For an old guy, you seem to be pretty blind to reality. Reality is, businesses need to deal with office documents. Reality is, businesses need to deal with hardware support for the latest hardware from Dell/HP/etc on day of release. Reality is, businesses need to be able to sync with the GM's PDA of choice. Wake me up when Linux can do any of that.
It's the only way things will be fixed. If the US borrows more, then what? Reminds me of the global warming episode of futurama "our handsomest politicians have come up with an idea: we borrow money to pay back the debt. except every time we need to borrow a little bit more. thereby solving the problem"
Exactly. I have similar, though less extensive experience with different platforms to yourself. Slackware back to 3.1, debian back to 1.2, freebsd back to 3.x, beos, amigaOS, MacOS, Windows back to 3.0 with DOS 5.0, etc.
Every OS is crap. Some are just less crap than others, and some have better apps than others. An OS with no apps, or without the apps you need to get your job done, is useless. If your job is high performance TCP/IP networking, Linux or FreeBSD is ideal. If you're a graphic designer, the Mac is a smart choice. If you're an office drone, or need to support office drones, Windows is a good choice.
They all have their flaws, but many have a niche they are good at, due to the available apps.
If you can get past the religious zealotry and use the correct tool for the job, it makes your life a lot easier and more productive.
Trying to use Linux for everything, Windows for everything or Mac OS for everything is like trying to use a screwdriver for everything because you don't like hammers or drills.
Don't use fglrx. If you have hardware that requires it, get hardware that doesn't.
I thought you said everything was supported already?
Are you seriously suggesting that a better solution than running Linux in a VM for TESTING purposes is an inferior solution than wiping out your operating system, finding it doesn't work and then shelling out real world money for some mythical video card for Linux that is supported under some particular version of driver?
No they're not ALL running Linux in a VM. The Linux UI still has massive problems when running natively, and the problems associated with desktop linux aren't usually performance related in any case. They are mostly UI inconsistency, no stable kernel ABI and general lack of native hardware support.
AS someone who ran native linux for a decade, and still does from time to time, i still say that running it in a VM is FINE for educational purposes. This mother is not going to be running an enterprise off it, and running in a VM will protect her from breaking her day to day OS.
If you think the fact that the UI may not be quite as fast is a critical problem when running in a VM, when its merely for a project then you're being as ass.
Such as? In 15 years of running linux i've never run into a problem running it in a virtual environment, be it on Windows, Mac or elsewhere. Stop spouting shit, or back it up with real world evidence that there is a problem doing so.
Ah but you're one of those who "gets it" - that the OS is just a platform to run apps. If an os runs the apps you want and doesn't continually fuck up (and contrary to what some would have you believe, i can count the number of rebuilds i've needed to do with windows for my own systems on half of one hand in the past 3 years - and thats including a hardware upgrade) - windows vista / 7 fulfil this purpose.
If linux runs your apps, go for it. The OS is merely a platform.
I suspect they are too late. The iPhone has made huge inroads into corporate land, and execs have been buying apps like everyone else. But you are correct in saying that is likely hp's best bet.
Perhaps for you or I, there are things we can't do with it, but one thing steve "gets" is that 99.99% of users out there simply *don't care*. They are far more interested in being protected from malware, having their kids protected from porn, and protected from having to make a hardware choice.
In the apple ecosystem, if you want a tablet, you buy an ipad or an ipad2 (if you're richer). In android/other land? There's a huge array of options, and many of them are rather crap. The typical end user doesn't care that they can't root their device and install SSH on it, they just want it to work as advertised. Rather than risk making a bad choice, they just get an iPad.
The apple gear generally works, as advertised.
They'll never bother to make an ipad that isn't "crippled" because the market return vs investment required simply isn't there for it.
If you want to do stuff an iPad can't do, Steve will sell you some variety of Macbook (likely, the Air).
... OS X was competing with Windows 98 and Windows 2000. Which were, by comparison, rather crap - Windows 98 had fairly dodgy memory protection, and Windows 2000 had very little software compatibility.
