The X Files died the day after the movie was released. The main attraction in my opinion was the question of whether aliens existed or not. Now that I know for sure, it does not intrest me. The Xfiles should have done what the movie Ronin did. They should have never told us the secret. Also moving to California was the gravest mistake they ever made. This whole season was a mistake I hope.
In my dorm we used to watch the X files like it was a religious ritual. After three episodes of this season we never watched it again. Once you know too much the secrets are not important anymore. Not to mention this season was terrible!
They should have learned from JMS (from B5 fame) to leave meat on the hook and keep drawing the audience deeper.
Great point, Free BSD is more secure/stable out of the box but I like the idea of choice. For instance in linux you get plenty of distro's each with there problems and bonuses. There are enough people who use the major distros to point out problems in each distro. So say they are 10000 users for distribution X, you can imagine that if a user find an error the user can submit bug reports and/or fixes.
From a tatical point of view FreeBSD is more vunerable to attack then the cell nature of Linux. It is unlikely that this will happen but if FreeBSD were to fall than users will be hurt, on the otherhand it is harder to kill Linux because there is no central location for linux new distros pop up all the time. If most Linux coders were to give up coding, Linux could survive because the code is GPL'd. I think Linus understood this from the get go and this is why Linux is so popular.
PS. IMHO this in no way means that FreeBSD is anyway technically bad.
Uhmmm I count about ~ 283 people who contributed to the Linux kernel! I don't see anything wrong with my kernel!!! Whether it is 1 or 10000 people who can touch code, it is the bottom line that counts. Whats with the antilinux FUD and antiBSD FUD both are great OSs with there own merits and problems. Microsoft has 1000s of programmers from around the world working on windows but that does not make it better. IMHO size does not matter it is what you do with it.
Even a clumsy and fat Penguin can be trained into a well oiled killing machine!
I do agree with you on the FreeBSD clean install, it does not even install Bash by default (that's raw). But to tell you the truth you can install Linux without Bash either! Installing my NE2000 card was easier in Linux than it was in Windows with PNP support.
As with anything first installs are difficult because you are not used to the pros and cons. Question how is installing X and KDE easier in FreeBSD than Linux?? When I used both I had to do an XF86Setup for configuring both. Also if you do not like the files in your directories you can easily do an rm.
I have read just about 100 or so comments on why BSD is better than Linux. They say it is more secure, stable, etc. But it seems that nobody has any concrete examples of why this may be so. Like FreeBSD uses this technology while Linux uses that technology which makes FreeBSD better. Or look at lines xxx in Linux code which makes it unstable.
I have used both Linux and FreeBSD and to tell you the honest truth I don't see that much of a difference. Many programs designed for linux has been ported for FreeBSD and I when I finished configuring FreeBSD I found myself with the same environment as Linux. It was actually quite funny. But because I was so used to configuring Linux, I went back to Slackware where it was more comfortable for me.
The morale of the story is when we complain about Linux vs. FreeBSD we are mainly blowing steam. At least for the workstation usage it is relatively the same. If FreeBSD is more stable than Linux then that is fine. I have not noticed the difference. If Linux is so bad then I want to see concrete examples of why that is so. In my experience the badly written programs that crash in Linux still crash in BSD when ported. Linux is plainly more friendly and has more programs for it (But IMNSHO most programs that only run in Linux and not *nix are badly written). On the other hand, FreeBSD's compile on demand ports collection is just tooo sweet!
The only thing that leaves me itching to go back to BSD is those damn script kiddies and the greed factor is getting just a little to high for my taste.
Glass is usually looked at as fragile. Whats up with a flying window? Also glass can be a very painfull thing when broken. You can see right through glass, like what many security experts say when talking about windows ~security. This mirrors (no pun intended) how windows works in my experience. It is an accurate choice for a mascot.
That is disturbing!! I hope they don't enlarge the breasts on Tux.
Re:Upgrading your kernel is an addiction
on
Kernel 2.2.12
·
· Score: 1
You were not paying attention last time a kernel notice was posted! This is the same phobic argument somebody made last time. Disregarding any newly support hardware, any changes made to the kernel in minor additions are basically bugfixes. I am sure that bugfixes can create new bugs, but I am damn sure that many more bugs are fixed than they are caused with new kernel releases.
