From my experience the distribution has a lot to do with how easy it is getting the X Server up and running. When I first ran slackware back in '96 it was difficult, but I eventually got it working on an STB Lightspeed 128 2.25 meg card
Well, when I ran slackware back in 95, xf86config already existed, so it was just a matter of choosing your card from the list. (of course you needed the appropriate X server installed and it wouldn't warn you if you didn't)
Some things with debian aren't that obvious though, say you just apt-get install the xserver. Ok I type startx and it flicks to X server and dies instantly. This actually happened to a friend of mine. I simple asked, do you have a window manager installed? Nope he said. He apt-get install'ed wmaker and everything was fine.
It does get easier if you read the log at/var/log/XFree86.n.log, where n is a number from 0 to 9, and I understand what you mean.
X server installation frequenly breaks the symbolic link to 'X' and that can be a bit annoying. And RPM always overwrites/usr/X11R6/bin/startx, which I have customized (I run X apps remotely) and have backed up by now.
Because I don't know of a single person first hand that has been happy with an NVidia card in X.
I know, it sucks. I have an ATI AIW 128 and I regularly play Quake 3 in Windows with it. I get about 50fps with 640x480 in very good settings. Performance under Linux blows (~35fps average, with very low frame rates when explosions arrive). The new X release makes things only 10% faster and very unstable.
But the important thing to remember is that the 3D performance issue is being dealt with as fast as possible and it's a driver issue. Linux developers aren't to blame for that.
Anyway, my point is that just because hardware is listed as "Supported" doesn't meat that the drivers are rock solid and work with every single card with that chipset.
The trick is to research before you buy something you expect to run in Linux. I'm more than satisfied with my AIW 128 because I can watch TV in Linux and 2D performance is fine. I only play quake 3 with it, so rebooting is fine as well. And yeah, it was dirt cheap:)
Another example: I bought a $15 10/100 nic, in the 2.2.x tree the thing would freeze under heavy load.
I have 2 PCI Realtek cards in this box, a RTL-8139 and a RTL-8029(AS) (100mbps and 10mbps, respectively). I do masquerading with it. I'm running the 2.4.0 test series and everything's great too. But I suppose your problem was with a specific version of the 2.2.x. I ran 2.2.x before and it was fine as well.
In any case, it's always best to look if some card is supported in Linux before buying it.
And a word to hardware developers out there: if your product doesn't have linux drivers, I don't buy it.
I wonder if you are actually writting this view of yours to the consumer. We all know that Linux is not windows or mac os, but in order to become used amoungst the consumer, it'll have to start acting like one of them, by becoming easier.
That's precisely where the flaw lies: "acting like one of them" doesn't mean "becoming easier".
The consumer should realise that the UNIX "everything is a file" philosophy must be understood. One can't just push the Windows stupidity onto the user and expect him to adjust everything he knows and understand Linux.
The article's author said "All I want is an OS that is easy to use and works the way I want it to, without my having to go under the hood all the time. The fact that I know how to edit the Windows Registry and the Macintosh extensions manager doesn't mean I like doing it."
This guy doesn't get it either. He's making this analogy between Windows' registry, MacOS' system extensions and "Linux's configuration" (is he referring to configuration files,/proc kernel parameters, daemon command line switches or to all of them?).
No consumer would ever go through the steps you did to install that mouse, I didn't have to.
I did yesterday and what I wrote was not an exaggeration.
That's a little easier to explain to someone than "Okay, now 'cd/dev/mouse', what?, no slash-dev!, what? OKay okay, type 'cd/' no, the other slash!"
It's easier yet dumber, because I put 2 different CD's in and out of my drive 2-3 times each and restarted the computer every time until the mouse worked.
The user wouldn't understand "sln/dev/input/mouse0/dev/mouse" because he/she has a Windows mind. You wouldn't have nearly as much trouble if Linux were the first OS that person actually learned to use.
Bullsh*t! No consumer cares where their/etc/X11/XF86Config file is, they just want control panels, and most don't even know where that is! Get out of your geek world with your geek OS.
So screw you guys, I'm going home!
I'm willing to give all the help in the world to someone who's interested on how to use his/her head to solve a problem. However, "the consumer" doesn't even want to learn where the control panel is YET wants me to provide FREE software and FREE tech support.
I leave the dumbasses with Microsoft and AOL. They get tons of legitimate money by selling their tech support.
This article's author had to write about something and didn't have a topic. So he decided to comment on Linux distributions and their "flaws".
So what exactly does he suggest? That we whip out "Debian Lite" and "RedHat Lite", costing $30 each? NO! The distribution's cost is for the support that comes with it, so the Lite version would cost exactly the same as the full one (not counting Enterprise licenses and the like, of course).
He claims Linux gives the user too many options. In other words, to simplify matters the "perfect" distro would give as many options to the user as MacOS or Windows does.
What these people don't usually get (and I'll be writing it in bold) is that Linux is NOT MacOS or Windows. One shouldn't expect a perfectly smooth transition because one isn't possible!
Is it so hard to understand that a perfect transition from Windows to "something else" can only be achieved if the something else is Windows itself?
The virtues of Linux come from variety and configurability. The user, no matter how much computer illiterate, must learn at least what the basic distributed programs do. The user must take a couple of hours out of his life and press '?' to read a paragraph about each RPM (or.deb or.tar.gz).
This is only my opinion, of course, but I would personally NOT make a Windows equivalent distro of Linux. Even if I or someone else did, complaints would still exist and it installation wouldn't be that much easier anyway because we're talking about a different OS.
