowing: GNU/Linux/X.org/Qt/KDE/{Mozilla}||{OpenOffice.org}
You can play against a modest PC and win - there isn't a use in shipping a game that you can't win at.
The problem that I found in the chess game that shipped with Ubuntu was its habit of thrashing me, up until the point where it just... lost.
(I played on easy, I admit. But it was _really_ thrashing me, up until the point where it went crazy)
Everyone I know who uses Ubuntu does so entirely because of Shipit.
Recently, Wubi & the hardware detection make it easy to install for the computer-illiterate, but easily 80% of the linux users I know use Ubuntu, pretty much directly from Canonical's distribution of free CDs.
Trying to submit an essentially trivial usability patch to a big project, eg, KDE (which I tried the other day), often conflicts with some policy, and changing that just takes too long.
'Patches Welcome' isn't just a case of identifying code changes, it involves convincing the usual maintainer that something is wrong with the usability. These sort of persuasive skills aren't common enough, so 'patches welcome', in the worst case, is just a method of shrugging off change by not accepting a patch on policy reasons.
The developers are not denying anything (except comments like 'KDE is dying!'). They just didn't realize that calling the package that included the completed KDE4 libs "KDE 4.0" meant that distributions would start pushing it out to users, and publicizing it before it was objectively 'ready'.
Phase 1) All users on Dell, HP, etc computers, running Windows.
Phase 2) Many as above, many running Apple computers with OSX
Phase 3) Dell, HP, et al, discover linux and use it to compete, as they can do more with it than windows once the MS monopoly dies.
People will buy linux if it is sold. It isn't being sold, really. Dell does a little, without much advertising (and we have seen a fairly sizable pickup since they started) - but if Apple starts gaining enough traction that Windows isn't a de facto choice, the retailers will start to use linux.
I think Dell is positioning themselves to do this./p
Why you think Microsoft ownes it to any of you to give away their computer code is beyond me.
If Microsoft gives out their programs (ie, sells. Then the customer is indeed owed something), they should let it be reverse engineered & reimplemented. The key issue (as far as, eg, the FSF seems to be concerned) is that at the moment it is legally impossible, even though it is technically possible. Redhat & co. have demonstrated an ability to make quite reasonable profits, so there is no reason for the state to be distorting the market.
Microsoft doesn't owe us anything. And the law shouldn't give Microsoft a free monopoly where the government's legislation has impeded the free market.
Getting the windows API onto other machines seems to have once been a core part of Microsoft's anti-competition plan (go down to where WLM is mentioned). I'm not certain if this really removes control of the API from Microsoft. Possibly Google should have worked to move make the Gimp interface less confusing.
The people who buy a $200 dollar laptop are either people who:
A) Can't use Windows anyway, so they won't notice they are running linux.
B) Are cheap enough that they'll probably put up with it.
The laws of supply and demand suggest that linux laptops just made a massive inroad. Even if 90% of people can't cope with it, that still leaves a 10% market share to profit from, or a growth of 1,000% what we have now. And that is a lot of profit for the first company there, and that profit will easily spread over a couple of years.
Linux isn't bad for [Average] because things don't work. It is bad because for [Average] it takes their time to set it up, and then their programs don't work where once they did. If it is bought on a new machine, it is acceptable. Especially for the cost.
What says KDE isn't catching flax off this? I haven't heard many people being happy about the first 'release candidate' for KDE4 being closer to a beta than a release.
They look to me like they are eating into their karma of being a big open source project - not that the eventual release won't be good, but there will be more grumbling and complaints than usual.
If the basic idea behind a game is a string of essentially separate puzzles, like in portal where each room is a new puzzle, then levels really enhance the gameplay by creating a sense of achievement. I'm thinking of a 2D version, I don't keep up to date on games and I vaguely remember there being several others that might be different.
Levels can be new layers of interest and difficulty. An immersion game is more like a storyline - games with levels play more like a series of puzzles. Some groups of gamers really like puzzles.