The problem here is you look at kernel upgrades as a potential creation of problems to a stable kernel. I look at kernel upgrades as a fix to problems in a relatively stable kernel. If there are any kernel exploits found I want them patched. Sure there are idiots that download new kernels for the spiffy new number but I am not one of them.
My kernel size has increased by 10K without any additions of new hardware. My logical guess is that is 10K of fixes and improvements. So it fixed/updated things for me THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I respectfully disagree
on
Kernel 2.2.12
·
· Score: 2
I believe the figure of uptime is how well computers can do when on for long periods of time. When you reboot you reinitialize the state of the hardware as well as software so any problems like memory leakage, fs corruption, etc stops when you reboot.
If you can keep your computer on for long periods of time without rebooting not only means you have a good OS it may also show the skill of the administrator. Not to say you are a bad administrator when you reboot.
The problem with using uptime as a bragging right is that it is not much to brag about when we talk about workstations. It is important to upgrade the hardware and kernels of workstations so reboots may be frequent depending on the type of user. For "static" mission critical severs uptime is a very important figure that is worth bragging about. If your server does a very limited set of functions day-in and day-out you want to keep you computers up as long as possible.
You're living in a world where you just don't want to pay for anything, that's all. Get over it. Wait, Wait, Wait, I buy don't care if it is free of charge. As for calling me cheap thats a stupid insult, you don't even know who I am. I never said GPL is the equivilant of digital sweetness. I have seen rather sh**ty software in released in GPL, I have also seen some rather great software released in closed source.
If it is a good product, GPL'd, and cost a reasonable price I would buy it. I'm insulted by the idea that you think I am cheap and only use software for free. I am just interested in having businesses sell open source software. I want the OSS paradigm to work in the commercial environment. I want when I buy hardware I can see the source, and use it and modify it as I see fit. I know GPL is not the only open source license on earth. I also know that many corporations cannot release source code yet because they may use APIs that are not open. This is understandible. Hell I will admit I use netscape although I cannot see the source. (I will on the other hand say I would be alot less buggy if programmers could see the source). Having all software free or commercial OSS is my ideal, I don't think society is ready for it yet. I just don't understand why I am taking so much slack for it. Money makes the world go around Money does not make the world go round gravity does. >=)
I remember reading an article about people worring about being fired for using linux. Now people are getting ousted for using Windows NT. A twist of fate I must say.
Last time I looked SGI is worth about $12 a share I could be wrong. It might be a good idea to invest.
If Intel shafts us many of us will go to AMD if not there already. Does Intel think we are stupid? Why do they do such foolish things? The people who are into dual processors are most likely knowlegeable about computer architecture issues. They are most likely not newbies who randomly pick processors because of name. I assure you if Intel does this, the sale of AMD processors will increase.
I think it would be pointless for me to use at least. My number one reason for using Linux is because it is free (with respect to most of its code). Many people who will use Delphi for *nix programming will develop open source programs. I just think that if you develop open source software you should develop on an open source coding environment. It is just my preference. Did you ever use a program that you believed could be improved, but was limited by closed source policy? The way things are going it is going to be illegal to reverse engineer code, and fix others mistakes. That means if you fix a company's code and increase productivity it is illegal. I don't like that.
I don't think I used a Gestapo tone, I just voiced my concerns with developing closed source programs in Linux. We need to prove to corporations that OSS is viable and profitable. Many programmers understand this but many more short-sided managers don't. If closed source programs do very well in Linux, companies will not have much of an incentive to develop OSS software. When Corel developed in linux I praised it as company willing to develop for an OSS platform. When I realised it did not release its code I deleted it and I never looked back. I would never force anybody to do the same. I just like freedom, using closed source programs in the name of productivity, is like sacrificing freedom of speech in the name of national security. It may be a noble cause initially but sooner or later it will be abused.