Now take a look at these quotes from the article:
And then there's Linux--chock-full of these kinds of peccadilloes and proud of it.
It seems like he's trying to piss us all off. Linux is designed for power and flexibility. If you can't handle it, either ignore the extra features you don't understand (and Linux will still run fine) or shut up about it.
Add a peripheral (or just sneeze, for that matter) and you'll spend a good chunk of time trying to figure out how to recompile your kernel.
Yeah, right. It takes about 2 minutes to teach someone how to recompile a kernel. It's a matter of "make menuconfig; make dep; make clean; make bzImage; make modules; make modules_install" with slight variations.
Yesterday I installed an USB intellimouse in my box. I didn't have USB support, but it took about 1 minute to choose the USB+HID support in the kernel and about 2 minutes to recompile it (I didn't make clean). After that, I edited XF86Config and changed "ms" for "imps2" and changed the/dev/mouse symbolic link.
That stuff isn't intuitive, but it can be taught in a matter of a few minutes and is all over the place in HOWTO files.
And there's also KUDZU, which already setup GPM automatically for me the next time I restarted. On the near future, X will already detect USB mice easily.
Now in Windows I had to reboot, see that message that no mice were detected. Then I:
1. inserted the CD that came with the mouse.
2. inserted the Win98 CD
3. restarted
4. inserted the CD that came with the mouse. some software installed.
5. restarted
6. I saw that the software was installed but the driver wasn't, DESPITE STEP #2!
7. reinstalled the driver that supposedly was in the CD that came with the mouse.
8. restarted
9. that INF file wasn't the USB mouse driver, but didn't call any installation program either. I still haven't figured that out and don't want to.
10. inserted the Win98 CD and installed the REAL, correct driver.
11. restarted. it worked.
SEE? The Win98 setup process takes forever and what's worse: you don't know what goes on.
Even something as simple as changing the desktop resolution in X can be quite a chore, depending on the distribution.
False. The distribution has nothing to do with it. Edit/etc/X11/XF86Config and change ONE LINE, which will be a very intuitive process if you know about that file.
Let's face it, for all but hackers and pros, Linux is too much of a hassle to be of much use on the desktop.
False. You just didn't have anything to write about and spreaded anti-Linux propaganda.
Linux IS harder than Windows to use, OF COURSE. But you don't have the feeling that you're banging your head against a wall when you're installing drivers for a MOUSE!
Once users realise there's something called a "kernel" that holds drivers and there are "configuration files" which you can change with "text editors", everything's fine.
One just can't expect such a major change to be done without some effort on the user's side.
Breakthrough Brings Java(TM) Capabilities to Eight-Bit Platforms
Since when running something on an 8-bit platform a breakthrough?
I can't believe this, since every single modern, useful chip has at least 16 bit words! Come on, who's going to run Java on an 8051 processor or technological equivalent?
I once thought the word breakthrough meant an advance into the future...
I find it strange that these companies are based on the US in the first place.
Why wouldn't they move to another country where no limits to satellite image resolution exist?
My bet is that image resolution doesn't really affect their current business and they're not very open to the possibilities of higher resolution imaging.
Wouldn't it be more useful to pursue optical storage mechanisms than magnetic? Isn't information density going to be best served by three-dimensional storage?
Consider the difficulties of actually seeing through the first layer of the data-storing object. You'd actually have two-dimensional storage that's not efficient since it's folded in three dimensional space. It would be kind of like the "high-tech" alien diagrams from the movie Contact.
You have a point, of course. You could theoretically make all the layers somewhat transparent and each layer would reflect light which had only certain characteristics. (don't ask me how to do that)
Achieving the multi-layer effect with magnetic fields would be much more difficult.
Why the hell do people ALWAYS bring Java into the discussion when talking about anything that involves the word "multi-platform"?
Java is SLOW, no matter how fast you can make it run. Java is NOT AN OPTION. This discussion is NOT about Java. We've discussed Java about a million times already and I'm tired of it.
Java has its various uses and is a very good programming language IMHO, but it's not for anything huge like StarOffice or Mozilla or anything designed for intense performance like Quake.
Now to keep this on topic, I believe I'm another skeptic. I question AmigaOS's capability to run things as well as advertised on all platforms. For example, consider the efforts that Microsoft puts into DirectX. Do you seriously think that you'll have comparable performance and features on all the platforms that AmigaOS supports?
I'd also like to extend the editorial's topic. If AmigaOS is all it advertises to be, it won't only "save" Linux, but every single obsolete architecture that's used for compatibility reasons. Above all, AmigaOS may ensure a smooth transition from Windows to, say, Linux and from x86 to, say, anything else.
Would you like a list of all the logical errors in your posts first, or a list of the factual errors?
As you wish.
First, nobody made a claim of the U.S. being the world's police and maintainer of justice in the thread.
Of course not, that's offtopic. But your politicians have mentioned it throughout history COUNTLESS times. (again for emphasis: countless)
I haven't read your comment yet, but you strike me as someone informed and not at all like the flag-waiving, politician-follower American that openly proclaims that the US is the world's police.
I'm bitter, since I've heard so much BS from American sources... It's hard to cope with people who want to rewrite their pasts and worse: hide the present right as it flies past your eyes.
Second, you seem to be confusing the USSR and the Soviet Bloc with the statement "not all of the USSR actually _fought_ for the allies. Bulgaria, Hungary and Romenia fought with the Nazis".
True, the confusion is apparent, but I don't have a choice, since Bulgaria, Hungary and Romenia are (were) a part of the USSR but very anti-socialist. C'mon, man, that's not a point to struggle over.
