MS Research is like a research university for all intents and purposes; they basically have academic latitude. Of course by the time the product reaches market it will be made, um..."better".
That's exactly it. MS Research is very much like a university except that their projects rarely make it out into the public in any meaningful and open way.
I'm not begrudging MS keeping their projects to themselves, just pointing out that there is a fairly key distinction to be made here.
I don't think you understand the situation properly. The "hex-hard" distros will still exist, for those that prefer them, and the "ascii-hard" distros will be there for those that prefer them.
By what process do you believe that the "ascii-hard" people are going to be able to stop people from making their "hex-hard" distros? This is the beauty of free software.
Because having a solitary botnet based on non-self-propegating pirated software is *so* exactly the same (or worse, even!) than how things are in Windows-land...
Normal people who understand other normal people who do not want to dink around with their computers.
You mention that Windows users have to install drivers (and then lump Apple users with them, for some reason). If you buy a piece of hardware, you can be almost certain that it will work with Windows. The driver comes in the box, and if it doesn't, you just google the manufacturer's website and download the driver.
With Linux, it either works (fairly often these days, but not nearly often enough), or you have to do a google search for "[hardware name] linux", then either get *really* lucky and only have to download a few files and run them as root in the terminal, and as you are running them, either a few things are different ("I don't have an/etc/network file, do I make one, or is it somewhere else?") or require a bit of customization, and further googling ("just enter my device id and revision code in place of the one in the file? I don't even know what those words mean!"), then maybe edit a configuration file or two. All the while not being really sure if the source of those files are trustworthy, but hey, they work. And even though it works, it doesn't work well (and all the forum users blame the hardware manufacturer for not releasing the specs--fat lot of good that does!).
If you're not lucky, you have to try google searches with the model number, not just hardware name. Then maybe even a revision number, to make sure you have the right version with the right chipset. Then you find something with a very similar chipset (the xt100, but you have the xt100n). Is the 'n' important? No searches show up for the one with the 'n', so let's try the xt100 driver. Nope, doesn't work.
Eventually, you think, "fuck it, it's not worth it" and install Windows and the xt100n works just fine, you didn't even need to download a driver. Or maybe you did, but you just used the disk in the box, or downloaded it from the manufacturer's website.
So, when I say "normal people", I mean people who have not only zero interest in going through that hassle, but people who have a fundamental aversion to such a process, if they're even capable of following it through in the first place. You may enjoy it, or may find it not a big deal. Hooray for you. But for everyone else, having to go through this process is a bad thing.
It was opposition to binary-only drivers that kicked off the formal free software movement in the first place, and it has helped. Greatly.
In the short-term, binary drivers are often a better choice. Some driver is better than no driver, right? But in the long run, free/open source drivers are usually better. Just look at how crashy and difficult to work with the Nvidia drivers have been. Or how severely limited the ATI drivers were.
What's more, the fact that the binary Nvidia drivers are treated as a sort of pariah helps Linux overall in that there are probably numerous other drivers that might have been released as binary-only drivers, but for fear of being rejected by the Linux community. Nvidia can get away with it because they are so large, they can say "my way, or the high way". Up to a point. But if binary-only drivers were treated as completely legitimate, every other hardware maker would be motivated to release binary drivers instead of open source drivers.
They may make life difficult sometimes, but you should thank those "rabid" idealists, because they also make life better for you. Without them, there wouldn't have even been a Linux in the first place.
Your fears are unfounded. If they were valid, we wouldn't have GNOME & KDE & the hundreds of other desktop environments and window managers.
In fact, this will make things even better. KDE will still be KDE, but it will be more usable. Same with GNOME. Some of the more esoteric systems will not change, because they aren't aimed at regular people.
There is no single Linux OS that can be bettered/ruined by a single person. There are literally *hundreds* of Linux OSs. And even if there were just one single Linux OS, how can you argue *against* usability testing? If there's just one OS, and it goes through testing, it will almost certainly be made better, but if you *don't* test, it will still be the single Linux OS that everyone has to use, it just won't be as good.
Ironically, Linux is a far better desktop OS than a Workstation OS. Microsoft is just too far ahead on making it easy to manage thousands of workstations with minimal setup.