How much do you bet they will not GPL the code. It is cool that Inprise was thoughtfull enough to code for Linux. It would be cooler if it is GPL'd. If they will not open the source then it is pointless. With a few exceptions like (PSX games, netscape, etc) I try to avoid using closed source programs.
All of this chaos and fragmentation is caused by programming for Linux only. Using/proc,/dev/sound, using x86 specific assembly code, etc. When you code make your code as portable as possible. Learn and use APIs that are supported in multiple OSs and hardware architectures.
For example if you do multithreading use gnu pthreads.
To reply to the Microsoft internal uniformity rant, Microsoft has tons of APIs last time I remember, AFC, MFC, base API, COM, ActiveX,.... Windows code is has a sprinkle of 16 bit, 32 bit, it is far from uniform but since it is not open I guess we will never truly know. Linux will do just fine since I can use modules if the sound card code is acting up, I could get rid of it. And wait until a fix. And yes a fix will be soon up since everybody can see the code.
To make a long story short the more portable the code the more people see your code, fix your code, enhance your code, hence it lasts longer.
Assuming hard crack is "potentially" incrackable, I don't think it is very useful. Public key crypto like PGP, on the other hand, is more secure for online mail and commerce. It may not be uncrackable but because the encryption keys can be sent publically it is more useful. Hard crack is as secure as the key transport system. I think hard crack is great for my security at home. Where do I hide the key????
Since Rob was in the army, I think his comments are more credible than some of these ACs who have never served. A person who is willing to give their life for the cause of freedom is a person who I admire. Go ROB!!!
With that aside, JINI technology may fail the java is to complicated for cheap low end user products. Its like using a oil drill for a tooth pick. They should start out with something small that resembles java and is compatible with java but is geared towards small scale devices. I am not psychic but I don't believe people want to by a toaster to surf the web. On the other hand it would be cool if I could plug my keyboard into the TV and download the necessary files to make it a temporary word processor. Or turn my remote control into a virtual keyboard. Or maybe plug my playstation to my TV, tv to the network, and download new games playing with my remote control as the joystick with out downloading new driver software, the devices would just know how to interact correctly. If they play their cards right we won't even need a playstation and you can play directly over the network thru the TV. But I don't think we have evolved as a society to accept that technology yet. Plus it takes a long time to replace all of those cheap devices into those new JINI enabled devices.
Whoa, BSD shows up in 1772 lines in linux kernel source code? I'm impressed Linux is looking more like BSD!!
Re:KDE has no future [Get your terms right]
on
The Future of KDE
·
· Score: 1
What are you talking about Linux is the kernel. It is possible to make a linux distro with absolutely no command line. You can say at the heart of windows 9x is the GUI but it built off of MS-DOS. Hmmm... Commandlines or GUIs are the user interfaces which are part of the OSs not the OS. I think Microsoft has brainwashed you!!
I agree, what makes free software strong is fair competition. Linus was ingenious by having others maintain the distributions, yet keeping the kernel centralized. If Microsoft kills one distribution you have plenty of others to attack, and more distros are on the way. If you are a skilled user get a distro that focuses on skilled users! Or make your own. Open software and a centralized kernels keeps things compatible.
Same thing goes for the window managers I can run gnome apps in KDE and KDE apps in fvwm!! To extend what the poster said, I think it is impossible to keep them both equal. GNOME can win one month and KDE can win the next. Competition keeps free software as a whole great.
Windows already does everything KDE currently does, will do, and will ever do.
Your kidding right? Please tell me you are kidding? You mean your third party hacks are better than things KDE and GNOME do inherently. Try configuring hardware with out the control panel? The customizeability of *nix and KDE blows windows out of the water! Do you think people are moving to linux because linux and windows are the same? KDE and Windows are not the same thing, if you would use *nix software before making baseless comparisons you probably would not have posted that silly comment.
Slashdot Mirror
Two words for you "Yeah Right!"
The X Files died the day after the movie was released. The main attraction in my opinion was the question of whether aliens existed or not. Now that I know for sure, it does not intrest me. The Xfiles should have done what the movie Ronin did. They should have never told us the secret. Also moving to California was the gravest mistake they ever made. This whole season was a mistake I hope.
