Well it certainly seems that Doctor Who is still popular. Not only is it being published on the web but the BBC releases an old episode on DVD every 3 months, has fequent VHS releases, comes up with two new novels every month and has licensed Big Finish to produce audio plays on CD in to the second half of this decade.
It's a wonder that with all this interest nobody is filming new episodes for TV.
We can look forward to a new season? Amazing! Here I was thinking that all we had to look forward to was the film next summer (which doesn't resolve RD8's cliffhanger).
Microsoft have been doing their best to eliminate open source for quite some time now. The chances of them actually doing anything to forward it are eqilivent to a ski resort opening in hell!
As long as there are enough PHBs out there to buy Microsoft becuase its Microsoft then Microsoft won't see a need to become interoperable with open source.
Judging from the comments it appears a lot of people are inturpreting this as "Linus thinks we should have a pretty graphical start up with displays no information at all", this isn't so.
If you read the email linked to by the artical it is suggesting the zapping of information that does not need to be displayed at startup such as what version of an obsure driver you are using.
Linus made no mention of the pretty bootups, they are a seperate an only indirectly related item.
I seem to remember hearing about a telephone service a while back that was free but would interrupt your call every few minutes with an advert.
Services have to be paid for somehow, and if advertising is the only way then I am happy to live with it... of course if I am already paying my ISP for my email account I wouldn't be happy about this at all - but for a free extra pop account (which I can stick as my nntp return address and is mainly spam anyway) then its a great idea.
Re:OS X is Mozilla's last chance for dominance
on
Mozilla 0.9.1 Out
·
· Score: 1
There are two reasons for Internet Explorer to have taken over from Netscape on the Windows platform.
First is that IE is now bundled with Windows - and it has the Microsoft brand name.
Secondly IE has better support for Invalid HTML (and certain so called WYSISYG editors create such code) and has had continued development for standards. Netscape 4 on the other hand has been abandoned leaving the open source community to replace it while being picky about valid HTML and having poor CSS support.
Unfortunatly it appears to be available only with Microsoft Windows 2000 or Windows Millenium, and the hardware specification is limited so I can't tell if you can even install Linux on it.
Unlike the Tardis which I believe has a Linux option. The only problem with that is that I'm waiting to see if the BBC will stamp down on the name.
Re:I LIKE these updates, so there.
on
XFree 4.1.0 Out
·
· Score: 5
Well, I for one THANK Slashdot for letting me know. I like to be informed when 2.4.next is out, and the same goes for XFree86 4.next. Some people may be bugged by it, but I think Slashdot strikes a nice (if tricky) balance between overcovering software releases and keeping a large portion of their readers (Linux users) up on the latest.
You can now subscribe to projects on Freshmeat and
get an email when something new is released.
AOL has too much to lose if their software isn't pre-installed, it was their key to success in the first place.
It may have contributed to some extent, but there have been other sign up icons that are have places on the desktop too. I always attributed their success the the huge quantity of CD-ROMs and floppy disks that they distribute like wildfire. I get about three a month (from magazines and direct).
Microsoft Windows always has been, and always will be holed up in the desktop market. It's stupid for Linux to even think of competing there. Windows 2000 and Windows XP are far superior, at least on the desktop. Like many slashdotters, I work in I.T. When I need to set up a new desktop client, it typically takes 3-4 days, using Windows 2000. If I were to try and use Linux, I would have even longer, downloading the source, copying it, fiddling with unresponsive hardware and looking for drivers that usually do not work. Then I have to compile, and compile again. And what am I rewarded with? An inferior operating system, matched by shoddy programs that don't work, such as mozilla, netscape, and staroffice; all three known to be resource hogs and constantly unstable.
There are some valid comments here, but I find the time estimates to be insanely high. When I was working at my company (I'm now at university and don't have a job right now) it would take about 3 hours to set up a new NT box. We had a standard procedure and simply worked down the list ticking stages off as we went.
As for having to download the source for Linux and compile everything, that is just plain silly. First of all, even if you did compile the source seperatly for every single machine you wouldn't need to download it each time. You would stick it on a local repository (network or cd). Secondly, you could just as easily use binaries of everything.
It takes me about an hour to set up a Linux box, and three hours for a Windows box with identical hardware (mainly due to needing half a dozen extra CDs and contant reboots).
If I make 20 bucks an hour, then the extra 10 hours minimum I have to spend to get linux working in a bare sense, I've already more than doubled the price of Windows 2000, and I have a system that's stable, secure (after patches of course, and some common sense) and easily installed. It's supported on 99.999 % of the hardware out there (no alphas, but they're dead anyway)
I've already argued against your time (and therefore cost estimates) above so I won't mention it again.
Linux hardware support may not be as wide as Windows, but that just means you have to check before you buy. Even windows doesn't have fantastic hardware support, I used to be a very regular visitor to http://www.microsoft.com/hcl/ (unless that's changed in the meantime).
and I can go down to CompUSA and get spare parts any time. (What a wonderful place CompUSA is! Great prices too!)
I can't comment on CompUSA, I'm in the wrong country. But should I need hardware I can pop up to the local M-squared, Gig@byte, or a number of other local shops. I can even go to PC World if things get really desperate. If time isn't so important I can also call up Scan.co.uk or pay a visit to dabs.com and get even better value.
All my users can easily and quickly sit down to any machine and recognize it. They're not confused about some > or a bash2.04> prompt.
Linux has had graphical log in prompts available for quite some time now.
As a server, on the other hand, linux has its place. In the dumpster.
Really? Its surprisingly popular for something that should be in the dumpster.