I don't make any confusion personally, anyway, although perhaps it may have seemed so from how I wrote.
And, in actual fact, the U.S. offered Marshall Plan aid to all the Soviet-occupied countries; the USSR prohibited the occupied states from recieving such aid in order to keep out U.S. influence
The US didn't call back ships with medicine and supplies because of that.
The USSR rejected help because of their pride. You fail to mention (apart from the vague, impartial term "conditional offer") that US made DEMANDS in exchange for the goods. Very particular and unacceptable demands for a socialist government. Demands they knew the USSR would turn down.
Oh, my, it was just a "conditional offer"!
This type of policy reminds me of the inquisition. One of the methods to determine if someone was a witch/sorcerer was to tie her/him up with hands behind her/his back and feet together and thrown the person in a lake. *IF* this person didn't drown, fine, "chances were" she/he wasn't a witch. This is also involves a condition, but not a very fair one.
Third, you view U.S. interventions in South America as wrong but consider restraint in intervening in Africa also wrong?
You didn't understand my point.
US interventions in Latin America (and not just South America -- central american countries (yup, the small ones some call the "banana republics" to other less informed people who may read this) suffered extremely because of them) always had perverse economic objectives.
I asked directly why the US didn't intervene in Rwanda (as one very small example out of dozens possible) because there was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to be won out of that deal. You'd send, say, 500 soldiers armed with only average equipment and clear out the situation, but there's nothing to be gained.
Fourth, you make no allowance for the fact that humans make errors, or the fact that in imperfect situations often the best choice is merely the lesser of two evils.
Humans make errors.
American politicians consciously make morally horrendous decisions that kill hundreds of thousands of lives and leave whole countries in utter, hopeless poverty and then make sure practically their whole country's population believes that was not the "lesser of two evils", but that it was the most beautiful thing they could've done.
Lots of dirty people make conscious mistakes for personal gain, man. The worse problem is that they're usually reproached for that. In the US they aren't because the ideology works so well. All decisions that were made toward the Soviet Union and Latin America made sure your country stayed on top (by far), thus making Americans extremely happy with their government.
That's what I'm here to criticise. I hope you see my point.
The motion picture industry's effort to ban computer code that undermines the morals of its DVD encryption scheme.
Fine, but as you very well put it, subvert can also mean "overthrow completely" or "ruin". So "The motion picture industry's effort to ban computer code that ruins its DVD encryption scheme" makes sense.
DeCSS DOES destroy encryption and to make an open DVD player you must openly break encryption.
Is that so hard to understand?
sigh!
[Since we're on it, DeCSS does make piracy possible and can serve as a stimulus. There are tons of DivX movies ripped from DVD's on the internet, so let's not hide the truth.
Napster also encourage piracy.
The truth is obvious.
Now what I and most people out there defend is our rights to legitimately use the DVD's that we've bought at a normal store.
For example, some days ago I wanted to play a DVD on my [desktop] computer, but it doesn't have a DVD drive. My laptop _does_ have a DVD drive, but I just think DVDs look like crap on it. So I rip the DVD and transfer it through the network to my desktop. Is that wrong? Legally, yes, but not morally.]
heh. you meant to say "less than 280 million", didn't you?
That's the USSR's _actual_ population, dumbass.
(Russia had 147 million in 1990, for reference; the whole USSR would've had 283 million)
Right before the war the figure was about 120 million, but considering that:
1. 20 million casualties is an extremely conservative estimate (more radical estimates say 27-30 million)
2. not all of the USSR actually _fought_ for the allies. Bulgaria, Hungary and Romenia fought with the Nazis
3. not all of the USSR actually engaged in the war
I reduced the number to 80 million.
BTW we offered Marshall plan assistance to the soviet union in exchange for pulling their troops out of Berlin. They refused.
Of course they refused! The US doesn't have the divine right to boss other countries around. The US would be actually *bribing* the USSR to remove theirselves from Berlin.
Don't make the US into villains
I don't have to make the US villains. It already IS. Consider also that every single latin american country with NO EXCEPTION has had their whole political system destroyed by American interventions at least once, in most cases leading to dictatorships. This is not a lie, and not flamebait. I'm well aware that every country has issues and you can never blame one party for all the evils. These facts only happened because there was an elite siding the Americans (from the USA) in all cases.
I just dislike to hear all the BS of the US being the world's police and maintaner of justice.
If that were true, what exactly was done by your forces in Rwanda, when a dictator with probably 500 soldiers terrorized the population for years? Episodes like this one happen constantly and still the US government has the nerve to say its crap.
This only happens for two reasons:
1. other countries don't have the GUTS to tell the US to shove it, mostly because they depend on the US's economy.
2. other people don't have the guts to say the truth
3. yet other people don't want to listen because their homes and lives are just too comfortable
Don't make the US into villains here for refusing to fund the military expansion of an aggressive, oppressive political regime.
I don't disagree the regime is opressive and agressive. I don't support it.
Your argument, though, proves everything I've written in this comment: absolutely everything the US does aims for huge profit and there is no benevolence or noblility in their actions so drop the BS.
I agree. In France nuclear power is by far the largest electricity source and has good popular approval.
Because of (mostly unfounded) international pressure, the french are now changing their minds about nuclear power's safety, but it still is a country where scientists and engineers are greatly respected for their very reliable plants.
As for your comment on hydroelectric power, I disagree. Hydroelectricity can be undoubtedly the best source if relief conditions help.
