Support will cost you but that doesn't stop Linux being free. It's no more sensible to say "support costs money therefore Linux is not free!" than to complain that a free beer costs you your time to drink it.
Linux is free. Linux is free. Linux is free. I'm sorry I had to say it 3 times but it'll help you remember.
First, NTSC signals are analog, which means there is virtually infinite horizontal resolution.
Oh for fucks sake would you freaking idiots stop it with this "infinite analog" bullshit. The NTSC standard allocates 4.2Mhz of bandwidth for the colour signal which works out to 450 "pixels" of horizontal resolution.
<blatant lack of application engineering knowledge> If *everything* has to go through a tcp/ip stack before it goes to the monitor, there should at the very least be some speed improvedments.</blatant lack of application engineering knowledge>
It's not clear if you're being sarcastic or serious but you've been moderated Insightful and Interesting. So it'd be best if everybody is clear that with XFree86 your local X11 does not go through the TCP/IP stack; it goes through a UNIX socket. Pixmaps can optionally go through SHM. And if you're very lucky then your client can write directly to the hardware using DRI or DGA.
The only statistic worth debating is typing speed.
Uhhh, error rates, finger fatigue, increased or decreased risk of RSI, retraining costs, application changes, documentation changes... these are ALL statistics worth debating.
I've been working with Sun Solaris and Sun SunOne products for the past two years and I have to say I've NEVER gotten worse support from ANY company
Ahh, this should be interesting...
Example. The person maintaining our Enterprise 220R before me was vary lax about applying patches to the OS.
Hrm.
So I decided to say screw this and just procede with upgrading our SunOne Messaging server even though the OS isn't patched,
Hrm?
Then I call support to find out how I move mail and users from one box to another.
Hrm?!
We're an OpenVMS shop with a legacy app... but we chose HP-UX because we are a Digital/Compaq shop.
HRRMMM!
So let me get this straight. You start with a woefully maintained box, left behind by another administrator who didn't maintain it properly, you have zero experience with UNIX (demonstrated by your inability to move user accounts), you are in a self-confessed non-Solaris shop, you don't even have a test environment for a production system, you expect free training from the support desk to do simple tasks (rather than reading a book or doing the Solaris admin course), and then when you don't get everything your way you have a temper tantrum and migrate to... HP/UX?!?!?!?!
To see the damage that he does to himself, just look at the hideous slagging he's getting by some of the posters here.
Sure, a hideous slagging from people who write "GNU/Linux is rediculuous because Linux Torvalds wrote Linux" and often match that brilliance with "hehe, M$ is evil cos my frend says Bill Gatez sucks dick".
No wonder RMS ignores them. Find me somebody with an *intelligent* argument against RMS. I've yet to find one.
Re:Why you gottat go and do a stupid thing like th
on
SCO DOS'ed
·
· Score: 1
Sure SCO is being a prick about this law suit but to have a bunch of vengefull open source/Linux Crusaders attack thier systems just gives the whole opensource community a bad name.
Who said a bunch of "open source/Linux crusaders" are responsible? I sure as hell didn't see a thread on LK titled "SCO Attack scheduled for next Sunday".
The matrix is a great movie beacuse it is the first and only movie to really focus on the use of illusion as a tool of social control.
What a load of crap. The Matrix is a great movie because it combines sci-fi, kung-fu, explosions and babes in leather. It's essentially a live-action cyberpunk anime.
they're just as useful as 'best song ever' lists..
Well, I *do* find these lists useful. I have neither the time nor money to play every game in existence. I rely on these lists to give me an indication of which games are worth my attention.
Oh sure, there's a tiny chance that the list won't have an obscure title that I would enjoy playing. Tough. I'm not willing to rent/buy an obscure title on the off-chance it won't suck.
And yes, I have the same philosophy for music, movies and books.
The GPL isn't a Copyright type, it's an End User License Agreement. It's contract made between the End User, and the Copyright owner.
You are mistaken.
It is important to understand the distinction between *using* software and *copying* software (where "copy" is shorthand for copy, modify or distribute). Using OpenOffice to write a letter is an example of use. Selling boxed copies of OpenOffice is not an example of use.
The EULA has nothing to do with copyright. Normal copyright still applies so you still have no right to copy, modify or distribute the software. The EULA *restricts* your *use* of the software.
The GPL does not restrict your use of the software; a fact that the GPL makes painfully clear. The GPL is specifically concerned with copyright and NOTHING ELSE. The GPL *grants* you limited rights to *copy* the software.
See the difference? EULA restricts your usage. GPL does not restrict your usage. EULA does not grant you additional copying rights. The GPL does grant you additional copying rights.
