Uhhhhmmmm, why do you need a super duper CPU to run DX10? That is the job of the GPU. Trying to improve your video with a CPU upgrade is a lost cause. If you're using onboard video that uses shared system memory, you never see video performance.
Simply put, DirectX is a Windows technology that enables higher performance in graphics and sound when you're playing games or watching video on your PC.
At the core of DirectX are its application programming interfaces, or APIs. The APIs act as a kind of bridge for the hardware and the software to "talk" to each other. The DirectX APIs gives multimedia applications access to the advanced features of high-performance hardware such as three-dimensional (3-D) graphics acceleration chips and sound cards. They control low-level functions, including two-dimensional (2-D) graphics acceleration; support for input devices such as joysticks, keyboards, and mice; and control of sound mixing and sound output.
Because of DirectX, what you experience with your computer is better 3-D graphics and immersive music and audio effects.
Phhhttt. I'm afraid that you miss the target with that one. First, I have built almost every computer I've ever owned, then installed Linux myself. My computers are guaranteed to work, or the guy who built them fixes them free. Can't beat a deal like that, huh?
Support Linux? Well, I've built 3 computers to date, with Linux installed, and GIVEN them to people who couldn't afford to purchase a computer. I've assisted 4 other people to install Linux on their home computers, and given limited support to them, to get them up and running. Proseletyzing and free limited support has netted a number of other people into switching.
No one gave me a ready made machine, nor do I need one, and at this point in time, I'm not even sure that I want one for myself. (I can build a better machine than almost any OEM offers, for about 1/2 to 2/3 the money.)
The thing is, there ARE people out there who would choose Linux, if it were readily available. Precious few of those people are going to spend hours, days, or weeks trying to find a vendor and the support necessary to get them over the initial learning curve. They aren't going to drive 100 miles or more just to scope out a shop they heard of, nor do they want to send $300 to a man they've never met, and have no references for.
Those people deserve the availability of a good solid machine that will work with Linux. That really isn't asking for very much - just the availability. Dell sells solid hardware that works with Linux. All they need to do is put a freaking button on their main web page, making it easy for the odd wannabe-geek to find what he needs. It's a win-win thing - just a few pixels showing a link to their linux-compatible hardware. Geek-boy gets what he wants, and Dell makes a couple dollars in the process.
Sarcasm noted. Dell doesn't have any No-OS computers readily available for sale, thank you very much. All of their pages advertise Microsoft operating systems. If I DIG, if I PERSIST, I can get past all of that, in the business area. Dell knows that there is a market for Linux, and they know that there is a market for No-OS machines. Why are those market areas buried deep?
The second part of your post is entirely off target. I did stipulate "reputable dealer". If no one in my county ever heard of a dealer, how can I establish their reputation? Word of mouth, almost everywhere that people are evolved enough to speak, says that Dell makes good machines, with good warranties, and that most people are happy with them. Joe Buzzard's Custom Computers on Highway 69 South? I haven't heard anything good or bad about him, because no one knows him, hence, he has no reputation.
I can repair automobiles for free, in my spare time, for freinds and neighbors. If some creep comes into my shop, and threatens to beat the shit out of me unless I repair his broken down junk-heap, you are suggesting that I would have no legal recourse. The fact that I have given free labor to people I know and like, means I have to give the same free labor to some arrogant bully.
It's possible that we didn't read the same article. I guess it's just as likely that English isn't your first language. In the article posted at the top of this page, the links lead to other articles which clearly state that there was a suit filed against Microsoft. MS didn't just discover that they had inadvertantly used GPL code, and decide that the right thing to do was release their work under the GPL. There wasn't a choice of contacting the copyright owner, or trying to cover it up. The choices were, comply with the copyright, or go to court.
Compliance was cheaper than sending their law team down to some court house to haggle over the GPL.
Sounds good in theory. The fact is, Microsoft had OEM's locked down for years, and SOP isn't going to change until someone stirs the policy makers up.
If I want a Peterbilt with no engine in it, Peterbilt will build it and sell it to me. If I want a laptop with no OS in it, just how many reputable companies are willing to sell it to me? Why should I be forced to deal with a company that no one in my county has ever HEARD OF, to get what I want?