Maybe we (the USA and EU) need a Marshall plan for that part of the world, selling them wind turbines and combined-cycle gas turbine generators and taking their spent fuel so we know where it's going (better here than Iraq).
Well, perhaps you should've thought of that just after World War II, when the US not only refused to include the USSR in its Marshall plan despite 20 million male casualties in a country with less than 80 million inhabitants (basically their whole male workforce) and actually called back ships that were already under way.
Magic appealed to an people of an age that should be capable of making their own choices, while Pokemon aims at little kids who are hardly capable of determining the way they're being messed around with.
The problem is I'm not used to seeing "little kids who are (...)" playing Pokemon. I see 8, 9, 10 year old kids playing it. That's probably because I'm not in the US and Pokemon was marketed differently here.
See what I worry about?
So what do you do as a parent, allow your kids to take part in the hype, or make them feel terrible for not having the same toys as the other kids?
I'd try to show my kids something that would make them think "damn, Pokemon sucks!" (not with those actual words:) and turn to another activity. That'd make _yet another outcast by choice_. Another geek. The cycle never ends.
From when I was 7 years old on I read Disney comics like crazy, and there was no way I'd change such activities to watching the Pokemon cartoon or playing the Pokemon card game. I'd play other card games and certainly other video games, but not Pokemon.
But you see, your kids are not like yourself. I don't know what would happen, since I don't have any. I won't have to worry about that in a while. Isn't unmarried life bliss? =)
I may sound like the devil's advocate for a while, so bear with me.
Very often objective and legitimate criticism (or even comparison) turns into a flame-war because other people jump to conclusions.
I blame the people who read a supposed flame for actually starting the flame war. If what the original poster said is BS, why reply in the first place?
There's a "don't feed the troll" sign, right? If you think the poster is so inflamed with passion to the point of becoming illogical, perhaps paste this paragraph as a reply.
On the other hand, what if the poster really made an objective, non-passionate declaration? In most cases this is what happen and flame wars start.
So I blame the readers, who are uninformed and don't accept new points of view other than their own.
Pray tell me, what exactly is wrong with people that used to play Magic? Aside from the fact that it swallowed all my money, of course...
Aside from the fact you blew all your money and time on a really bad game, not much.
Magic is very time consuming, like pretty much every RPG/Pseudo-RPG card game. You could've spent your time/money on something better.
My objective wasn't to offend you, though. If I did, I'm sorry. I've played magic 3 or 4 times with friends (I've never bought cards myself) and don't like it very much. I also know some people who played Magic (they've outgrown it:) and there's nothing wrong with those guys.
I worry about the Pokemon obsession, because it is... well... an obsession. Magic was never like that.
Pokemon (the gameboy game) helped my 6-year old nephew to:
You mention an exception (a 6 year old kid with ADHD playing gameboy pokemon).
Most kids who play Pokemon, (THE CARD GAME, not the Gameboy one) are older than 6 years old and don't have ADHD. At that same age I read tons Disney comic books, which are clearly much more interesting, imaginative, informative and fun.
I could be wrong, but I believe that "everything has its place" is too idealistic. Some things are just crap and don't deserve the merit that's attributed to them.
But whether they will able to bridge the generational chasm that separated them from their elders, whether they apply their strategic thinking, creativity and problem-solving skills to our broken educational and political systems -- it's too soon to say.
You can say that again. What will become of the Pokemon generation? Kids that were brought up playing probably the stupidest card games around, dealing with even less strategy than "Magic: the Gathering" players did a short time before them.
It's interesting to see that while thinking/feeling games like Metal Gear Solid 2, Deus Ex, System Shock 2 are released and become quite successful (with the exception, alas, of Looking Glass Studios), we have another contemporary generation obsessed with the dumbest game ever.
With at least 6 very good, stable window managers and hundreds of high quality themes, I really don't care.
Apple has the right to protect its creation, I believe, even if it's not a logo or a phrase. They've chosen to do it, and why would you blame them? It's not like they're protecting their ownership of the "blue" color.
You can still get the themes somewhere else. No one can keep data completely out of the internet, no matter how forbidden it is.
Just the inertia from its predecessor will make it sell well. That, added to the fact the game will be excellent shall probably make a winner out of MGS2.
I'm also a Looking Glass Studios fan, having been absolutely fascinated by System Shock I (which is IMHO, THE best game ever made).
I believe that Looking Glass' games were too modern for their time. That, coupled with very little marketing was the cause for bad sales.
The common guy usually prefers shooting at everything that moves to thinking. It's extremely fortunate that most people are getting tired of mindless shooting games, so the market for MGS grows.
Still, if you had to bet on a battle between Hideo and Carmack, I'd put my money on Hideo. He just has a lot more talent.
I wouldn't say that... Carmack's engines are technically revolutionary. Kojima is a general game designer; Carmack's an engine programmer.
Both are extraordinary programmers.
And since we're talking about creativity, let's mention American McGee. There's not much talk about Alice in Slashdot, but it seems to be a great game.
Slashdot Mirror
From my experience the distribution has a lot to do with how easy it is getting the X Server up and running. When I first ran slackware back in '96 it was difficult, but I eventually got it working on an STB Lightspeed 128 2.25 meg card
/var/log/XFree86.n.log, where n is a number from 0 to 9, and I understand what you mean.
/usr/X11R6/bin/startx, which I have customized (I run X apps remotely) and have backed up by now.
:)
Well, when I ran slackware back in 95, xf86config already existed, so it was just a matter of choosing your card from the list. (of course you needed the appropriate X server installed and it wouldn't warn you if you didn't)
Some things with debian aren't that obvious though, say you just apt-get install the xserver. Ok I type startx and it flicks to X server and dies instantly. This actually happened to a friend of mine. I simple asked, do you have a window manager installed? Nope he said. He apt-get install'ed wmaker and everything was fine.