HP are now competing against an entrenched market leader at a similar price point and a huge application library. Unless they can offer lower cost, higher performance, smaller size, better battery life or some other "hook", they're boned.
The app store is an awesome lock-in for apple. All the apps purchased are not transferrable to a non-apple device. Unless they can give me a compelling reason to ditch all of the apps I have purchased on my other i-devices, its going to be a fucking hard sell to get me to buy any tablet other than an ipad.
I don't own one yet (doesn't do anything for my usage patterns), but if i was in the market, it would be a no-brainer.
Want away, it will never happen. In the mean time, in the real world, a stable ABI will provide the actual ability for the rest of us to have driver support.
and typically caused by a red light runner t-boning someone at high speed. roundabout crashes are far less serious when they do occasionally happen.
incompetent drivers will crash irrespective of road design. roundabouts improve traffic flow and also make those who do manage to crash have less serious crashes.
You are assuming that all drivers actually stop at red lights. Many don't. I've nearly been killed on my bike by a red light runner. With an appropriately sized round-about the action required is akin to merging or changing lanes. You check to your side, and if safe, go. No need to stop unless its unsafe to proceed.
The only times I've seen roundabouts fail is when people put traffic lights on them, or traffic lights at the next intersection which back up and cause the roundabout to get congested. And even then they don't really "fail" you merely have to stop for an extended period until there is a gap - typically no longer than at a set of lights with similar traffic.
We use them successfully in these places not in america. You often don't need to stop, but everyone typically needs to slow down enough to negotiate the roundabout.
Do you lot really believe that your drivers are so inferior to the rest of the world that they're a traffic hazard?
All lights do is create stop/start, reducing traffic flow, thus increasing fuel consumption, time spent on the road (and thus traffic congestion), etc. They're also no good when they fail - roundabouts can't suddenly stop working.
Slashdot Mirror
For an old guy, you seem to be pretty blind to reality. Reality is, businesses need to deal with office documents. Reality is, businesses need to deal with hardware support for the latest hardware from Dell/HP/etc on day of release. Reality is, businesses need to be able to sync with the GM's PDA of choice. Wake me up when Linux can do any of that.
It's the only way things will be fixed. If the US borrows more, then what? Reminds me of the global warming episode of futurama "our handsomest politicians have come up with an idea: we borrow money to pay back the debt. except every time we need to borrow a little bit more. thereby solving the problem"
Sounds like it was a dumb idea to buy a computer that has no local support?
I upgraded hardware twice.
Exactly. I have similar, though less extensive experience with different platforms to yourself. Slackware back to 3.1, debian back to 1.2, freebsd back to 3.x, beos, amigaOS, MacOS, Windows back to 3.0 with DOS 5.0, etc.
Every OS is crap. Some are just less crap than others, and some have better apps than others. An OS with no apps, or without the apps you need to get your job done, is useless. If your job is high performance TCP/IP networking, Linux or FreeBSD is ideal. If you're a graphic designer, the Mac is a smart choice. If you're an office drone, or need to support office drones, Windows is a good choice.
They all have their flaws, but many have a niche they are good at, due to the available apps.
If you can get past the religious zealotry and use the correct tool for the job, it makes your life a lot easier and more productive.
Trying to use Linux for everything, Windows for everything or Mac OS for everything is like trying to use a screwdriver for everything because you don't like hammers or drills.
Oh really. I've been a linux/bsd admin (in an enterprise, and previously a Linux based ISP) for the past 15 years. try again junior.
You must be new here. He got modded up because he was sledging windows in a round-about way in a Linux story.
I thought you said everything was supported already?
Are you seriously suggesting that a better solution than running Linux in a VM for TESTING purposes is an inferior solution than wiping out your operating system, finding it doesn't work and then shelling out real world money for some mythical video card for Linux that is supported under some particular version of driver?
No they're not ALL running Linux in a VM. The Linux UI still has massive problems when running natively, and the problems associated with desktop linux aren't usually performance related in any case. They are mostly UI inconsistency, no stable kernel ABI and general lack of native hardware support.