OEM's and resellers need to get with the program. There are more and more people wanting choices in their purchases, and if it takes a few court cases for people to get what they want, then so be it. None of us ever saw or voted on a referendum to pay a Microsoft tax.
Maybe we can clarify something here - maybe for you, maybe for me.
GPL has little concern for a corporation that downloads and uses GPL'd code. That corporation can use, modify, and use GPL'd material for eternity, and no one will care in the least. So long as this code stays inhouse, it is the property of that corporation, more so than if they had "licensed" similar software from Microsoft.
Only if and when that corporation releases their code to the public, and/or attempts to sell that code, does the GPL kick in. The moment that program crosses the line from their private inhouse servers out into "public" areas, THEN the GPL kicks in, meaning that they must document where the original code came from, who authored it, and what changes they have made to it.
The idea that enterprise operations somehow become liable for USING GPL'd products seems to me patently ridiculous. FUD, plain and simple.
If I am wrong, I certainly wish that someone would correct me, and spell out in detail what I'm missing.
Uhhh, I think the GPL was meant to BE viral. It just keeps spreading, and inoculations don't do anything to stop it. It is about as viral as copyright and patent abuse, I would say. The day that the GPL and it's mutant strains become the dominant license virus on this planet, I'll do a few "Hail Mary" and sing "Hallelujah", and I'm not even Catholic!!
Especially at Christmas time, there are often charitable organizations set up near Wal-Mart entrances, and other shopping centers. So, I go in, and shoplift a bunch of stuff, but the manager is eyeballing me. As I exit, he follows me to the parking lot. Solution? I throw all the shoplifted stuff into Santa's collection box!!! Everyone will see me as a HERO because I donated so much stuff to the needy!! There's really no need to mention that all the stuff I donated was stolen, LMAO
I think that the GP was trying to point out that when the authorities do make major busts, there is almost always someone who is powerful and influential involved. Mayors, governors, chiefs of police, members of parliament, congressmen, etc.
He may or may not be aware that possession of a personally owned computer puts him into the wealthiest 10% of the world's population, by definition.
Agreed. There are a number of applications designed to anoynymize your traffic before and/or as it leaves your own machine. I trust that a lot more than I trust anyone to protect my anonymity. The lackwitted "h4x0r" who broke into Palin's email trusted the "anonymous proxy" that he went through, and THAT bastard cooperated with the Feds. WTF was he keeping logs for, anyway? Without logs, the Feds couldn't have got a thing!! Stealthnet, Freenet, TOR, I2P and the rest of the darkweb apps may be slow, but the government isn't going to trace you without a LOT of coordinated effort. Trust The Pirate Bay? Phhhht. Those guys have balls, and have already stood up to a lot of pressure, but if they don't HAVE my IP address, they can never give it away.
People make this shit up at the drop of a dime. This is NT 6.1, simple as that. The "Windows 7" tag is meaningless bullshit, that bears no relation whatsoever to the NT version. The Windows version naming scheme had a little bit of meaning, up through NT4.x and Win98. Starting with Windows 2000 and WinME, Microsoft broke the naming scheme, intentionally, to confuse the public.
Trying to make up reasons for a new bogus naming scheme is only going to make people look stupid.
But, the EULA looks as legitimate as anything Microsoft or Adobe asks you to "sign", or accept. begin sarcasm: IMO, that makes it legal, doesn't it? end sarcasm
I'd put this asshole on ignore, but AC actually makes some good posts now and then. Which asshole is which? Slashdot should enable us to put people on ignore based on IP address rather than nick. Hmmm, how would that work? Hmmm..........
LOL, I'm not offended. If you wish to know more about me in particular, just google my nick. A lot of my political views are stated at mauisun.org/vbb - free registration required to get to the forums. We don't very much like spambots and trolls over there.
As for the majority of Americans being ethnocentric - I have to admit you are pretty much on target.
GP errs, slightly, in that I make little effort to be "sensitive". Instead, I try to see the big picture, and I know that the US is only a small part of the world in respects to area, population, and wealth. We are also a small part of the world's power, and we seem to be shrinking in that respect.
