Sure, then you end up with two monitors that can't really work together and are not customizable.
The issues you're referring to are all driver related. The fact that both nvidia and ATI have already been releasing win7 drivers for months while still screwing around on Linux should make it all clear; It's about the drivers and the hardware guys just don't care about Linux enough yet. That's not the fault of the OS; it's the hardware a$$es not opening up their drivers.
As for Linux vs Windows for multimonitor: Until about a year ago this was definately a problem on Linux as the drivers did not support it well enough. It works quite well actially. Also, setting up multi monitor does not cover "use a machine with 2 monitors". The actual usage, once it has been set up, is the most important part (which you're ignoring). Windows is not prepared for a multidesktop/multiscreen setup. It never has been. Linux on the other hand is quite different. Nearly all desktop managers support multi monitors properly. Ever tried multi monitor setup and opening up new windows? Windows pop up in the middle of the two screens sometimes, which is bloody irritating. The fixed task bar can not properly be split up between the two monitors and one who would want only programs on that perticular monitor to be in the taskbar on the monitor are completely screwed.
As Opera has been complaint to most standards for years, while it took other browsers years to do the same, it is the websites that have the incompatibilities, not Opera.
Driving your nice little environment degrading Toyota Prius to Germany and finding out they have trimmed all branches of trees so that only VW, BMW, Merc and Audi can pass through without being scratched would probably upset you just as much as your statement would to any Opera supporters. And you would not be blaming Toyota, you'd be blaming the German government. Why does the word rationale mean something completely different when it's about IT?
Also, afidel's post is far from "right-on", as he/she/it too makes at least two assumptions (while debunking someone elses!): Opera being an insignificant browser; you're forgetting all mobile devices here. And Opera's request being insignificant. Judging from what's Opera's requirements are, I'm assuming (see, there's one!) they're ready to order some very serious amounts of high-end server stuff.
Please explain to us how patch-to-patch-to-patch becoming too much for the system to bear is NOT Microsoft's fault but of the users. Apart from the fact that people are dumb enough to accept it as something that's inherent to computers, it's Microsoft's inability to build a proper update system.
(Running a Debian machine that's been apt-get upgrading and dist-upgrading for as long as I can remember without any patch problems.)
Because: 1) That OS is built once, then the cost of "producing" it, is nill. 2) There IS a competitor (which gives you the exact same crap); free download. 3) Because your CPU does not FAIL as much as your OS will 4) Because your CPU will still work in 5 years. Will the OS? Anyone who can add anything to this list?:)
He clearly insinuates that having other morals than his is a bad thing, yet you try to defend him by saying that people should open up their eyes and see the world?
The world's full of people with money higher up their list than moral or ethics. Welcome to the *real* world. You might want to get used to that:)
Piracy has always been around and it always will be.
Cool! So now they built a relatively environmentally friendly concept that has so many power consuming features that it uses a whole cole power plant on its own. Way to go greenies!
And crashing one of these babies because you're looking for a particular pixel to push on the touch screen would create quite some environmentally unfriendly mess. Blood and all...
This measurement is definitely very debatable. I for one am not a native English speaker but do only read the English Wiki. And I know I'm not the only one over here who does that.
Ah, you mean the article in which the idea of Windows 7 being less-worse than Vista was based on perceptions? The article where they HAVE measured that the actual performance of the applications was not quicker, but they knew that the interface was quicker. They did not measure the speed of the interface, but it was quicker... really.... trust us.....
"But, having spent a few hours really teaching myself Word 2003, then trying to see where the same functionality was in Writer, it became apparent that some of it just wasn't there."
Have you also tried it the other way around? OO.o has many features that are either broken or absent in Microsoft Office. It does not support Word's backwards incompatibility either. Is that a bad thing?
That's funny; I though the article was about the operating system and not the market that was created around it. In terms of "support", Linux is far better than Windows. It's the support of the environment of the OS that's the problem. Linux supports gaming. Only the games hardly "support Linux". Devices are very well supported on Linux. Windows does hardly support any device at all out-of-the-box. It's the drivers that you get on the friggin CDs (where do I get a USB CD drive these days?) or downloadable from a website that add the support. Office software (I suppose the only office software you know of is Microsoft's office) all support nearly any OS including Windows. If you consider all office software, support is quite nicely spread.