I can't see the link between a Xen-based hypervisor and and a company being punished for a "unpatched zero-day vulnerability" that doesn't look like it is part of the hypervisor. Also, I can't see why the stock price would drop based on critical bugs. Stock prices should reflect number of people buying the software anyway. Hence Microsoft stock have value.
They are trying to promote torrent use, by getting rid of legal alternatives. First make it to expensive, and then watch a black market form. It's happened before:(
"not the Slackware crowd, who is obviously much more comfortable within a command line environment than mainstream users"
I'm very comfortable with the command line. I enjoy working without a GUI. I like the sound of Slackware. I use Ubuntu because it gives out ree CDs, downloading it is too hard.
I've never seen anyone point that out, and I bet that has a big influence on the number of 'buntu users. I've installed it 4 machines, used by about 6 users - and that wouldn't happen if I had to download anything big.
Slashdot Mirror
Plants use solar, but very few natural things use wind or tidal power. Nature has had a very long time to try and fill these energy niches, so it is a safe guess that they can't produce enough energy to sustain a large population at a reasonable standard of living.
The productive renewable path is solar - and this article suggests we have quite a way to go for mass production there - or relying on difficult to access energy sources like coal or uranium, maybe geothermal - which the biosphere has difficulty getting to.
If tidal power was really an option, I would expect to see more coastal trees taking advantage of it. If wind was an option, there would be plants using it to survive. Both these things probably exist, but neither in the numbers to suggests they represent a better deal than solar power.
Victory doesn't have to imply something as strong as war. It is possible to be victorious over self, or in a friendly struggle.
>> they should probably scrap it and start over by porting KDE3 to Qt4.
I agree 100% that the KDE 4 lacks a horrible level of features for a release series, thus far. The 4.2 betas are more stable and usable for users than 4.0 and 4.1 combined (:P Literally if combining means combining bugs)
That said, since porting would involve re-reading and recoding the whole old codebase, and reimplementing would also involve re-reading and recoding the whole old codebase, I think that scrapping the _very nice_ desktop framework is a very poor suggestion.
Really the new Desktop model is better than the old. The current implementation sucks from lack of features - but it is a better start than a 3.x port. The underlying work are complete enough that a port is now simply beyond a waste of effort. KDE 4 is here to stay, and this is not a bad thing.
But none of the linux systems in common use run on anything other than GNU. GNU runs on everything (Mac, Windows, Linux, *BSD, GNU Hurd). Most importantly, the GNU project does actually include it's own kernel, which was written before Linux, and is fully capable of independent existence. That is why the GNU people claim it is more fundamental, and make a big deal about the GNU/Linux thing.
GNU/Linux/X.org/Qt/KDE/Mozilla
It goes left-right from most fundamental to the system to least, in the order of use. I suspect. A linux distro is built from the base of GNU tools (starting with gcc) and then moving to kernel, X, etc.
And I suspect you imply that you run Firefox out of OpenOffice. Possibly the syntax needs an update allowing:
GNU/Linux/X.org/Qt/KDE/{Mozilla}||{OpenOffice.org}
You can play against a modest PC and win - there isn't a use in shipping a game that you can't win at. The problem that I found in the chess game that shipped with Ubuntu was its habit of thrashing me, up until the point where it just ... lost.
(I played on easy, I admit. But it was _really_ thrashing me, up until the point where it went crazy)
Everyone I know who uses Ubuntu does so entirely because of Shipit. Recently, Wubi & the hardware detection make it easy to install for the computer-illiterate, but easily 80% of the linux users I know use Ubuntu, pretty much directly from Canonical's distribution of free CDs.
Trying to submit an essentially trivial usability patch to a big project, eg, KDE (which I tried the other day), often conflicts with some policy, and changing that just takes too long. 'Patches Welcome' isn't just a case of identifying code changes, it involves convincing the usual maintainer that something is wrong with the usability. These sort of persuasive skills aren't common enough, so 'patches welcome', in the worst case, is just a method of shrugging off change by not accepting a patch on policy reasons.