It does get easier if you read the log at
X server installation frequenly breaks the symbolic link to 'X' and that can be a bit annoying. And RPM always overwrites
Because I don't know of a single person first hand that has been happy with an NVidia card in X.
I know, it sucks. I have an ATI AIW 128 and I regularly play Quake 3 in Windows with it. I get about 50fps with 640x480 in very good settings. Performance under Linux blows (~35fps average, with very low frame rates when explosions arrive). The new X release makes things only 10% faster and very unstable.
But the important thing to remember is that the 3D performance issue is being dealt with as fast as possible and it's a driver issue. Linux developers aren't to blame for that.
Anyway, my point is that just because hardware is listed as "Supported" doesn't meat that the drivers are rock solid and work with every single card with that chipset.
The trick is to research before you buy something you expect to run in Linux. I'm more than satisfied with my AIW 128 because I can watch TV in Linux and 2D performance is fine. I only play quake 3 with it, so rebooting is fine as well. And yeah, it was dirt cheap
Another example: I bought a $15 10/100 nic, in the 2.2.x tree the thing would freeze under heavy load.
I have 2 PCI Realtek cards in this box, a RTL-8139 and a RTL-8029(AS) (100mbps and 10mbps, respectively). I do masquerading with it. I'm running the 2.4.0 test series and everything's great too. But I suppose your problem was with a specific version of the 2.2.x. I ran 2.2.x before and it was fine as well.
In any case, it's always best to look if some card is supported in Linux before buying it.
And a word to hardware developers out there: if your product doesn't have linux drivers, I don't buy it.
Flavio
I wonder if you are actually writting this view of yours to the consumer. We all know that Linux is not windows or mac os, but in order to become used amoungst the consumer, it'll have to start acting like one of them, by becoming easier.
/proc kernel parameters, daemon command line switches or to all of them?).
/dev/mouse', what?, no slash-dev!, what? OKay okay, type 'cd /' no, the other slash!"
/dev/input/mouse0 /dev/mouse" because he/she has a Windows mind. You wouldn't have nearly as much trouble if Linux were the first OS that person actually learned to use.
/etc/X11/XF86Config file is, they just want control panels, and most don't even know where that is! Get out of your geek world with your geek OS.
That's precisely where the flaw lies: "acting like one of them" doesn't mean "becoming easier".
The consumer should realise that the UNIX "everything is a file" philosophy must be understood. One can't just push the Windows stupidity onto the user and expect him to adjust everything he knows and understand Linux.
The article's author said "All I want is an OS that is easy to use and works the way I want it to, without my having to go under the hood all the time. The fact that I know how to edit the Windows Registry and the Macintosh extensions manager doesn't mean I like doing it."
This guy doesn't get it either. He's making this analogy between Windows' registry, MacOS' system extensions and "Linux's configuration" (is he referring to configuration files,
No consumer would ever go through the steps you did to install that mouse, I didn't have to.
I did yesterday and what I wrote was not an exaggeration.
That's a little easier to explain to someone than "Okay, now 'cd
It's easier yet dumber, because I put 2 different CD's in and out of my drive 2-3 times each and restarted the computer every time until the mouse worked.
The user wouldn't understand "sln
Bullsh*t! No consumer cares where their
So screw you guys, I'm going home!
I'm willing to give all the help in the world to someone who's interested on how to use his/her head to solve a problem. However, "the consumer" doesn't even want to learn where the control panel is YET wants me to provide FREE software and FREE tech support.
I leave the dumbasses with Microsoft and AOL. They get tons of legitimate money by selling their tech support.
Flavio
This article's author had to write about something and didn't have a topic. So he decided to comment on Linux distributions and their "flaws".
.deb or .tar.gz).
/dev/mouse symbolic link.
/etc/X11/XF86Config and change ONE LINE, which will be a very intuitive process if you know about that file.
So what exactly does he suggest? That we whip out "Debian Lite" and "RedHat Lite", costing $30 each? NO! The distribution's cost is for the support that comes with it, so the Lite version would cost exactly the same as the full one (not counting Enterprise licenses and the like, of course).
He claims Linux gives the user too many options. In other words, to simplify matters the "perfect" distro would give as many options to the user as MacOS or Windows does.
What these people don't usually get (and I'll be writing it in bold) is that Linux is NOT MacOS or Windows. One shouldn't expect a perfectly smooth transition because one isn't possible!
Is it so hard to understand that a perfect transition from Windows to "something else" can only be achieved if the something else is Windows itself?
The virtues of Linux come from variety and configurability. The user, no matter how much computer illiterate, must learn at least what the basic distributed programs do. The user must take a couple of hours out of his life and press '?' to read a paragraph about each RPM (or
This is only my opinion, of course, but I would personally NOT make a Windows equivalent distro of Linux. Even if I or someone else did, complaints would still exist and it installation wouldn't be that much easier anyway because we're talking about a different OS.
Now take a look at these quotes from the article:
And then there's Linux--chock-full of these kinds of peccadilloes and proud of it.
It seems like he's trying to piss us all off. Linux is designed for power and flexibility. If you can't handle it, either ignore the extra features you don't understand (and Linux will still run fine) or shut up about it.
Add a peripheral (or just sneeze, for that matter) and you'll spend a good chunk of time trying to figure out how to recompile your kernel.