Perhaps, but I don't think botnets really count as an example of superiority over Linux.
I don't see that (seriously) showing a Nazi flag could ever not be taken as a threat against the Jewish/Roma/whatever population of a city.
That's absurd. It's just a flag. If someone puts up a flag and they are a person who will engage in violence against some other group of people, how is them not being able to put up the flag going to change anything?
I see. You're offended that I called the notion that the health care bill has "death panels" absurd. How quaint!
I thought I told you to go polish your VAIO? Now, get. You want it to be nice and shiny for when those Glenn Beck torrents finish! If you're not a good boy, Dick Cheney will come and take you hunting with him!
You keep talking about "Joe and Sally", but your examples are of people with very specific needs (a NASA guy, someone who needs billing software).
For Joe and Sally, the only "must have" software is the web browser, unless you're talking about the main computer, which has other needs. But for their auxiliary computer? Web browser covers it.
Oh great. Another ignorant X basher. What do you think is wrong with X 11.7.4, picking a recent version for example? And those problems, are they really wrong with X, or some flaws in the specific xorg reference implementation?
When I mentioned X11, I was referring both to the standard itself, and the present implementation (including extant window managers and desktop environments).
Architecturally, it's a mess. You have the core portion, which is little more than a network transparent way of drawing rectangles, moving a cursor around and typing. On top of that, all the extensions, like Xinerama, and the various and incompatible acceleration/3d modules. Next is the slew of various and disparate libraries for doing *standard* things like drawing shapes and buttons. And finally, the various window managers and desktop environments do their best (which is pretty damned awful) to mix it all together into something remotely resembling a user interface.
I have yet to meet an X basher who really understands it (and it's flaws) properly. Or the benefits and flaws of other windowing systems for that matter.
I think this may be because you are looking at X11 with blinders on. If you look at just the protocol itself, I can see why someone might think there's nothing wrong with it, because the overwhelming majority of its flaws are further down the chain. Sound, 3D, window compositing, UI, desktop environment, multimedia support, all those things are on top of X11, so they might seem like separate problems, but because none of these are inherent to X11, they have to be bolted on. The two main graphical environments, Windows and Mac OS X, have a coherent and integrated set of technologies, and this is what X11 sorely lacks.
And, most of the people who actually act on the "throw it away" premise really seem to insist on ditching everything that X got right, and often failing to fix what was wrong.
X got *nothing* right. The only thing even remotely positive about X is that you can display your programs on a remote display without needing to do anything special, and it does such a piss poor job of it that unless you want to mix windows from various machines (which *is* pretty cool, however), you're generally better off just running VNC.
Take, eg gnome and it's wretched configuration database, compared to xrdb. It is quite clear that none of the gnome devs have machines with an NFS shared home directory, a hetrogeneous environment or much need for remote X at all.
NFS is another crap protocol. But that's a side issue, except for the similarity in that the open source/unix crowd really needs to work on replacing the foundations of their system (the Linux kernel, the POSIX environment and the GNU utilities are just about the only things *right* about Linux). NFS is so awful, it's better to just run SAMBA in most cases.
But back to X11. It needs to be scrapped, but it's got so much inertia that all of the various projects that have aimed to replace it have gained little traction.
If they did, they would have paid far more attention to what xrdb got right, and fixed the real flaws rather than reimplementing the windows registry of all things.
I agree. Gnome's two biggest mistakes are trying to emulate classic Mac OS too closely, and their configuration system.
Manned exploration. People opposed to exploration seem like they must be among the most uninteresting people imaginable.
Apropos, some people decry space science, because it won't tell us anything about things here on Earth (which is not entirely true, but true enough in the way they mean it). Some people explore space through a telescope, some from the tip of a rocket.
It's rather hypocritical to applaud one form of exploration, but deride the other. They're both important human endeavors.
Wonderful! It's the year of the linux netbook... long live 2007 and the eee 701!.
Euh, I mean, 2009! With Moblin!
Propaganda 101: exaggerate and ascribe claims to those you disagree with so that you can easily knock them down. Ex. Death Panels.
*If* you prefer Linux and *if* you have a netbook, this is nice news. If not, then what's it matter? There is no "the year of Linux", and until X11 is either repaired or replaced, there never will be. That doesn't mean every positive Linux story is rubbish just because it won't cause the world to switch en masse over to Linux.