There are solutions that really help
The developers are not denying anything (except comments like 'KDE is dying!'). They just didn't realize that calling the package that included the completed KDE4 libs "KDE 4.0" meant that distributions would start pushing it out to users, and publicizing it before it was objectively 'ready'.
Phase 1) All users on Dell, HP, etc computers, running Windows.
Phase 2) Many as above, many running Apple computers with OSX
Phase 3) Dell, HP, et al, discover linux and use it to compete, as they can do more with it than windows once the MS monopoly dies.
People will buy linux if it is sold. It isn't being sold, really. Dell does a little, without much advertising (and we have seen a fairly sizable pickup since they started) - but if Apple starts gaining enough traction that Windows isn't a de facto choice, the retailers will start to use linux. I think Dell is positioning themselves to do this./p
Why you think Microsoft ownes it to any of you to give away their computer code is beyond me.
If Microsoft gives out their programs (ie, sells. Then the customer is indeed owed something), they should let it be reverse engineered & reimplemented. The key issue (as far as, eg, the FSF seems to be concerned) is that at the moment it is legally impossible, even though it is technically possible. Redhat & co. have demonstrated an ability to make quite reasonable profits, so there is no reason for the state to be distorting the market.
Microsoft doesn't owe us anything. And the law shouldn't give Microsoft a free monopoly where the government's legislation has impeded the free market.
Getting the windows API onto other machines seems to have once been a core part of Microsoft's anti-competition plan (go down to where WLM is mentioned). I'm not certain if this really removes control of the API from Microsoft. Possibly Google should have worked to move make the Gimp interface less confusing.
The people who buy a $200 dollar laptop are either people who:
A) Can't use Windows anyway, so they won't notice they are running linux.
B) Are cheap enough that they'll probably put up with it.
The laws of supply and demand suggest that linux laptops just made a massive inroad. Even if 90% of people can't cope with it, that still leaves a 10% market share to profit from, or a growth of 1,000% what we have now. And that is a lot of profit for the first company there, and that profit will easily spread over a couple of years.
Linux isn't bad for [Average] because things don't work. It is bad because for [Average] it takes their time to set it up, and then their programs don't work where once they did. If it is bought on a new machine, it is acceptable. Especially for the cost.
It make you wonder what Vista is doing with all the resources it needs. I seriously believe it all goes into the DRM :(
They look to me like they are eating into their karma of being a big open source project - not that the eventual release won't be good, but there will be more grumbling and complaints than usual.
If the basic idea behind a game is a string of essentially separate puzzles, like in portal where each room is a new puzzle, then levels really enhance the gameplay by creating a sense of achievement. I'm thinking of a 2D version, I don't keep up to date on games and I vaguely remember there being several others that might be different.
Levels can be new layers of interest and difficulty. An immersion game is more like a storyline - games with levels play more like a series of puzzles. Some groups of gamers really like puzzles.
I can't see the link between a Xen-based hypervisor and and a company being punished for a "unpatched zero-day vulnerability" that doesn't look like it is part of the hypervisor. Also, I can't see why the stock price would drop based on critical bugs. Stock prices should reflect number of people buying the software anyway. Hence Microsoft stock have value.
They are trying to promote torrent use, by getting rid of legal alternatives. First make it to expensive, and then watch a black market form. It's happened before :(
"not the Slackware crowd, who is obviously much more comfortable within a command line environment than mainstream users" I'm very comfortable with the command line. I enjoy working without a GUI. I like the sound of Slackware. I use Ubuntu because it gives out ree CDs, downloading it is too hard. I've never seen anyone point that out, and I bet that has a big influence on the number of 'buntu users. I've installed it 4 machines, used by about 6 users - and that wouldn't happen if I had to download anything big.