In my dorm we used to watch the X files like it was a religious ritual. After three episodes of this season we never watched it again. Once you know too much the secrets are not important anymore. Not to mention this season was terrible!
They should have learned from JMS (from B5 fame) to leave meat on the hook and keep drawing the audience deeper.
True-DAT!!!
Like I said the ports collection is one of the most awesome things I've seen since I migrated from windows.
If something like that were to be made for linux I would be most impressed. If there were any reason for me to go back to Free BSD it would be ports.
I do not see why it has not been done yet?
Great point, Free BSD is more secure/stable out of the box but I like the idea of choice. For instance in linux you get plenty of distro's each with there problems and bonuses. There are enough people who use the major distros to point out problems in each distro. So say they are 10000 users for distribution X, you can imagine that if a user find an error the user can submit bug reports and/or fixes.
From a tatical point of view FreeBSD is more vunerable to attack then the cell nature of Linux. It is unlikely that this will happen but if FreeBSD were to fall than users will be hurt, on the otherhand it is harder to kill Linux because there is no central location for linux new distros pop up all the time. If most Linux coders were to give up coding, Linux could survive because the code is GPL'd. I think Linus understood this from the get go and this is why Linux is so popular.
PS. IMHO this in no way means that FreeBSD is anyway technically bad.
Uhmmm I count about ~ 283 people who contributed to the Linux kernel! I don't see anything wrong with my kernel!!! Whether it is 1 or 10000 people who can touch code, it is the bottom line that counts.
/usr/src/linux/CREDITS
Whats with the antilinux FUD and antiBSD FUD both are great OSs with there own merits and problems.
Microsoft has 1000s of programmers from around the world working on windows but that does not make it better. IMHO size does not matter it is what you do with it.
source of info:
Even a clumsy and fat Penguin can be trained into a well oiled killing machine!
I do agree with you on the FreeBSD clean install, it does not even install Bash by default (that's raw). But to tell you the truth you can install Linux without Bash either! Installing my NE2000 card was easier in Linux than it was in Windows with PNP support.
As with anything first installs are difficult because you are not used to the pros and cons.
Question how is installing X and KDE easier in FreeBSD than Linux?? When I used both I had to do an XF86Setup for configuring both. Also if you do not like the files in your directories you can easily do an rm.
I have read just about 100 or so comments on why BSD is better than Linux. They say it is more secure, stable, etc. But it seems that nobody has any concrete examples of why this may be so. Like FreeBSD uses this technology while Linux uses that technology which makes FreeBSD better. Or look at lines xxx in Linux code which makes it unstable.
I have used both Linux and FreeBSD and to tell you the honest truth I don't see that much of a difference. Many programs designed for linux has been ported for FreeBSD and I when I finished configuring FreeBSD I found myself with the same environment as Linux. It was actually quite funny. But because I was so used to configuring Linux, I went back to Slackware where it was more comfortable for me.
The morale of the story is when we complain about Linux vs. FreeBSD we are mainly blowing steam. At least for the workstation usage it is relatively the same. If FreeBSD is more stable than Linux then that is fine. I have not noticed the difference. If Linux is so bad then I want to see concrete examples of why that is so. In my experience the badly written programs that crash in Linux still crash in BSD when ported. Linux is plainly more friendly and has more programs for it (But IMNSHO most programs that only run in Linux and not *nix are badly written). On the other hand, FreeBSD's compile on demand ports collection is just tooo sweet!
The only thing that leaves me itching to go back to BSD is those damn script kiddies and the greed factor is getting just a little to high for my taste.
Just use whats best for you.
Glass is usually looked at as fragile. Whats up with a flying window? Also glass can be a very painfull thing when broken. You can see right through glass, like what many security experts say when talking about windows ~security. This mirrors (no pun intended) how windows works in my experience. It is an accurate choice for a mascot.
That is disturbing!!
I hope they don't enlarge the breasts on Tux.