Yeah, right. It takes about 2 minutes to teach someone how to recompile a kernel. It's a matter of "make menuconfig; make dep; make clean; make bzImage; make modules; make modules_install" with slight variations.
Yesterday I installed an USB intellimouse in my box. I didn't have USB support, but it took about 1 minute to choose the USB+HID support in the kernel and about 2 minutes to recompile it (I didn't make clean). After that, I edited XF86Config and changed "ms" for "imps2" and changed the
That stuff isn't intuitive, but it can be taught in a matter of a few minutes and is all over the place in HOWTO files.
And there's also KUDZU, which already setup GPM automatically for me the next time I restarted. On the near future, X will already detect USB mice easily.
Now in Windows I had to reboot, see that message that no mice were detected. Then I:
1. inserted the CD that came with the mouse.
2. inserted the Win98 CD
3. restarted
4. inserted the CD that came with the mouse. some software installed.
5. restarted
6. I saw that the software was installed but the driver wasn't, DESPITE STEP #2!
7. reinstalled the driver that supposedly was in the CD that came with the mouse.
8. restarted
9. that INF file wasn't the USB mouse driver, but didn't call any installation program either. I still haven't figured that out and don't want to.
10. inserted the Win98 CD and installed the REAL, correct driver.
11. restarted. it worked.
SEE? The Win98 setup process takes forever and what's worse: you don't know what goes on.
Even something as simple as changing the desktop resolution in X can be quite a chore, depending on the distribution.
False. The distribution has nothing to do with it. Edit
Let's face it, for all but hackers and pros, Linux is too much of a hassle to be of much use on the desktop.
False. You just didn't have anything to write about and spreaded anti-Linux propaganda.
Linux IS harder than Windows to use, OF COURSE. But you don't have the feeling that you're banging your head against a wall when you're installing drivers for a MOUSE!
Once users realise there's something called a "kernel" that holds drivers and there are "configuration files" which you can change with "text editors", everything's fine.
One just can't expect such a major change to be done without some effort on the user's side.
Flavio
including "intelligent" pens, lighting, telephones and vehicle monitoring devices.
And PAPER CLIPS!!! NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How much longer must these demons haunt us?
Flavio
Breakthrough Brings Java(TM) Capabilities to Eight-Bit Platforms
Since when running something on an 8-bit platform a breakthrough?
I can't believe this, since every single modern, useful chip has at least 16 bit words! Come on, who's going to run Java on an 8051 processor or technological equivalent?
I once thought the word breakthrough meant an advance into the future...
Flavio
I find it strange that these companies are based on the US in the first place.
Why wouldn't they move to another country where no limits to satellite image resolution exist?
My bet is that image resolution doesn't really affect their current business and they're not very open to the possibilities of higher resolution imaging.
Flavio
Wouldn't it be more useful to pursue optical storage mechanisms than magnetic? Isn't information density going to be best served by three-dimensional storage?
Consider the difficulties of actually seeing through the first layer of the data-storing object. You'd actually have two-dimensional storage that's not efficient since it's folded in three dimensional space. It would be kind of like the "high-tech" alien diagrams from the movie Contact.
You have a point, of course. You could theoretically make all the layers somewhat transparent and each layer would reflect light which had only certain characteristics. (don't ask me how to do that)
Achieving the multi-layer effect with magnetic fields would be much more difficult.
Flavio
They killed Tux!
You bastards!
Why the hell do people ALWAYS bring Java into the discussion when talking about anything that involves the word "multi-platform"?
Java is SLOW, no matter how fast you can make it run. Java is NOT AN OPTION. This discussion is NOT about Java. We've discussed Java about a million times already and I'm tired of it.
Java has its various uses and is a very good programming language IMHO, but it's not for anything huge like StarOffice or Mozilla or anything designed for intense performance like Quake.
Now to keep this on topic, I believe I'm another skeptic. I question AmigaOS's capability to run things as well as advertised on all platforms. For example, consider the efforts that Microsoft puts into DirectX. Do you seriously think that you'll have comparable performance and features on all the platforms that AmigaOS supports?
I'd also like to extend the editorial's topic. If AmigaOS is all it advertises to be, it won't only "save" Linux, but every single obsolete architecture that's used for compatibility reasons. Above all, AmigaOS may ensure a smooth transition from Windows to, say, Linux and from x86 to, say, anything else.
Flavio
The articles say that 3dfx shareholders will either get money for their shares or have the opportunity to get common nvidia shares.
In any case, I consider the prognostic for nvidia's shares to be very good, since they shouldn't face ANY crises in the future.
This won't be a killer, 300%/year stock investment, but it should give you decent profit with little risk.
Again, I could be wrong. I don't have any money to invest on them. If I did, I would.
Flavio
If I were in the stock business, I'd get myself some 3dfx or Nvidia shares ASAP.
With only ATI as a competitor and no new, revolutionary product coming from them, what's there to prevent Nvidia from dominating the market?
Just my thoughts, anyway. I could be wrong.
Flavio
Holy shit, you're right. Believe it or not, my source *was* wrong. Thanks.
Flavio
Would you like a list of all the logical errors in your posts first, or a list of the factual errors?
As you wish.
First, nobody made a claim of the U.S. being the world's police and maintainer of justice in the thread.
Of course not, that's offtopic. But your politicians have mentioned it throughout history COUNTLESS times. (again for emphasis: countless)
I haven't read your comment yet, but you strike me as someone informed and not at all like the flag-waiving, politician-follower American that openly proclaims that the US is the world's police.
