Only 14 years behind but then again, the Vista codebase is 6 years behind schedule anyways.
6? Try 12+. A large number of the features in vista, including some of those that have been dropped during development (SQL FS, etc), were due in Windows "Cairo", which was originally slated for *1994*.
Still, will reserve judgement on Vista till i see it running. If it's actually good, I may even pay for it.
I doubt it though. Next machine is either a Mac or dedicated FreeBSD/Linux box, and Win2k is good enough for what I use Windows for.
Because if it crashes after x days, that means there was some sort of bug or memory leak, etc that caused it to crash. It also means that under more serious load, it's likely that the machine will crash in a shorter period of time.
Operating systems should not crash, except under cases of hardware failure - and even then, if possible, it should attempt to fail "gracefully" (i.e., print what was wrong and wait for user input. of course this is not always feasible, eg if the display hardware dies). Anything less is due to programming error and needs to be fixed.
I'm aware that no operating system is perfect, but that doesn't mean we just have to accept it when things crash for no good reason.
Computer's don't "just crash" - they crash for a reason... and usually it's shitty code.
If i want to keep a machine running for 366 days, it should keep running for 366 days. Anything less and the operating system (or hardware) is broken.
Whilst i agree with a lot of what you're saying - in-built driver support is irrelevant - drivers are available and easy to install from the manufacturer. If not, then it's the user's fault for not checking compatibility first.
If someone has driver issues with Linux then it's their own fault for not checking compatibility first.
Same shit... only difference is there's more commercial support for windows. Doesn't mean that you can't get linux hardware though - you just have to check the compatibility first.
I guess what i'm getting at is that regardless of O/S, driver support is a secondary issue that can be fixed after relase (driver update for windows, kernel upgrade/loadable module for linux). Getting pissed off with driver problems and calling the O/S crap because of it is retarded - whether it's linux OR windows. Evaluate an O/S based on it's core functionality, as that's what's important and less likely to change after release.
Your laptop may be "an old crusty one", however it's still at least 2-3 years newer than Windows XP. Hence, it's hardly a surprise that XP does not support it's hardware out of the box.
But anyway, who cares about out of the box driver support. So long as it supports the media you install from/to and some level of display/input device, everything else can be added later.
As mentioned several times already, normal users do not install operating systems. Hell, normal users can't even change their password without assistance...
As to vista's major problems, the major ones I see are all the "must have" features that have been dropped - that we've been promised as part of Cairo since *1994* (or earlier).
The old menus still exist, they are just turned off by default with the Ribbon enabled. For die-hard people who don't want to give the ribbon a try, the old interface can easily be brought back.
So in other words, in the one arena where it will matter (i.e., in the corporate world where, if you don't know how to use office, and are required to, you just don't get the job), the "ribbons" will be disabled and the admin will do as much as possible to make it look like good ol' office 97/2k/xp/2k3.
There's 3 things that make people buy office: compatibility with everyone else, because the cost of re-training is too much (which means they won't re-train for this) and excel. Microsoft could make office the most painful, dog of a program to use and people would still buy it...
Let me get this straight... by forcing commerce to surrender their private keys, this surrender's the terrorist's keys how?
This achieves nothing, other than piss innocent people off.
Oh, I'm *sure* a terrorist who is plotting a terrorism event will stop and think, "Oh, fuck - I'd better submit my private encryption key to the US/UK government, or they'll send me an angry letter!".
This law smacks of being formulated by someone who has no fucking clue as to how easily configured and commonplace encryption is...
If you can not deliver bandwidth that a user has paid for as part of your service plans, then your pricing model is broken and needs to be fixed.
This charging content providers for delivery of content stuff is crap. Content providers ALREADY pay for hosting (and bandwidth charges for said hosting too) - and service providers ALREADY charge for provision of bandwidth to their clients.
Fix your pricing, don't try to go for 2 (or hell, 3 or more) bites of the cherry that you aren't entitled to.
You could also just replace gnome with KDE and have something that's useful "out of the box"?
I've run both off and on during the past 8 years, and I have to say that during that time I've noticed KDE getting more and more useful to me, and gnome... well, not really.
The last time I had a "wow, that's cool" moment was with KDE, and drag/drop MP3 ripping. Before that, it was with FISH.
I haven't had one with gnome in a very long time, if ever, that I can recall.