You were not paying attention last time a kernel notice was posted! This is the same phobic argument somebody made last time. Disregarding any newly support hardware, any changes made to the kernel in minor additions are basically bugfixes. I am sure that bugfixes can create new bugs, but I am damn sure that many more bugs are fixed than they are caused with new kernel releases.
The problem here is you look at kernel upgrades as a potential creation of problems to a stable kernel. I look at kernel upgrades as a fix to problems in a relatively stable kernel. If there are any kernel exploits found I want them patched. Sure there are idiots that download new kernels for the spiffy new number but I am not one of them.
My kernel size has increased by 10K without any additions of new hardware. My logical guess is that is 10K of fixes and improvements. So it fixed/updated things for me THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I believe the figure of uptime is how well computers can do when on for long periods of time. When you reboot you reinitialize the state of the hardware as well as software so any problems like memory leakage, fs corruption, etc stops when you reboot.
If you can keep your computer on for long periods of time without rebooting not only means you have a good OS it may also show the skill of the administrator. Not to say you are a bad administrator when you reboot.
The problem with using uptime as a bragging right is that it is not much to brag about when we talk about workstations. It is important to upgrade the hardware and kernels of workstations so reboots may be frequent depending on the type of user. For "static" mission critical severs uptime is a very important figure that is worth bragging about. If your server does a very limited set of functions day-in and day-out you want to keep you computers up as long as possible.
You're living in a world where you just don't want to pay for anything, that's all. Get over it.
Wait, Wait, Wait, I buy don't care if it is free of charge. As for calling me cheap thats a stupid insult, you don't even know who I am. I never said GPL is the equivilant of digital sweetness. I have seen rather sh**ty software in released in GPL, I have also seen some rather great software released in closed source.
If it is a good product, GPL'd, and cost a reasonable price I would buy it. I'm insulted by the idea that you think I am cheap and only use software for free. I am just interested in having businesses sell open source software. I want the OSS paradigm to work in the commercial environment. I want when I buy hardware I can see the source, and use it and modify it as I see fit. I know GPL is not the only open source license on earth. I also know that many corporations cannot release source code yet because they may use APIs that are not open. This is understandible. Hell I will admit I use netscape although I cannot see the source. (I will on the other hand say I would be alot less buggy if programmers could see the source). Having all software free or commercial OSS is my ideal, I don't think society is ready for it yet. I just don't understand why I am taking so much slack for it.
Money makes the world go around
Money does not make the world go round gravity does. >=)
I remember reading an article about people worring about being fired for using linux. Now people are getting ousted for using Windows NT. A twist of fate I must say.
Last time I looked SGI is worth about $12 a share I could be wrong. It might be a good idea to invest.
If Intel shafts us many of us will go to AMD if not there already. Does Intel think we are stupid? Why do they do such foolish things? The people who are into dual processors are most likely knowlegeable about computer architecture issues. They are most likely not newbies who randomly pick processors because of name. I assure you if Intel does this, the sale of AMD processors will increase.
I think it would be pointless for me to use at least. My number one reason for using Linux is because it is free (with respect to most of its code). Many people who will use Delphi for *nix programming will develop open source programs. I just think that if you develop open source software you should develop on an open source coding environment. It is just my preference. Did you ever use a program that you believed could be improved, but was limited by closed source policy? The way things are going it is going to be illegal to reverse engineer code, and fix others mistakes. That means if you fix a company's code and increase productivity it is illegal. I don't like that.
I don't think I used a Gestapo tone, I just voiced my concerns with developing closed source programs in Linux. We need to prove to corporations that OSS is viable and profitable. Many programmers understand this but many more short-sided managers don't. If closed source programs do very well in Linux, companies will not have much of an incentive to develop OSS software. When Corel developed in linux I praised it as company willing to develop for an OSS platform. When I realised it did not release its code I deleted it and I never looked back. I would never force anybody to do the same. I just like freedom, using closed source programs in the name of productivity, is like sacrificing freedom of speech in the name of national security. It may be a noble cause initially but sooner or later it will be abused.
How much do you bet they will not GPL the code. It is cool that Inprise was thoughtfull enough to code for Linux. It would be cooler if it is GPL'd. If they will not open the source then it is pointless. With a few exceptions like (PSX games, netscape, etc) I try to avoid using closed source programs.