But just like the other "must have-no matter what" that ain't gonna run on ARM either. So while I have no doubt they'll find a nice niche I doubt they make a dent in Atom. Sorry hoss, but folks are just creatures of habit, that's all.
You're still making the assumption that netbooks are going to replace the main computer. They're not. They are better suited as auxiliary computers, and as the iPhone has proven, your auxiliary computer doesn't have to run the same apps as your desktop.
Dunno why the other comment got modded as a troll; most companies will happily refund you the cost of Windows; it's been documented many times.
Where to even start?
most companies
Not even remotely true.
will happily
"Happily" is a somewhat meaningless term here. Let's assume you mean this as a synonym for "readily and easily". Not true. Can you point me to the web form or phone number or even postal address where I request my refund from any major PC maker?
it's been documented many times
This is extremely misleading. It's been documented many times because each time it happens, it took tenacity and is not the normal outcome. Sort of like how natural cancer remission has been documented many times.
What it doesn't mean is that it happens so much, it's normal and simple. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Unless, like I mentioned, you could provide the requisite contact info for the refund? A web form seems like the most obvious choice for a company that will do this "happily" and does it so routinely that "it's been documented many times".
While that may be true for...say a geek with IT experience, you really have to think like Joe and Sally average. You know what my customers call Netbooks? They call them "baby laptops" which is VERY important. You see they expect their "baby laptops" to be able to do most of the things a big laptop would, only slower...well because they are babies and babies are little.
Except they suck as "baby laptops". Trying to run a netbook the same way you run your desktop (let's be fair, laptops are already "baby desktops"), is doomed to frustration. Just as using a netbook as a primary computer is misguided (sometimes circumstances require it, but a netbook is, at best, a temporary hold-me-over until you can replace it with a real computer).
Netbooks should really be seen as auxiliary computers, like the iPhone. Windows is a poor fit for netbooks, but probably the best there is at the moment. Linux, especially Android, has a lot of potential, but has yet to convert that potential into something useful and usable.
For a netbook as a "baby PC", Intel and Windows is pretty much a requirement. But for a netbook as a netbook, ARM is *much* better suited for this than Intel is. It's just lacking the proper OS (which, unfortunately, is the hardest part to get right).
Trying to switch folks over to X86 Linux is one thing, where you can at least give them Crossover Office which will help cover the "must haves" but with ARM you are expecting the user to not only throw away everything they know, but every program that they like. And whether Joe and Sally will go for that is a BIG if my friend.
Switching people to Linux on a netbook implies they are replacing or foregoing have a full-sized system (desktop or notebook).
If they can make sure there's an HD supporting graphics chipset with drivers, this will be an interesting chip.
The GMA 950 found in Atom systems is capable of outputting at 1080p60, and with a hardware decoder, can play HD H.264/VC1/MPEG2 content (such as Blu-ray). Broadcom makes such a decoder in PCI Express Mini Card form.
The GMA950, and the associated chipset to go with it, found in atom systems is capable of using up significantly more power than the Atom processor itself. Adding in yet another chip is not the answer.
Ever wonder why there aren't any Atom smartphones, but tons of ARM based ones? As a platform, Atom is pretty crappy. It just happens to have the best mix of performance, low cost, and low power, while still being able to run Windows.
The Cortex A9 looks very promising, and may trounce the Atom in all ways, except being able to run Windows (which, depending on your point of view, may not be a negative).
Atom + Ion looks like a good combination for those who must have Windows, but the new ARMs look like a more perfect fit for the netbook hardware itself.
Slashdot Mirror
MS Research is like a research university for all intents and purposes; they basically have academic latitude. Of course by the time the product reaches market it will be made, um..."better".
That's exactly it. MS Research is very much like a university except that their projects rarely make it out into the public in any meaningful and open way.
I'm not begrudging MS keeping their projects to themselves, just pointing out that there is a fairly key distinction to be made here.
I don't think you understand the situation properly. The "hex-hard" distros will still exist, for those that prefer them, and the "ascii-hard" distros will be there for those that prefer them.
By what process do you believe that the "ascii-hard" people are going to be able to stop people from making their "hex-hard" distros? This is the beauty of free software.
