They already collect a LOT of hardware data via Ubuntu's ability to submit your hardware info to them.
But this info isn't sorted or organized or ANYTHING. And it really does come down to having drivers IN THE KERNEL for all of the hardware on your machine.
Mark, if you want to make it easier, chat with Mr. Dell and show him the stats for the hardware. Even paying the Windows tax may be acceptable if Dell can sell machines that have 100% Linux-friendly hardware.
Windows may very well be shitty shitty shitty, but there isn't any reason to conclude that there is actually something out there that isn't shitty shitty shitty.
Windows has a specific security model designed and implemented by Microsoft.
Microsoft's choices have been disparaged by security professionals for YEARS because they violate the BASIC rules of security.
Ubuntu follows the basic rules far better than Windows. Ubuntu is far more secure than Windows.
There are different categories of threats and each category requires different security procedures. It's not that complicated. Just because Microsoft chose "user friendly" over security does not mean that security does not exist outside of Microsoft products.
How would YOU guess that your 2.4 -> 2.6 kernel upgrade would cause PHP sessions to lock up under heavy load, when you look at the list of changes?? Answer: you wouldn't.
Actually, I can think of a dozen different ways it would.
You're talking about going from one MAJOR kernel version to a different MAJOR kernel version.
You'd deploy this on the live servers and experience mysterious downtimes all the time.
Why would you deploy a MAJOR change on production servers without massive testing?
A "service pack" would be more like lib-foo_2.1.2 going to lib-foo_2.1.3.
Which is different than going to lib-foo_2.2.0.
Which is far different from going to lib-foo_3.0.0.
Which is far different from going to kernel 2.6.x from kernel 2.4.x.
Microsoft's fondness of the MEGA patch just means too many things that can go wrong. With Debian, if I update an app or library or whatever... it pretty much stays updated. I don't have to go back and re-install the same update later.
I am very curious as to how they would pick a Linux and properly provide support for it without preventing you from being able to upgrade your kernel whenever you want or adding any of the bazillion packages out there that you want.
Pretty much the same way they provide "support" for Windows.
Take your installer disk and re-install the system and it will be back to the same way you received it. Too bad about your data.
Come on. The distributions can do better than that without even trying. Dell doesn't provide any support beyond returning your system to the configuration you received.
As for upgrading your kernel and breaking things... that would mean that the drivers in the kernel were broken... and that would be the fault of the developer who submitted the buggy patch. If anything, having a few thousand Dell boxes out there means that testing on those boxes would happen sooner and the bugs would be found BEFORE the kernel was released.
Almost every Linux distribution out there has a package management system that means that the problems Windows users have will be non-existent on Linux.
You've claimed to use Debian and Ubuntu. How easy is it to remove an application? That's how easy tech support is for Linux. On known hardware.
By offering NONE... pre-installed... but offering options on boxes so that they include only 100% Linux-friendly hardware. Which would be tested against the current kernel (and the kernel tested with would be documented).
AND NOT COSTING MORE THAN AN EQUIVALENT WINDOWS BOX.
No one who understands the technology believes that virtualization can perform all the miracles that the marketing people claim it can.
Unfortunately, management usually falls for the marketing materials while ignoring the technologists' cautions.
Remember, if they've never tried it before, you can promise them anything to make the first sale. Once you've sold it, it becomes a tech support issue.
At work there are other considerations to use. But TLS is very simple. You can send the emails in plain text... over an encrypted channel.
This is handy for me because it is far more likely that I'll have to grep through a month's worth of email looking for one message than it is that the government will have any LEGIT reason to search through the same mail.
But for just about everything you send from your personal account, spend some time and do it encrypted.
I mean, you can tell he was frustrated. He takes a bunch of shots at the people trying to help him, but still, he just seems frustrated.
It's an OS. It's not your girlfriend.
Who gives a fuck if it works or not?
There's no need to be an ass over it. It was a free download. It didn't wreck your car or give away your TV or cheat on you.
If it didn't install right, maybe you'd take some time and see if you could figure out why. If not, why would you worry about it anymore?
I had trouble with Gentoo when I first tried it. But you don't see me putting styling myself as "GentooDupe" and repeatedly posting about how Gentoo didn't work, do you? Of course I don't. That would be stupid and pathetic. Why focus your identity on an installation problem with an OS? And do so in public?
Find yourself a girlfriend and get some perspective on this.
I have software design standards Ubuntu didn't meet.
Like I said, you can make any claims you want because you're the only one with the direct experience of that. But given how you use "diagnosed" I wouldn't put much trust in the veracity of your statements.