I'm bitter, since I've heard so much BS from American sources... It's hard to cope with people who want to rewrite their pasts and worse: hide the present right as it flies past your eyes.
Second, you seem to be confusing the USSR and the Soviet Bloc with the statement "not all of the USSR actually _fought_ for the allies. Bulgaria, Hungary and Romenia fought with the Nazis".
True, the confusion is apparent, but I don't have a choice, since Bulgaria, Hungary and Romenia are (were) a part of the USSR but very anti-socialist. C'mon, man, that's not a point to struggle over.
I don't make any confusion personally, anyway, although perhaps it may have seemed so from how I wrote.
And, in actual fact, the U.S. offered Marshall Plan aid to all the Soviet-occupied countries; the USSR prohibited the occupied states from recieving such aid in order to keep out U.S. influence
The US didn't call back ships with medicine and supplies because of that.
The USSR rejected help because of their pride. You fail to mention (apart from the vague, impartial term "conditional offer") that US made DEMANDS in exchange for the goods. Very particular and unacceptable demands for a socialist government. Demands they knew the USSR would turn down.
Oh, my, it was just a "conditional offer"!
This type of policy reminds me of the inquisition. One of the methods to determine if someone was a witch/sorcerer was to tie her/him up with hands behind her/his back and feet together and thrown the person in a lake. *IF* this person didn't drown, fine, "chances were" she/he wasn't a witch. This is also involves a condition, but not a very fair one.
Third, you view U.S. interventions in South America as wrong but consider restraint in intervening in Africa also wrong?
You didn't understand my point.
US interventions in Latin America (and not just South America -- central american countries (yup, the small ones some call the "banana republics" to other less informed people who may read this) suffered extremely because of them) always had perverse economic objectives.
I asked directly why the US didn't intervene in Rwanda (as one very small example out of dozens possible) because there was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to be won out of that deal. You'd send, say, 500 soldiers armed with only average equipment and clear out the situation, but there's nothing to be gained.
Fourth, you make no allowance for the fact that humans make errors, or the fact that in imperfect situations often the best choice is merely the lesser of two evils.
Humans make errors.
American politicians consciously make morally horrendous decisions that kill hundreds of thousands of lives and leave whole countries in utter, hopeless poverty and then make sure practically their whole country's population believes that was not the "lesser of two evils", but that it was the most beautiful thing they could've done.
Lots of dirty people make conscious mistakes for personal gain, man. The worse problem is that they're usually reproached for that. In the US they aren't because the ideology works so well. All decisions that were made toward the Soviet Union and Latin America made sure your country stayed on top (by far), thus making Americans extremely happy with their government.
That's what I'm here to criticise. I hope you see my point.
Flavio
The motion picture industry's effort to ban computer code that undermines the morals of its DVD encryption scheme.
Fine, but as you very well put it, subvert can also mean "overthrow completely" or "ruin". So "The motion picture industry's effort to ban computer code that ruins its DVD encryption scheme" makes sense.
DeCSS DOES destroy encryption and to make an open DVD player you must openly break encryption.
Is that so hard to understand?
sigh!
[Since we're on it, DeCSS does make piracy possible and can serve as a stimulus. There are tons of DivX movies ripped from DVD's on the internet, so let's not hide the truth.
Napster also encourage piracy.
The truth is obvious.
Now what I and most people out there defend is our rights to legitimately use the DVD's that we've bought at a normal store.
For example, some days ago I wanted to play a DVD on my [desktop] computer, but it doesn't have a DVD drive. My laptop _does_ have a DVD drive, but I just think DVDs look like crap on it. So I rip the DVD and transfer it through the network to my desktop. Is that wrong? Legally, yes, but not morally.]
Flavio
heh. you meant to say "less than 280 million", didn't you?
That's the USSR's _actual_ population, dumbass.
(Russia had 147 million in 1990, for reference; the whole USSR would've had 283 million)
Right before the war the figure was about 120 million, but considering that:
1. 20 million casualties is an extremely conservative estimate (more radical estimates say 27-30 million)
2. not all of the USSR actually _fought_ for the allies. Bulgaria, Hungary and Romenia fought with the Nazis
3. not all of the USSR actually engaged in the war
I reduced the number to 80 million.
BTW we offered Marshall plan assistance to the soviet union in exchange for pulling their troops out of Berlin. They refused.
Of course they refused! The US doesn't have the divine right to boss other countries around. The US would be actually *bribing* the USSR to remove theirselves from Berlin.
Don't make the US into villains
I don't have to make the US villains. It already IS. Consider also that every single latin american country with NO EXCEPTION has had their whole political system destroyed by American interventions at least once, in most cases leading to dictatorships. This is not a lie, and not flamebait. I'm well aware that every country has issues and you can never blame one party for all the evils. These facts only happened because there was an elite siding the Americans (from the USA) in all cases.
I just dislike to hear all the BS of the US being the world's police and maintaner of justice.
If that were true, what exactly was done by your forces in Rwanda, when a dictator with probably 500 soldiers terrorized the population for years? Episodes like this one happen constantly and still the US government has the nerve to say its crap.
This only happens for two reasons:
1. other countries don't have the GUTS to tell the US to shove it, mostly because they depend on the US's economy.
2. other people don't have the guts to say the truth
3. yet other people don't want to listen because their homes and lives are just too comfortable
Don't make the US into villains here for refusing to fund the military expansion of an aggressive, oppressive political regime.
I don't disagree the regime is opressive and agressive. I don't support it.
Your argument, though, proves everything I've written in this comment: absolutely everything the US does aims for huge profit and there is no benevolence or noblility in their actions so drop the BS.