Linux is too chaotic to code for.
/proc, /dev/sound, using x86 specific assembly code, etc. When you code make your code as portable as possible. Learn and use APIs that are supported in multiple OSs and hardware architectures.
.... Windows code is has a sprinkle of 16 bit, 32 bit, it is far from uniform but since it is not open I guess we will never truly know. Linux will do just fine since I can use modules if the sound card code is acting up, I could get rid of it. And wait until a fix. And yes a fix will be soon up since everybody can see the code.
.....
All of this chaos and fragmentation is caused by programming for Linux only. Using
For example if you do multithreading use gnu pthreads.
To reply to the Microsoft internal uniformity rant, Microsoft has tons of APIs last time I remember, AFC, MFC, base API, COM, ActiveX,
To make a long story short the more portable the code the more people see your code, fix your code, enhance your code, hence it lasts longer.
Write once, rewrite, rewrite, rewrite,
Do you have any proof? Any articles to validate your point. Did they back door commercial PGP or PGPI?
Assuming hard crack is "potentially" incrackable, I don't think it is very useful. Public key crypto like PGP, on the other hand, is more secure for online mail and commerce. It may not be uncrackable but because the encryption keys can be sent publically it is more useful. Hard crack is as secure as the key transport system. I think hard crack is great for my security at home. Where do I hide the key????
Since Rob was in the army, I think his comments are more credible than
some of these ACs who have never served. A person who is willing to give
their life for the cause of freedom is a person who I admire. Go ROB!!!
With that aside, JINI technology may fail the java is to complicated for
cheap low end user products. Its like using a oil drill for a tooth pick.
They should start out with something small that resembles java and is
compatible with java but is geared towards small scale devices. I am not
psychic but I don't believe people want to by a toaster to surf the web.
On the other hand it would be cool if I could plug my keyboard into the TV
and download the necessary files to make it a temporary word processor. Or
turn my remote control into a virtual keyboard. Or maybe plug my
playstation to my TV, tv to the network, and download new games playing
with my remote control as the joystick with out downloading new driver
software, the devices would just know how to interact correctly. If they
play their cards right we won't even need a playstation and you can play
directly over the network thru the TV. But I don't think we have evolved
as a society to accept that technology yet. Plus it takes a long time to
replace all of those cheap devices into those new JINI enabled devices.
I hope sun will improve the memory usage and improve the conversion of Word Documents to StarOffice docs. I wonder if they will open the source?
Oh I think coders can make a program to replace "bad" words with less vulgar words! Many commercial UNIces are unispired relative to Linux.
Whoa, BSD shows up in 1772 lines in linux kernel source code? I'm impressed Linux is looking more like BSD!!
What are you talking about Linux is the kernel. It is possible to make a linux distro with absolutely no command line. You can say at the heart of windows 9x is the GUI but it built off of MS-DOS. Hmmm... Commandlines or GUIs are the user interfaces which are part of the OSs not the OS. I think Microsoft has brainwashed you!!
I agree, what makes free software strong is fair competition. Linus was ingenious by having others maintain the distributions, yet keeping the kernel centralized. If Microsoft kills one distribution you have plenty of others to attack, and more distros are on the way. If you are a skilled user get a distro that focuses on skilled users! Or make your own. Open software and a centralized kernels keeps things compatible.
Same thing goes for the window managers I can run gnome apps in KDE and KDE apps in fvwm!! To extend what the poster said, I think it is impossible to keep them both equal. GNOME can win one month and KDE can win the next. Competition keeps free software as a whole great.
Windows already does everything KDE currently does, will do, and will ever do.
Your kidding right? Please tell me you are kidding? You mean your third party hacks are better than things KDE and GNOME do inherently. Try configuring hardware with out the control panel? The customizeability of *nix and KDE blows windows out of the water! Do you think people are moving to linux because linux and windows are the same? KDE and Windows are not the same thing, if you would use *nix software before making baseless comparisons you probably would not have posted that silly comment.