As for the specific problem with the install, that was diagnosed too: the bootloader screwed up.
Again, your usage of "diagnosed" seems to indicate a substantial lack of knowledge.
Once that was clear, I *still* got people who claimed they ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT HELP unless I told them which version of on operating system (that was never accessed) I was using.
What was that I've been saying about the veracity of your claims?
Yes, the version of the OS is important. Following the Ubuntu installation path here... Edgy (6.10) treats SATA drives slightly differently than Feisty (7.04) does. More correctly, the kernel versions included with them are the issue. Edgy runs fine but Feisty will not install.
If you are asking a question online, and someone asks you for more information, why would you complain about providing it?
That depends upon what the problem is finally determined to be.
Since there is no way anyone else can diagnose your problem, you are free to make any claims you want to about it.
Meanwhile, your experience seems to run counter to the majority. I have installed Ubuntu on many machines without a single problem. Ubuntu does have problems installing at times, but mostly with SATA drives on specific chipsets in specific configurations.
I'm worried about the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT having this capability. The local cops are local people with local knowledge and local families.
If this is developed for use on the battlefield, it WILL be available to monitor us. Databases don't care whether it's the USofA or not. Cameras don't understand Freedom.
The only thing that would prevent it being deployed in our country is the good will and honest nature of our politicians. They'd be testing it on us before it made it to the military.
As with any project, you have to determine the specific requirements before you can even THINK of looking at vendors.
#1. Must support pop3 - will test using clients X, Y & Z.
#2. Must support imap - will test using clients X, Y & Z.
#3. Must support 1 & 2 with encryption - will test using clients X, Y & Z.
etc.
It is the requirements that make or break projects. Determine the requirements and how you'll be testing to see if those requirements will be met and THEN you can start looking at which vendors can meet those requirements (and testing to see that they actually DO meet them).
"The terrorists" aren't getting ID cards. The law-abiding citizens are. And the citizens are the ones who will pay the consequences.
Actually, most terrorists in the US have had authentic identification issued by the US government (or accepted by it).
The real terrorists will have no problem complying with this law.
Not only that, but it will be run by people. And people can be corrupted. A single ID card that is accepted as valid anywhere in the US becomes very valuable. So some low grade government paper pusher decides that he can make a bit of money on the side by approving fake requests. So the illegals in Texas are getting ID cards issued by a corrupt guy in New York.
Yeah, if you wanted to help crime NATIONWIDE, you really couldn't come up with a better plan than this.
REAL ID is a nationwide effort intended to prevent terrorism, reduce fraud, and improve the reliability and accuracy of identification documents that State governments issue.
So pointing out that the terrorists had authentic identification does contradict the premise of Real ID.
Do not confuse terrorism with identification. These cards will NOT carry the "may be a terrorist" stamp when they are issued.
How many fail in the first 6 months? 12 months? 18 months?... 60 months? That would be the info that I'd need. Where's the big failure spike? I'm going to be replacing them right before that.
Remember, Microsoft still has their desktop monopoly. That gives them the edge is "integrating" new tech.
Which is also why Microsoft cannot follow Google's lead on this. Microsoft's revenue is based upon the concept of: one user per physical box per licensed OS copy per licensed office suit copy.
Microsoft will not do anything that could harm those revenue streams.
If you can validate the hardware the "professional support" will come from the distribution.
This is Linux, not Windows. There's no need to stay with Microsoft's support methods. Either the hardware is flawed or there is something in the software that isn't right. And the people best able to address that would be the support staff at the distribution you're running.
Dell is continuing to talk with the makers of other Linux distributions about certifying the hardware for those Linux distributions, he said. "When you talk about an operating system, if Dell is going to install it and test it, it takes a lot of work" before getting it ready for the marketplace, including having training and support in place.
It's as much work as you want to make it.
The simple solution is to ship a hardware testing CD with the box and let whatever distribution provide the "support" for anyone installing it.
All Dell would have to do would be to contact Linus (who would delegate it) to check that the hardware is supported by the current kernel. Problem solved.
Novell would have each NetWare server broadcast its license on the network. If two boxes used the same license, both boxes would shut down.
And Novell tracked each license number by company. You could transfer your license to a different company by sending Novell a letter on your company's letterhead.
Microsoft couldn't distinguish between the serial number for a mouse and the serial number for NT server. Microsoft didn't keep a record of what licenses you had registered. They couldn't even tell you if you HAD registered any licenses.
So you could get one license code for NT server and install 1,000 "pirated" servers.