It continues to have the same problems there that it has in the desktops. It's much easier (and requires less powerhouse machines) to run FreeBSD or OpenBSD.
Perhaps, I've only had problems trying to get FreeBSD set up (and haven't tried OpenBSD).
Linux is unrevolutionary, except in the sense that it's been popular.
Revolutionary isn't important. What is important is stability and support - and Linux has both of those.
Even Windows 2000 has been starting to increase its hold in the server farm I have. Why? Its great.
That's just one person's opinion though.
The few linux machines I've been playing with (I've got one at home that I love) do what they are supposed to do, but not as well as others. Linux is a nice mild system that's well rounded, but in each department, there are better solutions.
It all comes down to the individual, I find that for everything except games and DVD, Linux does the job the way I want it done.
Due to the arrogant 31337 linux hackers disregard for market realities Linux on the desktop has never become reality.
31337 hackers are not the driving force behind Linux. Most of the people driving it forward are actually quite sane and can use language without feeling the need to substitute numbers for letters.
Much of the developement behind Linux is along the lines of "I want it to do this so I'll make it do it." Developement of tools for the everyday user isn't driven forward so quickly, although there are efforts being made purely to make life easier for the new user as well as commercial ventures which target that market.
These are failing as part of the slow down of the entire tech industry, not becuase they are not any good.
From the cryptic command line tools like awk and sed, the smelly undisciplined communist and hippy advocates who practice various 'alternative' sexualities, through to the abysmal support for de-facto standards such as DirectX and XML, Linux is a walking disaster area as far as the non tech-savvy user is concerned. It is a Marketing man's NIGHTMARE.
I've never needed to use sed or awk, although I have dabbled with Perl and use Emacs frequently.
DirectX is not a defacto standard, its a Windows API. XML is not a defacto standard, it is an official standard, and I see less Windows implementation then Linux implementation.
As for the personal hygine and sexual prferences of some of the people behind Linux... I don't see any adverts saying "Use Windows, Bill Gates uses soap and is straight!".
Slashdot Mirror
It should be on Sky One early in the new year.
They travel in ships though (maybe not starships, but still ships).
(BTW - watch Top Gun or Hot Shots)
It was released on DVD a month or so ago. I actually quite liked it, Eric Masters wasn't bad, the real problem was that the script wasn't up to much.
Well it certainly seems that Doctor Who is still popular. Not only is it being published on the web but the BBC releases an old episode on DVD every 3 months, has fequent VHS releases, comes up with two new novels every month and has licensed Big Finish to produce audio plays on CD in to the second half of this decade.
It's a wonder that with all this interest nobody is filming new episodes for TV.
...is the one your friend uses.
(Unless your friend is me - I wouldn't suggest anybody start with http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ !)
We can look forward to a new season? Amazing! Here I was thinking that all we had to look forward to was the film next summer (which doesn't resolve RD8's cliffhanger).
Where's the evidence then?
Microsoft have been doing their best to eliminate open source for quite some time now. The chances of them actually doing anything to forward it are eqilivent to a ski resort opening in hell!
As long as there are enough PHBs out there to buy Microsoft becuase its Microsoft then Microsoft won't see a need to become interoperable with open source.
Judging from the comments it appears a lot of people are inturpreting this as "Linus thinks we should have a pretty graphical start up with displays no information at all", this isn't so.
If you read the email linked to by the artical it is suggesting the zapping of information that does not need to be displayed at startup such as what version of an obsure driver you are using.
Linus made no mention of the pretty bootups, they are a seperate an only indirectly related item.
I seem to remember hearing about a telephone service a while back that was free but would interrupt your call every few minutes with an advert.
Services have to be paid for somehow, and if advertising is the only way then I am happy to live with it... of course if I am already paying my ISP for my email account I wouldn't be happy about this at all - but for a free extra pop account (which I can stick as my nntp return address and is mainly spam anyway) then its a great idea.
There are two reasons for Internet Explorer to have taken over from Netscape on the Windows platform.
First is that IE is now bundled with Windows - and it has the Microsoft brand name.
Secondly IE has better support for Invalid HTML (and certain so called WYSISYG editors create such code) and has had continued development for standards. Netscape 4 on the other hand has been abandoned leaving the open source community to replace it while being picky about valid HTML and having poor CSS support.
It may not have quite as many features as Mozilla, but it is very fast and does a VERY good job of rendering CSS and HTML.
I tend to stick to Mozilla most of the time though.
http://www.mozilla.org/crypto-faq.html#1-5
No, it doesn't
With each release of Mozilla I have noticed that it runs faster, smoother and with fewer problems then the previous edition.
While 0.9 isn't as fast as (for example) Konq, its still respectable and I can't wait to see the improvements in 0.9.1
* VGA Embedded i810
Never heard of it so its debatable if X will support it well or not.
* Placa de Rede Embedded 10/100Mbps (RJ-45 Port);
Embedded network card? Sounds ricky.
* Placa de Som SB Compatible Embedded (Line Out, Mic In);
SB Compatable's often require custom drivers.
* Embedded Fax-Modem 56Kbps V.90 (RJ-11 Port);
Almost certainly a winmodem
Unfortunatly it appears to be available only with Microsoft Windows 2000 or Windows Millenium, and the hardware specification is limited so I can't tell if you can even install Linux on it.
Unlike the Tardis which I believe has a Linux option. The only problem with that is that I'm waiting to see if the BBC will stamp down on the name.
I dug http://www.citydesk.pt/produto_ezgo.htm out of the page source.
Got solitare ;)
http://freshmeat.net/projects/pysol/
Unless the car was stolen!