I'd much rather think this data is stored on servers that are more secure than the average desktop (how was the market share of Linux/Windows on Desktop/Servers again?)
From the psychology classes I had, I remember that the colour red is associated with anger by the brain. I doubt that that will do much for the red team when they actually wear red because then they won't see much of it, would they? I would assume the other team does see a lot of red and this then triggers aggression. Maybe that influences their ability to think straight?
It has everything to do with the devaluation of your car because after quite some sunshine, most red cars (thanks to tree-huggers to force us all to use crappy paint) turn pink. And it seems that there isn't much demand for a pink car these days... (head hurts just thinking of all the jokes I can make about this)
Are you kidding me? RTFA: "IFAW is hoping that eBay will ban all ivory sales".
IFAW wants all ivory to be banned from eBay because these tree(sorry, animal) huggers are to darned lazy to filter out the authentical ones themselves. They want eBay to do it for them.
You have obviously never used anything but Windows, have you?
Proper operating systems use ALL memory available. It uses a bit for it's own valuable data and uses the rest as disk cache. If an application requests memory, the os should free up some of the memory by cleaning up some of the disk cache. A computer with less than 90% (total) memory usage is a waste of memory (or you should give it some more data to grind).
Windows is a complete waste of resources. It always has and always will be. It steals too much memory (which is uses extremely inefficiently), takes up too much CPU usage and constantly accesses HDDs (what's that? WTF is it doing?!)
Slashdot Mirror
Or just use Plausible deniability, like Rubberhose: http://iq.org/~proff/rubberhose.org/
Sure, then you end up with two monitors that can't really work together and are not customizable.
The issues you're referring to are all driver related. The fact that both nvidia and ATI have already been releasing win7 drivers for months while still screwing around on Linux should make it all clear; It's about the drivers and the hardware guys just don't care about Linux enough yet. That's not the fault of the OS; it's the hardware a$$es not opening up their drivers.
As for Linux vs Windows for multimonitor: Until about a year ago this was definately a problem on Linux as the drivers did not support it well enough. It works quite well actially. Also, setting up multi monitor does not cover "use a machine with 2 monitors". The actual usage, once it has been set up, is the most important part (which you're ignoring). Windows is not prepared for a multidesktop/multiscreen setup. It never has been. Linux on the other hand is quite different. Nearly all desktop managers support multi monitors properly. Ever tried multi monitor setup and opening up new windows? Windows pop up in the middle of the two screens sometimes, which is bloody irritating. The fixed task bar can not properly be split up between the two monitors and one who would want only programs on that perticular monitor to be in the taskbar on the monitor are completely screwed.
Why not build a huge cage around the darned things (if the bats are able to see it though)
Or what about just using one of those proven power generators that do not kill animals, like nuclear reaction?
We DO know the context; it's a flippin' webadmin site! How hard can it be to write it in proper HTML/CSS/whatever?!
Chances are 90% of it was stolen from Open Source PHP stuff anyway.
As Opera has been complaint to most standards for years, while it took other browsers years to do the same, it is the websites that have the incompatibilities, not Opera.
Driving your nice little environment degrading Toyota Prius to Germany and finding out they have trimmed all branches of trees so that only VW, BMW, Merc and Audi can pass through without being scratched would probably upset you just as much as your statement would to any Opera supporters. And you would not be blaming Toyota, you'd be blaming the German government. Why does the word rationale mean something completely different when it's about IT?
Also, afidel's post is far from "right-on", as he/she/it too makes at least two assumptions (while debunking someone elses!): Opera being an insignificant browser; you're forgetting all mobile devices here. And Opera's request being insignificant. Judging from what's Opera's requirements are, I'm assuming (see, there's one!) they're ready to order some very serious amounts of high-end server stuff.
Please explain to us how patch-to-patch-to-patch becoming too much for the system to bear is NOT Microsoft's fault but of the users. Apart from the fact that people are dumb enough to accept it as something that's inherent to computers, it's Microsoft's inability to build a proper update system.
(Running a Debian machine that's been apt-get upgrading and dist-upgrading for as long as I can remember without any patch problems.)
Because: :)
1) That OS is built once, then the cost of "producing" it, is nill.
2) There IS a competitor (which gives you the exact same crap); free download.