Ehhh. As I say, visit the forum, and just hit the news section - I always add commentary.;-)
People who are downloading Adobe deserve what they get. There are PDF readers on the net that download in 1/10th the time, use less than 1/10th of the resources, run faster, with more features, and WITHOUT the vulnerabilities. Most are free for personal use, most have features that can be unlocked by upgrading, and even the upgraded version can be had for "free" through the advertising schemes. If all a person ever needs to do is read a document published on the web, he doesn't even NEED any features.
It's been years since I installed Acrobat or Adobe reader, and I'll never install it again.
I'm not sure I follow your meaning. I pointed out specifically that converters are required in the US, because it is my understanding that they aren't required worldwide.
As for "matters" - well, laws passed in Afghanistan and Zimbabwe aren't likely to affect me, so I don't pay them any mind. Laws passed in the US are likely to affect me, so I pay attention. Is that somehow wrong, or even evil?
I guess the key phrase in your post might be "seem to assume". Maybe your perspective is skewed.
You may be right, in that a spark makes a better ignition source. But, do we KNOW that, or do we just assume so? I won't argue the point, but I will point to explosives, and note that a spark is often not the best source of ignition. Naval guns use electricity to detonate primers. C4 and other explosives use a carefully controlled combination of pressure and temperature. In fact, those explosives can be set alight, and used to cook dinner, because the spark isn't what detonates them.
Gasoline? Internal combustion engines? They are terribly wasteful of both fuel, and energy. Even a very efficient gas burning engine pumps fuel out the tail pipe, which is the reason catalytic converters are required on vehicles in the US. If a laser can set off a more thorough, more efficient ignition, that burns ALL of the gasoline in the cylinder, fuel mileage will increase, for certain. Polluting emissions will probably be reduced. Is it worth the cost? Only time will tell.
And, THAT is the reason for research. Very few people will purchase these things if they add $10,000 to the cost of a vehicle - but if the cost is brought down to $50 per cylinder, they never have to be replaced, AND they increase fuel mileage even a little bit, people will buy them.
Let them research. If/when they have a product ready for market, I'll probably test it.
Good going, dude. Please, point us at your published works on philosophy. Seems to me that OUR WAY is as broken as Asia's way, maybe worse.
Remember the financial meltdown on Wall Street, recently? There should have been hundreds of bodies hitting the sidewalk. Not for their own lost fortunes, but for the billions and billions of dollars lost that WEREN'T THEIR'S to lose.
Parent is modded down as flamebait. He makes a damned good point, but it probably offends people who are very much like the protohuman who lost the prototype. The cretin decided that HIS OWN LIFE was worth less than a stupid telephone. Who are we to argue with him? As if it would do any good after the fact.
Darwin award, for certain.
Me? I could lose a whole frigging TRUCKLOAD of prototypes off of a bridge, and I wouldn't risk MY LIFE to go save them. Why? I'm not a test human, I'm for real.
Mod parent up, FFS. No-brain no-life candy asses took offense, where he meant none.
Because I hate writing laws for everything from wiping your butt, to picking your nose in public, to how you can speak to your child, I tend to agree with your attitude. However, I was one of the first to agree when Florida became the first state to pass meaningful drunk driving laws. True, the laws have been carried to far in many cases, and "zero tolerance" becomes just idiocy by elected officials who have to "posture" to stay in office. Yes, most adult men CAN drive safely after consuming a drink or two, but today's laws don't recognize that fact.
All the same, it begins to seem to me that cell phone (among other distracting activities) needs to be addressed. How, exactly? A law? How about technologically? Some contact with the outside world is reasonable, as you try to point out. Number one, all phone usage should be Voice Activated - no driver should EVER be fumbling for buttons. Even at cruise speed on the interstate, it only takes a heartbeat to find yourself in a situation that you CANNOT get out of, so you should be able to say "PHONE wife" or "TEXT boss", and the phone does all the work. That is a huge start - but even that doesn't address the "emotional involvement". I got involved in a phone call, years ago, when my boss called me. I couldn't put him off, I couldn't find a place to park, and his demands took more and more of my attention. Suddenly, I realized that I was in the neighboring state, and that I couldn't recall anything from the last ten minutes of driving. A busload of kids could have rolled over in front of me, and I'd probably have plowed into them.