I'll make this even clearer with an example. I walk into a store, I purchase RedHat, I install it at home, I run OpenOffice, I write a letter, I print that letter. Did I have to agree to the GPL at any stage? The answer is "no". I could choose to say "bah humbug" to the GPL and still print my letter.
"We're finding...cases where there is line-by-line code in the Linux kernel that is matching up to our UnixWare code," McBride said in an interview
Interesting... eh?:)
Not just interesting. It's bloody hilarious! The reasonable conclusion is not that Linux has appropriated SCO code, but rather that SCO has appropriated Linux code. This means McBride is about to demonstrate - in a court of law - that SCO violated the GPL. What a maroon!
Unless you've also got much newer graphics card, I doubt that many people would enjoy the resolution you must be at.
It runs at 1280x1024 in 24bpp. As I said, this is a Tektronix XP400, a semi-professional X-terminal. It isn't a 486 and an EGA card running XFree86.
However my intention wasn't to discuss the age of the terminal. I wanted to demonstrate that a normal GNOME desktop doesn't require considerable resources from the X server. 33Mhz CPU and 16MB RAM suffices. If your GNOME desktop is slow on a P100 then that is the fault of GNOME, not of X.
I never claimed anything like that.
Well, to be blunt, it's not at all obvious what you did claim. You compared Windows 98 and GNOME running on a Pentium 100. If you weren't talking about CPU requirements then why mention the CPU at all?
Network transparency does not slow down X locally.
Yes, it does. Marshalling and unmarshalling of the X11 request still occurs even with UNIX domain sockets as the transport. That's an obvious and easily measurable performance hit.
It's not a big hit. It's certainly not enough to warrant the unbridled (and uninformed) hatred of X11. There are other problems to consider but they're not things I strongly understand myself.
This is a possible reason why Microsoft Windows 98(tm) running on a 100mhz Pentium seems so much snappier for minor UI-interaction tasks (pulling down a menu) than a same-vintage Gnome on identical hardware.
Perhaps, but my current desktop is a Tektronix XP400 which has a 33Mhz CPU and 16MB RAM running over 10Mbps Ethernet. It is just the X server and it is perfectly acceptable for running GNOME. That's because GNOME itself runs on a Celeron-II 900 with 512MB RAM and high-speed RAID arrays in the other room.
X isn't bloated, GNOME is. The X requirements for GNOME are satisfied by my 10 year old X-terminal with less RAM than a modern video card. XFree86 isn't consuming all your RAM and CPU. My Tektronix proves this to me. Profiling can prove it to you. Though you may need some programming experience to profile XFree86 and GNOME (not trivial).
Now, that said, I don't think GNOME is all that bloated. It's certainly on par with XP for RAM and CPU requirements (or at least it is in the same ballpark). I think by next year with Moore's Law in effect this is going to be one of those irrelevant arguments.
Slashdot Mirror
I am applauding it. Why are you stereotyping "us" based on your own shallow opinions?
PS: glad I'm an individual and not part of "we".
No. Linux *is* free. It is not a myth.
Support will cost you but that doesn't stop Linux being free. It's no more sensible to say "support costs money therefore Linux is not free!" than to complain that a free beer costs you your time to drink it.
Linux is free. Linux is free. Linux is free. I'm sorry I had to say it 3 times but it'll help you remember.
Nintendo know how to make games.
Oh for fucks sake would you freaking idiots stop it with this "infinite analog" bullshit. The NTSC standard allocates 4.2Mhz of bandwidth for the colour signal which works out to 450 "pixels" of horizontal resolution.
Read this.
It's not clear if you're being sarcastic or serious but you've been moderated Insightful and Interesting. So it'd be best if everybody is clear that with XFree86 your local X11 does not go through the TCP/IP stack; it goes through a UNIX socket. Pixmaps can optionally go through SHM. And if you're very lucky then your client can write directly to the hardware using DRI or DGA.
Uhhh, error rates, finger fatigue, increased or decreased risk of RSI, retraining costs, application changes, documentation changes... these are ALL statistics worth debating.
Ahh, this should be interesting...
Hrm.
Hrm?
Hrm?!
HRRMMM!
So let me get this straight. You start with a woefully maintained box, left behind by another administrator who didn't maintain it properly, you have zero experience with UNIX (demonstrated by your inability to move user accounts), you are in a self-confessed non-Solaris shop, you don't even have a test environment for a production system, you expect free training from the support desk to do simple tasks (rather than reading a book or doing the Solaris admin course), and then when you don't get everything your way you have a temper tantrum and migrate to... HP/UX?!?!?!?!
You're a freaking idiot.
Wrote most of it.
He didn't. Do you even know what "GNU" is?
Sure, a hideous slagging from people who write "GNU/Linux is rediculuous because Linux Torvalds wrote Linux" and often match that brilliance with "hehe, M$ is evil cos my frend says Bill Gatez sucks dick".