AS someone who ran native linux for a decade, and still does from time to time, i still say that running it in a VM is FINE for educational purposes. This mother is not going to be running an enterprise off it, and running in a VM will protect her from breaking her day to day OS.
If you think the fact that the UI may not be quite as fast is a critical problem when running in a VM, when its merely for a project then you're being as ass.
Such as? In 15 years of running linux i've never run into a problem running it in a virtual environment, be it on Windows, Mac or elsewhere. Stop spouting shit, or back it up with real world evidence that there is a problem doing so.
Ah but you're one of those who "gets it" - that the OS is just a platform to run apps. If an os runs the apps you want and doesn't continually fuck up (and contrary to what some would have you believe, i can count the number of rebuilds i've needed to do with windows for my own systems on half of one hand in the past 3 years - and thats including a hardware upgrade) - windows vista / 7 fulfil this purpose.
If linux runs your apps, go for it. The OS is merely a platform.
Other than rabid fanboyism - there is no valid reason not to do this. It works fine.
Best thing about icloud imho is the match service. which google doesn't have.
I suspect they are too late. The iPhone has made huge inroads into corporate land, and execs have been buying apps like everyone else. But you are correct in saying that is likely hp's best bet.
You want a macbook air, not an iPad.
Define: crippled.
Perhaps for you or I, there are things we can't do with it, but one thing steve "gets" is that 99.99% of users out there simply *don't care*. They are far more interested in being protected from malware, having their kids protected from porn, and protected from having to make a hardware choice.
In the apple ecosystem, if you want a tablet, you buy an ipad or an ipad2 (if you're richer). In android/other land? There's a huge array of options, and many of them are rather crap. The typical end user doesn't care that they can't root their device and install SSH on it, they just want it to work as advertised. Rather than risk making a bad choice, they just get an iPad.
The apple gear generally works, as advertised.
They'll never bother to make an ipad that isn't "crippled" because the market return vs investment required simply isn't there for it.
If you want to do stuff an iPad can't do, Steve will sell you some variety of Macbook (likely, the Air).
HP are now competing against an entrenched market leader at a similar price point and a huge application library. Unless they can offer lower cost, higher performance, smaller size, better battery life or some other "hook", they're boned.
The app store is an awesome lock-in for apple. All the apps purchased are not transferrable to a non-apple device. Unless they can give me a compelling reason to ditch all of the apps I have purchased on my other i-devices, its going to be a fucking hard sell to get me to buy any tablet other than an ipad.
I don't own one yet (doesn't do anything for my usage patterns), but if i was in the market, it would be a no-brainer.
Want away, it will never happen. In the mean time, in the real world, a stable ABI will provide the actual ability for the rest of us to have driver support.
So basically you're saying that drivers in your area don't look where they are driving. That isn't a roundabout problem.
and typically caused by a red light runner t-boning someone at high speed. roundabout crashes are far less serious when they do occasionally happen.
incompetent drivers will crash irrespective of road design. roundabouts improve traffic flow and also make those who do manage to crash have less serious crashes.
You are assuming that all drivers actually stop at red lights. Many don't. I've nearly been killed on my bike by a red light runner. With an appropriately sized round-about the action required is akin to merging or changing lanes. You check to your side, and if safe, go. No need to stop unless its unsafe to proceed.
The only times I've seen roundabouts fail is when people put traffic lights on them, or traffic lights at the next intersection which back up and cause the roundabout to get congested. And even then they don't really "fail" you merely have to stop for an extended period until there is a gap - typically no longer than at a set of lights with similar traffic.
We use them successfully in these places not in america. You often don't need to stop, but everyone typically needs to slow down enough to negotiate the roundabout.
Do you lot really believe that your drivers are so inferior to the rest of the world that they're a traffic hazard?
All lights do is create stop/start, reducing traffic flow, thus increasing fuel consumption, time spent on the road (and thus traffic congestion), etc. They're also no good when they fail - roundabouts can't suddenly stop working.
So, how's the weather out there? Cold here today, expecting 16-20c (middle of winter).
Virtualbox + os of your choice. You get a test environment for free as well.