Nobody said anything about Mac OS X
Because having a solitary botnet based on non-self-propegating pirated software is *so* exactly the same (or worse, even!) than how things are in Windows-land...
You mention that Windows users have to install drivers (and then lump Apple users with them, for some reason). If you buy a piece of hardware, you can be almost certain that it will work with Windows. The driver comes in the box, and if it doesn't, you just google the manufacturer's website and download the driver.
With Linux, it either works (fairly often these days, but not nearly often enough), or you have to do a google search for "[hardware name] linux", then either get *really* lucky and only have to download a few files and run them as root in the terminal, and as you are running them, either a few things are different ("I don't have an /etc/network file, do I make one, or is it somewhere else?") or require a bit of customization, and further googling ("just enter my device id and revision code in place of the one in the file? I don't even know what those words mean!"), then maybe edit a configuration file or two. All the while not being really sure if the source of those files are trustworthy, but hey, they work. And even though it works, it doesn't work well (and all the forum users blame the hardware manufacturer for not releasing the specs--fat lot of good that does!).
If you're not lucky, you have to try google searches with the model number, not just hardware name. Then maybe even a revision number, to make sure you have the right version with the right chipset. Then you find something with a very similar chipset (the xt100, but you have the xt100n). Is the 'n' important? No searches show up for the one with the 'n', so let's try the xt100 driver. Nope, doesn't work.
Eventually, you think, "fuck it, it's not worth it" and install Windows and the xt100n works just fine, you didn't even need to download a driver. Or maybe you did, but you just used the disk in the box, or downloaded it from the manufacturer's website.
So, when I say "normal people", I mean people who have not only zero interest in going through that hassle, but people who have a fundamental aversion to such a process, if they're even capable of following it through in the first place. You may enjoy it, or may find it not a big deal. Hooray for you. But for everyone else, having to go through this process is a bad thing.
It was opposition to binary-only drivers that kicked off the formal free software movement in the first place, and it has helped. Greatly.
In the short-term, binary drivers are often a better choice. Some driver is better than no driver, right? But in the long run, free/open source drivers are usually better. Just look at how crashy and difficult to work with the Nvidia drivers have been. Or how severely limited the ATI drivers were.
What's more, the fact that the binary Nvidia drivers are treated as a sort of pariah helps Linux overall in that there are probably numerous other drivers that might have been released as binary-only drivers, but for fear of being rejected by the Linux community. Nvidia can get away with it because they are so large, they can say "my way, or the high way". Up to a point. But if binary-only drivers were treated as completely legitimate, every other hardware maker would be motivated to release binary drivers instead of open source drivers.
They may make life difficult sometimes, but you should thank those "rabid" idealists, because they also make life better for you. Without them, there wouldn't have even been a Linux in the first place.
Your fears are unfounded. If they were valid, we wouldn't have GNOME & KDE & the hundreds of other desktop environments and window managers.
In fact, this will make things even better. KDE will still be KDE, but it will be more usable. Same with GNOME. Some of the more esoteric systems will not change, because they aren't aimed at regular people.
There is no single Linux OS that can be bettered/ruined by a single person. There are literally *hundreds* of Linux OSs. And even if there were just one single Linux OS, how can you argue *against* usability testing? If there's just one OS, and it goes through testing, it will almost certainly be made better, but if you *don't* test, it will still be the single Linux OS that everyone has to use, it just won't be as good.
This is Linux, we can have, and need to have, both.
There will be free Linuxes, like Debian. There will be "pragmatic" Linuxes, like Ubuntu. There will be all sorts of Linuxes in between.
Linux requires both the RMS types and the Shuttleworth types in order to both survive (RMS) and grow out of its niche (Shuttleworth).
Ironically, Linux is a far better desktop OS than a Workstation OS. Microsoft is just too far ahead on making it easy to manage thousands of workstations with minimal setup.
Perhaps, but I don't think botnets really count as an example of superiority over Linux.
I don't see that (seriously) showing a Nazi flag could ever not be taken as a threat against the Jewish/Roma/whatever population of a city.
That's absurd. It's just a flag. If someone puts up a flag and they are a person who will engage in violence against some other group of people, how is them not being able to put up the flag going to change anything?