Phones and driving are just as bad a combination as alcohol and driving, believe me. They can be mixed in moderation, but few people have any idea what their real limits are.
People from slashdotters, to bloggers, to self appointed tech reviewers, to wall street lackwits try to read drama into everything that happens in the computing world. A new Firefox is the IE Killer, Chrome was the FF and IE killer, Android was the iPhone killer, etc ad nauseum. It's almost as if people DEMAND that one killer OS, and a handful of killer apps rule the world. God help us if that ever does happen. It would be pure hell trying to be "different". It would be like - like - well - it would be like loving Linux in a Microsoft world!!!
No, I don't think that Canonical released the source code for PPA in response to Google's new operating system. In fact, if you think about it, they have just GIVEN Google a somewhat tested means to release their OS and updates. I mean, it's OPEN SOURCE - even Microsoft can take it and use it! (Hole shit, what an idea!!! What if Microsoft picks up on it, and gives people a decent update system? The world might actually change for the better!)
I don't understand why people have to move. PPA isn't exclusive of Subversion, or any other system, is it? I have some PPA's on my systems, some Subs, I mostly use Synaptic for over all management, but sometimes I find myself going CLI with apt-get - especially when dependencies just won't "resolve themselves". If/when PPA can do everything a person might want to do, then a lot of people probably will move. But, I don't see this happening soon, nor do I see it being a unanimous mass movement. Maybe among the primary Ubuntu audience, that being the unsophisticated, and migrants coming over from Windows, yes, but there are a lot of other people who use Ubuntu derivatives who may or may not adopt PPA.
Slashdot Mirror
Uhhhhmmmm, why do you need a super duper CPU to run DX10? That is the job of the GPU. Trying to improve your video with a CPU upgrade is a lost cause. If you're using onboard video that uses shared system memory, you never see video performance.
http://www.microsoft.com/games/en-US/AboutGFW/Pages/DirectX10-a.aspx
Simply put, DirectX is a Windows technology that enables higher performance in graphics and sound when you're playing games or watching video on your PC.
At the core of DirectX are its application programming interfaces, or APIs. The APIs act as a kind of bridge for the hardware and the software to "talk" to each other. The DirectX APIs gives multimedia applications access to the advanced features of high-performance hardware such as three-dimensional (3-D) graphics acceleration chips and sound cards. They control low-level functions, including two-dimensional (2-D) graphics acceleration; support for input devices such as joysticks, keyboards, and mice; and control of sound mixing and sound output.
Because of DirectX, what you experience with your computer is better 3-D graphics and immersive music and audio effects.
Phhhttt. I'm afraid that you miss the target with that one. First, I have built almost every computer I've ever owned, then installed Linux myself. My computers are guaranteed to work, or the guy who built them fixes them free. Can't beat a deal like that, huh?
Support Linux? Well, I've built 3 computers to date, with Linux installed, and GIVEN them to people who couldn't afford to purchase a computer. I've assisted 4 other people to install Linux on their home computers, and given limited support to them, to get them up and running. Proseletyzing and free limited support has netted a number of other people into switching.
No one gave me a ready made machine, nor do I need one, and at this point in time, I'm not even sure that I want one for myself. (I can build a better machine than almost any OEM offers, for about 1/2 to 2/3 the money.)
The thing is, there ARE people out there who would choose Linux, if it were readily available. Precious few of those people are going to spend hours, days, or weeks trying to find a vendor and the support necessary to get them over the initial learning curve. They aren't going to drive 100 miles or more just to scope out a shop they heard of, nor do they want to send $300 to a man they've never met, and have no references for.
Those people deserve the availability of a good solid machine that will work with Linux. That really isn't asking for very much - just the availability. Dell sells solid hardware that works with Linux. All they need to do is put a freaking button on their main web page, making it easy for the odd wannabe-geek to find what he needs. It's a win-win thing - just a few pixels showing a link to their linux-compatible hardware. Geek-boy gets what he wants, and Dell makes a couple dollars in the process.