Flavio
I agree. In France nuclear power is by far the largest electricity source and has good popular approval.
Because of (mostly unfounded) international pressure, the french are now changing their minds about nuclear power's safety, but it still is a country where scientists and engineers are greatly respected for their very reliable plants.
As for your comment on hydroelectric power, I disagree. Hydroelectricity can be undoubtedly the best source if relief conditions help.
Flavio
Maybe we (the USA and EU) need a Marshall plan for that part of the world, selling them wind turbines and combined-cycle gas turbine generators and taking their spent fuel so we know where it's going (better here than Iraq).
Well, perhaps you should've thought of that just after World War II, when the US not only refused to include the USSR in its Marshall plan despite 20 million male casualties in a country with less than 80 million inhabitants (basically their whole male workforce) and actually called back ships that were already under way.
And this isn't flamebait -- it's the raw fact.
Flavio
Magic appealed to an people of an age that should be capable of making their own choices, while Pokemon aims at little kids who are hardly capable of determining the way they're being messed around with.
:) and turn to another activity. That'd make _yet another outcast by choice_. Another geek. The cycle never ends.
The problem is I'm not used to seeing "little kids who are (...)" playing Pokemon. I see 8, 9, 10 year old kids playing it. That's probably because I'm not in the US and Pokemon was marketed differently here.
See what I worry about?
So what do you do as a parent, allow your kids to take part in the hype, or make them feel terrible for not having the same toys as the other kids?
I'd try to show my kids something that would make them think "damn, Pokemon sucks!" (not with those actual words
From when I was 7 years old on I read Disney comics like crazy, and there was no way I'd change such activities to watching the Pokemon cartoon or playing the Pokemon card game. I'd play other card games and certainly other video games, but not Pokemon.
But you see, your kids are not like yourself. I don't know what would happen, since I don't have any. I won't have to worry about that in a while. Isn't unmarried life bliss? =)
Flavio
I may sound like the devil's advocate for a while, so bear with me.
Very often objective and legitimate criticism (or even comparison) turns into a flame-war because other people jump to conclusions.
I blame the people who read a supposed flame for actually starting the flame war. If what the original poster said is BS, why reply in the first place?
There's a "don't feed the troll" sign, right? If you think the poster is so inflamed with passion to the point of becoming illogical, perhaps paste this paragraph as a reply.
On the other hand, what if the poster really made an objective, non-passionate declaration? In most cases this is what happen and flame wars start.
So I blame the readers, who are uninformed and don't accept new points of view other than their own.
Flavio
Pray tell me, what exactly is wrong with people that used to play Magic? Aside from the fact that it swallowed all my money, of course...
:) and there's nothing wrong with those guys.
Aside from the fact you blew all your money and time on a really bad game, not much.
Magic is very time consuming, like pretty much every RPG/Pseudo-RPG card game. You could've spent your time/money on something better.
My objective wasn't to offend you, though. If I did, I'm sorry. I've played magic 3 or 4 times with friends (I've never bought cards myself) and don't like it very much. I also know some people who played Magic (they've outgrown it
I worry about the Pokemon obsession, because it is... well... an obsession. Magic was never like that.
Flavio
Pokemon (the gameboy game) helped my 6-year old nephew to:
You mention an exception (a 6 year old kid with ADHD playing gameboy pokemon).
Most kids who play Pokemon, (THE CARD GAME, not the Gameboy one) are older than 6 years old and don't have ADHD. At that same age I read tons Disney comic books, which are clearly much more interesting, imaginative, informative and fun.
I could be wrong, but I believe that "everything has its place" is too idealistic. Some things are just crap and don't deserve the merit that's attributed to them.
Flavio
But whether they will able to bridge the generational chasm that separated them from their elders, whether they apply their strategic thinking, creativity and problem-solving skills to our broken educational and political systems -- it's too soon to say.
You can say that again. What will become of the Pokemon generation? Kids that were brought up playing probably the stupidest card games around, dealing with even less strategy than "Magic: the Gathering" players did a short time before them.
It's interesting to see that while thinking/feeling games like Metal Gear Solid 2, Deus Ex, System Shock 2 are released and become quite successful (with the exception, alas, of Looking Glass Studios), we have another contemporary generation obsessed with the dumbest game ever.
Flavio
With at least 6 very good, stable window managers and hundreds of high quality themes, I really don't care.
Apple has the right to protect its creation, I believe, even if it's not a logo or a phrase. They've chosen to do it, and why would you blame them? It's not like they're protecting their ownership of the "blue" color.
You can still get the themes somewhere else. No one can keep data completely out of the internet, no matter how forbidden it is.
Flavio
Just the inertia from its predecessor will make it sell well. That, added to the fact the game will be excellent shall probably make a winner out of MGS2.
I'm also a Looking Glass Studios fan, having been absolutely fascinated by System Shock I (which is IMHO, THE best game ever made).
I believe that Looking Glass' games were too modern for their time. That, coupled with very little marketing was the cause for bad sales.
The common guy usually prefers shooting at everything that moves to thinking. It's extremely fortunate that most people are getting tired of mindless shooting games, so the market for MGS grows.
Flavio
Still, if you had to bet on a battle between Hideo and Carmack, I'd put my money on Hideo. He just has a lot more talent.
I wouldn't say that... Carmack's engines are technically revolutionary. Kojima is a general game designer; Carmack's an engine programmer.
Both are extraordinary programmers.
And since we're talking about creativity, let's mention American McGee. There's not much talk about Alice in Slashdot, but it seems to be a great game.
Flavio