One could make exactly the same arguments trying to migrate from a Windows environment to Linux, when employing a bunch of Linux-only admins, and running windows hardware with no open-source drivers. Or, alternatively, trying to migrate from Solaris to Windows, when only employing Windows admins.
What's your point?
Sounds like a project management problem to me, not an operating systems issue.
However, in my experience, if you don't care particularly about bleeding edge, and want something that "just works" and is nice and quick to get up and running with, then "pkg_add -r" is the go.
It's easier than apt, even - because you don't have to root around with sources.list, it's a fairly logical name (package add = pkg_add - wtf is "apt" - yes i know, it was rhetorical), and you don't need to update the local database all the time. pkg_add -r whatever, that's it, done - dependencies etc are all handled automatically.
However, if you do want to use special compiler options, want the latest package, etc - you can use ports.
Whatever... you stated a problem, I gave you an option, no need to get all defensive about it.
Still, the problem remains - to get software support you need a userbase. Catch-22 - game developers are not going to write for Linux/BSD until it gets enough users to be profitable.
Stating "god people are stupid" when mentioning a fact that all of us already KNOW is not really productive.
Yes, we know there's little game support for Linux - however that's just not going to happen until it becomes popular - unfortunately it won't happen BEFORE that to MAKE it popular.
I just can't wait for FreeBSD to be more commonly supported without needing to root around with Linux emulation - I wholeheartedly agree that the BSD system is more logically laid out, the base-os is a known quantity that is independent from the packages, and the documentation is just infinately better than you get with Linux.
And i've used both - Linux since 1996, and BSD since around 2000. I also currently have both installed on various machines that I maintain.
They're assuming people would pay money for the stuff they copy if it was unavailable as warez.
Shit, i can't be arsed *copying* most of the crap out there, let along watching it or heaven forbid, having to pay for it.
I have no trouble paying for media, however when the average new release is about as enjoyable as prison rape, I doubt their financial problems are soley due to freely available copies...
To contrast: What's wrong with office 2003? (i.e., why would I bother to upgrade to 2007?)
Totally re-do the interface = require totally re-training anyone who uses it. IMHO, doing that would be pretty damn stupid of them. The re-learning requirement is one of the major arguments against switching to free software such as openoffice for most users.
If the sales point of office 2k7 is "there's nothing wrong with it" then it's not a very convincing sales pitch..
If you had a clue about the history of PHP, you would realise that it is and never was designed to be comparable to Java.
Totally different original scope, and totally different current purpose.
As stated, there's plenty of other open-source languages that *ARE* comparable.
Original scope, from php.net:
PHP/FI
PHP succeeds an older product, named PHP/FI. PHP/FI was created by Rasmus Lerdorf in 1995, initially as a simple set of Perl scripts for tracking accesses to his online resume. He named this set of scripts 'Personal Home Page Tools'. As more functionality was required, Rasmus wrote a much larger C implementation, which was able to communicate with databases, and enabled users to develop simple dynamic Web applications. Rasmus chose to release the source code for PHP/FI for everybody to see, so that anybody can use it, as well as fix bugs in it and improve the code.
Slashdot Mirror
6? Try 12+. A large number of the features in vista, including some of those that have been dropped during development (SQL FS, etc), were due in Windows "Cairo", which was originally slated for *1994*.
Still, will reserve judgement on Vista till i see it running. If it's actually good, I may even pay for it.
I doubt it though. Next machine is either a Mac or dedicated FreeBSD/Linux box, and Win2k is good enough for what I use Windows for.
smash.
Operating systems should not crash, except under cases of hardware failure - and even then, if possible, it should attempt to fail "gracefully" (i.e., print what was wrong and wait for user input. of course this is not always feasible, eg if the display hardware dies). Anything less is due to programming error and needs to be fixed.
I'm aware that no operating system is perfect, but that doesn't mean we just have to accept it when things crash for no good reason.
Computer's don't "just crash" - they crash for a reason... and usually it's shitty code.
If i want to keep a machine running for 366 days, it should keep running for 366 days. Anything less and the operating system (or hardware) is broken.
smash.
If someone has driver issues with Linux then it's their own fault for not checking compatibility first.
Same shit... only difference is there's more commercial support for windows. Doesn't mean that you can't get linux hardware though - you just have to check the compatibility first.
I guess what i'm getting at is that regardless of O/S, driver support is a secondary issue that can be fixed after relase (driver update for windows, kernel upgrade/loadable module for linux). Getting pissed off with driver problems and calling the O/S crap because of it is retarded - whether it's linux OR windows. Evaluate an O/S based on it's core functionality, as that's what's important and less likely to change after release.
smash.