No wonder RMS ignores them. Find me somebody with an *intelligent* argument against RMS. I've yet to find one.
Who said a bunch of "open source/Linux crusaders" are responsible? I sure as hell didn't see a thread on LK titled "SCO Attack scheduled for next Sunday".
What a load of crap. The Matrix is a great movie because it combines sci-fi, kung-fu, explosions and babes in leather. It's essentially a live-action cyberpunk anime.
X is already part of the GNU system. You have read the GNU project announcement, right?
And GNU software accounts for about a quarter of modern GNU/Linux systems, not 90%.
And there is no "e" in ridiculous.
RMS calls the kernel "Linux" as well.
The rest of your post is just as confused.
Well, I *do* find these lists useful. I have neither the time nor money to play every game in existence. I rely on these lists to give me an indication of which games are worth my attention.
Oh sure, there's a tiny chance that the list won't have an obscure title that I would enjoy playing. Tough. I'm not willing to rent/buy an obscure title on the off-chance it won't suck.
And yes, I have the same philosophy for music, movies and books.
You are mistaken.
It is important to understand the distinction between *using* software and *copying* software (where "copy" is shorthand for copy, modify or distribute). Using OpenOffice to write a letter is an example of use. Selling boxed copies of OpenOffice is not an example of use.
The EULA has nothing to do with copyright. Normal copyright still applies so you still have no right to copy, modify or distribute the software. The EULA *restricts* your *use* of the software.
The GPL does not restrict your use of the software; a fact that the GPL makes painfully clear. The GPL is specifically concerned with copyright and NOTHING ELSE. The GPL *grants* you limited rights to *copy* the software.
See the difference? EULA restricts your usage. GPL does not restrict your usage. EULA does not grant you additional copying rights. The GPL does grant you additional copying rights.
I'll make this even clearer with an example. I walk into a store, I purchase RedHat, I install it at home, I run OpenOffice, I write a letter, I print that letter. Did I have to agree to the GPL at any stage? The answer is "no". I could choose to say "bah humbug" to the GPL and still print my letter.
Not just interesting. It's bloody hilarious! The reasonable conclusion is not that Linux has appropriated SCO code, but rather that SCO has appropriated Linux code. This means McBride is about to demonstrate - in a court of law - that SCO violated the GPL. What a maroon!
And who is writing Microsoft's software *cough*stacker*cough*? I think Ballmer should stop throwing stones.
It runs at 1280x1024 in 24bpp. As I said, this is a Tektronix XP400, a semi-professional X-terminal. It isn't a 486 and an EGA card running XFree86.
However my intention wasn't to discuss the age of the terminal. I wanted to demonstrate that a normal GNOME desktop doesn't require considerable resources from the X server. 33Mhz CPU and 16MB RAM suffices. If your GNOME desktop is slow on a P100 then that is the fault of GNOME, not of X.
Well, to be blunt, it's not at all obvious what you did claim. You compared Windows 98 and GNOME running on a Pentium 100. If you weren't talking about CPU requirements then why mention the CPU at all?
Strange for a self-proclaimed 8-year Linux fanatic to have missed the distinction between "free software" and "no-cost software".
Yes, OS X is more polished than Linux. So is Windows XP. But the cost of using those operating systems doesn't just affect your wallet.
Yes, it does. Marshalling and unmarshalling of the X11 request still occurs even with UNIX domain sockets as the transport. That's an obvious and easily measurable performance hit.
It's not a big hit. It's certainly not enough to warrant the unbridled (and uninformed) hatred of X11. There are other problems to consider but they're not things I strongly understand myself.
Perhaps, but my current desktop is a Tektronix XP400 which has a 33Mhz CPU and 16MB RAM running over 10Mbps Ethernet. It is just the X server and it is perfectly acceptable for running GNOME. That's because GNOME itself runs on a Celeron-II 900 with 512MB RAM and high-speed RAID arrays in the other room.
X isn't bloated, GNOME is. The X requirements for GNOME are satisfied by my 10 year old X-terminal with less RAM than a modern video card. XFree86 isn't consuming all your RAM and CPU. My Tektronix proves this to me. Profiling can prove it to you. Though you may need some programming experience to profile XFree86 and GNOME (not trivial).
Now, that said, I don't think GNOME is all that bloated. It's certainly on par with XP for RAM and CPU requirements (or at least it is in the same ballpark). I think by next year with Moore's Law in effect this is going to be one of those irrelevant arguments.
Grammar police shouldn't capitalise words following a comma. Nor should they include a redundant period at the end of a sentence.
Does there have to be an election before you can have a presidence?
You are potentially the stupidest person on Slashdot.