People are too goddamned cowardly these days.
He must mean Jobs. Ballmer wouldn't have any problem with supporting the malware vendors...
Wasn't this in The Fountainhead?
I see. You're offended that I called the notion that the health care bill has "death panels" absurd. How quaint!
I thought I told you to go polish your VAIO? Now, get. You want it to be nice and shiny for when those Glenn Beck torrents finish! If you're not a good boy, Dick Cheney will come and take you hunting with him!
You keep talking about "Joe and Sally", but your examples are of people with very specific needs (a NASA guy, someone who needs billing software).
For Joe and Sally, the only "must have" software is the web browser, unless you're talking about the main computer, which has other needs. But for their auxiliary computer? Web browser covers it.
And, I ain't a horse, chief.
Oh my, how dreadfully clever. Now be a good lad and get back polishing your VAIO until you're ready to start acting like a grown-up.
Oh great. Another ignorant X basher. What do you think is wrong with X 11.7.4, picking a recent version for example? And those problems, are they really wrong with X, or some flaws in the specific xorg reference implementation?
When I mentioned X11, I was referring both to the standard itself, and the present implementation (including extant window managers and desktop environments).
Architecturally, it's a mess. You have the core portion, which is little more than a network transparent way of drawing rectangles, moving a cursor around and typing. On top of that, all the extensions, like Xinerama, and the various and incompatible acceleration/3d modules. Next is the slew of various and disparate libraries for doing *standard* things like drawing shapes and buttons. And finally, the various window managers and desktop environments do their best (which is pretty damned awful) to mix it all together into something remotely resembling a user interface.
I have yet to meet an X basher who really understands it (and it's flaws) properly. Or the benefits and flaws of other windowing systems for that matter.
I think this may be because you are looking at X11 with blinders on. If you look at just the protocol itself, I can see why someone might think there's nothing wrong with it, because the overwhelming majority of its flaws are further down the chain. Sound, 3D, window compositing, UI, desktop environment, multimedia support, all those things are on top of X11, so they might seem like separate problems, but because none of these are inherent to X11, they have to be bolted on. The two main graphical environments, Windows and Mac OS X, have a coherent and integrated set of technologies, and this is what X11 sorely lacks.
And, most of the people who actually act on the "throw it away" premise really seem to insist on ditching everything that X got right, and often failing to fix what was wrong.
X got *nothing* right. The only thing even remotely positive about X is that you can display your programs on a remote display without needing to do anything special, and it does such a piss poor job of it that unless you want to mix windows from various machines (which *is* pretty cool, however), you're generally better off just running VNC.
Take, eg gnome and it's wretched configuration database, compared to xrdb. It is quite clear that none of the gnome devs have machines with an NFS shared home directory, a hetrogeneous environment or much need for remote X at all.
NFS is another crap protocol. But that's a side issue, except for the similarity in that the open source/unix crowd really needs to work on replacing the foundations of their system (the Linux kernel, the POSIX environment and the GNU utilities are just about the only things *right* about Linux). NFS is so awful, it's better to just run SAMBA in most cases.
But back to X11. It needs to be scrapped, but it's got so much inertia that all of the various projects that have aimed to replace it have gained little traction.
If they did, they would have paid far more attention to what xrdb got right, and fixed the real flaws rather than reimplementing the windows registry of all things.
I agree. Gnome's two biggest mistakes are trying to emulate classic Mac OS too closely, and their configuration system.
Propaganda 101: exaggerate and ascribe claims to those you disagree with so that you can easily knock them down. Ex. Death Panels.
What does this have to do with the parent?
Because you tried to associate this story with being yet another "year of Linux" article.
Manned spaceflight
Manned exploration. People opposed to exploration seem like they must be among the most uninteresting people imaginable.
Apropos, some people decry space science, because it won't tell us anything about things here on Earth (which is not entirely true, but true enough in the way they mean it). Some people explore space through a telescope, some from the tip of a rocket.
It's rather hypocritical to applaud one form of exploration, but deride the other. They're both important human endeavors.
Wonderful! It's the year of the linux netbook ... long live 2007 and the eee 701!.
Euh, I mean, 2009! With Moblin!