I've read all the dan brown books, but from what I've heard of the movie, it's quite tedious.
smash.
But anyway, who cares about out of the box driver support. So long as it supports the media you install from/to and some level of display/input device, everything else can be added later.
As mentioned several times already, normal users do not install operating systems. Hell, normal users can't even change their password without assistance...
As to vista's major problems, the major ones I see are all the "must have" features that have been dropped - that we've been promised as part of Cairo since *1994* (or earlier).
smash.
smash.
smash.
There's 3 things that make people buy office: compatibility with everyone else, because the cost of re-training is too much (which means they won't re-train for this) and excel. Microsoft could make office the most painful, dog of a program to use and people would still buy it...
smash.
This achieves nothing, other than piss innocent people off.
Oh, I'm *sure* a terrorist who is plotting a terrorism event will stop and think, "Oh, fuck - I'd better submit my private encryption key to the US/UK government, or they'll send me an angry letter!".
This law smacks of being formulated by someone who has no fucking clue as to how easily configured and commonplace encryption is...
smash.
smash
This charging content providers for delivery of content stuff is crap. Content providers ALREADY pay for hosting (and bandwidth charges for said hosting too) - and service providers ALREADY charge for provision of bandwidth to their clients.
Fix your pricing, don't try to go for 2 (or hell, 3 or more) bites of the cherry that you aren't entitled to.
smash.
I've run both off and on during the past 8 years, and I have to say that during that time I've noticed KDE getting more and more useful to me, and gnome... well, not really.
The last time I had a "wow, that's cool" moment was with KDE, and drag/drop MP3 ripping. Before that, it was with FISH.
I haven't had one with gnome in a very long time, if ever, that I can recall.
smash.
Imho, HURD = more vapor than Longhorn...
smash.
What's your point?
Sounds like a project management problem to me, not an operating systems issue.
smash.
However, in my experience, if you don't care particularly about bleeding edge, and want something that "just works" and is nice and quick to get up and running with, then "pkg_add -r" is the go.
It's easier than apt, even - because you don't have to root around with sources.list, it's a fairly logical name (package add = pkg_add - wtf is "apt" - yes i know, it was rhetorical), and you don't need to update the local database all the time. pkg_add -r whatever, that's it, done - dependencies etc are all handled automatically.
However, if you do want to use special compiler options, want the latest package, etc - you can use ports.
Or, if you prefer, a mix of the two...
smash.
Come on now... it's not that hard.
smash.
Still, the problem remains - to get software support you need a userbase. Catch-22 - game developers are not going to write for Linux/BSD until it gets enough users to be profitable.
Stating "god people are stupid" when mentioning a fact that all of us already KNOW is not really productive.
Yes, we know there's little game support for Linux - however that's just not going to happen until it becomes popular - unfortunately it won't happen BEFORE that to MAKE it popular.
smash.
Take 1/2 the money you'd spend on purchasing/maintaining windows over 3-4 years, and buy a transgaming account.
smash.
I't not pretty enough?
Having been installing Dos/Windows/Linux/FreeBSD/Solaris/AmigaOS, etc for the past 18 years I rate BSDs installer as fairly pleasant and easy to use.
smash
I just can't wait for FreeBSD to be more commonly supported without needing to root around with Linux emulation - I wholeheartedly agree that the BSD system is more logically laid out, the base-os is a known quantity that is independent from the packages, and the documentation is just infinately better than you get with Linux.
And i've used both - Linux since 1996, and BSD since around 2000. I also currently have both installed on various machines that I maintain.
smash.
smash.
Shit, i can't be arsed *copying* most of the crap out there, let along watching it or heaven forbid, having to pay for it.
I have no trouble paying for media, however when the average new release is about as enjoyable as prison rape, I doubt their financial problems are soley due to freely available copies...
smash.
Totally re-do the interface = require totally re-training anyone who uses it. IMHO, doing that would be pretty damn stupid of them. The re-learning requirement is one of the major arguments against switching to free software such as openoffice for most users.
If the sales point of office 2k7 is "there's nothing wrong with it" then it's not a very convincing sales pitch..
smash.
smash.
Totally different original scope, and totally different current purpose.
As stated, there's plenty of other open-source languages that *ARE* comparable.
Original scope, from php.net:
smash.