Sarcasm noted. Dell doesn't have any No-OS computers readily available for sale, thank you very much. All of their pages advertise Microsoft operating systems. If I DIG, if I PERSIST, I can get past all of that, in the business area. Dell knows that there is a market for Linux, and they know that there is a market for No-OS machines. Why are those market areas buried deep?
http://search.dell.com/results.aspx?s=gen&c=us&l=en&cs=&k=no+os&cat=all&ref=ac
The second part of your post is entirely off target. I did stipulate "reputable dealer". If no one in my county ever heard of a dealer, how can I establish their reputation? Word of mouth, almost everywhere that people are evolved enough to speak, says that Dell makes good machines, with good warranties, and that most people are happy with them. Joe Buzzard's Custom Computers on Highway 69 South? I haven't heard anything good or bad about him, because no one knows him, hence, he has no reputation.
I can repair automobiles for free, in my spare time, for freinds and neighbors. If some creep comes into my shop, and threatens to beat the shit out of me unless I repair his broken down junk-heap, you are suggesting that I would have no legal recourse. The fact that I have given free labor to people I know and like, means I have to give the same free labor to some arrogant bully.
Makes sense to me - NOT.
It's possible that we didn't read the same article. I guess it's just as likely that English isn't your first language. In the article posted at the top of this page, the links lead to other articles which clearly state that there was a suit filed against Microsoft. MS didn't just discover that they had inadvertantly used GPL code, and decide that the right thing to do was release their work under the GPL. There wasn't a choice of contacting the copyright owner, or trying to cover it up. The choices were, comply with the copyright, or go to court.
Compliance was cheaper than sending their law team down to some court house to haggle over the GPL.
Mucking phoron.
Sounds good in theory. The fact is, Microsoft had OEM's locked down for years, and SOP isn't going to change until someone stirs the policy makers up.
If I want a Peterbilt with no engine in it, Peterbilt will build it and sell it to me. If I want a laptop with no OS in it, just how many reputable companies are willing to sell it to me? Why should I be forced to deal with a company that no one in my county has ever HEARD OF, to get what I want?
OEM's and resellers need to get with the program. There are more and more people wanting choices in their purchases, and if it takes a few court cases for people to get what they want, then so be it. None of us ever saw or voted on a referendum to pay a Microsoft tax.
Maybe we can clarify something here - maybe for you, maybe for me.
GPL has little concern for a corporation that downloads and uses GPL'd code. That corporation can use, modify, and use GPL'd material for eternity, and no one will care in the least. So long as this code stays inhouse, it is the property of that corporation, more so than if they had "licensed" similar software from Microsoft.
Only if and when that corporation releases their code to the public, and/or attempts to sell that code, does the GPL kick in. The moment that program crosses the line from their private inhouse servers out into "public" areas, THEN the GPL kicks in, meaning that they must document where the original code came from, who authored it, and what changes they have made to it.
The idea that enterprise operations somehow become liable for USING GPL'd products seems to me patently ridiculous. FUD, plain and simple.
If I am wrong, I certainly wish that someone would correct me, and spell out in detail what I'm missing.
Uhhh, I think the GPL was meant to BE viral. It just keeps spreading, and inoculations don't do anything to stop it. It is about as viral as copyright and patent abuse, I would say. The day that the GPL and it's mutant strains become the dominant license virus on this planet, I'll do a few "Hail Mary" and sing "Hallelujah", and I'm not even Catholic!!
Especially at Christmas time, there are often charitable organizations set up near Wal-Mart entrances, and other shopping centers. So, I go in, and shoplift a bunch of stuff, but the manager is eyeballing me. As I exit, he follows me to the parking lot. Solution? I throw all the shoplifted stuff into Santa's collection box!!! Everyone will see me as a HERO because I donated so much stuff to the needy!! There's really no need to mention that all the stuff I donated was stolen, LMAO
I think that the GP was trying to point out that when the authorities do make major busts, there is almost always someone who is powerful and influential involved. Mayors, governors, chiefs of police, members of parliament, congressmen, etc.