Propaganda 101: exaggerate and ascribe claims to those you disagree with so that you can easily knock them down. Ex. Death Panels.
*If* you prefer Linux and *if* you have a netbook, this is nice news. If not, then what's it matter? There is no "the year of Linux", and until X11 is either repaired or replaced, there never will be. That doesn't mean every positive Linux story is rubbish just because it won't cause the world to switch en masse over to Linux.
Just a waste of time, this moblin thing.
Correct, because everyone is just like you.
But just like the other "must have-no matter what" that ain't gonna run on ARM either. So while I have no doubt they'll find a nice niche I doubt they make a dent in Atom. Sorry hoss, but folks are just creatures of habit, that's all.
You're still making the assumption that netbooks are going to replace the main computer. They're not. They are better suited as auxiliary computers, and as the iPhone has proven, your auxiliary computer doesn't have to run the same apps as your desktop.
I guess it doesn't do EVERYTHING the Intel Atom does.
I think you've got that backwards. This chip has one sublime feature that the Atom lacks...
Dunno why the other comment got modded as a troll; most companies will happily refund you the cost of Windows; it's been documented many times.
Where to even start?
most companies
Not even remotely true.
will happily
"Happily" is a somewhat meaningless term here. Let's assume you mean this as a synonym for "readily and easily". Not true. Can you point me to the web form or phone number or even postal address where I request my refund from any major PC maker?
it's been documented many times
This is extremely misleading. It's been documented many times because each time it happens, it took tenacity and is not the normal outcome. Sort of like how natural cancer remission has been documented many times.
What it doesn't mean is that it happens so much, it's normal and simple. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Unless, like I mentioned, you could provide the requisite contact info for the refund? A web form seems like the most obvious choice for a company that will do this "happily" and does it so routinely that "it's been documented many times".
Great! You go ahead and be an early adopter, suffer through first gen/beta headaches, buggy drivers, random system crashes.
I think you're operating on a flawed assumption. These systems won't be running Windows.
While that may be true for...say a geek with IT experience, you really have to think like Joe and Sally average. You know what my customers call Netbooks? They call them "baby laptops" which is VERY important. You see they expect their "baby laptops" to be able to do most of the things a big laptop would, only slower...well because they are babies and babies are little.
Except they suck as "baby laptops". Trying to run a netbook the same way you run your desktop (let's be fair, laptops are already "baby desktops"), is doomed to frustration. Just as using a netbook as a primary computer is misguided (sometimes circumstances require it, but a netbook is, at best, a temporary hold-me-over until you can replace it with a real computer).
Netbooks should really be seen as auxiliary computers, like the iPhone. Windows is a poor fit for netbooks, but probably the best there is at the moment. Linux, especially Android, has a lot of potential, but has yet to convert that potential into something useful and usable.
For a netbook as a "baby PC", Intel and Windows is pretty much a requirement. But for a netbook as a netbook, ARM is *much* better suited for this than Intel is. It's just lacking the proper OS (which, unfortunately, is the hardest part to get right).
Trying to switch folks over to X86 Linux is one thing, where you can at least give them Crossover Office which will help cover the "must haves" but with ARM you are expecting the user to not only throw away everything they know, but every program that they like. And whether Joe and Sally will go for that is a BIG if my friend.
Switching people to Linux on a netbook implies they are replacing or foregoing have a full-sized system (desktop or notebook).
The GMA 950 found in Atom systems is capable of outputting at 1080p60, and with a hardware decoder, can play HD H.264/VC1/MPEG2 content (such as Blu-ray). Broadcom makes such a decoder in PCI Express Mini Card form.
The GMA950, and the associated chipset to go with it, found in atom systems is capable of using up significantly more power than the Atom processor itself. Adding in yet another chip is not the answer.
Ever wonder why there aren't any Atom smartphones, but tons of ARM based ones? As a platform, Atom is pretty crappy. It just happens to have the best mix of performance, low cost, and low power, while still being able to run Windows.
The Cortex A9 looks very promising, and may trounce the Atom in all ways, except being able to run Windows (which, depending on your point of view, may not be a negative).
Atom + Ion looks like a good combination for those who must have Windows, but the new ARMs look like a more perfect fit for the netbook hardware itself.