3) Because your CPU does not FAIL as much as your OS will
4) Because your CPU will still work in 5 years. Will the OS?
Anyone who can add anything to this list?
...the data moved to significance extremely quickly
How are they to judge what's significant? Looking at their OS, they haven't got a clue!
He clearly insinuates that having other morals than his is a bad thing, yet you try to defend him by saying that people should open up their eyes and see the world?
The world's full of people with money higher up their list than moral or ethics. Welcome to the *real* world. You might want to get used to that :)
Piracy has always been around and it always will be.
Cool! So now they built a relatively environmentally friendly concept that has so many power consuming features that it uses a whole cole power plant on its own. Way to go greenies!
And crashing one of these babies because you're looking for a particular pixel to push on the touch screen would create quite some environmentally unfriendly mess. Blood and all...
(I hate replying to myself) ..there is also no one "Chinese" language, which makes measuring Wikis on one language even more dodgy.
This measurement is definitely very debatable. I for one am not a native English speaker but do only read the English Wiki. And I know I'm not the only one over here who does that.
Ah, you mean the article in which the idea of Windows 7 being less-worse than Vista was based on perceptions? The article where they HAVE measured that the actual performance of the applications was not quicker, but they knew that the interface was quicker. They did not measure the speed of the interface, but it was quicker... really.... trust us.....
"But, having spent a few hours really teaching myself Word 2003, then trying to see where the same functionality was in Writer, it became apparent that some of it just wasn't there."
Have you also tried it the other way around? OO.o has many features that are either broken or absent in Microsoft Office.
It does not support Word's backwards incompatibility either. Is that a bad thing?
That's funny; I though the article was about the operating system and not the market that was created around it. In terms of "support", Linux is far better than Windows. It's the support of the environment of the OS that's the problem. Linux supports gaming. Only the games hardly "support Linux". Devices are very well supported on Linux. Windows does hardly support any device at all out-of-the-box. It's the drivers that you get on the friggin CDs (where do I get a USB CD drive these days?) or downloadable from a website that add the support. Office software (I suppose the only office software you know of is Microsoft's office) all support nearly any OS including Windows. If you consider all office software, support is quite nicely spread.
No, we need a few more megapixels (or a smaller angle) to get to see him, I guess ;)
"(A) is 10% quicker than (B)" means time(A) = 0.9 * time(B), and not time(B) = 1.1 * time(A).
You're just repeating the mistake.
(A) being 10% quicker than (B) is not the same as (B) taking 10% longer than (A). This is also more relevant in the 50%-range.
You're on slashdot; you should have known this. At any cost.
They respond in the same way as they would in real life? It's almost as if there are real people behind these avatars...
I'd much rather think this data is stored on servers that are more secure than the average desktop (how was the market share of Linux/Windows on Desktop/Servers again?)
From the psychology classes I had, I remember that the colour red is associated with anger by the brain. I doubt that that will do much for the red team when they actually wear red because then they won't see much of it, would they? I would assume the other team does see a lot of red and this then triggers aggression. Maybe that influences their ability to think straight?
:)
Just my 2p
It has everything to do with the devaluation of your car because after quite some sunshine, most red cars (thanks to tree-huggers to force us all to use crappy paint) turn pink. And it seems that there isn't much demand for a pink car these days... (head hurts just thinking of all the jokes I can make about this)
Are you kidding me? RTFA:
"IFAW is hoping that eBay will ban all ivory sales".
IFAW wants all ivory to be banned from eBay because these tree(sorry, animal) huggers are to darned lazy to filter out the authentical ones themselves. They want eBay to do it for them.
You have obviously never used anything but Windows, have you?
Proper operating systems use ALL memory available. It uses a bit for it's own valuable data and uses the rest as disk cache. If an application requests memory, the os should free up some of the memory by cleaning up some of the disk cache. A computer with less than 90% (total) memory usage is a waste of memory (or you should give it some more data to grind).
Windows is a complete waste of resources. It always has and always will be. It steals too much memory (which is uses extremely inefficiently), takes up too much CPU usage and constantly accesses HDDs (what's that? WTF is it doing?!)
I guess they just found the OFF-switch of the C-Net servers... :-S
http://downtime.cnet.co.uk/cnet-down.html