He may or may not be aware that possession of a personally owned computer puts him into the wealthiest 10% of the world's population, by definition.
Agreed. There are a number of applications designed to anoynymize your traffic before and/or as it leaves your own machine. I trust that a lot more than I trust anyone to protect my anonymity. The lackwitted "h4x0r" who broke into Palin's email trusted the "anonymous proxy" that he went through, and THAT bastard cooperated with the Feds. WTF was he keeping logs for, anyway? Without logs, the Feds couldn't have got a thing!! Stealthnet, Freenet, TOR, I2P and the rest of the darkweb apps may be slow, but the government isn't going to trace you without a LOT of coordinated effort. Trust The Pirate Bay? Phhhht. Those guys have balls, and have already stood up to a lot of pressure, but if they don't HAVE my IP address, they can never give it away.
People make this shit up at the drop of a dime. This is NT 6.1, simple as that. The "Windows 7" tag is meaningless bullshit, that bears no relation whatsoever to the NT version. The Windows version naming scheme had a little bit of meaning, up through NT4.x and Win98. Starting with Windows 2000 and WinME, Microsoft broke the naming scheme, intentionally, to confuse the public.
Trying to make up reasons for a new bogus naming scheme is only going to make people look stupid.
But, the EULA looks as legitimate as anything Microsoft or Adobe asks you to "sign", or accept. begin sarcasm: IMO, that makes it legal, doesn't it? end sarcasm
I'd put this asshole on ignore, but AC actually makes some good posts now and then. Which asshole is which? Slashdot should enable us to put people on ignore based on IP address rather than nick. Hmmm, how would that work? Hmmm..........
LOL, I'm not offended. If you wish to know more about me in particular, just google my nick. A lot of my political views are stated at mauisun.org/vbb - free registration required to get to the forums. We don't very much like spambots and trolls over there.
As for the majority of Americans being ethnocentric - I have to admit you are pretty much on target.
GP errs, slightly, in that I make little effort to be "sensitive". Instead, I try to see the big picture, and I know that the US is only a small part of the world in respects to area, population, and wealth. We are also a small part of the world's power, and we seem to be shrinking in that respect.
Ehhh. As I say, visit the forum, and just hit the news section - I always add commentary. ;-)
People who are downloading Adobe deserve what they get. There are PDF readers on the net that download in 1/10th the time, use less than 1/10th of the resources, run faster, with more features, and WITHOUT the vulnerabilities. Most are free for personal use, most have features that can be unlocked by upgrading, and even the upgraded version can be had for "free" through the advertising schemes. If all a person ever needs to do is read a document published on the web, he doesn't even NEED any features.
It's been years since I installed Acrobat or Adobe reader, and I'll never install it again.
sudo apt-get remove windows
I'm not sure I follow your meaning. I pointed out specifically that converters are required in the US, because it is my understanding that they aren't required worldwide.
As for "matters" - well, laws passed in Afghanistan and Zimbabwe aren't likely to affect me, so I don't pay them any mind. Laws passed in the US are likely to affect me, so I pay attention. Is that somehow wrong, or even evil?
I guess the key phrase in your post might be "seem to assume". Maybe your perspective is skewed.
You may be right, in that a spark makes a better ignition source. But, do we KNOW that, or do we just assume so? I won't argue the point, but I will point to explosives, and note that a spark is often not the best source of ignition. Naval guns use electricity to detonate primers. C4 and other explosives use a carefully controlled combination of pressure and temperature. In fact, those explosives can be set alight, and used to cook dinner, because the spark isn't what detonates them.
Gasoline? Internal combustion engines? They are terribly wasteful of both fuel, and energy. Even a very efficient gas burning engine pumps fuel out the tail pipe, which is the reason catalytic converters are required on vehicles in the US. If a laser can set off a more thorough, more efficient ignition, that burns ALL of the gasoline in the cylinder, fuel mileage will increase, for certain. Polluting emissions will probably be reduced. Is it worth the cost? Only time will tell.