And Microsoft liked it like that. That gave them the edge over Novell.
Now that Microsoft's competition is practically dead, Microsoft is looking for ways to increase their revenue by making sure that every single license is paid for. Just like Novell was doing in the 90's.
Slashdot Mirror
Well DUH! Of course it is.
We have this thing called "The Internet" now which means that machines can be scanned and cracked 24/7.
Hmmm, I guess that the sales or McAfee and Norton anti-virus are not real then.
They already collect a LOT of hardware data via Ubuntu's ability to submit your hardware info to them.
But this info isn't sorted or organized or ANYTHING. And it really does come down to having drivers IN THE KERNEL for all of the hardware on your machine.
Mark, if you want to make it easier, chat with Mr. Dell and show him the stats for the hardware. Even paying the Windows tax may be acceptable if Dell can sell machines that have 100% Linux-friendly hardware.
Windows has a specific security model designed and implemented by Microsoft.
Microsoft's choices have been disparaged by security professionals for YEARS because they violate the BASIC rules of security.
Ubuntu follows the basic rules far better than Windows. Ubuntu is far more secure than Windows.
There are different categories of threats and each category requires different security procedures. It's not that complicated. Just because Microsoft chose "user friendly" over security does not mean that security does not exist outside of Microsoft products.
Actually, I can think of a dozen different ways it would.
You're talking about going from one MAJOR kernel version to a different MAJOR kernel version.
Why would you deploy a MAJOR change on production servers without massive testing?
A "service pack" would be more like lib-foo_2.1.2 going to lib-foo_2.1.3.
Which is different than going to lib-foo_2.2.0.
Which is far different from going to lib-foo_3.0.0.
Which is far different from going to kernel 2.6.x from kernel 2.4.x.
And Ubuntu.
... it pretty much stays updated. I don't have to go back and re-install the same update later.
Microsoft's fondness of the MEGA patch just means too many things that can go wrong. With Debian, if I update an app or library or whatever
Pretty much the same way they provide "support" for Windows.
Take your installer disk and re-install the system and it will be back to the same way you received it. Too bad about your data.
Come on. The distributions can do better than that without even trying. Dell doesn't provide any support beyond returning your system to the configuration you received.
As for upgrading your kernel and breaking things
Almost every Linux distribution out there has a package management system that means that the problems Windows users have will be non-existent on Linux.
You've claimed to use Debian and Ubuntu. How easy is it to remove an application? That's how easy tech support is for Linux. On known hardware.
By offering NONE ... pre-installed ... but offering options on boxes so that they include only 100% Linux-friendly hardware. Which would be tested against the current kernel (and the kernel tested with would be documented).
AND NOT COSTING MORE THAN AN EQUIVALENT WINDOWS BOX.
Box A
Windows config - $500
Linux config -
- remove modem (save $5)
- replace modem w/Linux compatible (kernel 2.6.18) (add $15)
- remove wireless card (save $10)
- replace wireless card w/Linux compatible (kernel 2.6.20) (add $25)
And so on. Support "Linux", not "Red Hat". Ship the hardware and let the buyer get support from the distribution s/he prefers.
Focus on content, not the technology, okay?
Now, decide upon what your content will be that will make it different or more useful than all the other content out there. That's hint #2.
How does this benefit the average citizen?
It won't reduce terrorist activities.
It won't reduce crime.
All it will do is make it easier for the government to find SOMETHING on you if they ever want to.
No one who understands the technology believes that virtualization can perform all the miracles that the marketing people claim it can.
Unfortunately, management usually falls for the marketing materials while ignoring the technologists' cautions.
Remember, if they've never tried it before, you can promise them anything to make the first sale. Once you've sold it, it becomes a tech support issue.
First off, just looking at your router configs should tell you what addresses are where.
Then, make sure you're using dhcp to assign the addresses.
Use nmap to check for weirdness.
At work there are other considerations to use. But TLS is very simple. You can send the emails in plain text ... over an encrypted channel.
This is handy for me because it is far more likely that I'll have to grep through a month's worth of email looking for one message than it is that the government will have any LEGIT reason to search through the same mail.
But for just about everything you send from your personal account, spend some time and do it encrypted.
It's an OS. It's not your girlfriend.
Who gives a fuck if it works or not?
There's no need to be an ass over it. It was a free download. It didn't wreck your car or give away your TV or cheat on you.
If it didn't install right, maybe you'd take some time and see if you could figure out why. If not, why would you worry about it anymore?
I had trouble with Gentoo when I first tried it. But you don't see me putting styling myself as "GentooDupe" and repeatedly posting about how Gentoo didn't work, do you? Of course I don't. That would be stupid and pathetic. Why focus your identity on an installation problem with an OS? And do so in public?
Find yourself a girlfriend and get some perspective on this.
Like I said, you can make any claims you want because you're the only one with the direct experience of that. But given how you use "diagnosed" I wouldn't put much trust in the veracity of your statements.
Again, your usage of "diagnosed" seems to indicate a substantial lack of knowledge.
What was that I've been saying about the veracity of your claims?
Yes, the version of the OS is important. Following the Ubuntu installation path here
If you are asking a question online, and someone asks you for more information, why would you complain about providing it?
That depends upon what the problem is finally determined to be.
Since there is no way anyone else can diagnose your problem, you are free to make any claims you want to about it.
Meanwhile, your experience seems to run counter to the majority. I have installed Ubuntu on many machines without a single problem. Ubuntu does have problems installing at times, but mostly with SATA drives on specific chipsets in specific configurations.
I'm worried about the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT having this capability. The local cops are local people with local knowledge and local families.
If this is developed for use on the battlefield, it WILL be available to monitor us. Databases don't care whether it's the USofA or not. Cameras don't understand Freedom.
The only thing that would prevent it being deployed in our country is the good will and honest nature of our politicians. They'd be testing it on us before it made it to the military.
As with any project, you have to determine the specific requirements before you can even THINK of looking at vendors.
#1. Must support pop3 - will test using clients X, Y & Z.
#2. Must support imap - will test using clients X, Y & Z.
#3. Must support 1 & 2 with encryption - will test using clients X, Y & Z.
etc.
It is the requirements that make or break projects. Determine the requirements and how you'll be testing to see if those requirements will be met and THEN you can start looking at which vendors can meet those requirements (and testing to see that they actually DO meet them).
Actually, most terrorists in the US have had authentic identification issued by the US government (or accepted by it).
The real terrorists will have no problem complying with this law.
Not only that, but it will be run by people. And people can be corrupted. A single ID card that is accepted as valid anywhere in the US becomes very valuable. So some low grade government paper pusher decides that he can make a bit of money on the side by approving fake requests. So the illegals in Texas are getting ID cards issued by a corrupt guy in New York.
Yeah, if you wanted to help crime NATIONWIDE, you really couldn't come up with a better plan than this.
So pointing out that the terrorists had authentic identification does contradict the premise of Real ID.
Do not confuse terrorism with identification. These cards will NOT carry the "may be a terrorist" stamp when they are issued.
Give me 6 month failure rates.
... 60 months? That would be the info that I'd need. Where's the big failure spike? I'm going to be replacing them right before that.
Start with 100 drives. Continuous usage.
How many fail in the first 6 months? 12 months? 18 months?
Various "experts" sell books and make appearances to "explain" how the "problem" was created and what we should do to "solve" the problem.
The names of these "experts" change over the years.
As do their claimed "causes" of the "problem".
But their MO is always the same.
Remember, Microsoft still has their desktop monopoly. That gives them the edge is "integrating" new tech.
Which is also why Microsoft cannot follow Google's lead on this. Microsoft's revenue is based upon the concept of:
one user
per physical box
per licensed OS copy
per licensed office suit copy.
Microsoft will not do anything that could harm those revenue streams.
If you can validate the hardware the "professional support" will come from the distribution.
This is Linux, not Windows. There's no need to stay with Microsoft's support methods. Either the hardware is flawed or there is something in the software that isn't right. And the people best able to address that would be the support staff at the distribution you're running.
It's as much work as you want to make it.
The simple solution is to ship a hardware testing CD with the box and let whatever distribution provide the "support" for anyone installing it.
All Dell would have to do would be to contact Linus (who would delegate it) to check that the hardware is supported by the current kernel. Problem solved.
Novell would have each NetWare server broadcast its license on the network. If two boxes used the same license, both boxes would shut down.
And Novell tracked each license number by company. You could transfer your license to a different company by sending Novell a letter on your company's letterhead.
Microsoft couldn't distinguish between the serial number for a mouse and the serial number for NT server. Microsoft didn't keep a record of what licenses you had registered. They couldn't even tell you if you HAD registered any licenses.
So you could get one license code for NT server and install 1,000 "pirated" servers.
And Microsoft liked it like that. That gave them the edge over Novell.
Now that Microsoft's competition is practically dead, Microsoft is looking for ways to increase their revenue by making sure that every single license is paid for. Just like Novell was doing in the 90's.