And, THAT is the reason for research. Very few people will purchase these things if they add $10,000 to the cost of a vehicle - but if the cost is brought down to $50 per cylinder, they never have to be replaced, AND they increase fuel mileage even a little bit, people will buy them.
Let them research. If/when they have a product ready for market, I'll probably test it.
"current Asian cultures seems to me to be broken"
Good going, dude. Please, point us at your published works on philosophy. Seems to me that OUR WAY is as broken as Asia's way, maybe worse.
Remember the financial meltdown on Wall Street, recently? There should have been hundreds of bodies hitting the sidewalk. Not for their own lost fortunes, but for the billions and billions of dollars lost that WEREN'T THEIR'S to lose.
Buncha low lifes.....
Parent is modded down as flamebait. He makes a damned good point, but it probably offends people who are very much like the protohuman who lost the prototype. The cretin decided that HIS OWN LIFE was worth less than a stupid telephone. Who are we to argue with him? As if it would do any good after the fact.
Darwin award, for certain.
Me? I could lose a whole frigging TRUCKLOAD of prototypes off of a bridge, and I wouldn't risk MY LIFE to go save them. Why? I'm not a test human, I'm for real.
Mod parent up, FFS. No-brain no-life candy asses took offense, where he meant none.
Because I hate writing laws for everything from wiping your butt, to picking your nose in public, to how you can speak to your child, I tend to agree with your attitude. However, I was one of the first to agree when Florida became the first state to pass meaningful drunk driving laws. True, the laws have been carried to far in many cases, and "zero tolerance" becomes just idiocy by elected officials who have to "posture" to stay in office. Yes, most adult men CAN drive safely after consuming a drink or two, but today's laws don't recognize that fact.
All the same, it begins to seem to me that cell phone (among other distracting activities) needs to be addressed. How, exactly? A law? How about technologically? Some contact with the outside world is reasonable, as you try to point out. Number one, all phone usage should be Voice Activated - no driver should EVER be fumbling for buttons. Even at cruise speed on the interstate, it only takes a heartbeat to find yourself in a situation that you CANNOT get out of, so you should be able to say "PHONE wife" or "TEXT boss", and the phone does all the work. That is a huge start - but even that doesn't address the "emotional involvement". I got involved in a phone call, years ago, when my boss called me. I couldn't put him off, I couldn't find a place to park, and his demands took more and more of my attention. Suddenly, I realized that I was in the neighboring state, and that I couldn't recall anything from the last ten minutes of driving. A busload of kids could have rolled over in front of me, and I'd probably have plowed into them.
Phones and driving are just as bad a combination as alcohol and driving, believe me. They can be mixed in moderation, but few people have any idea what their real limits are.
People from slashdotters, to bloggers, to self appointed tech reviewers, to wall street lackwits try to read drama into everything that happens in the computing world. A new Firefox is the IE Killer, Chrome was the FF and IE killer, Android was the iPhone killer, etc ad nauseum. It's almost as if people DEMAND that one killer OS, and a handful of killer apps rule the world. God help us if that ever does happen. It would be pure hell trying to be "different". It would be like - like - well - it would be like loving Linux in a Microsoft world!!!
No, I don't think that Canonical released the source code for PPA in response to Google's new operating system. In fact, if you think about it, they have just GIVEN Google a somewhat tested means to release their OS and updates. I mean, it's OPEN SOURCE - even Microsoft can take it and use it! (Hole shit, what an idea!!! What if Microsoft picks up on it, and gives people a decent update system? The world might actually change for the better!)
I don't understand why people have to move. PPA isn't exclusive of Subversion, or any other system, is it? I have some PPA's on my systems, some Subs, I mostly use Synaptic for over all management, but sometimes I find myself going CLI with apt-get - especially when dependencies just won't "resolve themselves". If/when PPA can do everything a person might want to do, then a lot of people probably will move. But, I don't see this happening soon, nor do I see it being a unanimous mass movement. Maybe among the primary Ubuntu audience, that being the unsophisticated, and migrants coming over from Windows, yes, but there are a lot of other people who use Ubuntu derivatives who may or may not adopt PPA.